Teaching Social Media Literacy Over Bans
In response to Josh Dehaas's column on Mark Carney's Safe Social Media Act (Bill C-34), reader Tony D'Andrea of Toronto argues that the legislation is a classic bait-and-switch, restricting Charter freedoms while pretending to improve society. He writes, “Bill C-34 is not protection. It is a failure of education.” D'Andrea emphasizes that teaching young people how social media works—its manipulations, incentives, and traps—develops judgment far better than censorship, which replaces knowledge with ignorance. He notes that any determined 16-year-old can bypass restrictions with a VPN, making media literacy at every grade level a more effective approach.
D'Andrea invokes Northrop Frye's idea that education is a moral obligation one generation owes the next. He argues that a confident country does not fear young people encountering unpleasant ideas; it fears their ignorance. Suppressing radical or offensive opinions does not make them disappear but blinds society to problems that must be confronted openly.
Hockey Night in Canada and National Identity
Kevin Kattas of Toronto comments on the cancellation of Hockey Night in Canada (HNIC) on CBC after 74 years. He argues that CBC's mandate includes contributing to a shared national consciousness and identity, and HNIC was the only program that unified Canadians. He questions why CBC should continue as a federal Crown corporation if it has removed the one program that achieved this unity.
Jed Rabinovitch of Toronto shares nostalgic memories of watching HNIC on black-and-white screens, with voices of Danny Gallivan and Foster Hewitt. He recalls the Habs Golden Era of the 1960s and expresses sadness at the news, though he notes that fans will still chant for their teams on different streaming platforms.
Other Letters: Language Police and More
In another letter, a reader comments on Chris Selley's column about a complaint to the Office québécois de la langue française (OQLF) against Arthurs Nosh Bar in Montreal over the word “nosh.” The reader suggests the complaint may have targeted the Jewish root of the word rather than its lack of French origin, sparking debate about language regulation.
