________________________
________________________
By Marie-Danielle Smith • The Canadian Press
OTTAWA – The House of Commons passed a Liberal bill on Wednesday designed to require web giants to compensate journalism outfits for reposting their content, and Meta is once again threatening to remove news content from Facebook in Canada.
Federal Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez has argued the bill will “enhance fairness” in the digital news marketplace by creating a framework and bargaining process for behemoths such as Google and Meta, which owns social media sites Facebook and Instagram, to pay media outlets.
“On the surface, the bill we are debating now is simply about ensuring fair compensation for Canadian media, but the issue is actually much bigger than that,” he said during a final speech on Tuesday.
“It is about protecting the future of a free and independent press. It is about ensuring that Canadians have access to fact-based information. It is about protecting the strength of our democracy.”
The bill would create a system overseen by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, which would have the power to impose administrative monetary penalties on companies that are not compliant with its provisions.
Last week, the heritage committee sent the bill back to the House with 18 amendments to add clarity on Indigenous news, eligibility requirements, clearer timelines for the negotiation process and transparency.
As NDP heritage critic Peter Julian pointed out during a speech on Tuesday, 16 of those amendments came from his party during a weeks-long clause-by-clause process.
“There was much that was missing in the bill regarding transparency, supporting local community press and journalism, supporting non-profit journalism, and allowing Indigenous news outlets to have a role. There was radio silence regarding Indigenous news outlets,” he said.
Several of the amendments explicitly created protections for Indigenous-led news outlets into the bill, including one that requires tech companies to have agreements in place with “a significant portion of Indigenous news outlets.”
The same section was changed to make sure that the companies have agreements with a “range of news outlets in both the non-profit and for-profit sectors,” and that reflect “all markets and diverse populations, including local and regional markets in every province and territory, anglophone and francophone communities, including official language minority communities, and Black and other racialized communities.”
Google and Meta have roundly criticized the bill.
In a statement on Wednesday afternoon, Meta once again threatened to “consider removing news from Facebook in Canada rather than being compelled to submit to government-mandated negotiations that do not properly account for the value we provide publishers.”
Google had previously warned that a provision requiring it to show no “undue” preference to certain outlets could lead to poorer-quality information being presented in search results. It also raised the prospect of misinformation becoming more visible for the same reason.
A Bloc Québécois amendment raised during the committee process sought to assuage concerns that outlets that are not committed to journalistic principles could still benefit from the bill.
It included to the bill’s definition of “eligible news business” a requirement for the outlet to be a member of a recognized journalism association and to follow its code of ethics or have its own code that requires “adherence to the recognized processes and principles of the journalism profession, including fairness, independence and rigour in reporting news and handling sources.”
Such a code would need to include measures to make sure that news content produced by the outlet does not promote “hatred or misinformation against any identifiable group” and that any errors of fact are promptly and transparently corrected.
“The creators and news agencies are reporting on the news and their content is being utilized by these giants, which are not paying anything for it.”
The vote ultimately passed 213 votes to 114 on Wednesday, with Conservatives the only ones to vote against it. It goes to the Senate for consideration next.
