The Edmonton Journal runs an op-ed on the negative implications of the digital lock provisions in C-32 for Canadian consumers.
Copyright Bill Shortchanges Consumers
4 Comments
Recent Posts
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 280: A Fall Update on Where Things Stand on Canadian Digital Policy Reforms 
The Wrong Ban: The Heritage Committee Backed a Targeted Ad Ban for Kids and Stopped Short of a Social Media Ban, Yet the Government Chose the Reverse 
Regulator First, Rules Later: Bill C-34 Debate Shows the Government Wants a Digital Safety Commission Before It Figures Out What It Will Do 
Making the Case Against Its Own Bill: What the Government’s Bill C-34 Charter Statement Reveals About the Constitutional Vulnerability of the Social Media Ban 
“Position Has Not Changed”: The Canadian Government Reaffirms That Antisemitism Includes Anti-Zionism
That’s some of the worst writing I’ve seen in a newspaper. And this person is a vice president of a university?
I guess that’s why academics have editors…
@AWJ
I’m not really sure where your coming from, I don’t see errors or anything that would make it the ‘worst writing seen in a newspaper.’
I personally think the writing style is bang on for it’s purpose – an easy read that explains the problems with tpm as presented in the bill. It’s not literature nor academic writing… it’s for quick informative consumption.
Mr.
It’s just the usual spin-doctoring by the entertainment lobby, that’s all. It certainly isn’t bad writing.
Proof? You can’t handle the proof!
@AWJ – It’s bad because it’s against the bill, of course! Who needs more examples other than that?
Seriously, bad how? Give at least a few significant examples before spewing trash talk. Plus, even assuming the grammar is bad (which I assume you speak of since you don’t say what’s wrong) you avoided the subject matter of the article completely. It’s more of a personal letter than a news article if that’s your beef and what’s wrong with that, A Wrong Jerk?