Copyright Watch notes the striking similarity between Industry Minister Jim Prentice's talking points and some letters to the editor from local chambers of commerce."
Copyright Watch on Prentice’s Parrots
July 9, 2008
Share this post
3 Comments

Law Bytes
Episode 254: Looking Back at the Year in Canadian Digital Law and Policy
byMichael Geist

December 22, 2025
Michael Geist
December 8, 2025
Michael Geist
December 1, 2025
Michael Geist
November 24, 2025
Michael Geist
November 17, 2025
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Recent Posts
The Year in Review: Top Ten Posts
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 254: Looking Back at the Year in Canadian Digital Law and Policy
Confronting Antisemitism in Canada: If Leaders Won’t Call It Out Without Qualifiers, They Can’t Address It
“Shock” and the Bondi Beach Chanukah Massacre
The Catch-22 of Canadian Digital Sovereignty

Yeah, I noticed that in the St. Catharines Standard. I thought maybe the local Chamber of Commerce head had political aspirations, but now I don’t know. Why would this happen? Is the Ministry of Industry lobbying the Chambers of Commerce?
It prompted me to write my own letter to the editor, which appeared in today’s Standard, so it probably had the reverse of the desired effect.
Puppeteering
One would hope so for the entire country.
Policy laundering
Classic tactic for controversial legislation: a) refer to vague international obligations requiring passage of invasive law, b) diffuse meaningful public debate by introducing law during \’political downtime\’, c) quietly wait for press coverage to drift, d) use allied interests to present an appearance of consensus, e) enact law quickly by focussing on those interests during final legislative analysis.