this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2025
107 points (99.1% liked)

Canada

9130 readers
1961 users here now

What's going on Canada?

Related Communities

🍁 Meta

🗺️ Provinces / Territories

🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.

🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer

💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.

💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales

🗣️ Politics

🍁 Social / Culture

Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
otter@lemmy.ca
mp3@lemmy.ca
107
Proposed new rules for c/Canada during the election season, looking for feedback (lemmy.ca)
submitted 15 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) by otter@lemmy.ca to c/canada@lemmy.ca
29 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Elections Canada has released this resource with some common bits of false or misleading content about elections on social media: https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=res&dir=dis&document=index&lang=e

We plan on pinning this resource, and we are proposing the following rules:

  • Posts or comments with inaccurate or misleading information from this list will be removed, and users are encouraged to report them
  • Repeatedly posting such content will result in a ban from the community until April 28 (at a minimum)

So far we haven't noticed any serious issues, but we want to get ahead of anything that might come up

top 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Nils@lemmy.ca 5 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

My understanding is that this covers only disinformation about Elections Canada, not in general, like news about people, politicians, provinces, policies, institutions, etc…

I suggest to also pin + sidebar one of Canada's guides to identify and report disinformation.

[–] HonoredMule@lemmy.ca 1 points 20 minutes ago

That sounds like a good idea to me. I'd say the first link is probably the best/most accessible single-page resource, but the third's "Learn More" section of links the most comprehensive overall -- it even directly links the first resource. Given the length of articles that get traction here, I think this is a community that can handle the comprehensive option.

[–] hrmbee@lemmy.ca 8 points 9 hours ago

I think this would be a reasonable step to take. IMO it's better to have policies in place before things go sideways rather than try to implement things afterwards so kudos for this!

[–] Kovukono@pawb.social 32 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Why would repeatedly posting electoral misinformation during an election only result in a ban until the election was over? I don't think these people would become good actors just because the election ended.

[–] otter@lemmy.ca 11 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

This is true, and we wouldn't want to keep a bad actor around just because the election is over. I'll change the wording to add 'minimum'

We're also working on updated guidelines, so there will be a bigger call for feedback like this once we have that together. Those guidelines will apply site wide and across the different platforms (pixelfed.ca for example). How we deal with misinformation is an important area that we want to get right

[–] abff08f4813c@j4vcdedmiokf56h3ho4t62mlku.srv.us 8 points 13 hours ago

I imagine a "you can apply to be unbanned after April 28" could suffice. Almost certainly these folks (or bots?) will just disappear after the date and not bother to apply.

Not saying that we should do this - just that after April 28 matters less because most of the bad actors will almost certainly abandon their accounts after the election.

[–] CanadianCorhen@lemmy.ca 10 points 12 hours ago

strongly agree! there is so much trouble allready with misinformation, anything to help stop its spread helps

[–] johnefrancis@lemmy.ca 26 points 15 hours ago

Sounds good to me.

[–] LimpRimble@lemmy.ca 11 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

How about a reminder to not feed the trolls?

Edit: And maybe a pinned daily or weekly (depending on traffic) mega thread?

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 15 points 15 hours ago (4 children)

Will we be restricting the posting of links to foreign owned media?

[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 13 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

That seems like a little much - there's plenty of foreign media that produces worthwhile content.

Blacklisting certain outlets, on the other hand...

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 6 points 14 hours ago

That may be a more reasonable and targeted approach. I am mainly suggesting this from a place of concern about US interference in our upcoming election.

It may be easier to have a specific list of banned outlets.

[–] Sunshine@lemmy.ca 3 points 14 hours ago

I certainly wouldn't miss the Western Standard...

[–] HonoredMule@lemmy.ca 10 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

To what extent? Do we have an issue with Reuters or AP now? How about Canadian commentators like Steve Boots on foreign YouTube?

I'm having a hard time envisioning a rule around this that can be enforced equitably, but we can equitably reject content regardless of source, based on established merits of its substance.

[–] villasv@lemmy.ca 7 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Instead of an open ended rule, it’s easier to just blocklist a few repeat offenders like everything owned by Postmedia.

[–] Sunshine@lemmy.ca 2 points 14 hours ago

Let's also add Sun Media and Saltwire Network to the blocklist.

[–] tempest@lemmy.ca 3 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

Technically Reuters is not foreign owned

[–] Sturgist@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 minute ago

Well....shit... that's cool!

[–] HonoredMule@lemmy.ca 2 points 7 minutes ago

Learn something new every day. 🙂

[–] otter@lemmy.ca 9 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

No decisions have been made on that yet, and I'm happy to discuss more about it :)

Right now, I think a rule like that might be too broad. A big part of this election is about what's going on outside of Canada, so I can see us having to make exceptions for important news that hasn't been covered by a local news organization yet. I'd prefer to set some basic rules that we can follow consistently, and deal with problem posts if/when they get posted. Misleading and inaccurate headlines would still be removed under this rule

[–] Subscript5676@lemmy.ca 4 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Just to add to your comment, case in point, The Guardian sometimes covers Canadian news, and has recently published a bit more about current Canadian political events. They operate mainly in the UK but have a US office. They are independent and don’t have a corporate backer, and have been working relentlessly covering the events in the US since the new admin took power.

Digressing a bit, I’d urge people to use tools like GroundNews to find out the political leanings and maybe even the corporate owners of news outlets that you come across, and use that to your own judgement.

[–] Sunshine@lemmy.ca 0 points 8 hours ago

True, as Reuters, The Guardian and The Associated Press are not pretending to be Canadian in order to push their oligarchical interests.

[–] villasv@lemmy.ca 3 points 13 hours ago

I mean, just block things from the Sun network and it's half the job done. No complicated debates required, no risk of cross-fire with the entire rest of the news world.

[–] Sunshine@lemmy.ca 4 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

I'm sure @AlolanVulpix@lemmy.ca will like to speak up. As they have produced a great guide on foreign media posing as canadian.

[–] AlolanVulpix@lemmy.ca 3 points 12 hours ago

No need to, people like you and others have already done so! As was the original hope of creating the infographic!

I'll take a step back from this. Proportional representation is the real end game.

[–] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 7 points 13 hours ago

Good luck to my northern neighbors. It's near impossible to stop the online shitnado.

[–] chrisbtoo@lemmy.world 7 points 14 hours ago

That seems like a good move.

[–] Sunshine@lemmy.ca 5 points 14 hours ago

Good timing as I remember back in the fall that there were some trolls brigading the instance defending their lord of Nechako Lakes.

[–] Punchshark@lemmy.ca -3 points 14 hours ago

CANADA DOESNT NEED A SMALL pp