Parties have criticisms, but their differences suggest any
legislation isn't imminent
By Ryan Tracy
This article is being republished as part of our daily
reproduction of WSJ.com articles that also appeared in the U.S.
print edition of The Wall Street Journal (July 31, 2020).
WASHINGTON -- This week's hearing into Big Tech's market power
underscored the deep discontent in Congress toward giant technology
companies, but also divisions about what the problems are and how
to address them.
In more than five hours of adversarial interrogation before the
House Antitrust Subcommittee on Wednesday, the chief executives of
Amazon.com Inc., Apple Inc., Facebook, Inc. and Google owner
Alphabet Inc. were accused of a range of unfair business
practices.
But Democrats focused more on the alleged stifling of
competition to preserve their dominance, while Republicans honed in
more on the platforms' outsize grip on information and public
debate.
Members at times dismissed one another's specific concerns and
proposed solutions, making it clear that legislative changes
concerning Big Tech aren't imminent.
"We do not need to change our antitrust laws. They have been
working just fine," said Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R., Wis.), the
subcommittee's top Republican, at Wednesday's hearing. He said law
enforcement agencies should be the ones to decide whether they were
wrong in permitting tech companies' growth, allowing: "Maybe they
made a mistake."
Still, the near-universal enmity was a sign that Capitol Hill
inquiries into the companies will continue no matter who controls
Congress next year.
"Yesterday's event was a milestone. It makes clear to everybody
that the question is no longer should we, could we do something
about the platform monopolists but when exactly are we going to do
it, and what exactly are we going to do?" Barry Lynn, executive
director of the Open Markets Institute, which advocates for
breaking up and imposing new rules on tech platforms, said
Thursday.
Robert Kaminski, an analyst with Capital Alpha Partners, counted
28 discrete policy issues lawmakers raised, saying it indicates the
so-called Tech Lash has room to run.
"The quantity and diversity of issues serve to keep the
spotlight on tech for an indefinite amount of time," he said in a
note to clients.
The tech industry's supporters dismissed the hearing as lacking
in substance.
"This hearing isn't about competition, evidence, or consumers;
it's a piece of political theater," said Carl Szabo, general
counsel of NetChoice, a trade group whose members include Google,
Facebook and Amazon. "We heard odd arguments about how each of
these companies is somehow a monopoly in the same overlapping
markets."
For now, the near-term threat to the companies remains ongoing
investigations by the agencies that enforce U.S. antitrust laws,
including the Justice Department and Federal Trade Commission as
well as the states.
As did the subcommittee, those agencies have been collecting
documents and talking to the companies' competitors during the past
year, so evidence cited in the Wednesday hearing may not have
surprised them. The Justice Department is expected to sue Google as
soon as this summer, and other less-advanced investigations are
proceeding into the other companies, The Wall Street Journal has
reported previously citing people familiar with the matter.
Lawmakers sought to put pressure on the agencies, in part by
disclosing dozens of documents, such as internal company emails and
strategy discussions.
"The documentary evidence shows that several of these companies
were engaged in serious anticompetitive practices," said Rep. Joe
Neguse (D., Colo.), a member of the House panel in an interview
after the hearing. "Regulators in many respects across multiple
administrations, Democratic and Republican, have been asleep at the
wheel."
If the hearing put scrutiny on the record of antitrust
enforcers, though, it also offered examples of the arguments they
would face in taking one of the tech giants to court.
Lawmakers in both parties said Facebook's strategy to acquire
apps such as Instagram and WhatsApp appeared designed to maintain a
dominant market position. But courts also would consider the
effects of the transaction, as Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg implied
when he countered that Instagram "has done wildly well largely
because not just of the founder's talent, but because we invested
heavily."
The criticism of the CEOs came across a range of topics. Mr.
Zuckerberg took heat from Rep. David Cicilline, the subcommittee
chairman, concerning the spread of misinformation about the
coronavirus pandemic, and from Rep. Gregory Steube (R., Fla.) about
the ideological diversity of people who monitor Facebook
content.
Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos heard concerns about how his company
treats independent retailers from Rep. Kelly Armstrong, a North
Dakota Republican, and from Rep. Pramila Jayapal, a Democrat whose
district includes the company's headquarters in Seattle.
The House panel is set in the coming weeks to publish a report
summarizing its probe into the tech firms and making policy
recommendations.
Democrats pushed for a change in laws governing competition,
arguing that existing antitrust statues have failed to curb the
technology giants. "Their control of the marketplace allows them to
do whatever it takes to crush independent business and expand their
own power. This must end," Mr. Cicilline said at the close of the
hearing.
Republicans' primary concern at the hearing was perceived
censorship of conservative speech by social-media companies.
Democrats and the tech companies dispute those allegations,
pointing in part to the popularity of conservative content on
platforms such as Facebook.
To address that issue, some GOP lawmakers have proposed changes
to Section 230, a law that immunizes websites from lawsuits for
moderating content. Tech companies oppose those efforts. Democrats
generally say they are willing to review Section 230 but are
skeptical of the Republican proposals.
Lawmakers also have discussed legislation imposing new
requirements on tech firms to protect consumer privacy, but this
year failed to reach a compromise.
Write to Ryan Tracy at ryan.tracy@wsj.com
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
July 31, 2020 02:47 ET (06:47 GMT)
Copyright (c) 2020 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
Meta Platforms (NASDAQ:META)
Historical Stock Chart
From Mar 2024 to Apr 2024
Meta Platforms (NASDAQ:META)
Historical Stock Chart
From Apr 2023 to Apr 2024