Facebook is Quietly Helping To Set Up a New Pro-tech Advocacy Group To Battle Washington (washingtonpost.com) 35
Facebook is working behind the scenes to help launch a new political advocacy group that would combat U.S. lawmakers and regulators trying to rein in the tech industry, escalating Silicon Valley's war with Washington at a moment when government officials are threatening to break up large companies. From a report: The organization is called American Edge, and it aims through a barrage of advertising and other political spending to convince policymakers that Silicon Valley is essential to the U.S. economy and the future of free speech, according to three people familiar with the matter as well as documents reviewed by The Washington Post. The people spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe the group because it hasn't officially been announced. In December, American Edge formed as a nonprofit organization, and last month, it registered an accompanying foundation, according to incorporation documents filed in Virginia. The setup essentially allows it to navigate a thicket of tax laws in such a way that it can raise money, and blitz the airwaves with ads, without the obligation of disclosing all of its donors. Many powerful political actors -- including the National Rifle Association -- similarly operate with the aid of "social welfare" groups.
Those uppity congressmen! (Score:2)
How dare they call the CEO on the carpet!
Translation: Our CEO feels uncomfortable with being called to Washington to testify, so we'll create this group to keep them occupied instead.
Re: (Score:2)
Err....well, as long as that SPEECH agrees with their political bent and agenda.
I think they've shown that more and MORE lately....their idea of free speech is not quite as broad as the US Constitution tries to protect.
Sure they're a private company, BUT the second they start whipping the free speech ideal in their propaganda, they'd better damned sure start promoti
Re: (Score:1)
Well, your interpretation of free speech and how it is actually described in your constitution paper. Those two don't match.
While your interpretation is shared commonly, it is also preferable over what is actually written there. And if you consider supreme court judge Thomas to be a defender of this Free Speech thing you are so proud of, you have a nasty surprise coming your way.
He signs with most other members, but also writes letters/memo's on how free speech for normal U.S. citizens should be limited, ac
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You realize this is senators and Congressmen who feel facebook isn't making enough legal donations, right?
They aren't your heroes. This is the way of the world, and all of history.
Terry Jones as a mafia enforcer: "Shame if your company...gets broken...up."
Re: (Score:2)
How dare they call the CEO on the carpet!
Translation: Our CEO feels uncomfortable with being called to Washington to testify, so we'll create this group to keep them occupied instead.
While I agree that some tech companies need to be "reigned in", the same needs to also happen in Washington on the government's war on encryption (see the EARN IT Act).
They should lobby California first (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Lobbying Washington seems to be the wrong approach. Their real problem is right at home with their anti-business state government.
Really? CA is in the top 10 economies of the world, exceeding most countries. Facebook is not that big a piece of it in the overall scheme of things. And, they show that you don't have to cut taxes every minute for the top earners to maintain that economy.
Now lets compare that to KY, MS, KS, and those "business friendly" states often harped on about...whose governments kowtow to business to the detriment of the population (health, safety, and so on).
Facebook is essential to free speech? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Then why are they so heavy handed in shutting down discourse they disagree with?
Because they are under political pressure to do so.
The government wants tech companies to practice censorship-by-proxy.
Facebook doesn't want to be in that role, which is one reason for the creation of this lobbying group.
Re: (Score:2)
I think the pressure on social media companies is commercial more than political, at least in the US. There is some, yes - but the real drive towards tighter control is in preserving the company brand and appeal to advertisers. That means removing anything that the advertising clients would be unwilling to appear to be endorsing. No conspiracy theories, no highly-partisan politics, no quackery, nothing that even faintly could be considered sexual, and no creepy things aimed at children.
Re: (Score:2)
There are plenty of advertisers who want to target right-wing kooks, such as companies selling t-shirts, bumper stickers, and Confederate memorabilia.
Facebook was allowing that before they were pressured to stop.
Re: (Score:2)
They absolutely want to be in that role. They just want to be the sole arbiters of what gets censored or promoted, rather than having to listen to someone else.
Re: (Score:3)
They just want to be the sole arbiters of what gets censored or promoted
That's fine with me. It's their site, they should be able to do whatever they want.
When the government is involved in deciding what is "good" or "bad", that's far more dangerous.
Facebook and politics (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The ISPs were in this position not that long ago, some of the most hated companies in the country, and solved their problem, or at least delayed it, by going partisan and aligned themselves with the GOP. Network neutrality went from a nonpartisan issue to an intractable partisan issue very quickly. I can sorta picture Facebook going down the same path and aligning themselves with the GOP... at least their executives. I'm not sure how their
Just another bunch of billionaires (Score:5, Insightful)
Who don't want "burdensome regulation", so they can "legally" pwn you, and sell everything about you to anyone.
But the idiots here think you should have no privacy, so they can stalk you.
Excuse me, what? (Score:2)
SV: Free Speech for Me, but not for Thee (Score:3)
I'll enjoy when they fall.
Anything they disagree with is labeled "hate speech" and taken down.
That's not how this is supposed to work.
Facebook needs a new branch (Score:2)
Maybe they could call it "FaceBook Initiative", or "FBI" for sh - oh wait.
Maybe they should start a political party (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you can start with Palantir, Brave, and Reddit right off the bat. Twitter tries to put up a progressive image, but they ignore their own ToS to give right-wingers a platform. There's also no shortage of right-wing screeds on YouTube. HP notoriously made Carly Fiorina (R) their CEO at one point. Microsoft and Amazon are fighting to be the DoD's bitch. And even Google (Along with the aforementioned Microsoft) was working to get in bed with ICE before a group of their employees were like: "Hey, what happ
What "the future of free speech" means to Facebook (Score:2)
Facebook just created an Oversight Board that determines what gets censored and what is allowed. Its members are so comically left-wing that it's clear what future they see for free speech: none.
After all the criticism they doubled down on their bias and now they want to tell us they are essential for free speech?
Re: What "the future of free speech" means to Face (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Silicon valley IS important, and so is free speech (Score:2)
Free speech comes with need to be responsible. For example, we are not allowed to liable/slander somebody, nor are we allowed to scream 'Fire' in a theater that is not on fire. So, what stops ppl from doing such things IRL? Your being forced to take responsibility because YOU ARE KNOWN.
With the net, we are nearly all anonymous. That means that it is IMPOSSIBLE for Social Media to determine which logins are ppl, bots, KNOWN ppl, etc.
What is needed is
Maybe they should have thought this out (Score:2)
1. Work to increase the power of federal government in every way possible.
2. Come to understand that the power may be used against you.
3. Work to decrease the power of federal government in every way possible, but only where it might hurt you.
4. Profit.
Introduction of regulation also (Score:1)
The summary describes the goal of this lobby group as "reining in lawmakers and regulators". It is important to remember that Facebook, and companies like it, also lobby to *introduce* new legislation. Often under the guise of 'creating a level playing field', new regulation serves to increase the barrier of entry for competitors. Facebook has the cash and organizational capabilities to hire lawyers and implement corporate compliance processes. Your average guys-in-garage-startup have not.
Back in the year 1999.. (Score:1)
I remember the day when all these tech companies just stayed out of politics. They stayed out of politics, politics stayed out of them, and everyone was going, "Hey this tech stuff is pretty cool."
Everything was great. Companies would innovate, we'd get new shit all the time, and everyone had a ball.
Then the MS anti-trust trial happened. That was... well, I don't necessarily feel MS should have been able to exclude everyone, but that really started the ball rolling. MS started investing a bit into some corp
Doing what MS had to do (Score:1)