Digital Content

Apple kicked the popular Fortnite video game off its App Store after the gaming company released a payment system that sidestepped Apple’s. Fortnite maker Epic Games released a feature that lets users choose how they want to pay for in-app purchases — either through the App Store or Play Store, or from Epic directly, which saves up to 20 percent.  Apple takes a cut of in-app sales — usually 30 percent — in a practice that has faced significant backlash from

Facebook is rolling out a new policy that will prevent U.S.

With due respect to Federal Communications Commissioner Michael O’Rielly, conservatives interested in reform understand full well the purpose of the First Amendment (“Mike O’Rielly’s Free Speech Fall,” Review & Outlook, Aug. 5). We simply don’t believe that gigantic and massively powerful social-media platforms deserve special statutory protection, as is laid out in Section 230.

The coronavirus pandemic, Black Lives Matter protests and a looming election have brought long-simmering conflicts between tech platforms and President Donald Trump to a boil, as Facebook, Twitter and other services are starting to take presidential misinformation seriously. The new willingness to challenge the president is coming only as Trump's presidency is weakened by a deadly pandemic and an economic meltdown.

President Donald Trump issued a pair of executive orders that will impose new limits on Chinese social-media apps TikTok and WeChat, effectively setting a 45-day deadline for an American company to purchase TikTok’s US operations. The orders bar people in the US or subject to US jurisdiction from transactions with the China-based owners of the apps, effective 45 days from Aug 6. That raises the possibility that US citizens would be prevented from downloading the apps in the Apple or Google app stores.

President Donald Trump has sent a message to the Federal Communications Commission: Cross me for misusing my powers in this way, and you’ll be punished, too. The president wants Mike O’Rielly, his fellow FCC commissioners, and appointees across agencies to know what happens when they dare to put the rule of law first, just as the president wants Twitter, and Facebook, and all influential companies on the Internet or off to know how carefully they must tread with him in charge.

Companies like Apple, Alphabet, Facebook and Amazon provide consumers with a wider array of goods and services than ever and at remarkably low prices. But there’s a catch: The same companies that have improved consumer access to cheap products are increasingly limiting options in the marketplace of ideas and raising the cost of ideological dissent.

Twenty state attorneys general called on Facebook to better prevent messages of hate, bias and disinformation from spreading, and said the company needed to provide more help to users facing online abuse. In a letter to the social media giant, the officials said they regularly encountered people facing online intimidation and harassment on Facebook. They outlined seven steps the company should take, including allowing third-party audits of hate content and offering real-time assistance to users.

The Federal Communications Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau will invite public input on the Petition for Rulemaking recently filed by the Department of Commerce regarding Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. Longstanding rules require the agency to put such petitions out for public comment ‘promptly,’ and we will follow that requirement here. I strongly disagree with those who demand that we ignore the law and deny the public and all stakeholders the opportunity to weigh in on this important issue. We should welcome vigorous debate—not foreclose it.

It was the “Wizard of Oz” in digital format as the four titans of Big Tech testified via video before the House Antitrust Subcommittee. Just like in the movie, what the subcommittee saw was controlled by a force hidden from view. The wizard in this case—the reason these four companies are so powerful—is the math that takes our private information and turns it into their corporate asset. It is the 21st century equivalent of Rockefeller’s 20th century monopoly over oil. Unlike industrial assets such as oil, data is reusable. Data is also iterative, as its use in a product creates new data.