10/17/2019 / By News Editors
There is growing and bipartisan alarm a
(Article by Mike Davis republished from TownHall.com)
Big Tech has engaged in this deplorable conduct largel
Fortunately, bold and courageous conservatives and populist progressives are stepping up on behalf of the American people in the fight against Big Tech. This includes new U.S. Senators Josh Hawley (R-MO) and Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), joining a bipartisan chorus of 51 attorn
We recently launched the Internet Accountability Project (IAP) with the goal of supporting bold, principled leaders who have the courage to stand up to Big Tech’s bad acts, hold them accountable, and give a voice to real Americans — especially grassroots conservatives — thr
Since our launch just a few weeks ago, we have already heard from many c
Enough is enough. It’s time to re-boot Big Tech, upgrade and reform the sweetheart laws that protect them, and enforce the antitrust, consumer protection, and similar laws already on the books.
Enforce Our Antitrust Laws
We are pleased that the bipartisan 51 state attorneys general, along with a bipartisan group of lawmakers on the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, recently took the bold and courageous steps of investigating Big Tech under the antitrust laws. As conservatives, we should support law enforcement. A free market requires a functioning market, so we should praise government officials in their efforts to investigate and hold Big Tech accountable. Conservatives should not shy away from these antitrust investigations; we should support vigorous enforcement. After all, antitrust law enforcement is the great American solution to the problem of undue political and market power. Rather than impose regulations on every company in a sector using a regulatory hammer, antitrust law enforcement uses a scalpel and goes after only those companies that are harming markets. As conservatives, we believe that antitrust law enforcement is a better approach to take than heavy-handed regulation. We now have a populist Republican back in the White House, making it an opportune time for antitrust law enforcement to return to its roots and for antitrust law enforcers to rein in Big Tech. It is time for today’s Republicans to take on Big Tech using antitrust law enforcement, just like Republican trustbusters like President Teddy Roosevelt did before them.
Upgrade Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996
Beyond antitrust, conservatives should also look to modernize Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. Section 230 was a well-intentioned piece of legislation back in 1996 when enacted. It was intended to protect Internet start-ups from being wiped out by defamation suits for content posted by users online. The big idea underpinning Section 230 was that the internet would be a thriving marketplace: competition online would be fierce because entry barriers for new websites were very low. In 1996, Congress believed that Section 230 was needed in order to protect nascent Internet companies. Of course, today’s Internet is nothing like the Internet lawmakers envisio
Personal Data = Personal Property
Conservatives should also support the idea of data as a property right. Every year, and largely without our understanding, Big Tech makes hundreds of billions of dollars by harvesting our personal data. We are just beginning to comprehend the enormous cost in our loss of privacy for “free” social-media accounts, email addresses, and Internet searches. Creatin
What This All Means To Conservatives
As conservatives, we don’t want to see any economic activity over-regulated. Funda
Read more at: TownHall.com
Tagged Under: Big Tech, Censorship, conservatives, First Amendment, free speech, political bias, spying, surveillance, tech giants, Tyranny
COPYRIGHT © 2017 FIRSTAMENDMENT.NEWS
All content posted on this site is protected under Free Speech. FirstAmendment.news is not responsible for content written by contributing authors. The information on this site is provided for educational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended as a substitute for professional advice of any kind. FirstAmendment.news assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. All trademarks, registered trademarks and service marks mentioned on this site are the property of their respective owners.