Seeing ongoing difficulty in getting ANYTHING passed through Congress & can’t help but think: none of the digital rulemaking linked to #antitrust, #contentmoderation or, already a long shot, #privacy is going to happen before the midterms, if not the 2024 presidential election
This is frustrating in some many ways (and, tbf, I’m a cynic on US rulemaking anyway). I wonder if @FrancesHaugen’s testimony will change the dynamics, but I doubt it. Digital policymaking and the fight against “Big Tech” is just not a priority
If you can barely pass a budget or an infrastructure bill, is there really an appetite for #ArtificialIntelligence rules or platform regulation? I find that hard to believe, especially as mid-term electioneering is already around the corner
.@tewheels put it pretty clearly during an event I moderated recently. In the US, digital policymaking comes down to regulatory enforcement and lawsuits, not legislation
That, tbh, could actually be a quicker response to near-term problems. But it’s a band aid trying to heal a broken leg. You don’t move the needle, imo, solely through enforcement. Only comprehensive legislation can tackle the root cause
I contrast the US with Europe and it’s stark — albeit the tech giants spend all their time cajoling Capitol Hill at the detriment to their engagement overseas where the majority of their users live
I am not a cheerleader for the @EU_Commission. But they have already passed comprehensive (and global) privacy rules. Are half-way to new content and antitrust proposals. Have data governance and AI proposals working their way through the legislative process
And then there’s existing rules on #misinformation and more planned — plus upcoming specific rules on political ads (more on that Monday from me and @clothildegouj).
Not all of this is good policymaking (cough, data localization, cough). But the growing divide between the US and Europe is disappointing. Washington just isn’t anywhere near close to participating in these global debates, IMO
Rant over. Thoughts appreciated. Enjoy your Sundays.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I find this point from @FrancesHaugen telling in terms how US social media companies (and, frankly) US-based reporters and others view #misinformation. It’s as if they haven’t looked beyond their noses to the wider world & lack of support for tackling this problem elsewhere.
I’m not the best at languages, but across French, Spanish, Italian and German, social media companies have routinely failed to offer the same protections as offered to (US) English users. My @crowdtangle is just full of this stuff. All unchecked
Part One looks at EU Reporter, a Brussels-based media organization and its undisclosed ties to foreign governments and companies eagerly promoting themselves within the EU halls of power politico.eu/article/brusse…
Part Two looks specifically at how @Huawei used media organizations to lobby EU (and Belgian) officials without disclosing those associations politico.eu/article/huawei…
ICYMI -- a deal to fundamentally overhaul the global tax system is expected to be announced tomorrow. It would rewrite domestic laws & international treaties, forcing the likes of @google & @facebook to pay more, globally, where they operate.
<<Cracks knucles>> cue thread
This comes down to who gets the right to tax the world's largest companies on their global operations: these firms' home jurisidictions, or countries that are home to these companies' actual customers.
In short, it's a question of sovereignty.
Friday's deal will be viewed as global. But, it really isn't. It's come down to a fight between the US (and its tech giants) and Europe (and its push to reclaim tax revenue from these companies)
Anyone in DC looking for suggestions on what to do about social media companies’ harm on society? Want to police algorithms and increase transparency on what everyone sees online. Here’s a quick guide to EU’s Digital Services Act proposals that do just that 👇
Reminder: these rules will likely get passed in first half of 2022. They have changed since first being announced in December, 2020, but hit on everything @FrancesHaugen touched on today in terms of algorithmic and data accountability
And unlike similar content moderation proposals put of Canada, UK or Germany, they balance free speech and online protection that, imo, is a pretty good balance
US & EU senior officials meet today in Pittsburgh to talk tech & trade. It's part of efforts to rebuild the transatlantic relation after Trump's 4 years.
Here's a thread on what you need to know about today's meeting and what it means for US-US relations.
<<cracks knuckles>>
First, the basics. The EU-US Trade and Tech Council was an idea dreamed up by @EU_Commission president Ursula von der Leyen to pigeonhole US thinking about digital policymaking and trade. The goal: to get DC to follow Brussels' lead
That, obviously, did not happen. The US quickly pivoted the conversation to "let's use this against China!," including efforts to stop Beijing from buying up EU & US companies and creating a Western alliance to set the next generation of tech/trade standards
After talking to folk today, two things have become very clear: UK govt is willing to walk away from its adequacy deal w/ EU; almost no one with power in London understands how privacy regulations work
There is a feeling within part of UK govt that GDPR has been a hindrance to growth (it has not); and that business wants more freedom to “innovate” (most do, but not at expense of privacy rights)
But what is missing is context. The UK’s data protection regimes is decades old, is based on existing (EU-based) global norms and, for the most part, has worked.