The impact on the discoverability piece is minimal. What this amendment that's on the table would do is, again, clarify or deem that social media services do not exercise programming control over unaffiliated content that's uploaded to those services.
Again, in part, it would be Parliament answering the question of fact very clearly that it considers all programming that's uploaded to social media services by unaffiliated users not to be under the programming control of those social media services. It wouldn't detract from the fact that the committee has voted to give the CRTC the power to require discoverability measures to increase the prominence of Canadian creators. That would still be in effect and still exist.
With respect to your other question, the way I would frame it is that all recommendation engines likely have many different factors that are driving the recommendations that are made to us. At the end of the day, if you're dealing with a for-profit company, those algorithms, those recommendation engines, would be fundamentally about supporting the business model of that online undertaking.
What I've indicated to the committee before is that the government's position on the discoverability piece is not to fundamentally kind of say that this isn't about not surfacing content that individuals want to watch on these services, but saying that amongst all those factors we think it's appropriate that those platforms make an effort to surface local Canadian artists and creators. It would be one factor that gets fed into that broader calculation that is done that ultimately surfaces content on the platforms that we use.