House Democrat Fights Silicon Valley

Almost everyone in Washington is angry with Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google.

“If we do not deal with this, we will no longer have democracy,” David Chichilline's loud voice sounded into the microphone, against which incendiary music sounded. It was this morning that the Democratic colleagues of Chichilline in the House of Representatives began impeachment hearings for President Donald Trump, so the mood at a left-wing gathering on a November evening night at the Baby Wale bar in Washington's Shaw area was upbeat. But the threat to the republic’s existence was not the occupier of the Oval Office, but what Chichilline and his allies regard as another serious threat: Silicon Valley.

Currently, the entire US political map is angry with the American technology industry, from Democrats who want to smash the Big Four of Apple, Amazon, Google and Facebook, to Republicans, including Trump himself, who think the industry and its products are biased in with conservatives, however, Chichilline is quite capable of doing something about this, and as chairman of the House’s Subcommittee on Antitrust, he is the only Democrat in Washington to lead itutom responsible for combating excessive concentration of power in the US economy.

This summer, Chichilline, a 58-year-old Rhode Island spokesman, announced that, with the support of his Republican counterparts in the Judicial Committee of the House of Representatives, resources had been allocated from his subcommittee to investigate the illegal anti-competitiveness of digital markets. Is the Big Four, with a combined value of $ 4 trillion, bullying suppliers, illegally processing data, and strangling its competitors, while both Washington political parties not only looked the other way, but also actively honored these companies as the most successful of all American businesses?

Chichilline is unlikely to be the leader of a bipartisan coalition. He is an up-and-coming fighter for the left on Fox News and an arrogant Twitter user. One morning, he tweeted that Republicans asked “absolutely insane” questions at impeachment hearings, adding: “I was almost ready to hear about a grassy mound on Dili Square in Dallas or jet fuel smelting steel beams.” This month, during a debate on Iran, he wrote that there are "real doubts about whether the President knows what he is doing." But in connection with the investigation into Silicon Valley, he unexpectedly attracted allies to his side, and not only Wisconsin Republican Jim Sensenbrenner, who is his colleague in the subcommittee,but also a high-ranking Republican representative on the Dag Collins Legal Committee and Republican Matt Getz, outspoken Trump supporters who bickered with Chichilline and his Democratic counterparts about impeachment.

“I am very pleased that we will be able to unite both right and left populists,” Goetz said in the early days of the Chichilline investigation. He still considers himself committed to this cause.

Perhaps one of the reasons for such strange allies is Chichillina’s willingness to take responsibility for her fellow Democrats, as well as Republicans, for what, in his opinion, they have refused to curb the Big Four over the past two decades. The show district’s bar celebrated the release of Matt Stoller’s book, Goliath, inspired by the widely-debated article on The Atlantic, “How Democrats Killed Populists in Their Souls.” At the event, Fayz Shakir, head of the presidential campaign, Bernie Sanders, and Rohit Chopra, an authorized representative of the US Federal Trade Commission, who sharply criticized his own department for the inadequate, in his opinion, approach to the situation with Silicon Valley, spoke with Chichilline. Chichilline called Stoller, a staunch supporter of tougher antitrust measures,"Inspiration", and thanked him for telling such an "important story".

Nevertheless, Chichilline attracted the Allies by the fact that his investigation is scrupulous and serious, which Congress has lacked in recent days.

As the investigation progressed, Chichilline’s questions became clearer and more specific.

Why did Facebook decide to disable Twitter’s Vine video app cache access?

What percentage of Google searches will direct users to sites owned by Google?

How exactly does Amazon determine which sellers win the Amazon Buy Box?

Who at Apple can listen to what we say Siri?

That’s why everyone is closely monitoring the outcome of David Chichilline’s high-tech investigation, which he said should be completed in the next few months. Will this help change Washington’s attitude toward Silicon Valley? Or will it turn out that most of the political leaders' indignation at the Big Four is just a high-profile, eye-catching event that only highlights how little Washington has done to test the extremely profitable and powerful technology industry?

***

Unlike the Federal Trade Commission, Chichilline cannot issue fines. Unlike the Ministry of Justice, he cannot make criminal charges. He cannot pass new laws alone. To call the court he needs to get the approval of the chairman of his committee, a representative from New York, Jerry Nadler. What he can do and have done is to convene high-profile hearings, record evidence received from technical companies in a public act, and turn his office into a refuge for those who were frightened by the Big Four. But this does not mean that critics of Silicon Valley do not have high hopes for further actions by David Chichillina.

“Decades have passed since Congress conducted an investigation in such a sector. You need to turn around and remember the 40s, 50s, and 60s, ”said Stacy Mitchell, co-director of the Institute for Self-Sufficiency, an advocacy group struggling with economic concentration, which has become one of Washington's most prominent technology critics. Mitchell spoke in July on the Chicillin Subcommittee.

Anyone who remembers the widespread mockery of the questions asked by Mark Zuckerberg when he testified before several Senate committees in 2018 knows that they are not even trying to hide this in Washington: no one, from lawmakers to regulators and reporters, understands how companies such as Facebook, Google, Amazon and Apple continue to work day after day. For this reason, Chichilline wants to raise the hood, and then describe in detail to all of Washington how the Silicon Valley engines work.

If you think about it, this can lead to changes in the long-established antitrust laws of the country or force the antitrust authorities to act.

At the moment, Chichilline has held five open hearings, but those close to the investigation say that he and his staff are also conducting important behind-the-scenes work with companies who are afraid to testify in the open hearing room and whose complaints may serve as key evidence in future court cases. against the Big Four.

One senior executive at a high-tech company anonymously commented on Chichilline’s investigation by writing an email: “We are very encouraged by the work of the Chair and the professionalism of his staff. We hope that in order to maximize the effectiveness of the investigation, he will provide reliable and real protection against retaliation to those companies that have the courage to speak. ” (All Big Four companies claim to not engage in such revenge.)

According to Chichilline, Washington has been indulging in the high-tech industry for too long. He declares his disappointment, referring to the July FTC agreement with Facebook regarding complaints about data privacy, including a fine of $ 5 billion, which Chichillina and other critics called largely insignificant for a company like Facebook, which has huge resources .

On the other hand, the investigation should not be contradictory, as Chichillina insists. At the very beginning of his investigation, Chichilline personally spoke on the phone with the leaders of leading technology companies, including Tim Cook from Apple, so that the first communication of the companies with the Subcommittee would not be a consequence of receiving a subpoena or requesting documents.

Nevertheless, according to him, relations between Washington and Silicon Valley should change.

“These large technology companies were in some ways“ promising young men and women ”of the American economy,” said Chichilline, sitting at the head of the conference table in his office in July. There was an Apple Watch on his wrist.

To the left of Chichilline sat Slade Bond, a longtime Judicial Committee official serving as the chief adviser to the subcommittee. Lina Khan, a lawyer who did not publish the iconic article “Amazon Antitrust Paradox” in Yale Law Magazine in 2017, is perhaps the “rock star” in the world of antitrust law regarding technology. She often sits behind Chichilline at the hearing. Her admission to work in March as an adviser to the subcommittee was seen by many in the antitrust world as a sign that Chichilline seriously intended to exercise his new powers.

***

“This smell is not normal for this office,” said the interview at the very beginning. He had just sprayed poison ivy on himself. “That's what happens when you work in your own yard,” he said. "I do not advise".

Stately, tanned and dressed in a classic suit paired with a colorful tie, Chichilline radiates the energy of a tough lawyer, who he was before entering the world of politics. Chichilline was born in Providence, Rhode Island in 1961, into a family of a lawyer who defended the East Coast mafia, after Chichilline studied at Brown University, where, together with John F. Kennedy, Jr., he founded a branch of the College of Democrats, and then went south to the county Columbia to pursue studies at Georgetown University Law Center.

In 2002, he was elected Mayor of Providence, the first mayor to openly acknowledge his gay status. He held this position until 2010, when, while in New England, his fate again intersected with the fate of another Kennedy: Senator Ted Kennedy announced his resignation from the US House of Representatives from Rhode Island. Chichilline took part and won in this difficult race.

Over the past decade, Chichilline has risen substantially up the democratic ladder. He currently holds office in the US House of Representatives as deputy chairman of the Democratic Party's Political and Mass Communications Committee.

He has a very sharp character that on cable news and in the courtroom he can express the same impatience, ambiguity and contempt for those who disagree with him - be it a witness or a TV presenter. “Mary, this is all a lie!” - Once he shouted at Maria Bartiromo at Fox News to refute the opinion of tax policy. He shouted out loud at Amazon's lawyer in July: "I remind you, sir, you are under oath."

But again and again, in interviews with colleagues, friends and former employees, Cichilline is described as a charming, cheerful, caring, generous, welcoming, trusting, pensive person who loves life and parties. “Chichilline is an amazing person,” said spokeswoman Annie Custer, a Democrat from New Hampshire. “Most people [in Congress] are either very serious and, frankly, a little grouchy, or they always radiate fun, but they never really get to the bottom of the matter,” Custer said. "David has created a balance that I admire and try to emulate, being friendly, but continuing to do serious work."

When in Washington Chichillin, Custer and several other members of Congress stayed in a block of flats in the Washington Navy area, where Chichillin held a recent discussion party attended by about five dozen people, Custer said he was “an example of reliability for all.”

As Chichilline recalls now, almost ten years ago he came to power with little experience and interest in technology and antitrust law. When Jerry Nadler invited him to try something new, Chichilline decided to join the subcommittee. Starting to work in the direction of economic concentration, he immediately noticed that a handful of large companies dominate in Silicon Valley.

As for any other personal experience related to the threat posed by the Big Four, Chichilline points out the following case: his path as a 41-year-old legislator to the mayor’s position was simplified due to corruption charges against mayor Buddy Changchi, whose misconduct was published in the Providence Journal.

As with other local newspapers, the Providence Journal has also had tough times, due to what Chichilline and others call the “digital duopoly” of Facebook and Google. This duopoly almost destroyed the journalistic business, continuing to absorb advertising money, which, if you think about it, should be sent to publications such as the Providence Journal.

“It's about access to reliable and reliable news and information,” says Chichilline in his office. “If this is lost, I think we will put our democracy at real risk.”

***

Cicillin’s criticism of Washington’s inability to set any limits on the containment of Silicon Valley’s historical formation as an economic, political, and social center is that during most of what was happening, it was the Democrats who led the way.

This criticism was heard among left-wing forces, where some critics claim that the Obama administration was distracted when it came to technology, whether it was fundraising in Silicon Valley, or the belief in the information revolution as a driving force of great blessing, or the strengthening of ISIS, the Great Recession, or the prospect of future job offers in the west. White House spokeswoman Jay Carney joined Amazon after leaving the White House, senior presidential adviser David Pluff moved to Uber, and other administration officials continued their careers with companies such as Facebook, Airbnb, and Square.

Today, Elizabeth Warren leads a small but active coalition of Democrats who claim that the time has come to liquidate companies such as Facebook, a statement that has not been heard in the technology industry since the 1990s, since the antitrust investigation of Microsoft. Other Democrats, albeit scared by everyone, from the role of Cambridge Analytica in the 2016 presidential election to the obvious impact of online shopping on Main Street, are not ready to go that far. Some even offer to name and shame objectionable companies before the end of the investigation in Congress, which is very similar to what Donald Trump would have done.

Trump certainly did just that, making mostly unfounded statements that the Big Four intentionally biased conservatives, which is manifested in their products. These thoughts are voiced by some of the most active members of the Republican Party, such as Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri, Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee and Ted Cruz of Texas. But the right-wing liberal movement is pushing away from the idea that Washington is interfering with the free market, or is rewriting the country's antitrust laws to target companies that politicians don't like. This thinking affects a wide audience of Republicans who fear Silicon Valley for its power and cultural influence, but reject the Congress’s offer to conclude that a particular private company is worthless.

Chichillina, who claims conversations about company breakdown is ahead of the curve, has largely managed to preserve this fragile coalition, which agrees that Silicon Valley’s power is worrying, but not strongly supporting what to do about it.

“He's asking important questions to understand what the real problems are,” said Justin Brookman, an FTC employee at the Obama presidency, who is currently director of privacy and technical policy for Consumer Reports, a nonprofit consumer protection organization. "It's not as simple as" Let's tear them all to shreds. " This is a little more complicated. ”

In early December, reports began to appear that Warren was drafting a bill prohibiting the so-called mega-mergers involving multibillion-dollar companies, and that she was working on this bill with Chichilline. Such news cast doubt on the fact that Chichilline will propose antitrust laws, if any, only after the investigation is completed.

Answering a question about cooperation, Chichilline said that he and Warren did not conduct direct negotiations on any of these bills, but left open the possibility that their employees could conduct informal conversations.

Rumors of a possible alliance with Chichillin and Warren did not cost him a single member of his coalition, but the chances are high that the weeks or months before the end of the investigation will be associated not only with hearings and requests for documents, but also with a thorough study of the political minefield in front of him .

If Chichillina manages to hold onto the coalition he has assembled and at the same time arrive at politically acceptable, but convincing conclusions, then the regulators will have no choice but to break into business models based on personal data, or Congress will be forced to revise the country's antitrust laws, and in this Chichilline’s case has a chance to leave a major mark on Washington’s history.

This is exactly what his critics fear.

***

“You cannot simply ignore facts that do not support your alleged findings. “Investigations” do not work that way, ”says Carl Szabo. “Especially from the Judicial Committee?” We must be better. "

On a warm Friday in October, the sun shone through the window of Szabo's offices on K Street, decorated with thick books on telecommunications law, LEGO R2-D2 and framed by imitations of patent applications for heavy equipment from the Star Wars universe. Szabo is the vice president and chief lawyer for Silicon Valley's most aggressive lobbying presence in Washington: a group called NetChoice, which includes Facebook and Google.

Szabo’s task is to state that technology companies cannot speak frankly, namely that Chichilline unfairly targeted them. That he does not pursue illegal corporate behavior, but simply wants to “scalp” the most famous companies in the world. That, despite Chichillina’s statements about his impartiality, the result of his investigation is already a foregone conclusion. Chichilline, I am convinced that in the technological industry there is no competition left. “But have you heard of Chicillin about TikTok?” Says Sabo.

The Chichilline investigation will not reveal anything, Sabo insists, since there is nothing to identify. The concern is that Chichilline added his powerful voice to the “cacophony of people complaining about technology" - many of which, according to Szabo, are motivated only by the desire to highlight their name in the headlines of the anti-Facebook, Google and other companies. “I think the whole reason we talk about these groups is SEO,” or search engine optimization, Szabo said.

And Chichilline repeatedly supported those who are convinced that he got involved in this investigation because of the mention in the press and his own revenge, although this, in fact, does not give him much pleasure.

During his second investigation hearing in July, he spoke with varying degrees of success with Amazon witness, assistant general counsel Nate Sutton, about how the company uses purchasing data to resolve its own product offerings. “You collect a lot of data about which products are popular, what is sold, where is sold,” said Chichilline. “You want to say that this data is not used in any way to promote Amazon products?”

Sutton tried to testify that offers from different brands are common among retailers, and, moreover, Amazon uses only a combination of data to make decisions in the retail sector, and not to get information about individual sellers. At that moment, Chichilline demanded clarification and stated: "I remind you, sir, you are under oath."

Days later, Chichillina sent a letter to Sutton’s boss at Amazon, in which he said he was “disturbed” by the testimony of his lawyer. Like Sutton's colleagues, witnesses from the Big Four easily got off. In a Facebook post, Chichillin said the company’s witness “claimed to be unfamiliar with the basic facts” about his company’s business.

Chichilline returned to this topic in mid-September, when he sent letters to the company, asking numerous questions about their activities. The letter addressed to Amazon contained 158 separate requests for information, including disputed use of seller data.

Awaiting answers, Chichilline posted a newsreel tweet detailing how to set up the Amazon search algorithm to take advantage of his own proposals, adding: “Lying in Congress is a serious crime with serious consequences.” It was an unusually strong move by Chichilline during an open investigation.

We can say that in this case, Chichilline won the round. When Amazon responded to Chichillina’s information request, the technical answers received were interpreted by some in such a way that the congressman received “extra points”. Read CNBC material on this subject: "Amazon recognizes to Congress that it uses" aggregated "data from third-party sellers to offer its own products."

***

Chichilline said his investigation will end earlier this year. One of the likely results: the report prepared by Chichillina ends with such a strong blow that it will remove the centrists, including the Republicans, forming his bipartisan coalition. In the conditions of such a strong split in Washington, this would facilitate the work of his subcommittee, providing another field for earning party points. A series of news on this subject will be distributed almost instantly, and with it the rest of Congress.

Another possible, even probable result: its investigation will retain its bipartisan system, avoiding calls for radical reforms, and thus will be ignored in the political context, since only full-scale allegations of misconduct are subject to registration. A series of news on this subject will be distributed almost instantly, and with it the rest of Congress.

Or the Chichilline Subcommittee will write a rather sophisticated report that would set out the path for the future of technology in the United States of America that would provide the perfect balance between preserving the public good and promoting innovation, and that would be ignored by the Senate, which showed little interest in rethinking antitrust laws, in view of his preoccupation with the struggle to remove Donald Trump from the presidency.

All this reduces Chichilline’s chances of a fundamental reform of the country's antitrust laws or a reload of Silicon Valley’s regulatory approach. But, according to Chichilline, this battle is too important to stop fighting.

Chichilline says that for many years, people in Washington, including him, have allowed outrage in Silicon Valley. “I think it was more familiar for them to let things go, let these companies flourish, and just watch it,” he says. “I think that we have reached the point where we have the responsibility to accomplish something more.”

Also more interesting pieces - in the Telegram channel .

Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/undefined/