Jamie Sarkonak: The Liberals’ Bill C-34 is a boomer plan to censor the internet

Article content

The bill would also create the means for the Liberals to censor the internet. All social media platforms would have a duty to minimize the risk of “harmful content,” and a digital safety commssion would be set up to adjudicate complaints about such content online. The definition of “harmful content is cast unworkably wide, grouping content sexualizing children in with “content that foments hatred” and “content that incites violence.” It includes the addendum that this should not be regulated in a way that “unreasonably” limits free expression, which doesn’t offer security at all. We should expect that this scheme will be used to limit the reach of online videos that portray favoured minorities in a bad light, whether that be news of transgender mass shooters or of migrant violence in Europe.

Article content

The consequence for missing the bar set by cabinet, whether it be failure to censor or to scrutinize the age of users, would be a fine as high as $10 million or three per cent of gross revenue, whichever is greater.

Article content

For the children, it has long been clear where the concerns lie online: TikTok is an infinite-scroll, short-video platform engineered by a civilizational enemy that can quickly turn addictive for children (and adults), shortening their attention spans and sending them down rabbit holes of toxic content, whether it be sexual, radical, violent, or, as with the latest diabetes-inducing trend of soaking pineapple spears in Kool-Aid, unhealthy.

Article content

Article content

It’s not the only offender: Instagram is the modern glamour magazine, exposing its users to richer, more luxurious, more beautiful lifestyles that they’re unlikely to ever obtain. Facebook is a pool of AI slop and a platform where, historically at least, exploitation occurred. Snapchat is an app that features prominently in police news releases about online luring busts. And of course, there are the porn sites, which host everything from consensual activity to re-uploaded abuse videos behind easily bypassable age-gates.

Article content

It’s no wonder that there is interest in putting age filters on such sites. But there is a such a thing as parental responsibility — which should include putting limits on screen time and barring objectionable sites from children’s access using the available tools. Instead of PSAs and campaigns to encourage online hygiene, we’re getting more government control.

Article content

We’re also seeing regulations so strong that they could very well ban children from much of the gaming world; indeed, many games and game platforms have a social component that could land them in the 16-and-up-only category. Unfortunately, Bill C-34 is completely blind to the issue of online games, as if its drafters don’t actually spend time on the internet themselves, and haven’t bothered to understand how young people use online spaces.

Article content

Article content

Meanwhile, under this bill, even the adults are to be treated like children, with limits to be imposed on speech offensive to the progressive mind. A “harmful content” censorship regime threatens to undermine critical conversations about criminality, terrorism, extremism, anti-social behaviour, gender roles, and really anything that involves being critical of certain groups, particularly those considered vulnerable by the left. It’s hard as is to have these discussions in Canada, where data collection on these topics is poor and where the limited research available is unrigorous and often politically driven.

Article content

The Liberals could have kept to the simple goal of keeping sexual content online away from minors, as it is in the physical world. Instead of coming up with an elegant solution, they’re using it as cover to usher in a plan that will muzzle adults and oust children from video games in the process. It’s a terrible bill for all ages.

Article content

National Post

Article content