Canadian Heritage Committee on Dec. 6th, 2016

[Linda Solomon Wood]

Local is a really hard nut to crack. I can't say I've fully cracked it with the Vancouver Observer. I think that is where we would really benefit from some sort of non-profit/charitable status, special status for journalism, that would allow in Vancouver, let's say, the Vancouver Foundation to support local reporting projects that will just cover city hall and provide people with basic information about what's going on. I think that's really important.

For us, removing sales tax on subscriptions would be incredible. There are all these little things. Now journalism is treated as if it's just any other business. It needs to be treated as a public good.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Yes, because it's all about democracy.

[Linda Solomon Wood]

Right.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you, Mr. Samson.

I want to thank you very much, Linda. Earlier I said that we did not have your submission. The clerk researched this and has pointed out that your submission was sent to all the members on November 2, in English and French. We do have it, so you don't need to send it back to us.

I have a question, because I think Mr. Samson has hit on it—the whole catch-22 thing in terms of what we're trying to do in this committee, the challenges, and the circular things we get into with no resolutions.

Specifically, you talked about a definition of journalism. We had a witness the other day who said that if you want to rate what good journalism or news is all about, it must be verifiable and accountable. Now, that's an important thing. How do you do that when aggregators are just throwing everything at people, nobody knows what is verifiable and what isn't, and therefore there's no accountability for it? How do you take that horse and put it into a stable somewhere—i.e., you can actually refer to it as a guideline, or gold standard, for when people decide that they've just written a piece of news when it really isn't? That talks to the whole false news bit and the post-truth stuff.

[Linda Solomon Wood]

Well, again, I think as a committee, to do it, or as a government, to do it, you would have to be very bold. You would be attacked by people who disagree. Whatever definition you would come up with, I'm sure it would be under fire. However, again, you can look to France, where they have done that. I think there can be established guidelines, such as verifiable, fact-based....

But in terms of who is a journalist, what is a journalist, in the same way that lawyers have to be certified or pass a bar exam, we could have those kinds of structures for journalism.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

It would be accreditation, so to speak.

[Linda Solomon Wood]

Accreditation, yes, because right now we're in a pretty dangerous situation, actually. Anybody can say, “I'm a journalist. I get to come in. I get to crash the party.” Then they can start to use Twitter, use Facebook, or use their own web platform to promulgate untruth: lies.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you very much. That was a very thoughtful and thought-provoking presentation. Thank you for coming in at the last minute and giving us some of your insights.

We'll next go in camera for committee business.

[Proceedings continue in camera]