Whatever the Liberals do these days—even if it is groundbreaking, and puts $100-million into the creation of domestic news stories—they cannot win.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on December 4, 2023.

OTTAWA—The government’s Google announcement last week should have been met with applause all the way around.

Canada has always been a leader in new ideas and instruments to protect culture, and obviously the survival of local news is a key to spawning more Canadian content.

But whatever the Liberals do these days—even if it is groundbreaking, and puts $100-million into the creation of domestic news stories—they cannot win.

Pundits variously described the agreement with Google as “dodging a bullet,” a self-inflicted wound, and another cock-up by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Talk about kicking a guy while he is down.

We know the numbers for the Liberals look grim. According to the latest polls, they are running neck and neck with the New Democratic Party. But how that unpopularity can be expanded to include the government’s Google agreement is pretty hard to swallow.

The Canadian government has followed the lead of Australia, which was the first country in the world to regulate the social media landscape in an attempt to secure funding for domestic content.

This is one area where Canadians have a fair bit of experience, and the decision to take on Google, Meta, and the other social media behemoths was a courageous one. Some said the Liberals should just wait to take their lead from the G7 or the OECD. That advice would have meant no action, as the Americans are usually opposed to public intrusion into what they consider their media space.

The European Union has been making its own inroads into taking on big tech. The EU fought Apple in a decision last year as it moved to standardize chargers for smartphones and tablets sold in Europe. Canada announced a similar decision in the last budget, and the European market of 450 million people will receive a standard USB Type-C charging port by the end of next year.

As Europe takes on Apple, Canada goes for Google. One jaded journalist went so far as to claim the Canadian government was involved in a “shakedown.”

Globe and Mail columnist Andrew Coyne tweeted that there was “no actual legal, logical or moral case for forcing Google to underwrite the Canadian media.” He called the agreement “strictly opportunistic: 1) Google has a lot of money. 2) We want some. 3) Make them give it to us.”

In fact, there is plenty of precedent for content transmitters to chip in on Canadian story development. That model has been used in the television world since the private cable industry was required to establish a fund to support Canadian content.

Their fund morphed into partnership with the government via the Canadian Television Fund, and then into the Canada Media Fund, which currently invests $366-million annually into media production. That investment triggers $1.7-billion in industry activity in Canada, providing employment for more than 244,000 people.

As television and streaming collided through the introduction of internet media content creation, it made sense for the Canadian government to require new media players to do their part in the creation of content. As Google traffics in the news, it can also help to pay for local news creation, using a tried-and-true model that will now likely be copied by dozens of other jurisdictions around the world.

The Liberal government should be congratulated as a leader in public policy on the issue of social media transmission. Instead, even though last week’s announcement will assist in the survival of local media outlets, there were no kudos for Trudeau.

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has already promised to trash the Google deal with the same vision he uses to promise defunding of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.

The Google story was not big news across the country as it was an inside-the-beltway negotiation, but the outcome of this new investment could be critical for the survival of local media in the next decade.

Most people may not care about the intricacies of public policy when it comes to the creation of Canadian content. But without government leadership, the chance to grow a dying news industry is slim to none.

Last week’s announcement should have been met with at least one day of positive coverage. But when the media decides that it is time for a change at the top, nothing—not even a trailblazing move to save media—will kill the main story.

The appetite for political change is fuelled by negative Trudeau stories on a daily basis.

That is not going to change.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

Google leadership told a parliamentary committee that the government’s attempt to monetize internet news content for local support would not work. They said the same thing in Australia and, according to the government there, the move has provided almost $200-million in payments to news providers since the bill passed in 2021.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on February 27, 2023.

OTTAWA—Google’s Canadian muzzle may not work.

The company says it is cutting off service to four per cent of the population on a temporary basis.

But rest assured, the four per cent will be those who feel it most.

Canadian Heritage is on the hit list.

That direct line of fire suggest this is an attempt to convince Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez to drop legislation which will require internet giants like Google to compensate Canadian news outlets for populating their sites with stories by Canadian journalists. Google says it is limiting access to news content to assess possible responses to the bill.

Google says the legislation doesn’t work, and is obviously doing everything in its power to stop it.

That temporary blockage on Canadian Heritage information and other key providers coincides with second reading of Bill C-18 in the Senate.

It is the last stand for an internet behemoth that has no interest in paying for the news content consumed through its portals.

But similar legislation has been in place in Australia since 2021 and appears to be having the desired effect.

Our Bill C-18 is modelled on the Australian law, which has been effective in stemming the cash hemorrhage facing many Aussie news outlets.

In Canada, newspapers are dropping like flies. And it isn’t just the printed word that is suffering.

Just last week, Quebec television network TVA announced layoffs of more than 200 people. A couple of weeks earlier, The Vancouver Sun wielded a similar axe to its editorial staff.

Google leadership told a parliamentary committee that the government’s attempt to monetize internet news content for local support would not work.

But they said the same thing in Australia, threatening to pull Google out of the country altogether before the legislation was finalized.

In the end, Google complied with the requirement to sign commercial remuneration deals with the news outlets that populate their sites.

According to the Australian government, the move has provided almost $200-million in payments to news providers since the bill passed in 2021.

As the Senate Committee on Transportation and Communications undertakes second reading of the our version of the bill, the usual suspects are lining up in opposition. University of Ottawa professor Michael Geist is calling Bill C-18 an attack on freedom of expression for all Canadians in one column, published Nov. 1, 2022 and headlined “Why Bill C-18’s mandated payment for links is a threat to freedom of expression in Canada.” Geist claims that seeking payment for some news retransmission is the basis for this threat. His argument runs counter to the fact that for more than a century, Canadians have paid, in some form or another, for access to news.

Whether it’s included in the cost of a television cable package, or financed by an annual newspaper subscription, access to content created by journalists has been financed the consumers of that content.

Geist and other “freedom of expression” proponents know that the internet is not exactly free, either.

Providers like Facebook and Google are currently charging for advertising to monetize their information offerings. Their advertising totals $9.7-billion a year, representing more than 80 per cent of online ad revenues.

So, Geist’s free speech claim doesn’t really hold water. Every consumer of online news is subject to the influence of those paid advertisements. Hardly free at all.

The irony is that the news outlets whose stories are populating the internet are not paid a penny as a share of that whopping annual total of almost $10-billion in advertising revenue.

Conservatives are opposing the legislation, partly because they say the CBC will receive remuneration as an outcome.

But they are not speaking too loudly because they agree that local news outlets in Canada are in real trouble and need some help to survive.

Bill C-18 is not going to solve all the problems facing the Canadian news-gathering ecosystem.

Most internet-surfing young Canadians have never even bothered to subscribe to any made-in-Canada news service. Their news reach is global and much of what populates their feeds could loosely be called infotainment, not information.

The goings-on of Hollywood are much more interesting than the trajectory of a Canadian bill to save local newsgathering.

Government is also tackling the tricky issue of how to deal with fake news, and deliberate foreign interference in Canadian public policy decisions, including elections.

Last summer, Rodriguez and Justice Minister David Lametti set up an advisory roundtable on how to tackle internet disinformation and fraud.

Recent reports have alleged Chinese interference in the 2021 Canadian election.

Russian internet news influence in the last American election has been well-documented.

Internet information transmission is here to stay.

But it is time to pay the piper.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.