Canadian Government Sends Controversial 'Online Harms' Bill Back to the Drawing Board

Canadian Government Sends Controversial 'Online Harms' Bill Back to the Drawing Board

OTTAWA — The Canadian government released its report on a controversial "online harms" bill today, highlighting concerns raised by stakeholders and sending it back to the drawing board.

According to CBC News, Canada’s Heritage Department, which would have been in charge of implementing Bill C-10, was compelled to acknowledge serious issues since “multiple civil society groups have expressed reservations with the federal government's proposed online harm legislation, which would force tech giants to take down flagged content within 24 hours.”

That requirement and other provisions of the bill were initially justified to the Canadian public during a heated period when a number of legislators from all five major parties targeted Montreal-based MindGeek in an atmosphere of “porn panic.” The proposal itself was linked to a series of parliamentary hearings in early 2021 targeting MindGeek’s tube site Pornhub.

New Report Follows Broad Consultation

As XBIZ reported last August, the Canadian government invited “stakeholders and Canadians” to submit comments regarding the bill's proposed updates to Canada's Broadcasting Act, and today's report is the result of that broad consultation.

The government’s call for comment stated that, although “social media platforms and other online communications services play a vital and important role in Canada’s society and economy,” they can also “be abused and used to incite hate, promote violence and extremism or for other illegal activity.”

“The Government of Canada is committed to taking meaningful action to combat hate speech and other kinds of harmful content online, including child sexual exploitation content, terrorist content, content that incites violence, and the non-consensual sharing of intimate images,” it continued.

Groups like NCOSE and Exodus Cry, and anti-porn activists like Laila Mickelwait, who was invited earlier last year to testify before the Canadian Parliament, have long argued that since neither age nor consent can be verified by merely watching a video or image, all sexual content online should be subject to takedowns. Longstanding First Amendment and free-speech arguments, they allege, are not applicable because of vague anti-“human trafficking” carveouts, including controversial U.S. law FOSTA-SESTA, which they hoped Canada would emulate.

But today’s report by the Heritage Department explicitly noted that “marginalized and racialized groups are particularly likely to be affected by the requirement to force tech companies, such as Facebook and Twitter, to quickly remove content that is flagged as offensive,” the CBC explained.

“Following consultations with various community groups last summer, the report said respondents believed the 24-hour requirement was flawed because it would give platforms an incentive to be overly vigilant and remove more content than necessary to avoid breaking the law,” the CBC report continued.

Proposal Included 'Systematically Flawed' Censorship Provision

The Canadian government now admits that “a significant majority of respondents asserted that the 24-hour requirement was systematically flawed. It would incentivize platforms to be over-vigilant and over-remove content, simply to avoid non-compliance.”

Google submitted a response to the consultation, expressing concern “about the government potentially limiting freedom of expression.”

Similar points were made last year by sex workers and advocates during the parliamentary hearings targeting Pornhub and MindGeek. The hearings' organizers had initially neglected to include sex worker voices in the debate and only invited them after mounting social media pressure.

The Heritage Department told the CBC that “it intends to engage with experts over the next few weeks now that the report is out,” but offered “no timeline for the introduction of legislation” beyond a commitment “to move as quickly as possible.”

Copyright © 2026 Adnet Media. All Rights Reserved. XBIZ is a trademark of Adnet Media.
Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission is prohibited.

More News

Segpay Opens New Global Headquarters in Boca Raton

Segpay has selected Boca Raton for its new global headquarters.

X3 Euro All-Stars Paint Amsterdam Red in Billboard Campaign

The X3 Expo Euro All-Stars are making a splash on the vibrant streets of Amsterdam as the creator-first fan event prepares to make its debut on the continent.

Tiny Secret Games Taps Pauline Schmiechen for Growth and Partnerships Advisor

Adult game studio Tiny Secret Games has named Pauline Schmiechen as its new growth and partnerships advisor.

BranditScan Names Aerie Saunders as Community Manager

BranditScan has named Aerie Saunders as its new community manager.

'Goddess' Charlotte Sins Blesses the September Issue of X3 Magazine

Charlotte Sins graces the cover of the September issue of X3 magazine, the premier publication capturing the real personalities, passions, and stories behind top stars.

Centrobill Names Len Garcia as Chief Sales Officer

Centrobill has named Len Garcia as its new chief sales officer.

Mistrezz.AI Joins ASACP as Corporate Sponsor

The UK-based adult AI companion platform Mistrezz.AI has signed on as the latest corporate sponsor for Association of Sites Advocating Child Protection (ASACP).

Woodhull Freedom Foundation Debunks Pornography Myths in Latest Edition of 'Fact Checked' Series

Woodhull Freedom Foundation is hosting the latest edition of its virtual series “Fact Checked by Woodhull,” addressing myths about pornography.

Utah VPN Enforcement Pause Extended in Aylo Lawsuit

Provisions of a Utah law making adult websites liable if minors in the state circumvent geolocation efforts to bypass age verification, which were set to come into force in May, have again been put on hold temporarily.

Anti-Censorship Bill Could Shield US Sites From Foreign AV Laws

A Republican congressman has introduced legislation to bar U.S. courts from helping to enforce any foreign law restricting speech that would domestically be protected under the First Amendment, potentially including foreign age verification laws.

Show More