Freezenet produces a lot of content. We look at whether or not we qualify as Canadian for Bill C-11 purposes.
When I first started Freezenet back in 2013, it was largely to continue my career as an online journalist after the likes of Slyck and ZeroPaid basically shut down. At the time, the focus was exclusively on writing articles because I felt that there are many stories in the digital world that needed to be told.
Fast forward to today, and you can see that we have not only made Freezenet a sort of journalistic life raft, but also a larger web operation complete with music reviews, video game reviews, a podcast, a vidcast, a Wiki (something that was so heavily requested back in the ZeroPaid days), and, oh yeah, lots of news content. We’ve basically taken a general format for a basic website and ran it up to heights that was barely thought possible with even fewer resources.
The thing with the Internet is that it doesn’t ask for qualifications or a resume. When you want to start up a website, you are not asked for your qualifications or certifications. You just take out a domain, get some web hosting, maybe install a Content Management System (CMS), and you get to see what magic you can make happen. In many ways, that is a big reason why the Internet is such a huge thing today. People can start something and just see what happens. Who knows what will or won’t be popular?
One way in which Freezenet is interesting is the fact that Freezenet is basically a Canadian web operation. Slyck and ZeroPaid were both based out of the US. The last time a Canadian operation like this happened was when P2Pnet was a thing. That site, of course, is now defunct, but it did operate out of Vancouver, Canada. Freezenet is owned and operated by a Canadian who is, of course, me. There really is only one other person helping this operation out. That is Nolan who provides mixing services for our podcast. Nolan is, of course, also Canadian. Ultimately, Freezenet is, at the moment, 100% Canadian staffed.
So, you might think that this inherently means that some of our productions would automatically qualify as Canadian. After all, we, naturally, spend a good deal of time talking about Canadian related issues along with what is going on on the international stage. So, on the surface, it might be tempting to say, “Yeah, you are perfectly safe on that one.” Well, not so fast.
According to the website for the Canadian regulator, the CRTC, there is certain criteria one must adhere to if we were to qualify as a Canadian content production. Apparently, this falls under a so-called “points” system. From the CRTC:
What is the points system?
Very often, a book has only one author. Audio-visual productions, on the other hand, require a team of creative personnel to bring them to our screens to inform, enlighten or entertain us. Points are awarded for productions based on the key creative functions being performed by Canadians.
Key creative positions for live action productions*:
- Director (2 pts.)
- Screenwriter (2 pts.)
- First and Second Lead Performers (performer or voice) (1 pt. each)
- Production Designer (1 pt.)
- Director of Photography (1 pt.)
- Music Composer (1 pt.)
- Picture Editor (1 pt.)
*note that other rules apply to animation productions
Yeah, you can already tell just how out of date all of this is based on the first paragraph. It definitely envisions an “audio-visual” production as involving camera’s that record to VCR tapes, vacuum tube’s being involved, a whole crew for editing, etc. It just doesn’t even begin to grasp what this newfangled thing called “the Internet” would entail by any stretch of the imagination. Still, these are the rules set by the CRTC.
So, a question might be, would we qualify? We ask given the context of the obviously terrible and unconstitutional legislation that is Bill C-11. So, sooner or later, we will probably find ourselves under the tyranny of that anti-innovation, anti-creator, anti-Canadian, and anti-Internet law.
Obviously, we have multiple productions at this point in time. This is split between our audio news podcast and our YouTube videos. So, let’s divide the two up and see if either qualify. Remember, we need 6 points to qualify here.
First, our audio podcast. Technically, I would be the director as I am making this audio podcast. I retake lines when I don’t quite get one right, so, I’m basically directing myself. So, that is 2 points right there.
Next, we have the screenwriter. Note that it specifically says “screenwriter” and not a “script writer”. A script writer would apply more broadly and allow us to qualify for this. However, although I do write a script for this, I’m not actually fulfilling the role of a “screenwriter” because what I’m writing is not, in fact, a screenplay.
Next is the first and second lead performers. There is only one “performer” and that performer is the lead. I voice my own podcast. There’s no other people present in this podcast. So, that nets me a nice additional 1 point for a total of 3 points. Half way there!
Moving down the list, we have “Production Designer”. This role is responsible for all the visual aspects of the production. This is an audio only podcast, so there is no visual aspect going on. I did create the thumbnails and logo’s for the podcast which is a visual element added on the side. This is really stretching the technical definition, but let’s just pretend that this counts for the sake of pure stretched optimism here. So, that’s an additional 1 point for a total of 4 points.
Next is the Director of Photography. We do not use photographs for our productions, so we simply don’t qualify there. Next is the music composer. Unfortunately, there is no music in the podcast, so we don’t qualify for that.
Finally, we have a “picture editor”. We don’t really see how that applies to us unless you can take everything that was said about making thumbnails and applying it here. Let’s completely warp that definition and say that this somehow magically applies to us. We are really warping, bending, and breaking the definition that is unlikely to pass any kind of muster, but let’s be insanely optimistic here and say that this somehow manages to qualify. That gives us 1 additional point for a total of, uh, 5 points. So, even under the most extreme interpretations to bend the rules, despite being a 100% Canadian production, we wouldn’t qualify as “Canadian content”.
OK, so, our audio podcast doesn’t qualify for the current rules of being Canadian content, what about our YouTube podcast? Yes, this is a different production altogether, so, let’s see how this fares.
Technically, we don’t have a director for this visual podcast. No one is making me take productions. Still, let’s just pretend that we have this imaginary director who is me that is making sure I keep on pace with these live recordings. It’s a heck of a stretch, but let’s be super incredibly optimistic here. That’s 2 points to start with. A third of the way there already!
The next item is “Screenwriter”. Believe it or not, I do write a small script for the intro’s. Everything past the intro is not scripted as the point is to just rattle off what is going through my mind as I play these games. So, a fairly easy qualification here. So, that’s an added 2 points for a total of 4. That’s a great start!
After that is the lead performer. Well, I am the lead performer in these video’s, so that works nicely there. That’s another 1 point right there for a total 5 points. Just need 1 more point and we meet that threshold!
Next is the Production Designer. Well, I didn’t make the video game nor did I make what is happening on the screen. So, that’s a non-starter. After that is the Director of Photography. There’s no photo’s involved in this production, so that doesn’t really work either. How about Music Composer? Nope, I didn’t compose any music for these video’s either. Finally, there’s the Picture Editor. The video’s are not edited, so, unfortunately, we don’t qualify for that either. Thumbnails are generated by YouTube.
So, after all that, we got a total of 5 points with all our bending and warping of the rules. This is 1 point short of that much needed 6 points required to qualify as “Canadian content”. So, as a result, despite our best efforts, our video podcast does not count either.
With every person to date being involved being Canadian, none of Freezenet’s productions qualify as being “Canadian enough”. This is, of course, is assuming that the CRTC keeps with these current rules (and many know that the CRTC would be asinine enough to do that). There is, obviously, a long-running joke that the CRTC stands for “Can’t Recognize True Canadian” for a reason.
If that weren’t bad enough, when one looks at what does, in fact, qualify, as Canadian content, the story gets much worse. Michael Geist is noting that the film “Gotta Love Trump” is considered “Canadian content”, but the series, “All of Nothing: Toronto Maple Leafs” is not:
The Canadian film and television sector has enjoyed record success in recent years, with massive new spending often driven by foreign streaming services (the claims that companies such as Netflix don’t contribute in Canada has long been a myth). This is particularly true in Quebec, where recent data shows record spending. Given the enormous economic success, the suggestion that Bill C-11 solves an economic problem simply doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. Instead, proponents argue that the bill is needed for cultural reasons by supporting the creation of certified Canadian content rather than what is known as “foreign location and service production” (FLSP), where the production occurs in Canada but is not certified as Cancon. However, the not-so-secret reality of the Canadian system is that foreign location and service production and Canadian content are frequently indistinguishable. Qualifying as Canadian requires having a Canadian producer along with meeting a point system that rewards granting roles such as the director, screenwriter, lead actors, and music composer to Canadians (the qualifications for CAVCO CPTC certification are here).
This is a poor proxy for “telling our stories”. I pointed to this issue in 2020 with the Cancon quiz, which highlighted the disconnect between productions Canadians might think are Canadian and those that are not. Recently, I found a more remarkable example of why Cancon rules require an overhaul in order for cultural policy to meet its objective of supporting “Canadian stories.” Gotta Love Trump is a 2020 documentary with practically no connection to Canada, yet the film is listed as a CAVCO certified Canadian production. It is sold on sites such as PatriotFortyFive.com, with a promo blurb about how “so many people have come to love the 45th President of the United States.”
As the name would suggest, Gotta Love Trump is 90 minutes of pro-Trump clips and interviews, warning of the dangers of immigration from Mexico and the support for former President Donald Trump. The primary interview subjects are Joy Villa, a Youtuber and outspoken Trump supporter, Gene Ho, Trump’s former photographer, and Tana Goertz, a former The Apprentice contestant. The film also includes extended clips from Trump world luminaries such as Roger Stone and Candace Owens. As far as I can tell, there is one Canadian interviewed, Ashish Manral, an immigration consultant in B.C., who never reveals he’s actually in Canada.
So how does Gotta Love Trump, produced by Love Trump Productions, tell a Canadian story or qualify as Cancon? There are a few minutes of footage that show B.C. and the narrator is an Australian named Scott Allan, who previously operated out of Australia but has some Canadian connection. His IMBD page does not list the Trump documentary. The film credits list several other Canadians, but having watched the documentary I didn’t see them. For example, the cast purportedly includes Dean Aylesworth and Frederique Roussel, but perhaps I blinked and missed their appearance. Similarly, the credits also say there were interviews with Neema Manral, a B.C. Green Party candidate, and Hallie Latimer, a Vancouver cashier, but I did not see them on film either.
This documentary simply has nothing to do with Canada or a Canadian story. Yet it is purportedly this kind of content that Bill C-11 seeks to support with mandated payments from Internet services around the world. Gotta Love Trump stands in stark contrast to productions such as Amazon’s All of Nothing: Toronto Maple Leafs, a five part series that followed the Leafs for months during the 2020-21 season. The film is narrated by Will Arnett (a Canadian) and used Canadian crews. However, it does not qualify as Canadian content, nor does Jusqu’a Declin (a Quebec film produced by Netflix) or Turning Red (Disney+). The problem lies with an outdated certification system that privileges some professions over others and makes it difficult to distinguish between Cancon and FLSP.
Even in the context of the 80’s, the system is utterly broken. More than 40 years later, the system gets further and further broken. Yet, despite this, the Canadian government has decided to take this broken beyond repair and apply it to the Internet, effectively carpet bombing what’s left of the free speech privileges online into oblivion. Our example of how we don’t qualify for being “Canadian enough” will be far from the only story online. What’s worse is that Canadian creators online will suffer greatly, ending careers before some even start. It’s, without a doubt, a complete and utter disaster in the making.
Drew Wilson on Twitter: @icecube85 and Facebook.
