Evidence of meeting #19 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was site.
A recording is available from Parliament.
1:15 p.m.
Conservative
Shannon Stubbs Conservative Lakeland, AB
To me, sound would be extremely important to decipher consent.
1:15 p.m.
Chief Operating Officer, Entreprise MindGeek Canada
In the case [Technical difficulty—Editor] an individual performer, they probably wouldn't need sound to establish that. We always instruct all of our agents to err on the caution side. Basically, if you have any doubt at all, just don't let it up, versus just letting it up.
Even one video, as Feras mentioned, could create irreparable harm to us. The way we view it is that every piece of content that makes it up to the site that shouldn't be there.... For every viewer who stumbles upon that content, we believe the vast majority of individuals want nothing to do with this content, 99.9% and I don't know how many more nines. But after that—
1:15 p.m.
Conservative
Shannon Stubbs Conservative Lakeland, AB
Right, but the main question is then, why did MindGeek wait until December 2020, after global condemnation, after threats from payment processors, to take these actions?
1:15 p.m.
Chief Operating Officer, Entreprise MindGeek Canada
I respectfully disagree with that. I think it's been a constant evolution. Some of the parts that have been more publicly made available to the changes we've made were more publicly spoken about, but this has been a constant evolution in our company since the onset, since 2008. We had human moderation available on our sites when it was a word that didn't even exist, when Facebook and any of the other main platforms in the world never used it.
These were all things that we started. We weren't public about it, but these are things we did since the beginning. They've been core to the way we wanted the company to run.
1:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Chris Warkentin
Thank you very much.
Mrs. Stubbs, your time is up.
We'll turn to Mr. Erskine-Smith.
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Thanks very much, Mr. Chair.
I'll start with Mr. Antoon.
We heard devastating testimony on Monday from a young woman who was victimized on your platform. Is it fair to say that Pornhub and MindGeek failed to take all the actions they could have taken a number of years ago to prevent that instance from happening?
1:15 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Entreprise MindGeek Canada
Maybe I could step back and just explain.
The first time ever that we heard the name of Ms. Fleites was a couple of months before The New York Times article was released. The writer, Mr. Nicholas Kristof, reached out to our PR team around September. So—
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Pause there, Mr. Antoon, because your company did hear from her when she asked for that content to be taken down. Is that correct?
1:15 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Entreprise MindGeek Canada
No. For now, we only know her first and last name. We started an investigation, but we do not have enough information to see if she ever contacted us or not. I'm not saying that she's not telling the truth—not at all, and please do not misunderstand me. I'm just saying that with the first name and last name, it is impossible to know if she's contacted us—
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Don't you think that's worse, that you have no idea if she contacted you? She said she did.
You, as a company that is making millions of dollars...and here is a woman who has been victimized on your platform, and you don't even know, sitting here today, that she contacted you many years ago, when she was 13, to have that content taken down. Don't you think that's even worse?
1:15 p.m.
Chief Operating Officer, Entreprise MindGeek Canada
Mr. Smith, if I could jump in. I—
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
1:15 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Entreprise MindGeek Canada
No problem, I can answer that.
With the information we have today, we cannot find anything from what Ms. Fleites is saying—nothing.
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
I will say, then, it is worse.
What do you say to young women like Serena who have been victimized through your site? You have an opportunity today. The public is watching. What do you say to these individuals who have been victimized on your site?
1:15 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Entreprise MindGeek Canada
I am a father. I have a daughter. I have a wife. I have a mother. I'm heartbroken when I hear these stories. The things that they have suffered are unimaginable. We are aligned with everyone who wants to come up with new regulations. This is a heartbreaking story. Of course I feel sad. This is not what the company—
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Would you say, “We should have done more”? Would you say that?
1:15 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Entreprise MindGeek Canada
We always can do more. We are committed to always doing more.
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Let's talk about how many instances there were. Let's just pick a year. How many times in 2020 did individuals reach out to MindGeek and say, “I want content taken down because I did not consent to that content being put up”?
1:15 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Entreprise MindGeek Canada
We are preparing a transparency report that will be published very soon to close the 2020 year, which—
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
1:15 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Entreprise MindGeek Canada
David, I don't know if you know the number off the top of your head.