Canadian Heritage Committee on Oct. 18th, 2022

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

I'm a little concerned that Google is unable or unwilling to provide that figure. You were asked a few months ago. You're being asked again today. I get a sense of stonewalling. I don't feel comfortable with that. Google has a responsibility to come clean.

Is it your commitment to this committee that you will provide that number this week?

[Colin McKay]

What I can underline for the committee is our commitment to addressing those issues, which is ongoing and has been for years. We are making those investments in teams around the world to both identify and deal with the sort of online commentary and discourse that Canadians are identifying and that individuals around the world are concerned about.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

You will not provide those figures to us.

[Colin McKay]

I'll get back to the committee.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Do you commit to providing those figures to the committee this week?

[Colin McKay]

Yes.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

I appreciate that, Mr. Chair. I think that's important information.

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Martin Champoux]

Absolutely.

That is all the time you have for this round, Mr. Julian. Thank you.

We will continue with the Conservative Party.

Mr. Shields, the floor is yours for five minutes.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the time.

I'd like to go to Mr. Jamison and Mr. Merrell. This has to do with the Alberta piece, in the sense of representing the news media.

When I think of the ones in my riding—like The Strathmore Times, The Chestermere Anchor, The Brooks Bulletin and The Drumheller Mail—they don't fall within the parameters that you've talked about in your organization. They talk to me about the 30% of federal funding for advertising that came to their newspapers or weeklies that's now gone to the majors. Their suggestion is that the 30% of advertising that the federal government now sends out of this country to the internationals should come back to the weeklies. That would solve the problem.

Do you have any response to that particular comment?

[Evan Jamison]

I guess I'm not terribly clear on what you mean by the 30% going to the majors. I think we have all seen, no matter what size of operation, that—

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

It's to Google and Facebook.

[Evan Jamison]

Yes, absolutely. I don't have the numbers sitting right in front of me, but it's well documented that the federal government has moved a tremendous amount of its advertising spending into major online platforms and away from local newspapers.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

So, if that advertising was returned to the weekly papers, papers in my riding suggest that this would resolve this issue.

[Evan Jamison]

I don't know if that would be the case for everybody. It would certainly be helpful. It's something that we have advocated for over time, both at the federal and the provincial level: trying to get more government advertising into local papers. They're a very effective means of reaching the local communities.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

One of the things I've done is survey my constituents about which papers they read. Number one, they identify their local newspaper as their first source to get local information and, two, as the most trusted source of information. Would you agree with that?

[Evan Jamison]

Yes, we have done a lot of research over the years that would confirm that—that the local Canadian newspapers are well trusted and people look to them first for information. As I said in my opening statement, those are often the only operations providing local news.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

The second part of that is the one they don't trust, which Bill C‑18 would benefit most: the legacy media. That's the one my constituents don't trust, and they don't see more money going to the legacy media as an advantage. Do you have a response to that?

[Evan Jamison]

I guess it depends on what you mean by “legacy”. It seems to be kind of an opaque term, because we get termed as “legacy”, our papers that have been operating since the early 1900s. What is legacy? Is that an issue that some people have with larger outlets?

I think, in fairness, everybody wants to try to do a good job of journalism in their communities, but most really lack the resources to do that properly anymore. Of course, there are different issues with particular companies across Canada, but I think everybody really does want to do a good job. They just do not have the resources to sustain that anymore.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

When you mentioned the resources, you were sort of hedging on how to solve the problem because.... A number of the weekly papers in my riding, as you're familiar with, do not have two full-time journalists. I can't think of any that have two. So, how would you resolve that?

[Evan Jamison]

Of course, many of them are wearing multiple hats. Whether they are full-time journalists or not, many people in small operations, even in mid-size operations, wear many hats every day.

There have been thoughts around whether the LJI program could be supplemented to help bring those operations up to two-person newsrooms. Would additional government advertising spending help with that? There are any number of different programs that we've talked about over time that might help bring those newsrooms back.

As I said before, it's not necessarily just about trying to maintain what is currently there. It's about trying to find a way to provide adequate resources to provide good-quality news content to these different communities. For a lot of them, that means that they need to add back because so many of them have been decimated. They're shells of their former selves. A lot of operations are trying to be the best they can, but they aren't doing what they should be doing because they just cannot afford to do it anymore.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

What would be your ultimate solution, then, to resolve the issue with the two journalists? What would you recommend as an amendment?

[Evan Jamison]

It's really challenging, because when you spread this out over all the communities in Alberta.... There are many small communities, and it's an expensive issue. I don't know if there's any one particular thing. You know, we talk about the LJI. We talk about things like the aid to publishers that have helped over time. I don't know if there is any one thing. I think it's highly likely that it's going to be a combination of many factors to help all the different business models and different types of operations that are out there. It's going to be a combination of several different things to make that work.

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Martin Champoux]

Thank you, Mr. Jamison.

Mr. Shields' speaking time is up.

It is now the Liberal Party's turn.

Ms. Hepfner, the floor is yours for five minutes.

[Lisa Hepfner, Liberal, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I will go back to Mr. McKay with Google and these agreements that we know have already been signed with some news producers in Canada. In these agreements, does Google insist on a non-disclosure agreement, and if so, why?

[Colin McKay]

These are standard contractual agreements with publishers and other organizations and they're mutually agreed terms.