The White House sought to dis*tance it*self Sat*ur*day from re*ports that President Trump is con*sid*er*ing an ex*ec*u*tive ord*er that would sub*ject tech giants like Facebook, Goo*gle and Twitter to federal in*ves*ti*gat*ions into al*leged po*lit*i*cal bias.
For weeks, top tech com*panies have been on edge, fear*ing that the Trump ad*min*is*tra*tion could seek to regu*late the in*dus*try in re*sponse to the president’s tweets at*tack*ing so*cial media sites for si*len*cing con*ser*va*tives online. Their worst sus*pi*cions seemed to come true Fri*day night, with the e*mer*gence of a draft ex*ec*u*tive ord*er that called for near*ly every federal a*gen*cy to study how com*panies like Facebook police their plat*forms and re*fer in*stan*ces of “bias” to the Justice Department for further study.
But three White House aides soon in*sist*ed they didn’t write the draft ord*er, didn’t know where it came from and gen*er*al*ly found it to be un*work*able pol*icy. One seni*or White House of*fi*cial con*firmed the docu*ment had been float*ing around the White House but had not gone through the for*mal proc*ess, which is con*trolled by the staff sec*re*tar*y.
Asked a*bout the docu*ment, Lind*say Walters, the dep*u*ty White House press sec*re*tar*y, said of the dig*i*tal-age ‘who*dun*it’ on Sat*ur*day: “Al*though the White House is con*cerned a*bout the con*duct of online plat*forms and their im*pact on soci*ety, this docu*ment is not the re*sult of an of*fi*cial White House policymaking proc*ess.”
For months, com*panies like Facebook, Goo*gle and Twitter have grap*pled with al*le*ga*tions of anti-con*ser*va*tive bias from the coun*try’s top Re*pub*lic*ans. In tweets, Trump re*peat*ed*ly has charged with*out evi*dence that tech com*panies de*lib*er*ate*ly si*lence right-lean*ing view*ers and even rig search re*sults to show neg*a*tive stor*ies a*bout con*ser*va*tives or hide their ac*counts altogether. He has fre*quent*ly told al*lies that bias against con*ser*va*tives is a cen*tral issue to his sup*port*ers, and his cam*paign has used the al*le*ga*tions as fod*der for fundraising in re*cent weeks.
On Capitol Hill, mean*while, top Re*pub*lic*ans have mount*ed their own cam*paign against Sil*i*con Valley, even for*cing Twitter CEO Jack Dor*sey to tes*ti*fy at a re*cent hear*ing a*bout ac*cu*sa*tions of cen*sor*ship. GOP lead*ers have threat*ened to force Goo*gle’s lead*ing exec*utives to do the same.
Bias, drugs and bots: Congress questions Twitter and Facebook
Facebook’s Sheryl Sandberg and Twitter’s Jack Dorsey appeared before lawmakers on Sept. 5 and discussed foreign interference, political bias and drug sales. (Patrick Martin /The Washington Post)
But the po*lit*i*cal attacks morphed into a real threat of sting*ing reg*u*la*tion earli*er this month, when the Justice Department an*nounced it would gath*er state at*tor*neys gen*er*al on Tuesday to dis*cuss the tech in*dus*try, its fil*ter*ing prac*tices online and the im*pli*ca*tions for an*ti*trust. For Facebook, Goo*gle, Twitter and their peers, the ses*sion seemed poised to open the door for the federal and state gov*ern*ments to coordinate and be*gin fresh in*ves*ti*gat*ions of their busi*ness prac*tices.
All month, those com*panies' lobby*ists also had been buzz*ing a*bout a po*ten*tial White House ex*ec*u*tive ord*er that aimed “to pro*tect com*pe*ti*tion and small busi*nes*ses from bias in online plat*forms,” ac*cord*ing to a copy of the docu*ment ob*tained by The Washington Post. If signed by the president, it would task federal ag*en*cies — in*clud*ing the in*de*pend*ent Justice Department — to “in*ves*ti*gate and/or pros*ecute” com*panies that use their “mar*ket pow*er in a way that harms con*sum*ers.” The draft docu*ment ul*ti*mate*ly leaked Fri*day, pub*lished by Bloom*berg News, to whom a White House of*fi*cial said it was un*der con*sid*er*a*tion.
Aides at the White House said all week that the National Economic Council — which would have been tasked un*der the draft ord*er to help ag*en*cies probe online bias — didn’t write it and didn’t know where it came from. Nor did the White House’s top tech pol*icy hub, the Office of Science and Technology Policy, two White House sources said. Trump has of*ten or*dered aides to write ex*ec*u*tive or*ders that were later deemed un*work*able, but another seni*or White House of*fi*cial said he had no knowl*edge of this one.
“It would be en*tire*ly in*sane,” said one lawyer with knowl*edge of the docu*ment, who spoke on the con*di*tion of anonymity.
The docu*ment has float*ed to tech com*panies such as Facebook and law*yers at white-shoe firms around Washington. In fact, the first that many at OSTP had even heard of an ex*ec*u*tive ord*er came from an email sent by an un*like*ly source: Yelp, the re*views site. The com*pany long has at*tacked Goo*gle for abus*ing its mar*ket pow*er, al*be*it by lim*it*ing the reach of some of its com*peti*tors in search re*sults and not po*lit*i*cal bias. Still, Lu*ther Lowe, seni*or vice president for pol*icy at Yelp, con*tacted White House aides in Sep*tem*ber with the draft ex*ec*u*tive ord*er, ac*cord*ing to two White House aides and a copy of an email shared with The Post.
Reached this week*end, Lowe did not ad*dress whether he wrote or com*mis*sioned the ex*ec*u*tive ord*er. “Far from rid*ing the cur*rent tech back*lash, Yelp has been con*sis*tent*ly criti*cal of Goo*gle for ac*tu*al bias in search re*sults — in local search, for their own com*pe*ti*tive benefit,” he said in a state*ment. “We believe this anti-com*pe*ti*tive con*duct — bias*ing their re*sults in fa*vor of their own house prop*er*ties — to be a vi*o*la*tion of US an*ti*trust law and we have been urging both po*lit*i*cal par*ties in Congress, the Administration and regu*la*tors to in*ves*ti*gate and pros*ecute this il*legal bias.”
Reply With Quote