President Biden published an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal yesterday informing Big Tech of what his administration is working, and is doing, to curb the worst abuses. But these “broad principles for reform” seem pretty familiar.
The editorial begins by thanking the tech sector for its hard work (and its contribution to GDP, it is understood), and soon begins to lament the blame for children and other vulnerable populations.
“I see how some parts of the industry collect, share and misuse our most personal data, deepening extremism and polarization in our country, tipping the economic playing field and and violating the civil rights of minorities and even endangering children. There is a risk,” the president wrote.
He cites three main areas where the federal government needs to intervene: privacy, algorithm liability, and competition.
His concerns about privacy are that companies “collect, use and share highly personal data” primarily for ad targeting. He said the White House is “developing new privacy rules for commercial data.” good! The industry has been asking for federal rules for years – sure, it’s because they didn’t like California rules, but they definitely wanted it. It was a long time ago. It takes forever for them to unravel and then lead to dozens of lawsuits defining the finer contours, as seen in his GDPR effort for the European Union.
We’ve seen privacy bills come and go, but like everything else they fall prey to partisan politics, and that doesn’t seem likely to change. A state-led effort is giving us a preview of what challenges lie ahead.
The second issue is that technology must be “accountable for the content it spreads and the algorithms it uses.” For this reason, he proposes reforming Section 230. Section 230 is the can of worms that everyone has had on their desks for years, but no one seems to want to open it. Too little won’t change anything. Go too far and the tech sector will bog down under a hail of lawsuits. It seems easier to complain than thread that needle, and algorithmic transparency is easier to achieve, especially when it comes to his AI-related policies and protected class and category issues. may become.
Finally, there is a need to “bring competition back to the tech sector”. In this regard, Biden is clearly leaning on her FTC chairman, Lina Khan, who has the upper hand and nemesis of Amazon, Meta, and now Microsoft.
Biden wrote that he “recently secured significant funding for antitrust law enforcement agencies.” Khan and others complain that the FTC lacks funding, authority and personnel (not to mention a trend under some administrations), and that industry giants are blaming competitors for nothing. You can’t undertake to take over like Launching a new antitrust team with a new antitrust philosophy (just ask Khan) could really accomplish what Biden wants.
But of course, this isn’t the first time someone has complained about things like Facebook’s acquisition of Instagram and WhatsApp. All this has been made possible by systematic incentives given to those who can afford to lobby the government. Remember, many of the “great American corporations overwhelmed by dominant incumbents” have come and gone while Biden was Vice President or Senator. So we have heard this song. what’s next? Usually nothing.
Biden’s op-ed adds nothing to the debate about technology overreach and potential remedies, but it wasn’t intended. Instead, it serves as a public declaration of his (reluctant) opposition to problems in the tech world. “Friend, you brought this on yourself,” he seems to say. Perhaps this legislative period will be filled with the long-promised nips and tucks that technology so desperately needed and actually sought. I’m here.
“There will be many policy issues on which we disagree in the new Congress, but let us unite behind our common values for technological change,” he wrote. Good luck, Mr. President! Certainly this time.
