Common menu bar links
Resources
Publications
Reports
Part VI: Role of Civil Society and Government
Whichever approach Parliament adopts, its impact will be more successful if implemented as part of a comprehensive strategy to deal with the complex issue of hate-motivated activities.
Civil society and government have a responsibility to ensure that Canadians are given the full measure of the dignity and respect to which they are entitled without having to be subject to electronic messages that expose them to hatred or contempt based on their race, sexual orientation or other grounds. If the proper response to bad speech is good speech, it is appropriate for government and society to encourage opportunities for those aggrieved by alleged bad speech to have an opportunity to challenge such speech and to call organizations and individuals to account for their actions.
There are already several mechanisms that allow citizens to call to account individuals and organizations for what they write or broadcast. These can be built upon and strengthened. Other such mechanisms may be needed to deal with the electronic media.
Many Canadian newspapers belong to voluntary press councils.55 Press councils provide a means for readers to have complaints about unfair conduct and ethics in journalism adjudicated. Usually press councils consist of representatives of the press, including working journalists and editors, and citizen members representing the reading public. If a press council upholds a complaint, it can only require that the newspaper in question publish the council’s findings.
The Senate Standing Committee on Transport and Communications conducted an extensive study on the news media in Canada. In its Final Report on the Canadian News Media (June 2006), the Committee supported the role of strong voluntary press councils:
Press councils are an important element of Canada’s news and information system and they can make a significant contribution to the quality of journalism in Canada.
There is no equivalent to press councils to deal with complaints about material posted solely on the Internet. However, at least one council, the Quebec Press Council, has stated that its code of ethics applies to journalists publishing online.56
Press councils are a form of voluntary self-regulation by the media. The Commission commends the use of voluntary press councils by the appropriate bodies.
The Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC) is an independent, non-governmental organization created by the Canadian Association of Broadcasters (CAB) to administer standards established by its members, Canada’s private broadcasters.57
The CBSC adjudicates complaints from viewers to determine whether broadcasters are in compliance with the CAB Code of Ethics that states:
Recognizing that every person has the right to full and equal recognition and to enjoy certain fundamental rights and freedoms, broadcasters shall ensure that their programming contains no abusive or unduly discriminatory material or comment which is based on matters of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status or physical or mental disability.58
The Canadian Radio-television Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) also has responsibilities with regard to the contents of radio and television broadcasts.59 Section 5 of the Television Broadcasting Regulations 198760 provides that:
A licensee shall not broadcast…
(b) Any abusive comment or abusive pictorial representation that, when taken in context, tends to or is likely to expose an individual or a group or class of individuals to hatred or contempt on the basis of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, sexual orientation, age or mental or physical disability;
Identical regulations apply to radio and specialty TV channels.
The CRTC adjudicates complaints alleging violations of section 5 and can order broadcasters to take corrective measures. In extreme cases, the CRTC can revoke or alter the licence of a broadcaster for a violation of the regulations.
Internet service providers (ISPs) have an important self-regulatory role in dealing with prejudicial or hateful speech on the Internet. ISP industry representatives, such as the Canadian Association of Internet Providers (CAIP) have long promoted measures to ensure that the Internet is a safe place for their customers to learn and be entertained. For example, CAIP was instrumental in developing measures to assist the police in dealing with child pornography on the Internet.
ISPs have acceptable use policies (AUPs) as part of their terms and conditions of the use. Individuals who violate an AUP may have service suspended or terminated. Part of Bell Internet Services AUP reads:
You are prohibited from using the Service for activities that include, but are not limited to:
Uploading or downloading, transmitting, posting, publishing, disseminating, receiving, retrieving, storing or otherwise reproducing, distributing or providing access to information, software, files or other material which are . . . are defamatory, obscene, child pornography or hate literature; . . .
ISPs routinely provide an email address for reports of abusive or inappropriate use of their services. They investigate reports and take action, as they deem appropriate. These types of self-regulatory efforts are to be commended.
Hotlines for the reporting of illegal content on the Internet have been successfully implemented in many countries. The International Association of Internet Hotlines (INHOPE) was founded in 1999 under the European Council’s Safer Internet Action Plan. Hotlines from more than 30 countries are members of INHOPE. The experience of these hotlines could be studied in the development of an appropriate self-regulatory model for Canada.
The federal Department of Justice has conducted research and carried out consultation on how a hotline for Internet hate might be established in Canada. This is a valuable initiative.61
National Strategy Against Racism
Vulnerable communities are increasingly concerned about the underlying prejudices and hatred that are still too common in Canadian society. Federal, provincial, territorial and municipal governments have undertaken important initiatives to promote tolerance and understanding between Canadians and to combat hatred and prejudice, but more needs to be done.
In 2005, the Government of Canada announced A Canada for All: Canada’s Action Plan Against Racism.62 This five-year, $56-million program, is aimed at giving Canadians tools to combat intolerance. The Plan’s objective is eloquently stated in its opening paragraph:
A society free from racism. More than a matter of principle, this is Canada’s vision. It brings together people of all backgrounds — ethnic, racial, and religious — to build a society where one’s heritage is a source of pride and inspiration.
Building a society free from racism is an ongoing endeavour and an ongoing priority of all levels of government and civil society.
Strategy to Promote Safe, Wise and Responsible Internet Use
In 2001, when Internet use in Canada was rapidly expanding, the government adopted The Canadian Strategy to Promote Safe, Wise and Responsible Internet Use. The Strategy acknowledged that "legislation alone will not solve the problem" and that there was a need to involve a broad spectrum of Canadians in addressing the issue. The Strategy sets out five key priorities:
- supporting initiatives that educate and empower users;
- promoting effective industry self-regulation;
- strengthening the enforcement of laws in cyberspace;
- implementing hotlines and complaint-reporting systems; and
- fostering consultations between the public and private sector, and their counterparts in other countries.
Although the Strategy resulted in some positive developments, it has not been actively promoted in recent years. The Commission encourages the Government to consider a specific strategy to deal with illegal content on the Internet, especially the promotion of hatred. The Safer Internet Program of the European Commission is a worthy example of a co-ordinated approach to illegal content on the Internet.63
55. For information on the work of a press council, consult the website of the Ontario Press Council at: http://www.ontpress.com/index.asp.
56. Rights and Responsibilities of the Press, Third Edition, 2003, Conseil de presse du Québec, page 9.
57. The CBC is not a member of the CBSC or the CAB. However, the CBC’s Office of the Ombudsman does deal with complaints from the public.
58. Canadian Association of Broadcasters’ Code of Ethics, Administered by the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (revised June 2002), clause 2.
59. In Broadcasting Public Notice CRTC 1999-84, issued in 1999, the CRTC determined that it would not exercise control over the content of the Internet, including offensive and illegal content. The CRTC found that such content could be more effectively dealt with under existing legal provisions such as the Criminal Code and the CHRA.
60. Television Broadcasting Regulations 1987, SOR/87-49.
61. Department of Justice Component of Canada’s Action Plan Against Racism Formative Evaluation, Evaluation Division, Justice Canada, June 2008.
62. A Canada for All: Canada’s Action Plan Against Racism, Department of Canadian Heritage, 2005.
63. Safer Internet Program of the European Commission.
