Proposed Changes to Social Media Access in Canada
If Prime Minister Mark Carney has his way, Canadians might find logging into social media requires more than just a password in the future.
Critics argue that the Liberal Party’s recent bill is an underhanded attempt to implement standardized digital identification, while creating a new bureaucratic body to oversee online discourse.
Non-compliance with the proposed regulations could lead to fines reaching up to $10 million, alongside an additional penalty of 3% of global revenue.
This initiative is part of a sustained effort to increase government control over the internet, which began under former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and seems to have intensified during Carney’s tenure.
Restrictions for Younger Users
The bill, known as C-34, includes restrictions barring individuals under 16 from using certain social media platforms. To enforce this, users might eventually need to confirm their age online, raising concerns that digital IDs or similar systems might become a requirement for access.
Furthermore, the legislation outlines broad categories of “harmful content” that would be banned. Platforms failing to comply could face hefty fines, potentially blaming individual creators for content violations—a situation some have described as “trickle-down censorship.”
It’s still unclear whether Bill C-34 is designed to replace the previous Online Harms Act introduced by the Trudeau administration, or if it serves as an additional component within Canada’s expanding digital regulatory framework.
Hate Speech Legislation
Meanwhile, Bill C-9, which seeks to enhance laws against hate speech, awaits final legislative approval. This bill is anticipated to pass without issue and aims to broaden the scope of Canada’s hate speech laws. Notably, it removes a long-standing defense pertaining to sincere religious practice in specific hate speech cases, alarming advocates for civil liberties and religious rights.
The previous Online Harms Act (Bill C-63) was ultimately not passed, as Parliament was dissolved before a vote could be held. Yet, the proposed measures have raised concerns about a significant infringement on freedom of expression in Canada.
Among its more contentious provisions, the bill would empower courts to impose preventative peace bonds—such as curfews and electronic monitoring—on individuals who haven’t yet been convicted or charged with a hate-related offense. It’s troubling to think that freedoms might be restricted based on what the government fears people could potentially do.
Pre-crime Considerations
Additionally, Section 13 amendments to the Canadian Human Rights Act would increase civil penalties for specific forms of online expression, expanding hate-related penalties throughout Canadian law. Critics have labeled this legislation as a “thought crime” initiative, marking a significant shift from the idea that punishment should be for actions, not thoughts or words.
Bill C-34 outlines seven types of prohibited “harmful content”:
- Intimate content shared without consent.
- Content that exploits children or re-traumatizes survivors.
- Material encouraging self-harm in minors.
- Content promoting bullying against children.
- Material inciting hatred.
- Content inciting violence.
- Terrorist or extremist portrayal.
However, the bill doesn’t clarify what constitutes “hate,” even as it elaborates on definitions of terrorism and violent extremism.
The legislation also intends to establish a digital safety commission, which critics fear could act as a national censor with vast authority over online content regulations.
Calls for Clear Regulations
Many organizations, including the Canadian Civil Liberties Union, have condemned the measure. They argue that while better transparency and accountability for tech companies are necessary, this shouldn’t lead to unchecked government authority over all regulated services. The representative from the Union stated that “a blank check for federal authority is the wrong answer to a real problem.”
“Bill C-34 imposes broadly defined obligations that could result in overcompliance by service providers, undermining users’ rights to free expression and privacy,” they added.
Another proposal from Carney’s government, Bill C-22, could compel technology companies to disclose user communications if requested by federal authorities, harming privacy efforts.
Two Republican lawmakers have also voiced concerns about Bill C-22 to Canadian officials, suggesting it might compromise privacy rights in both Canada and the U.S.
