I keep on coming back to questioning the value vs harm of social media in our social and political discourse. It seems pretty clear that mis- and disinformation are prevalent on these platforms, and that our ability to make sound decisions, with good information, is increasingly threatened as a result. (See the work we’ve been doing on the efforts of KICLEI to derail municipal climate action, for example.)

Further, the drive for engagement causes platforms to engineer algorithm that prioritize behavioural hot-buttons, like fear and anger and aggression. These form the basis of the plot for Netflix’s Adolescence, mentioned our March 2025 newsletter.

It’s also important to recognize that Section 2(b) of the Charter guarantees, “freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication.” While, unlike in the U.S., this right is not absolute, being subject to the Charter’s Section 1, which allows for reasonable limits, this is nevertheless a strong thrust toward allowing, by default, speech regardless of what it might be in the first instance, with any checks only taking effect in the second.

Given such checks on speech, the question of who makes those determinations is extremely important. As an environmental advocacy organization, we frequently run up against accusations of political activity, while believing that we are in fact simply expressing a truth. In some instances, this has resulted in avenues for funding being closed to us.

So, here’s this month’s question: Do you believe that there should be more stringent regulation of social media platforms in Canada?