Just arrived home from Ottawa, 🇨🇦 - super trip. Canada is close to passing bill which will rebalance bargaining power between Google, Facebook and the local news media. As with similar code in Australia, both companies will try near everything to stop it. Here is my testimony: /1
I shared 5 points: 1) will help rebalance bargaining power 2) relies on market rather than govt for terms protecting news independence 3) applies only to situation of significant power imbalance (eg Google, Facebook) /2
4) it’s BS that it will harm the internet or act as a tax on links (more on that shortly) 5) pubs can collectively bargain which is what in Australia allowed small pubs to generate more $ per journalist than larger ones /3
I shouldn’t have been surprised but a witness, a MP and a twitter account simultaneously tried to introduce the idea the law requires payment for links contrary to my opening statement. Thankfully, I was allowed to respond. “Hogwash.” /4
I was also asked the importance of this legislation to stop the “hemorrhaging” of local news media at the hands of the dominant gatekeepers, Google and Facebook, and ensure funding of trusted local journalism for democracy. /5
Reminder, Facebook executed on a highly calculated plan to cause chaos in Australia with considerations for its global policy interests. One of the most unethical plans I've ever seen by major tech company in my 30yrs. Now it's Canada's turn. /6
Adding this to the end as someone was asking about any other reports available on Australia results. /8 jninstitute.org/wp-content/upl…
Suffice it to say, $329 million per year of additional funding to the news, their newsrooms and journalists would be a GAME CHANGER. #C18 ht @DCNorg /9 pressgazette.co.uk/canada-google-…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Incredible work being done by the press to keep facts building on facts. Grateful. This entire WSJ report overnight starting with this lede on how White House orders sparked LA crackdown is both chilling and informative. /1
This statement. “We came to the United States for protection of what we encountered in Russia. It seems that we are encountering here what we fled.” /2
WSJ separating out cases of targeting groups who have not committed crimes but even noting here incredible resources being used against what appears to be clear, First Amendment protected activity alerted the community. Here is the must-read report. /3 wsj.com/us-news/protes…
Confession. Having watched Scott Pelley's outstanding work over nearly three decades, I almost didn't take the time to watch his W.F. commencement speech thinking the news reports told me enough of the facts. Frankly, that would have been a huge mistake on my part. Huge. 1/5
Disclosure: I'm a 60 Minutes fan. In fact, I read Don Hewitt's "Tell Me a Story" after nearly a decade in sports media and it likely tipped the scale in 2007 when I decided to jump to work at CBS. I find Pelley and team brilliant in telling stories in barely 15 min segments. 2/5
“If liberty means anything at all, it means telling someone something that they don’t want to hear. I fear there may be some people in the audience who don’t want to hear what I have to say today but I appreciate your forbearance in this small act of liberty.” - Scott Pelley 3/5
wow, another order for Mark Zuckerberg to sit for another court deposition. This time in a case involving privacy violations with ingesting web-wide health data. Remember they paid billions in cases to try to avoid this. Data and privacy issues are especially sensitive. /1
Zuckerberg depositions are interesting as they often go on for hours with highly informed attorneys driving for answers. And those answers may be put up against the often questioned veracity of his answers to Congress. Yes, as a CEO, he has testified to Congress A LOT. /2
I think his first real depo was SEC on very sensitive data scandal leading to $5B+ settlements with FTC+SEC. That scandal is still playing out in courts (did he overpay to protect himself?) It took 3yrs to get unsealed after I caught it in a footnote. /3
The Verge comes in with a massive scoop on the backstory reporting it was Musk - and Sacks - behind the scenes trying to blow up IP to train AI on behalf of his allies. This wouldn't be a surprise to anyone. /1
they have reports and details on the carnage and firing of the leadership and on the possible incorrect assumption that the new people in charge were running their playbook. /2
It may be rare that @mrddmia is in agreement with Dems but in the world of accountability for big tech abuse whether over data, monetization, IP, censorship, privacy, you name it, these aren't partisan issues. appreciate the shared voice from advocates all around. /3
omg. I can't believe what I am seeing in the FTC v Meta exhibits that just posted. This is the start of a long Oct 2018 thread where redacted executive tells another c-level executive, Adam Mosseri, "some estimates fake engagement [on Instagram] could be in range of 40%." /1
and Mosseri does nothing to dispute the data point either. he actually agrees they are a threat saying, "they present a bigger thread [sic] to the business than to the user experience." The timing of this remarkable if you know the context of what was going on there. /2
Earlier in that year, Facebook was using same Mosseri to pitch and spin (this entire pitch document is amazing behind the scenes) the infamous Wired cover story, WSJ, CNN press on work to improve meaningful social interactions, and much much more. /3 ftcvmeta.app.box.com/s/b8m39toze8uc…
woah, I've now read Google and DOJ's proposed remedies for Google's 3rd antitrust defeat (adtech). I threaded Friday's hearing but this full doc is nothing short of beautiful. Best stuff may be missed so hear me out. This is a huge deal - 10yrs, "lifeblood of the Internet." /1
A reminder on the four objectives of antitrust remedies. In court on Friday and in Google's proposal, Google just seems to ignore the third and fourth as if they don't matter. That's a major problem for them. Judge Brinkema will be all over it. She gets this case wonderfully. /2
For instance, on Friday she labeled Google's ad demand, AdWords, the "golden goose." Now here is how DOJ describes it: "unique advertising demand." Notably, they don't flag that the demand also connects back to Google's other illegal monopoly loss for "search text ads." /3