Since this late-summer election kicked off one month ago, the campaign’s biggest surprise has been the meteoric rise of the People’s Party of Canada (PPC).
An Ekos poll from Sept. 9 pegged national support for the party at a whopping 11.2 per cent, with impressive backing in Alberta (19 per cent), Quebec (13 per cent), and Ontario (11 per cent).
While Ekos has consistently shown higher support of the PPC than other polling firms in recent weeks, virtually all public polling in this campaign has revealed that it’s attracting far more voters than it did two years ago when it debuted as a national party. On election day in 2019, the nascent party earned a paltry 1.62 per cent of the popular vote and not one seat in the House of Commons.
Today, the far-right-wing party led by former Conservative cabinet minister Maxime Bernier is enjoying a new lease on life. While the PPC’s supporters aren’t monolithic, it’s safe to say they represent a minority of Canadians who are deeply angry about the sweeping government interventions resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic over the past 18 months.
Before the pandemic, Bernier’s party was known mainly for preaching pro-freedom, small-government solutions. Its emphatically right-wing platform didn’t even resonate much with the country’s most conservative voters in the 2019 election.
But the pandemic’s government-imposed lockdowns, widespread job losses, and now the vaccine passports introduced by the federal and provincial governments, have reinvigorated the PPC’s electoral prospects.
Bernier has quickly transformed his party into a sanctuary for a pernicious coalition of cult-like anti-vaxxers and Trumpist conspiracy theorists. Throughout this election campaign, many of these fanatics have repeatedly demonstrated that they’re not above mob-like protests — attended by young children — in which profanities are hurled and physical violence is sometimes triggered.
While the PPC’s most repugnant elements don’t represent all the party’s supporters, these zealots and their leader have thrust the movement into the news-media spotlight for all the wrong reasons in this campaign.
In a video posted to his Twitter account early last month, Bernier boasted to his supporters that he refuses to be vaccinated. It was a reckless message, when the Delta-driven fourth wave began spreading across much of the country.
Then, in the campaign’s third week, the president of the local PPC riding association threw gravel at Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau as he left a campaign event in London, Ont. The 25-year-old man has since been arrested, but his affiliation with Bernier’s party has put a chill down the spines of millions of Canadians.
Finally, on Labour Day weekend, Bernier released an inflammatory video in which he uttered this opening salvo: “When tyranny becomes law, revolution becomes our duty.” The video has since gone viral on social media, while being almost universally excoriated for quoting the words of John F. Kennedy to justify the party’s crusade against “government overreach” during an ongoing public-health crisis.
Until last week, the PPC was scarcely covered by mainstream news outlets. While that lack of coverage, and exclusion from the leaders’ debates, undoubtedly incensed the party’s brass, it also meant it wasn’t subjected to close public scrutiny.
For much of the campaign, large news outlets ostensibly ignored Bernier’s party, so as not to amplify its dangerous messages, thereby starving it of oxygen and blunting its political appeal. Although the Green party has been consistently dwarfed by the PPC in the polls, it’s received far more news coverage than Bernier’s — until recently.
But the news outlets’ initial approach was ill-conceived and unsustainable. As the PPC’s supporters have grown steadily more vicious in this campaign — often attempting to drown out Trudeau’s events by shouting expletives — the news media have been forced to reluctantly shed light on the party and its often-dubious motives.
As a result, the fourth estate has exposed an increasingly popular, albeit reckless, party beholden to anti-vaxxers and conspiracy theorists, as our country emerges from the most prolonged economic and public-health crisis in a century.
In the campaign’s final week, Canadians are more mindful of the PPC’s surging popularity, and how it might affect the election’s outcome.
That in itself is a good thing. As a democratic society, we can’t begin to genuinely understand the menacing elements of a movement without reporting on them extensively in the press.
It’s not about amplifying their voices, but reporting on them accurately and forthrightly so we can better understand the grave danger some of these individuals pose to Canada’s pandemic recovery.
It remains to be seen precisely how Bernier’s party will affect election day. But instead of ignoring the party in hopes that its appeal will magically disappear, news outlets will serve voters better by producing stories that seek to meaningfully expose the PPC’s dark underbelly.
Andrew Perez is a Toronto-based communications and public affairs professional who has volunteered for Liberal parties at the federal and provincial levels. You can follow him on Twitter @andrewaperez.
This post was copy-edited after publication.
The views, opinions and positions expressed by all iPolitics columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of iPolitics.
Media Availability: Minister Haggie Available to Media to Discuss Emergency Services – News Releases – Government of Newfoundland and Labrador
The Honourable John Haggie, Minister of Health and Community Services, will hold a media availability today (Thursday, September 16) to discuss emergency services following a meeting with NAPE.
The availability will take place in the Media Centre, East Block, Confederation Building, at 2:15 p.m. Media covering the availability are asked to attend in-person.
Health and Community Services
The Growing Tensions Between Digital Media Platforms and Copyright Enforcement – AAF – American Action Forum
- Copyright infringement tensions between digital “new media” platforms and traditional media are at an all-time high.
- Pressure from copyright holders combined with aggressive infringement-flagging algorithms and significant penalties under current regulations push platforms to take down content—often before infringement has been proven.
- While there are legitimate concerns regarding copyright infringement online, current regulation incentivizes over-blocking content in order to avoid fines; this tactic is alienating content creators and limiting free speech and innovation.
- Moreover, recent reform proposals aim to increase platform liability; this will make platforms even more cautious, exacerbating current problems and seriously limiting the content that has made these platforms a novel means of entertainment.
Digital media or “new media” platforms that host user-generated videos such as YouTube or Vimeo, and livestreams such as Twitch, YouTube Gaming, and Facebook Gaming, are gaining a bigger role in the entertainment industry. This trend accelerated during the coronavirus pandemic, with viewership rates increasing to 27.9 billion hours in 2020, an all-time high. While most of the livestreaming platforms initially focused on gaming content, their offerings have expanded to include podcasters, DJs, musicians, and traditional sports. For example, Twitch is now the official streaming partner of USA Basketball and hosted the Spain broadcast of the biggest South American soccer tournament.
As these platforms grow, the attention and level of scrutiny grows as well. One of the most prominent criticisms is that the platforms are failing to properly address copyright infringement on their websites. Record labels and movie studios complain that these platforms are not doing a good enough job protecting their intellectual property rights. Yet on the other side, content creators and their fans complain that overly restrictive application of copyright regulations severely limits content that should constitute “fair use” of copyrighted material.
The “fair use” doctrine” and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) are at the center of this debate. The DMCA, the most important law regarding copyrighted work on the internet, aims to prevent the unauthorized access and copying of copyrighted works, which usually requires authorization by the copyright holder. The exception is “fair use,” or the reproduction of these copyrighted materials for “criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research.” Fair use is key to the development of an online entertainment industry, as it allows the content creators on these platforms to reproduce materials to create original content such as parodies, commentary, reviews, or live reactions.
Copyright Enforcement Is Increasingly Burdensome for Platforms and Creators
Platforms bear the responsibility of enforcing the fair use doctrine. Under the DMCA, they can face fines of over $150,000 per instance of copyright infringement. According to a public statement by Twitch, the number of copyright claims on its platform increased from less than 50 per year to more than 1,000 a week. This can translate into multi-million-dollar fines if platforms’ moderation is deemed inadequate.
This has pushed the platforms in the direction of preemptively taking down content or sanctioning streamers once they receive a DMCA claim and letting content creators appeal their case after the sanction. It is more cost effective to review appeals carefully over a longer period, as they are not bound to respond to appeals within any specific timeline, as is the case with DMCA claims. The number of appeals will certainly be lower, and in case of a mistake, the potential revenue loss for platforms will certainly be lower than the potential fine for a DMCA violation.
Platforms have also moved toward automation as a mechanism to respond to DCMA claims in a timely and cost-effective manner. By using automated systems and algorithms, platforms forgo the need to use human systems, which tend to be costly and slower in their review process. While on-demand platforms such as YouTube have implemented algorithmic systems for around 14 years, livestreaming platforms have started to increasingly implement similar systems in order to quickly remove or mute a potentially copyright-infringing livestream.
While automation has been beneficial in terms of response time, its increased application has presented multiple issues. One of its main issues is its lack of accuracy, where fair use content or original materials can be incorrectly flagged. This is a common problem, as automated systems lack comprehension of context and can be activated with as little as three seconds of audio or video being reproduced. This lack of context has also led to the sanctioning of content where copyrighted music was played unintentionally, such as a video capturing loud music from a passing car or store speaker.
Another common problem with automated systems is that they are vulnerable to exploitation. For example, there are cases of law enforcement officers playing copyrighted music to prevent civilians’ recordings from being uploaded to these platforms. Another example is the weaponization of DMCA claims, where a user flags content as a violation of copyright with the intention of censoring or negatively impacting a content creator, rather than as a legitimate claim over copyright infringement. In fact, it has become common for content creators to be extorted by ill-intentioned individuals who threaten a copyright claim unless they are paid a certain amount of money.
The combination of caution, automation, and preemptive takedowns reflects the rising burden of moderating copyright infringement. An example of this is the introduction of the three-strike system, where content creators are banned from posting content after receiving three copyright claims. Beyond threatening content creators, this practice threatens the platforms themselves, as they run the risk of alienating the creators that provide the content which makes them appealing to the viewers and advertisers that provide revenue for them.
Proposed Changes to the DMCA Will Make the Issue Worse
Current proposals to update the DMCA and copyright enforcement regulations seek to increase platforms’ legal liability, which could make this situation worse. Senator Tom Tillis has led efforts to pass legislation for more stringent copyright enforcement, reforming both the “notice and takedown” system in the DMCA and increasing the legal consequences of copyright infringement. The Protecting Lawful Streaming Act and the Copyright Alternative Small-Claims Enforcement (CASE) Act, both included in last year’s appropriations bill, introduced major tweaks to copyright enforcement. The CASE Act created a small-claims copyright tribunal, with the objective of speeding up the dispute process for copyright cases under $30,000. On the other hand, the Protecting Lawful Streaming Act targets commercial websites designated exclusively to illegally streaming copyrighted content by making this act a felony instead of a civil infraction.
Sen. Tillis has also said he hopes to introduce legislation that would increase platform liability as moderators; this would require the platforms to establish a system that prevents the re-upload of copyrighted content previously taken down. This change would replace the current “notice and takedown,” where platforms are bound to remove content after it has been flagged as a copyright violation, with a “notice and stay-down” system. Such a system would compel platforms to take a more proactive and strict approach, in which they must review and approve content before it is posted, rather than after the fact. Advocates of this system claim it is the best mechanism to prevent the reposting of infringing content, as platforms will be forced to moderate at an earlier stage, allowing them to prevent rather than react.
Yet this approach could further stifle creativity and innovation on these platforms. Increasing platforms’ potential liability would push them to take a further precautionary approach, where they will likely over-block content in order to reduce potential legal liabilities. By placing a higher burden on platforms, platforms would have to review and approve all content before it is published. To do so, platforms would need to further rely on automatization to review content in a timely manner, so that creators are still able to post content, but platforms are able to comply with regulation. While this could potentially prevent some cases of copyright infringement, it will do at a cost to consumers, content creators, and platforms. Consumers would be further deprived of content and content creators would face further barriers to enter a booming market, potentially pushing them out of it. This would severely hinder the platforms’ value proposition and content diversity, effectively hindering their growth.
Better Principles for Potential DMCA Reform
To maintain the growth of the new-media platform industry, policymakers should focus on updating and expanding the definition of fair use so that its application in these platforms is clearer. By establishing clearer fair use guidelines, creators and platforms can more easily moderate potentially infringing content. More important, the definition of fair use must be broadened to include newer uses, such as video game streaming or movie and music reviews. Adopting a broad, technology-neutral definition of fair use is vital for promoting an open internet, which hosts these novel forms of entertainment. This provides platforms with a clearer roadmap to focus on combating privacy and meaningful copyright violations.
While some platforms—such as the Facebook Gaming streaming platform—have been able to strike licensing deals with major record labels to use their music in streams, such agreements usually require the payment of hefty fees that only a few platforms can afford. Under the DMCA, copyright holders hold higher leverage in this kind of negotiations, and licensing fees would have to offset projected earnings from pursuing compensation under the DMCA.
Policymakers and regulators ought to also understand the nuances of content moderation. When formulating content moderation strategies, platforms face continuous and multiple tradeoffs: relying on human systems tends to increase accuracy but will sacrifice timeliness and increase costs. On the other hand, relying on automated systems increases timeliness and reduces costs, but at the expense of over-blocking content, and increasing misreporting and vulnerability for exploitation. While adding a human backstop could be helpful to remedy this issue, the pressure of fines and time-to-takedown restrains push platforms to prioritize timeliness over accuracy.
These challenges are magnified in livestreaming platforms, where responding to copyright infringement should ideally happen in real-time. Yet such immediate responses require significant additional resources to detect, analyze, take down, and notify the streamer of the infringement. This can be an extremely difficult task for platforms, considering livestreams can last for multiple hours and the threshold for what is considered infringement can be as low as three seconds.
New media platforms, or platforms that host livestreaming and video content, have shown tremendous growth as new entertainment, evolving from a niche audience to attracting mainstream users. Nonetheless, this growth might be severely hindered by the platforms’ growing conflicts with current copyright regulation. Increasing pressure from copyright holders and the threats of onerous fines under the DMCA have pushed platforms to implement automated systems to take down materials flagged as infringing on copyrights. The technical limitations with algorithmic systems have generated a problem of over-blocking, where creativity and innovation are stifled, and content creators’ right to fair use can be trampled, pushing them off of the platforms. Reform must be fair both for copyright holders, content creators and new media platforms. Rather than simply piling on more regulation, policymakers and regulators should strive to make fair use policies clearer and more workable, and shift the burden of proof to copyright holders claiming harm, instead of forcing content creators to prove themselves innocent.
City of Brandon – September 15, 2021 ***Special Media Release*** – Missing Person – City of Brandon –
The Brandon Police Service is seeking the public’s assistance in locating Leigha Marcela CLOUD. Leigha is described as being a 23 year old aboriginal female, 5’7 and 165 pounds, brown eyes and brown hair. It is unknown what clothing she was wearing when she was last seen by family on August 15th, 2021. She is known to spend time between Brandon, Waywayseecappo and Winnipeg. If anyone knows the whereabouts of Leigha, please contact the Brandon Police Service.
Release Authorized by:
A/Sgt. Adam Potter #155
Public Information Officer
For media inquiries: (204)729-2430
Art Beat: Prize-winning author pays Coast a virtual visit – Coast Reporter
Reconciliation through Indigenous art is the theme at a Calgary mall – CTV News Calgary
COMMENTARY: Young Canadians are struggling economically. This election is our chance to fix that. – Global News
Silver investment demand jumped 12% in 2019
Europe kicks off vaccination programs | All media content | DW | 27.12.2020 – Deutsche Welle
Iran anticipates renewed protests amid social media shutdown
Business13 hours ago
Present Yourself as a ‘No Brainer’ to Hire
Economy12 hours ago
Canadian dollar falls as Canadian data shows economic momentum easing
Politics18 hours ago
Politics Briefing: Post-debate Nanos poll shows the Liberals ahead in Ontario – The Globe and Mail
Business11 hours ago
GM extends EV Bolt production halt to mid-October
Politics19 hours ago
Trump's Big Lie is changing the face of American politics – CNN
Politics11 hours ago
Canada’s Trudeau hammers main election rival’s COVID-19 approach
Sports20 hours ago
Sick Jon Rahm withdraws from Fortinet Championship's Wednesday pro-am – Golf Channel
Health11 hours ago
Goodbye Pfizer, hello Comirnaty: Top COVID-19 vaccines given brand names in Canada – CBC.ca