Although I respect @fmanjoo perspective and agree with much of this, it also gets a number of super important facts wrong on the state of holding Facebook accountable. I’m going to thread them here and may need to write a longer op-ed to get everyone back on same page. /1
https://twitter.com/FBoversight/status/1456996924221968387
First, they wouldn’t retain all the data. Even in case of German Cartel Office historic decision (under appeal), FB has to silo its data across apps and off-platform (where the company gets most of its data). In an actual breakup, it’s entirely limited esp growth leader Insta. /2 
This isn’t right. Judge threw out saying states waited too long. Regarding failing to prove monopoly, judge said FTC didn’t back up with data but they could refile which they’ve already done with clearly supporting data on multiple dimensions. /3
Again, no. This is linking to an op-ed by person least involved in law nearly a year before voters passed belt and suspenders strengthening it even further. Regs will pass in next 6 months threatening FB greatly as users can flip a switch and stop FB tracking (as apple did). /4
And I may be living in a different DC but antitrust integrated with data policy is leading solutions here. FB *wants* debate to be on 230 where it’s less likely to move, more political. Even in EU, they’re focused on Digital Markets Act to limit “gatekeepers” (aka Facebook). /5
Ok, don’t want to spoil a lot of good perspective. Just important public maintains confidence, understands solutions are focused more upstream rather than on partisan downstream debates. Bipartisan antitrust Senate bill proposed just yesterday matching bipartisan house bill. /eof
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
