[ad_1]
Members of the European Parliament have filed complaints against three tech giants Amazon, Google and Meta in the EU’s Transparency Register – a monitoring process designed to track lobbying activities aimed at EU lawmakers – accusing the three of lobbying transparency violations. Laws using small front organizations to clearly press their interests.
The complaints, previously reported by Politico and Bloomberg, are aimed at a series of tech industry associations and lobby groups – including a number whose names represent the interests of start-ups and small businesses – for alleged involvement by MEPs in Big Tech’s astronomical work on two major EU-US digital regulatory bodies, the Digital Services Act. (DSA) and targeting the Digital Markets Act (DMA), according to the documents we reviewed.
Technology trade association the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA), online advertising industry body IAB Europe and SME and start-up lobby groups Allied for Startups, SME Connect and the Council of Connected Commerce (3C) were named in the Astrology complaints. They were sued by three Social Democrat lawmakers: Paul Tang, René Rapsey and Crystal Schaldemos.
The MPs are demanding that the accused tech giants be banned from entering the European Parliament if their complaint is upheld. We understand that a total of nine complaints have been registered (two targeted Google).
While DSA and DMA are both accepted now, the unclear impact of Big Tech’s policy influence ops on future digital policy-making is worrying.
MEPs’ complaints about using freedom of information follow a report compiled in April by civil society groups Corporate Europe Observatory and Global Witness, which revealed how many tech giants sought to influence the EU’s two main digital policy files – at great cost. Pushing self-interested amendments to the (then) draft regulations.
Some of the activities of this Big Tech lobby include the introduction of detailed proposals in late closed-door policy discussions between the EU institutions – proposing amendments to legislators to water down provisions that directly threaten their interests – for example, based on surveillance advertising. (In the event, the DSA and DMA were passed with some restrictions on surveillance-based advertising, though not the outright ban that many MEPs had been pushing for.)
The complaints refer to a moderate post by Georg Riekeles – director of the Brussels-based European Policy Center think tank (which lists a few tech giants as its members) and former EU official – who warned this summer. The EU debated the DSA and DMA package, while front groups and other hidden forms of lobbying were on the rise. I dare say Brussels has never seen an effort of this magnitude and boldness. Most of the customs are completely contrary not only to the code of conduct established in the representation of interests, but also to the basic principles of ethics and behavior in society.
As public inquiry and research into the issue of “Big Tobacco” found, vested interests create systems of thought and influence to control civil society and policymakers, the Reales blog continued. “At this point, Big Tech’s intervention strategies must be systematically monitored and measures taken to counter them. The EU’s ability to defend its fundamental interests starts with the independence and transparency of the EU institutions, but also requires a wider societal ecosystem.” Technology controlHe said.
Systematic monitoring of Big Tech lobbying is something the EU lacks, MEPs’ complaints suggest, as transparency laws meant to highlight corporate lobbying are being systematically circumvented by a sprawling network of third parties supported by money (or otherwise by the press). b) from well-resourced tech giants to align their talking points with the grassroots lobbying campaign rather than the one behind the effort.
Such astrologer strategies erode accountability and subvert democracy – enabling corporate interests to build high-impact operations with deep pockets and high market power, expanding the reach and connections of their third-party networks and amplifying their lines. Minimizing firepower while ‘cleaning’ their brand at a safe distance.
Two lobbying campaigns mentioned in the complaints – aimed at ‘targeting start-ups’ (now under a new EU digital policy proposal, the Data Act); And the second, called the ‘Coalition for Digital Ads of SMEs’, which promoted small businesses in a form that mimics tracking-based advertising – is not registered in the EU’s transparency register but appears in one of the documents as it has a long list of supporters. Funders: Some are on the Transparency Register (including some that list Big Tech entities theirs members/supporters), others are not, so their funding sources are not disclosed.
“You can only get an access badge for EU institutions [as a lobbyist] If you register [in the transparency register]. But Google, Amazon and Meta have agreed to abide by the code of conduct on the record. And the code requires all registrants not to tamper with the registry itself. So it’s an obstacle for another organization to lobby on their behalf,” Tang told us, explaining how this intertwining of declared and undeclared interests raises transparency concerns for EU policymakers.
“We are dealing here with all kinds of affiliates / national organizations / EU lobbying organizations etc. that are actively promoting the narrative from Big Tech – and the only thing we know is that someone called 3C will contact us and if we look them up in the Transparency Register, they are not affiliated with anyone,” he added. .
TechCrunch has contacted the three tech companies named in the MEPs’ complaint for comment.
At the time of writing, Meta had not responded. But Amazon and Google have denied violating EU lobbying laws.
Here are their statements:
A Google spokesperson said: “Openness and transparency are important values in how Google interacts with EU institutions. For many years, we have included extensive information about our lobbying activities in the Transparency Register. We are committed to transparent participation and announce our sponsorships and partnerships with various organizations in a comprehensive list on the registry’s website. Our partnership with the Associated Chamber of Commerce is clearly and prominently outlined in our statement.
An Amazon spokesperson said: “In the EU, Amazon has not consulted the Chamber of Commerce. Lobby under the DMA, DSA or any other European law. Amazon does not work with a connected Chamber of Commerce in Europe.
Amazon has confirmed it’s working with 3C in the US – the association’s website lists both Amazon and Google as “corporate partners” and says the pair are “invested in supporting small businesses and offer a range of free and low-cost digital tools to help small business leaders move and grow their businesses.” ” — but the ecommerce giant’s response rejects the idea that any of its dealings with 3C in the United States will end up in the hands of the same firm in the EU.
We have also contacted the five industry groups named in the MEPs’ complaint.
The four responded at press time and made no mistake – listing many of their listings on the Transparency Register is itself a sign of compliance.
Allied for Startups’ Inés Moreno-Alonso said: “Allied for Startups is proud to be a member-supported organization of over 40 non-profit startup associations representing entrepreneurs and innovators worldwide. Our policy priorities are determined annually by a vote of all of these members and within the mandate clearly set out in our bylaws. We have been listed in the Transparency Register since 2015 and fully comply with EU lobbying laws.
3C executive director Rob Retzlaff told us earlier this year that he was investigated by the filing — but said the practice was shut down without sanction in June.
“We received a request from the Transparency Register in March 2022, we responded, and as of June 2, 2022, the case is closed, and our filing is correct and satisfies the Transparency Register,” he said.
The 3C lobby group is listed in the EU’s transparency register as a US non-profit trade and business organization with an address in Washington, DC – and a “single purpose… .
It doesn’t list membership for 3C’s European operations or membership to any other organizations, but the list says it estimates the annual cost. As of 5/1/22, the list “ceased to argue with EU policy” – a time when political agreements on the details of the DMA and DSA were confirmed, indicating the end of lobbying. , the last one at the end of April.
CCIA Europe and IAB Europe have denied that disclosing some public support for the aforementioned Target Start campaign is a breach of any EU transparency law.
A spokesperson for CCIA Europe told us:
“CCIA Europe values the transparency that governs the EU’s policy-making process and adheres to the Code of Conduct. The CCIA has been a voluntary signatory to the EU Transparency Register since its inception a decade ago.
As is typical for any Brussels-based industry association, CCIA Europe is regularly approached to sign joint letters or declarations, often with other stakeholders.
CCIA’s involvement in the target startups was limited to a few joint statements involving many signatories. We have never been involved in the internal workings of CCIA targeting startups or supported them financially.
Note: CCIA Europe lists Amazon, Google and Meta (among other tech giants) on its member page.
IAB Europe also sent us this statement:
“IAB Europe has joined some of the officially announced ‘initiatives’ coalitions, but the suggestion that IAB Europe pretends to represent anyone other than its own members is absurd. We need to see the alleged complaints to comment further.
IAB Europe also lists the Big Tech Three – Amazon, Google and Meta – in its more extensive membership directory. So the straw-man line “to pretend to represent anyone but its own members” is, in this context, certainly absurd.
In recent years, the EU has emerged as a global hub for digital policy-making as regional legislators manage to reach some kind of consensus on a flurry of major regulations – often while their legislative partners across the pond (and in the UK) are left to decide how to regulate the internet at home. Disagreement or other political distractions.
This means Brussels has become a major target for the Big Tech lobby, with a report last year showing hundreds of companies, groups and trade associations spending a total of €97M (~$115M) to influence EU institutions – accounting for ten tech giants. The third (defined) cost (list driven by Google and Facebook/Meta).
However, as that report points out, Astrological methods indicate that it is Big Tech. Real The lobbying budget goes far beyond that, as funds are distributed and allocated to an unknown number of third parties with whom the tech giants have ties. Therefore, a robust examination of long-term access technology networks seems to be an important task for establishing democratic accountability.
[ad_2]
Source link
