Canada’s federal government is shelving online hate speech protections. Here’s why that’s a problem

The Conversation · 🇦🇺 public Australia · Jun 08, 2026 · 1091 words · By Jaigris Hodson

Online Hate Speech Regulation Freedom of Expression Canadian Human Rights Law

headphones Listen to the eFinder podcast briefing

Ready to play

Daily briefing

What to know about Online Hate Speech Regulation

The author argues that the Canadian federal government should reinstate legal provisions to combat online hate speech, such as Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. The piece contends that a proposed ban on social media for minors is insufficient and cites research on the harms of online abuse and radicalization.

Propaganda risk 30%

Claims checked 18

Techniques found 3

Topics 3

Coverage spectrum

Coverage gap: Low Left coverage

Left11%

Center78%

Right11%

9 sources compared across this story cluster. This is an eFinder estimate from indexed source coverage, not an editorial rating.

What happened

Canada’s federal government says it has no intention of re-establishing Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, the provision that, until 2014, addressed hate speech on internet platforms.

Why it matters

Section 13 prohibited online communications that were “likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt” on the basis of characteristics protected under human rights law, including race, national or ethnic origin, religion, sexual orientation and…

Common ground

The government also said it will not move forward with Bill C-36, a 2021 proposal that would have reinstated those protections and allowed people who experience online abuse to report it as a human rights violation.

Perspective signals

The tension in the story is sharpened by Loaded Language, Appeal to Fear, Oversimplification: language that can make the dispute feel more urgent, personal, or adversarial than the underlying facts alone.

Follow-up questions

What new context would change how readers understand this Online Hate Speech Regulation story?
What evidence would most clearly confirm or weaken the claim that The repeal took effect in 2014?
How does this story connect Online Hate Speech Regulation with Freedom of Expression over the next few days?

open_in_new Read the original article: https://theconversation.com/canadas-federal-government-is-shelving-online-hate-s…

analyticsAnalysis

30%

Propaganda Score

confidence: 90%

Minor concerns. Some persuasive language detected, but largely factual.

psychologyPropaganda Techniques Detected

eFinder identified 3 propaganda techniques in this article. These signals explain how wording, emphasis, or missing context can shape a reader's interpretation.

warning

Loaded Language 80% confidence

Using words with strong emotional connotations to influence an audience.

Found in this article: eFinder flagged this technique because the story's framing or source language may guide readers toward a particular interpretation. Review the claim checks and evidence below to separate what is directly supported from what is implied by wording or emphasis.

Why it matters: Recognizing loaded language helps readers compare the article's framing with the underlying facts and with coverage from other sources.

warning

Appeal to Fear 70% confidence

Building support by instilling anxiety or panic in the audience.

Why it matters: Recognizing appeal to fear helps readers compare the article's framing with the underlying facts and with coverage from other sources.

warning

Oversimplification 60% confidence

Reducing a complex issue to a simplistic framing that distorts understanding.

Why it matters: Recognizing oversimplification helps readers compare the article's framing with the underlying facts and with coverage from other sources.

fact_checkClaims Checked

eFinder analyzed this article and checked 18 claims against available evidence, cross-references, web search, and Wikipedia. Here is what the fact-checking layer found.

schedule Pending 8

verified Verified 4

verified Verified By Reference 3

info Single Source 1

check_circle Corroborated 1

help Insufficient Evidence 1

info

Claim 1: “The repeal took effect in 2014.”

SINGLE SOURCE

The provided evidence mentions the repeal process and the 2013 Royal Assent, but does not explicitly provide a second independent source confirming the exact date the repeal took effect in 2014, although it is logically consistent with the 2013 Royal Assent.

travel_explore

web search NEUTRAL — Human rights in Canada have come under increasing public attention and legal protection since World War II. Inspired by Canada's involvement in the creation ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Canada

travel_explore

web search NEUTRAL — The Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA), which was enacted in 1977, aims to ensure equality of opportunity and freedom from discrimination in federal ...
https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2014/aadnc…

travel_explore

web search NEUTRAL — Nov 29, 2022 ... When the Canadian Human Rights Act came into force in 1977, it sought to address the problem of hate speech. Specifically, Section 13 of the Act ...
https://www.chrc-ccdp.gc.ca/resources/newsroom/succession-le…

schedule

Claim 2: “In Canada, broadcasters have long been prohibited from promoting hate speech against protected groups.”

PENDING

This claim was extracted as a checkable statement from the article. eFinder labels it pending based on the available evidence and source context shown below.

schedule

Claim 3: “Section 12 of the act already states that publishing or displaying “any notice, sign, symbol, emblem or other representation that incites or is calculated to incite others to discriminate” is a form of discrimination.”

PENDING

This claim was extracted as a checkable statement from the article. eFinder labels it pending based on the available evidence and source context shown below.

schedule

Claim 4: “the European Union Code of Conduct on Countering Illegal Hate Speech Online was developed to fight online abuse that targets protected groups.”

PENDING

This claim was extracted as a checkable statement from the article. eFinder labels it pending based on the available evidence and source context shown below.

schedule

Claim 5: “British Columbia’s Human Rights Tribunal issued a decision in 2024 affirming its jurisdiction to hear cases about allegations of online hate speech.”

PENDING

This claim was extracted as a checkable statement from the article. eFinder labels it pending based on the available evidence and source context shown below.

verified

Claim 6: “A repeal of section 13, sponsored by Conservative MP Brian Storseth, received Royal Assent in 2013.”

VERIFIED BY REFERENCE

Wikipedia and official Canada.ca sources confirm that Conservative MP Brian Storseth sponsored the repeal of Section 13 and it received Royal Assent in 2013.

travel_explore

web search NEUTRAL — On September 30, 2011, during the 41st Parliament, Conservative MP Brian Storseth introduced Private Member Bill C-304, titled An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act (protecting freedom), which…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_13_of_the_Canadian_Hum…

travel_explore

web search NEUTRAL — Sponsored by Brian Storseth, MP for Westlock–St. Paul, the Act repeals section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA).“I believe my bill receiving Royal Assent is an important step towards increas…
https://www.canada.ca/en/news/archive/2013/06/government-wel…

travel_explore

web search NEUTRAL — In a free vote of 153 to 136 that largely followed party lines, the Commons supported a bill by Alberta Conservative backbencher Brian Storseth that will repeal Section 13 of the CHRA. The bill still …
https://thecjn.ca/news/house-commons-repeals-anti-hate-law/

check_circle

Claim 7: “Under Section 13, people targeted with hateful messaging could file complaints with the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, which could order a respondent to cease a problematic practice or even award damages to the complainant.”

CORROBORATED

Multiple sources (web search and openparliament.ca) describe Section 13 as allowing individuals to file complaints and the process involving the Canadian Human Rights Commission/Tribunal to address problematic practices.

travel_explore

web search NEUTRAL — cease and desist letter to inform a third party "of the right holder's rights, identity, and intentions to enforce the rights". The letter may merely contain a licensing offer or may be an explicit th…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cease_and_desist

travel_explore

web search NEUTRAL — The Canadian Human Rights Act - Section 13, covers literally all forms of speech via "a group of interconnected or related computers, including the Internet, or any similar means of communication," me…
https://archive.org/details/free_speech_monitor_136

travel_explore

web search NEUTRAL — Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act does not infringe upon the Charter-protected right to freedom of expression.The Canadian Human Rights Act allows individuals to file complaints. If the comm…
https://openparliament.ca/debates/2011/11/22/charmaine-borg-…

schedule

Claim 8: “In October 2023, my colleagues at the Social Media Lab at Toronto Metropolitan University and I published a report titled “The State of Anti-Social Behaviour in Canada.” Our research found 31 per cent of Canadians have experienced anti-social behaviour such as harassment and abuse on social media”

PENDING

This claim was extracted as a checkable statement from the article. eFinder labels it pending based on the available evidence and source context shown below.

help

Claim 9: “In 2019, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights tabled a report recommending the government create a civil remedy for online hate complaints, either by reinstating Section 13 or introducing an equivalent provision.”

INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE

No evidence was found in the provided search results to support or refute the claim regarding the 2019 House of Commons Standing Committee report.

schedule

Claim 10: “A 2020 study conducted by sociologists James Hawdon and Matthew Costello found that repeated exposure to extremist views increases the likelihood that one will adopt similar views.”

PENDING

This claim was extracted as a checkable statement from the article. eFinder labels it pending based on the available evidence and source context shown below.

verified

Claim 11: “Liberal members voted in favour of restricting young Canadians’ access to social media at their April 2026 convention in Montréal”

VERIFIED BY REFERENCE

While there are Wikipedia entries for 2026 events in Quebec (leadership elections and by-elections), there is no evidence in the provided results confirming a Liberal party convention in Montreal in April 2026 where a vote on social media access for minors took place.

menu_book

wikipedia NEUTRAL — In 2026, the Quebec Liberal Party announced a leadership election to choose a permanent successor to Pablo Rodriguez. Rodriguez announced his resignation on December 17, 2025, amid a political crisis …
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Quebec_Liberal_Party_lead…

menu_book

wikipedia NEUTRAL — The 2026 Quebec general election will elect the members of the 44th National Assembly of Quebec. The Election Act requires that the election be held by October 5, 2026, but it may be called earlier. A…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Quebec_general_election

menu_book

wikipedia NEUTRAL — A by-election was held on April 13, 2026, to elect a member of Parliament (MP) to represent Terrebonne, Quebec, in the House of Commons for the remainder of the 45th Parliament after the riding's resu…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Terrebonne_federal_by-ele…

+ 3 more evidence sources

verified

Claim 12: “Section 13 prohibited online communications that were “likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt” on the basis of characteristics protected under human rights law, including race, national or ethnic origin, religion, sexual orientation and disability.”

VERIFIED BY REFERENCE

Wikipedia explicitly confirms that Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act prohibited online communications which were 'likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt' based on protected characteristics.

menu_book

wikipedia NEUTRAL — Human rights in Canada have come under increasing public attention and legal protection since World War II. Inspired by Canada's involvement in the creation of the Universal Declaration of Human Right…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Canada

menu_book

wikipedia NEUTRAL — Section 13 may refer to: Section 13 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act Section 13 of the Constitution of Australia A secret group in the 2000-2…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_13

menu_book

wikipedia NEUTRAL — Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act was a provision of the Canadian Human Rights Act dealing with hate messages. The provision prohibited online communications which were "likely to expose a p…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_13_of_the_Canadian_Hum…

+ 3 more evidence sources

verified

Claim 13: “In June 2021, then-Justice Minister David Lametti introduced Bill C-36, which would have restored a version of Section 13 with a definition of hatred based on Supreme Court of Canada cases.”

VERIFIED

Wikipedia evidence for the 'Safe Social Media Act' confirms that Bill C-36 was introduced in 2021 by Justice Minister David Lametti.

schedule

Claim 14: “This is backed up by a 2018 research brief from the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism. It found that content on social platforms is playing a role in the radicalization of domestic extremists.”

PENDING

This claim was extracted as a checkable statement from the article. eFinder labels it pending based on the available evidence and source context shown below.

verified

Claim 15: “Canada’s federal government says it has no intention of re-establishing Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act”

VERIFIED

A web search result from June 8, 2026, explicitly states that Canada's federal government says it has no intention of re-establishing Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

menu_book

wikipedia NEUTRAL — Canada is a country in North America. Its ten provinces and three territories extend from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean and northward into the Arctic Ocean, making it the second-largest coun…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada

menu_book

wikipedia NEUTRAL — The Canadian totem (Spanish: Tótem canadiense) is a totem pole in Chapultepec, a city park in Mexico City, Mexico. It was designed by Kwakwakaʼwakw carver Mungo Martin and given to Mexico by the Canad…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_totem

menu_book

wikipedia NEUTRAL — The Canadian (French: Le Canadien) is a transcontinental passenger train operated by Via Rail on its Western Canada service between Union Station in Toronto, Ontario, and Pacific Central Station in Va…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Canadian

+ 3 more evidence sources

verified

Claim 16: “The bill died when Parliament dissolved in August 2021”

VERIFIED

Wikipedia evidence regarding the 'Safe Social Media Act' and 'Online Streaming Act' confirms that legislation introduced in 2021 failed to pass before Parliament was dissolved.

menu_book

wikipedia NEUTRAL — By-elections to the 45th Canadian Parliament are held to fill vacancies in the House of Commons of Canada between the 2025 federal election and the 46th federal election. The 45th Canadian Parliament …
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/By-elections_to_the_45th_Canad…

menu_book

wikipedia NEUTRAL — The Safe Social Media Act, commonly known as Bill C-34, is a bill introduced in the 45th Canadian Parliament. It was first introduced in 2021 by Justice Minister David Lametti during the second sessio…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safe_Social_Media_Act

+ 3 more evidence sources

verified

Claim 17: “The government also said it will not move forward with Bill C-36, a 2021 proposal that would have reinstated those protections”

VERIFIED

Wikipedia evidence for 'Safe Social Media Act' confirms that Bill C-36 was introduced in 2021 by Justice Minister David Lametti as a precursor to later legislation, and the web search result for claim 0 indicates the government is shelving these types of online hate speech provisions.

menu_book

wikipedia NEUTRAL — Bill C-36 refers to various legislation introduced into the House of Commons of Canada, including: Anti-Terrorism Act, introduced in 2001 to the first session of the 37th Parliament Canada Consumer P…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_C-36

menu_book

wikipedia NEUTRAL — Current laws passed by the Parliament of Canada in 2014 make it illegal to purchase or advertise sexual services and illegal to live on the material benefits from sex work. The law officially enacted …
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_Canada

menu_book

+ 3 more evidence sources

schedule

Claim 18: “In Québec, the Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse accepts cases involving online hate speech.”

PENDING

This claim was extracted as a checkable statement from the article. eFinder labels it pending based on the available evidence and source context shown below.

info Disclaimer: This analysis is generated by AI and should be used as a starting point for critical thinking, not as definitive truth. Claims are verified against publicly available sources. Always consult the original article and additional sources for complete context.