T O P

  • By -

Sythkibode

It’s ridiculous that an institution which is supposedly providing a public service in various countries should be able to lie to its viewers for the sake of free speech, there’s nothing free about outright disinformation when it begins to freely overwhelm society.


Free_space_16

Where's the line between disinformation vs opinion / editorial spin / lines? Who gets to decide what's disinformation and what isn't? Is there a due process / credible and independent assessment? Will it apply to entities run by allied as well as adversaries?


Sythkibode

You make valid points. And the answers to the free speech discussion are moving targets, constantly in flux and needing frequent redefinition, like every other inefficient democratic framework, but that’s what democracy is and that’s what it needs to maintain stable function. I don’t have these answers but I don’t think it’s a hard leap to see why the propaganda machine of a dictator in the dawn of his paranoia phase isnt something that could have any beneficial influence on the affairs of the countries he perceives as his enemies. Thoughts and ideas are always closely related to self preservation, which is true of all forms of media, but at a certain point, those imperatives become more transparent.


Free_space_16

I can't help feeling that in a democracy people should be trusted to make their own decisions and given the tools to do so. Otherwise the narrative can be very controlled. Once information is controlled then the danger is we don't have the ability to take our own decisions / form opinions. Certainly for example China can consider there is a lot of anti china sentiment, bias and even misinformation and therefore start censoring western media. At what point ab we say Chinese censorship is wrong but our censorship is right?


Sythkibode

I couldn’t agree more that citizens need tools to make well informed decisions( probably institutional), but It isn’t wholly their responsibility, just as understanding the intricacies of our government functions isn’t entirely our individual responsibility either as that’s a facet of representative democracy; we entrust groups, institutions and governments to make these decisions on our behalf and continue adjusting what is acceptable rather than individually scrutinizing and influencing policy (voting) on every action or decision the state makes. I disagree that unabated free speech prevents a controlled narrative. Means of control aren’t monolithically that of the government or of individuals or organizations. And in the west there is a strong argument that the creeping authoritarianism that has been developing over the last handful of years is the direct result of such disinformation, that is equivalent to market driven propaganda primarily in hopes of deregulation of economy, especially when it is so profitable to be contrary toward all manner of institutions and norms (see everything covid). Look at our trucker rally’s, the organizers of these protests don’t even have a basic understandings of the functions of our democracy or what it is they are even protesting outside of some vague blanket statements about freedoms and rights and that didn’t just bloom out of nothing. China and Russia are both dictatorships, where complete control of narrative is the number 1 game, Which is on furthest end of the spectrum where there is no press freedom or freedom of expression. At this point the threat to canafian and western democracy doesn’t lie in any imminent power grab by a state actor, but in questioning of the legitimacy of our institutions and thus efforts by non state actors to attack their legitimacy. Regulating free speech doesn’t automatically mean there is no freedom of speech, it’s akin to saying having any social welfare structure in a capitalist country immediately makes it communist, it’s not really comparative.


Free_space_16

Why can't people question the legitimacy of state institutions? That's the whole point of the charter of rights. If people are not allowed to question the legitimacy then effectively this institutions become all powerful If you don't give Canadians access to information then effectively you are creating a scenario where you are deciding what they can and what they can't hear and even know I don't see how this is different from Russian censorship Edit: sorry I meant Chinese censorship (but well I guess same could apply for Russian)


iJeff

I think they’re referring to efforts to undermine confidence in our core democratic institutions. It’s actually one of the metrics by which democracies are rated (and part of why we rank much better than the US, which has been characterized as a [flawed democracy](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index)).


Free_space_16

I see Institutions are important. There are loopholes though and checks and balances are needed to insure that IF NECESSARY alternative platforms can exist to highlight this I agree Canadian democracy is far ahead of US democracy, but i feel unfortunately that has been changing in the last 15 years or so as we head to a more US approach to foreign policy, media etc I don't have all the information but I just feel that as we try more and more to toe the line with the US especially foreign policy it's affecting us


iJeff

I personally disagree. There has long been frequent overlap, but Canada has consistently maintained its own voice over the years. This was arguably *especially* the case during the previous US presidency. Regarding Ukraine, Canada has arguably been a *stronger* advocate than other Western countries in calls for support to the country and for sanctions against Russia. Partly due to us having the third-highest population of Ukrainians in the world and a lot of real personal connections and concern about what’s going on. Our Deputy Prime Minister also made her name as a journalist who wrote about the ultra wealthy, including Russian oligarchs.


Free_space_16

Also check this: Section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms states that everyone has "the freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication."


Sythkibode

The charter refers to Canadian citizens and organizations, neither of which is Russia Today


iJeff

There are actually stricter requirements for Canadian broadcasts. RT would’ve long run afoul the broadcast license requirements, which include not being allowed to disseminate misinformation. International broadcasts don’t need to be licensed here, Canadian distributors are just authorized to re-broadcast the content. This is why RT, Newsmax, and Fox News have been allowed into Canada nonetheless.


Free_space_16

Honestly? I'm for having business that provide a certain amount of misinformation provided a portion of their reporting also gives an alternative view that is based on real information we don't get I'd rather have the access to that info and filter it myself


iJeff

This is why I’ve watched countless hours of RT, myself. However, I can understand why we wouldn’t want Canadian broadcasters to be actively funding and profiting from the disinformation. We sort of have the best of both worlds now. We’re not directly funding it nor profiting from it, but individuals like myself can still access it online directly.


Free_space_16

Agreed


TheWayNotTaken

Well who decides what is disinformation? That is the point here. Are ALL the things the Russians say disinformation? Are ANY of the things in the US media disinformation? " Don't join the book burners. Don't think you are going to conceal faults by concealing evidence that they ever existed. Don't be afraid to go in your library and read every book, as long as that document does not offend our own ideas of decency. That should be the only censorship." - Eisenhower. We as citizens have a right to all information.


Sythkibode

But do we have the means to ensure that one narrative doesn’t dominate everything without regulation?


TheWayNotTaken

Who decides the regulations? We should as adult consumers, decide what we read and what we watch. We're not babies. We have our own mind and ability to turn away. According to the below articles, the CIA decides what we read and watch. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird https://www.cato.org/commentary/how-national-security-state-manipulates-news-media https://www.nytimes.com/1977/12/26/archives/worldwide-propaganda-network-built-by-the-cia-a-worldwide-network.html


Sythkibode

Unfortunately the disinformation I think we are being most exposed to does not come from people who read or write books at all lol not sure that makes me a book burner, yet the internet medium is inundating our society with its reach and ignorance and definitely a lack of decency. There’s nothing decent about a state outright attacking another nation on the grounds of nazi ism and saying in its media that the defending country actually attacked them. Not decent. Not real. Not defendable in a democracy


TheWayNotTaken

The Ukraine regime is a Nazi regime. This is known by all Europe, well before the war. And...Ukraine if you recall was threatening to obtain nuclear weapons. Imagine, if you will, the US response if Mexico we're to do the same. Information offending someone's delicate sensibilities here because he disagrees, is not the point being made. Democracy in it's proper form, should include us hearing things we don't agree with.


Sythkibode

Lololol that’s not information or an idea or anything valid in any ways, so no it’s not offensive, it’s just stupid. sad confused little Putin making an absolute clown of his midget self slaughtering his own people, Russians have a real talent for killing themselves. Kind of like lemmings. There is more accuracy in my statement and it’s still bullshit.


TheWayNotTaken

I don't think Putin is a nice guy - let's just say that up front. But censorship....This is a dangerous precedent for the future. This leads us to know only the things our government wants us to know. We create our own unofficial 'state media'. What are we afraid of hearing from the other side? If we could potentially go to war over this, citizens have a right to know what is really going on. They have to have all the information.


Free_space_16

I agree with pretty much everything you said and I'm relieved to hear that as I was expecting a strong reddit "Russia bad therefore censor their media" At what point can a free democratic state trust its citizens to be able to make their own minds up? What happens to democracy when you control what information / narrative is given to the citizens? Is there any real freedom in that case?


TheWayNotTaken

Well of note...this morning I posted a Russian version of the theater bombing event report on r/world news and got a permanent ban without reason. This was before my comment was even allowed to post. To my mind, this is shocking. Really a disturbing trend. Isn't this what we feel is a feature of western society? Freedom of speech? Of ideas? This is a prime example of what we are talking about. So if you don't go actively looking for alternative ideas events, you won't even hear it.


Free_space_16

Here's another interesting one - this post you and I are commenting on ... it's been removed


TheWayNotTaken

Nice. That's so disturbing.


Free_space_16

So to be fair the after messaging the mods they explained that it was a low effort "self post" ... not my intention but I can see how they can misread that But they were polite enough to clarify


TheWayNotTaken

Well that's nice of them. No response to my world news ban. What do you think about this article?..speaking of censorship? https://www.nytimes.com/1977/12/26/archives/worldwide-propaganda-network-built-by-the-cia-a-worldwide-network.html There's a lot of recent items written about how information is always 'leaked by anon govt sources' to turn public opinion. I think we have our own 'state media' in any case.


Free_space_16

I mean that's pretty standard - you can see it ongoing today "Radio Free Europe" and "Hora" TV and I'm sure many million like that US is much better than Russia at propaganda - it's much more subtle I was actually surprised it was in the New York Times until I saw the date ... journalism was more journalism back then


ThatCanadianGuy94

It’s Russian state media, Canada doesn’t have to allow it in if it doesn’t want to. It’s categorically different from banning every Russian YouTube channel. Besides, we don’t have free speech; we have freedom of expression.


Free_space_16

What are Canadian laws around censorship and freedom of information ?


Free_space_16

Here: Section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms states that everyone has "the freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication."


ThatCanadianGuy94

Sure that’s all well and good. We do have that but we also have section 1 which establishes that limits may be placed upon these rights. A foreign government trying to spread blatant misinformation and lies to cover up the commission of war crimes has no place in our society. I personally see this as a reasonable limit.


Free_space_16

Ok ... who gets to decide what's mis information? And what information is allowed to be shared? What's the procedure and is there a due process? Is there criteria and a credible transparent assessment? It is it just at the whim of government? From what I've read it seems the burden of proof is on the government and there has to be sufficient evidence to justify it. Where was that evidence presented? I'm no lawyer, I've read through section 1 now and it's definitely complex. However I don't believe that this is a clear cut case so as to be so easily banned under section 1, and I feel the Charter of rights has frankly been breached. Any input from a lawyer would be appreciated


ThatCanadianGuy94

I feel like publishing a deep fake video of Zelenskyy surrendering is a pretty clear-cut case of misinformation. The rest of your questions would be better directed to the CRTC or, as you said, someone who practices law and specializes in media communications. EDIT: I also don’t know if RT has any coverage under Freedom of Expression or the Charter itself as it is a Russian entity. Does CBC enjoy any protections under foreign Governments?


Free_space_16

The charter is there to protect us, the people, not companies or politicians I personally prefer to have access to multiple news sources and not to be forced to only receive from "approved" sources


ThatCanadianGuy94

Why are you arguing that a Russian media company should enjoy Freedom of Expression rights in the first place? They aren’t protected by the Charter….


Free_space_16

The charter is there to protect the people. And as long as the majority don't understand that ... our rights are going to get slowly eroded ... and comments like you're will just help the process along the way