2011 ONSC 2281 (CanLII)
taken to comply with s. 329 in an environment that she
describes as the "new social media age" and argues that as
a result of the prohibition in s. 329, the CBC will be
unable to provide reporting on election results while other
social media outlets will be doing so;
(2) an 11-page affidavit of the executive producer of the
weekly W5 public affairs program broadcast on CTV and
election producer for CTV. He also described the impact of
the Internet and new social media on CTV's operations and
on how news is gathered generally in Canada. He provided
the opinion that extraordinary precautions will need to be
taken to ensure that there is no breach of s. 329. These
precautions will result in cost and inconvenience to CTV
and CTV will be unable to provide accurate and timely
information to Canadians;
(3) a 15-page affidavit of Dr. Michael Geist, a University of
Ottawa law professor who holds the Canada Research Chair in
Internet and E-commerce Law. He has appeared as an expert
witness on Internet and technology issues before various
government committees and his work has been cited before
the courts. In his affidavit, which has approximately 50
documents attached, he reviewed the experts' affidavits
filed on the R. v. Bryan challenge to s. 329. He says that
Facebook was not available to the general public in 2005
and Twitter did not exist at the time. He says these social
media tools are now used widely by Canadians. He takes the
position that on election day, millions of Canadians will
likely turn to social media tools to gather information and
that banning such communication will be technically
impossible;
(4) a 15-page affidavit sworn on April 7, 2011 of Dr. Ruth M.
Corbin, who is managing partner of a marketing science
company which conducts market research and analysis. She
[page683] is an adjunct professor of trademark and
intellectual property law at Osgoode Hall Law School, holds
a Ph.D in psychology and has been deemed an expert witness
before courts in Canada. She reviewed the survey research
considered by the Supreme Court in the R. v. Bryan case and
provided the view that based on current standards for
evaluating expert survey evidence, the evidence concerning
the Decima poll that was before the Supreme Court does not