Thank you, Chair.
I have a few comments with regard to this amendment and bringing back protection for the content that people post online.
One of the interesting things is that, for all the conversation we have had, the debates that have taken place and the opinions that have been sought, unfortunately very few creators have been asked to speak to Bill C-10, which is a shame because it's actually creators who are going to be impacted to a great extent.
I wish, then, to present the words of Scott Benzie, who is the CEO of something called Buffer Festival, an event hosted in Toronto every year that celebrates the creative material being brought forward by artists.
Speaking from that heart, that passion and that understanding of what digital creators put into their work, I'm going to read his statement, because I think it's really powerful. Again I would present to the committee that we really have not done justice to this group. We really have not considered them to the fullest extent. I believe before moving forward they do need to be considered, and with the fact that the censorship of the content they post is going to have such a detrimental impact on them, their well-being and their way forward, it does us well to hit the pause button for a moment and to really consider what that impact is.
Mr. Benzie wrote, “The democratization of media caused by platforms like YouTube, TikTok, Snapchat, Spotify and others has given rise to the quietest renaissance of Canadian Culture in history. Canadians are among The most watched, with the most exported content and the Canadian musicians that have dominated the charts have almost exclusively been Digital First Creators and they are world class.
“With them, Tens of Thousands Canadians of diverse backgrounds, economic status, gender identification and educational level have all succeeded through finding an audience, a niche and a business outside of the 'Canadian Cultural System'.
“So what’s the problem bill C-10 is trying to solve? It’s just that...that these Creators have found success outside of the existing traditional system…this is about money and status. Those inside the system do not consider online Creators 'real' artists, have created a false narrative around what is 'Canadian Culture' and feel they need to be compensated for someone else’s success.
“I would like to touch on 3 major issues with C-10 and how it affects the community at large.
“1. Digital Creators have not been widely consulted, the Minister has repeatedly claimed that “artists” are in support of the bill yet never once accepted an invitation from Digital Creators to engage.”
I'll pause and add my commentary. That's shameful—the fact that this government has not even sought the opinions, the direction or the feedback of digital first creators in putting this bill together, and the fact that at this committee, during clause-by-clause, not a single one of these individuals was invited to the table to offer their insight.
Folks, we're legislators. We've been elected to represent the Canadian people, and we can't even so much as hit the pause button for two seconds here and give consideration or thought to those individuals who are going to be most impacted by this bill. This is a government that claims to be for diversity, for inclusion, and for advancing in the digital world. This bill is a direct attack on all of those things.
I'll resume Mr. Benzie's statement here. He writes, “It is clear he means 'Traditional Artists'. Legislation is being written without any consultation of those being impacted, and being written by people who do not understand the first thing about how money is made, audiences are found and maintained and how discovery online happens (at least not without being propped up by regulation and subsidies). Just because Heritage has heard from YouTube, TikTok etc, does not mean they have heard from creators themselves.”
His second point is this: “Technically the bill is flawed. While promoting Canadian Culture is an admirable goal and one we support. Non organically promoting videos and content on platforms could negatively impact the discoverability of the content. Elevating one video/song over another means demoting someone else's video, who makes that decision? Likely it will benefit media organizations over new and emerging voices trying to break through. That along with definitions of CANCON as a binary from Netflix to TikTok is not only impractical it might be impossible to define and regulate. Additionally CAVCO requires all Creators to be incorporated that will again discriminate against new and emerging Creators. Finally Canada can not take this step and expect fair and equal treatment abroad, if this same step is taken in the US, we will see an end to Canadian online success stories, millions of dollars in revenue for entrepreneurs and a diverse representative Canada, as 90% of all YouTube views (specifically) come from outside of Canada for Canadian creators.”
The third point is on the Canadian cultural system. He writes, “We are being told C-10 is needed to save 'Canadian Culture', but who defines it? For years digital first Creators have been written out of grant applications, told that they do not have a distribution plan because they don’t have a deal with Bell or CBC and have not had access to money through funding organizations even with the honest attempts from those organizations to include them. If there is to be a tax or inputs from the platforms it is imperative that those funds be set aside for the Creators that use those platforms. This is nothing more than an attempt from an industry that is not as important as it once was to get a piece of the pie. Digital First Creators do not have Unions or lobbyists or in house grant writers, additionally unlike conventional producers they do not spend time worrying about the government because their success has not been predicated on it.
“Do not allow those unions to grab money from the platforms and then fund the same programs they always have, in the same way they always have.”
He continues, “Bill C-10 is legislation based on a fallacy of popular Canadian Content. If it is passed Creators need to be at the table while the CRTC cleans it up.
“When we talk about the Canadian Media Landscape the truth nobody wants to talk about is that the sea change is already here. The most popular Canadian Storytellers and media are not traditional anymore. WatchMoJo might be the most successful export Canadian content history and it dwarfs the audience for programs as great as Schitt's Creek but I don't see them winning Canadian Screen Awards. Peter McKinnon is probably Canada's most famous photographer. While traditional infrastructure tries to find ways to be inclusive, Molly Burke, Stef Sanjati, Julie Vu, King Bach, Shannon Boodram, Lilly Singh and thousands more have already smashed barriers traditional media are still wrestling with.”
He goes on to say, “I'll just leave a few names in music as well. Justin Bieber, Alessia Cara, Shawn Mendes.
“What they all have in common is they didn't need the 'Canadian Media Industry' for discoverability, they just needed it not to get in the way. I fear we are starting to get in the way when we should be finding ways to enable more voices, more stories, more Canada.”
Those are the words of an individual whose life is consumed with advocating for and understanding working with digital first creators. This is a group that has not been consulted. This is a group that has not been understood, but I think we need to take a step back and acknowledge as a committee is that these individuals will be extremely impacted in a very detrimental way by this bill.