Thank you for the question. I'm just scribbling notes. I'll make a few comments.
I think the first, almost academic, point is that much of our law and thinking around freedom of expression was developed in the context of the town square. What it doesn't account for is the power of the multiplication, which can happen online, with all of the other examples that are coming up. I would just encourage the committee, through the chair, and everyone to know that it doesn't translate perfectly, and there's still a tremendous amount of space for online regulation that doesn't violate the right to freedom of expression.
The second thing I would say, in moving into professional speech—which was the context of the Jordan Peterson case—and professional discipline, there are limits on what we as professionals can say in the context of our profession. For example, lawyers are restricted in what we can and can't say in court all the time. There are protocols, as in this committee, about how we need to direct our comments and what we can and can't talk about.
Similarly, the bargain for—