While a much-awaited antitrust hearing has been charged as an Inquisition to get Big Tech kingpins, the CEOs were largely able to skirt questions and talk circles around lawmakers looking to bring internet platforms under stern control.
Though countless empty slogans and assurances were provided at the moment, little was actually said, however, as the reps attempted and failed to press the CEOs on concerns of “anti-competitive” business practices and political bias on social networking.
Zuckerberg confronted a flurry of queries on Facebook’s penchant for buying up competitors. Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colorado) grilled Zuckerberg on the business ’s purchase of programs such as Instagram and WhatsApp, asserting Facebook had become a societal networking monopoly.
In fact, as [subcommittee chairman Rep. Jerrold Nadler] noted, you’d tell one of Facebook’s senior engineers in 2012 you are able to quote, ‘likely purchase, just purchase any aggressive startup, but it’ll be a while before we could buy Google. ’ Can you remember writing that email?
Zuckerberg brushed off the promise, stating that while he did not recall the email, “it sounds like a joke. ” The congressmen, however, noted that it had been sent “in regards to having just closed the Instagram sale” at April 2012.
Also on rt.com
Zuckerberg insisted that the platform still faces competition from many angles, even while repeatedly deflecting direct queries about the company ’s self-described “land catch ” approach to competing companies.
An arbiter of speech?
Zuckerberg’s time at the hot chair also saw him grilled over Facebook’s alleged bias against conservative voices. Even though the platform has been repeatedly caught selectively censoring specific posts and blocking accounts under obscure pretexts, Zuckerberg used a collection of platitudes to shrug off the question.
“Our purpose is to offer you a platform for many thoughts. We wish to give everybody in the world a voice,” Zuckerberg said, insisting Facebook had distinguished itself as “one of the companies that defends free expression that the most. ”
While Zuckerberg said Facebook shouldn’t ever turn into an “arbiter of fact,” he had been happy to explain how the platform frequently makes itself an arbiter of speech.
“On particular claims, if a person is going to head out and say hydroxychloroquine is demonstrated to heal Covid, when actually it’s not… that statement could lead people to take a medication that… could be detrimental to people, we believe we should take that down,” that the CEO argued.
Also on rt.com
No more ‘hushed donations’?
Google and Alphabet head honcho Sundar Pichai also faced tough questions on political bias, as Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) sought to induce him to take a clear stance on whether the search giant would be configured “at a means to assist Joe Biden” and “silence conservatives,” together with the November election just months away.
“Congressman, on our search engine, conservatives have more access to information than ever before,” Pichai said, largely side-stepping the question, prompting Jordan to state it again, imagining it had been a “yes or no question. ”
“You have my dedication, it’s always been true, and we’ll continue to conduct ourselves in a neutral way,” that the CEO said at last, including “We won’t perform some work to politically tilt anything one way or the other, it’s contrary to our core values. ”
Also on rt.com
Jordan subsequently contacted Pichai to a leaked company email dated to 2016, in which a top marketing head at the company explained a “hushed contribution ” contributed into a nonprofit, allegedly linked to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, also aimed at outreach to Latino voters.
“But you did it 2016,” Jordan said. “Ms. Eliana Murillo, head of your multicultural marketing, talks about the hushed donation Google made into the Clinton effort, and also you applauded her work. ”
Keeping with a common topic of the hearing, Pichai diverted, insisting Google “didn’t find any signs of such activity” and the firm “complied with laws in 2016. ”
For much of the hearing, Jeff Bezos, Amazon main and the planet ’s wealthiest man, found himself the odd man out, almost disregarded as lawmakers interrogated the other CEOs gift — using Bezos at one stage observed kindly snacking amid the spectacle.
His turn eventually did come, but as Washington Democrat Pramila Jayapal — who represents the district in which the organization is established — began hammering Amazon’s usage of third party vendor data.
While Bezos noted that the company had policies prohibiting such practices, in what may have been first during Wednesday’s hours of evasive testimony, Bezos openly admitted that he could not “guarantee… that coverage has never been violated. ”
Despite the extended marathon hearing eating up most of Wednesday afternoon, Americans who suffered the entire event will walk away with couple of new insights, together with all the four billionaires present avoiding meaningful accountability at almost every turn, capable to game Congress’ time-constrained arrangement with filibustering non-answers for nearly half an hour straight.
Think your friends are interested?