"Considering" might be a bit strong. All that's really happening is the CRTC is opening a public consultation in response to a formal complaint. A cursory look at the CRTC's website shows quite a few public proceedings that are open to comment [0], including the one from the featured article.
I'm inclined to believe this is an example of the system working as intended. A complaint was filed and now the public has their opportunity to voice their opinions in response.
I would agree CRTC complaints are like lawsuits, anyone can file one. However, there is some risk that this is a trial balloon for more restrictive policies, and publicizing it like this is consistent with a playbook this government has been using. Fox is mostly harmless, and a good canary for what's going on up here. The whole picture is far too pessimistic for most people to even consider.
One can be simultaneously supportive of the freedoms of LGBT people and against the malefactors who have co-opted this and other legitimate popular movements for some very insideous ends. The primary need of these actors behind the movements is for the majority of people to do nothing. It's called neutralization - where they don't have to actually defeat you if you don't resist. Bizarre behavior, extreme statements, disproportionate aggression over seemingly minor transgressons are all designed to cow people into not confronting their representatives or the activists who operate on their behalf.
The reason they're going after Fox is because their commentators embolden viewers to become disagreeable to official narratives. In Canada, Fox News represents dissent, and dissent represents both hope and belief that can create resistance to the revolutionaries who have seized our institutions while we were being polite and civil. I've been watching the canaries pile up for years, but maybe this one will be the one that alerts the people in the cave.
Headline seems kind of misleading. Someone filed a complaint and CRTC is going through the process of handling the complaint. Its not like crtc just initiated these proceedings on their own.
Canadians are too apathetic to care. It's one of those "they came for X but I wasn't one so I didn't care" situations up here. It's going to get way worse before it gets better.
Yes and unfortunately, courts have already ruled that the CRTC had the right to shutdown radio stations because of insults and swear words[0]. So it wouldn't surprise me if they had the authority to ban Fox News.
> “During the segment, Carlson made the inflammatory and false claim that trans people are ‘targeting’ Christians. To position trans people in existential opposition to Christianity is an incitement of violence against trans people that is plain to any viewer.”
Interestingly, religious beliefs are a defense for "inciting or promoting hatred" in Canada[0]: "in good faith, the person expressed or attempted to establish by an argument an opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text;"
That doesn't sound like a religious opinion to me. Like its not based in the bible or anything. I don't think just because an opinion involves a religious group it counts as a religious opinion.
As an example, the most obvious example of hate speech would be nazi stuff about jews being evil. They don't get a pass because they are making an opinion about a religious group.
That's related but a qualitatively different thing from the quoted claim.
He's not saying he hates trans people because he's christian, which would be protected I guess maybe. He's saying trans people hate christians because they are trans. These don't seem that similar to me but I also understand how they could be confused.
I also agree with the assessment that the first one is personally shitty but the second is an incitement to violence.
In 2015 this would be shocking but in 2023 it's not that surprising as government media control ramps up around the world.
There is no longer any tolerance for anything but a narrow slice of views an opinions to be available to people.
What's worse is that I generally agree with all the views of mainstream western media it still pisses me off that it seems to be biased in agreement with me... Unless I'm now part of the sheeple?
> There is no longer any tolerance for anything but a narrow slice of views an opinions to be available to people.
I get that you're soap-boxing, but...
"trans people are targeting Christians" isn't a viewpoint. It's a statement of fact that may be false or true. In the context used (a vile statement by a trashy fear monger), it seems to be an intentional statement, and further one designed to incite hatred over a lie.
The website for which couldn't be bothered with even basic accessibility requirements. None of which are difficult.
The statement in question is also not entirely inaccurate. My entire friend group is LGBTQIA2+ and consistently makes comments against Christianity that would satisfy Carlson's statement. Frankly however, a lot of Christian's deserve it and the LGBTQIA2S+ community has been the target by a large sum of Christian's for long enough to warrant such a view in my opinion.
With all of that being said, and with understanding of what the article is about, the CRTC should not be doing this. It doesn't serve anyone in the long run except some extremely well off, probably straight, probably white, and probably lifelong male persons. As well as the group. The same group that doesn't care about other disadvantaged people enough to comply with simple legislation enabling technology to assist those with differing ability to read and navigate the web.
Tucker isnt even with Fox news anymore, but this isn't the point.
For those not following Canadian politics. Bill C-11 recently became law and they are combining this with our lack of free speech.
>The group said the Fox News “coverage aimed to provoke hatred and violence against 2SLGBTQI communities, particularly those who are Two Spirit, trans, nonbinary and gender non-conforming (2STNBGN).”
This is about censorship. You claim your political opponents are 'inciting hatred' toward yourself or others and the government has the ability to censor your shared political opponents.
I will be shocked if they don't completely ban Fox news from Canada.
Funny thing is that CNN is creating these TV channels in Europe the past couple of years. Here they are following the quasi-extremist line that better suits the opposition of the parties in power in the country in order to get popular engagement.
i.e.: In Portugal, a left wing party (they call themselves Socialist Party, but most are just moderate left) is in power, so CNN Portugal, to get views from running the contradictory viewpoint, most of the time is a quasi alt-right mouthpiece.
It'd be a reasonable guess that more people will hear about this on Joe Rogan's podcast than on Fox News. If Tucker Carlson starts a podcast it is plausible more people will be deciding their opinions based on what he says than based on what Fox News says.
We are fortunate to live in an era when groups like the CRTC are incapable of silencing opinions that they disagree with. Still distasteful though.
> We are fortunate to live in an era when groups like the CRTC are incapable of silencing opinions that they disagree with. Still distasteful though.
I'd recommend reading the article.
> The CRTC has opened a public consultation on a complaint from an LGBTQ rights group asking the broadcast regulator to ban Fox News from cable packages in Canada.
Someone made a complaint, CRTC is following up. That's all.
Fox news just settled a defamation case for over $700 million. At some point, you can't call what's being broadcast an "opinion." Clearly Fox agrees what they're broadcasting isn't an opinion and is instead a falsehood, because otherwise they would have argued their case.
"trans people are targeting christians" is not an opinion. It is stating something as a fact (I highly doubt it's true, but it's still stated as a fact).
Fox News just banned itself by getting rid of Carlson. He was their most popular host by far, and the rest of their popular evening lineup depended on his lead in.
Fox News just banned itself by getting rid of O'Reilly. He was their most popular host by far, and the rest of their popular evening lineup depended on his lead in.
How is that not a clear-cut first amendment violation?
The government literally banning what speech can reach it's citizens. To be fair, it's not really a surprise. The government decided at one point to suspend the constitution (because that's a thing over there?) during peaceful protests by truckers...
[+] [-] ColinCochrane|2 years ago|reply
I'm inclined to believe this is an example of the system working as intended. A complaint was filed and now the public has their opportunity to voice their opinions in response.
[0] https://applications.crtc.gc.ca/instances-proceedings/Defaul...
[+] [-] motohagiography|2 years ago|reply
One can be simultaneously supportive of the freedoms of LGBT people and against the malefactors who have co-opted this and other legitimate popular movements for some very insideous ends. The primary need of these actors behind the movements is for the majority of people to do nothing. It's called neutralization - where they don't have to actually defeat you if you don't resist. Bizarre behavior, extreme statements, disproportionate aggression over seemingly minor transgressons are all designed to cow people into not confronting their representatives or the activists who operate on their behalf.
The reason they're going after Fox is because their commentators embolden viewers to become disagreeable to official narratives. In Canada, Fox News represents dissent, and dissent represents both hope and belief that can create resistance to the revolutionaries who have seized our institutions while we were being polite and civil. I've been watching the canaries pile up for years, but maybe this one will be the one that alerts the people in the cave.
[+] [-] bawolff|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] obblekk|2 years ago|reply
Canada has many reasonable regulatory alternatives including:
- condition libel protection to retractions made with the same prominence if fox is made aware of falsity
- create individual liability for libel in addition to corporate
- require public broadcast messages on certain topics
- require a fairness doctrine on certain topics
[+] [-] BunsanSpace|2 years ago|reply
This recent complaint came from Tucker's weird Canada is under a dictatorship documentary.
Given he spread blatantly false and harmful information, the CRTC is forced to review the complaint. People need to read beyond the headlines.
This is the regulatory framework at work.
[+] [-] version_five|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] olalonde|2 years ago|reply
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CHOI-FM#Dispute_with_the_CRTC
[+] [-] olalonde|2 years ago|reply
Interestingly, religious beliefs are a defense for "inciting or promoting hatred" in Canada[0]: "in good faith, the person expressed or attempted to establish by an argument an opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text;"
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_in_Canada#Sec...
[+] [-] bawolff|2 years ago|reply
As an example, the most obvious example of hate speech would be nazi stuff about jews being evil. They don't get a pass because they are making an opinion about a religious group.
[+] [-] boomboomsubban|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] giraffe_lady|2 years ago|reply
He's not saying he hates trans people because he's christian, which would be protected I guess maybe. He's saying trans people hate christians because they are trans. These don't seem that similar to me but I also understand how they could be confused.
I also agree with the assessment that the first one is personally shitty but the second is an incitement to violence.
[+] [-] sophacles|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] psychphysic|2 years ago|reply
There is no longer any tolerance for anything but a narrow slice of views an opinions to be available to people.
What's worse is that I generally agree with all the views of mainstream western media it still pisses me off that it seems to be biased in agreement with me... Unless I'm now part of the sheeple?
[+] [-] sophacles|2 years ago|reply
I get that you're soap-boxing, but...
"trans people are targeting Christians" isn't a viewpoint. It's a statement of fact that may be false or true. In the context used (a vile statement by a trashy fear monger), it seems to be an intentional statement, and further one designed to incite hatred over a lie.
[+] [-] uvnq|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mschuster91|2 years ago|reply
Carlson literally disputed the results of an election, and that despite heaps of evidence that there never has been fraud.
At that point, he and his gullible viewers become a threat to democracy itself - and that is not an exaggeration given the events of Jan 6th.
It used to be the case that such events got classified and prosecuted as high treason.
[+] [-] iinnPP|2 years ago|reply
The website for which couldn't be bothered with even basic accessibility requirements. None of which are difficult.
The statement in question is also not entirely inaccurate. My entire friend group is LGBTQIA2+ and consistently makes comments against Christianity that would satisfy Carlson's statement. Frankly however, a lot of Christian's deserve it and the LGBTQIA2S+ community has been the target by a large sum of Christian's for long enough to warrant such a view in my opinion.
With all of that being said, and with understanding of what the article is about, the CRTC should not be doing this. It doesn't serve anyone in the long run except some extremely well off, probably straight, probably white, and probably lifelong male persons. As well as the group. The same group that doesn't care about other disadvantaged people enough to comply with simple legislation enabling technology to assist those with differing ability to read and navigate the web.
[+] [-] incomingpain|2 years ago|reply
For those not following Canadian politics. Bill C-11 recently became law and they are combining this with our lack of free speech.
>The group said the Fox News “coverage aimed to provoke hatred and violence against 2SLGBTQI communities, particularly those who are Two Spirit, trans, nonbinary and gender non-conforming (2STNBGN).”
This is about censorship. You claim your political opponents are 'inciting hatred' toward yourself or others and the government has the ability to censor your shared political opponents.
I will be shocked if they don't completely ban Fox news from Canada.
[+] [-] noonething|2 years ago|reply
Wasn't there an organization for standards in journalism? or can anyone start up a news org now and start reporting stuff?
[+] [-] pjc50|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bawolff|2 years ago|reply
If you think cnn is deserving of a complaint, you can file one about them too.
[+] [-] wtcactus|2 years ago|reply
i.e.: In Portugal, a left wing party (they call themselves Socialist Party, but most are just moderate left) is in power, so CNN Portugal, to get views from running the contradictory viewpoint, most of the time is a quasi alt-right mouthpiece.
[+] [-] roenxi|2 years ago|reply
We are fortunate to live in an era when groups like the CRTC are incapable of silencing opinions that they disagree with. Still distasteful though.
[+] [-] barbazoo|2 years ago|reply
I'd recommend reading the article.
> The CRTC has opened a public consultation on a complaint from an LGBTQ rights group asking the broadcast regulator to ban Fox News from cable packages in Canada.
Someone made a complaint, CRTC is following up. That's all.
[+] [-] rcme|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sophacles|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] allanmacgregor|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] psychphysic|2 years ago|reply
But by god it was a fun show to watch!
[+] [-] dirtyid|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] calimac|2 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] fwungy|2 years ago|reply
They're going to cellar to CNN.
[+] [-] MisterBastahrd|2 years ago|reply
They're going to cellar to CNN.
-- someone else, 6 years ago
[+] [-] 908B64B197|2 years ago|reply
The government literally banning what speech can reach it's citizens. To be fair, it's not really a surprise. The government decided at one point to suspend the constitution (because that's a thing over there?) during peaceful protests by truckers...
[+] [-] SonicScrub|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pearle|2 years ago|reply