The Role of Private Online Spaces in Platform Governance

Résumé analytique

Defining the scope of platform governance has become a pressing policy challenge as illegal and harmful content spreads across both public and private platforms. In the absence of meaningful regulation, the task of balancing free expression against growing harms has fallen to a small number of mostly foreign-based, ad-driven companies. Canadians report frequent exposure to hate speech and harassment, with higher rates among racialized people, those with disabilities, and LGBTQ2S+ individuals. Since 2021, Canadian Heritage consultations have let Canada shift from a 24-hour takedown approach toward a more adaptable model emphasizing platforms' duty to act responsibly, aligning with Australia, the EU, and the UK.

Private spaces raise particular problems. In a 2020 survey, 26% of Canadians reported receiving hate-speech messages at least monthly on private messaging platforms, and an estimated 70% of child sexual abuse reports on Facebook come through Messenger or Instagram direct messages. Platform designs vary widely — Telegram allows groups of up to 200,000 users, versus 250 on Messenger/Instagram.

Representative surveys show most Canadians distrust platforms and support governance: about two-thirds prefer intervention when balancing rights. Asked which spaces should be required to remove illegal content, 87% supported moderation on public pages/profiles, 61% for private groups, 59% for private pages/profiles, and 40% for private messaging. The brief recommends Canada follow the EU's Digital Services Act by setting minimum standards for high-reach messaging platforms — systemic-risk review, user reporting, and transparency reports — without imposing content scanning or weakening end-to-end encryption.