Lobbying

A Q&A with New York Times tech policy reporter David McCabe. 

When asked, "How is Silicon Valley having an impact on Washington (DC)?", McCabe said, "Washington has become intertwined with the Valley in lots of different ways. Every major tech company has ramped up its presence here. Small armies of lobbyists work Capitol Hill and a vast swath of the administration to fight attempts to regulate the industry or to shape the rules when they become inevitable."

The weaponization of nonprofit advocacy and service organizations has been ongoing in Sacramento (CA) (and Washington) for years, although it seems to have risen recently to new levels of duplicity and complexity. If you were hanging around Sacramento this legislative year, for example, you couldn’t help but run into The Nonprofit Alliance, a newly constituted advocacy group which claimed to be the voice of nonprofits.

Few companies have more riding on proposed privacy legislation than Google and Facebook.

Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) is the only Senate Democrat not co-sponsoring the Save the Internet Act, a bill to restore net neutrality rules that were enacted by the Federal Communications Commission during the Obama administration and reversed in 2017 by President Trump’s FCC Chair, former Verizon attorney Ajit Pai. Instead, Sen Sinema has formed a working group with Sen.

Comcast is lobbying lawmakers against plans to encrypt web traffic that would make it harder for internet service providers (ISPs) to determine your browsing history. The plan, which Google intends to implement soon, would enforce the encryption of DNS data made using Chrome, meaning the sites you visit. Privacy activists have praised Google's move. But ISPs are pushing back as part of a wider lobbying effort against encrypted DNS, according to a lobbying presentation.

Too often, the corporate response to regulation has not been “what’s best for all stakeholders,” but “what’s best for the CFO (Chief Financial Officer).” The lobbying refrain sounds like this: “because regulation could hurt profits, it will hurt our ability to invest and innovate and therefore hurt the public interest.” You hear this from Big Pharma’s television ads. Broadband networks used the argument to kill net neutrality.

A fierce battle over the regulation of the internet was riddled with millions of fake comments in the most prolific known instance of political impersonation in US history.

Facebook initially mounted an aggressive legal offensive against federal regulators who sought to fine the tech giant billions of dollars for privacy abuses, arguing in newly revealed documents that the company did not harm consumers or profit from mishandling users’ data — and that it would have prevailed in court if it had come to that.

Adopted in 2018, the California Consumer Privacy Act grants Web users the right to see the personal information that companies collect about them and stop it from being sold. The law applies only to CA residents, but its backers hope it might someday spur regulators around the country to follow suit — and force the tech giants to change their practices nationwide. But powerful business organizations — representing retailers, marketers and tech giants — have responded by seeking sweeping revisions to the law before it goes into effect.

A broad coalition of some of the largest network neutrality advocacy groups is launching an activism site and pledge, which asks all 2020 presidential candidates to support strong net neutrality and reject telecom donations. “It’s not enough for candidates to simply say they support net neutrality,” said Mark Stanley, director of communications for Demand Progress.  “We’re looking for specific commitments from candidates to appoint commissioners who will restore the Title II-based net neutrality protections repealed by the [Federal Communications Commission], and who will close dangerous lo