Google partners with lefty collective in attempted end run around C-18

Article content

The Online News Act, which came into force at the end of last year, forced major information technology companies like Google and Meta to share revenue from Canadian news stories posted on their websites with the media outlets that originally produced them.

Google opted to make a deal with the Department of Canadian Heritage last November, which will see the company contribute $100 million a year to Canadian-based news publishers, to be distributed in an equitable fashion by a collective.

Article content

In early June, Google announced it had selected the Canadian Journalism Collective (CJC) to distribute the funds. According to CJC’s website, it was founded in May “by a diverse group of news publishers and broadcasters to promote sustainability, equity and innovation in the implementation of the Online News Act and regulations.”

It lists 12 members who make up the collective, all of whom are involved with relatively obscure left-wing, alternative publications — including Indiginews, Pivot and the Resolve — along with small media outlets, such as Village Media and Discourse Community Publishing. The one exception is the Inspirit Foundation, an organization that provides media and arts funding to advance progressive causes.

The political leanings of most CJC members is unsurprising. What’s surprising is that a multinational corporation like Google would willingly establish a working relationship with little-known individuals and groups that neither represent mainstream political opinions in this country, or the sources most Canadians turn to in order to get their news.

Article content

Article content

What’s the nature of this relationship? It’s a good question — and one that may be puzzling the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) to some degree, too.

On June 27, the CRTC put out a call for comments on the proposed deal, to “determine if Google has demonstrated that it met the criteria for an exemption order under Section 11 of the (Online News Act) and the regulations.”

If it has, then the regulator must determine “how long the exemption order should last, up to a maximum of five years,” “which provisions of the act Google should be exempted from” and “if any conditions should be attached to the exemption order.”

The CRTC’s call for comments raises numerous red flags about the agreement.

In terms of payments, the agreement only begins after an exemption has been granted. Yet the CRTC noted that the timeline for the allocation of the $100 million in the first year is “unclear.” There’s no indication as to whether it will be issued as a lump sum payment, or spread out over time.

There’s also the possibility, as the CRTC noted, that Google “would not make payments to the CJC in response to an interim exemption order based on the current language of the agreement.”

Article content

The section on the CJC’s operation and governance is equally concerning.

“Minimal information was submitted on how the CJC will govern itself, distribute funds or ensure that members comply with their obligations under the agreement,” the CRTC noted. “Similarly, minimal information is provided on how disputes between members, or between Google and the CJC, will be resolved.”

This has to be outlined in some detail, because there will undoubtedly be disagreements between Google and the CJC, or between the collective and the media outlets it is supposed to be distributing funds to. The collaborative process is far from perfect, and a mechanism needs to be in place if disputes arise. As of right now, there doesn’t appear to be anything like that specified in the deal.

Later on, the CRTC says that, “Beyond the distribution of funds, the CJC has agreed to a number of other terms, including that it, and its members, will not launch any bargaining or copyright-related proceedings against Google, and that it will indemnify Google against a wide variety of potential losses.”

Article content

This makes no sense whatsoever. It’s baffling that left-wing CJC members would willingly forego the right to collective bargaining and legal protections for copyrighted works. They’re the ones who usually complain the most about supposed negligence in both areas! If it’s in their DNA, why are they dropping these conditions so readily?

It’s also impossible to understand how the CJC, a small organization founded about two months ago, could have either the ability or the financial means of indemnifying a tech giant like Google — a company valued at over US$2 trillion (C$2.7 trillion). If we try to add a bit of logic to this illogical situation, shouldn’t it be the other way around? Unless the CJC has many pots of gold stashed away at the end of a series of invisible rainbows, this is a real head-scratcher.

Answers to the CRTC’s questions about the Google-CJC working relationship will either become more clear once the comment period has ended at the end of this month, or cause a delay in Google’s exemption. Either way, it shows that the tech giant is not acting in good faith in its dealings with Canadian media.

National Post

Article content