News
Featured Image
 Shutterstock

You’re invited! Join LifeSite in celebrating 25 years of pro-life and pro-family reporting at our anniversary Gala August 17th in Naples, Florida. Tickets and sponsorships can be purchased by clicking here. 

WASHINGTON, D.C. (LifeSiteNews) — A trove of formerly classified internal documents released as part of a congressional investigation into Big Tech could help lawmakers rein in the power of massive companies including Amazon, Facebook, and Google, reports suggest.

The heavily-redacted internal documents, including emails and confidential company reports, were released this week as part of a bipartisan House Judiciary Committee investigation into Big Tech companies’ alleged illegal anti-competitive activities.

The Committee formally published its 450-page “Investigation of Competition in the Digital Marketplace” report Tuesday, after a 16-month investigation headed by the Antitrust Subcommittee, according to a June 19 press release put out by Democratic U.S. Rep. David Cicilline, chairman of the Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial, and Administrative law.

Politico noted the newly released documents could add “ammunition to the push for Congress to toughen antitrust laws,” and “bolster the committee’s claims that the internet giants illegally favor their own products.”

The Tuesday press release stated the recently released documents include “internal Facebook documents showing the company views itself as dominant in the social networking market and insulated from competitive threats.”

Similarly, formerly classified communications obtained from Google appear to show the company “leverages its control over the Android mobile operating system to prevent smartphone manufacturers from introducing products or services that compete with Google’s family of mobile apps,” the press release stated.

Internal Amazon documents, meanwhile, allegedly “demonstrate how Amazon’s abuses its dominance over e-commerce to coerce third-party sellers to purchase other services from Amazon, such as fulfillment and distribution.”

Google spokesman Peter Schottenfels pushed back against the committee’s report in a statement to Politico, arguing the documents had been “cherry-picked,” and that the report  “relies on outdated documents and inaccurate allegations from our commercial rivals.”

While it’s unclear whether the House Committee will be successful in pursuing antitrust litigation against the Big Tech companies (Politico noted that “pending legislation to update antitrust laws would make” lawsuits “more difficult”) the trust-busting push has bipartisan support in a divisive political climate that rarely sees cooperation from both sides of the aisle.

Many Republicans, largely interested in cutting back Big Tech’s power to censor the voices of conservatives, have also advanced efforts to break up corporate monopolies via antitrust litigation.

Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri, for example, has been an ardent supporter of antitrust legislation against Big Tech corporations.

Last year, Hawley introduced the “Bust Up Big Tech Act” to stop corporations from “seeking to dominate multiple industries simultaneously by banning companies like Amazon from marketing their own retail goods alongside those of other sellers or providing online hosting or cloud services to an ever-growing swath of the internet—including competitors.”

In January, Hawley, along with Republican Senators Lindsey Graham, Steve Daines, and Ted Cruz, formed an unlikely alliance with Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota to back Klobuchar’s bipartisan “American Innovation and Choice Online Act,” which would “ban self-preferencing by Big Tech platforms such as Amazon or Google,” protocol.com reported.

RELATED: New Senate bill to rein in Big Tech draws bipartisan support, opposition

While the moves to bust up Big Tech monopolies have garnered bipartisan support, other Republican lawmakers and politicians have focused more intently on preventing social media companies from censoring conservative voices.

Republican lawmakers have notably pushed for social media companies to be stripped of their protections under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which shield them from legal liability for content posted on their sites. Conservatives have argued that Section 230 protections should not be afforded to companies that censor or curate content, thereby acting more as an editor than a platform.

Meanwhile, other Republicans argue that social media companies have violated Americans’ first amendment rights by allegedly colluding with the federal government to stifle free speech.

In May, the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana filed a federal lawsuit alleging that the Biden administration had conspired with social media companies to suppress Americans’ free speech on a range of controversial subjects.

READ: Louisiana and Missouri sue Biden admin for ‘colluding’ with Big Tech to censor free speech

Last week, U.S. District Court Judge Terry Doughty granted permission for the discovery phase of the trial to move forward, The Center Square reported.

Dr. Anthony Fauci, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, and five social media companies are among those served subpoenas in connection with the legal action, LifeSiteNews previously reported.

Comments

Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.

0 Comments

    Loading...