Thread by @matthewstoller

1. I don't think that the Biden WH's call for Facebook to control disinformation is a giant power grab for a simple reason. Grab implies there's a change, but the power already exists and has existed for years. The Trump admin sought to use it too.
washingtonpost.com/technology/202…

2. What is the actual problem here? We don't have a disinformation or censorship problem related to phone networks or email. Only social networking. Why? Because the FB problem we are dealing with is a business model issue, the financing of monopoly communications system by ads.

3. While a lot of people focus on Jennifer Psaki's comment about taking down anti-vax content from specific users, this commentary by the Surgeon General on the danger of clickbait ad models hit the root problem.

https://twitter.com/jason_kint/status/1415771344441159693?s=20

4. From the left, the real issue isn't that people are saying things that aren't true - they've always done that - but that algorithms create a click-bait ad system that promotes the most toxic content. It's a business model problem! nytimes.com/2019/10/17/opi…

5. If your goal is to get credible information out there, the clumsy censorship approach will fail. Delete the six conspiracy theorists of any stripe and you will only open the door to six more. Bc it's profitable for FB to promote incendiary content.

https://twitter.com/Moonalice/status/1416184056841048073

6. There's a reason the UN blamed Facebook for fostering genocide in Myanmar, and local police lay blame on social media for gang violence. Social media business models thrive on conflict. mattstoller.substack.com/p/rumors-sprea…

7. From the right, the dominance of a few tech platforms - which is largely a result of lax antitrust enforcement and the no regulation approach of the Republican Party - has enabled actual informal censorship, the Hunter Biden laptop story being an important example.

8. Both problems - toxic content and censorship - have the same root cause. A lax antitrust policy regime fostering concentrations of power and that enable conflicts of interest and a click-bait ad model. nytimes.com/2019/10/17/opi…

9. Those of us who have been focused on antitrust have been warning that the centralization of media and communications power due to lax antitrust would lead to the purposing of this power by government. I wrote this in 2018. buzzfeednews.com/article/mattst…

10. Political leaders will attempt to purpose this centralized power. They have to. That's what governing means. Clarence Thomas noted that reality. These are firms clothed with the public interest and the government will act on them. mattstoller.substack.com/p/why-is-clare…

11. There are Republicans - like Mike Lee and Jim Jordan - who seize on this moment to decry big tech censorship. But their defense of lax antitrust law is why the power to censor exists in the first place. The power to censor is upstream from monopoly. foxnews.com/media/mike-lee…

12. There are other Republicans, like @RepKenBuck, who are actually getting to the root cause, and trying to break up big tech. axios.com/buck-caucus-go…

13. Fundamentally, the problem here is that our policy regime encourages the consolidation of power. The right way to address it is simple. Congress should pass laws breaking up big tech firms and banning surveillance advertising models. economicliberties.us/our-work/how-t…

14. Once that happens, there just won't be an incentive to amplify toxic incendiary nonsense, because ad sales will once again correlate to some sort of trusted relationship with an audience. And there won't be one dominant platform anymore.

15. I'm encouraged that the right has noticed concentrations of private power. But it's important to note that censorship is upstream from monopoly, and it's Republicans @CSWilsonFTC and @FTCPhillips at the FTC who voted against bringing an antitrust suit to break up Facebook.

16. And I like that Biden's surgeon general has recognized that the click-bait model of advertising is a serious problem. But Psaki's focus should be on the ad money and business model that supersize toxic content, not a clumsy content regulation regime.

17. Whatever you think of Biden's attempt to use Facebook's dominant power to censor discourse, the reason they can do so is because Republican political leaders - like Mike Lee and Jim Jordan - allowed that power to exist in the first place. And they still defend it.