You are here Google
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2021-06-22 19:20
The Heartland Institute
BIG-TECH DEFENDERS VASTLY UNDERESTIMATE ITS POWER RELATIVE TO GOVERNMENT’S
JUNE 22, 2021
By Scott Cleland
Big-Tech is much more powerful than its defenders assume.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2021-05-25 13:02
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2021-05-17 15:08
CLELAND: The Achilles Heel Of Big Tech’s Cancel Power | The Daily Caller
DAILY CALLER OPINION SCOTT CLELAND |CONTRIBUTOR|May 17, 20211:04 PM ET
CLELAND: The Achilles Heel of Big Tech’s Cancel Power
Big Tech’s unchecked.
If the four CEOs of Google, Facebook, Twitter and Amazon collectively could cancel online a sitting Republican U.S. president and his political allies with impunity in January, what checks them from collectively cancelling tens of millions of Republicans again?
What checks Big Tech from using their Section 230 impunity in the 2022 midterm elections and collectively canceling many Republican Senate and House candidates, their political allies and online followers that express broadly held Republican views that Big Tech deems objectionable?
It is in the raw political interests of the government’s incumbent party and unchecked Big Tech to collectively cancel the opposition party online to retain control of their levers of power long term.
Do any checks stand in the way of “The Collective Cancel” political precedent becoming practice?
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Fri, 2021-04-23 12:17
https://dailycaller.com/2021/04/23/cleland-why-repeal-not-reform-section-230/
DAILY CALLER
CLELAND: Why Repeal Not Reform Section 230?
SCOTT CLELAND -- CONTRIBUTOR -- April 23, 2021 10:20 AM ET
Repeal of Section 230’s 1996 lawless Wild West Internet policy is inevitable because it is based on an immoral premise and has inflicted severe damage to America’s constitutional liberties, national security and economic prosperity.
Repeal vs. Reform
Repeal of Section 230 would serve America and Americans much better than reforms that perpetuate lawless U.S. Internet policy and guarantee Big Tech remains unaccountable and Americans remain unprotected online.
Repeal would affect a major national policy change, while reform incrementalism would preserve the online status quo.
Repeal would be a comprehensive and constitutional solution, while content moderation reforms are piecemeal solutions that carry constitutional risks.
Repeal would empower 2022 and 2024 voters with a national policy conversation that asks candidates if and how they are going to ensure Big Tech is accountable and Americans are protected online?
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2021-04-19 12:02
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2020-10-21 14:12
“The court of public opinion” is not a court of law.
“The truth” is not sufficient in a court of law like it is in the court of public opinion. In a court of law, the well-known legal “truth” standard and oath is telling “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.”
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Fri, 2020-10-09 11:45
https://dailycaller.com/2020/10/08/cleland-discovering-googles-rule-of-scofflaw/
DAILY CALLER OPINION
Discovering Google’s Rule of Scofflaw
SCOTT CLELAND CONTRIBUTOR -- October 08, 20203:04 PM ET
Google has a discovery double standard.
Google treats the discovery of others’ information the way they don’t want discovery of their information treated, the opposite of the Golden Rule.
The evidence shows Google expects everyone else’s private or proprietary information to be publicly accessible and useful, except Google’s.
Google knows information is power.
Google and antitrust authorities also know asymmetric information advantages can create, maintain and extend market power.
This is a timely and relevant concern as the two biggest legal cases that Google has ever faced are coming to a head in public, at nearly the same time.
On October 7, the Supreme Court heard the final Oracle v. Google arguments.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2020-09-21 11:04
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2020-09-14 16:33
The impending public filing of the expected DOJ antitrust case against Google means big change is afoot for U.S. antitrust enforcement for Internet platforms.
As we look ahead, it’s important to not miss the forest for the trees.
The Senate is having an antitrust hearing on Google. The House is soon releasing a report on Big Tech antitrust. And the DOJ and states are expected to file an antitrust lawsuit against Google.
Some background on my insights and predictions below.
Thirteen years ago, I testified before the Senate Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee in opposition to the proposed Google-DoubleClick acquisition. I accurately warned of “the stakes of lax antitrust enforcement…” and “missing the forest for the trees,” because the merger obviously “would create extreme market concentration horizontally and vertically, and also tip the online advertising market to a bottleneck.” Since then, I have copiously chronicled Google’s antitrust issues on Googleopoly.net.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2020-09-08 17:22
Please don’t miss my Daily Caller Op-Ed (PDF here) on America’s Internet Reset Opportunity for a Responsible, Prosperous Internet.
It explains how America can and must do much better than a Wild West, Winner-Take-All, Internet law.
And it spotlights a bipartisan, popular Internet reset opportunity for Congress to restore a legal duty of care online to revitalize America’s civil society, competitive commerce, and productive prosperity.
Pages
|
