[ad_1]
Opposition to big tech is a rare issue on which Republicans and Democrats can agree, but several federal proposals with bipartisan support have stalled in Washington, with a comprehensive privacy bill and antitrust package likely to fizzle out in the GOP majority next year. The house. When it comes to policing Big Tech, Congress is basically deadlocked. The real action is happening at the government level.
Texas and Florida have been trying to push through new social media laws, which are currently tussled in the courts and may now be ruled on by the Supreme Court. Both Facebook and Twitter Inc. They want to stop existing companies from blocking some political speech — which may do more to appeal to their Republican base than adequately clean up harmful online content. Still, like California’s new laws, they emphasize the importance of state-level regulation of firepower technology. While Congress has done so little, many state legislatures must try to pass much-needed legislation that addresses privacy, online harm, and market abuse by these companies.
Doing so takes a cue from Big Tech’s own playbook.
For years, industry lobbyists have targeted state lawmakers to enact watered-down privacy laws, crafting tougher policies that could threaten their business models by forcing changes in their advertising or data collection practices.
Privacy laws recently passed in Virginia, Utah and Colorado, and similar bills under consideration in 22 other states, have no real enforcement power. That’s because tech firms themselves have been pushing or advocating for the legislation.
Amazon.com Inc., for example, provided Virginia lawmakers with the first draft of a bill that would become that state’s privacy law. “Amazon gave us a first draft to look at,” Virginia state Sen. David Marsden, a Democrat, recently told The Protocol.
A powerful tech industry group known as the State Privacy and Security Consortium (SPSC), whose members include Facebook parent Meta Platforms Inc., Alphabet Inc. and Amazon, and has also provided “useful knowledge” to state legislators and advice on privacy legislation. A lobbyist with the group helped Utah Republican state Sen. Kirk Cullimore add replacement language to his state’s privacy bill, according to minutes of a February 2022 hearing.(1)
Ironically, the best current effort to protect consumer privacy comes from a large tech company. Apple’s Inc. app tracking transparency popup, which was introduced globally last year with iPhones, is an over-the-top effort to block targeted advertisers on our phones, cutting an estimated $14 billion off Facebook’s ad sales this year alone (and improving Apple’s business, in the process).
Highly profitable technology companies should not be the ultimate custodians of our data, nor should they dictate the direction of privacy policy. It is the job of democratically elected legislators.
California provides an important example. Its own privacy law, passed in 2020, (2) became the American standard because tech companies realized it would be easier to follow the rules globally than to turn off California users.
A similar situation may occur with the state’s new age-appropriate design code. It forces internet firms to change their websites or algorithms if they breach the privacy of under-18s or expose them to harmful content, and is tougher than existing UK laws.
For example, Facebook has been accused of continuing to target ads to teenagers even after it said it could no longer protect children under new UK laws. Under California law, that would be difficult to avoid. The state attorney general can pursue fines of up to $7,500 for each person injured by a company that violates the law.
Tougher state laws aimed at the tech industry won’t just spark a national push to eventually pass federal laws. It may also force tech companies to be more receptive to federal regulation, which they see as a more palatable alternative to confusing reliance on state regulations. And once Congress does standardize something, even if it’s only for a few years, the risk of watering down certain laws is reduced. Federal laws will become more powerful.
Interestingly, groups campaigning for better privacy or online protections aren’t attracting government houses at the same rate as tech companies, said Jesse Lehrich, co-founder of Accounting Tech, which pushes for stronger regulation of social media companies. . “I’m a little surprised because I haven’t heard many of our partners get serious about mapping opportunities,” he said.
That could be a missed opportunity for advocacy groups. She has shown that the states of California can do more than Congress to fight the dominance of Big Tech. Federal laws trying to do the same next year seem unlikely. States can, and should, make the necessary difference.
More from Bloomberg Commentary:
• You too can be a huge viral star on LinkedIn, Truong Phan.
• Apollo Ventures Where Amazon Fears to Tread: Andy Mukherjee
• Microsoft deal for trust buyers: Chris Hughes is a tough target.
(1) Anton Van Sventer, a lobbyist for the State Privacy and Security Coalition, is cited in the minutes as having helped pass the bill.
(2) California’s privacy law was originally passed in 2018, but after a ballot initiative, the legislature prevented it from being rolled back.
This column does not necessarily reflect the views of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
Parmy Olsen is a Bloomberg opinion columnist covering technology. A former reporter for the Wall Street Journal and Forbes, she is the author of “We Are Anonymous.”
More stories like this can be found at bloomberg.com/opinion
[ad_2]
Source link
