Canadian Heritage Committee on April 20th, 2023

[Richard Gingras]

We've signed contracts covering, I believe, something in excess of 200 news organizations across Australia.

I will clarify that question because the first formulation of the question was how many agreements were signed after the code. The second formulation of the question was how many we have. I believe some agreements had been entered into before the code and of course the code has never actually gone into effect vis-à-vis Google.

We have been bargaining with awareness of the code, but not subject to it.

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

It's 200 news organizations. Would that include collectives such as Country Press?

[Richard Gingras]

I believe it does, but again that was a long time ago. I'm quite sure Country Press was included.

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

We're actually saying that the number of contracts would be far below 200 then. It may be with 200 news organizations, but could you reveal to the committee the number of contracts signed, please?

[Richard Gingras]

We can certainly follow up with that. I apologize for not having that number precisely.

You point out, actually, one thing that is often difficult, which is signing an agreement with an organization that may have many brands or an association that represents many brands.

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

Yes. Thank you.

I will move on to Canada. How many contracts have you signed in Canada to date?

[Richard Gingras]

I honestly do not recall that number. I would think that with regard to the number of brands it is in excess of 100. I cannot, fairly, accurately recall the number of contracts.

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

Is that something you could provide—

[Richard Gingras]

I know that it covers a range of publications, going from the very large, such as The Globe and Mail, to news organizations covering Yellowknife.

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

My next question is around the tests that did cut off access to news information. The number we've been given is 1.2 million Canadians. How was the decision made internally? Who makes that decision? Who approves it?

[Richard Gingras]

Such decisions regarding tests are typically driven by several components of the organization—

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

I'm asking specifically about this one. Mr. Walker was aware of it. I'm wondering who makes the decision and who approves it within the organization.

[Kent Walker]

Perhaps I can jump in on this one, Richard.

[Richard Gingras]

Feel free.

[Kent Walker]

As Richard was starting to say, I think the recommendations just come from the product teams—the search teams, the news teams, etc.—and then, in this case, would have been reviewed by a cross-section of our leadership team.

We're a relatively consensus-oriented company, so I can't point to a single person who said “yes” or “no”, but I think the recommendation was probably accepted, and we went forward with it for that five-week period.

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

In relation to Mr. Housefather's question about the legal advice you receive, that of course would be very helpful to the committee. Was there any vetting on that decision around Canadian or U.S. privacy laws?

[Kent Walker]

I think I have the same answer that I gave to Mr. Housefather, which is that we believe, of course, that we are complying with both American and Canadian privacy laws. I'm not aware of a separate line of inquiry here, but I honestly don't know for sure.

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

Thank you.

In terms of your initial presentation, you talked about this being a “random” test. Anecdotally, a number of journalists have indicated that they didn't have access through the news process. In the targeting, the algorithm that was set up to impede access to news—let's be frank—were journalists or news organizations considered as part of that overall thrust of the message that Google wanted to send?

[Richard Gingras]

As I have noted in regard to detail, when we do tests, we have to follow appropriate scientific methodology. It's important that those tests be random. The randomness was driven by IP address, which is not tied to any known individual by us. There was certainly no effort to target any type of profession or individual or organization in Canada in doing so, and I would expect—

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

Thanks for that.

My next question, then, is—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Wrap it up pretty quickly, if you don't mind, Mr. Julian.

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

My final question is this: Was there any geographical targeting of IP addresses?

[Richard Gingras]

Similarly, it is randomized, so the geographic representation would, if the mathematics work, be proportionate to the IP addresses or populations in those various geographies within Canada.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kevin Waugh]

Thank you, Mr. Julian.

He is right on the 200 Australian news organizations. When the Murdoch News agency signed on, it was the first to sign on with Google in Australia, and the rest followed, but we would like to get the correct number from you. The Murdoch News agency is rather large, as you know, in Australia, and it dominates the news in that country.

In the second round, we'll start with Ms. Gladu.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for being here today.

Originally, Bill C-18 was supposed to ensure local media would be sustainable. A lot of times, we've heard that it was modelled on the Australian legislation, but I think I heard you say in your testimony that we're the first country to put a price on links, so I assume that means Australia did not do that. I think you also said that you weren't subject to the Australian code. Is that correct? Could you confirm that?