Category Archives: Big Tech

Online safety: what young people really think about social media, big tech regulation and adults...  Moneycontrol

Read this article:

Online safety: what young people really think about social media, big tech regulation and adults... - Moneycontrol

Text size

No one knows which publicly traded companies will score by bringing commercial artificial intelligence products to market, but an analyst at MKM Partners believes he has already found some near-term winners: public cloud players such as Amazon Web Services.

Analyst Rohit Kulkarni wrote in a research note Tuesday that he has been deeply researching AI over the past month. Over the past few weeks, he said, he has also watched Teslas (ticker: TSLA) AI day demo video and tried Meta Platforms (META) Make-A-Video and Googles Phenaki. The latter two projects can generate videos from text.

We are quite convinced that we are on the cusp of accelerating Big Tech AI Wars, however, it is unclear who holds the early edge as far as commercial success is concerned, Kulkarni wrote. Moreover, we are quite certain aboutone thing: commercial rollout of AI apps requires significant storage and computing resources, thus public cloud vendors could benefit from a strong usage tailwind over the next several years.

Amazon Web Services, Microsoft (MSFT)s Azure, and Google Cloud Platform are among the leading cloud services providers.

Kulkarni has Buy ratings on Googles parent Alphabet (GOOGL), Amazon.com (AMZN), and Meta, with price targets of $140, $170, and $240, respectively. He believes AI innovations in the past 18 months have shifted from contextual search, chatbots, and auto-complete tech to AI-generated content.

All in, we think the advent of personalized AI content is a significant step for Internet, likely bigger than AI-driven content recommendations, he writes. Unlike TikTok, which pulls the best content for you, AI apps can now generate the best content for you, at a fairly minimal incremental cost.

He notes that such apps have high storage and computational requirements. For example, he thinks Metas investments in its AI ambitions are likely to have added between $3 billion and $5 billion to its capital spending for 2022.

Write to Connor Smith at connor.smith@barrons.com

Read the rest here:

The 'Big Tech AI Wars' Are Coming. Public Cloud Stocks Stand to Gain. - Barron's

Sen. Amy Klobuchar recently invoked David and Goliath when discussing her fight to pass antitrust legislation to rein in dominant tech firms. I have two lawyers. They have 2,800 lawyers and lobbyists, she said at this years Code Conference in September. But executives at those dominant tech firms would do well to remember that Goliath ultimately lost to David.

Whether or not Klobuchars legislation makes it to a vote this term, weve crossed a Rubicon. Whatever legitimate (or illegitimate) concerns may be raised about the precise wording of the bill, the fact is that Europe has already prohibited dominant tech platforms from thwarting competitors in search services, operating systems, app stores, online retail and numerous other digital markets.

It would be irresponsible for U.S. policymakers to sit on the sidelines and let others set the rulesa fact perhaps recognized by the 242 members of the House of Representatives who voted in favor of the Merger Filing Fee Modernization Act, designed to strengthen antitrust enforcement. While that bill did not single out big tech companies, it passed in spite of significant opposition from the likes of Google and Amazon, a sign that lawmakers are no longer afraid to move against the industrys wishes.

Read more:

Fighting New Antitrust Rules Is a Bad Move for Big Tech - The Information

Oct 13, 2022 11:28 2 min read (Updated: Oct 13, 2022 11:52)

Despite Meta announcing the removal of 600,000 posts during the official campaign ahead of Brazils first-round general elections, data analysis consulting firm Novelo Data has identified a string of misleading content published on major social platforms over the last two weeks, which Big Tech firms have failed to curb.

In the three days after the first-round vote on October 2, Novelo Data found 16 live broadcasts and 137 videos posted on YouTube alleging fraud in the electoral process. The posts racked up at least 3.3 million views.

On Facebook, a rehashed 2018 video depicting pro-Bolsonaro lawmaker Carla Zambelli making unfounded electoral fraud claims amassed 791,000 views during the 12 hour period it remained available.

Meta said it removed 310,000 posts violating its policy on inciting violence, and another 290,000 in relation to its terms of use regarding hate speech. It also announced strikes for content violating rules on electoral interference, but provided no concrete numbers to this end.

Experts complain that while oversight has allowed for the removal of potentially harmful content, it remains a case of closing the stable door after the horse has bolted while these posts remain online, they rack up large numbers of views and interactions before they are eventually pulled.

YouTube has come under special scrutiny for its failure to block recommendations for videos containing misinformation. For instance, a search for fraud will bring up suggestions for fraud in the 2022 elections, while users searching for ballot boxes are recommended to click rigged ballot boxes.

The platform claims it has a solid set of policies and systems that, as well as giving visibility to trustworthy content, reduce the spread of misleading information and allow for political debate.

The rest is here:

Big Tech fails once more to contain disinformation in Brazil's elections - The Brazilian Report

Photo Illustration by Luis G. Rendon/The Daily Beast/Getty

It seems like there isnt an industry left for the Big Tech giants (Google, Amazon, Apple, and Facebook) to swallow up.

In their drive to entrench their monopoly power (century-old antitrust law be damned!), Big Tech has encroached on almost every sector of the global economy. In great part thanks to their capitalizing off of users data, the four major companies have emerged as among the most powerful the world has ever seen.

But even as the giants have moved into everything from Hollywood to healthcare, theres one big piece of the puzzle that remains up-for-grabs: The automobile industry. Unfortunately, its clear that Big Tech sees the auto industry, particularly the autonomous vehicle (AV) market, as a new, golden opportunity for consumer data collection.

Break Up the Big Tech Giantsthe People Want It!

In a time when modern, computerized cars increasingly extract more and more data from drivers, Big Techs disastrous record on privacy rights makes its presence in the sector an alarming one. And in a post-Roe era where Big Techs data collection practices are a treasure trove for states working to punish abortion patients, the tech giants expansion into the auto sector will only heighten the dangers to individual rights.

The federal government can and must prevent the tech giants from leveraging drivers personal data to further entrench their monopoly power. Failure to take action could mean a further erosion of privacy rights in a nation where access to reproductive healthcare and other liberties are being actively stripped away.

From car software to digital key agreements with existing car companies, Big Tech companies are already making their mark in the field. But anyone familiar with headlines about the Apple Car or Googles autonomous vehicle project Waymo project knowsthe tech giants ambitions in the auto space goes well beyond dashboard features.

Though it may sound far-fetched, the notion that modern cars are becoming smartphones on wheels reflects the grim truth that automobiles are increasingly adept at recording driver data without their knowledge. A 2021 report in The Intercept found that the infotainment systems built into newer car models can store data as sensitive as favorite locations, call logs, contact lists, SMS messages, emails, pictures, videos, social media feeds, and the navigation history of everywhere the vehicle has been.

Story continues

Indeed, modern cars are becoming increasingly adept at collecting both visual and audio data via external cameras and built-in sensors. Even though its public presence remains minimal years after launch, footage recorded by vehicles in Googles Waymo service is already being utilized by law enforcement.

Equipped with as many as 29 external cameras, the prospect of Waymo becoming commonplace throughout the United States would mark a massive expansion of mass surveillance. Zoox, the robotaxi company acquired by Amazon in 2020, reportedly has built-in sensors that can detect and track roughly a hundred people and vehicles over 400 feet away.

A robot car from Googles sister company Waymo on the road in Mountain View.

Andrej Sokolow/picture alliance via Getty

While some may find little problem with footage taken by AVs becoming standard in the fight against violent crime, the prospect of it being used to criminalize abortion should serve as a wake-up call to policymakers.

Even before the Supreme Court took a sledgehammer to reproductive rights this year, advocates have sounded the alarm on the use of digital surveillance to persecute abortion patients. Far from tin-foil hattery, messages and search histories have already been leveraged to punish women for seeking abortion care.

Want to Fix Big Tech? Stop Ignoring Sex Workers.

So-called geofence warrants, which allow the police find out which phones were used at a specific location in a set time period, already pose a significant risk to abortion patients. Activists have also raised concern about the potential use of automated license plate readers (ALPRs), which can either be stationary or attached to a moving police car, to surveil abortion patients.

In August, digital rights organization Fight For The Future (FFTF) raised these exact concerns with the Federal Trade Commission, and noted that [w]hen combined with Googles ability to location-track Android users, the threat to privacy this poses is mind-boggling.

And make no mistake: Big Techs intrusion into the auto space poses a threat to privacy rights well beyond the scope of reproductive healthcare access. Big Tech companies have proven time and time again that they are unwilling to take proper precautions when handling sensitive user data.

In 2018, Google willfully failed to report a data breach that affected as many as half a million users until some seven months later. Over the past decades, data breaches affecting Amazon subsidiaries have compromised the data of millions of users. Experts have sounded the alarm that Apples CarPlay technology could be compromised by hackers, potentially putting the welfare of drivers in jeopardy.

Dont Buy Big Techs BS That Regulating Them Is a Threat to National Security

If Big Techs efforts to dominate the auto industry were truly a good faith effort to innovate in the sector, one would expect the companies to be transparent about the potential risks their technologies pose. Unfortunately, this is not the case. True to Googles general lack of transparency, the company has fought tirelessly to keep Waymo safety statistics out of the public eye.

Following a legal battle with the California DMV, Waymo was able to keep crucial data related to vehicle crashes safety under the guise of protecting trade secrets. The so-called Self-Driving Coalition for Safer Streets, an industry group that counts both Waymo and Zoox as members, has worked tirelessly to water down basic safety regulations at the federal level.

A Waymo autonomous vehicle drives along California Street on April 11, 2022, in San Francisco, California.

Justin Sullivan/Getty

From putting privacy rights of abortion patients at risk to undermining vehicle safety standards, Big Techs auto obsession is an all-around bad deal for consumers.

Federal regulators should heed the advice of Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin and crack down on Big Techs active effort to dominate the auto industry before it's too late.

Additionally, Congress needs to curb Big Techs monopoly power and safeguard the privacy rights of Americansparticularly vulnerable people seeking abortions in a country thats increasingly hostile to reproductive rights.

Read more at The Daily Beast.

Get the Daily Beast's biggest scoops and scandals delivered right to your inbox. Sign up now.

Stay informed and gain unlimited access to the Daily Beast's unmatched reporting. Subscribe now.

See the original post here:

Big Techs Cars Could Help the Government Spy on Abortion Patients - Yahoo News

Lots of pain all around in this down market and amid these challenging economic times. But with pain comes opportunity, and the media and entertainment business is no exception. All of a sudden, deals that were well out of reach have become affordable. Many, in fact, become downright bargains. Meanwhile, companies pummeled by Wall Street have become increasingly open (several even desperate) to at least actively explore (and ultimately consummate) strategic alternatives with a cash-rich sugar daddy or mommy. All that makes for fascinating speculation about whos next in this great game of media and entertainment chess. (Note: I moderate an M&A panel of experts about just this subject on Wednesday at TheWraps TheGrill event, which features top M&A execs from four important industry players LionTree, Moelis, Raine and Shamrock.)

Obvious buyers are those who are cash rich. And Big Tech which has transformed the media and entertainment business over the past several years is where we begin. Even in these market conditions, the trillion-dollar valuations of Big Tech, together with their individual cash hordes of tens of billions of dollars, dwarf other potential buyers by an order of magnitude. The cash richest of them all is Apple (with a current market cap of nearly $2.3 trillion and tens of billions of cash on hand), so lets begin there and focus on the hypercompetitive streaming video world dominated by tech behemoths.

Apple doesnt typically buy companies. The stealthy Apple corps prefers to innovate itself. But even mighty Apple cant do it all. Lets not forget that Spotify was eating Apples lunch when digital downloads transitioned to the new dominant world of streaming music. Thats when Apple acquired Dr. Dres Beats for a cool $3 billion. And look at Apple Music now. It has catapulted to become Spotifys biggest challenger. Membership in the Apple family of cross-promotion has its privileges, after all.

Story continues

Also Read:Why NFTs Arent Dead and How the Right Ones Will Transform Entertainment | PRO Insight

And the same may be said for Apple TV+ at this point. Cupertinos premium video paid streamer certainly scratches Apples strategic itch, providing highly effective marketing for Apple hardware products. The platforms historic streaming-first Best Picture Oscar for CODA and numerous Emmys dont hurt. But Apple is an ambitious one. So how about Apple doing for video what it did for music buy its way into victory?

And in the streaming video clash of the titans, Netflix, of course, is the big prize. Nothing comes close. And lookie-lookie. The streaming innovator, which once seemed invincible, now trades at a valuation about 67% less than its heights just one year ago (its current market cap is just over $100 billion, or about 23 times less than Apples). Sure, there are obstacles the antitrust police being just one. But its a potential deal that is definitely one to watch. After all, Netflixs depressed valuation isnt the only reason it is ripe for acquisition. The streamer simply cant endure the new rules of the game in the streaming video world for the long term. With few content franchises, it has no choice but to continue to spend massively on content and content alone is what it monetizes. Big Techs situation is vastly different. These massive players also spend big on content. But they can withstand those economics because their video services are only one cog in much larger multifaceted revenue machines. In other words, streaming video is a marketing means to an end.

And dont forget about Amazon as a possible buyer. Or Google or Microsoft, for that matter (you can rule out Meta/Facebook at this point since Mark Zuckerberg is now directly in the feds antitrust cross-hairs and humbled by a valuation well under $400 billion). Netflix is likely in Amazons direct line of sight for reasons similar to Apples. Marketing, plain and simple. Amazon, like Apple, uses content in this case premium video to pull us in to buy (and keep buying) Prime memberships and shop for more online good. Amazon Prime Video helps over 200 million of us forget that we automatically pay well over $100 annually for Prime memberships. Together with its recent MGM buyout, Amazon is in the streaming game to win it, and the companys roughly $1.2 trillion market cap is about 12 times Netflixs.

Also Read:Why No One Has Jumped at Buying Bite-Sized Netflix Right Now

And how about Google? It has tried various flavors of paid premium video subscriptions too many times to count and has essentially scrapped that idea for its YouTube brand. So why fight when you can bite the bullet and buy yourself into the game? Google certainly has the means. Just like with Apple, cash isnt the issue (its market cap is roughly the same as Amazons). Antitrust could be a challenge, of course, but that doesnt prevent an ambitious cash-rich player from trying.

Meanwhile, sleeping giant Microsoft quietly second only to Apple in its market valuation (now at roughly $1.7 trillion) has awakened to the power of content in a big way. The company bought leading games studio Activision for nearly $70 billion earlier this year. And its Xbox Game Pass is the market leader in subscription gaming. So why not go after Netflix to be the two-time streaming winner for gaming and video? Why stop there? Why not buy out the music leader Spotify too for the streaming trifecta? Spotify suffers from the same disease as Netflix content-only monetization-itis. And its burden may be even greater than Netflixs because its content licensing costs are variable the more success it has, the more costly that success is.

But these big four tech giants dont just want Netflixs massive international reach and global brand. They also crave franchise content. And for that, they will need to go elsewhere, since Netflix carries few IP franchise content gems (Stranger Things is likely the platforms biggest). Content franchises certainly are a major motivator for M&A right now, because they come with instant brand recognition and built-in audiences and can be re-imagined over and over again for decades. Thats why Amazon bought MGM.

Also Read:Make No Mistake, Content Spending Isnt Going Down Anytime Soon | PRO Insight

And for those reasons, despite its protestations to the contrary, Warner Bros. Discovery is ripe for the picking at a market cap of about only 30% of Netflixs. Just think about Warner Bros. and HBO franchises alone. That instant marketing star power would bring the eventual winner ever closer to Disneys Magic Kingdom of mega-franchises like Star Wars, Pixar and the Marvel Universe. Warner Bros. Discovery is MGM on steroids. While Warner Bros. Discovery CEO David Zaslav denies any interest in selling the company he just recently proclaimed We are not for sale, absolutely, not for sale Ill channel my own inner Shakespeare: Methinks thou dost protest too much. All M&A targets say that to drive up their price. Accordingly, the company will ultimately be bought.

In that same vein, its entirely logical for broadband-focused Comcast to shed its franchise-content-rich, but much lower-margin NBCUniversal business. That part of Comcasts business could be a bargain, given that the combined company now trades at a market cap just over Netflixs at about $130 billion. (Hey mega-buyers out there, why not just combine NBCUniversal with Netflix to create a franchise-rich streaming media juggernaut?)

How about Disney the franchise behemoth in this game of studio roulette? The companys cash cheese is a mouse compared to the trappings of Big Tech. At a market cap hovering around $175 billion, its means are seven dwarfed by those green-rich giants. No contest. So its not a buyer. But could it be a seller? If weve all learned nothing else, weve learned never say never. Disney owns Pixar. Steve Jobs birthed Pixar. So Apple and Disney share the same DNA. Just sayin

Also Read:Warner Bros. Discoverys CFO Has Analysts Charmed but Investors Arent Buying It

In terms of smaller, yet still strategic, content and franchise-driven deals, prestige studios A24, Anonymous Content and Blumhouse should be on everyones lists. To be clear, these would not be bargains. Far from it. Laurene Powell Jobs and her Emerson Collective own a significant share of Anonymous Content, after all. But the streaming behemoths will pay up for the A-list content they need to win.

These are just the potential megadeals in the streaming video space. Not saying they will happen now or even anytime soon. But mark my words, Warner Bros. Discovery, NBCUniversal and yes, even Netflix, will happen. Apart from very real antitrust headwinds right now, financial buying conditions certainly dont get much better for big tech than they are today. And even if market conditions change radically in the months and years ahead, big techs basic asymmetry in terms of cash resources has created a new and lasting Silicon Valley-fueled media and entertainment world order.

As we wait for these shoes to drop, however, lets not forget that scores of other media and entertainment M&A deals are likely in the works right now due to market conditions. Some will become headline news. Many wont. But all media and entertainment M&A will be fueled by a good dose of tech.

Also Read:Vox Media CEO Thinks Companies Are Missing the Boat Tech-Wise: Theres More Than Streaming TV (Audio)

Read more here:

Big Tech Acquisitions of Media Companies Are on the Horizon Whos Next? | PRO Insight - Yahoo Entertainment

Theres a little titbit that should put the fear of God into every sensible, right-thinking, everyday Victorian, says Sky News host Rowan Dean.

Your government, the most authoritarian and repugnant in Australia, the Andrews Labor government, has joined forces with leftist media tech giants Meta, Facebook, Twitter, Google and Microsoft and the Chinese-run TikTok to pervert the course of democracy in your state in the run-up to the November election, Mr Dean said.

He said the Victorian Electoral Commission boasts of having partnered with big tech organisations in order to counter harmful electoral disinformation.

Electoral Commissioner Warwick Gately commended the platforms for their public commitment to protecting election integrity.

No, Mr Gately, with all due respect, you are perverting democracy, not protecting it, Mr Dean said.

You are behaving as every petty authoritarian has done since time immemorial you are censoring what the plebs can and cannot read.

Original post:

'Authoritarian' governments teamed up with big tech to 'pervert the course of democracy' - Sky News Australia

What does the headline for Milwaukee look like in 10 years?

That was the question lingering on the minds of participants at the This Week in Milwaukee Rising Summit, a roundtable event hosted by Technical.lyon Tuesday. The result was an enthusiastic and wide-ranging conversation examining the citys journey to becoming the next big tech hub while underlining the challenges Milwaukees business community faces on its road to building a thriving and equitable economic future.

But what does equity actually look like? And when will we stop talking about creating equal opportunities and put our money where our mouth is?

The event, held Oct. 4 at Northwestern Mutuals Cream City Labs, was part of the lineup for Milwaukee Tech Week, a weeklong celebration of tech led by Milwaukee Tech Hub Coalition designed to celebrate innovation in Southeast Wisconsin. The summit was the first such in-person event for Technical.ly in Milwaukee, bringing startup founders, students, business leaders and nonprofit pros together in one room.

Ahead of a roundtable discussion with all summit attendees, several past subjects of our reporting series joined this reporter onstage for a discussion of their work. That included Nikki Purvis, president and CEO of the African American Chamber of Wisconsin; Quentin Prince, executive director of Milwaukee Youth Sports Alliance; Teresa Esser, managing director at ESG Financial Inc.; and Tarsha Wiggins, founder and CEO at Speak Wellness Behavioral Health Consulting; as well as Shakkiah Curtis, manager of member engagement at the Milwaukee Tech Hub.

(Graphic by Technical.ly)

The panel brought to life several emerging themes from our reporting, including a sense of urgency among the business community to push beyond Milwaukees status quo to embrace fresh perspectives and pathways in its bid to grow its economy.

Kicking off the talk, the panelists were asked to define what an equitable future looks like here in Milwaukee. The first step toward establishing Milwaukees technology ecosystem is to get more diverse voices to the table, Purvis said.

If there is equitable, representation of diverse backgrounds in all of these things, then we dont have to have these conversations anymore, she said. That takes energy, that takes a willingness to give up power when youre in a higher position, and understanding that when there is diversity and equity that we will have the outcome that we want to see.

Nikki Purvis. (Photo by Antonio Davis)

Exposure, mentorship and partnerships are also key, Curtis added. As a young woman growing up in the central city, Curtis credits programs such as the Chapter 220 program for showing her opportunities outside of her neighborhoods limited purview. Still, extending those opportunities across the city are necessary, she added.

Esser pointed out that social determinants, such as homeownership, need to be addressed in tandem with the regions business initiatives. The homeownership rate in the Black community hovers at 26%, for example, while White homeowners in the city top 75%, she said. The housing gap and high rental rates among Milwaukees marginalized groups is a result of structural racism, she added.

A person who does not own their own home cannot benefit from inflation, they cant benefit from the [equity] structure, Esser said. Equity means making the structure fair for everybody.

Teresa Esser. (Photo by Antonio Davis)

We dont know what it looks like, but we have to be willing and intentional in our path toward [equity], Prince said. Later, he sought to clarify his thoughts in a LinkedIn post: In my head, I wanted to say I dont know Ive never seen it. We can all imagine what it would look like, where we need the intentional focus to be, is in the process. A mentor once told me in your mind, your business idea is perfect, thats where you need to live. Lets live out equity. I want to walk out my front door and point it out in every space.

To Wiggins, the citys businesses and organizations must reach beyond opportunity exposure.

Now that we know what opportunities are out there, can we access it? she asked. Those two things [exposure and access] must be present if were going to talk about how to make things more equitable.

Quentin Prince and Shakkiah Curtis. (Photo by Antonio Davis)

Creating equal and fair access to opportunity was a central theme as summit attendees brainstormed solutions to the following questions during a breakout session:

Tarsha Wiggins. (Photo by Antonio Davis)

Some ideas that emerged: Centralizing resources for emerging startups, adapting to new educational models focused on tech outside of traditional higher education, and extending opportunities to business capital including accelerating startup investments in early-stage ventures could help eliminate persistent gaps in the citys entrepreneurial landscape.

Building a viable technology ecosystem could also be the key to breaking down many of the citys barriers. Besides contributing to social innovation initiatives, the rise of good-paying remote tech jobs removes hurdles such as transportation, potentially opening up the opportunity for a bigger, diverse group of people to take advantage.

Many attendees also pointed to the need to rebrand Milwaukee from its longstanding reputation as the home of the beer, cheese, and the Green Bay Packers or being another loop in the Rust Belt. Its great that we have so many breweries, one attendee noted, but our citys tourism marketing misses the mark when it comes to highlighting the diverse number of businesses, cultural amenities, and people who make Milwaukee an attractive and unique destination.

Summit attendees discuss. (Photo by Anna Lardinois)

Despite the citys challenges, panelists and attendees alike said they were energized by the work being done to change the narrative of Milwaukee and felt inspired to play a role in embracing innovation across the region.

Its the innate hustle of entrepreneurs and the path to success that Ive been able to witness over so many years, Purvis said. Thats what keeps me motivated. Knowing that from those entrepreneurs comes job creation, comes a boost to our economy its just really inspiring.

So, what does the headline look like for Milwaukee in 10 years? If any of the attendees at the This Week in Milwaukee Rising Summit have a say, it wont look like the one running today.

###

Special thanks to Cream City Labs for hosting, Milwaukee Tech Hub Coalition for organizing the week of events, and our panelists for joining the conversation.

Have thoughts on the above questions? Share them with us at milwaukee@technical.ly.

Subscribe to This Week in Milwaukee Rising:

Link:

If Milwaukee wants to become the next big tech hub, this is what needs to change - Technical.ly

Frances Haugen left her role as a product manager at Facebook in 2021, bringing with her a cache of internal documents illustrating allegations of wrongdoing at the company.

But a year later, despite congressional hearings and investigations, Meta has made few meaningful changes to its policies, Haugen says, and as the US midterm elections approach, the stakes are high.

Im extremely concerned about the upcoming election, and Im even more concerned about future elections, Haugen told the Guardian. Without transparency and without oversight, we should expect [Facebook] will not spend enough on safety they wont produce a level of safety that we deserve.

Frustrated by the inaction, Haugen is one of dozens of former government officials, independent researchers and public health advocates who are joining a new bipartisan coalition that hopes to force fundamental change to the worlds major tech platforms.

Launching on Thursday, the Council for Responsible Social Media (CRSM) aims to advocate for bipartisan solutions and serve a critical mechanism in holding these companies accountable.

The council is trying to bring together a bipartisan, diverse set of people to emphasize that these are not partisan issues, Haugen told the Guardian. These are common sense solutions that can make a really big difference, and we need to act now.

Launched in partnership with political reform group Issue One, the CRSM will advocate for change in three main areas: kids, communities and national security.

Other members of the CRSM include former defense secretaries Chuck Hagel and Leon Panetta, former Congress members Claire McCaskill and Dick Gephardt, and former National Security Agency director Michael Rogers.

Social media defines nearly every aspect of our social fabric and has changed the world as we know it. We can now see clearly that the companies operating these platforms have too often failed to be responsible stewards of our political, social and communications spaces, Gephardt said.

Some 68% of Americans believe big tech firms have too much power and influence on the economy, and 56% say they should be more regulated than they are currently. But despite broad bipartisan support for action, Congress has for years failed to pass effective legislation.

The new council aims to advocate for reforms to bring more transparency and oversight to these companies, Haugen said, adding that there are several low hanging fruits of regulation that could be passed imminently.

That includes the Platform Accountability and Transparency Act, a bill introduced in 2021 that would require social media firms to comply with researcher data requests for external audits. Under the proposed law, failure to do so could result in loss of legal protections for content hosted on their platform.

Haugen also highlighted the Kids Online Safety Act, a bill introduced in 2022 that would install more safeguards and transparency for minors using social media.

There are a number of large opportunities today that were not on the table a year ago in terms of moving forward in a bipartisan way, she said. They just need a push over the finish line.

Haugen said these protections were only growing more important as tech companies continue to expand their reach. Nearly one year ago, Facebooks parent company officially changed its name to Meta, with its chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, announcing a new focus on building out a digital world called the metaverse.

The idea that that were going to let Mark Zuckerberg for a second time define a critical piece of social public infrastructure without any accountability or transparency is amazing, she said. He has not earned the privilege of being able to act with this level of impunity.

More:

Whistleblower Frances Haugen on the alliance to hold social media accountable: We need to act now - The Guardian

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996has been called the "Internets First Amendment." Its also been calleda tool for Big Tech to avoid accountability. Now, the U.S. Supreme Court may decide its fate.

The provision was meant to block internet companies from liability for what users do on their platforms. It was not explicitly meant to refer to social media, as 1996 was the era of AOL and Compuserve, and neither Facebook nor Twitter existed yet. But more recently, Section 230 has been viewed by supporters and foes alike as something that keeps those platforms from liability.

While then-President Donald Trump in late 2020vetoed a must-pass National Defense Authorization Act bill because he wanted Section 230 repealed, calls for overturning or modifying the provision are not the province of any one political party;the Biden White House has also called for the removal of the section.

Per NBC News, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case alleging that YouTube "helped aid and abet the killing of an American woman in the 2015 Islamic State terrorist attacks in Paris. The court also agreed to hear a different case, brought by Twitter, about whether the company can be liable under a federal law called the Anti-Terrorism Act.

What would happen if Section 230 were to be repealed? It would likely cause social media companies to begin moderating content much more aggressively, possibly leading them to remove anything that could potentially cause them liability. This could include everything from incendiary posts by politicians to music videos on YouTube. Its been alleged that absent Section 230, Twitter probably would have banned Trump years before it did.

Internet activists have argued strongly against any Section 230 repeal, whether it comes from the Supreme Court or Congress.

The two cases the Supreme Court has agreed to hear both deal with horrific crimes related to terrorism. One case deals specifically with liability around online recommendation algorithms, like those used by YouTube. Weve written before about how attempting to regulate algorithmic recommendations by changing Section 230 is a dangerous idea. Most legislative attempts to do this will run smack into the First Amendment, which protects platforms ability to make editorial decisions, Evan Greer of the group Fight for the Future said in a statement to the press this week.

The Supreme Court should leave Section 230 alone. So should Congress. Instead, lawmakers should focus their efforts on enacting privacy legislation strong enough to effectively end the surveillance-driven business model of harmful tech giants like Facebook. The best way to address the harms of algorithmic manipulation without making matters worse is to regulate surveillance, not speech. The Biden administrations FTC should also do everything in its power to crack down on corporate data harvesting and use of personal data to power harmful and discriminatory algorithms.

Stephen Silver, a technology writer for The National Interest, is a journalist, essayist and film critic, who is also a contributor to The Philadelphia Inquirer, Philly Voice, Philadelphia Weekly, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Living Life Fearless, Backstage magazine, Broad Street Review and Splice Today. The co-founder of the Philadelphia Film Critics Circle, Stephen lives in suburban Philadelphia with his wife and two sons. Follow him on Twitter at @StephenSilver.

Image: Reuters.

Read more:

What Happens to Big Tech if Section 230 Gets Overturned? - The National Interest Online