CRTC drops references to egregious abuses by HRCs from final report on broadcasting in new media

The CRTC released a report on June 4th, 2009 titled “Review of broadcasting in new media, Broadcasting Regulatory Policy CRTC 2009-329.”

However, on the CRTC website the following notice appears,

Broadcasting regulatory policy:

The Commission replaces the concurring opinion appended to Review of broadcasting in new media, Broadcasting Regulatory Policy CRTC 2009-329.

What was the amended document that with which the CRTC replaced the original? Here’s is the new version of the report:

What changes were made?

I’ve run a software-based PDF comparison tool on both documents and I’ve found that the documents are almost identical except for the following omission from the final version:

“The history of the regulation of speech in this country does not engender confidence that such powers will be used wisely. Canada has experienced several instances in recent times where regulatory commissions of another type and armed with a different mission have challenged the right to say controversial things. The struggles of Ezra Levant,14 Mark Steyn15 and others have served as important warnings that regulatory authorities charged with combating racism, hatred, and other evils have consistently expanded their mandates, have abused their powers and eroded fundamental liberties. Wherever there is official orthodoxy, disagreement is heresy, and where there is heresy, there is usually an inquisition to root it out. After centuries ridding ourselves of thought control agencies, 20th century Canada re-invented them.”

Now that’s interesting. Why did the CRTC feel that it was necessary to omit references to Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn’s battles with “regulatory authorities”?

Comments

comments

  • Robbie Laird

    1984 Double Think

  • Joan Tintor

    Let's hope someone in the media asks them.

  • Sean Reid

    Well done Stephen. That is a stunning revision. Second only to the astounding reality that such a paragraph ever made it into a CRTC draft document in the first place!

    To the point of your earlier post about putting our money where the substance is. Who are the MPs currently on the Hill leading the charge on this issue of real importance?

    Sean

  • Phil

    Joan, the Canadian media is too busy running important stories about Michael Jackson's funeral and whether or not Stephen Harper ate the wafer to worry about inconsequential stories about government abuses being censured by the government.

  • http://bigcitylib.blogspot.com/ bigcitylib

    Because on closer inspection they realized Ez and Steyn were bullshitters?

  • John

    Both the CRTC and the CHRC are in the censorship business.

  • john mackay

    The CRTC indicates it has “appended” the report. By definition, “append” means to “add on, affix, supplement, hang on, tack”. Perhaps, instead, they should have indicated the deletions in the report as “redacted”.

  • MT

    Very disturbing trend back to feudalism world-wide and in all sectors of government in the so-called West.

  • MT

    Very disturbing trend back to feudalism world-wide and in all sectors of government in the so-called West.

  • Liz J

    Neither of these bodies belong in a democracy. They're havens for Socialistic zealots to interfere in our lives through intimidation. If the cases of Ezra and Mark Steyn don't scare the masses we're in more trouble than we know.

    IMO, Socialism is best described by Sir Winston Churchill: “Socialism is a philosophy of failure,the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, it's inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery”.

  • Omanator

    Liz J. I could not have said it better myself. In Fact a lot of that went on during the 20 and thirties in Germany. And the uneducated masses swallowed it. We should get rid of both organizations. If someone broadcast something about someone, which is defamatory, he or she can always appeal to the courts. That is where such issues should be solved. Not in the cangeroo court of the CHRC.

  • terry1

    Liz j hysterical…..you should be asking your own party why it exerts so much effort trying to suppress news from the PMO. The censorship practiced there would make Stalin blush. Harpo has his fingerprnts over everthing that comes out of there including all the lies we've been told. everyhing is stage managed by the PMO and does not get to us in a normal fashion.

    Plus, you Tories are running the most socialist economic platform seen in this Country since the 50's.

  • Brett

    If the Tories are running “the most socialist economic platform since the 50's”, what platform are the Lieberals running on? Oh, that's right, they don't have one other than demand massive spending on stimulus, complain that it isn't happening fast enough and in the next breath complain that it is going too far. Yeah, that's the ticket.

  • djb

    Perhaps they feel free to delete such references because the Harper government continues to demonstrate it doesn't give a rat's rosy red rectum about freedom of speech or fundamental human rights?

  • terry1

    gee brett, why do you want a platform from the Libs. Why not the NDP and the Bloc as well?

    You see, there is no election just yet and I ggy is holding his fire because if he issued a policy the policy bankrupt reformatories would simply steal it. Their lack of ethics being that appalling.

  • Brett

    I don't live in Quebec, therefore the Bloc is irrelevant to me and the NDP have no hope in hell of ever forming government except by the back door option of a coalition.

    “You see, there is no election just yet and I ggy is holding his fire because if he issued a policy the policy bankrupt reformatories would simply steal it. Their lack of ethics being that appalling.”

    You mean the same ethics that JC and the gang displayed when they frequently took Reform ideas and passed them off as their own? Or the same ethics that Lester Pearson displayed when he used Tommy Douglas' idea of National Medicare? The Libs are hardly in any position to lecture about ethics anyway (Sponsorship Scandal anyone?)

    If the Accidental Tourist wants to become Prime Minister, he must demonstrate that he has a vision for Canada, not just a lust for power. So far all he has demonstrated is that he can suck and blow at the same time, but not much in the way of substance.

  • Brett

    I don't live in Quebec, therefore the Bloc is irrelevant to me and the NDP have no hope in hell of ever forming government except by the back door option of a coalition.

    “You see, there is no election just yet and I ggy is holding his fire because if he issued a policy the policy bankrupt reformatories would simply steal it. Their lack of ethics being that appalling.”

    You mean the same ethics that JC and the gang displayed when they frequently took Reform ideas and passed them off as their own? Or the same ethics that Lester Pearson displayed when he used Tommy Douglas' idea of National Medicare? The Libs are hardly in any position to lecture about ethics anyway (Sponsorship Scandal anyone?)

    If the Accidental Tourist wants to become Prime Minister, he must demonstrate that he has a vision for Canada, not just a lust for power. So far all he has demonstrated is that he can suck and blow at the same time, but not much in the way of substance.