Information & Ethics Committee on Oct. 24th, 2024

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

I know that famed Canadian creators, such as Margaret Atwood, likened this legislation to Soviet-era censorship. I'm wondering, Ms. Patell, with the bill having been enacted, do you or would you still recommend the repeal of this online censorship bill, Bill C-11, that came from the Trudeau government?

[Jeanette Patell]

That's a really great question.

We're obviously still in the middle of understanding how the CRTC intends to implement this measure. Our focus, regardless of the decisions of parliamentarians now and in the future, is really on protecting and preserving the ecosystem, so we will engage constructively, whether that's with the CRTC or with parliamentarians who are reviewing the future of this legislation.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

I have a question for Meta about the impact of the Online News Act and the effect it's having on local journalism.

I've heard, in my community and from Canadians across the country who work in the news space, that when this law was passed, they then saw their traffic, which was coming to them for free from Facebook, hit a wall. It dropped right off. In some cases it caused outlets to lay off journalists. In some cases it caused them to close.

I'm curious about whether you have measured that impact. However, I would also like to know about the space opened up when reputable and accredited journalists, independent journalists, have left, and their space is now being filled by other actors, and also about the potential for the spread of misinformation in the place of news that was previously being sought out and shared on your platform.

[Rachel Curran]

We disagree with the contention that the space has been replaced by misinformation, MP Barrett. What it has been replaced by is content from our users' friends and families, from other pages they follow, whether those are non-governmental organizations, politicians, civic content—

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Can I just interrupt?

What about the impact on local news?

[Rachel Curran]

We signalled to the government well in advance of removing news from our platforms that this was going to be the impact. We said, “Look, there's going to be a disproportionately negative impact on smaller digital-first publications. We would like to avoid that. We think the value transfer flows the other way. We are providing great value to publishers. Please don't scope us into the bill so that we have to remove news.”

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Thank you for your response.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Mr. Housefather, go ahead for five minutes.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Thank you.

Thank you to all of the witnesses for being here.

Ms. Curran, I have a very short question to ask you at the beginning. In your experience, Israeli companies aren't more nefarious than companies from other countries, are they?

[Rachel Curran]

I'll turn to my colleague, Dr. Hundley, to answer that question.

[Dr. Lindsay Hundley]

I would say that there is just a global rise in the number of disinformation-for-hire firms that are operating around the world. Of course, your colleague has already referenced one network that is based in Israel, but we have seen a lot of these that are based in Russia and other countries, including in the west.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

You get complaints, I assume, from both sides of the conflict that you're essentially taking one side over the other. Is that correct, Ms. Curran?

[Rachel Curran]

Yes, that's correct, MP Housefather.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Thank you.

I want to come back to you, Mr. Fernández, for a second.

At the end of the last round of questioning for Ms. Khalid, you did acknowledge that you were funding the lawsuit of Mr. Strauss. You said that X would fund lawsuits of people who lost their jobs related to comments they made on the platform.

If I were a member of Parliament and made foolish comments on the platform attacking, for example, a specific ethnic group, and as a result the voters of my riding decided to not re-elect me in the next election because I said very stupid things on your platform, would I be able to get X to fund a legal challenge on that?

[Wifredo Fernández]

I don't believe that's in the spirit of the program.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

What if I were thrown out of my caucus? What if I were still a member of Parliament but had said very foolish things on your platform, and my party leader decided to throw me out of caucus because it embarrassed our party? Would I be able to sue to be reinstated in caucus?

[Wifredo Fernández]

We would welcome you to use the service to speak about your challenges and your positions.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Okay.

Now that you have at least acknowledged that you're funding a Canadian political candidate's legal challenge, would you agree to disclose to the committee what number of political candidates in Canada you are funding legal challenges for and to provide any supporting documents related to the costs that you have incurred related to those legal challenges?

[Wifredo Fernández]

I'm happy to take the request back to our legal team, yes.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Thank you very much.

Mr. de Eyre, I have a question for you and TikTok.

Am I correct that you're familiar with the Network Contagion Research Institute?

[Steve de Eyre]

Yes, and I saw that they testified at this committee in the spring.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

They have, exactly. Mr. Finkelstein was here at our committee on this very study.

As you know, the NCRI did a study on Chinese influence on TikTok. I'm going to read their conclusions to you. They say:

The conclusions of our research are clear: Whether content is promoted or muted on TikTok appears to depend on whether it is aligned or opposed to the interests of the Chinese Government. As the summary data graph below illustrates, the percentages of TikTok posts out of Instagram posts are consistently range-bound for general political and pop-culture topics, but completely out-of-bounds for topics sensitive to the Chinese Government.

Those would be, for example, the Uyghurs.

I read the 26 pages of the report, and it's pretty troubling.

What is your response to the idea that TikTok is essentially muting all of the voices that are against the Chinese Communist Party?

[Steve de Eyre]

First, I absolutely disagree with the premise of the question and with the report. We have serious concerns—

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

You disagree with the premise of my question? The premise of my question was simply that the report found that you were doing this. Do you disagree that the report found that you were doing this?