‘It’s free speech’ is no defence for threats

Opinion

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 16/05/2024 (482 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

It’s not “free speech” or “political discourse.” The type of rhetoric Canadian politicians are being exposed to has become increasingly threatening, to the point that security for protecting elected members of Parliaments is now costing taxpayers record amounts of money. And things may be getting worse.

Earlier this week, RCMP commissioner Mike Duheme announced that he would like the government to consider drafting a new law to make it easier for charges to be pursued against people who threaten elected officials. Right now, the behaviours do not always meet the Criminal Code threshold for laying a charge. However, that doesn’t mean the threats aren’t pernicious and disturbing.

Former Conservative MLA Rochelle Squires has written on these pages about the abuse and misogyny she faced while in public office. Indeed, she told my class of third-year students at the University of Manitoba that her promotion to cabinet minister was belittled as a sexual favour instead of a celebration of her talent.

But it’s more than these vile comments that are cause for concern — although they are certainly bad enough. It’s the ongoing threats to individual’s safety: death threats, rape threats, threats of violence.

This is not instilling democracy. This is about shutting democracy down.

The war in Gaza has exacerbated tensions. Security has tightened and there has been more police protection for politicians of all political leanings. However, the fallout from the convoy protests and the implementation of COVID protections, fuelled by disinformation and extremist narratives also dialed up the anger.

According to an intelligence report released in March prepared by a federal task force that aims to safeguard elections: “Violent rhetoric routinely fixates on elected officials — with particular hostility towards high-profile women.”

Just recently, Liberal MP Pam Damoff announced she wouldn’t run again in her Ontario riding in the next federal election because of the threats to her life, along with the misogyny and disrespectful dialogue she has experienced. Catherine McKenna, Canada’s former environment minister stepped down after six years of enduring a barrage of online hate and physical attacks on her constituency office. Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland had numerous death threats as well.

Male politicians are not immune however. Both Opposition Leader Pierre Poilievre and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau have also been threatened with violence. In February, a Montreal man was charged with threatening to kill Trudeau on X.

There are concerns that artificial intelligence will only make things worse. Just recently in his weekly online memo to subscribers, Free Press editor Paul Samyn spoke about the use of AI to create disturbingly realistic fake news stories. To those not paying attention, these stories could be perceived as coming from mainstream media outlets. But the information is deliberately provocative and available on Facebook and other Meta social media sites which are now blocking mainstream Canadian news articles.

In other words, fake news can proliferate online, but real news can’t. And that fake news is meant to inflame. The example that Samyn used showed Premier Wab Kinew being shut down mid-interview on the CBC for comments he made against the Canadian government. Of course, nothing of the sort happened, but in the online environment, facts shouldn’t get in the way of a good story and an angry reader clicks on content.

Normalizing violent, disrespectful and misogynist behaviour under the guise of free speech does nothing to advance democracy. It doesn’t ensure an abundance of candidates put their names forward for nomination prior to elections. It certainly shuts out women and people of colour. It doesn’t create opportunities for open and respectful dialogue that creates opportunities for understanding. It breeds distrust, contempt and — for many — disengagement in the political process.

There have been calls for social media platforms to become more serious about online aggression and threats against politicians. There has also been some pressure for these companies to act against the tide of disinformation. But these have been met by the usual refrain of censorship from both the corporations that own these media platforms and the politicians who are concerned that any attempts to control messaging could be akin to a hammer to kill a mosquito.

While new legislation to curtail hate speech against politicians may be a consideration, it isn’t likely to happen quickly, and no doubt there will be a backlash to its implementation as well.

It’s a depressing dystopia that we’re facing and there are no easy answers. But something must change.

Shannon Sampert is a lecturer at RRC Polytech and an instructor at the University of Manitoba. She was the politics and perspectives editor at the Free Press from 2014-17. shannon@mediadiva.ca