Registry rules for journalists need more clarity
Foreign Influence Transparency Commissioner Anton Boegman has been busy in the last couple of weeks since his office’s official launch doing outreach and media to communicate just what they’re doing over there.
Among the key jobs in this early stage is setting and managing expectations.
“Transparency, I think, [is] one of the most effective tools that we have around helping us be resilient as a society against foreign interference,” Boegman told The Hill Times earlier this month.
That push for transparency also seems to be guiding Boegman’s interpretation of the legislation driving his work—2024’s Foreign Influence Transparency and Accountability Act—when it comes to the question of whether journalists should be making submissions to his office’s registry of foreign influence activities when they report what foreign sources have to say about Canadian democratic processes.
The legislation requires that anyone who enters into “arrangements with foreign principles” in relation to “political or governmental processes in Canada” disclose those activities to Boegman, who will maintain a public registry of that information.
He confirmed to The Hill Times last week that “[c]ommunication professionals, journalists, and media organizations may be required to register,” adding that the requirement for registration only exists if it meets all three elements set out in the legislation.
“It may capture activities that are already transparent, but it really is designed to make sure that there are no opportunities to skirt around this if an activity meets the requirements of the legislation,” he said, highlighting an example that if a journalist or media outlet agreed to publish a foreign principal’s views regarding a Canadian political process, whether it be an election, nomination race, referendum, governmental policy, or procurement decision, it would be required to register that activity.
Boegman has said that more transparency is a good thing—and that’s not something at which journalists typically turn up their noses.
But, as the Canadian Association of Journalists’ president Brent Jolly told The Hill Times, the overly broad interpretation of what the registry is intended to capture will both make things difficult for media trying to do their jobs properly, and dilute the registry’s purpose.
“If you’re casting such a wide net, you’re going to get caught up in a bunch of garbage that is unnecessary to monitoring legitimate instances of foreign interference,” Jolly said.
He also noted that the lack of clarity around who is supposed to register and when could also throw a wrench in the reporting process. “This isn’t collecting information for surreptitious purposes; it’s serving the public’s right to know, and I think we really need to make sure this [registry] is in line with traditional news-gathering practices.”
There are few things journalists like more than transparency, and one of those things is clarity. Having to maybe log reporting with international sources on a just-in-case basis to avoid a hefty fine doesn’t really seem like a good use of anyone’s time, resources, or the registry.
The Hill Times