FASKEN

Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP 333 Bay Street, Suite 2400 T +1 416 366 8381
Barristers and Solicitors P.O. Box 20 +1 800 268 8424
Patent and Trade-mark Agents Toronto, Ontario M5H 2T5 F +1 416 364 7813
Canada
fasken.com

Peter A. Downard
Direct +1 416 865 4369
pdownard@fasken.com
October 12, 2018 www.fasken.com/en/peter-downard

VIA EMAIL

Mr. Jaren Kerr Mr. Jesse Brown

Canadaland Canadaland
399-401 Richmond Street 399-401 Richmond Street
West West
Toronto, Ontario Toronto, Ontario
M5V 3A8 M5V 3A8

Dear Mr. Kerr and Mr. Brown:

Re: WE Charity

Further to my letter to Mr. Kerr of yesterday's date, I have not heard from your legal counsel. I
understand, however, that publication of material on your website regarding WE Charity may be
imminent.

Given these circumstances, I wish to provide you with concerns I have regarding your
commitment to responsible journalism. I have reviewed Mr. Chapman's October 10 letter to Mr.
Brown and 1 agree with it. 1 have also reviewed Mr. Kerr's various communications with Angie
Gurley of WE Charity. It appears to me that Mr. Kerr's claims of his commitment to principles
of responsible journalism are hollow, for at least two reasons.

First, responsible journalism is not a poker game in which cards are held close to the chest. It is
a fundamental principle of responsible journalism that where a journalist contemplates
publishing a statement of fact which is defamatory of the subject of the statement, the subject
must be invited to comment on that statement before it is published. Mr. Kerr has been asked by
our client many times to do this, yet he has plainly failed to do so. In addition, a fair opportunity
to comment provides a reasonable time within which to comment. Mr. Kerr's extraordinary
action of putting numerous questions to our client after 6:30 p.m. on the Friday before a long
weekend, coupled with a request that they be answered within one business day, demonstrates a
complete lack of understanding of the importance of this principle, which responsible journalists
understand to be necessary to promote accuracy and fairness.
 FASKEN

Though repeated requests for clarification on any allegations made against WE Charity were
ignored, WE Charity has fully cooperated at every stage throughout this process and provided
over 100 pages of transparent information in a professional maimer. This professionalism has
not been reciprocated. Despite ignoring principles of responsible journalism, at the last minute
you requested the Co-founders of WE Charity to appear on your podcast without any information
or context on the nature of the allegations or claims you would be making.

Second, the highest standards of verification are necessary in this case, having regard to the
potential harm that may be done to WE Charity through the publication of false, misleading or
decontextualized information which may damage WE Charity and the achievement of its social
mission. It is well established that the more serious a defamatory statement, the more thorough
the efforts at verification must be. Mr. Kerr's communications with Ms. Gurley clearly
demonstrate a readiness to rely on sources of information who may obviously have a bias or "axe
to grind", in a manner that is completely inconsistent with appropriate standards of verification.
Mr. Kerr also appears to be very ready to utilize confidential sources. Responsible joumalists
know that anonymous sources are only to be used as a last resort, particularly where harm to a
person or organization defamed may be very serious.

There should be no doubt that in this case the damage would be enormous. It would be reflected
in a court's award of monetary compensation to WE Charity. WE Charity's great prominence as
an enormously successful organization, the importance of WE Charity's reputation for the
achievement of its mission, the extraordinary ubiquity of your material's mass publication
through Internet channels, the disregard of adequate principles of verification and the
inappropriate use of biased and anonymous sources would drive a very large award of general,
aggravated, special, and very possibly, punitive damages.

Yours truly,

Peter A. Downard %