Russiagate 3.0 a distraction from Canada's own foreign interference scandals

Jamie Sarkonak: Russian-funded YouTubers don't hold a candle to China's meddling in Canada | National Post | Jamie Sarkonak:

September 10, 2024 - "In Canada, it’s been months since politicians and others across the country were declared to have provided 'witting and unwitting' assistance to foreign governments — and we’re still waiting to learn their names. So, when the Americans announced the discovery of a foreign interference plot last Wednesday, it was a relief to see them put the details on the table.

"Alleged in the indictment were illegal activities by a pair of Russian propagandists carried out as they contracted two Canadian influencers in American right-wing media to produce content. Some 2,000 videos were uploaded in the scheme starting in November 2023, at least 51 of which had something to do with Canada. A total of 16 million views were racked up.... The videos, by the way, weren’t illegal.... The Russians, who have now disappeared into thin air and are unlikely to ever be prosecuted, were accused of conspiring to violate foreign agent registration laws and commit money laundering (namely, routing money out of and back into the U.S. to commit unregistered foreign agent activities)....

"The indictment has had the remarkable effect of hammering everyone except its targets (though, maybe that was the point).... One, Lauren Southern, is also a Canadian influencer of the American right; another, Tim Pool, is the creator of the Timcast podcast. Both have since stated that they had full editorial control over the material they made, countering the notion that any Russians were telling them what to say. American prosecutors seem to agree. 'The company never disclosed to the influencers or to their millions of followers its ties to RT (Russia Today) and the Russian government,' U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland said at a news conference last week.

"Very little direct propaganda appears to be made. Based on the indictment, Russian masters did ask for anti-Ukraine content after a concert hall near Moscow suffered an ISIS attack, in which around 150 people were killed. The rest appeared to be business-as-usual topics for the subcontracted creators: immigration, race politics, gender, the economy.... The videos didn’t really reach beyond the online American right, and if their influence operation worked anything like the way the Russian social media bot campaign did in 2016, they were narrow in effect and far eclipsed by genuine American media. It’s possible that the indictment, made in the weeks before the election, will have more influence over the public mind than any Tenet Media video ever could....

"[C]ommentators on the left have still pointed to the indictment as a means of discrediting the conservative ecosystem online. A CBC News investigation attacked Southern’s record of criticizing immigration. In the Star, Luke Lebrun of Press Progress wrote, 'millions of Canadians are regularly consuming content from these sources and that’s something we can’t ignore. It is bad for our democracy when a significant slice of our population is being deliberately misled and even radicalized.' Lebrun, looking for a deeper Canadian connection, even found a video in which Southern interviewed Counter Signal journalist Katrina Panova, known online as 'Kat Kanada,' who is not funded by Russia, to imply guilt by association. This prompted Liberal MP Mark Gerretsen to block Panova on the false basis of 'a foreign government paying you to engage with me'; he retracted the allegation of foreign funding afterward.

"There’s the other benefit of sponsoring propaganda overseas: you get discourse like this, painting a picture of a corrupted, misinformation-gorging horde threatening the enlightened half of society, worthy of being digitally quarantined. It can’t just be that high immigration, identity politics and the economic failures of progressive politicians are organically popular topics among the populace; no, it’s a Russian conspiracy.

"Meanwhile, as the U.S. indictment distracts, dust accumulates on the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians’ (NSICOP) June report on foreign interference.  China and India, too, have corrupted media members to some unknown degree (the Chinese government is alleged to have paid media outlets to publish articles; India is said to have an influence network that includes journalists). The public, unfortunately, remains in the dark as to who these figures are.

"Worse, some countries have tapped directly into our legislative houses. NSICOP has already discovered that some elected officials 'began wittingly assisting foreign state actors soon after their election.” India and China again are top suspects. Some Parliamentarians may have betrayed Canada, says NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, but their names never manage to escape from whisper networks to the general public. It will be an improvement when Canada finally gets its own foreign agent registry... But before we allow ourselves to be distracted by flashy U.S. Department of Justice badges, we have far greater, unresolved concerns in our halls of government."

Read more: https://nationalpost.com/opinion/jamie-sarkonak-russian-funded-youtubers-dont-hold-a-candle-to-chinas-meddling-in-canada

Dangerous Foreign Agents? or Victims of Democrat Smear Campaign? | North West Cavalryman | September 9, 2024:

Podcaster demonetized over anonymous charges

YouTube Has Demonetized Russell Brand Over Anonymous #MeToo Allegations | Reason | Robby Soave:

September 19, 2023 - "Russell Brand is a comedian, actor, and podcaster with a considerable following on social media platforms, including Rumble and YouTube. Once firmly on the political left, his contrarian views on COVID-19 and other subjects have earned him a substantial following among independents and conservatives, in the vein of figures like Joe Rogan and Glenn Greenwald.

"Last week, the London Sunday Times accused Brand of sexually assaulting multiple women during the time period from 2006 and 2013.... Brand has denied the allegations, but the consequences have been swift. His talent agency dropped him the same day the story was published, and now YouTube has demonetized his channel, meaning that he can't make money from advertisements.

"The reporting in The Sunday Times is very detailed, and the story does offer some corroborating details.... Brand has admitted in the past to struggling with drug abuse and sex addiction and engaging in lewd behavior—which doesn't mean he's guilty of rape but does put the accusations in context.

"It's fair, of course, to scrutinize the motivations of the accusers as well: The Sunday Times notes that the women wanted to talk to reporters because of 'Brand's newfound prominence as an online wellness influencer, with millions of followers on YouTube and other sites.' Brand's supporters may see this admission as evidence that he is being targeted specifically because of his recently established animosity toward mainstream media and institutions.

"Regardless of how one feels about this situation, YouTube's actions should raise eyebrows. The platform has not punished Brand for something he said—for some piece of video content he created. YouTube is punishing Brand for conduct that took place entirely off the platform and does not involve speech at all.

"As a private company, YouTube has the right, of course, to platform and deplatform anyone it wishes. It is not obligated to obey the First Amendment, extend due process to content creators, or enforce internally consistent rules. The company is free to do whatever it wants — and users are free to complain. And this seems like something worth complaining about. 

"YouTube's guidelines do require creators to remain 'responsible' both on and off the platform, and the company specifically prohibits 'abuse or violence, demonstrating cruelty, or participating in fraudulent or deceptive behavior that leads to real-world harm.' But let's keep in mind that Brand has not been convicted of any crime. His accusers remain anonymous. Will any prominent figure accused of sexual misconduct anonymously face similar sanction, prior to any criminal action taking place?

"Due process, the presumption of innocence, the burden of the proof — these things are not legally required in a situation like this, but wholly jettisoning them is morally, practically, and philosophically unsound. It's unwise for YouTube to put itself in the position of litigating extremely contentious off-site personal behavior. This sets a very dangerous, quasi-dystopian precedent."

Read more: https://reason.com/2023/09/19/russell-brand-youtube-demonetized-rape-accusations/

Russell Brand DEPLATFORMED on Streaming; Ad Revenue SUSPENDED In Stunning Censorship Move: Rising | The Hill | September 20, 2023:

Liberals reject Bill C-11 user content protection

Canada's Senate has passed Bill C-11, which allows the CRTC to regulate internet platforms, but with an amendment that would protect user-generated content from regulation. However, the Liberal government has rejected that amendment. 

Government Rejection of Key Senate Bill C-11 Amendment Reveals Its True Intent: Retain Power to Regulate User Content | Michael Geist blog: 

March 8, 2023 - "For more than a year, Canadian Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez has clung to the Bill C-11 mantra of 'platforms in, users out'. When presented with clear evidence from thousands of digital creators, the former chair of the CRTC, and numerous experts that that wasn’t true, the Senate passed compromise language to ensure that platforms such as Youtube would be caught by the legislation consistent with the government’s stated objective, but that user content would not. 

"Last night, Rodriguez rejected the compromise amendment, turning his back on digital creators and a Senate process lauded as one of the most comprehensive ever. In doing so, he has left no doubt about the government’s true intent with Bill C-11: retain power and flexibility to regulate user content.

"While the decision does not come as a total shock – Rodriguez suggested last month that he would reject any substantive amendments – it still stings. The Senate amendment crafted by Trudeau-appointed Senators Simons and Miville-Duchêne took the government at its word that their objective was to ensure sound recordings on services such as Youtube were caught by the bill. Their amendment did that, while scoping out user content on sites such as TikTok.... 

"The government’s official response to the Senate amendments, posted as a motion that will be voted on by the House before heading back again to the Senate, accepted some amendments, rejected others (notably new age verification requirements), and even amended some amendments. But on the issue of user content regulation, Rodriguez offered a flat rejection of an amendment narrowly tailored to meet his stated objectives:

respectfully disagrees with amendment 3 because this would affect the Governor in Council’s ability to publicly consult on, and issue, a policy direction to the CRTC to appropriately scope the regulation of social media services with respect to their distribution of commercial programs, as well as prevent the broadcasting system from adapting to technological changes over time;

"The rationale behind the rejection finally removes any pretense of the government’s true Bill C-11 intent. Rather than citing misleading lobbying claims opposed to the change, it calls it like it is: the government wants the power to direct the CRTC on user content today and the power to exert further regulation tomorrow. Regulatory power over user content today is confirmed by a bill that covers user TikToks, many Youtube videos, podcasts, and other content and future regulation is plainly framed as 'adapting to technological changes'.

"While the government may seek to provide assurances that it will issue a policy direction that addresses some of these concerns, that is neither strictly binding on the CRTC nor a substitute for providing legislative certainty that user content regulation falls outside of the bill. 

"There are still several steps left for the bill including a House vote that will likely make the NDP and Bloc complicit in making Canada the only country in the democratic world to engage in this form of user content regulation and a return to the Senate for a final review. But regardless of the upcoming legislative steps, the government has left no doubt about its position. On its way to rejecting the concerns of thousands of Canadian creators and dismissing the fears of authors such as Margaret Atwood and Senator David Adams Richards, its real mantra is platforms are in and user content regulation is in."

Read more: https://www.michaelgeist.ca/2023/03/government-response-to-senate-bill-c-11-amendments-reveals-its-true-intent-retain-power-and-flexibility-to-regulate-user-content/

Anthony Furey, "Bill C-11 is closer to becoming law — here’s what’s at stake," True North, February 5, 2023:

Bill C-11 critics accused of "misinformation"

Liberal government’s online streaming bill heads to senate after 3rd House reading | Global News - Canadian Press:

June 21, 2022 - "The Liberal government’s online-streaming bill, which has been the subject of fierce debate among members of Parliament, is now headed to the Senate. Bill C-11 passed third reading in the House of Commons with a vote of 208 to 117, with the Conservatives opposing the proposed legislation.

"The bill would update the Broadcasting Act and bring streaming platforms such as Netflix and Amazon Prime within the regulatory regime. It would also apply to platforms including YouTube and Spotify.... Critics of the bill say that as currently worded, it could also apply to amateur videos and user-generated content posted on YouTube.

"The government faced protests from Conservative and Green Party MPs after it cut short debate and discussion of amendments in the heritage committee to push the bill through the House of Commons before the summer break."
Read more: https://globalnews.ca/news/8937589/online-streaming-bill-senate-third-house-of-commons-reading/ 

Bill C-11 Enters a Danger Zone: Government Shifts from Ignoring Witnesses on User Content Regulation to Dismissing Criticisms as “Misinformation” | Michael Geist:

June 18, 2022 - "The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage heard from a total of 48 witnesses as individuals or representing organizations during its study of Bill C-11 (excluding the CRTC and government officials). Of those 48, at least 16 either raised concerns about the regulation of user content in the bill or disputed government claims about its effect ... but somehow the testimony of one-third of the witnesses, which included creators, consumer groups, independent experts, Internet platforms, and industry associations. was ignored.

"The government’s decision to ignore the overwhelming majority of testimony on the issue of regulating user content damages the credibility of the committee Bill C-11 review and makes the forthcoming Senate study on the bill even more essential. But the government went beyond just ignoring witness testimony yesterday in the House of Commons. It now claims those views constitute 'misinformation.' Tim Louis, a Liberal MP who is on the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage and sat through hours of testimony, said this in the House of Commons yesterday:

We have heard a lot of misinformation. My colleague just mentioned previously that a lot of emails have come in with a lot of confusion and misinformation, and I believe that is deliberate.... The bill explicitly excludes all user-generated content in social media platforms and streaming services. I will read the subsection. Subsection 2.1 of Bill C-11 states: 

 A person who uses a social media service to upload programs for transmission over the Internet and reception by other users of the service – and who is not the provider of the service or the provider’s affiliate, or the agent or mandatary of either of them – does not, by the fact of that use, carry on a broadcasting undertaking for the purposes of this Act.

In plain language, that means that users, even digital-first creators with millions of subscribers, are not broadcasters and therefore they will not face any obligations under the act. Any suggestions otherwise are simply untrue.

This is the same MP who has heard CRTC Chair Ian Scott tell his committee:

[Section] 4.2 allows the CRTC to prescribe by regulation user uploaded content subject to very explicit criteria. That is also in the Act [stress added]....

"The effort to conflate regulation of users with regulating their content has been ongoing for months. It has been misleading for months. But the government enters a danger zone when it labels the concerns raised by one-third of the witnesses before committee as 'misinformation.'  It is not and the risks associated with the label within political debate are enormous. There are members of the government’s online harms panel calling for new regulations on 'misleading political communications'. When government MPs call the majority of expert testimony and analysis – corroborated by its own regulator – misinformation, it creates risks to freedom of expression that cannot be ignored.

"This past week was a bad week for democratic governance and Bill C-11. The decision to race through over 100 amendments without public disclosure or debate ran counter to basic democratic norms as the public will never know what changes were proposed in those secret amendments. Now government MPs are resorting to claims of misinformation for testimony they heard directly from one-third of witnesses. The harm that causes will last long after some extra Netflix money is added to the Canadian system."
Read more: https://www.michaelgeist.ca/2022/06/bill-c-11-enters-a-danger-zone-government-shifts-from-ignoring-witnesses-on-user-content-regulation-to-dismissing-criticisms-as-misinformation/

Bill C11 lets gov't regulate content YouTube warns

YouTube says bill could cover user-generated content, despite minister's assurances | CP24 - Marie Woolf, Canadian Press:

May 4, 2022 - "YouTube has warned that cooking videos made in people's kitchens and other home videos could be regulated by an online streaming law, despite assurances from the heritage minister that this will not happen. Speaking publicly for the first time about Bill C-11, Jeanette Patell, head of government affairs at YouTube Canada, ... told the National Culture Summit in Ottawa that the bill's text appears to contradict Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez's public assurances that it does not cover amateur content.... 

"The online streaming bill, known in Parliament as Bill C-11, contains a clause excluding from regulation videos uploaded by a user for other users to watch. It is followed by qualifying clauses saying the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission can make regulations relating to 'programs,' which YouTube claims would give the regulator the discretion and scope to oversee a wide range of content, including home videos.

"Patell told the summit that if the government wants an 'option in the future' to regulate YouTube users' videos, 'that's a conversation we need to have.... It's incumbent on us to have clarity in the law,' she told the summit. Patell indicated that YouTube accepts that full-length professional music videos should fall within the bill's scope, but she said she wants the legal text of the bill to explicitly reflect the minister's insistence that amateur videos will be exempt.

"In February, when the bill was unveiled, Rodriguez said 'cat videos' or social-media 'influencers' would not be covered by it. A spokeswoman for the minister said the government has been very clear that user-generated content does not come within the scope of the bill and the text reflects that. 'We have been extremely clear.... Users and creators will not be regulated. Platforms are in, user-generated content is out,' said Laura Scaffidi.

"The bill would make online streaming platforms, such as Netflix, Spotify and YouTube, promote a certain amount of Canadian content and contribute financially to the Canadian cultural sector. It also gives the CRTC wider powers over digital platforms, so they are regulated along with traditional broadcasters.

"Patell said in an interview that the bill 'provides the CRTC the discretion to regulate user-generated content like a fan doing a cover song or someone making cooking videos in their kitchen or doing how-to-fix-a-bike videos.'"

Read more: https://www.cp24.com/news/youtube-says-bill-could-cover-user-generated-content-despite-minister-s-assurances-1.5888496

Rumble: a market solution to YouTube censorship

All Americans should join Rumble’s free speech fight | Washington Times - Dean Karayanis:

illustration: Washington Times

December 6, 2021 - "In an era with precious little common ground, everyone objects to social media platforms. Conservatives gripe that they put speech in the hands of Big Tech oligarchs, corporate liberals that reap billions while giving content creators mere pennies. But upstart video platform Rumble has chosen another route, and it’s better to light a candle than tweet about the darkness. 

"Rumble’s simple commitment to open expression just gained a big-time ally. The platform just joined forces with CF Acquisition Corp. VI, an entity sponsored by Cantor Fitzgerald, which is expected to provide about $400 million to the 'neutral video platform.'

"Rumble not only respects free speech; it offers monetization for videos ten times that of Google’s YouTube, which recently demonetized 'Sad Little Man' for criticizing Dr. Anthony Fauci. The video’s content may make Dr. Fauci’s fans faint, but is it any different [from] the music video for the ’80s hit 'Land of Confusion' by Genesis, which depicted a grotesque, senile puppet of President Ronald Reagan kissing a chimp and accidentally nuking the world? 

"I had a front-row seat for two of the media’s biggest free-speech revolutions: ‘The Rush Limbaugh Show' and Fox News Channel (FNC). Before them, the majority of Americans tuned in to see their beliefs ridiculed or ignored.... Rumble is still a digital David taking on Google’s Goliath, but those of us who left Rush’s TV show to launch Fox in 1996 didn’t think the country would support a third cable news network, especially with Microsoft and NBC backing MSNBC. But we were young and figured the gig would last just long enough to pay off our bar tabs. Twenty years later, what is now the #1 cable news channel, proved us wrong.... 

"FNC had Rupert Murdoch’s deep pockets.... Thanks to its merger, Rumble now has that key ingredient of financing. More importantly, they have that commitment to freedom..... Rumble has an uphill climb every bit as steep as Rush and Fox, but they benefit from the fact that Americans are disillusioned with Big Tech. We can watch videos without being transformed into mindless zombies out of a George Romero film — and we like to get paid for what we create.

"We’ll hear a lot of shade thrown at Rumble as it eats away at YouTube’s market share. But America is still an exception to a world of repression, and 44 million have already flocked to its platform, eager to be free of censorship, biased algorithms and digital serfdom."

Read more: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/dec/6/all-americans-should-join-rumbles-free-speech-figh/

YouTube removes UK MP's vaccine pass speech

YouTube censors David Davis MP’s speech against vaccine passports | Big Brother Watch:

October 14, 2021 - "YouTube has removed a video of former minister David Davis MP giving a speech against Covid passports during Conservative Party Conference. The video was uploaded by the non-partisan civil liberties NGO, Big Brother Watch. 

"YouTube removed Davis’ speech, filmed at a conference fringe event held by Big Brother Watch, for violating its policy on 'medical misinformation' but did not specify what content had breached the rules. In a notification email to Big Brother Watch, the platform said: 'YouTube doesn’t allow claims about COVID-19 vaccinations that contradict expert consensus from local health authorities or the World Health Organization (WHO)'....

"In the censored speech, Mr Davis promoted the benefits of vaccination but warned that domestic vaccine passports are 'illiberal, demanding that we an ordinary British citizen produce our papers to do something which is normal in our daily lives.... We know from our history that a free society is a greater, a better, a more economically successful, a happier place to be,' Mr Davis said.

"Big Brother Watch, which is leading the national campaign against domestic Covid passes, said that the group ... is mounting an appeal.

"David Davis MP said:

This is an outrageous attack on free speech. Throughout the pandemic, we have seen blatant attempts by Big Tech to silence opposition voices challenging the conventional wisdom. This episode serves as a further example of the worrying trend of strangling free speech.
My speech at conference was carefully researched, wholly accurate and backed up with the latest scientific evidence.
This Government will shortly be bringing forward the Online Safety Bill. This harmful piece of legislation is nothing but a censor’s charter that only hands more power to these unaccountable Silicon Valley giants.
The unambiguous attempt by YouTube to censor my speech is a warning. If YouTube is happy to attempt to silence elected Members of Parliament, then they are also happy to censor anyone.... The Government must stop the erosion of free speech online. That starts with looking again at the wholly inadequate proposals in the Online Safety Bill.”

Mark Johnson, Legal and Policy Officer at Big Brother Watch said:

The removal of David Davis’ brilliant speech at our civil liberties event is a serious act of censorship from a platform with a growing track record of clamping down on free speech. YouTube has become increasingly intolerant of discussion around the pandemic.... The Government is doing nothing to tackle online censorship but stands to make the problem worse with broad rules clamping down on lawful speech in its new Online Safety Bill. This ought to be a wakeup call to politicians that freedom of speech is under severe threat in the digital world.

Read more: https://bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/2021/10/youtube-censors-david-davis-mps-speech-against-vaccine-passports/

[Update] YouTube U-turns over David Davis vaccination passports clip after protest | BBC News:
October 14, 2021 - "YouTube has reversed its decision to remove a video of David Davis arguing against Covid passports, following criticism from the ex-minister.... YouTube said the video was 'immediately reinstated following a review'. A spokeswoman for the company said: "We quickly remove flagged content that violates our community guidelines, including Covid-19 content that explicitly contradicts expert consensus from local health authorities or the World Health Organization. With millions of hours of videos uploaded on our site each day, sometimes we make the wrong call.'"
Read more: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-58915092

Canadian gov't moves to regulate online content

 'Full-blown assault' on free expression: Inside the comprehensive Liberal bill to regulate the internet |National Post - Tristin Hopper:

April 29, 2021 - "After more than 25 years of Canadian governments pursuing a hands-off approach to the online world, the government of Justin Trudeau is now pushing Bill C-10, a law that would see Canadians subjected to the most regulated internet in the free world. 

"Although pitched as a way to expand Canadian content provisions to the online sphere, the powers of Bill C-10 have expanded considerably in committee, including a provision introduced last week that could conceivably allow the federal government to order the deletion of any Facebook, YouTube, Instagram or Twitter upload made by a Canadian. In comments this week, NDP leader Jagmeet Singh indicated his party was open to providing the votes needed to pass C-10, seeing the bill as a means to combat online hate....

"Former CRTC commissioner Peter Menzies said in an interview that Bill C-10 'doesn’t just infringe on free expression, it constitutes a full-blown assault upon it and, through it, the foundations of democracy'....

"The draft text of Bill C-10 specifically included a clause exempting social media. While the government was looking to regulate the internet, it didn’t want to bother with anything 'uploaded to an online undertaking that provides a social media service by a user of the service.' Indeed, Heritage Minister Steven Guilbeault has repeatedly framed C-10 as a way to regulate streaming services such as Netflix and Crave while leaving social media alone.... 

"But in a House of Commons Heritage committee meeting Friday the social media clause was deleted.... What the deletion means is that every single Canadian who posts to Instagram, Facebook, TikTok, Twitter or YouTube could be treated like a broadcaster subject to CRTC oversight and sanction. The users themselves may not necessarily be subject to direct CRTC regulation, but social media providers would have to answer to every post on their platforms as if it were a TV show or radio program....

"When he introduced Bill C-10 in November, Guilbeault assured the House of Commons that 'user-generated content, news content and video games' would not be subject to the new regulations. Guilbeault’s 180-degree turn on social media ... [means that] if your Canadian website isn’t a text-only GeoCities blog from 1996, Bill C-10 thinks it’s a program deserving of CRTC regulation. This covers news sites, podcasts, blogs, the websites of political parties or activist groups and even foreign websites that might be seen in Canada. In a Monday meeting of the Canadian Heritage committee, smartphone apps were also thrown under the Bill C-10 rubric, although the complete text has not been released to the public.

"Passage of Bill C-10 would not subject Canadian content creators to a top-down China-style censorship regime.... But the ultimate effect of C-10 would be to plunge whole realms of independent media — from YouTubers to podcasters to bloggers — into an environment where they could face both a requirement for government registration as well as any number of CRTC content strictures drawn up without the need for additional legislation or oversight. As the bill’s official FAQ states, only after it becomes law will the CRTC decide 'how it should implement the new powers afforded by the Bill.'

"Michael Geist, a University of Ottawa professor and the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-Commerce Law, has been among one of the most persistent critics of Bill C-10, calling it 'dangerous,' and 'inexcusable.' In a February blog post, Geist noted that aside from C-10’s infringements on free expression, it could spark blowback.... Geist cites the experience of Facebook in Australia.... [After]  Australia passed legislation requiring the social media giant to compensate news companies whenever a link was shared on its platform ... Facebook simply banned the sharing of news content by Australian users, restoring it only after Australian legislation was amended.

"The penalties prescribed by Bill C-10 are substantial. For corporations, a first offence can yield penalties of up to $10 million, while subsequent offences could be up to $15 million apiece. If TikTok, Twitter, Facebook and YouTube are suddenly put in a situation where their millions of users must follow the same rules as a Canadian cable channel or radio station, it’s not unreasonable to assume they may just follow Facebook’s example and take the nuclear option." 

Read more: https://nationalpost.com/news/full-blown-assault-on-free-expression-inside-the-comprehensive-liberal-bill-to-regulate-the-internet

Children left behind in USA's return to normal

Will COVID hysterics ever let our children live normal lives? | New York Post - Karol Markowicz

April 11, 2021 - "The end of the pandemic is nigh. Americans continue to get vaccinated at a rapid clip. Life will be moving on. Except, it seems, for children. For more than a year, they have suffered from irrational, unscientific and downright superstitious policies inflicted upon them by adults — and there is no end in sight.

"In March, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ­issued new guidance that three-foot social distancing suffices in schools, instead of the usual six. Yet in many localities where teachers unions wield power, schools still didn’t fully reopen. In New York City, schools have ­reopened on a (very) part-time basis in large part owing to the ­debunked six-foot rule. United Federation of Teachers boss Michael Mulgrew immediately balked at the guidance, calling it 'strange' and saying the union would consult with its own experts. But the real question is: Why do kids even need to socially distance at all?

"Many places in Europe, including Britain, as well as some schools across America, long ago scrapped social-distancing ­requirements for kids. They opened their schools and kept them open. That’s ­because ­research has repeatedly showed that children are at minuscule risk from the disease and also transmit it a much lower rate than do adults.

"We also need to cut it out with the masking of kids. Let’s notice that every video of a 2-year-old being escorted off an airplane for not wearing a mask is set in America. On European flights, masks are required for ages 6 and up.... And while masking 6-year-olds still seems unnecessary and should hopefully end soon, it’s saner than sticking one on a toddler. 

"In November, Maria van Kerkhove, head of the World Health Organization’s emerging-diseases unit, clarified that 'for children under 6 years old, we don’t recommend the use of masks.' This, she said, was 'for many reasons — because of the way children are developing' and because enforcing adherence is a fool’s errand. She added: 'Between 6 [and] 11, we recommend taking a risk-based approach depending on where the children are, the types of activities they are doing.'

"Yet last week, YouTube removed a video of scientists from places like Stanford saying much the same to Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. The Google-owned video service called it 'medical misinformation.' This, even though last April, YouTube CEO Susan Wojcocki said her site would interdict 'anything that would go against World Health ­Organization recommendations.' In this case, it’s YouTube itself that was contradicting WHO....

"There is a specific reason ­other developed nations treat children differently than adults, and it seems hard for the coronavirus hysterics to accept: Again, COVID-19 largely doesn’t affect children. 

"Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.), caused a stir when he said last August that 'seasonal flu is actually, in many cases, a deadlier virus if [kids] contract that' — a claim that Politifact was forced to rate 'mostly true.' It’s actually completely true, and if this is surprising news, it’s because the CDC, virus guru Dr. Anthony Fauci and the media at large have failed to tell the truth about COVID’s risks to children and the risks of children spreading it to adults."

Read more: https://nypost.com/2021/04/11/will-covid-hysterics-ever-let-our-children-live-normal-lives/ 

YouTube removes Canadian doctors' Covid video

Concern mounts over censorship of Canadian doctors |  iPolitics - Rachel Emmanuel:

March 9, 2021 - "A video of Canadian doctors listing reasons not to be afraid of COVID-19 was censored within minutes of being posted to YouTube, says a group advocating to end government lockdowns. Liberty Coalition Canada posted the video to YouTube on Monday morning, and 20 minutes later, the video-sharing platform removed the post citing a violation of its policy....

"The move is indicative of the escalating censorship for anyone questioning the government’s approach to COVID-19, contended Independent MP Derek Sloan, a member of the End the Lockdowns National Caucus. 'What we’re seeing is: whatever the prevailing consensus is — if you run counter to that, then you’re silenced,' Sloan told iPolitics on Tuesday. 'But good science is all about consent and discussion, and we seem to be seeing the shutdown of that debate.'

"The video in question was created by The Canada Health Alliance, a group of medical doctors, nurses and other health practitioners with a goal to protect patients’ freedom of choice and autonomy through informed consent. Some professionals in the Canada Health Alliance are also part of the Liberty Coalition initiative Professionals Against Lockdowns. 

"The video, which was posted yesterday, and had been viewed on Rumble nearly 57,000 times at the time of iPolitics’ publication, begins with an introduction from B.C. medical doctor Stephen Malthouse. Malthouse lists a range of reasons not to be afraid of the novel coronavirus, including that: the vast majority of people with COVID-19 have few or no symptoms of being sick; there are less patients in the ICU than in the previous three years; and that yearly deaths since 2001 have remained relatively steady, other than a slight uptick in deaths in 2020, which he attributes to an aging population. He also says COVID deaths in children are so rare the death rate is statistically zero. Meanwhile, the survival rate for those under 50 is greater than 99.9 per cent, or 94.6 per cent for those over 70, before early treatment like Vitamin C or D.... 

"In what Sloan describes as the most controversial part of the video, Malthouse says PCR (polymerase chain reaction) tests are 'practically worthless,' with research now showing that only three per cent of people with a positive PCR actually have COVID-19. This is worth debating because Ottawa is basing most of its decisions off case-counts determined by PRC tests, said Sloan.

Read more: https://ipolitics.ca/2021/03/09/concern-mounts-over-censorship-of-canadian-doctors/

1st online US POTUS convention begins tonight

Opinion: Libertarians to be first to nominate a presidential candidate via virtual convention | Atlanta Journal-Constitution - Jim Galloway:

May 19, 2020 - "Over the weekend, U.S. Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan decided that he wouldn’t make a run for president under the Libertarian Party banner after all.... There is still a reason to keep an eye on Libertarians as they pick their presidential nominee this weekend. But many will consider the 'how' to be more important than the 'who.'

"The pandemic has forced the Libertarian nominating convention into cyberspace — something that Republicans and Democrats alike might find themselves mimicking.... On Friday evening and Saturday morning, 1,045 Libertarian delegates will become the first 50-state, national party to select their nominees for U.S. president and vice president via Zoom, one of several video chat services that have risen up to serve as a substitute for face-to-face contact....

"Libertarians were to gather in Austin, Texas, this Memorial Day weekend. Then the hotel they booked canceled its operations, and Texas officials imposed a 14-day mandatory quarantine on all out-of-state interlopers. They still hope to have an in-person national gathering in July.... But ... Libertarians are under deadline pressures when it comes to the presidential contest that Republicans and Democrats are not. The names of their candidate for president, along with electors, must be submitted far earlier in many states. Which is why, only two weeks ago, the Libertarian National Committee voted to take its presidential nomination process into virtual territory....

"'We’ve been running training sessions on how to run a parliamentary meeting online. We’re throwing every monkey wrench in,' said Dan Fishman, executive director of the Libertarian Party.... Fishman is a software architect – not uncommon among Libertarians, he said. 'We’ve always been a party of technologists. Among software engineers, the dominating preference is libertarianism. So we have a lot of technical people really helping out,' he said....

"Libertarians decided to use the Zoom 'webinar' feature. Delegates will be able to see the principals, but not each other. State party chairs, who as 'panelists' can see the convention/audience, will forward delegation votes and motions. Members of state delegations have set up Slack channels so they can chat among themselves throughout the process.

"The vote for president is expected Saturday. With Amash out – he will remain the first and only member of Congress to bear a Libertarian label – the race is an open one. The only Georgian in the contest is John Monds, who is something of a Libertarian legend. In 2008, in an obscure state Public Service Commission race against Republican Doug Everett, Monds became the first Libertarian in U.S. history to win more than 1 million votes....

"Fishman said he expects Republicans and Democrats alike to be paying attention. 'I know at some point in time people are going to want to talk to us about this. They don’t have quite the same issues that we do, in terms of how their conventions are run, but they are going to have to do something like this,” Fishman said....

"The Libertarian Party has a YouTube channel that will allow you to watch its proceedings, live or delayed. Do tune in, at least for a half-hour or so. You’ll get a glimpse of the skeleton of business that is actually conducted at a political convention – with all the froth and fancy removed."

Read more: https://www.ajc.com/blog/politics/opinion-libertarians-first-nominate-presidential-candidate-via-virtual-convention/3wva19YUrooFK3ROU1dbzK/

Roger Ver keeps attention on Ross Ulbricht case

'Bitcoin Jesus' Preaches Libertarian Gospel of Crypto & Crack Cocaine - P.H. Madore, CCN:

May 11, 2019 - "Roger Ver took to YouTube to read another letter from Ross Ulbricht, creator of the first darknet market using Bitcoin. The libertarian idealist used the opportunity to rail against the war on drugs.... Ver – once nicknamed 'Bitcoin Jesus' for his rabid crypto evangelism –  is more recently best known as a major proponent of Bitcoin Cash, which he views as remaining more faithful to the vision of Satoshi Nakamoto than Bitcoin....

"Ulbricht ... is currently serving a [double] life sentence in federal prison for his role in providing a safe place for people to buy and sell drugs online. Some have argued that Silk Road created the first real demand for Bitcoin, which was the only currency used on the website....

"After reading the letter, Roger Ver unleashed an emotional monologue about the war on drugs, of which he believes Ross Ulbricht is an unfortunate victim. He presented a boilerplate libertarian stance that drugs should not be illegal, in any form....

And just because some people get together and write some words down on paper and call it a law, that doesn’t alter morality one bit. And if people have the right to drink alcohol, they have the right to smoke marijuana – they have the right to smoke crack. Because their lives and their bodies belong to them and their lives and their bodies don’t belong to the politicians or the police officers or any of these other people....

"Ulbricht never sold drugs himself. The most involvement in the drug trade Ulbricht had was trying to grow mushrooms. Even so, he received the harshest sentence out of anyone ever arrested related to darknet markets.

"Governments worldwide have gone the opposite route from what Roger Ver and libertarians might prefer. Recently, DeepDotWeb, a clear net site devoted to the underworld of the web, was shut down and its domain seized. At least two of its operators have so far been arrested. This follows the capture of the proprietors of Wall Street Market, which had recently exit scammed.

"A substantial darknet bust coincided with the closure of Dream Market, leading some to speculate the events were correlated.

"In theory, it’s challenging to track users on the dark web and transactions made using certain privacy-enhancing technologies like cryptocurrency. The reality is that law enforcement often gets a big boost when it compromises just one or two individuals."

Read more and watch video: https://www.ccn.com/bitcoin-jesus-preaches-libertarian-gospel-of-crypto-crack-cocaine
'via Blog this'

PragerU videos viewed a billion times in a year

How PragerU Is Winning The Right-Wing Culture War Without Donald Trump - Joseph Bernstein, Buzzfeed News:

March 3, 2018 - "While it is not an accredited institution of higher learning, Prager University is most definitely an education. Scrolling through its 300-odd videos yields a survey of almost every divisive national issue in the United States today: racism, sexism, income inequality, gun ownership, Islam, immigration, Israel, police brutality, and, of course, speech on college campuses.

"Many of the people presenting these topics are establishment, PBS NewsHour–conservative types like [Bret] Stephens, Charles Krauthammer, and Steve Forbes. But more importantly, PragerU’s faculty includes an all-star lineup of internet and media personalities who have made their bones in the Trump era antagonizing the campus left: Ben Shapiro, Jordan Peterson, James Damore, Steven Crowder, Dinesh D’Souza, Christina Sommers, Adam Carolla, Charlie Kirk, and many more. They are, according to PragerU’s founder and namesake, the conservative talk radio host Dennis Prager, 'the best thinkers presenting their best ideas.” Their goal: to 'undo [the] damage' inflicted by an education system that teaches US students that their country is 'a land of inequality and racism' and a place of which to be 'ashamed.'

"These ideas — each one expressed in a five-minute video with titles like 'Facts Don’t Care About Your Feelings,' 'Black, Millennial, Female and… Conservative,' 'Why I Left the Left' and 'Why Isn’t Communism as Hated as Nazism?' — have found an enormous, and growing, audience. According to PragerU’s annual report, in 2017 the organization’s videos received 625 million views between Facebook and YouTube, up from 250 million the year before, and 75 million the year before that. Individual videos frequently garner more than a million views; at least 10 PragerU videos gained more than 5 million views in 2017, and at least six gained more than 10 million.

Read more: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/josephbernstein/prager-university

PragerU Surpasses 2 Billion All-Time Views - PRNewswire:

March 14, 2019 - PragerU recently launched The Candace Owens Show ... garnering millions of views in its first few days. That same week PragerU crossed two billion total views since its founding in 2011. While it took approximately seven years to reach its first billion, PragerU recreated the feat in just over one year, a clear sign of how rapidly the organization has grown....

"While PragerU continues to experience an increasing level of censorship from big tech companies, the organization has recently launched a new mobile app as well as an upgraded website where all of its videos are hosted natively. Through these 'owned' platforms, viewers are guaranteed to be able to watch all PragerU videos without censorship from Google/YouTube and Facebook.

"PragerU, founded by Dennis Prager in 2011, is a not-for-profit online media organization that helps millions understand the values that shaped America and provides millions of people around the world with the intellectual ammunition they need to advocate for limited government, individual responsibility and economic freedom. Since its founding, PragerU videos have received over two billion views. PragerU is a resource for all who value liberty. It is a threat to all those who do not."

Read more: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/prageru-surpasses-2-billion-all-time-views-300812721.html
'via Blog this'

Google stops carrying Canadian political ads

Google to ban political ads ahead of federal election, citing new transparency rules - The Globe and Mail - Tom Cardoso:

March 5, 2019 - "Google is banning political advertising on its platforms ahead of the Canadian federal election because of new ad transparency rules it says would be too challenging to comply with.

"The decision comes in response to the Liberals’ signature election measure, Bill C-76, which passed in December. Among other things, it requires online platforms to keep a registry of all political and partisan ads they directly or indirectly publish. The penalties for not doing so include fines and possible jail time.... The bill’s advertising-transparency requirements come into force on June 30, or sooner if an early election is called....

"To enforce its ban, Google will modify its ad policies and systems to block advertisers from running ads that fall under the definitions set out in C-76. Other Google services, such as enhanced search results and platforms including YouTube, will still be available during the campaign period.... Google also expressed concerns about how it would detect ads of a partisan nature, which may not specifically mention a candidate or party by name.

"Democratic Institutions Minister Karina Gould said the decision was 'very disappointing' in an e-mailed statement. 'Google’s decision to opt out of political advertising during the regulated period appears to have been made for business reasons and does not reflect on the quality of our laws, which are designed to protect Canadian voters and our elections'....

"The internet giant first spoke publicly about C-76 in November. In a presentation to a Senate committee, Google ... included marked up versions of Bill C-76 indicating which sections Google wanted removed or edited. Because of how Google’s advertising systems work, the company argued, it doesn’t know which ads get displayed, making a registry impossible....

"In Google’s system, ads can be targeted to users ... through a real-time bidding process. When users visit a web page, as the page loads their profile is shared with an advertising exchange ... the web page’s publisher then auctions off the ads ... [and] the winning bidder displays an ad to the user. This entire process often lasts less than two tenths of a second.... Google argues the publisher may not know which ads were displayed. Similarly, the advertising exchange itself may not know which ad was shown....

"Google is one of the world’s largest digital-advertising companies.... A study from the Canadian Media Concentration Project estimates that, in 2016, the company accounted for 48 per cent of all internet advertising in Canada, eclipsing Facebook, at 24 per cent."

Read more: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-google-to-ban-political-ads-ahead-of-federal-election-citing-new/
'via Blog this'

15,000 protest Russian online Iron Curtain

'Point of No Return': Russia's Libertarians Lead Protest Against 'Sovereign Internet' - Evan Gurschkovich, Moscow Times:

March 10, 2019 - "Mikhail Svetov was buzzing with nervous energy. Just 24 hours later, the member of Russia’s Libertarian Party would be leading a protest against a draft bill aimed at creating a so-called sovereign internet....

"Last May, when communications watchdog Roskomnadzor moved to block the popular messaging app Telegram, some 12,000 Russians turned out to a protest Svetov organized — which, he is eager to point out, was last year’s largest street demonstration....

"But last month, a draft bill passed the first of three readings in the State Duma that would require Russian internet traffic to go mostly through domestic routers and exchanges. Critics like Svetov say the bill could give the government the sweeping ability to censor online content and, going forward, actually be able to block apps like Telegram. Svetov believes the new law was written to target opposition leaders like Alexei Navalny who have found success on YouTube....

"With the state quashing independent media in recent years, YouTube has become an increasingly popular tool among opposition activists seeking out audiences. The platform is now viewed by 82 percent of the Russian population aged 18-44, as The Economist reported last week. In spring 2017, ... Navalny took authorities by surprise by using his YouTube channel to inspire thousands into the streets for the first mass protests against the Kremlin since 2012. While Navalny on Saturday afternoon tweeted that he couldn’t attend Sunday’s protest ... he 'urgently' called for the public to attend.

"Many obliged. According to White Counter, an NGO that tallies up participants at rallies using metal detector frames, 15,300 people on Sunday came out to the rally. Interior Ministry estimates cited by Interfax put the number of participants at 6,500.... Despite the protest having been allowed by the authorities, as many as 30 people were detained according to the OVD-Info police-monitoring website. At least three were minors, including one who had to be taken to the hospital....

"On the eve of the protest, political analyst Yekaterina Schulmann said that if organizers could get more than 15,000 to attend, the authorities would pay attention when adopting corrections later this month before the bill’s second reading."

"Even if the law is adopted without changes, however, Russian internet experts doubt that Russia could create anything similar to China’s Great Firewall.... Karen Kazaryan, chief analyst of the Russian Association of Electronic Communications, ... predicts the plan to create a way to cut Russia’s internet off from the rest of the world’s will likewise fall through.

"'They’ll mess around for a long time and they’ll spend a lot of money on it,' Kazaryan said. 'But in the end it won’t work. Russia is not China. It’s very complex and expensive to build a system like this and we simply don’t have the engineers to realize this project.'”

Read more: https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2019/03/10/point-of-no-return-russias-libertarians-lead-protest-against-sovereign-internet-a64758
'via Blog this'

ARI begins outreach to student libertarian groups

What Defenders of Liberty Need to Know - Tom Bowden, New Ideal:

January 21, 2019 - "In recent years, there has been a resurgence of libertarian student organizations both in the US and around the world. Many of the students involved in those organizations are interested in Ayn Rand, and it’s for this audience that philosophers Onkar Ghate and Gregory Salmieri presented a seven-part lecture series called “What Is Liberty?”"

"'It’s exciting to see that there are so many students around the world interested in promoting liberty,' Salmieri says. 'That’s a project that requires philosophy, and most of these students are still at the early stages in the process of thinking through what liberty is and what’s needed to defend it. We prepared these lectures as a summary for this audience of Rand’s political philosophy....

”The relationship between Objectivism and the libertarian movement has been fraught since the libertarian movement coalesced in the late 1960s, Salmieri observes. 'Early libertarian leaders all cited Rand as an influence, but most of them had embraced anarchism, a view that Rand considered to be deeply incompatible with capitalism — and, indeed, with the requirements of human life. She held the libertarian movement in contempt for this reason, and also because she regarded it as unphilosophical — as an attempt to pursue ‘liberty’ as a vaguely defined political goal without first doing the thinking needed to understand what liberty is or what it requires.'

"In some ways, Salmieri notes, today’s liberty movement is a lot better than the movement Rand denounced in the early 1970s, but her central criticisms of the movement remain valid. 'Anarchism may not be as dominant as it once was,' he explains, 'but it exerts an outsized influence on how almost all self-professed libertarians think about freedom. And, if one looks at the full range of positions endorsed by all the people who claim to be united ‘for liberty,’ they’re too disparate for them to count as all fighting for the same thing. Some of them are fighting for something I can recognize as freedom, but others are fighting against it.'

"This confusion presents a real problem for the future, Salmieri contends, because at one time or another all of the most oppressive social systems in history — socialism, fascism, anarchism — have been hailed as 'pro-liberty' and championed by young people who thought they were on the side of freedom....

"All seven sessions, filmed at the 2017 Ayn Rand Student Conference, are available on this YouTube playlist in the order presented."

Read more: https://newideal.aynrand.org/what-defenders-of-liberty-need-to-know/

'via Blog this'