That's an interesting question. If the Star runs a bunch of ads that are political in nature and doesn't identify who paid for them, I'm not sure who takes the hit. Is it the newspaper or is it the person who bought the ad? I'm not sure how the law works right now. Thankfully, I haven't had any personal experience with that.
I see what you're saying. The slight difference is—because we've looked at your amendment, of course—is that you start to get into where the triggers are. I think we have to have a discussion about that.
Again, I can see some very targeted social media platforms that don't have a high number of visitations but have great effect, because they're targeting into the 25 swing ridings that parties have identified into the 25% of swing voters. Sure they get 40,000 hits that week, but the 40,000 are incredibly effective over a much larger site that is scatter shooting across the Internet.
That's a second debate that we'll get to, but this one is very particular: Identify the ad, whether it's coming from parties, third parties; pre-election period, pre-writ or writ period. If you don't, you're in violation.
Again, I actually don't know who gets hammered if that rule is broken currently.