Discussion · Government Orders
Garnett Genuis Conservative
“Politicians often misuse words like misinformation and disinformation to accuse their critics of lying. This bill tries to regulate those things online, but it leaves too many details to regulations instead of putting them directly in the law. That gives officials too much power and makes it easier for them to abuse it.”
“Madam Speaker, of course I agree there is a difference between those two words. My point was simply that those words get thrown around casually, often interchangeably, and admittedly in a way that is disconnected from the true meanings of them. Because it is against parliamentary rules for someone to accuse someone else of lying in this place, I think often people just say that something is misinformation, which is their way of trying to get underneath the rules of not being able to say someone is lying. The point, though, is that when we have the casual use of the terms “misinformation” and “disinformation” thrown against political critics at the same time as there is legislation aiming to, through legal intervention and online regulation, prevent misinformation and disinformation, there is a bit of a problem: How do we prevent the misuse of terms that we see in political discourse from creeping into the misuse of terms in other places? I will pick up on what the member said as well. She highlighted the number of decisions that are left to regulation. That is a concern we have in general. The number of decisions in this framework that are ultimately left to regulation rather than established in legislation increases the risk and potential concern of abusive decisions later.”
-
Reply to a debate question
Relevance 100 of 100
Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.
See full analysis
Madam Speaker, of course I agree there is a difference between those two words. My point was simply that those words get thrown around casually, often interchangeably, and admittedly in a way that is disconnected from the true meanings of them. Because it is against parliamentary rules for someone to accuse someone else of lying in this place, I think often people just say that something is misinformation, which is their way of trying to get underneath the rules of not being able to say someone is lying. The point, though, is that when we have the casual use of the terms “misinformation” and “disinformation” thrown against political critics at the same time as there is legislation aiming to, through legal intervention and online regulation, prevent misinformation and disinformation, there is a bit of a problem: How do we prevent the misuse of terms that we see in political discourse from creeping into the misuse of terms in other places? I will pick up on what the member said as well. She highlighted the number of decisions that are left to regulation. That is a concern we have in general. The number of decisions in this framework that are ultimately left to regulation rather than established in legislation increases the risk and potential concern of abusive decisions later.