Are you a hater？
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
168.66454
Summary
The Liberals invented a new word for how they're going to censor things, and it's pretty cool. They invented a word that's like a baby panda being born. It just makes me laugh. It's a wonderful moment.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Hello, my rebels. Today, I take you through some of the censorship proposals that the convicted
00:00:05.300
criminal and heritage minister in Canada, his name is Stephen Gilboa, is considering to make
00:00:10.040
it a law. And they've invented a new word. I'm sorry, I'm laughing at it. I'm not going to spoil
00:00:15.780
the podcast. You got to go, it's about eight minutes in. They invented a new word. And that's
00:00:22.980
pretty cool. It's like witnessing a baby panda being born. It's a wonderful moment. The liberals
00:00:29.980
invented a new word for how they're going to censor things. It just makes me laugh. That's
00:00:34.220
ahead. Hey, please consider becoming a subscriber to what we call Rebel News Plus. It's eight bucks
00:00:40.600
a month. You get the video version of this podcast, plus Sheila Gunn-Reed's show, David Menzies' show,
00:00:45.280
Andrew Chapitow's show. And just go to rebelnews.com and click the button subscribe. And you know,
00:00:50.580
I like to look at it as eight bucks a month. I'm pretty sure I'm paying double that on Netflix.
00:00:54.760
Plus, I got the Amazon Prime. Sorry, I'm making Bezos richer. And the kids got the Disney and whatnot.
00:01:01.440
So eight bucks, it's not a lot of dough. And you know, I think it's the only place you're
00:01:06.780
going to get this side of the story. All right, here's today's podcast.
00:01:09.380
Tonight, are you a hater? It's January 28th, and this is the Ezra LeVant Show.
00:01:30.540
Hey, can I ask you a question? Are you a hater? Of course not. It would be very odd if you said you
00:01:57.700
were. It's like me asking, are you a bad person? But it's even more specific. It's asking you about
00:02:05.520
a particular sin, the sin of hatred. I think if you were deeply philosophical and introspective,
00:02:13.280
you could say, sometimes. It's like asking about any of the other sins, envy, greed, lust, pride.
00:02:19.180
I think all of us have elements of those in us. And part of our work as people is to manage those,
00:02:24.860
to transcend them, to tame them. I think the great men of history have actually
00:02:29.400
harnessed their sinning impulses and wrestled them and transformed them into energy to do great
00:02:36.840
things. I mean, what wouldn't a young man do to impress a woman if he were motivated by lust?
00:02:44.060
Could he transform that into something positive? How much more enduring beauty in the world is there
00:02:51.560
because, you know, in the form of art, a sculpture, a painting, or even sports achievements? How much
00:02:58.040
was done to impress a woman? If that's an odd example for you, how's this one? Let me talk about
00:03:04.260
greed instead of lust. Adam Smith said, I quote, it is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer,
00:03:11.720
or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest. Another way
00:03:17.560
of saying that is when capitalism works well, people serve us, you know, bread and beer, not because
00:03:26.360
they're saints or charitable or altruistic or wanting to do us a favor, but because it's in their own
00:03:33.620
greedy interest because they managed to make a profit of it. Smith puts it better, but his point is
00:03:39.080
if you can harness people's selfishness in a system that transforms it and makes them take the sin of
00:03:46.100
greed and transform it into something productive, well, that's wonderful. In darker systems, people get rich
00:03:53.060
by fraud or theft or coercion. In free societies, the richer you are, odds are, the more people you have
00:03:58.940
helped or made happy in some way, whether you're an inventor or a pop star. So back to my question, are you
00:04:05.820
a hater? Are you a hater? Well, then, philosophically, we are all a bit. Don't pretend you're not. You can't love
00:04:14.100
things and like things unless you also, I suppose, hate things or even just hate the opposite or the
00:04:19.640
absence of what you like. I love my family means I hate or fear those things that would hurt my family.
00:04:25.620
I love my hockey team and I want them to win implies you hate to see them lose. Maybe you even hate the
00:04:30.700
other team. I'm stretching the words, but I say that anyone who doesn't have some hate in their heart
00:04:35.800
doesn't have a heart. It's a natural human emotion. The whole idea is to control yourself, right?
00:04:43.300
If you can watch 9-11, the scene of the planes hitting the Twin Towers without having feelings
00:04:47.940
of hatred, then I put it to you, you do not have a normal or healthy personality. So I ask a third
00:04:54.180
time, are you a hater? Well, if a pollster asked you that question, some stranger on the phone,
00:05:02.200
you're probably not going to give them a five-minute amateur philosophy answer like I just
00:05:08.500
tried to do there. You're going to say, of course not. I mean, it really couldn't be an easier question
00:05:14.940
to answer. Hey, do you like breathing? Are you a hater? Because only bad people are bad?
00:05:22.260
I'd actually call that a stupid question. But is it much less stupid to ask people in an official
00:05:30.860
public opinion poll? Are you against hate? I mean, it would be bizarre for anyone to say anything
00:05:38.420
except, of course, even haters. And it's true, even those of us who wrestle with sins, especially
00:05:44.980
those of us who wrestle with sins. I say especially. I mean, say we're against sins, especially if we're
00:05:53.240
overcome by them. Look how fat I am. Am I against gluttony? Of course, more than most people,
00:05:58.600
because I'm so familiar with its evil. If you ask a hater if he's against hatred, he probably will
00:06:06.240
say, yes, I am so very much. And so what value should we put on a public opinion poll
00:06:13.380
commissioned by a taxpayer-funded lobby group called the Canadian Race Relations Foundation
00:06:19.340
that commissioned a poll from a polling company owned by a Liberal Party activist named Bruce Anderson
00:06:25.840
that asks Canadians if they're against hate? Here's that poll by the Liberal Lobby Group.
00:06:36.220
Poll demonstrates support for strong social media regulations to prevent online hate and racism.
00:06:42.260
Here's a press release. Recent events in the U.S. have caused Canadians to internally examine
00:06:48.500
the rise of extremism and hate speech within the world of online platforms such as Facebook,
00:06:54.820
Twitter, and YouTube. The findings of a poll conducted by the Canadian Race Relations Foundation
00:06:59.200
and Abacus Data released today indicate that 93% of Canadians believe that online hate speech
00:07:07.200
and racism are a problem, including 49% who believe online hate speech and racism are very serious
00:07:13.140
problems. Look at that, eh? That first part. That Americans have made Canadians afraid of extremism.
00:07:20.340
That's their starting point. That's called having your thumb on the scale. If you say that to someone
00:07:24.980
before asking them a poll question, you've torqued it. If that's the predicate for asking Canadians
00:07:32.440
about hatred, Abacus Data, as you can see, is a liberal firm. Bruce Anderson, liberal strategist,
00:07:38.300
is its boss. His daughter is Kate Purchase, who was Justin Trudeau's longtime communications director.
00:07:45.020
You can see his son-in-law, Perry Turgis, is on there, a liberal party lobbyist. This is an inside
00:07:50.860
job, of course. Seriously, I'm surprised that only 93% of Canadians say they don't like hate. I mean,
00:08:00.320
who are those 7% who say, I like hate? I do. Who are those 7%? But if you read through the poll,
00:08:07.640
you can see it's worse than that. The poll only asks about right-wing violence. Hang on,
00:08:14.520
what about an entire year of left-wing violence from Antifa and Black Lives Matter just burning
00:08:21.740
and shooting? How is it a legitimate survey to specifically only ask about right-wing violence
00:08:28.120
when we've had a year of riots across America from the left? And they've started up again,
00:08:32.720
by the way, in Portland, for example. Well, this is a liberal polling company commissioned by a liberal
00:08:38.440
funded NGO for a liberal cabinet minister. Garbage in, garbage out. You'll learn nothing from people
00:08:45.280
asking if they're against hate. Of course they are. You'll learn nothing from asking people if they're
00:08:50.880
against violence. Of course they are. And once you've whipped them up with your narrative that we're in a
00:08:55.500
crisis, if you ask them if they want the government to do something about it, well, of course they do.
00:09:01.840
Or at least, of course, they say they do, especially if you don't tell them exactly what you're going to do.
00:09:07.300
That report was given massive coverage in the mainstream media, and I didn't see one story
00:09:13.240
that either mentioned that it's a liberal firm that conducted the poll, or that the questions only
00:09:18.680
focused on right-wing haters. Not surprisingly, Trudeau's censorship mission minister was thrilled
00:09:27.560
with it. I should tell you, he appointed the president of the NGO that started this whole
00:09:32.160
government-funded thing. And this was timed just coincidentally with another think tank, which
00:09:39.200
means a government-funded liberal front group called the Public Policy Forum. It came out with a deep
00:09:45.420
thinking policy paper calling for the censorship of hate, too. Here's a story about it in the Globe and
00:09:51.880
Mail. Heritage minister says, take down rules coming, welcomes calls for a new social media regulator.
00:09:59.780
They're not calls. You paid them to say that. No one, you, it's like sending yourself flowers on
00:10:06.800
Valentine's Day. No one, you paid them to say that to you. Let me read. Canadian heritage minister
00:10:13.840
Stephen Gilboa says government rules are coming that will require social media companies to take
00:10:18.240
down illegal or hateful content. On Wednesday, Mr. Gilboa welcomed federally funded reports from the
00:10:24.300
Public Policy Forum and the Canadian Race Relations Foundation that urged the government to act because
00:10:29.820
they say internet giants like Google and Facebook are not doing enough to review and remove dangerous
00:10:34.140
content on their platforms. Canadians are now asking their government to hold social media companies
00:10:39.960
accountable for the content that appears on their platforms, Mr. Gilboa said in a statement
00:10:44.080
provided by his office. This is exactly what we intend to do by introducing new regulations that
00:10:49.100
will require online platforms to remove illegal and hateful content before they cause more harm and
00:10:53.620
damage. Here's my favorite part. The Public Policy Forum, an independent policy organization that
00:11:01.360
received Canadian heritage funding to produce its report, called this week for the creation of a powerful
00:11:08.200
federal regulator to oversee how platform companies moderate content on their sites. The forum also
00:11:14.260
recommended creating an e-tribunal to which Canadians can bring concerns over individual social media posts.
00:11:21.000
Don't you love that? An independent organization that was paid by Gilboa. Well, don't be surprised.
00:11:30.380
This story was published in the Globe and Mail, which is another independent organization that is funded by
00:11:35.720
Trudeau, actually by Gilboa. Here's my favorite part of the whole thing. Kara Zwiebel, director of the
00:11:42.820
Canadian Civil Liberties Association's Fundamental Freedoms Program, said she is not opposed to an
00:11:48.940
independent tribunal that resolves disputes over online content, but noted the government has not been
00:11:54.020
clear exactly what it's proposing. If new rules go beyond existing legal definitions of hate speech or
00:11:59.980
attempt to define misinformation, she said that will raise freedom of speech concerns. Yeah, I don't know. The devil
00:12:07.960
really will be in the details, she said. Oh, well. I'm nervous about the prospect of government deciding on what is
00:12:14.800
true. Probably just as nervous as I am about social media platforms deciding what is true. So I think we need to
00:12:21.040
really be careful about regulation that tries to deal with the problem. But she started by saying she's open to it.
00:12:31.820
The devil's in the details. She says there's some questions she wants answered. Okay, fair enough. But she is fine with
00:12:41.040
the concept. She just wants to see the details on this. But she's not saying no. I don't know if you noticed that.
00:12:49.080
And how about this thing? What's it called again? The Conservative Party? And what are they called again?
00:12:55.780
The official opposition? Did they say anything conservative or did they oppose this? Well, let's go to the globe.
00:13:02.540
Conservative MP Alain Reyes said in an email that he appreciated the thoroughness of the PPF report and he's
00:13:10.200
consulting with interested groups. We are waiting impatiently for the government to table a bill so that we can start
00:13:16.600
working on this file, he said. The government needs to find the right balance between regulation and
00:13:21.920
preserving freedom of expression, which is so important to our democracy. That's all you got.
00:13:28.760
You're consulting with interested parties. Aren't all 37 million of us interested parties?
00:13:34.600
You're not opposed to this. You're going to wait for the details, too. You think maybe the balance right
00:13:40.420
now is too far towards free speech. And so you're willing to balance it with more liberal censorship
00:13:45.740
and you're a conservative MP. All right. Here's how they're going to do it, if you're wondering.
00:13:53.540
It's another item from a liberal-funded org in the Toronto Star. Look at this from just yesterday.
00:13:59.260
During an interview with the Star, Gilboa also said that a new regulator will be set up to oversee the
00:14:06.740
rules Ottawa is bringing in to curb the sharing of illegal content, including hate speech, child
00:14:12.960
pornography, and non-consensual intimate images on platforms like those owned by Facebook and Google.
00:14:18.880
Now, do you see the difference there? They're talking about child pornography and revenge porn,
00:14:23.900
and they sneak in hate speech. And here's a CBC story, also funded by the liberals, where they say
00:14:31.140
it's about terrorist propaganda. That should include rules around hate speech, the letter said, as well
00:14:38.900
as radicalization, incitement of violence, exploitation of children, or creation or distribution of terrorist
00:14:44.800
propaganda. I think it's pretty clear they're going to announce that they're going after terrorist
00:14:50.900
speech and child pornography and criminal things. And who could be against that? I mean, you're not
00:14:56.900
against that, are you? You're not pro-terrorist, are you? I already asked if you're pro-hate. You're not
00:15:02.920
pro-terrorist now. And then they're just going to sneak in a little stowaway, what they're really after
00:15:08.380
here, political censorship. Because you know what? Terrorist propaganda is already illegal. If you say it,
00:15:14.940
if you phone it, if you type it, if you internet it, those laws were brought in after 9-11.
00:15:20.900
You can't even give moral support to terrorist groups. You don't have to be a terrorist yourself,
00:15:26.860
but merely supporting a terrorist group is a crime in our criminal code. Same with child pornography.
00:15:32.760
We have had these online laws from the pre-social media era. The internet itself has been really
00:15:39.860
popular for about 25 years. This is not new. The criminal code is already pretty much caught up.
00:15:45.880
But what's new is the political censorship. So let me show you what was written by the public policy
00:15:51.120
forum, that liberal party think tank. I'm going to read for you the principles of their memo. It's a
00:15:56.880
long report. The first principle, free speech is fundamental to a democratic society and that the
00:16:04.760
internet enables more people to participate in public discussions and debates. All right, now that's
00:16:09.660
where you end it. That's it. That's the principle. But like they say, ignore everything in a sentence
00:16:16.640
before the word but. Oh yeah, that dress looks really good on you, but you might want something
00:16:21.740
that's a bit more slimming. You can ignore everything before the word but. So they just said,
00:16:27.540
hey guys, we really like free speech, but, um, and I mean, it would be weird to, um, pay attention
00:16:39.920
to anything before the word but, because let me show you the next principles underneath that.
00:16:47.680
The rise of hatred, disinformation, conspiracies, bullying, and other harmful communications online
00:16:52.380
is undermining, is undermining these gains and having a corrosive impact on democratic expression
00:16:57.760
in Canada. So you can't have free speech if you engage in conspiracies. That should be illegal.
00:17:06.580
Disinformation should be illegal. And other harmful communications that they don't list.
00:17:13.740
Like what? Is one man's disinformation another man's truth? I think it could be. You know,
00:17:18.720
for three years, the media party, including here in Canada, the CBC, the star of the globe,
00:17:23.560
they all said that Trump was colluding with Russia. I mean, it was nonstop for three years.
00:17:29.320
But after a $50 million investigation by Robert Mueller, that was ruled out as just fake news.
00:17:36.860
There was no evidence of it whatsoever. That was disinformation. The CBC and the government
00:17:42.500
itself promotes disinformation to this day from the China-run World Health Organization.
00:17:46.880
But now the government will decide what information is disinformation. And that's more important
00:17:56.440
The status quo of leaving a content moderation to the sole discretion of the platforms has failed
00:18:01.620
to stem the spread of these harms and that platform companies can find themselves in conflict
00:18:06.240
between their private interests and the public good. But that's actually not true. You can sue
00:18:11.400
anyone for publishing something on Twitter or Facebook, just like you can sue anyone for saying
00:18:17.460
something on TV or radio or on a printing press or with a ink and quill. Each of those technologies
00:18:25.020
were incremental innovations to the ancient laws of libel that predated those technologies.
00:18:30.680
There's no such thing as an unmoderated content on the internet. You can sue anyone if you don't like
00:18:36.820
the content. But what's new is they want the government of Canada to do it. Translation,
00:18:42.380
they want the Liberal Party to do it. Maybe the next point. We find fault with the notion that
00:18:48.280
platforms are neutral disseminators of information. Platforms curate content to serve their commercial
00:18:54.100
interests and so must assume greater responsibility for the harms they amplify and spread. All right,
00:19:00.920
I don't know exactly what they mean, but I think it's code for they're going to delegate the censorship
00:19:06.260
to Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, because the Liberals want their censorship to happen quickly and without
00:19:12.820
a trial, without public scrutiny, not in public courts where the accused disinformer might actually
00:19:19.900
have a fair trial. Point five, government must play a more active role in furthering the cause of
00:19:27.380
democratic expression and protecting Canadians from online harms. Look at that Orwellian speak.
00:19:34.940
We need to protect expression. We're going to further expression by protecting people from
00:19:42.340
expression. You'd have to be a pretzel to think that way and get this. Tell me if you can see the
00:19:48.940
new word they invented here. Any policy response must push citizens first, reduce online harms,
00:19:57.380
and guard against the potential for over-censorship of content in putting forth remedies. This requires
00:20:03.880
a balanced and multi-pronged approach. So did you see it? It's that word over-censorship.
00:20:08.880
So the government's fine with censorship, of course. It's just over-censorship they're worried about.
00:20:15.600
Censorship's fine. Just don't over-censor. And they'll tell you where that line is.
00:20:19.800
My friends, this is a done deal. This has been in the works for years. These reports were commissioned
00:20:24.880
a long time ago, especially this public policy forum-wise. Trudeau hates dissident voices. He
00:20:31.420
has banned, for example, our rebel reporters from press conferences. That hasn't stopped us. He banned
00:20:36.940
us from reporting on the leaders' debates. That didn't stop us. We went to federal court. Trudeau
00:20:43.120
threatened me personally and fined me $3,000 for publishing a book about him
00:20:48.500
called the Libranos. Trudeau bought off 99% of the media in this country, including all the media
00:20:55.440
sources I showed you today. The CBC, the Toronto Star, the Globe and Mail. He bought them off
00:21:00.120
through his $600 million bailout. But he just can't stand that last 1% holding out, like us.
00:21:08.980
And he can't stand you as citizens saying things on Facebook to your friends without him prosecuting you.
00:21:15.140
He hates that. He hates us. He hates you. But that's the good kind of hate. And if a pollster
00:21:24.440
asked him, do you hate anything? He'd say, no, no, no. I don't hate anyone. But don't worry. Sure,
00:21:30.980
he'll censor us. He just won't over-censor us. And if you hate that, well, you're just a hate
00:21:38.000
criminal, aren't you? Stay with us for more. Hey, welcome back. You know, I like to follow
00:21:54.240
politicians of all stripes on Twitter because I like to know what the other side is saying. In
00:21:59.900
fact, if I counted them up, I think I probably follow people I disagree with or frankly am scared
00:22:05.300
of more than I follow people on my own side because I sort of already know what my team
00:22:10.140
thinks. But I can't follow Canada's heritage minister, Stephen Gilbeau. Maybe it's because
00:22:17.380
I have been sharp in my commentary about him. I always mention that he's a convicted criminal,
00:22:21.740
which is odd to be elevated to cabinet. But whatever it is, Stephen Gilbeau has blocked me
00:22:27.880
on Twitter, which is too bad because I'd like to know what he's planning to do to me. Because you
00:22:35.760
see, Stephen Gilbeau has announced, and the liberals have confirmed to the Globe and Mail and other
00:22:40.520
places, that they intend to bring in brutal censorship laws, post-haste, to tackle not just
00:22:48.120
things like terrorism online or child pornography online, things everyone could agree with, but they
00:22:55.680
throw into the laundry list hurtful opinions and offensive opinions. Well, no one could disagree
00:23:04.360
with fighting terrorism or child pornography, but they throw in these stowaways of offensive words.
00:23:11.500
Well, that makes me think maybe they're coming from me and a handful of other conservative critics
00:23:17.000
of Gilbeau and the Liberal Party, including our next guest. You know him. He's one of Canada's
00:23:23.520
few independent journalists. His name is Spencer Fernando. He's the boss of SpencerFernando.com,
00:23:30.200
and he joins us now via Skype from Winnipeg. Great to see you again, Spencer. I have to say,
00:23:34.360
I'm a little bit nervous about this because the liberals have almost total control over the
00:23:40.080
legacy media. There's just a handful of independents left, like you and me and True North and a few
00:23:46.060
others. They don't want any dissidents at all. That's my worry. Do you think that there's going
00:23:52.460
to have political censorship here in addition to actual censorship of criminal acts like terrorism
00:23:59.080
or child porn? Yeah, it seems like they're moving in that direction. And one thing I repeatedly say is
00:24:05.740
when the government already has authority to do something and then they create a new bureaucracy
00:24:10.820
or a new program to fight against the thing they can already deal with, that tells you that what
00:24:15.420
they're claiming the problem is is not actually what they're really talking about. So the government
00:24:20.500
says, oh, they need to fight hate online. Well, there's already hate speech laws that the government
00:24:24.480
has the authority to use. So they don't need new authority there. And then when you start throwing
00:24:29.900
in things like an offensive opinion, well, offensive to who? Hurtful opinion. Well, hurtful to who?
00:24:35.840
Right. Everyone's got a different idea of that. It's very subjective. So it looks like they're trying
00:24:40.680
to, I think, capitalize on what they feel is perhaps a political environment where people are pushing for
00:24:46.680
more censorship and more control. And they feel they can appeal to that. Of course, that's the kind of
00:24:50.580
thing that, you know, people, they may want that for a while. You know, there's a certain mood in the
00:24:54.760
country or North America or the world. But, you know, that that kind of shifts and people, you know,
00:24:59.700
the opinions change, but you're left with the government control. And a lot of people regret what they
00:25:04.520
had previously pushed for. So I think it is very concerning. And I don't trust the government to use
00:25:10.020
that kind of authority wisely. Yeah, that's a good point. I mean, there are hate speech and hate
00:25:15.100
propaganda provisions in our criminal code. But the thing is, that's a problem for a guy like
00:25:20.640
Stephen Gilboa, because he's got to get a prosecutor to take the case to a judge beyond a reasonable doubt.
00:25:28.800
There are some legal defenses. Now, there are some convictions under those sections of the criminal code,
00:25:33.480
but there's a whole legal process. It can be appealed theoretically all the way to the Supreme Court.
00:25:39.620
One of the things that I note about the way the Liberal Party is talking about their proposals,
00:25:44.880
they haven't published their proposals yet, is that they want to copy some approaches done in European
00:25:52.060
jurisdictions where they don't value free speech. One of the things that I've heard Gilboa talk about,
00:25:57.680
and it was in his mandate letter from Justin Trudeau, I think going back to 2019,
00:26:04.820
was they want social media companies to delete comments that are complained about within 24 hours
00:26:14.700
or face enormous fines. Now, the thing is, you can't have a trial in 24 hours. In fact, if it's on a
00:26:22.340
weekend, people might not even be at work answering. So if you have a complaint on a Saturday,
00:26:28.140
does Facebook have to have some sort of trial, Saturday night, Sunday morning, and have the,
00:26:33.920
you know, it, there is no way to properly have a hearing on the facts. And if there's massive fines,
00:26:41.480
Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, all these social media companies, they'll just delete everything.
00:26:46.860
Because if there's a million dollar fine, they're not going to risk it for free speech. I'm deeply
00:26:52.660
worried not just about the substance of the censorship, but this lack of process. What do
00:26:59.780
you think about that? Yeah, well, I think, you know, whenever you see a government impose something
00:27:05.040
that's obviously impossible to, to meet a regulation that's impossible to meet, then I think they want
00:27:11.180
exactly what you're talking about, right? They know the companies will just say, well, I'm not able to shut
00:27:14.380
down comments entirely, right? They're able to shut down entirely. And that's really what they want,
00:27:18.740
right? It's, you know, it's funny. I don't know if you're watching some of the financial news today,
00:27:22.040
you're seeing the, a lot of the hedge funds in big trouble, because I think it's GameStop, you know,
00:27:27.480
a bunch of just regular retail investors are buying up GameStop, kind of playing the same game
00:27:31.780
the hedge funds have been playing, right? And all of a sudden, oh, it's so unfair. Oh, we need
00:27:36.640
regulation. We need to be bailed out. All the big hedge funds that were so powerful and so
00:27:41.140
influential. They're all panicking and begging for government help. And that kind of reminds me of
00:27:45.120
much of the media as they've responded to social media. It's like, oh, wait a minute. No, no, no,
00:27:49.320
no. We're, we're the only ones who are allowed to reach people and share our opinions and share the
00:27:53.600
facts, right? Oh, how dare these regular people share their opinions freely as well? And so I think
00:27:59.480
you're seeing a bit of the same thing. It's both the media and the government who have lost their
00:28:03.360
monopoly on the control and flow of information, and they're panicking and they're trying to get it
00:28:08.180
back. And, you know, regulation and government control is always the way they try to do that.
00:28:12.680
You know, it's funny. I'm looking at these crazy statements by Stephen Gilboa. I mean,
00:28:17.620
I remember when he went on Evan Solomon's show and talked about a media license. You'd need a license
00:28:24.000
for a website. And he later walked that back when he was embarrassed. Here's a quick reminder of what
00:28:28.920
that looked like for folks. You're talking about a couple of different things here. But as far as the
00:28:33.480
licensing is concerned, if you're a distributor of content in Canada, and obviously, you know,
00:28:39.080
if you're a very small media organization, the requirement probably wouldn't be the same
00:28:45.800
as if you're Facebook or Google. So there would have to be some proportionality embedded into this.
00:28:55.180
But we would ask that they have a license. Yes. So he was willing to talk about a news license.
00:29:00.480
Evan Solomon, to his credit, pushed back. And Gilboa was trotted out a few days later and said,
00:29:06.100
no, no, no, I didn't mean it. But Spencer, imagine if 10 years ago, Stephen Harper were to say,
00:29:13.120
we're going to bring in extreme regulation of social media. I'm going to demand that Facebook,
00:29:18.300
YouTube, Twitter, have 24-hour turnaround when I complain. We're going to set up a new bureaucracy
00:29:24.920
for things that are offensive. I am certain that the entire press corps and all the NGOs and all the
00:29:34.120
civil liberties groups and all the law professors and all the intellectual class would say he's a
00:29:39.760
fascist, he's a censor, he's a control freak. You know, we heard the CBC calling him Heil Harper,
00:29:46.140
like Hare Harper, they call him a Nazi. My point to you is, where are the Canadian Association of
00:29:53.520
Journalists, the Canadian Journalists for Free Speech? Where are all these civil liberties groups
00:29:57.780
in the face of the most brazen censorship proposal in a generation?
00:30:05.300
Yeah, well, they're really nowhere to be found. We'll see if someone will speak up.
00:30:09.260
But that's exactly right. I mean, if Harper had tried anything like this, they would have gone
00:30:12.660
absolutely crazy. They would have been right to criticize him, right? But he never went anywhere
00:30:16.120
close to this kind of censorship. So it's obviously very hypocritical. But you know,
00:30:20.580
the thing is, I think to the, call them the elites or just, you know, the governing class,
00:30:26.220
you know, people basically in the business world, media and the government who have really
00:30:30.480
an interest in not letting just regular people share our views. I think it's, the issue is the
00:30:37.700
wrong people in their mind are sharing their views now, right? They don't see democracy as
00:30:42.060
just everyone's free to say what they want. They have to say exactly what certain, you know,
00:30:47.740
what the government wants to hear, right? So now, oh, people are too critical. People are too free to
00:30:52.560
share their views. Oh, it's getting too negative. It's getting too partisan. And all of a sudden,
00:30:57.280
now they're worried about it, right? But it's only when, you know, you know, the left is in power or,
00:31:02.700
you know, to be honest, it's not just, it's not just the left. You see people on the right,
00:31:06.320
who are either silent on this or pushing for it as well in some cases. And, you know, I just,
00:31:12.660
I just think it's, you know, we're losing our faith in freedom, and we're losing our faith in
00:31:16.740
free speech and free expression. And it always feels tempting in the moment to use government
00:31:20.840
power to shut down your opponents, but no one's in power forever. And that power can be turned
00:31:25.040
around back on the people who wielded it. And then they'll be the ones complaining, oh, this is
00:31:29.680
totally unfair. This is undemocratic. So people need to be careful what they wish for here.
00:31:33.660
Yeah, I mean, Facebook just banned some far left wing groups who in the past have called for the
00:31:39.640
censorship of the right wing groups. I'm not happy with any groups being silenced. Here's the one
00:31:44.500
surprise to me. I'm surprised that the government is doing this publicly through, they say they're
00:31:51.660
going to do it in parliament. I'm surprised by that. I had always assumed that it would just be a quiet
00:31:57.840
phone call between Trudeau and Mark Zuckerberg. Trudeau would say it would be like a log rolling deal,
00:32:03.280
let's cut a deal. I won't agree to a trust busting lawsuit against you. I won't tax you. I won't have
00:32:12.560
a Facebook tax. And in return, you will just quietly censor from Silicon Valley, anyone right wing,
00:32:21.480
I assumed it would be like a secret private outsourcing of censorship to Facebook. Because
00:32:27.360
how are you going to track that? How are you going to fight that? How are you going to appeal that?
00:32:30.240
How are you going to take that to court in Canada? You can't. So to do this through the legislature
00:32:35.560
is sort of surprising to me. I wonder if Google, Facebook, YouTube, etc. are going to object to what
00:32:45.400
Gilboa is proposing. And maybe they would fight him. Or maybe they want to get on side with it. I don't
00:32:52.240
know. I mean, I don't know what a tech titan like Mark Zuckerberg or Jack Dorsey thinks of this.
00:33:00.480
Maybe they are repelled by this and say, hey, only we get to choose who we censor. We don't listen to
00:33:07.480
puny prime ministers. I don't know. I'm confused by what's going on a little bit.
00:33:13.020
Yeah, well, I think the kind of the disturbing thing is, you know, to be honest, I think
00:33:18.380
people like Mark Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey, to be honest, I think they actually are more pro free
00:33:24.340
speech than Justin Trudeau and most politicians are. And it sounds crazy. But look at what they
00:33:29.600
said when they first started their companies, right? Jack Dorsey said, we are the free speech
00:33:33.820
wing of the free speech party. Facebook was all about openness and free speech. And I think in some
00:33:38.960
cases, these companies grew far beyond what even the CEO was expected. And now they've got a bunch
00:33:44.580
of politicians threatening to shut them down and, you know, attack them and break them up if you
00:33:49.000
don't censor people. So they're in some cases, they're obviously giving in. But I think they're
00:33:53.080
definitely more pro free speech than most politicians are. So I think I'd be much more concerned about,
00:33:58.780
you know, Justin Trudeau or Stephen Gilboa than Mark Zuckerberg. And they probably do think they'll
00:34:02.820
fight it. So they can't just do some sort of backroom deal. I think they they know there's going to be
00:34:07.340
some pushback. But I think the other thing is, they want to, if I was the liberals, you know,
00:34:12.540
you'd want to put the conservatives on the record on this. And that's what's going to be interesting.
00:34:16.880
You know, the liberals, we know how they're going to frame it, they're going to say,
00:34:20.220
oh, well, no, this is totally innocent. We're just fighting hate speech. I mean, surely everyone
00:34:24.080
wants to fight hate speech, right? How could you possibly be against that? And we look forward to
00:34:28.020
Aaron O'Toole and the conservatives joining us to fight against hate speech and racism online.
00:34:32.480
So puts the conservatives in an interesting situation. If they're true to their values,
00:34:37.640
obviously, they would oppose a new government bureaucracy and oppose government control
00:34:41.600
over social media and free expression. But as we've seen in the past few weeks,
00:34:45.560
they're definitely running very scared, you know, falling into the liberal narrative
00:34:48.820
and trying to make themselves seem very much like the liberals in many ways.
00:34:52.940
So I think that puts them in a tough position. They're party based. And I think most conservative
00:34:57.060
MPs, in their personal opinions, would be totally against this. But we'll see if there's some
00:35:02.440
pressure from the top of the party and the leadership of the party that might push people
00:35:06.640
to support it. So I think it's going to be interesting to see how that goes.
00:35:10.320
Well, you have terrified me because Aaron O'Toole in the last few weeks has shown himself
00:35:14.880
extremely vulnerable to, I'm going to call it, peer pressure. Peer pressure from the media party,
00:35:19.860
from the liberal party. He's so worried about being liked by the cool kids and so terrified of being
00:35:25.240
painted as a hater that he'll go along with anything. And I think you are very wise to keep
00:35:31.340
your eye on the conservative party. Will they actually stand for free speech? I don't know the
00:35:35.080
answer yet. Spencer, thank you for taking the time with us. You've scared me a little bit,
00:35:39.320
but you've also given me a little drop of hope. Wouldn't it be something if Zuckerberg and Dorsey
00:35:45.200
and the others said, yeah, you know what, we don't want Justin Trudeau telling us what we can and can't
00:35:50.380
publish. Wouldn't it be something if they pushed back, I don't know, with a constitutional objection,
00:35:55.100
or a lawsuit or something? We're in interesting days. Thanks for joining us today and keep up the
00:36:00.160
great work at spencerfernando.com. I always tell our viewers, you got to go there. Fast on the news,
00:36:07.020
smart takes, and a good Western point of view too. So thanks for joining us.
00:36:13.880
All right. There you have it, Spencer Fernando. Stay with us. More ahead.
00:36:25.100
Hey, welcome back on my show last night. Max writes, start lawsuits across Canada and take
00:36:33.460
the feds to court over the lockdowns and open up the country. Max, we are slowly but surely doing
00:36:38.460
that. We are very seriously investigating a constitutional challenge in Ontario. We've
00:36:43.360
got the one in Saskatchewan, and I'm very open to challenges across the country. We need to find
00:36:48.480
good plaintiffs who have standing. That is, they have the right to go to court.
00:36:52.380
Justin writes, I gave up on Canada. I'm making this comment in a packed breakfast restaurant
00:36:58.940
in Florida. Freedom is glorious. Well, you had me at breakfast restaurant, but I do remember
00:37:05.560
the before times when people could go out and see each other, look each other in the face,
00:37:10.480
not be all masked up like, you know, we're on Mars or something. And you remember, I don't know if you
00:37:16.760
remember this, there was a thing called concerts where you'd be seated next to people. Sometimes you'd be
00:37:21.500
standing, you might even brush up against someone. That was in the before times. What makes me so sad
00:37:27.860
is that children are already forgetting those before times. Isn't that sad? Richard writes,
00:37:33.340
glad to know someone in the media tackles issues playing out in Saskatchewan. Well, listen, I feel
00:37:38.200
like we have underpaid attention to Saskatchewan. I've always wanted to do more there. And I was trying
00:37:43.240
to recruit someone there and it didn't really come to fruition. Sheila has gone out to Prince Albert to do
00:37:49.360
some journalism there. We need more work there. I accept that. And I'm just looking for the right
00:37:53.260
talent who is ready to roll. So I'm open to it. Well, that's our show for today. Until tomorrow,
00:37:59.940
on behalf of all of us here at Rebel World, 10 quarters to you at home. Good night and keep fighting for freedom.
00:38:04.540
help of all of us here at Rebel World, 10 quarters to you at home. We'll walk by Rev.