Beyond Google Alerts: The Fallout From Canada’s Online News Act (Bill C-18) Just Made Your Job Harder
Government affairs professionals know that staying informed isn’t a luxury — it’s necessary. Yet, much of their traditional toolkit — Google alerts, early morning scans from media monitoring companies, and manual click-throughs of key sources — is inadequate in our rapidly-changing information landscape. Canadian news content is about to vanish from the world’s two biggest tech platforms now that the Online News Act (Bill C-18) has received Royal Assent. C-18 will require internet platforms and search engines to pay Canadian online news companies for linking their content. Even though enforcement is expected to be six months out, big tech companies are announcing sweeping changes. Fearing a contagion that might spread further, Google and Meta declared they would stop sharing Canadian news links on their platforms. This isn’t unique to Canada. Australia faced down the same threat in response to similar legislation of its own, resulting in a compromise of sorts. The US Congress had similar legislation before it last year, and a bill is currently winding its way through the California state legislature. The EU had already adopted measures in response to the same concerns that motivated legislators in those jurisdictions. So, what’s going on? Well, as the Public Policy Forum’s report, “the Shattered Mirror” (and the Shattered Mirror: Five Years On) highlights, when it comes to the threat that local news outlets face when up against these companies, the tech giants are eating their lunch. This is, in part, due to the substantial shift in advertising revenue away from local news and towards digital platforms, even though these digital platforms don’t actually produce the content they use to generate those advertising dollars. In 2022, 80% of all online ad revenue in Canada went to Google and Meta. Traditional news outlets are feeling the squeeze, leading to the closure of more than 450 outlets since 2008. Just last week, two of Canada’s biggest news media conglomerates announced they were exploring a merger to survive this challenging environment. The fallout from Bill C-18 highlights a growing issue for those in government affairs: the way we monitor information is in flux. This situation mirrors the conflict between big tech and the Canadian government, and intra-tech rivalries like Meta’s launch of Threads to compete with Twitter. The sources we have relied on are changing, as are the tools we use to access them. Meanwhile, shifts in the news media industry are affecting the type of issues that are getting coverage at all. In a world where local journalism is on life support, much of the information government affairs professionals need doesn’t even make the news anymore. It is getting harder to monitor an array of sources and piece data together to uncover intelligence that affects your business. Government affairs professionals will need to focus on directly monitoring a wider range of authoritative sources with a critical eye for the truth. No matter who wins these battles — big tech or government (or somewhere in the middle) — the whole thing highlights that our profession is in the midst of an irreversible transformation. Old tactics and tools are not cutting it and as the landscape continues to change, so must we. Want to learn more about what Delphic Research is doing to solve this problem? Contact me at danny.chang@delphicresearch.ca
Changing Technologies, Changing Industry: How Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning are Driving Innovation in the Life Science Sector
ith the rapid uptake and influence of Artificial Intelligence (AI) within nearly all facets of life, now is the time for those of us in the healthcare and life sciences sectors to query the relationship between this tectonic-shifting technology and healthcare professionals. The life sciences sector has often been a pioneer of new technologies, leveraging human innovation to increase efficacy, decrease time to market, and improve data management. The rapid uptake of AI and Machine Learning (ML) across all sectors provides the next opportunity for life science companies to lead charge. Major influential bodies have already been exploring and discussing the implications of these advancements in technology; specifically, for AI and Machine Learning (ML). Despite their similarities, AI and ML can pose vastly different implications for the healthcare sector. While AI involves the development of technology designed to imitate human behaviour as effectively as possible, ML is a subset of AI that focuses less on general imitation and instead on training a machine to carry out a specific task. Both, however, carry far-reaching implications for the future of healthcare. The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) addresses the new technologies in its recently published discussion paper on the use of AI and ML in the development of drugs. This accompanies another whitepaper regarding AI in drug manufacturing, which serves as a starting point for various stakeholders to discuss the potential implications of AI within the pharmaceutical industry and beyond. So, what does the FDA think about these technologies? In the discussion papers, they anticipate three ways AI will have a direct impact on the advancement in drug development, and by extension, the role of healthcare professionals: Despite outlining these various benefits, the FDA has expressed significant concerns for a world with blind faith in AI. Emphasizing the vital role that humans play in the effective implementation of AI, the FDA believes that AI should not be completely unregulated, but rather, that regulations should work under the influence of humans to carry out various tasks more efficiently. In particular, the discussion paper notes that human-led governance is necessary to maintain accountability and transparency over AI when it comes to Life Sciences. Initial excitement over the capabilities of AI may result in a world with lax regulation and inaccuracies in drug development. The FDA stresses the importance of careful, human-led planning when using AI in drug development. Discontinuation may be necessary if the maintenance of AI becomes counterproductive to an institution’s ability to benefit people. Further, any benefits of efficient scraping and data analysis are mitigated when datasets themselves are flawed. AI may not always see through these flaws, thus generating biased, unrepresentative, or inaccurate results. The FDA urges the importance of human eyes thoroughly looking over data collected and selected by AI to ensure that bias is eradicated from the beginning. Beyond this whitepaper, life sciences professionals are presently evaluating the immediate impact of Large Language Models, such as Chat-GPT and GPT 4, in healthcare. In a webinar run by FirstWord HealthTech about the use of Generative AI in healthcare, Najat Khan, Janssen’s Chief Data Science Officer, discussed how AI can effectively address pressing problems with greater efficiency than humans. Machine learning can generate reports and knowledge graphs with greater ease and accuracy, allowing professionals to focus their energy on achieving large-scale innovations. AI also significantly helps to tailor drugs to patient needs by scouring through electronic records more quickly than a human. However, Dr. Khan expressed the same warning shared by the FDA; namely AI, within the context of healthcare, is only truly as good as the data it is fed. As the world embraces AI and ML, healthcare professionals and data scientists still play a vital role in ensuring that data sets are accurate and diverse. At Delphic Research we are encouraged by the advances that the life science industry is experiencing as a result of these new technologies. We continue to be vigilant, monitoring for developing technologies and their applications, keeping clients updated on the trends that they need to know.
From Reaction to Pro action: Canada’s Journey to Pandemic Preparedness after COVID-19
Three years and three months after COVID-19 was declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) in January 2020, the WHO Director-General, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, has announced that COVID-19 is no longer considered a PHEIC. The decision was grounded on expert advice and trends showing decreases in COVID-19 deaths, hospitalizations and ICU admissions, as well as high levels of population immunity to SARS-CoV-2. While this is the long-awaited news the world-over had hoped for, COVID-19 remains an ongoing health issue that requires long-term management. At home, the pandemic era has had a notable impact on the action Canada is taking to prioritize the health and safety of its citizens through enhanced pandemic preparedness. The actions include: introducing legislative changes, investing in infrastructure development, and playing a significant role in global pandemic prevention. 1. Legislative and Regulatory Changes Health Canada introduced Regulations Amending the Medical Devices Regulations (Interim Order No. 3) On February 22nd, 2023, with the aim off enhancing access to COVID-19 medical devices. This Order enables the continued importation and sale of authorized devices, ensuring a steady supply to effectively address ongoing or future pandemic challenges. Currently, Parliament is the Pandemic Prevention and Preparedness Act (Bill C-293) is undergoing consideration in committee. This act aims to prevent future pandemics by addressing factory farming and the commercial wildlife trade as 75% of new or emerging infectious diseases primarily originate from animals, especially wildlife. The bill identifies suspected pandemic drivers such as live animal markets, the wildlife trade, intensive farming, and habitat loss. It includes the creation of an advisory committee, emphasizes a ‘One Health’ approach by recognizing the interconnectedness of animal, human, and environmental health, and requires measures to mitigate risks and promote transparency and accountability. 2. Innovations for Pandemic Preparedness Canada has embraced innovative strategies to enhance pandemic preparedness. Wastewater monitoring systems have been expanded to detect and track pathogen changes, enabling timely public health interventions. The country has also increased whole genome sequencing testing capacity, leveraging scientific advancements for improved accessibility and timeliness of genomic data for better pandemic response. Canada also monitors adverse events following immunization and combats misinformation by exploring new tools like artificial intelligence and social media analysis. Additionally, behavioral science findings are being applied to boost vaccine confidence, combat misinformation, and test innovative interventions. 3. New Research Infrastructure Projects In 2021, the Biomanufacturing and Life Sciences Strategy, developed in collaboration with key stakeholders and external advisors, was unveiled. The strategy aims to build strategic partnerships, promote talent development, and enhance domestic capacity for next-generation vaccines and therapeutics development to position Canada ahead of future health threats. To fortify the biomanufacturing and life sciences ecosystem, the Canadian government is committing over $2.2 billion over a span of seven years. Five multidisciplinary research hubs have already been selected through the Canada Biomedical Research Fund and Biosciences Research Infrastructure Fund competition, advancing to Stage 2 in March 2023. 4. Procurement Initiatives Canada aims to reduce supply chain interruptions by investing in domestic production capabilities. An investment of up to $29 million was made to establish a new factory in Greater Montréal, ensuring end-to-end supply chain resilience for personal protective equipment (PPE). By reducing dependence on foreign suppliers, Canada strengthens its capacity to provide a stable and uninterrupted supply of critical PPE items. The country’s ventilator stockpile has also significantly increased, with over 27,000 ventilators procured and produced domestically. Collaboration with domestic manufacturers has enhanced self-sufficiency and preparedness for future public health emergencies. 5. Canada and its role in future global pandemic prevention Canada has demonstrated strong leadership in international pandemic preparedness, leveraging its public health expertise and commitment to global health diplomacy. The country has actively collaborated with international partners, provinces, and stakeholders throughout the pandemic. Canada is also playing a pivotal role in developing a new international instrument, known as a pandemic instrument, in collaboration with other countries and the WHO. The pandemic instrument aims to strengthen global pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response efforts through enhanced cooperation, collective action, and accountability. Canada has made incredible strides over the last three years to monitor and identify weaknesses within our pandemic preparedness and response systems and proactively seek solutions that are now considered world-leading. Canada is actively contributing to global efforts to prevent and respond to pandemics, emphasizing the importance of collective action and the need for continuous improvement in global health security. In 2003, The last time that Canada had been involved in the major SARS pandemic, that took 44 Canadian lives, it led to multiple inquiries and precautionary principles and pandemic planning exercises whose learnings were largely ignored when the time came during COVID-19. Can we expect Canada’s response to Disease X to be better? Looking to the future, our current efforts can only be measured against our response to the next crisis. For example, we need to ask: how will the Government of Canada balance its response to the ongoing COVID-19 health challenges alongside potential future pandemics such monkeypox, declared a PHEIC on July 23, 2022? Will it be able to maintain essential public health services and normal healthcare operations? How we assess Canada’s response to COVID-19 can only truly be known by our level of preparedness for the next pandemic; by our ability to stay vigilant with continuous monitoring of developments across a myriad of entities, and how we apply the valuable lessons we have just learned.
GR professionals would benefit from sharing with clients this inconvenient truth: the Federal Budget guarantees….very little
In 1215, King John of England signed the Magna Carta, which introduced the idea that the Crown would not have unlimited power over taxation and spending. Today, this principle is upheld through an intricate system of rules and procedures that govern the appropriation cycle which, at its core, is designed to ensure that public funds are distributed and spent transparently and accountably. The appropriation cycle therefore plays a crucial role in Canadian democracy, yet it is commonly misunderstood by the public. This is mainly because the budget is widely perceived as the primary instrument for authorizing government spending, when in actuality, passing the budget in Parliament is merely the initial step in a long process of scrutiny and sanction that must be completed before funds can be released for their intended purposes. The Auditor General makes efforts to outline the nuanced process for parliamentarians to understand, but its layout is difficult for those in the government to precisely understand, let along members of the general public Indeed, every year, expectations – from industries and sectors, municipalities and regions, organizations, and indeed individuals – are created solely on the basis of the budget’s approval, leading to disillusionment when promised measures are not implemented on schedule or at all. This is because the budget is, above all, a financial plan and does not provide authorization to spend funds; it is the main estimates that contain the detailed breakdown of spending initiatives and, most crucially, the authorization for government to allocate funds across those plans. What is more, even after the main estimates are approved in Parliament, there are further reviews and approvals that need to be completed before the funds can be made available for use. For instance, departments and agencies must present their spending plans to the Treasury Board, detailing how the funds will be used to achieve specific objectives and outcomes. Only once these plans are approved by Treasury Board can those funds be released for their intended purposes. Additionally, and even less widely understood, in some cases, Cabinet authorization may be necessary before departments and agencies can even commence seeking the approval of Treasury Board, particularly when proposing new spending initiatives that are beyond their existing mandate. By possessing a comprehensive understanding of the appropriation cycle, professionals in government affairs and related fields can offer more informed guidance on the prospects and difficulties presented by the budget, as well as the probability and timetable of specific measures being implemented. This begins with recognizing that funds are not automatically available for expenditure after the budget is passed in parliament or the main estimates are approved. The budget is just one step on the journey towards new program spending, with few guarantees. Much work remains to be done before the money ever leaves federal coffers.