Posted on 06/16/2020 9:50:22 AM PDT by Kaslin
It's the oddest thing. The more America's Big Tech companies such as Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Twitter have contributed to keeping America's economy afloat during the coronavirus lockdown, the louder the voices get to break them up or to tie them up into regulatory knots.
At the same time that the White House and many conservatives are pushing to "bring our businesses and manufacturing back home" from nations such as China, plenty of so-called nationalists see our globally dominant, high-tech firms as the enemy. Do they realize that there is nothing that the communists in Beijing would wish to do more than to knock Amazon, Apple or Google from their king-of-the-hill status and replace them with state-assisted enterprises such as Huawei or Alibaba? Washington's assault against America's trillion-dollar companies would aid and abet Chinese President Xi Jinping's efforts.
But it is happening. Last week, Tesla CEO Elon Musk blasted Amazon for being a "monopoly" and tweeted, "Time to break up Amazon." Conservatives piled on. Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri has introduced new antitrust legislation against the tech companies. President Donald Trump has threatened to regulate social media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook "strongly." Some in Congress want an investigation into Google's search engine algorithms to make sure they aren't discriminating against conservative websites.
I have been a loud critic of the anti-conservative bias of the big Silicon Valley tech firms, and conservative leaders must keep the pressure on these firms to level the playing field. New polling commissioned by a group I run, the Committee to Unleash Prosperity, and conducted by Remington Research Group revealed that a majority of conservative activists believe tech companies engage in censorship or display bias against conservatives.
When conservatives were asked, "Do you believe the federal government should be involved in regulating political speech on the internet?" the results were shockingly one-sided. Seventy-six percent of respondents said no, the government should keep its hands off regulating it, the technology companies and their platforms. The same poll asked conservatives which issue is most important to them when casting their vote for federal offices such as senator or representative. Just 1% said "online censorship."
It is reassuring. From the start of the internet age, conservatives such as Grover Norquist, me and many others have argued the best way for America to dominate the digital age of online commerce was to keep the internet tax- and regulation-free. That is what we have mostly done in America, and the rewards have been bountiful. Millions of jobs and the spurt of innovation and entrepreneurship has the top six American tech companies with a higher production capacity than the entire GDP of most other nations in the world.
We have seen firsthand how the gig economy saved our nation from plunging into a Great Depression over the past three months. These were terrible times, with as many as 40 million people losing their jobs. But thanks to our multitrillion-dollar tech sector -- and not just Big Tech but also hundreds of new entrepreneurial online services -- commerce kept flowing; food was available on the shelves; gas was in the tanks; packages were delivered; and paychecks were processed. They saved America from utter chaos and severe deprivation.
It was the services, know-how and infrastructure built by our pioneering tech giants that enabled the tens of thousands of small tech firms to sprout up from nowhere, and these firms will be essential to securing the next phase of recovery. Our construction firms; steel, oil and gas industries; hospitals; media; and food processing and manufacturing plants are all dependent on the kinds of just-in-time inventory and supply chain management made possible by the tech sector. In many ways, the success and the array of business-to-business services provided at little cost (often for free) from companies such as Google, Facebook, Amazon and the like are what make the next generation of tech firms possible through free market competition. Innovation stops monopolies, not government lawyers.
High tech isn't swallowing up small businesses; it is saving them. A new report from the Connected Commerce Council, which analyzed the impact of internet platforms and digital tools on small companies in the COVID-19 crisis, found almost 1 in 3 (31%) business owners said that without digital tools, they would have had to close part or all of their business. Nearly 70% said digital tools have been useful during the COVID-19 crisis.
There is now a call from both parties for multitrillion-dollar government "infrastructure bills." Wait a minute. Our most critical infrastructure today is the gig economy connectivity through satellites, internet platforms, clouds, fiber optic cables, the sophisticated nationwide electric grid system and the like, which were almost all built out by the very tech and telecommunications companies that are now coming under fire for being too successful and making too much money.
Conservatives are rightly suspicious of Big Tech's political power and liberal slant. The recent effort by Amazon in refusing to sell a book critical of the coronavirus lockdown is just a recent example of how the tech world seems to go out of its way to appease the left and to alienate and even silence the right.
But the one thing free market conservatives are even warier of is big government. When asked, "Who do you think should regulate Big Tech companies like Google: the federal government or the free market?" almost two-thirds answered "the free market."
We learned big-time during the coronavirus crisis that tech isn't broken. The last thing we need now is for Trump or Congress to fix it.
I say break them apart. Who knows how much money Amazon spent bribing politicians to keep retail stores closed so that they can make a killing with mail order retail.
Did Netflix and other streaming services conspire to shut down movie theaters to drive up demand for their services? I think so.
Yes we will often fail as citizens are not united and don't have the political or financial wherewithal to combat the lobbying efforts of megacorps. However, every once and a while there is a window of opportunity for us to get something for the average citizen. Being able to express conservative ideas on YouTube, Twitter, FaceBook, etc. without having to fear your account being suspended or being fired from your job would be a good win for the average citizen that any government worth its salt should be able to find a way to support and guarantee.
“High tech isn’t swallowing up small businesses; it is saving them. A new report from the Connected Commerce Council, which analyzed the impact of internet platforms and digital tools on small companies in the COVID-19 crisis...”
Unfortunately, Mr. Stossel, all the small businesses that have already been put out of business by the likes of Amazon were unavailable to answer the survey.
There is no battlefield of ideas if only one side is allowed to use the tools to communicate their ideas to people.
This reminds me of the old arguments why the government shouldn’t breakup the Bell Telephone Company.
In short, the technology was very stagnant, and the monopoly prevented any number of other companies from doing a better job of things. But when Bell was broken up, it indeed cause some degree of chaos in the market, but so do most “gold rushes”.
Bell ran on a vast amount of thick copper cables, which couldn’t support digital, and they wouldn’t let anyone else put up their lines, even for things like cable TV.
When Bell was busted, after a brief pause there was an explosion in technology and what we see today.
And how about what had been a near monopoly for the USPS? Once it could no longer suppress package delivery, the market got USPS, FedEx, etc., etc. a LOT faster and better.
So other than possible fears that *something* bad might happen, what potential exists for after a breakup of these tech companies?
.
Half Big Tech could do it just as well, and offer COMPETITION to keep them honest and improving.
More companies doing the same thing allows the Consumers to “Vote with their Feet” to correct a business. Monopolies simply laugh and go on doing their abuses.
.
Anti-Trust laws have been on the books for a very long time.
EVERY Silicon Valley employee has gone thru Anti-Trust training.
I did it 4 times I think while working for Intel.
The law was setup to keep any company from controlling a market.
If FB and Google refuse to follow clear law setup 50 years ago, why have a law?
Do you want the government to guarantee that Antifa members can post what they want on FR without fear of their posts being deleted or their accounts zotted?
No, they aren't, and your wishing doesn't make it so.
So are you a full up libertardian? Or do you only selectively support some libertardian positions?
For example, are you in favor of a free market in labor, i.e no borders and no ICE? If so, I hope you’ll be OK when we are a one-party progressive Democrat country. If not, then why plant your libertardian flag on a hill occupied by such nasty pieces of work as the libtards that run Google, FaceBook, and Twitter?
There are other search engines, aren’t there? People are not using them by choice, not because Google isn’t the only one.
Yes but they hold a market dominant position. And Google is far more than a search engine -
Break ‘em all up!
“ Washington’s assault against America’s trillion-dollar companies would aid and abet Chinese President Xi Jinping’s efforts.”
Idiotic position. These companies, most of them, are run by anti-American Marxist wannabes who are so aligned with China’s communist ideals that there’s hardly a dime‘s worth of difference between the two from an ideological perspective.
They only disagree on who the leaders should be.
Break them up soon.
Stossel often makes good points, but he couldn’t be more wrong on this one.
Amazingly uninformed.
Google SHOULD be broken up.
Specifically, they need to sell-off their operating system business from their data collection and advertising services.
I also never thought I’d say this, but the USA needs to have consumer protection laws enacted similar to that of the EU’s GDPR. Right now, Americans have no control over how their data is used, nor what data is collected and sold. This includes PII (Personally Identifiable Information) such as credit card number, date of birth and social security number, all of which can be used by criminals. Even HIPPA has been watered down to the point where personal information CAN be sold.
As an IT professional, I can say that GDPR is a pain to deal with, and in Germany, the German Workers Council has even stricter rules, to the point that we cannot identify which users are visiting websites using their employers Internet services and computers without special permissions.
But it DOES allow the user to take control of their personal data, and restricts what can be accessed, sold or distributed.
Mark
Another thing, since Google IS a publisher of content and they make editorial decisions based on the content of others, providing or denying them access to the public, they are NOT acting as a neutral platform, like a telephone company.
They make active decisions, making them a publisher of content, and need to be treated as such, rather than being given blanket immunity by congress.
That immunity and protection must be removed.
Mark
Yes but they hold a market dominant position. And Google is far more than a search engine -
This is absolutely correct. The search engine is tied directly into the Chrome Browser, which is an integral part of the Android Operating system, which also uses both the search and location functions. Have you ever noticed that your search results on a phone can change, based on your location? Or even certain app results? For instance, if you use the McDonalds app, you may find that the "Deals" option doesn't work, or deals can change, when you are physically near a McDonalds restaurant?
Then there's Google Analytics, which monitors your web browser, purchasing, dining, AND travel habits, building a profile, and then selling that information, including PII (Personally Identifiable Information,) over which, thanks to Google's lobbying efforts, you have no control.
And then there's their work with geolocation, self-driving vehicles and optical recognition, combined with their AI work. All of which is currently being done in conjunction with the ChiCom military (through Chinese university research.) Both the optical recognition and AI work have both civilian, as well as DIRECT military applications, which used to be illegal.
Mark
Google is working directly with the ChiCom military to develop AI, geolocation, facial recognition and other applications which have direct military applications, as well as law enforcement and civilian uses.
Mark
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.