Lobbying

With bipartisan agreement, members of Congress said that Silicon Valley needed to be reined in with new regulations. But time and again, when the most pressing issues have landed on Capitol Hill — like gun violence, school shootings, immigration and border control — Congress has declared five-alarm fires only to fail to follow through on major legislation. The current zest for new privacy laws is also likely to stall as lawmakers wrestle with the technical complexities and constitutional vexations sure to emerge with any legislation to control content on the internet. Beyond the typical pol

As Mark Zuckerberg prepares to testify before Congress, Facebook is quietly fighting a crucial privacy measure in the Illinois Statehouse. Starting April 11, state legislators will consider a new amendment to the Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) that could neuter one of the strongest privacy laws in the US, giving Facebook free rein to run facial recognition scans without users’ consent.

Facebook's lobbying influence — along with Mark Zuckerberg’s expected mea culpa — may be enough, privacy experts say, to blunt any talk of significant consumer privacy regulations meant to reign in Facebook and other tech giants, regardless of the angry bluster Zuckerberg endures on Capitol Hill both April 10 and 11. “I think it will be really interesting whether Republicans give Facebook a pass given Zuckerberg’s prostrate apology stance — ‘I’m sorry, I’m sorry.

In the early days, Silicon Valley and Washington largely ignored each other. But in 1998, the Justice Department accused Microsoft of building a software monopoly. A settlement was negotiated, and the tech companies got a lesson: They needed Washington lobbyists. Facebook opened its DC office when it was five years old — and already worth billions. It routinely hires lots of top-tier, veteran lobbyists, as does Google. The current lobbying environment is ideal. Many lawmakers still don't fully grasp the technology.

Alliances between Silicon Valley powerhouses and their cousins in Seattle (WA) are constantly forming and breaking apart, with big names often coming down on the opposite side of policy and legislative debates. The result is that the “tech lobby” is far from monolithic, with big names in the industry often at odds with one another.

President Donald Trump continued to needle Amazon, claiming the company maintains an advantageous relationship with the US Postal Service amounting to a "scam" worth "billions of dollars." The President wrote on Twitter:

Sinclair Broadcast Group — a media company run by a family of multi-millionaire Republican donors — is on the cusp of owning enough local television stations to reach 70 percent of American households. On the day that Donald Trump was elected, it would have been all but impossible for any single broadcaster to claim that large a share of the local TV news market.

The tech industry is splintering in the wake of the controversies surrounding social platforms like Facebook, Twitter and Google's YouTube. A wide range of companies — from legacy Silicon Valley firms like IBM and Oracle to business-focused firms like Salesforce and Cisco — want to be seen as responsible players who can be trusted to make wise decisions when faced with tough calls. Companies of all stripes are trying to explain more clearly what they do, why they're different, and how they benefit society, one senior level official at a non-internet company said.

[Commentary] Sinclair’s behavior in trying to merge with Tribune is doing it — and the entire broadcasting industry — no favors. By dragging out this process, and by pressing for every advantage, Sinclair is making life difficult for Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai, who has been broadcasters’ best friend in that job in decades.

Former White House ethics attorney Walter Shaub questioned whether a gun that Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai received from the National Rifle Association (NRA) violates the FCC’s ethics rules. In a number of tweets on Feb 23, Shaub expressed his confusion as to why accepting the gift didn’t go against the standards of conduct for federal employees that bar employees from receiving gifts from lobbyists, such as the NRA.