Mark Zuckerberg, Tim Cook, Sundar Pichai and Jeff Bezos were all present, and didn’t get an easy ride from representatives on either side of the House. Each CEO faced questions about user data, bullying competitors, left-wing bias, and more. The first day of the hearing didn’t necessarily resolve any of the questions from the committee. But, it certainly offered plenty of insight into how these companies operate, and their own perceptions of power.
What is the Aim of the Hearing?
Congress has called the giants of the tech industry to answer questions on whether or not the main players in the industry have become too big for their boots. Fears over anti-competitive practices, monopolization, and their threat to smaller businesses were discussed. Cicilline also referenced the ongoing global pandemic, by noting that these companies have thrived during the lockdown, as users depend on their services for essentials such as communication, education, online retail, and entertainment. To make his point, Cicilline referred to a similar situation that seemed a world apart from big tech – the railroads of the 1800’s. He argued that these carved up the geography of America through discriminating against farmers and holding monopolies which prevented true choice.
Accusation: Big Tech is Anti-Conservative
The hearing, for the most part, was non-partisan. However, at times political lines were drawn in the sand. It’s fair to say that there are some in the Republican party with a chip on their shoulder about tech, and recent events, such as Donald Trump Jr being temporarily banned from Twitter, and President Donald Trump’s social media messages having inaccuracies flagged, only added fuel to the fire. It’s not the first time these fears have been flagged. In 2018, Google CEO Sundar Pichai found himself in front of Congress explaining why when a user Googled the word ‘idiot’, the top result was Donald Trump. His answer at the time, which did little to appease Republicans, is that Google simply serves up the most relevant search results.
Accusation: Facebook Crushes its Competition
Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg is no stranger to sitting in front of Congress, even if this time it was only a video link from his garden. He found himself in the line of fire as Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler raised the purchase by his company of Instagram in 2012, a direct competitor. It’s long since been noted that Facebook has adopted an “if you can’t beat them, buy them” approach to its competitors, and Nadler expressed concern about the $1 billion dollar purchase of Instagram. Nadler’s exhibit A was a document obtained by the committee, written by Zuckerberg, which recommended pursuing Instagram to “neutralize a competitor.” Zuckerberg’s defense was that the Federal Trade Committee had approved the purchase at the time. But, Cicilline was quick to interject and state that the “failing” of the FTC did not necessarily mean that the merger didn’t impinge antitrust laws.
Accusation: Apple’s Pandemic Profiteering
Apple CEO, Tim Cook, had a fairly stress-free few hours during the early parts of the hearing, but as the day progressed, his companies dominance was brought into the limelight. First up, Cook was questioned as to why parental-control apps were removed from the platform, shortly after Apple introduced its own native version. Concerns were raised that this behavior was anti-competitive. Cook responded that these apps were removed due to privacy concerns. Rep. Lucy Kay McBath showed the committee an email from a concerned parent to an Apple executive, questioning the removal of these apps, only to be told that they could use Apple’s own version instead. When asked to comment, Cook stated that he was unable to view the email. Nadler raised the recent issue of Apple’s commission for payment from Airbnb and ClassPass, after the companies began offering virtual classes during the pandemic. This, stated Nadler, was “pandemic profiteering.” Cook defended Apple’s actions, stating that its own rules require companies that sell digitally to pay commission to Apple. These rules were brought up time and time again, with concerns that they weren’t being followed fairly. It was the first time Bezos had found himself sat in front of Congress, albeit via video link. In his opening statement, he painted himself as the perfect example of the American dream, telling the committee that his fortunate position was thanks to hard work and meeting customer demands.
Accusation: Google Has Become a Walled Garden
Google CEO Sundar Pichai is no stranger to speaking in front of Congress, and this time around found himself defending Google’s search engine practices. One of the main criticisms of late regarding Google is that it is circumventing other websites by serving up content within the search page itself, such as restaurant listings, recipes, purchase options, and other data. This removes the need to actually visit the websites providing the results, therefore keeping more of the user within Google’s walled garden and keeping more advertising revenue for Google itself. Not for the first time, Google’s handling of data was also raised. Despite Pichai stating that Google users had absolute control over their own data, and that the company had simplified its settings, not everyone was on board. Rep. Val Demings dragged Google over the coals for its handling of user data. It’s pretty hard to argue with that statement, to be fair.
What Next for the Antitrust Hearing?
It was a rocky first day for the hearings, and it’s unlikely either side came away feeling that they could claim a victory. With big tech facing some searching questions, they’ll likely be feeling the pressure. But, at the same time, their responses will have raised more questions than answers with Congress. The end result of all this is power – who yields it, who has too much of it, and who should be responsible for it. With so much influence over our lives, tech companies find themselves in a very privileged position of knowing almost everything about us, as well as controlling where we spend our money. That’s a problem for Congress, and if it can’t get some reasonable reassurances out of tech companies, they could face having power wrestled from them, or even be broken up. We’ll have to wait and see what happens next, but it’s certain that neither side will go down without a fight, while both claiming to have the public’s best interests at heart.
