The bill would make criminal offenses by individuals punishable by up to 15 years in prison. Thats up from four years under the existing law. Its also more time than the current federal maximum sentence of 10 years. Corporations could be fined up to $100 million, up from the current maximum New York state penalty of $1 million. The proposed changes would also allow class action lawsuits, which could lead to an increase in private antitrust litigation.

This proposed legislation comes just after federal lawmakers grilled Apple, Facebook, Amazon and Google over their business practices as part of a federal antitrust investigation. Apple and Google are under investigation in the EU, and New York and California are reportedly helping the Federal Trade Commission investigate Amazon. Apple and Amazon are under investigation in Italy, as well.

While there seems to be growing concern about the concentrated power Big Tech companies have, dont expect New Yorks bill to bring about immediate change. Most likely, the Twenty-First Century Anti-Trust Act will be discussed when New Yorks senate returns in August. Even if it is passed eventually, a vote probably wont happen until next year.

Excerpt from:

New York State targets big tech with tougher antitrust bill - Engadget

TOPLINE

Congresss grilling of top Silicon Valley CEOs Wednesday on antitrust issues reflects the American publics broad distrust of big tech companies increasing powerbut polling released throughout 2020 shows that while Americans may be wary of big tech, theyre more conflicted when it comes to what action the government should take in response.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg testifies before the House Financial Services Committee on October 23, ... [+] 2019. (Photo by Aurora Samperio/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

72% of U.S. adults believe big tech companies have too much power and influence in politics, per a Pew Research survey conducted in June, while an Accountable Tech/GQR Research poll in July found 85% of respondents believe they have too much power in general.

A Morning Consult poll released in January found that 65% believe tech companies benefits to users arent worth the industrys becoming more powerful at the expense of smaller companiesbut a majority of those respondents still enjoy big tech products, using major social media and search tools and predominantly shopping online.

Americans who distrust big tech dont necessarily support government action: 69.8% of respondents to a July poll by the Center for Growth and Opportunity/YouGov said they somewhat or completely agree that tech companies are too big, but only 44.4% agree the government should break them up.

A Knight Foundation/Gallup poll conducted in December and released in March found 50% support government intervention to break up tech companies, while 49% oppose, and the Pew survey found only 47% support more government tech regulationdown from 51% in 2018.

88% of Knight/Gallup respondents said they do not trust social media platforms to make the right decisions about what users can post, but 55% still said the companies should be making those decisions anyway, rather than the government.

A July Morning Consult poll found only 46% of Americans trust Congress to best regulate big tech companies, as compared with 57% who trust the courts, 53% trusting federal agencies and 34% who trust the president.

A national survey by The Verge released in March found that 51% believe Google and YouTube should be broken up into two different companiesbut 66% dont have a problem with Facebook owning Instagram and WhatsApp.

CEOs of worlds most powerful tech companies on Wednesday defended themselves against lawmaker accusations that their companies have too much power and stifle smaller businesses, claiming that their practices are instead part of a thriving competitive economy and that their size is essential to their value. Just like the world needs small companies, it also needs large ones, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos argued in his opening statement to the House antitrust subcommittee, while Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said Facebooks large size is an asset to its work to keep people safe on our platform, and to make sure were investing to fix our issues and get ahead of new risks.

Zuckerberg and Bezos, along with Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai and Apple CEO Tim Cook, appeared before the House antitrust subcommittee Wednesday, amid widespread scrutiny into the tech giants alleged anticompetitive practices. The companies are also facing antitrust investigations from the Department of Justice, Federal Trade Commission, state attorneys general and the European Union. The antitrust struggles come amid broader distrust of big tech companies and their role in the coronavirus pandemic, racial justice protests and impending November election, as companies have struggled to respond to growing misinformation and address hate speech and extremist groups on their platforms.

Though Americans are increasingly suspicious of big tech companies, polls show that the coronavirus pandemic may be improving their standing in the eyes of Americans. A Harris poll released in April found that 38% of respondents view of the tech industry had become more positive over the course of the pandemic, while an April report by the National Research Group found a full 88% of Americans say the pandemic has given them a greater appreciation for technologys positive impact.

Mark Zuckerberg Is Even Less Popular Than Donald Trump, Poll Finds (Forbes)

The Verge Tech Survey 2020 (The Verge)

Techlash? America's Growing Concern With Major Technology Companies (Knight Foundation)

Most People Dont Like Giving Big Tech More Power, but They Rely on Its Services (Morning Consult)

Most Americans say social media companies have too much power, influence in politics (Pew Research Center)

See the rest here:

As Tech Giants Face Congress, Heres What Americans Actually Think Of Big Tech - Forbes

In his opening statements, the chairman of Wednesdays historic tech hearing argued that regulating techs most dominant players is vital in the midst of the ongoing pandemic that has driven even more of American life online.

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, these corporations already stood out as titans in our economy, House Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee Chair David Cicilline said. In the wake of COVID-19, however, they are likely to emerge stronger and more powerful than ever before.

The argument that tech stands to benefit from the COVID-19 crisis is a smart one and a timely attack thats difficult to dispute. While many major companies in other industries are struggling, grappling with layoffs or filing for bankruptcy, many of techs largest companies stand to emerge from the economic storm largely unscathed if not better off.

In his own opening remarks, ranking member Jim Sensenbrenner also argued that because Americans are relying more on online companies than ever before, techs power must be examined in light of the pandemic.

That responsibility comes with increased scrutiny of your dominance in the market, Sensenbrenner said.

Its not the first warning about tech companies amassing more power in the throes of the coronavirus crisis. A handful of members of Congress have called attention to mergers planned during the pandemic, citing concerns about adequate scrutiny for deals that could make techs already huge companies even larger and more dominant.

In April, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) proposed the Pandemic Anti-Monopoly Act, which would freeze mergers during the crisis, calling out big tech specifically. The LEAST we should do is halt big mergers during COVID to slow the consolidation of sectors, Ocasio-Cortez said.

Cicilline also previously called for a freeze on mega-mergers and pushed for such a ban to be included in the economic stimulus package passed by Congress.

As hard as it is to believe, it is possible that our economy will emerge from this crisis even more concentrated and consolidated than before, Cicilline said. As American families shift more of their work, shopping and communication online, these giants stand to profit.

See original here:

Lawmakers argue that big tech stands to benefit from the pandemic and must be regulated - TechCrunch

He hit No. 1 on Institutional Investor's all-star analyst list for software 17 times in a row.

Now as an investment banker, Rick Sherlund is a tech power player who believes the group's record run is in the early innings.

During Tuesday's exclusive interview on CNBC"s "Trading Nation," he delivered a bullish case for tech, emphasizing demand for cutting-edge software as the U.S. battles the fallout from the coronavirus pandemic.

"Software is not only eating the world, it's leading the market higher," said the Bank of America Merrill Lynch vice chairman of technology investment banking. "Covid has accelerated the momentum and the urgency behind digital transformation."

Big Tech has been crushing records on Wall Street. On Tuesday, the tech-heavy Nasdaq closed at its 30th all-time high so far this year. It's now up almost 22% in 2020, while the broader S&P 500has risen 2%.

Plus,the Nasdaq has soared 65% since the March 23 low.

"The sector offers phenomenal growth, and right now, the Street is valuing that growth because you can't find growth elsewhere," Sherlund said.

He suggests the record run is justified based on long-term potential.

"Software used to be the tail of the dog, and now it's become the head of the dog," he said. "People use this to not only work at home, but shop at home, to learn at home, to play, to entertain at home [and] to socialize. So, software is really becoming the business."

He also downplays comparisons with the 2000 tech bubble.

"We are nowhere near those kinds of levels, and we have good business models now," said Sherlund. "I took a look recently at a number of dot-com names where they were valued back then and where they are today. We are nowhere near those kinds of valuation levels."

However, Sherlund acknowledges the rally could see some temporary burnout due to the nature of the economic recovery.

"It's likely to be led by the cyclical sectors that have lagged behind, and that's going to require a vaccine," he added. "But the growth rates that we see in the sector are just getting started."

According to Sherlund, the softness should be temporary, and tech IPOs will heat up in 2021.

"We are seeing a new generation of technology emerging over the horizon, a new generation of visionary leaders. It's well funded and guided by experienced VC board members." said Sherlund. "There's an awful lot to be done in the space."

He expects innovation to overshadow risks including the presidential election and U.S.-China trade tensions.

"Companies are probably going to go out in an earlier stage," Sherlund said. "I have companies now that are doing about $100 million [in revenues] saying 'can we hit the window next year?'"

Disclaimer

See the article here:

Tech power player Rick Sherlund: 'Software is not only eating the world, it's leading the market higher' - CNBC

SUBSCRIBE TO THE FEDERALIST RADIO HOUR HERE.

On this episode of The Federalist Radio Hour, Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) joined host Ben Domenech to discuss the danger of big tech censorship for the American public.Rep. Bucks new book, Capitol Freedom: Restoring American Greatness, is out now.

Many Republicans argue all private companies ought to remain unfettered by government intervention, but Buck argues that big tech companies such as Google dont use the extreme level of power they wield over free speech fairly. He debunked the idea that theres no relationship between privacy and size, saying that if these companies didnt have a monopoly on free speech, they couldnt get away with their actions.

There are 100 if not thousands of news sources that we can get information from and as we receive that information were able to filter it understanding the source. Thats not true when you go to google and you search for a particular item, the congressman said. Youre gonna find Don Jr. on page 23 of your Google search.

Listen Here:

Allison Schuster is an intern at The Federalist and is also a rising senior at Hillsdale College working toward a degree in politics and journalism. Follow her on Twitter @AllisonShoeStor.

Read more:

Rep. Ken Buck On Big Spending, Big Tech, And Progressive Attacks On Personal Freedom - The Federalist

The heads of Facebook, Apple, Google and Amazon appeared before angry lawmakers Wednesday as Congress prepares to weigh new anti-monopoly regulations, including possibly breaking them up. Facebooks Mark Zuckerberg turned to a familiar argument, saying that breaking up the big tech companies would hurt U.S. competitiveness against China in developing new technologies and Americas ability to curb Chinese influence globally.

So are U.S. tech giants an asset to the U.S. in its competition with China or a hindrance?

Google CEO Sundar Pichai answered several questions about his companys loyalty to the United States by recounting its expanding work with the Defense Department. Ever more, he attempted to cast Google as an engine of U.S. innovation.

Our engineers are helping America remain a global leader in emerging technologies like artificial intelligence, self driving cars and quantum computing, he said.

Zuckerberg contrasted between what he described as Facebooks American values and ideas with those of China. China is building its own version of the internet focused on very different ideas, and they are exporting their vision to other countries, he said in his prepared testimony.

He is not alone in this view. Daniel Castro, director of the Center for Data Innovation at the libertarian-leaning Internet Technology and Innovation Foundation, told Defense One, Breaking up U.S. tech firms would undercut American innovation. At a time when Chinese companies are growing more dominant in the global digital economy, U.S. policymakers should not hamstring successful tech companies.

Eric Schmidt, Googles former CEO who now chairs the Defense Innovation Board, has made similar statements, telling the Telegraph in May, Chinese companies are growing faster, they have higher valuations, and they have more users than their non-Chinese counterparts...Its very important to understand that there is a global competition around technology innovation, and China is a significant player and likely to remain so.

But not everyone agrees. David Segal, co-founder of the left-leaning group Demand Progress, took a categorically different view, telling Defense One, Far from stifling innovation, antitrust enforcement is necessary in order to enable it. He pointed to what he described as kill zones or areas of technology development that are too close to the products that the giants produce to attract venture capital.

Legal scholar Ganesh Sitaraman argues that conflating big tech with American innovation is part of the problem. Big tech, he says, is too intricately intertwined with China to be purely American.

The claim that big American tech companies are somehow an alternative to Chinese dominanceor, in the more extreme form, that they are competing with China on behalf of the United Statesis largely backwards he argues, in a January article for the Knight First Amendment Institute. Big techs integration with China thus supports the rise and export of digital authoritarianism; deepens economic dependence that can be used as leverage against the United States in future geopolitical moments; forces companies to self-censor and contort their preferences to serve Chinese censors and officials.

Lawmakers of both parties love to hate on big tech and its poster-child representatives, like those summoned to Wednesdays hearing. Conservatives routinely claim that Google is censoring their speech, a line they returned to repeatedly on Wednesday. Liberals argue that Facebook doesnt do a good enough job of calling out misinformation, especially if it might anger conservatives. Some observers worry that all of those resentments get in the way of a functional discussion about whether or not the companies are too big.

Im not confident that in the current environment you would see constructive solutions put forward that are not based on political retaliation, rather than a principled approach, said Mieke Eoyang, vice president for national security at think tank Third Way.

There is ample reason for lawmakers to be suspicious of how the big tech interacts with the Chinese government. A May report from London-based research firm Top10VPN shows that Amazon provides web services to Chinese companies on a Commerce Department sanctioned Entity list. Google has an AI research effort in China.

Facebook, which is effectively banned in the country, is arguably the least reliant on the Chinese market. Hong Kong-based TikTok is a major competitor to Facebook-owned Instagram. But that doesnt tell the whole story. Facebook is such a large gamer marketplace, it still makes money off of China from companies like Tencent that need Facebook's users to play their games.

From the Pentagons perspective, American tech giants do offer a unique technological resource, one that does produce innovation and that arguably would not exist if they were broken up. Consider the Pentagons JEDI cloud program. Smaller cloud providers complained that the programs requirements were tilted toward Amazon, the only company that many believed could meet them. Part of the reason that the JEDI contract came down to a race between Microsoft and Amazon (after Google pulled out) is because those are the companies with the largest cloud offerings, able to provide the highest level of security. It was only after visiting them that former Defense Secretary James Mattis realized that what Americans private big tech firms were doing with cloud computing was decades ahead of what the government was doing with smaller, patchwork capabilities. He also realized that cloud computing at enterprise scale was essential to real innovation in AI.

The size of that cloud capability and the amount of data available plays a big role in a companys ability to develop next-generation AI products. Googles compute power, and access to a massive dataset of online video footage via YouTube, was vital to the development of deep learning technologies. Facebooks compute power and its access to billions of biometric facial records pictures of faces allowed it to createunique facial recognition technology to rival the human brain.

These companies developed the worlds largest compute capabilities in order to become the worlds largest companies. Busting them up could eliminate something that doesnt exist anywhere else and actually is a driver for innovation, one that arguably requires more regulation and oversight but also that cant be replicated at a smaller scale.

The unique resource of big tech firms is what Congress is consideringin the context of these companies overall effects on the market, individuals, and tangled U.S. relations with China. How to do that? The answer is carefully and case by case. While Republicans and Democrats love to vilify big tech, these companies are very different from one another, even if they do have anti-competitive practices.

I think these companies are all differently situated based on their business models. So when it comes to discussions around breaking them up, the implications are all different, said Eoyang, as are the unintended consequences of doing so.

Read this article:

Busting Up Big Tech is Popular, But Here's what the US May Lose - Defense One

Rep. Ken Buck, R-Colo., says despite the big tech CEOs claiming they don't censor conservative voices online, he continues to see liberal viewpoints promoted on their sites and he believes that impacts elections.

Its morning in America and Silicon Valleys time of reckoning has come.

For years, Google, Amazon, Facebook, and Apple have benefited from Americas free-market system to grow into four of the biggest power players in the global economy.

REP. KEN BUCK CALLS OUT GOOGLE'S CHINA CONNECTIONS FOLLOWING BIG TECH CEO HEARING ON CAPITOL HILL

These companies have connected people to information and products in a way that previous generations could have only imaginedbut Big Techs darlings have also used their monopolistic advantage to corner the market and stifle competition.

Its time they faced the music.

Congress cant sit idly by as Big Tech uses its outsized influence to unfairly shut companies out of the marketplace, cozies up to communist China, and silences conservative voices.

Let me be clear big is not necessarily bad. In fact, big is often a force for good.

However, Congress cant sit idly by as Big Tech uses its outsized influence to unfairly shut companies out of the marketplace, cozies up to communist China, and silences conservative voices.

President Trump also jumped into the fray, tweeting that Congress needs to bring fairness to Big Tech.

After a year of investigating Big Techs anti-competitive practices, I agree with President Trump.

HAWLEY BLASTS BIG TECH FOR 'CENSORING' CHRISTIAN WORSHIP LEADER

The House Judiciary Committees antitrust subcommitteehas reviewed more than 1.3 million documents and heard from hundreds of small and medium-sized businesses that have been negatively impacted by Big Techs harmful business practices.

After reviewing all this evidence, its clear that we cant allow the status quo to continue.

In fact, two examples from the subcommittees field hearing in Boulder, Coloradothis January, show just how far Big Tech will go to maintain their dominance.

TWITTER LIMITS DONALD TRUMP JR'S ACCOUNT FEATURES AFTER HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE TWEET

The CEO and inventor of PopSockets, the company that makes those useful devices to help you grip your phone, told the subcommittee how Amazon allowed thousands of counterfeit products to appear alongside PopSockets product and failed to remedy these problems until the company agreed to a nearly $2 million marketing deal with Amazon.

Genius Media Group Inc., a company specializing in detecting song lyrics, also told the subcommittee how it caught Google stealing its product red-handed.

BIG TECH CEOS DIVIDED ON CHINA TECHNOLOGY THEFT

In fact, when Genius suspected this corporate theft was occurring, the company placed a digital watermark into its lyrics algorithm that spelled out red-handed in Morse Code.

When Googles lyric boxes contained the watermark in 43 percent of tested songs, it proved that the search behemoth was stealing what it couldnt or didnt want to produce itself.

I raised these examples during Wednesdays House Judiciary antitrust subcommittee hearing to help the American people understand the harm these tech giants are inflicting on startup businesses.

These brazen and anti-competitive moves were only possible because Big Tech holds a monopolistic advantage in the marketplace. Theres no other way an American company could get away with a move straight from the Chinese Communist Partys corporate espionage playbook.

GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE

These arent the only values some of Silicon Valleys biggest players share with China though the same communist nation that imprisons Uighur Muslims, exploits slave labor, suppresses the freedom of Hong Kongs residents, and lied to the world about COVID-19.

The CEOs answers were telling they refused to distance themselves from China in an effort to stay in President Xi Jinpings good graces.

It was like pulling teeth to get all four CEOs to state on the record that their companies do not and will never use slave labor to manufacture or sell their products.

This shouldnt even be a question for companies that claim they stand for freedom and equality.

The United States is the greatest country on Earth because we have embraced capitalism as an instrument for freedom.

The American dream is built squarely upon the central tenet of capitalism freedom.

Unfortunately, Big Tech has abused that freedom and harmed countless Americans in the process.

Its clear that Congress needs to reexamine how it treats Silicon Valley to ensure these companies can no longer stifle competition and harm the next generation of American greatness.

Republican Ken Buck represents Colorado's 4th Congressional District in the U.S. House of Representatives. Heis a member of the House Judiciary Committee and theHouse Foreign Affairs Committee.

READ MORE ON FOX BUSINESS BY CLICKING HERE

See more here:

Apple, Google, Facebook, Amazon and the Big Tech reckoning: Rep. Ken Buck - Fox Business

Following last week's waterfall of quarterly tech reports, the earnings season continues this week with blue chips leading the way, one being Walt Disney Co(NYSE: DIS) reporting later today. But we also see the earnings of pioneers such as Roku Inc(NASDAQ: ROKU), Nikola (NASDAQ: NKLA) and newly public companies such as Virgin Galactic (NYSE: SPCE), Uber Technologies Inc.(NYSE: UBER) and Beyond Meat (NASDAQ: BYND).

Nikola Corporation, the maker of battery-electric and hydrogen powered vehicles will report its first quarter since its June listing. Despite not having sold a single vehicle yet, its company's market capitalization already exceeded $10.8 billion last Friday.

The Clorox Company (NYSE: CLX) reported Monday and posted the highest sales growth the company has seen in its modern history. With a 24% increase in organic sales last quarter and a 10% increase in organic sales in its latest fiscal year, it followed its peer personal care companies including Kimberly-Clark Corporation (NYSE: KMB), Colgate-Palmolive (NYSE: CL) and The Procter & Gamble Company (NYSE: PG) that already reported strong results as home goods and personal health-care products are still enjoying a high level of demand.

Troubled travel companies crushed by the pandemic are also set to report, including Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings (NYSE: NCLH) and Wynn Resorts Limited (NASDAQ: WYNN). Just like airlines, these companies struggled to readjust their operations and slash costs as quickly as possible to be able to survive the severe reduction in demand. Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc (NYSE: HLT) and TripAdvisor Inc (NASDAQ: TRIP) are also set for a dismal performance as quarantine and travel restrictions are likely to have significantly impacted their top lines.

Pharmaceutical companies rank highly on our list these days and a few important players are also set to report this week. Regeneron Pharmaceutical (NASDAQ: REGN) just revealed it signed a $450 million contract with the U.S. government for its anti-coronavirus cocktail.Mylan Inc (NASDAQ: MYL) is a stock with a strong history of beating estimates and as it recently rolled out the branding for its giant generics combo that is being developed with Pfizer Inc (NYSE: PFE), it seems well-positioned to continue that trend. Although their merger is not official yet, it was approved by its shareholders on June 30th. Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (NYSE: BMY), a biopharmaceutical giant, is expected to report a year-over-year increase in earnings on higher revenues for its quarter that ended in June.

On Thursday, we also have some very interesting players to look forward to such as Datadog Inc (NASDAQ: DDOG). For the quarter, the company expects to report a break-even at the very least, with revenues in the range between $134 million and $136 million. Management warned that coronavirus-led disruptions are expected to have hurt net retention rate and new customer additions as well as caused delays in completing deals. But Datadog's potential remains intact in any scenario. Moreover, its growing international presence is likely to have benefited its performance during the quarter.

We are far from being out of the woods, but each week we are getting closer to leaving the pandemic and the resulting economic crisis behind us. This week will also provide us with significant insights on how to live in a COVID-19 reality that has turned our world upside down.

This article is not a press release and is contributed by a verified independent journalist for IAMNewswire. It should not be construed as investment advice at any time please read the full disclosure. IAM Newswire does not hold any position in the mentioned companies. Press Releases If you are looking for full Press release distribution contact: press@iamnewswire.com Contributors IAM Newswire accepts pitches. If you're interested in becoming an IAM journalist contact: contributors@iamnewswire.com

The post Last Week Was About Big Tech, This Week Is About Bluechips appeared first on IAM Newswire.

Photo by Carlos Muza on Unsplash

Read the original post:

Move Over Big Tech; This Week Is All About Blue Chips - Benzinga

WASHINGTON (AP) Congressional lawmakers finally got a chance to grill the CEOs of Big Tech over their dominance and allegations of monopolistic practices that stifle competition. But its unclear how much they advanced their goal of bringing some of the worlds largest companies to heel.

Invective flew Wednesday as legislators questioned Facebooks Mark Zuckerberg, Amazons Jeff Bezos, Googles Sundar Pichai and Apples Tim Cook at a hearing of the House Judiciary subcommittee on antitrust. For the last year, that panel has probed the business practices of the Silicon Valley giants with an eye to determining if they need to be regulated more heavily or even broken up.

In nearly five hours of testimony and questioning, however, there were few startling revelations or striking confrontations. While the executives faced hostile questioning and frequent interruptions from lawmakers of both parties, little seemed to land more than glancing blows.

The CEOs testified via video to lawmakers, at times appearing together on the committee room display as tiny individual figures in a mostly empty array of squares. Most committee members were seated, masks on, in the hearing room in Washington.

The execs provided lots of data purporting to show how much competition they face and how valuable their innovation and essential services are to consumers. But they sometimes struggled to answer pointed questions about their business practices. They also confronted a range of other concerns about alleged political bias, their effect on U.S. democracy and their role in China.

The panels chairman, Rep. David Cicilline, a Rhode Island Democrat, said each platform controlled by Facebook, Amazon, Google and Apple is a bottleneck for a key channel of distribution.

Whether they control access to information or to a marketplace, these platforms have the incentive and ability to exploit this power, he said. They can charge exorbitant fees, impose oppressive contracts, and extract valuable data from the people and businesses that rely on them.

Simply put: They have too much power.

The four CEOs command corporations whose products are woven into the fabric of everyday life, with millions or even billions of customers, and a combined market value greater than the entire German economy. One of them, Bezos, is the worlds richest individual; Zuckerberg is the fourth-ranked billionaire.

And they had a few rough moments. Pichai and Zuckerberg appeared discomfited when pressed about unsavory aspects of their companies businesses but got respites when their inquisitors ran out of time. Bezos also acknowledged that alleged misdeeds at Amazon such as reports that the company has used data generated by independent sellers on its platform to compete against them would be unacceptable if proved to be true.

Outside observers were able to draw radically different conclusions from the event. Richard Hamilton Jr., a former Justice Department antitrust lawyer, said that everyone on the committee seemed to be in agreement on the need for tougher regulation of all four companies an ominous sign, he said. But Stephen Beck, CEO of the management consulting firm cg42, said the tech companies and their brands emerged relatively unscathed.

In particular, he said, Cook was particularly polished and well prepared, enabling the Apple CEO to put on what Beck called a master class in terms of how to handle these situations. Cook drew less attention from lawmakers than did the other CEOs after arguing that Apple isnt dominant in any of its markets.

Among the toughest questions for Google and Amazon involved accusations that they used their dominant platforms to scoop up data about competitors in a way that gave them an unfair advantage.

Bezos, who was appearing before Congress for the first time, said he couldnt guarantee that the company had not accessed seller data to make competing products, an allegation that the company and its executives have previously denied.

We have a policy against using seller specific data to aid our private label business, Bezos said in a response to a question from Rep. Pramila Jayapal, a Washington Democrat. But I cant guarantee to you that that policy hasnt been violated.

Pichai deployed an old Washington trick appealing to the specific interests of legislators. In his opening remarks, he touted Googles value to mom-and-pop businesses in Bristol, Rhode Island, and Pewaukee, Wisconsin, which just happen to be located in the home districts of Cicilline and Rep. James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin, the panels senior Republican.

But the Google executive struggled as Cicilline accused the company of leveraging its dominant search engine to steal ideas and information from other websites and manipulating its results to drive people to its own digital services to boost its profits.

Pichai repeatedly deflected Cicillines attacks by asserting that Google tries to provide the most helpful and relevant information to the hundreds of millions of people who use its search engine each day in an effort to keep them coming back instead of defecting to a rival service, such as Microsofts Bing.

As Democrats largely focused on market competition, several Republicans aired longstanding grievances, claiming the tech companies are censoring conservative voices and questioning their business activities in China. Big Tech is out to get conservatives, insisted Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio.

In its bipartisan investigation, the Judiciary subcommittee collected testimony from mid-level executives of the four firms, competitors and legal experts, and pored over more than a million internal documents from the companies. A key question: whether existing competition policies and century-old antitrust laws are adequate for overseeing the tech giants, or if new legislation and enforcement funding are needed.

Cicilline has called the four companies monopolies, although he says breaking them up should be a last resort. While forced breakups may appear unlikely, the wide scrutiny of Big Tech points toward possible new restrictions on its power.

The companies face legal and political offensives on multiplying fronts, from Congress, the Trump administration, federal and state regulators and European watchdogs. The Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission have been investigating the four companies practices.

___

Liedtke reported from San Ramon, California, and OBrien from Providence, Rhode Island. AP Business Writer Joseph Pisani in New York contributed to this report.

___

Follow Gordon on Twitter at https://www.twitter.com/mgordonap.

Here is the original post:

Lawmakers grill 4 Big Tech CEOs but don't land many blows - The Associated Press

When the heads of four of the biggest tech companies lined up for a WebEx grilling from members of the U.S. House on Wednesday, there was something decidedly retro about the whole affair. Its as if Amazon is this centurys Standard Oil a behemoth that is integral to American life yet posing very real threats incumbent in a monopoly. That risk has been out there for some time, but the coronavirus pandemic has forced lawmakers to pay attention to how quickly these companies are changing Americans day-to-day lives and the inherent threat that carries.

Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google chiefs were nominally visiting with a House antitrust subcommittee to answer questions about free-market competition and consumer privacy that have been simmering for years. In reality, they were defending their very right to exist as the enormous brokers of how Americans shop for goods and ideas alike. Tech companies critics have argued that they are too large to stay in their current form and need to be broken up so as not to amass too much power. Their defenders say theyre (mostly) free services and compete with each other fiercely to provide the best products and experiences.

Make sense of what matters in Washington. Sign up for the daily D.C. Brief newsletter.

Congress has its own questions to answer in navigating whether these companies should be allowed to continue doing business as usual. Do lawmakers want to shut off the spigot of easy access to goods and ideas? Congress has been wary of stepping in to check these massive companies for good reason. One, theyre economic powerhouses that provide a steady stream of tax revenue. (Amazon, of course, is the exception to this, given its relatively low levels of profit and correspondingly low tax burden.) Two, the giants have armies of lobbyists ready to ding lawmakers who step out of line and to reward those who support their clients. And three, if a 2018 hearing with many of these same faces is any indicator, its clear that many of these lawmakers dont actually understand what these companies do.

But the coronavirus pandemic has laid bare the depth of these companies influence. Amazon now handles half of the entire e-commerce marketplace. The iPhone is ubiquitous and Apples app platform has a choke-hold over downloads, including e-health tracking systems. Facebook has become Americas national newspaper, while lacking any editorial standards. And Google is so common that its company has become a verb for most people. Therein lies a force too powerful to continue to lurk in the shadows unquestioned.

Its easy to treat todays hearing as an academic exercise about how much power is too much. But consider your family members social media feeds. It turns out that a quarter of Americans currently believe, to some degree, the false conspiracy theory that powerful people planned and executed the coronavirus pandemic. Pew Research Center polling out last week shows 20% of Americans think its probably true that powerful interests were behind the outbreak, and 5% who say its definitely true. Among Republicans, a full third buy the conspiracy theory. But Black and Hispanic voters, who are overwhelmingly against President Donald Trump, also buy this theory more than their white or Asian neighbors.

At some point, distrust of respected institutions like the Centers for Disease Control left the fringe and became a real public health threat. This reality exists in large part because social media platforms like Facebook allow disinformation to hum along without a credible antidote. Apple decides what apps you can use to check your own health and information. Amazon decides which products including books and the ideas packed between the covers are available and at what costs to publishers and to consumers. And Google decides what answers appear at the top of your searches. At a moment of twin health and economic crises, Congress had little option but to haul these execs in to justify their existence. A quick remedy, though, is out-of-stock on Amazon.

A version of this article first appeared in The DC Brief, TIMEs politics newsletter. Sign up here to get stories like this sent to your inbox every weekday.

For your security, we've sent a confirmation email to the address you entered. Click the link to confirm your subscription and begin receiving our newsletters. If you don't get the confirmation within 10 minutes, please check your spam folder.

Write to Philip Elliott at philip.elliott@time.com.

Follow this link:

Big Tech Faces an Overdue Grilling From Congress - TIME

Since the age of five I've enjoyed peeing outdoors. Forty years later, peeing has become something I must do several dozen times a day, and I don't like the outdoors. But life mimics math, and the product of two negatives is a positive. More math: Grilled cheese or tomato soup as individuals I find boring. But together, they're my favorite thing at the Crosby Hotel bar. God, I miss eating at bars alone, with strangers around me.

I'm staying alone in Montauk at a friend's house while he's in Portugal (something about taxes and quality of life). After my morning coffee and power shake, it's time to water the plants. Look, it's a bayberry plant, and there's a crape myrtle. I hear something and startle. I just came from Montana, where everyone tells you to be mindful of bears. My fear escalates to DEFCON 2 when I see not a bear, but five men standing in the backyard witnessing my divertissement. Four of them are wearing cargo shorts and could be quadruplets. The fifth is in a suit. The only guy that wears a suit on 92-degree Saturday morning is a real estate broker. Now I remember, the broker is showing the house this morning.

They act like my Vizsla when she's done something wrong: freeze in their tracks and avoid eye contact. Who would blame them.

The smartest and most noble people in the world according to the IRS, DC, and CNBC are really, really rich people who made their money in tech. The Jesus Christs of our generation. More than that innovators. So, taking my cues from our role models, I turn to the five men and say:

"We live in a great country. I was raised by a single mother who lived and died a secretary."

This week, the CEOs of the largest tech firms were all under consensual hallucination that an emotional opening statement absolves you of monopoly abuse. Bezos must have thought he was being filmed for his A&E biography. Pregnant teen mom, immigrant father, we get it, you were once poor.

Jesus (i.e., Elon), make them stop.

Scott Galloway

Struck me right away that the GOP seemed to be more prone to questions about a lack of patriotism when questioning the one brown guy, Pichai. The wordAmerican popped up 15 times in questions to Sundar Pichai, a US citizen born in Madurai, India. To Zuckerberg, whose platform has wreaked considerable damage on American elections, American politics, and American news, the word was only used nine times. Representatives on the panel felt the need to remind the witness what country we live in just once when questioning the guys born in Albuquerque, New Mexico, and Mobile, Alabama.

For the first two hours the witness who was subjected to the toughest grilling was Jack Dorsey. Of course, Mr. Dorsey wasn't there. Any problem regarding the rage machine that is Twitter has nothing to do with antitrust. Forcing the microblogging platform to divest Kanye's account, and let it trade on the NASDAQ, doesn't make much sense.

Or does it?

Many of the GOP panelists came to the wrong hearing. Twitter is worth $29 billion; the others are worth an average $1.23 trillion. I know, market cap isn't a signal of monopoly behavior that warrants antitrust. But here's the thing it is. To be fair, if Jack had testified, we'd only really understand the respective scale of the problem if Jack were 2 inches tall and weighed 4 pounds. Pretty sure the last sentence is a hate crime.

Rep. Jayapal stood out as the most effective examiner on the committee. Her questioning of Bezos around third-party seller data was pointed and effective, as well as her grilling Zuckerberg over copying apps. Politicians are sometimes overmatched in these hearings, but Rep. Jayapal demonstrated she was more than talented enough to have been in the opposite seat, testifying in front of Congress about the anticompetitive practices of her firm but instead decided to serve her country.

The Samurais of the world's greatest deliberative bodies increasingly have one thing in common: pantsuits. Reps Jayapal, Porter, Ocasio-Cortez, and Senator Warren have created a super-featherweight class whose fists of preparation and faculty make Floyd Mayweather uneasy. They will likely play a central role in the breakup of the world's most powerful firms. However, this pales in comparison to another contribution there are likely millions of young women who watch them and think, "Why not me?"

When they weren't questioning Pichai's patriotism, most of the Republicans on the committee spent their time complaining about alleged bias against conservatives, rather than addressing the actual subject of the hearing: antitrust. Were they just playing to the millions who watch Fox News? That's half right. They are playing to one person who watches Fox News. It's clear most Republicans still fear Trump and are desperate to please him. The persecution complex plays well, especially on Fox.

Scott Galloway

There is no conservative bias on Facebook. There is a "bias" (open community guidelines) against spreading dangerous health information. It's just that the two (conservative sources and misinformation) are often one and the same. But a "conservative bias" might as well mean, "the best place to get your conservative news, conservative opinion, and conservative conspiracy theories fed to you in a constant drip feed of enragement." In May, a study found that most of the top news publishers by interactions lean right (as they have for years). The top ten political publishers with highest engagement are: Ben Shapiro, Breitbart, NowThis, The Hill, The Western Journal, The Young Turks, The Blaze, IJR, Washington Examiner, and CNN Politics.

Scott Galloway

Two "oops I f----d up and told the truth, corrections coming":

David Cicilline, chairman of the committee, claims he's from the first district of Rhode Island. He's not fooling us. He's clearly from Ronkonkoma and he's a Michael, not a David. Anyway, Chairman Cicilline comes across both very smart and as someone who, when you order a frozen mai tai from a lobster stand in Westhampton, would lean over and recommend an extra rum floater. And he'd be right.

Rep. Cicilline's opening statement gave me hope: "This investigation has been bipartisan from the start As my colleague Congressman Ken Buck recently commented, and I quote, 'This is the most bipartisan effort that I've been involved with in five and a half years of Congress.'" His rhetoric was also powerful: "Our founders did not bow before a king, and we should not bow before the emperors of the online economy."

We should also stop thinking of the breakup of big tech as punishment for doing something wrong, or that they're bad people. We break companies up to restore competition to markets, which is the gangster app for a growing economy that demands better behavior. As a result, there are more options from other players who must then behave better.

So, I've decided to run for the Democratic nomination to challenge Senator Rubio in 2022. I've already drafted my closing remarks for a similar upcoming Senate panel:

"Mr. Cook, you are an inspiration and reek of grace. Mr. Pichai, you are the best of America, an exceptional young immigrant who creates greatness in the agency of others. Mr. Bezos, you are just so damn rich, and even more jacked we should roll. And Mr. Zuckerberg, you are an awful person, but a brilliant business mind. Your successes are nothing short of remarkable. It must be tremendously rewarding to know your grit, intellect, and vision took your firms to heights that made it difficult not to abuse your positions of power. Our separation of your assets will unlock tremendous value for tens, if not hundreds, of millions of people. Well done, and thank you."

This may be (and I've said this before) the beginning of the end of big tech. However, it could also be a new beginning for the country, entrepreneurs, and markets. I find it all quite exciting. It makes me want to venture outside.

READ MORE:Popular NYU professor Scott Galloway has a new course on business strategy anyone can sign up to take I took away MBA-like insights for way less money than going to business school

Read more from the original source:

SCOTT GALLOWAY: This may be the beginning of the end of Big Tech we shouldn't see it as a punishment, but a restoration of balance - Business Insider

Technology companies now make up around 20% of the state's overall economic impact.

SEATTLE As Congress investigates whether big tech companies are too big, Seattle continues to see fast growth as these companies expand.

Currently, tech companies make up 20.2% of Washington state's overall economy, according to a recent study by CompTIA.

In Seattle, the overall footprint among companies like Amazon, Apple, Google, and Facebook is expanding. Amazon's global headquarters is now more than 40 owned and leased buildings in Seattle.

When it comes to jobs, the impact is growing too.

Amazon currently employs around 50,000 people in the region. Apple, which is moving into two 12-story buildings on Dexter Avenue in Seattle, is planning to move in around 2,000 employees.

Google is putting the finishing touches on its new five-building campus along Mercer Street and is expected to provide around 4,500 jobs.

Facebook, which is also now growingwith five buildings in Seattle, has around 5,000 employees in the city.

But many feel that big tech growth can also do more harm than good.

"These four companies represent a private government that can overtake many countries in a way," said Hanson Hosein, co-director of the Communication Leadership master's program at the University of Washington. Hosein has been closely studying tech growth in Seattle for more than a decade.

"We're talking billions of people and trillions of dollars," he said. "That power is disproportionate, and the concern is very anti-democratic because they're not that accountable to us."

Read the rest here:

Big tech companies continue to expand in Seattle - KING5.com

DUBAI:On July 29, CEOs from the worlds biggest tech companies appeared before the US House Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial and Administrative Law. Amazons Jeff Bezos, Facebooks Mark Zuckerberg, Apples Tim Cook and Alphabet Inc.s Sundar Pichai spent hours facing questioning from lawmakers about anti-competitive monopolies.

There have been several concerns regarding the inclusion of all four companies due to their differences in business models, but subcommittee ChairDavid Cicilline addressed these by highlighting the commonalities between the companies: All are a bottleneck for a key channel of distribution; all use data and surveillance of other companies to buy, copy, or cut off potential competition; and all abuse their control over current technologies to extend their power.

Their ability to dictate terms, call the shots, upend entire sectors, and inspire fear represent the powers of a private government, said Cicilline.

Over a span of nearly six hours, lawmakers questioned the four CEOs on topics including Googles search practices, the filtering out of political viewpoints on a platform, Russian election interference, promoting racism and anti-Semitism and practices that could eliminate existing and potential competition.

Though it was Bezos first congressional testimony, he appeared the least fazed by the grilling. Cook drew fewer barbed questions than Bezos but handled them efficiently, while Zuckerberg took the most damage, stumbling a few times when confronted with internal emails. Pichai endured much heat from conservatives, and he looked the worse for it as he repeatedly told lawmakers he would be happy to look into various situations and get back to them.

Unfortunately, the Big Tech hearing was decidedly low-tech. Bezos escaped questioning for about 90 minutes in what may have been a tech issue and was caught reaching for what appeared to be a snack. Poor audio quality, flat-screen televisions switching off, and chief executives appearing together as thumbnails on a large screen all frustrated viewers and led to mockery of the virtual set-up on Twitter.

All of them indicated that they use their massive data advantages to peek into what their competitors or people who rely on their platforms are doing, said Gene Kimmelman, an adviser with the Washington-based nonprofit Public Knowledge. So, while they didnt really want to admit it, they couldnt deny it.

The hearing concluded with Cicilline saying: This hearing has made one fact clear to me: These companies, as they exist today, have monopoly power. Some need to be broken up, all need to be properly regulated and held accountable. We need to ensure the antitrust laws first written more than a century ago work in the digital age.

Read more here:

A recap of the Big Tech antitrust hearing - Arab News