One of my favorite books about presidential campaigns is "Primary Colors." In it, one of the consultants says to the candidate "Don't attempt to legislate until you get elected." I think that's Warren's mistake here, and in fact most of the would-be candidates are making this same mistake. They make it very easy for the opposition, both within the party, and elsewhere, to attack them. It becomes a variation on counting one's chickens before they're hatched.
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Sen. Elizabeth Warren pushes to break up big tech companies like Amazon and Facebook
- Thread starter FreddyE1977
- Start date
- Status
Very good observation!
That's the one thing Trump didn't do....announce specific legislation. Heavy doses of sloganeering and attacking the supposed enemies of the white working class, but nothing specific.
Apparently Senator Warren has posted a petition asking people to support her plan to break-up big tech companies.
On Facebook.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethb...ing-up-facebooks-monopolyon-facebook-n2542954
Article notes that Facebook initially pulled this down, but then realized they were only
throwing gasoline on the fire.
On Facebook.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethb...ing-up-facebooks-monopolyon-facebook-n2542954
Article notes that Facebook initially pulled this down, but then realized they were only
throwing gasoline on the fire.
Why do people keep referring to Facebook as a 'tech' company? They are NOT! They use tech to message and data mine but they do not produce anything resembling a tech product. Nor does Google for that matter (although a tiny bit of that company is in the tech bidness). Amazon is not primarily a tech company either although, like Google, they do have a tiny tech component.
Media, please educate yourselves on what is a genuine tech company.
Media, please educate yourselves on what is a genuine tech company.
Here's how Google describes itself:
Google LLC is an American multinational technology company that specializes in Internet-related services and products, which include online advertising technologies, search engine, cloud computing, software, and hardware.
Here's how Amazon describes itself:
Amazon, Inc. is a Seattle, Washington-based, multinational technology company focusing in e-commerce, cloud computing, and artificial intelligence.
I think a more useful debate for Congress to have would be about online privacy and coming up with legislation about how these companies can monetize the users personal data. There was an interesting story on 60 Minutes a few months ago that compared US privacy laws to those in Europe:
https://iapp.org/news/a/60-minutes-profiles-the-gdpr-and-us-privacy-regulation/
Rather than penalizing companies for their size, why not change something important, like the way they use our personal data to make money? Personally I don't care how big a company is. It doesn't affect me at all. But them using my personal information for their profit is something that should be stopped. And just breaking up Facebook or Amazon won't change that.
https://iapp.org/news/a/60-minutes-profiles-the-gdpr-and-us-privacy-regulation/
Rather than penalizing companies for their size, why not change something important, like the way they use our personal data to make money? Personally I don't care how big a company is. It doesn't affect me at all. But them using my personal information for their profit is something that should be stopped. And just breaking up Facebook or Amazon won't change that.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/12/tech/news-corp-google-break-up/index.html
An Update Now News Corp is allegedly calling for Google aka Alphabet Holdings to break up
An Update Now News Corp is allegedly calling for Google aka Alphabet Holdings to break up
As though we don't have a choice in search engines? I never use Google search. While we're at it, let's break up Murdoch's company.
The proper definition of what industry a particular company belongs is the definition of that industry itself and not the PR department of the company.
Amazon is a retailer - virtually pure and simple. Yes they use technology to sell things, manage inventory and market but that makes them no different than most every other retailer. Their actual 'technology' arm is a minuscule part of their business.
Google mines and sells information. Again, they use technology to perform that function - just as every other company in that industry does. Their 'technology' business is a very small part of their total business offerings.
OK, let's do that. Here's a definition from a business dictionary:
http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/technology.html
The purposeful application of information in the design, production, and utilization of goods and services, and in the organization of human activities.
From inc.com:
What's the definition of a tech company? It's complicated
"You are a technology company if you are in the business of selling technology--if you make money by selling applied scientific knowledge that solves a concrete problem."
-- Alex Payne, Co-Founder, Simple
"It's generally a company whose primary business is selling tech or tech services. A more nuanced definition is a company with tech or tech services as a key part of its business. It's a hard question."
-- Todd Berkowitz, VP of Research, Gartner
"A tech company uses technology to create an unfair advantage in terms of product uniqueness or scale or improved margins. Ask the question: Could this company exist without technology? If the answer is no, it has to be a tech company."
-- Greg Bettinelli, Partner, Upfront Ventures
"I think there's a false dichotomy in the idea that a company either is or is not a tech company. I think it's possible for a company to be a hybrid if tech is giving it an edge over incumbents."
-- Hayley Barna, Venture Partner, First Round Capital
Take a look at how big a part of Amazon the computer services division has become. It seems that half the big eCommerce sites and logistics services use Amazon server farms to run...
The whole company would not exist without a foundation in technology.
Except that none of Murdoch's companies have monopoly status. They don't even, when combined with another player or two, have oligopoly dominance of a market.
In any case, I just don't think that Senator Warren understands they tech sector at all.
That's not just her problem. Listen to the jaw-droppingly stupid questions that get asked by lawmakers of both parties whenever a hearing on anything tech-related is called for.
The point is: technology companies produce technology; they may or may not use it. Calling Amazon a technology company because it provides server farms is akin to calling the Yellow Cab company an auto manufacturer because it uses a product produced elsewhere.
Actually, Amazon has developed part of its severer administration hardware technology... and its administration software and systems are all its own. If Adobe, which makes no physical products is a tech company, so is Amazon.
Amazon developed the first book reader, and has sold over 100 million of Kindle devices. They developed the Echo, and one of those is in 26% of American homes and is the model for competitive devices. They also have created products like Fire TV and an extensive line of non-innovative but nonetheless technical products, ranging from charging cables to home automation devices. And they have bought a number of smart home companies that are pure tech innovators.
If you drill down to the operating level, the robotic and logistics systems that Amazon has developed, some on their own, some with partners, is at the very cutting edge of tech development.
Aside from making Facebook sell off Instagram, I'm not sure how you could "break it up."
Amazon would be easier because you could make them sell off Whole Foods, AWS, and other businesses.
But realistically, you're not going to be able to substantially blunt the influence of these companies through efforts like this.
Now, if you want to talk about radio.. and big groups like iHeartRadio, Entercom and Cumulus.. that would be much easier to do. I just think it would result in hundreds of radio stations going silent - permanently.
Maybe that's what needs to happen, but I'm not sure that's good public policy.
Amazon would be easier because you could make them sell off Whole Foods, AWS, and other businesses.
But realistically, you're not going to be able to substantially blunt the influence of these companies through efforts like this.
Now, if you want to talk about radio.. and big groups like iHeartRadio, Entercom and Cumulus.. that would be much easier to do. I just think it would result in hundreds of radio stations going silent - permanently.
Maybe that's what needs to happen, but I'm not sure that's good public policy.
In my view there hasn't been a lot of thought given to it because there are a lot of big technology companies, such as Intel, that aren't on the list. I don't see Microsoft being mentioned. It sounds like they've just picked the ones that get attention without a lot of thought to how they in fact work. Facebook became big because of the users, not because of anything they did themselves. It's user-generated content. Same with Twitter. Neither are conventional corporate structures. They have to find a way to change behavior more than break up companies. So they'd have to force people to use other platforms to make this work.
That was a different time. It was SOOOOOOO 90's.
Things are different today. This is NOT my grandfather's Democratic Party.
Probably isn't yours either.
- Status