Dear Everybody in the world

In Canada this year Thanksgiving, John Lennon’s Birthday and No Commercial Media Day all fall on October 9th.

If we can’t get our voice out we will not be heard and the change we advocate for therefore cannot happen. This is a reality we live with as we struggle to find a way to make real action on climate happen. Big money in politics is a root problem for the challenge we face.

You are welcome to join and promote this action. It is 100% peaceful.

This is how we take away the power of big money in the media.

Double Action Simultaneous Strike and Boycott

1. Just for one day — Wild Cat Strike
   Avoid working for third parties. Literally go on strike. If you work in the content production industry quit selling your work to advertising businesses. Give your work away for free or ask for donations to cover your costs of having an enjoyable life.

No only do all the content producers and their workers need to go on strike. The users/consumers of digital media content need to boycott commercial content access services.

1. Just for one day — Boycott
   Seek out safe, clean, quality, news, information, and entertainment that is free.
2. Speak up for The Digital Public Library Proposal. It is a democratic, content production financing engine.

The Proposal is a wonderful way to help the workers in the media content production industry cover their costs of living an enjoyable life.

At the same time for the poor, It lifts financial barriers to accessing the best safe, clean, quality news, information, and entertainment.

Peace and Love
Breezy Brian Gregg
CEO No Ads Canada
Amiskwacîwâskahikan

MEDIA ADVISORY
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE May 11, 2023
Polluter Pay Citizen Action Group
Media Liaison: Breezy Brian Gregg bzgregg@telusplanet.net
780.993.3624

PROTESTERS TO DUMP GARBAGE AT ALBERTA LEGISLATURE ON MAY 13 AND THEN MAKE SPEECHES ABOUT WHY GOVERNMENT SHOULD PAY US TO CLEAN UP THE MESS. THIS ACTION IS TO HIGHLIGHT GOVERNMENT INACTION ON DEMANDING OIL AND GAS INDUSTRY POLLUTERS CLEAN UP ORPHAN WELLS AND TOXIC OIL SANDS TAILINGS

WHAT: The UCP government proposes using taxpayers’ money (proposed R-Star/Liability Management Incentive Program) to pay industry to clean up orphan wells – costs estimated at $20 billion. Following this logic, government should pay protesters to clean up garbage dumped in protest to call attention to this inaction.

In spite of record profits by oil sands mining operations, virtually nothing has been done to effectively clean up the stored tailings effluent stored in “ponds” now covering twice the size of Vancouver. A toxic leak of 5.3 million litres at Imperial Oil’s Kearl site was kept secret for 9 months.

WHEN: May 13, 3 p.m.

WHERE: Alberta Legislature Building, Edmonton

WHO: Polluter Pay Citizen Action Group

WHY: Polluters should pay for industry clean up, not citizens. (We will clean up our mess, unlike the very profitable enterprises that are polluting the air, land and water in Alberta on a scale never seen before.)

-30-

Polluter Pay Citizen Action Group

I think I see a new way of promoting the Digital Public Library Proposal. It has to do with law.

In democracies the press is supposed to hold government accountable and the government is supposed to hold the press to be accountable. Neither institution is doing a very good job of policing the other.

We need to purge our systems of communication to rid them of hate, lies, advertising and surveillance.

We need to change the law so that private businesses should be liable for harms caused by content reproduced on their internet platforms. Public Libraries on the other hand should not. Changing this one detail of law will ignite the evolution of a new communication system that will function for the benefit of all.

The Americans passed a bad law in 1996. The Communications Decency act. The law creates a giant loophole for businesses providing interactive computer services, where they don’t have to be liable for any of the “shit” they make available through their services. That incredible privilege should only be allowed for public libraries. Now Article 19.17 of the USMCA (Trump’s New NAFTA) commits Canada too to giving private businesses “safe harbour” when publishing other’s content.

Because of that “safe harbour” law, publishing and amplifying hate and lies online has become a very lucrative business for interactive computer services, commonly now referred to as platforms.

Google, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Instagram would not exist without the 1996 American Communications Decency Act Section 230 which protects them from being held liable for publishing and amplifying information provided by another information content provider. How ironic. An act supposedly to govern communications decency has resulted in enabling an explosion of lies and rudeness in communications.

Canada and Mexico now have been locked into providing the same “safe harbour” provisions for internet platforms by signing on to Trump’s new NAFTA agreement: the USMCA, which includes Article 19.17 regarding Digital Trade.

Making profits from amplifying libellous misinformation and disinformation and enabling ill intentioned customers to profit at others expense using platform services is just plain wrong.

In Canada we must demand that we retain sovereignty over digital communications and that we be released from the conditions of Article 19.17 of the USMCA.

We need to remove this opportunity to profit by denying businesses “safe harbour” This will immediacy choke off the business of profiting from publishing and amplifying hate and lies online. Commercial platforms will not be able to deal with a mass of liable suits.

However there is a real need for everyone to be able to access digital content. A new Canadian Act will enable the development of public services to fill that need. It is being proposed that nonprofit publicly financed interactive computer services should be allowed “safe harbour” and private businesses not. We need an act like this —

Canadian Digital Communications Decency Act

1.) No Nonprofit, publicly financed interactive computer service which does not surveil or advertise to its users, shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information it provides but that is provided by another information content provider.
2.) Any for profit business providing interactive computer services shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information it provides that is provided by another information content provider.

The Digital Public Library* Proposal

Proposed that Canada enacts a Canadian Digital Communications Decency Act as above and that it brings in legislation to create and fund a new public communications service: The Digital Public Library*

• — * — Digital Public Library — a publicly financed interactive computer service that provides the public with access to digital content without surveilling the users and without exposing the users to third party advertising. As well as providing everyone with equal opportunity to access what exists, a Digital Public Library would automatically make payments for use to the content-owners of copyrighted content. Although payment is automatic, the user must have a manual option to reverse the automatic payment in cases where the user deems the content to be inappropriate or unworthy. This manual option for the user to be able to reverse automatic payments they triggered themselves, is a democratic and powerful way to discourage those who may wish to profit from deception.

Universally the Digital Public Library Proposal is rejected when it is pitched to journalists. To subscribe to this vision of a healthy communication system for society, is to face the fact that the whole community of active journalists, have totally missed a most important point. That point is that we cannot have a strong democracy that governs for the good of everyone and our planet, if we rely on the advertising industry and private publishing enterprises to finance social communications. In a world where wealth inequality exists, a communication system that provides the opportunity for the more wealthy to buy a bigger and louder voice for influencing and manipulating peoples commercial and political choices, will naturally expand the wealth gap and weaken democracy. 

Other than this proposal, which no one knows about, there is no vision for a way forward to reform and democratize the communications systems. Consequently the journalists, the academics, and the politicians make do, try their best, and talk about regulatory solutions. The Digital Public Library Proposal is a systematic solution.

It is useful to discriminate between three types of digital media enterprises:
• Content-production enterprises
• Telecommunication carrier enterprises, and
• Content-access enterprises.

We can leave the production enterprises including of course news outlets and individual authors, remaining as they are; a mix of for profit enterprises and not for profit enterprises supported by public and private grants and donations.

Some say that it would be better to de-privatize the Telecom carrier services. This also could be accomplished by anti-safe harbour legislation.

Most importantly the arm of the media though which needs radical transition is the area of enterprise that provides access to digital content. We live in a moment where this very important service is totally monopolized by a few private enterprises. The Digital Public Library Proposal is about replacing them with a public service.

* – includes entertainment

Despite dreadful news every day I am encouraged by how so many people I know are adapting to change and finding new ways to live and find joy and meaning in our lives. More and more I am thinking the way to speed up our response to the climate emergency and strengthen democracy is to get big money out of politics. More and more I think the way to get big money out of politics is to build a New Digital Information* Supply-Chain. DISC

(* includes digital entertainment)

Action paralysis

To de-paralyze climate action and social justice action. We need to de-privatize the DISC by building a digital public library that will be solely a service for the user.

The digital-information-supply-chains we presently rely on, are polluted with predatory pitches, (advertising, hate and lies). Although we have access now to more information and entertainment than ever, the commercial info supply-chains are primarily a predators tool and the information we want serves only as bait to capture our attention for the predators’ purpose of influencing our political and commercial choices.

Hoarding a glut of info for profit

In the current supply-chain, enterprises hoard digital information under the protection of copyright law designed for the pre-digital age. They restrict its free flow in the market of ideas. The fact is there is no shortage of digital files. It is also a fact that it does not cease to exist once it is consumed, unlike other commodities like for instance a bushel of wheat or a barrel of oil. In short there is a glut of digital files.

What happens to price when there is a glut? In a free market when there is over supply of a commodity its price drops. In the case where there is infinite supply the commodity becomes available virtually for free. So what enables enterprises to hoard digital information to make it scarce and therefore a very valuable commodity? One thing as touched on already; copyright law but also the fact that we have no publicly funded DISC.

It would be an incredibly change for societies progress, for the state to invest in our future now by purchasing the copyright to everything, so that poor people can have access to the best now instead of having to wait 50 years by which time they will have lost the opportunity to benefit from accessing the best.

Systemic conflict of interest

Current private enterprises in the DISC are dual enterprises. For a price, they serve users demands and they also serve advertisers. Being private corporate entities they must place profit above the users who are people.

Alberta’s Bill 81

The debate over Alberta’s Bill 81 shows that Big money in politics is a problem for democracy. This is a beautiful solution. I encourage everyone to give some attention to understanding and then promoting a systemic solution: The Digital Public Library

Regulation is a small part of the solution

Of those concerned with a lack of truth and accuracy in our electronic digital communications systems, it is assumed by most that a body of well thought out regulations is the solution. Rightly so, those driven to speak up for strict regulation as the solution, are driven by fear and disgust that technology is favouring profit over people and private enterprises are using practices that should be criminalized. Regulation though essential is only a small part of what can be done to clean up and organize communication. User control is what we need. A public digital-media-access-service, can provide user control where commercial digital-media-access-services cannot.

User Control

For this age we do not need a nanny state nor a nanny corporation deeming what digital media content we can and cannot expose ourselves to.

Maintaining the right to free expression while limiting the opportunity to advertise

The failure to publicly provide a service that is in high demand has resulted in this terribly undemocratic situation we face where there is a huge opportunity for wealthy people and their organizations to buy a dominating voice. There is a beautiful solution. Public provision of a service that is now financed with advertising will severely limit the opportunity to buy advertising. Due to our freedom of expression guarantees (which I hope we wish to retain) it is very difficult to prohibit or even regulate advertising. Publicly providing access to media-content, does not limit freedom of expression but it will limit the opportunity to advertise to people while they are satisfying their natural desire to know and be thrilled.

Long Range Solutions

I feel we have to put some energy into long range solutions or they will never happen. 60 years ago Medicare happened in Canada. A few spoke up and then many. Then we passed the legislation that de-privatized the medical insurance industry. We need to pass legislation to de-privatize the media-content-access industry. We need legislation to create a new public service to replace the mostly foreign private firms that are now monopolizing the provision of access to media-content.

Safe and Free Access

Digital Public Library? To be clear I am talking about a nonprofit, publicly funded but independent media-content-access service to provide everyone with the access to media-content that is now being provided by, to name some majors; YouTube, Google, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, WhatsApp, Spotify, Netflix, Amazon and and many more. We need a service that lets us access all content (including text books, academic papers and even live sporting and entertainment events) without having to pay a fee and without requiring us to consent to being surveilled and exposed to predatory advertising pitches intended to manipulate and influence our political and commercial choices.

It could and should also include social media, search and other information-sorting and communication utilities to enable citizens to interact with one another and develop resources for social and political communication.

Sustaining Production Workers

This service also needs to provide remuneration for the firms and individuals that produce media content and the remuneration should be democratic, based on people’s self-chosen use of media content. In the digital content realm, the remuneration can be automatic when transactions are triggered by real identifiable individuals’ use of media-content, and when the payments are made to real identifiable owners and producers of the media-content. Addressing the issue of privacy, it should be noted just as is done by Statistics Canada, general measurements can me made without tracking individuals’ identities.

Discouraging those who may want to profit from deception

The intention is to displace commercial digital-media-content-access-services like Google, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Netflix, and provide access to content using the public service. It should be understood that presently when a person connects to one of these commercial services they are connecting to a robot. The public service would too of course be a robot. It would automatically trigger payments to content producers but importantly people using the robot should have a manual option to reverse a payment they have triggered, if for any reason the user deems the content to be inappropriate or unworthy. This is a powerful and democratic way to discourage those who may want to profit from deception. This is user control.

Partial Socialism (our society’s reality)

I am not talking about a total socialization of media industries, just the access arm of the industry. I am fine with the production arm of the media industries remaining a mix of for profit and nonprofit organizations with part of their revenue streams coming from both public and private donations or grants, but mainly I see the production industries being sustained by use based royalties being paid by the public access service (The Digital Public Library).

Costs

The argument for making democracy stronger and fairer, by publicly funding a digital public library service, is probably most important for everyone to understand. There is a second important argument. What about costs? It is assumed the commercial system we are using is overall economically beneficial. There is no hard proof that it is. I have a hunch it is not at all of economic benefit to ordinary people. We need an academic study with hard data showing that the commercial system is or is not raising people’s cost of living. We need a study to show that a publicly funded system would or would not lower the cost of living by more than it would cost in taxes to fund a public system. We need to show that it is true or not true that the constant exposure to advertising creates artificial demand. (It makes people want things they would not naturally be wanting). We need to show that it is true on not true that the resulting artificial demand raises the cost of living for ordinary people and by how much. We need a good explanation, that if the cost is not coming ultimately out of consumers’ pockets then where are the billions of dollars coming from that are seen as profits by the major commercial digital platforms that have monopolized the media-content-access industry? Cost is of course important but even if my hunch is wrong that relying on a commercial system makes life more costly, what should we be willing to pay to have a strong and fair democracy?

The Pitch

Once again I would like to say — This is a beautiful solution. Big money in politics is a problem for democracy. I encourage everyone to give some attention to understanding and then promoting a systemic solution: The Digital Public Library

Let’s democratize the digital information supply-chain by creating a new public service: The Digital Public Library 

How to spend millions of dollars to talk about nothing.

Your comments on our recent civic election are welcomed. Please submit what you would add to my Election Report.

We live on Treaty Territory. We understand Indigenous Peoples were here before others. We value their understandings about the relationships between people and Mother Earth. In this spirit we promise to listen to stories, learn about the past and make the world a better place for everyone. Hi Hi

Thank you everyone for taking an interest in local politics. For a clearer insight into the ideas on which I worked to bring into the race for Mayor of Edmonton, please check this interview I gave to Public Interest Alberta. It was presented on YouTube after the advance polls had closed and 2 days before the election. It was my hope that issues I bring up in the PIA interview would have been rigorously debated publicly before election day. That absolutely was not the case. My intention remains to persist and bring these issues into our public discourse which determines what kind of representatives we elect to our government.

Breezy Brian Gregg – Edmonton Mayoral Candidate Interviews with Public Interest Alberta
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khZd5oGv-i8

---

Report

On February 5, 2021 the nomination to run for Mayor was filed at City Hall and the 14 point platform was published on the internet at www.briangregg.com

First of all thanks to my amazing, loving, kind partner, Patsy Amico without whose support I could never have put in the level of effort outlined in this report. Although I had a lot of great advice and feedback from the community, we had no office staff. This was good and bad. Bad in that it meant almost ten months of 12 hour days, 7 days a week, but good in that I know directly what communications occurred. It was my policy to answer every question honestly, except that in the last few days I chose not to reply to a few pushy emails demanding to know my position on freedom regarding vaccinations.

Although I lost the election badly, it was largely a joyful experience to be speaking up about things I feel we need to talk about and it is with joy I share this report. When asking what I should include in this report my best old friend from grade five, John Andrew said that I should report how good it feels to have dared to run for mayor again without being arrested on a mental health warrant. You see when I first ran in 1998 hoping to represent the non-voters, the stress of campaigning pushed me into having a bipolar manic episode. Two weeks before that election I was arrested. I had to finish the last two weeks of the campaign talking to one Edmonton Sun reporter from a payphone on a locked ward at the Alberta Mental Hospital. Strangely enough in 1998 I had about a thousand more votes than I did this time. The race has been run and I remain a free man.

In the 2021 race for Mayor of Amiskwacîwâskahikan,
• There was almost no public discussion of issues.
• There was very little media coverage of the issues.
• The City Administration ( not City Council ) cancelled The City Sponsored Public Debates.
• There were no actual debates only private forums with most questions being asked by the lobby groups sponsoring the forums.
• Only some of the forums allowed all 11 candidates to participate.
• The main public conversation was a dumbed down story that Nickel was terrible, so fearing that, vote Sohi.

I intend to continue to speak up and welcome debate. Here are issues that I feel should have been debated:

Burn Less — Climate Emergency Response

Big Money in Politics

Voter Incentive Program

Private Charity vs. Public Charity

Low Taxes vs. High Taxes

Private Campaign Finance vs. Public Campaign Finance

Partisanship in Civic Politics

Private Communication Services vs. Public Communication Services

---

Burn Less — Climate Emergency Response

Our focus has to be on burning less and speaking up about burning less. Popular notions that we will find technologies that will allow us to continue burning way more than is needed, are dangerous distractions. The greatest potential to reduce emissions are pre-combustion solutions not post-combustion solutions.

What about economy in the old fashioned sense of the word? Burn Less Save More. High Powered Travel means burn more. Travel Less Burn Less. More Buying usually means More Burning. Buy More means Burn More. Summarized, the commercial media’s message is Buy More. Buy More means Burn More. What could go wrong?

We need a media that is not a combustion accelerant.

---

Big Money in Politics

The first item on our Breezy For Mayor Platform was Getting Big Money out of politics. There was no discussion of that issue in the media or at any of the sponsored forums.

That we have regulations governing election campaign finances speaks to our understanding that there is a potential for unfairness stemming from election campaign financing. Though we have this understanding we have not yet found a working strategy to protect democracy from the influence of money in campaigns. It is taken for granted that there is no solution and that money’s influence has to be tolerated and only moderated where possible.

I argue that there is a solution and that it is also the solution to our inability to act quickly and intelligently in responding to the climate emergency.

Almost everyone recognizes that we have a big problem with big money influencing elections. Big money is being used to buy advertising to influence and manipulate people’s political choices.
Politicians buy ads everywhere often telling slightly different stories to different communities. They buy ads in ethnic newspapers, on radio and T.V. and now of course on internet platforms that serve ads. (Facebook, Linkedin, Google, YouTube, Twitter, Instagram, etc.)
The problem that weakens democracy is that the stories presented in political ads are the stories wealthier people and their organizations like to tell. In the advertising, we do not hear the voice of the poor, the working class or even the middle class very much.
It is the intention of democracy to work based on one person one vote. Now media ads take away that level playing field. Winning becomes a matter of raising maximum funds to buy maximum opportunity to influence and manipulate the voters’ choices.
It is fair to assume that people who donate to political campaigns expect the investment to pay off in swaying voters to their agenda for government. Also it is fair to assume that something, that if we look at carefully must be deemed un-democratic, is not being looked at in depth.

For the 2021 Edmonton Civic Election we could look into all the candidates financial data but let’s for now just consider the winner’s compared to mine.

The Sohi Campaign spent about $4.70 per vote. The Breezy For Mayor Quest spent $1.70 per vote.

I only have rough data from the Sohi Campaign Finance Disclosure which as promised was disclosed the day before the election but it does not disclose the actual total of the campaign donations. It discloses the names of those who donated more than $50 and what range the donation fell in.

Sohi for Mayor Donation Disclosure – Final Update October 17, 2021 —
https://sohi.ca/disclosureupdate

October 17, 2021 Data from Amarjeet Sohi Campaign Donation Public Disclosure

I have already filed my disclosure with Elections Edmonton with the exact total ($2,370.35) and disclosed that I was self financed and did not accept one cent in donations. https://www.briangregg.com/real-time-financial-disclosure

Extrapolating from Sohi’s disclosure and estimating his total by multiplying the number of donors in each donation range by the median donation of each range, it can be estimated that Sohi’s total donations taken in was about 3/4 of a million dollars. This means the Sohi Campaign spent about $4.70 per vote. The Breezy For Mayor Quest spent $1.70 per vote.

Even though my message in this regard has so far been largely ignored, I persist in speaking up. Part of the solution is outlined further on in this report in the sections on;
• Private Communication Services vs. Public Communication Services
• Private Campaign Finance vs. Public Campaign Finance

---

Voter Turnout — engagement

Some are quick to shame them for not voting. I excuse the 64% of eligible voters who did not vote. No one is trying to explain to them why it is in their own best interest to become politically engaged. They face a hump of disbelief. There is no clear indication that voting will affect their lives. Engaged people are beyond that hump and generally feel voting will bring them more fun in their lives, more money in their pockets in the future and more fairness in their world. We need some way to help people get over that hump of disbelief so they become engaged and help make democracy stronger. The proposal for a voter incentive program is a solution I argue for.

Voter turnout in Edmonton’s 2021 Municipal Election was 36%. In Australia people are fined if they don’t vote. I want us to reward people for voting.”

This is how the voter incentive program would work. When the voter marks their ballot and then places it in the ballot box, an agent of the elections returning officer would hand the voter $1000 cash. We should push the Federal Government to fund the program by bringing in a tax on the super wealthy.
This sounds crazy at first but it is not. It will accomplish three important things:
• We will have 99% voter turnout.
• Knowing they are going to vote, many of those voting will become engaged and check out who they want to choose for their representatives.
• It will help moderate wealth and income inequality by taking funds from those who most can afford, what to them will be only a slightly greater tax burden, and transfer funds to all voters.

---

Private Charity vs. Public Charity

I can understand people who are heavily invested in working for, volunteering for, or donating to private charities, opposing the position of arguing that it would be better to have public social services than to be relying on private charities to provide social services. We have to ask though, to look beyond the goodness of providing some assistance and consider that there is a way to provide more.

The problem with the charity model is that only compassionate people donate to charities. The non-compassionate do not donate. Public social services are funded by everyone who has enough good fortune to qualify to pay taxes, whether or not they are compassionate. It is more fair if everyone who is able to, contributes. Having everyone who is able contributing, allows for the expense of more robust social services.

Private Charity Social Services fail to provide adequate social services. Donations from compassionate people just do not provide the level of funding required and non-compassionate people carry none of the burden.

In the long run it is foolish and expensive to be choking the unfortunate from the opportunity to thrive. Many children that have to grow up in poverty never develop fully and as adults become a burden on others instead of becoming a productive member of society.

---

Low Taxes vs. High Taxes

In Canada tax rates have been going down for 40 years and are lower than in many other jurisdictions. Jurisdictions with higher taxes and especially the Democracies of Northern Europe take better care of their people with robust public social services. I speak up for need for us to be more like those jurisdictions.

Of course there has to be a limit but, especially for wealthy individuals taxes are far to low.
• Tax avoidance loopholes need to be closed.
• Anti-tax advocacy organizations need to be exposed for what they are.
• We need an Anti-Austerity tax plan.

An Anti-Austerity tax plan would call for annual steady tax rate hikes over a 40 year period. A steady long term rise will allow people and their businesses to adapt gradually thus avoiding the economic shock of a large rate increase.

Budget decisions and the fairness of tax law are separate issues. Anti-tax lobbyists incorrectly connect the two into a story that justifies lowering taxes on the rich and cutting public services. We need to work to make sure tax law is fair and we need to work to be sure our budget decisions are smart and most importantly kind.

Regarding Anti-tax advocacy organizations, many reports on government waste, the scale needs to be considered. A certain amount of waste is inevitable because nothing is perfect so therefore if we look it is easy to find examples of waste. Before concluding that an example of waste is reason to cut services and lower taxes we must measure the level of waste relative to the level of service being delivered in spite of some waste. It is better to tolerate a small level of waste than to waste even more trying to eliminate all waste.

Regarding municipal property tax, we hear politicians talking about having a “competitive” tax rate. It is a sick competition. It is a race to the bottom. I am calling for municipalities to strike an agreement to end the competition by agreeing to harmonize their tax rates.

---

Privately Funded Elections vs. Publicly Funded Elections

This is another example of a status quo that is undemocratic because it results in the rich dominating the poor. Some jurisdictions publicly fund candidates’ election campaigns and prohibit private funding. It is more democratic. The private funding model advantages the rich over the poor. What is the argument supporting our continued use of the private funding model?

---

Partisanship in Civic Politics

There is a fear that representatives being openly partisan in municipal politics will make cooperation between different levels of government difficult when the other levels of government may be held by a different partisan party. My position is that we should be honest especially when political parties differ on policy. We should remain polite and respectful but speak up about what we believe is good and bad. It is a fact municipalities are dependent on provincial and federal funds, and governments have used the bullying tactic of withholding funding as a way of manipulating and influencing the work of municipal governments. When we face that kind of pressure tactic I believe in speaking up about it in the hope that voters will in the next election round elect better and fairer governments. I can see myself changing my allegiance as political parties evolve and change, but for the moment both the Alberta NDP and the Federal NDP most closely fall in line with my values. Therefore I argue that municipal politicians should be honest with the voters and show their partisanship as a way of showing what ideas they represent.

---

Private Media vs. Public Media

There are three forms of private media: advertising financed media, subscription/paywall financed media, and donation funded media including self funded media produced by individuals and enterprises. They all provide people with access to information and entertainment but also at the same time present agendas that favour the priorities of those financing the service. What is very un-democratic is that these agendas being pushed by private media amplify the voices of the rich and exclude the voices of the poor.

This goes against a basic principle of democracy — that we should all have an equal voice. The dangerous result is that those who profit most from private media’s monopoly on shaping the media message are, with this power, taking profits at the expense of people and the whole planet. The most obvious and frightening result of this status quo of relying on private enterprise for access to information is our governments’ inability to respond to the climate emergency.

The horror of thinking about the climate emergency has more and more people anxiously looking for solutions but there seems to be little being said about democratic media reform as a first and necessary step to speed up our transition to a lifestyle that requires far less burning.

On Public Media, I speak up for building a new digital public media that is not a media-production enterprise but a service providing people with free access to the work of all digital media-production enterprises. At the same time this service would finance production enterprises based on public use which can be automatically measured for volume of use and also to respect privacy the volume should be measured without tracking individual’s use. The intention is to displace commercial digital-media-content-access-services like Google, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Netflix, and provide access to content using the public service. It should be understood that presently when a person connects to one of these commercial services they are connecting to a robot. The public service would too of course be a robot. It would automatically trigger payments to content producers but importantly people using the robot should have a manual option to reverse a payment they have triggered if for any reason the user deems the content to be inappropriate or unworthy. This is a powerful and democratic way to discourage those who may want to profit from deception.

Almost everyone I talk to thinks this is too big of an idea and could never happen. They feel that what is in place is too powerful and established for it to ever change. I try to explain that that is what they were telling Tommy Douglas 60 years ago when he was promoting Medicare. What I am promoting is big, but only a fraction of the cost of Medicare and like Medicare it should lower the cost of living overall.
Let’s create a digital public library to access content without being surveilled and exposed to advertising.

Another very important result to be expected in transitioning to a pubic system would be a severe loss of the opportunity to purchase advertising intended to influence and manipulate voters’ choices. The loss of opportunity would remove the problem and expense of trying to regulate how money is raised and spent on political advertising.

---

Outreach and Communications Summary

tour with Water Warriors YEG | Charity
August 26, 2021

Every Thursday at supper time this group of compassionate volunteers meet downtown and take hand wagons of water, food, and personal hygiene items and tour the downtown social service charity facilities and give out the items to people living rough on the street. I know and I think lots of us know there are people suffering on the streets of our city. Joining this group for their tour opens your eves and is a strong reminder that our social services are not nearly good enough. Less that two weeks later as my guest and I dined on a lavish lunch served to about 200 well dressed guests at The Commercial Real Estate Development Association’s Mayoral Forum in a Banquet Room at the Westin Hotel, I wondered if it has to be this way. Does it have to be that we have super rich and super poor folks living in the same city?

189 Breezy For Mayor Free Street Shows
• locations and dates— https://www.briangregg.com/gigs

Many thousands must have seen me and heard the music. No one else, candidate or not, was out rocking busy traffic intersections. The Free Street Shows playing electric guitar at busy traffic intersections became a big part of my daily routine. They gave me a lot of energy and a false impression that my message and mission was beginning to be embraced by voters. Many many drivers and passengers waved, honked, gave the rock on sign and videoed me with their phones. It was my feeling that this would translate into some news coverage that would draw people to check out our platform and perhaps become supporters. Ended up there was no news coverage of the fact that I was out every day from May 25 to the day before the election. Speculating on why this never became news, it can be surmised that the Pandemic and the Federal Election sucked up a lot to the media oxygen, plus due to the pandemic I did not want to draw crowds so I was not publicizing the shows.

In the last couple of weeks as it became clear the shows were not making the news we resorted to a little organic social media posting to try and help those online crowds make the connection that the guy rocking the traffic was Breezy the guy running for Mayor.

commercial social media
• September 30, 2021 – October 17, 202 — 115 Facebook posts, and 49 Instagram posts.

email, telephone and texting
• 2,327 emails sent, of which about 20 were mass email to about 250 recipients
• somewhere in the range of 3000 telephone conversations
• somewhere in the range of 3000 text messages

interviews from student media and small local media
• Mar. 14 2021 Magpie Magazine interview
• Mar. 19, 2021 Community Now Magazine interview
• April 13, 2021 Edify Magazine Interview https://edifyedmonton.com/urban/community/for-those-about-to-run-we-salute-you/
• July 26. 2021 The Gooch Podcast — Brian Gregg’s Wall https://open.spotify.com/episode/0XziENuqVIe8Wge4NNDU9d
• Aug 11, 2021 Griff Magazine Mayoral candidate interview https://thegriff.ca/edmonton-mayoral-candidates-a-brief-look-into-the-candidates-platforms-ahead-of-the-municipal-election/
• September 29, 2021 The Gateway, University of Alberta’s Student News, Zoom interview

interviews from major media
• Mar. 1, 2021 CHED Radio live interview
• July 20, 2021 My Radio 580 AM live interview
• July 2021 Global TV 30 minute interview with Breezy at his headquarters
• August 24, 2021 Edmonton Journal offer to publish a candidates op-ed — Breezy’s submission https://www.briangregg.com/2021/10/07/i-want-to-be-edmontons-first-rock-and-roll-mayor
• September 27, 2021 Radio Cité 97,9 FM
• September 28, 2021 Edmonton Journal Telephone interview with Dustin Cook
• October 1, 2021 Global TV News Interview
• October 4, 2021 Connect Radio 101.7 FM live interview
• October 7, 2021 CBC TV shoots a 1 minute video clip (single take)
• October 15, Natasha Riebe CBC Reporter/Editor asked about municipal taxes — answer https://www.briangregg.com/2021/10/15/breezy-tax-more-but-go-easy

many questionnaires from lobby groups answered
• https://www.briangregg.com/2021/07/29/breezys-response-to-edmonton-chamber-of-commerce-candidate-survey

interviews from lobby groups
• July 9, 2021 Edmonton and District Labour Council
• July 13, 2021 REALTORS Association of Edmonton
• July 20, 2021 Danielle Woo West Edmonton Mall
• August 24, Metis Settlements
• August 31, 2021 The Edmonton Screen Industries Office

related webinars and in person events
• Feb. 11, 2021 Lunch & Learn Edmonton Social Planning Council
• Feb. 17, 2021 Friends of Medicare
• Feb. 23, 2021 Seniors’ Action and Liaison Team
• Feb. 24, 2021 Edmonton Multicultural Coalition
• Feb. 24, 2021 Lunch & Learn Edmonton Social Planning Council
• Mar. 11, 2021 Lunch & Learn Edmonton Social Planning Council
• Mar. 11, 2021 Public Interest Alberta Democracy Task Force
• Mar. 15, 2021 Habitat for Humanity
• Mar. 20, 2021 Community Safety & Wellbeing with Councillor Aaron Paquette
• Mar. 25 Taproot Peoples’ Agenda
• April 17, 2021 Community Safety & Wellbeing with Councillor Aaron Paquette
• April 13, 2021 Prairie Sky Gondola presentation to Rossdale Community League
• April 20, 2021 Lunch & Learn Edmonton Social Planning Council
• April 22,2021 Taproot People’s Agenda
• April 29,2021 Taproot People’s Agenda
• May 5.2021 Friends of Medicare
• May 15, 2021 Community Safety & Wellbeing with Councillor Aaron Paquette
• May 26, 2021 Lunch & Learn Edmonton Social Planning Council
• May 29,2021 Fair Vote Edmonton
• June 1, 2021 Parkland Institute
• June 2, 2021 Rossdale: City of Edmonton Encampment Information Session
• June 14,2021 Edmonton Climate Hub
• June 23, 2021 Migrant Workers Speak Out
• June 29, 2021 CESSCO 1 YEAR LOCKOUT
• July 14, 2021 Lunch & Learn Edmonton Social Planning Council
• July 15, 2021 Edmonton Public Library Mayoral Tour
• July 19, 2021 Breezy Presents to Edmonton Climate Hub
• Ju;y 22. 2021 Parkland Institute
• August 25, 2021 Infill Development in Edmonton Association (IDEA) BBQ
• August 27, 2021 Greater Edmonton Alliance
• September 7, 2021 Voice of Albertans with Disabilities 
• September 15, 2021 Government and Community Relations University of Alberta
• September 15, 2021 Rat Creek Press O-Day’min Forum
• September 15, 2021 Elections Candidate Open House
• September 18, 2021 Kids Kottage Mayoral Interview
• September 18, 2021 Big Lake Community League Tour
• September 21, 2021 Accessibility Advisory Committee virtual information session
• October 1, 2021 Westend Seniors Activity Centre – Meet the Candidates
• October 5, 2021 Candidate Open House with Explore Edmonton

attended several privately sponsored public forums
• August 13, 2021 LCC Media Foundation Online Mayoral Forum
• August 14, 2021 Philippine Media Association of Alberta(PMAA) In Person Mayoral Forum
• September 9, 2021 The Greater Edmonton Alliance Mayoral Candidate Forum
• September 13, 2021 Stollery Children’s Hospital Foundation Mayoral Candidate Forum
• September 13, 2021 Rat Creek Press Mayoral Forum
• September 23, 2021 Queen Mary Park Community League Candidate Forum
• September 29, 2021 University of Alberta Students Union Mayoral Forum
• September 30, 2021 Infill Developers of Edmonton Association Lunch Hour Panel
• October 1, 2021 University of Alberta — Edmonton mayoral candidate climate debate
• October 4, 2021 EDMONTON CHAMBER OF VOLUNTARY ORGANIZATIONS Mayoral Forum
• October 6,2021 Edmonton Public Library Mayoral Forum
• October 8, 2021 Africa Centre Mayoral Forum
• October 12, 2021 Connect FM 101.7 Edmonton Mayoral Candidates’ Debate

excluded from several privately sponsored public forums
• July 22, 2021 KV Capital Mayoral Forum
• September 8, 2021 Alberta Enterprise Group Edmonton Mayoral Forum
• September 9, 2021 The Commercial Real Estate Development Association Mayoral Forum (invited to attend but not to speak)
• September 14, 2021 Chinatown and Area Business Association
• October 7, 2021 Edmonton Chamber of Commerce Mayoral Forum

A million thanks to everyone who helped me and put up with me as I made this run to be mayor.

Thanks Everyone. Congratulations to Amerjeet Sohi our new Mayor. I hope he and our new City Council will embrace parts of my Quest outlined here at www.briangregg.com

The website was formerly named Breezy For Mayor and now is renamed Breezy For Everyone.

Our new city council will be sworn in Tuesday October 26. Coincidentally The Edmonton Arts Council has booked me to do a Show across from City Hall at Churchill Square at Noon.

Tuesday October 26, Noon Hour — Free Concert — Breezy with James Anderson on Mouth Drums and David McCargar on Bass @ Churchill Square

thanks to The Edmonton Arts Council

To my surprise the 2021 race for Mayor was marked by a real lack of public debate on the issues.

Everyone including the bank, where to be nominated, I was required to have an account, insisted on calling my Quest a Campaign. In the later days of the Quest I gave up calling it a Quest and explaining that Campaign is a war term.

I object to the use of the war term campaign because I believe that democracy is about speaking up not about fighting. Others of course are fighting campaigns and using money as the ammunition to force advertising pitches into people’s attention with the intent to influence and manipulate voters political choices.

I understand that this is the status quo but it is not serving people or our planet. It is in my opinion severely weakening democracy in an age where we have the technology to participate in wide meaningful conversations.

Obviously my top issue “Getting big money out of politics, read how“, was not seen as too important by the voters. I hope it will be noted that I received the most votes per campaign dollar spent.