Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'internet'.
-
While you are caught up in the Covid-19 frenzy, Trudeau is quietly slipping through orders in council, free from any parliament oversight or questioning. On August 15, 2020, Cabinet issued an order that included its expectations that the CRTC amend the terms of a decision it issued in August, 2019, which found that the rates charged by the incumbent major telecom and cable companies (such as Bell Canada, Rogers and Videotron) for internet services for at least the past four years were not "just and reasonable". https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/vmedia-federal-cabinet-condemns-canadian-families-to-higher-internet-prices-in-bailout-of-big-telcos-870332467.html Summary: the incumbent big telecoms are spinning the line that they cannot afford to support the Liberal policy dream of broadband coverage over 95% of Canada, if they are forced to compete with each other in the cities. So without extracting any commitment from these big telecoms to actually build anything, Trudeau says 'at your service sir'. The full text of Cabinet's decision (https://www.canada.ca/en/innovation-science-economic-development/news/2020/08/order-in-council-responding-to-petitions-to-the-governor-in-council-concerning-telecom-order-crtc-2019-288.html) contained elements so supportive of the incumbents that lawyers for the incumbents immediately raced to the FCA with a request that the Court reopen the record and take the contents of the order and the Minister's statement into consideration in its deliberations. I was very surprised to hear that a boot-licking entity like the CRTC had even dared to suggest that 'unreasonable' broadband prices are being charged. I am not surprised to find that Trudeau's puppeteers wait until the middle of the covid crisis to jerk his hand to signing the refutation of the CRTC's suggestion.
-
Gregory Elliott's Twitter Harassment Trial
Evening Star posted a topic in Federal Politics in Canada
It's hard to find good coverage of this issue but it seems like it might have major repercussions: http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/christie-blatchford-ruling-in-twitter-harassment-trial-could-have-enormous-fallout-for-free-speech http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2014/01/09/gregory_alan_elliott_frustrations_boil_over_in_twitter_harassment_trial.html http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/christie-blatchford-the-twitter-trial-of-gregory-elliott-is-becoming-much-like-twitter-itself-shrill-and-uber-sensitive http://metronews.ca/news/toronto/448441/alleged-harassment-over-twitter-leads-to-criminal-charges-for-toronto-man/ Depending on the source, Elliott is either being targeted and silenced for holding views that are in conflict with those of young feminist activists or he was actually stalking and sexually harassing young women online. Either way, this could be the first case of someone going to court for social media harassment. What I find curious is that the accusation of sexual harassment only seems to appear in the Metro version of the story. Based on what the Post and the Star report, it seems like Elliott's comments were relatively mild and he is in fact being targeted here. Unfortunately, it seems like most of the coverage of this story is coming from sources that I am reluctant to trust, such as MRA groups. Anyone have info or thoughts on this? Edited: added link to Christie Blatchford's piece from last week- 54 replies
-
- harassment
- Internet
-
(and 3 more)
Tagged with: