Canada's Information War and Government "Countermeasures"
Researchers warn that online narratives are eroding trust in institutions, while recommending new tools for governments to shape what Canadians see and believe online.
A recent study has exposed the battle between the government and independent media for control of the prevailing narrative among Canadian citizens. Thanks to the widespread adoption of social media, many influencers, commentators, and independent outlets are gaining a stronger voice in the information landscape. They are increasingly challenging the monopoly legacy media once held over Canadians and the narratives we adopt.
As independent or non-government-funded media has grown, so too has the widespread use of the terms “conspiracy theory” and “conspiracy theorist.” These labels are often applied to narratives and individuals accused of undermining or delegitimizing governments by alleging secret plots carried out by powerful actors. The term first appeared in the New York Times in 1863, describing a belief that British aristocrats were secretly working against the United States during the Civil War. Since then, it has often been used to discredit those spreading unpopular opinions or controversial claims about governments around the world.
Recently, the Media Ecosystem Observatory, run by McGill University and the University of Toronto, released a study detailing the “conspiracy theories” currently circulating on social media in Canada and suggesting ways to combat them. The report refers to these as “anti-institutional conspiratorial claims,” defined as “narratives that transform institutional skepticism into claims of covert elite coordination and harm, often detached from factual evidence.”
In their methodology, they make it clear that the framing used to identify posts pushing a “conspiracy” is “a natural language inference task,” where they “try to find whether the claim follows from the textual content of the post.” In other words, they are not determining whether the claims made in these posts are true or false. They are simply assessing whether the post is making such a claim based on its context.
They collected 14 million posts from prominent Canadian accounts across X, TikTok, Instagram, and Bluesky. The study was conducted on the premise that these “conspiracy theories” challenge the legitimacy of democratic institutions and undermine trust in governing bodies and public officials.
The findings indicate that most of the highly viewed and interacted-with content labelled as conspiracy-related originated from a relatively small number of online creators. Just 100 users accounted for about 68% of the posts, capturing 90% of views and 86% of likes. The study also found that many of these users posted about multiple different “conspiracy theories,” not just a single topic.
The users’ positions on some of these subjects can be misrepresented or generalized. However, the data remains valuable for understanding how many Canadians are beginning to be exposed to different narratives.
Although only a small number of people actually believe these “conspiracies,” many Canadians are aware of them. The average Canadian surveyed was aware of 3.49 “conspiracies” and believed in 0.91 of those they knew about. Men were significantly more likely than women to both encounter and believe these claims. Younger Canadians aged 18–34 were aware of more “conspiracies” than older groups but were less likely to believe them. Middle-aged Canadians, between 35 and 54, showed average awareness but were more likely to believe them than any other group.
The survey was administered to 1,459 Canadians between October 30 and November 7, 2025. The most prominent theory in terms of awareness concerned health threats, mostly centred around COVID-19. The claim is that the threat was highly exaggerated in order to expand government powers over Canadians and push an untested vaccine intended to harm them. Sixty-three percent of respondents said they were aware of this theory, while only 13 percent said they believed it was true.
The claim most widely believed was the idea that schools are indoctrinating children with radical gender ideology without the knowledge or consent of parents or guardians through programs such as SOGI (Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity). According to the survey, 54% of respondents were aware of this claim, while 21% said they believed it was true.
The second most widely believed claim is the idea that elites control the media or that public opinion is manipulated through state-funded media. These claims suggest that mainstream outlets such as CBC or CTV are controlled or biased in favour of governments and powerful actors behind the scenes, often said to be influenced by corporations, the World Economic Forum (WEF), or other elite groups. Polling suggests that 47% of respondents are aware of this claim, while 16% say they believe it.
The five least prominent, though still notable, “conspiracy theories” identified in the study were election fraud, the deep state, digital ID, intentional wildfires, and the climate hoax. Each had about 8% of respondents reporting belief in the claim, with awareness ranging from 46% to 29%.
Unsurprisingly, the social media platform X was the dominant platform for engagement with these ideas, accounting for 70% of the likes and hosting the largest share of posts about them. Users of X were significantly more aware of these claims and were also the most likely to endorse them.
Although Canadians have become more aware of these subjects, that awareness also presents potential risks. Particularly in how these ideas are evaluated and how they may be interpreted by mainstream media and government institutions. We have already seen increased efforts to regulate online speech, along with legislation that raises privacy concerns for Canadians, such as Bill C-63, the Online Harms Act.
Numerous Members of Parliament across political parties have discussed measures to crack down on what they describe as “hate speech.” In the conclusion of the study, the researchers also put forward several troubling recommendations for how to suppress these kinds of narratives.
