Rebel News Podcast - January 29, 2021


Are you a hater?

Topics
Mentioned
We’ve filed a constitutional challenge to Saskatchewan’s lockdown laws Another day, another loss for Canadian civil liberties

Episode Stats


Length

38 minutes

Words per minute

168.66

Word count

6,463

Sentence count

508

Harmful content

Misogyny

1

sentences flagged

Toxicity

6

sentences flagged


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

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

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Toxicity classifications generated with s-nlp/roberta_toxicity_classifier .
Topics generated with Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct.
Hosts, guests, and mentioned names generated with spaCy (en_core_web_sm), reconciled against Wikidata.
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 1.00
00:05:30.860 public opinion poll? Are you against hate? I mean, it would be bizarre for anyone to say anything 0.99
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 1.00
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
00:17:53.360 than free speech. Let me read the third point.
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 0.98
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. 0.95
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 0.53
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, 0.96
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.
00:36:13.100 No problem. Take care.
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.
00:38:17.160 No ounce.