Canada bans election-night tweeting on pain of $25K fine

Pusher sez, "Elections Canada has vowed to enforce an archaic law that bans 'premature transmission' -- the broadcasting of election results before all polls in the country have closed on election night. And yes, the law applies to private citizens' Twitter and Facebook accounts. The law has already been upheld by the Supreme Court and carries penalties of up to a $25,000 fine or up to five years in prison."

Canada spans 4.5 hours across six timezones and elections administrators worry that poll data from "earlier" timezones will influence voters to the west, who might shift their votes to join (or block) a wave.

Back in 1938, when radio was king, Canada's election law was amended to include a ban on the "premature transmission" of electoral results across time zones. The idea was to prevent radio broadcasts of election results in Eastern Canada from influencing voter behaviour in the West.
The law, frankly, was always patronizing and paternalistic. There has never been any evidence that voting patterns in the West were, or would be, influenced by results from the East. Even if they were, why should the government deny voters in the West the opportunity to cast their ballots in the most informed way possible?

Ban on Twitter, Facebook election-night posts draconian (Thanks, Pusher!)

(Image: Timezoneswest.PNG, CIA World Factbook/Wikimedia)

I write books. My latest is a YA science fiction novel called Homeland (it's the sequel to Little Brother). More books: Rapture of the Nerds (a novel, with Charlie Stross); With a Little Help (short stories); and The Great Big Beautiful Tomorrow (novella and nonfic). I speak all over the place and I tweet and tumble, too.

More at Boing Boing

Eurovision 2013: An American in London

The technology that links taxonomy and Star Trek

sparklemotion

You know… there is another country pretty close to Canada that spans 4 timezones and seems to have got this sorted out.

As a Canadian-exile living in the US, I don’t really see a problem with the American system of not releasing any election results until the polls close on the west coast*. All the counting happens during the “black-out” period, so you get this awesome moment right at 10pm or whenever when suddenly all the results are in.

*this is not to say that there aren’t other serious problems with the American electoral system it’s just that this one feature seems to work pretty darn well.
- Anonymous
  
  On the other hand, that other country doesn’t have 2/3 of its voters in the Eastern/Maritime time zone.
- dragonfrog
  
  sparklemotion – I have the impression Americans can avoid releasing election count data much more easily, because the counting is done in weird, non-auditable, non-human comprehensible ways.
  
  In Canada our votes are counted by hand, by volunteers, in front of anyone who wants to watch to ensure the count is fair, and using a system that is simple enough for all of that to work. That yields a huge benefit in terms of how much we can trust that our votes were fairly and honestly counted.
  
  In the US, every state seems to use some different, completely weird, unaccountable method for counting the votes – mechanical counting machines that get confused by partially-punched cards; unauditable closed-source computer systems with a terrible security track record made by companies with questionable affiliation to non-partisanship and fairness; a state employee taking disks home to tally on an MS Access database and “find” thousands of votes in the privacy of their own home…
  
  In order to maintain secrecy of vote counts during the “blackout” period, it seems like the US have had to give up on transparency and reliability of their voting systems. To me, that does not constitute “having this sorted out”.
  
  I’ll repeat what I said in the first post – this is easily solvable by not starting to count any votes until every poll is closed. The ballots could be counted in the evening in the West. In the East, they could be guarded overnight and counted in the morning so the counters don’t have to be up all night.
  - sparklemotion
    
    Like I said, the American system is deeply broken.
    
    However, even with open and transparent balloting with lots of people observing a hand-count, enforcing a ban on publication of _any_ election results until polls close shouldn’t be that hard.
    
    Just sequester the counters/observers (like a jury) for a few hours. Or, make the punishment for leaking election results severe. Don’t give news outlets access to official results until polls close.
    
    It’s in the same vein as your solution, but gets results out faster.
    
    This thing with allowing news outlets to announce results, but only in certain regions at certain times is doomed to failure in an age where the internet exists.
    - dragonfrog
      
      oops – my post above was meant to be in reply to sparklemotion.
  - Anonymous
    
    I’ve seen Canadian Ballots, and If I’m not mistaken they have one circle for each party, and the date, and that’s it. In the US we vote for people, not parties, so things get far more complicated. In Chicago Illinois where I am a volunteer election judge, the 2008 vote had nearly 100 names on it, as we voted for president, vice-president, Governor, state and Federal Senators, Reps, 85 county judges etc., etc. Results would take many hours, and the possibility for mistakes are endless. In our jurisdiction we use paper ballots which can reviewed later if needed, but they are scanned by a machine. I think this is fair and effective and transparent.
- adamnvillani
  
  For the record, the U.S. (at least, the 50 states and DC) spans six time zones, not four. Don’t forget Alaska and Hawaii.
Anonymous

Don’t worry, Cory-you can tweet about the Conservatives winning a majority after the election is over. I’m not a Canadian, so I don’t understand all the subtleties, but it looks to me like the goal of the various opposition parties over the last few years has been to keep holding elections until Harper gets a majority. The Liberals appear to have the additional goal of making the NDP the second largest party in the country. As for the Bloc, they appear to be adhering to their historic goal of a strong and independent Quebec within Canada.

I love some of the comments here-@48, for instance, where the poster appears to feel that striking whole regions off the rolls is fine if they vote for a party the poster doesn’t like. One wonders what reception a similar post from an American Republican suggesting that New York State, Illinois, and California ought to have their votes not counted would get from the folks who run this blog. Having elections means that sometimes the party you like won’t win.

Cory, is there any chance you can post about the history of parliamentary government coalitions where the governing coalition needed the support of an avowedly secessionist party to stay in power? It will be a very short post, but it would be an interesting issue for you to cover. I’ve seen writings about it from Canadian Tories-which are pretty overwrought-and I would be interested to read something about it from someone who isn’t a Tory supporter. (I’m not sure whether you support the NDP or the Liberals.)

-Anders Ishsalterton
pauldrye

The ban’s irrelevant. For the last several elections I’ve been able to follow the returns as they come in by the simple expedient of looking at such obscure web sites as the BBC.
asuffield

Even if they were, why should the government deny voters in the West the opportunity to cast their ballots in the most informed way possible?

Wrong question. This isn’t related to the reason for it at all.

The dodgy voting system they use (“first past the post”) means that knowledge of how other people voting lets you cast your vote more effectively. This means that it changes the outcome.

Hence, if any election results are distributed before all polls have closed, then the timing, extent, and mechanism of that distribution has an effect on the outcome and must necessarily become one of the ways in which the election is fought. Rather than dealing with this horrible issue, they banned the whole thing.

Of course, it’s a bad solution. The right thing to do is to keep the ballot boxes sealed and not start counting until all the polls have closed.
jamesbow

Why is it so difficult for Elections Canada to — oh, I don’t know — hold off reporting the results from eastern Canada until the polls close in BC? That would solve the “problem” without this draconian schtick.
Jardine

I thought there was a court case a while back that stopped this. The Canadian news outlets were tired of being scooped by American news outlets. They were also tired of trying to setup their websites to allow those in some timezones to view the results but not allow others. I thought that’s why they changed the poll times to be staggered. I just checked and my polling station is open 9:30am-9:30pm (Ontario). I believe the poll times are set so they all close within a couple hours of each other rather than 5.5 hours.
Anonymous

As a almost-lifetime US west-coast resident, I’ve always found it extremely unfair that the East and West don’t get to vote under the same conditions. When almost every state has already released results by the time California polls close, how can anyone say that the California and other western results aren’t severely tainted. Who knows how much support a candidate *actually* has when people will change their votes, or not bother to vote, if their candidate is winning or losing. It totally violates the ‘one person, one vote’ theory. If your vote affects mine, that’s a caucus not an election. Not that caucuses are necessarily bad, but this one-way effect is intrinsically unfair to everybody.

It probably doesn’t hurt its survivability that this system makes the media tons of money as returns trickle in on election night. We should just release results the next morning. This is a democracy, not a sideshow, and maybe we should start acting like it.
- Maneki Nico
  
  This is a democracy, not a sideshow, and maybe we should start acting like it.
  
  I think you may have got that backwards. Also, that’ll be the day.
Dragonflye

@jamesbow …

Elections Canada DOES do that. Voting hours are staggered so that all polls across the country open and close on or around the same time.

http://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=vot&dir=bkg&document=ec90815&lang=e
- jamesbow
  
  Not quite. They’ve narrowed it down, but the Atlantic provinces still go an hour early, compared to Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba and Saskatchewan, and I believe BC and maybe Alberta go an hour late.
Anonymous

Does anyone want to throw up a hash tag so we can collectively kill the possibility of enforcing this law? #canadaelection good for you guys?
- lectio
  
  We’re using #elxn41 or #cdnpoli for most of our election related tweets.
  
  I won’t defy the ban. I understand the spirit of it – though I think strategic voting is already a bit part of the election process, and things really do seem to be decided by the time Ontario and Quebec are done with their voting.
  
  That, and I really enjoy staying up to watch Peter Mansbridge on election night. He rocks the CBC.
AGC

Elections should span a week, the results being given hourly. Lots more people would go to the polls. One day of voting every few years makes for a sad democracy.
TSI

It doesn’t really matter.

Remember Canada doesn’t elect like the US does, it is a parliamentary system and the skew for control of House of Commons is so heavily driven by what ever Ontario and Quebec [118 out of 305 seats] decide that even if the entire Western part of Canada decided to vote the opposite direction it wouldn’t make a bit of difference.

You can’t have the issue like we can in the US where the Congress goes one way the the President goes the other.

It’s effectively winner takes all in Canada. People elect MP in the House of Commons who choose the PM [sort of the GovGen picks based on who they feel has the most confidence which rationally is the majority] and then the PM picks the Senate [well really the GovGen does on advice of the PM]

To get a similar effect in the US image if the the first three states to close and publish were Texas, California, and New York and they controlled 60% of the House. After they are elected then the House got to vote for the President and then the President selected the Senate. That is basically what happens with ONT and QUE in Canada.
- Anonymous
  
  Remember Canada doesn’t elect like the US does, it is a parliamentary system and the skew for control of House of Commons is so heavily driven by what ever Ontario and Quebec [118 out of 305 seats] decide that even if the entire Western part of Canada decided to vote the opposite direction it wouldn’t make a bit of difference.
  
  If only Ontario and Quebec were voting, all the last elections would have given Liberal minorities. Harper is Prime Minister because of the western voters.
  - TSI
    
    2008: ONT was majority Conservative [51 to 38]. Quebec, well, they went Bloc QuÃ©bÃ©cois [49] which was equal to all the Con MPs voted in all but BC for the Western Proveniences. So I still think ONT and QUE can drive the election [if Quebec doesn't go loco and do the whole BQ thing]
    
    2006: Well I will barely give you that one. ONT went [40/54] but QUE went BQ again with more MPs than all the Consv in the Western Proveniences except BC.
    
    I still think the Western Proviences don’t really have the weight they should have, my point was if ONT and QUE want a party there is nothing the rest of Canada can do about it. The problem in 2006 and 2008 was BQ had a dramatic effect. Welcome to the Condorcet Paradox of Majority Vote Elections.
TSI

Sorry I meant 181 out of 305
slumlord

Please do it!
Elections are the only time I actually use Twitter, and I look forward to the drama. I really don’t think people are waiting quite that long to vote, anyway. If Twitter feeds with #canadaelection will persuade lazy youth to get off their duffs and vote, I’m all for it. Lousy 41% voter turnout %#$%%^$#.

I am just hoping that Harper doesn’t make it back in…
Wallenstein

During the 2010 general election here in the UK a Labour MP (Kerry McCarthy) tweeted the total number of postal votes cast in her constituency several days before polling day.

After a number of bloggers pointed out this was highly illegal she was interviewed by the police and ended up with a Caution under the Representation of the People Act.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-11621053
Anonymous

There has never been any evidence that voting patterns in the West were, or would be, influenced by results from the East.

In fact, in recent years there hasn’t been any evidence voting patterns in the West are shifted by anything, so long as a Conservative name is on the ballot.
- Kickstart
  
  For what it’s worth, I live in a Conservative Western Canada riding (Cariboo-Prince George) and it appears that the Liberals have abandoned all hope of making inroads here. There are a ton of blue signs for our current Conservative MP, quite a number of NDP and Green, a few signs for an independent, but I have yet to see any Liberal signs.
  
  –
  
  Side note: I am acquainted, through work, with Paul Bryan, who violated this ban years ago and went through appeal after appeal against the Liberal government. Hearing his stories on this shown the absolutely ridiculous lengths the Canadian federal government was willing go to ignore the west. The Conservative government I am sure is no better, no matter what western roots they may claim to have.
dragonfrog

I don’t think “denying voters in the West the opportunity to cast their ballots in the most informed way possible” is the key thing. It’s “denying voters in the East an opportunity that is afforded those in the West.”

Of course the robust way to fix this is to start the count at the same time. That would mean, on the West coast the count would start immediately after the polls close, but on the East coast someone would have to guard empty polling stations for three hours, but not be allowed to start counting anything. Also, vote counters on the East coast would have to stay up very late to get the count done.

It would be frustrating, but it would have the advantage of actually working.
Anonymous

4.5 timezones, actually: Pacific, Mountain/Central, Eastern, Atlantic, and Newfoundland (the .5).

And yes, I share your disdain for this ridiculous, archaic law.
Anonymous

Small correction, Canada has 5.5 time zones.
Anonymous

Having a similar law in PerÃº, in the last elections we replaced the candidates names with kind of food or football players. Eg. “Food popularity: Sushi 24% Burger 20% Pasta 18%”.
teknocholer

That would be 5.5 time zones, not 3.5. But yes, King Canute comes to mind.
- PaulR
  
  That would be FIVE times zones, spanning 4 1/2 hours.
  
  Half the time, before folks in BC even go to the polls, the news organizations are declaring a winner. I’ll be glad when they institute staggered hours for the polls, so they all close at pretty much the same time.
  
  Is it so much to ask?
  - teknocholer
    
    Your way of expressing it is more precise, but that means six time zones, (Newfoundland, Atlantic, Eastern, Central, Mountain, and Pacific) spanning 5.5 hours. The difference between Newfoundland and Pacific time is 4.5 hours.
    - PaulR
      
      Yes, I screwed up. It’s four hours from my time zone, AST, to BC. I forgot to start counting at 0, rather than 1.
  - Andrew W
    
    I think the provinces who’s polls are closing at midnight would argue that yes, that is a lot to ask.
dragonfrog

I don’t agree with you there – the problem isn’t news outlets anymore, because everyone is potentially a “news outlet” now.

Enforcing a ban on every single vote counter or observer posting anything like a result on their facebook or twitter accounts when they get home (not to mention, enforcing such a ban on everyone with whom they discuss their evening) is vastly more difficult than enforcing a ban on a limited, countable number of “old media” outlets.

The whole point of having the count done in public is that people know about it. Doing the counting publicly and accountably is fundamentally incompatible with having publication bans that affect tens of thousands of potential “publishers”, most of whom don’t have a legal team to vet their copy before they hit “post” on their blog, and may not even think of their action as “publishing a voting result”.
Tdawwg

Lol, they said “premature transmission.” Those are hard to block, lemme tell ya!
Anonymous

So why not let people in the West vote a day or two after the people in the East. Why not a week later?
It’s because the results in the East will distort the votes in the West as people vote tactically, or may not turn out at all if they think their candidate has no chance.
dmatos

They’re not banning election-night tweeting. That’s already been banned. They’re just confirming that yes, they are going to enforce the law that has existed for many years now. And they’re going to enforce it on new communication mediums that have arisen since the crafting of the law.
Anonymous

Just don’t let the Western half of Canada vote. They vote Conservative anyways, and that’s about the last thing we need any more of.
dainel

Keep the poll stations in the east open an additional 4 hours. Then start counting in the whole country AT THE SAME TIME.

There. Problem solved.
Anonymous

I actually wouldn’t mind the US implementing something like this. So often, people west of Central time can see that the election is going a certain way and feel their vote makes no difference. It’s probably altered the vote in California some.
Anonymous

Six. Canada has six time zones.
Anonymous

Strikes me as a no-brainer. Democratic voting is a closed and secret process. Results, any results, shall not be made public before voting is officially over. Doesn’t matter how large the country is – if one end of the country isn’t done yet, the other end must not publish official results on the stuff the one end is still voting on, period.
duncan

Time for someone to set up some fake accounts.
- joeposts
  
  Maybe use TOR too. Or sit outside the local Harper Party campaign HQ and use their wifi connection.
oculus

Actually, I have this strange feeling that one possible outcome of too much advanced warning would be a reduction of voter involvement; if the West gets the idea that the election is ‘over’ or a done deal due to the votes announced in the East, they might stay at home, even if in fact if they came out in even moderate numbers they could change things.

Amusing further speculation; this effect might be in favor of whichever parties and political movements were more likely to tweet, probably meaning younger and more connected types?

I have no more science for my sense of this than seems to be backing the idea that voters will amass in waves of vote-blocking chaos (or whatever the policy-makers claim to be concerned about), so I bring this up as something to look into, rather than build policy around.
- Flaminica
  
  @oculus: This is exactly the issue. I’ve lived and voted with this law my entire life and in every election there’s complaints from Westerners that premature publication of eastern polls disenfranchises them. Many people in BC simply do not vote because they figure they don’t matter and “it’s already been decided.”
  
  Banning Twitter unfortunately is the wrong tactic, as it’s unenforceable and not the real culprit. Something as simple and obvious as CBC not projecting winners with the polls still open for the sake of scooping the papers would be a nice start.
  - Andrew W
    
    Many people in BC simply do not vote because they figure they don’t matter
    
    Yes, I hear that a lot from family, and it always annoys me. Their federal riding has a population of 91,926. My riding in Toronto Centre has a population of 121,407. You tell me who’s vote matters less.