The legislative efforts to combat online harms in Canada have focused chiefly on platform responsibility, with Bill C-34 reintroducing a regulated duty to act responsibly. An Ontario court recently considered another avenue to address harms that instead targets influencers who weaponize their audiences. The Ontario Superior Court of Justice issued a decision that extends the tort of Internet harassment into networked harassment, in which influencers or those with large online audiences encourage their followers to target individuals. In Miller v. Ahn, the court granted an interim injunction against a social media creator with more than 100,000 followers who had mobilized her audience against a Toronto employment lawyer. The actions led to fake reviews of her firm, threatening phone calls and messages, and antisemitic abuse that was directed at the lawyer’s perceived Jewish and Israeli identity.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 3 days ago*

Isn't this the same writer who was calling the anti-genocide activists on campus as "intolerant"? He was even referencing a report that was debunked.

Here he is demonizing the BDS movement and victimizing Zionists feeling sad about the protests against Israel's genocide

https://thehub.ca/2025/05/19/michael-geist-when-the-drumbeat-of-intolerance-becomes-too-loud-to-ignore/

the union representing University of Ottawa professors—my union—narrowly voted to support a boycott, divest, and sanction motion targeting Israeli institutions

And the thing he's talking about is doxxing - surprised he didn't use that term which is used often. But I'm sure he wants to avoid using it because of how Zionist groups and websites used doxxing to attack and silence anti-genocide activists.

The guy is a walking oxymoron where he drones on about open dialogue and tolerance but advocates for stifling anti-genocide voices and probably support Canary Mission.

  • source