CLIPS: 10 February, 2022
Welcome to the Progressive Tech Policy Project! We curate and send weekly summaries of news on the left, along with occasional deep dives to reflect on timely issues. We always welcome your feedback and suggestions, and you can reach us anytime at techpolicy@geer.com. - Szelena Gray, Editor
Did someone forward you this email? Subscribe to receive our newsletter in your inbox every week!
Thanks, We Hate It: EARN IT Brings All Sides Together Saying it Hurts Encryption, Free Speech, Privacy
The widely unpopular EARN IT Act officially moved to markup on Thursday. EARN IT, which seeks to curb CSAM posting by erasing Section 230 protections for platforms, has been criticized by digital rights groups and experts for disincentivizing encryption, endangering free speech, and making it harder to protect childrens’ safety online. Since its reintroduction last week, a coalition of 60+ civil rights, human rights, and open Internet organizations led by CDT have joined the chorus of objection, sending a letter to Congress opposing EARN IT.
Mike Masnick, Daphne Keller, and Eric Goldman have also shared criticisms of EARN IT. Writing for Stanford’s Center for Internet and Society blog, fellow Riana Pfefferkorn compared EARN IT to FOSTA/SESTA, saying that this new bill would similarly make investigation or prosecution of offenders harder (driving CSAM traders off law-abiding platforms to offshore sites), and threaten user privacy and security by undermining strong encryption standards (putting children, especially, at risk for online abuse).
COVERAGE
Daily Dot, The EARN IT Act is back and ready to destroy Section 230
Reclaim the Net, The EARN IT act is back for a second attempt to ban private messaging
Platformer, The Senate's sneak attack on encryption
Electronic Frontier Foundation, It’s Back: Senators Want EARN IT Bill to Scan All Online Messages
Techdirt, How The EARN IT Act Is Significantly More Dangerous Than FOSTA
Washington Post, A bill aiming to protect children online reignites a battle over privacy and free speech
RESPONSES
In a joint statement, Americans for Prosperity and the ACLU criticized EARN IT, saying, “The measure would lead to a ‘backdoor’ in encrypted services, thereby jeopardizing the security of every individual.”
Fight for the Future relaunched its NoEARNITAct.org campaign, driving calls and email to Senate Judiciary members and Senate leadership ahead markup.” Members of this coalition include Demand Progress and the Tech Workers’ Coalition.
The Open Tech Institute said in a statement: “While the goal of combating child exploitation and curbing online abuse is extremely important, the EARN IT Act is unlikely to be effective in doing so. Instead, it would threaten both our constitutional rights and encryption, thereby also endangering the privacy and security of all internet users.”
In a petition, the Electronic Frontier Foundation lambasted EARN IT’s implications for privacy and user security: “The EARN IT Act will endanger privacy for everyone, including children. It treats every internet user as a potential criminal, and subjects our communications to mass scanning. Congress should reject it.”
Director of Cybersecurity Eva Galperin tweeted, “Every year, a backdoor encryption bill rises from the dead and every year we have to cut that damned thing's head off. This year it's EARN IT. Again.”
Stanford’s Daphne Keller posted a Twitter thread critiquing EARN IT, saying: “We already know who will get hurt here. LGBTQ+ groups have made clear that they expect the content purges, deplatforming, and loss of supportive forums to hit them hardest.”
In a Twitter thread, law professor Eric Goldman said, “What's the best way to protect CSAM victims? The bill would create a commission to answer this extremely complicated issue, but it repeals Section 230 without waiting to hear if the commission thinks that's a good idea.”
IRS Backs Down After Outrage Over Facial Recognition Announcement
Conceding to mounting bipartisan pressure and public criticism, the IRS will drop ID.me’s facial recognition authentication services. Applauding the pivot, digital activists are using the success of their campaigns against the platform to launch campaigns against the usage of AI surveillance across other federal agencies, also targeting the Pentagon and Department of Justice’s active contracts with Clearview AI. While moratoriums have halted government purchases of facial recognition software at the local level, critics are citing bias, inefficiencies, as well as cybersecurity risks to curtail the deployment of facial recognition technology within government operations at the federal level.
COVERAGE
Engadget, House Democrats urge IRS to halt facial recognition plans
New York Times, IRS to End Use of Facial Recognition for Identity Verification - The New York Times
Scientific American, Government agencies are tapping a facial recognition company to prove you're you
The Hill, From bank accounts to facial recognition, the IRS is digging into our personal data | TheHill
The Atlantic, The IRS Should Stop Using Facial Recognition - The Atlantic
Washington Post, Huge government agencies clash over imposing facial recognition
Washington Post, Private contractor to drop facial recognition requirement for all state and federal agencies after backlash over IRS plan
The Verge, Lawmakers call on feds to drop Clearview AI facial recognition contracts
CNN, After face-recognition backlash, ID.me says government agencies will get more verification options
RESPONSES
The ACLU tweeted, “Good. Face recognition tech is biased. But the IRS is just one of many agencies using ID.me’s problematic facial recognition services to verify our identities.”
EPIC Privacy Senior Counsel, Jeramie D. Scott tweeted, “Woohoo! IRS plans end use of facial recognition verification. Although this does not end the issue since face verification's use goes beyond the IRS.”
Global Privacy Counsel Calli Schroeder tweeted, “In the wake of the IRS about-face on facial recognition, it’s important to look at how much work and pressure contributed to this decision.We CAN make change. But it takes a lot of effort from a lot of people.
Director of Fight for the Future, Evan Greer, tweeted, “When we fight we win! Now let's get *all* Federal agencies to dump IDme”
Gina Helfrich, Senior Program Council at Global Tech, tweeted, “More proof that we don't have to accept facial recognition technology as ‘inevitable.’ IRS to abandon facial recognition plan after firestorm of criticism”
Jake Laperruque, Senior Counsel at Project on Government Oversight Watchdog, tweeted, “We can stop all government agencies from using Clearview AI by passing The Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale ActTell @SenatorDurbin it's time for the Senate Judiciary Committee to take up this important bill!”
Co-founder of Fast.AI Rachel Thomas tweeted, “Unemployment payments dropped by nearly 40% after ID me was deployed. How many of those were due to errors, denying people in need?”
NSO Pegasus Spyware Deployed On Israeli Citizens, Tested In the United States
A report from Calcalist has revealed that NSO’s Pegasus is being deployed by Israel’s police to hack citizen’s phones, targeting mayors, protestors, and former government employees. The revelations arrive just as new reports reveal the FBI and the New York Police Department tested and bought pegasus spyware. Despite repeated protest of government surveillance by international watchdog groups and privacy experts, surveillance technology continues to be deployed around the world, by authoritarian and democratic regimes alike.
COVERAGE
Al Jazeera, Pegasus: What you need to know about Israeli spyware
Al Jazeera, Israel PM vows action as police Pegasus spying scandal widens
New York Times, Israel to Investigate Domestic Use of Pegasus Spyware as Scrutiny Hits Home
BBC, NSO Group: Israel launches inquiry into police hacking claims
TechDirt, Spying Begins At Home: Israel's Government Used NSO Group Malware To Surveill Its Own Citizens
RESPONSES
Civil Liberties Director at EFF, David Greene, tweeted, “Today's example of how deeply NSO Group has inserted itself into governmental and private spying around the world. And, yes, that means the US too. (and it's only one of many spyware companies hawking their tools)”
Marietje Schaake International Policy Director at Stanford Cyber Policy Center tweeted, “Only democracy in the region’ > CEOs of ministries, journalists, tycoons, corporate executives, mayors, social activists & even the PMs relatives, all were police targets, having their phones hacked by NSO’s spyware, without judicial authorization“
Citizen Lab quoted Senior Researcher John Scott-Railton, tweeting, “Democracies and dictatorships shouldn’t share a hacking toolbox”
Eric Goldstein, Director at MENA Region tweeted, “Any surprise the surveillance weapon NSO sold to authoritarians has been abused also inside #Israel? Just like the rot of occupation wasn’t going to stay beyond the Green Line.”
In a statement, the Committee to Protect Journalists said, “Israel’s government should fully and transparently investigate whether police used NSO Group’s Pegasus spyware against Israeli journalists, and should take concrete steps to curtail the technology’s use against [journalists]”
Article 19 tweeted, “The FBI has admitted it purchased #NSO #PegasusSpyware , used to monitor journalists in #Mexico & around the globe. India's PM Modi was also a customer. @nytimes mag says Israel offered the tech as part of weapons deals to further its diplomatic goals.”
Spotify’s Joe Rogan Problem Is Spinning Up Into A Policy Debate
While Spotify’s CEO has issued an apology to employees and condemned Joe Rogan’s usage of racial slurs and insensitive language, Spotify will not commit to deplatforming Joe Rogan. The decision comes after more than 100 episodes of the Joe Rogan Experience were removed from the platform per Rogan’s request. As critics debate Spotify’s responsibility in the situation, experts have been quick to clarify that Spotify’s disinformation controversy has nothing to do with Section 230. Consistent enforcement of moderation across the platform is an issue, and Spotify’s perception in the marketplace continues to suffer because of it. Spotify has largely avoided public scrutiny, but the platform’s controversy with Joe Rogan has led to several lines of critique, including its payment of artists, the divide between platform and publisher, as well as deeper concerns about consolidation and market power.
COVERAGE
The Verge, Episodes of Joe Rogan’s show are disappearing from Spotify
New York Times, Spotify Stands by Joe Rogan: 'Canceling Voices Is a Slippery Slope'
AP News, Joe Rogan apologizes for racial slur after video surfaces
Reuters, Spotify CEO condemns Rogan over racial slurs, but won't silence him | Reuters
Slate, Spotify's Joe Rogan mess is about more than just content moderation.
TechCrunch, The Spotify-Rogan saga highlights the distinction between publishers and platforms
Protocol, The Spotify debates are loud, obnoxious and almost entirely wrong
RESPONSES:
Jeff Kosseff, Associate Professor of Cybersecurity Law at the U.S. Naval Academy, tweeted, “Spotify has confused the public debate by using the "publisher" and "platform" terms, and it is not the first company that I've seen misunderstand Section 230. Countless journalists have told me that over the years, their newsroom counsel have instructed them.”
UltraViolet tweeted, “THANK YOU EVERYONE! 70 episodes of Rog@n are removed! But the transphobic content is still up and @Spotify hasn't committed to developing and enforcing policies concerning COVID disinfo. NEXT STOP Tell advertisers to stop investing in Spotify”
Tech journalist Kara Swisher tweeted, “The use of the pointedly scary and loaded word “silencing” is the tech tell here — creating a false narrative when most are just asking for corrections of blatant and dangerous inaccuracies, not a gag. Ugh.”
Public Citizen tweeted, “The problem is about more than Joe Rogan. Streaming monopolies like Spotify use market power to kill competition. Most artists can’t afford to leave Spotify. Listeners don’t want to leave and lose all their data.This is about monopoly power.”
Analyst Benedict Evans tweeted, “The whole Spotify/Rogan story is a teachable moment in one area - the idea that somehow if you switched everything on the Internet from ads to subscription, all the bad stuff will go away. Spotify uses Rogan to drive subscriptions.”
As Facebook’s Parent Company Meta Sees Stocks Plummet 35%, Regulatory Questions Loom Large
Meta shares plummeted last Thursday, dropping about 25% in the span of a few hours, which is parallel to a $180 billion collapse in market capitalization. The good news for Meta is that this could help it dodge new antitrust scrutiny under the pending House antitrust package.
The crash came after a meeting on Wednesday when Meta announced unimpressive earnings and grim projections for the next quarter. In this meeting, they also mentioned a small decline in Facebook’s active user base, noting that it had 500,000 daily fewer logins during the last three months of 2021 ( it currently has 1.9 billion active users). Digital rights groups have responded about the crash, but only press have commented on the timing with new antitrust legislation under consideration. The situation begs the question: if a single financial event like this can change the landscape of antitrust regulation, how does new legislation hold up over time in a constantly growing and evolving industry?
COVERAGE
Washington Post, Facebook loses users for the first time in its history
Forbes, Facebook Loses Daily Active Users For The First Time – Here’s Where They're Going
Reuters, Meta shares sink 20% as Facebook loses daily users for the first time
The Verge, Facebook lost daily users for the first time ever last quarter
USA Today, Facebook is losing users for the first time ever and shares in Meta have fallen off a cliff
The Guardian, For the first time in its history, Facebook is in decline. Has the tech giant begun to crumble?
Public Sphere, Why Meta Is in Trouble
The Atlantic, Facebook Has a Superuser-Supremacy Problem
RESPONSES
Jan Rydzak, from Ranking Digital Rights, tweeted, “By leaning into targeting while chasing immersive tech, Meta will maintain a veneer of innovation but fail to adapt where it matters. Staking its future on a deeply damaging business model. Eventually it will impale itself on its own refusal to change.”
The Center for Digital Democracy tweeted, “Great list, but suggest another. #Facebook is a toxic environment and more people--and advertisers--know it. Impacts on democracy, journalism, information, civil rights, safety and more.”
Accountable Tech tweeted, “‘The Facebook parent plunged 24% in U.S. trading Thursday on the back of poor earnings results, putting it on track to erase more than $200 billion.’ All around the world, people are realizing how destructive Facebook truly is.”
Nikita Bier, founder of Something New, tweeted, “Facebook's hands are tied 1—High ARPU coastal users have churned; TikTok is eating their lunch 2—They can't acquire because of antitrust scrutiny 3—They can't build because founders don't want to be there 4—IDFA killed their ability to target ads 5—The metaverse is 10yrs out RIP”
Meta Considers Shutting Down Facebook and Instagram In Europe Amid Controversial Data Laws
European legislators are making plans to implement data laws that would affect how EU citizens’ user data is transferred to the Americas. In response, Meta announced that it would be considering shutting down Facebook and Instagram in Europe if it’s not able to transfer user data back to their American servers. Many of the digital tech advocacy groups that are responding note how Facebook seems to be trying to blackmail or bully European legislators into not implementing these new tech policies, and how that approach is not only doomed to fail, but is also indicative of how Facebook must exploit user data privacy in order to efficiently function. Many drew a comparison between their threats to EU legislators and how they had blocked Australians from viewing news sources in the past. Ministers from France and Germany have already publicly announced that they’re okay if Facebook drops their service there.
COVERAGE
CNBC, Meta says it may shut down Facebook and Instagram in Europe over data-sharing dispute
Euronews, Meta warns it may shut Facebook in Europe but EU leaders say life would be 'very good' without it
Bloomberg, Meta Renews Warning to EU It Will Be Forced to Pull Facebook
Independent, Meta could shut down Facebook and Instagram in Europe
Nypost, Facebook, Instagram could shut down in Europe without data deal, Meta warns
RESPONSES
Nathalie Maréchal, from Ranking Digital Rights, tweeted, “Alternative headline: Meta claims its business model is incompatible with respecting Europeans' privacy rights. Compare to: Big Tobacco claims its business model is incompatible with preventing cancer.”
The AELP tweeted, “Last year, Facebook tried to bully Australia so it could keep cheating newspapers. Now, it’s threatening all of Europe. This is just more bluster from a monopoly hoping it can win at a game of chicken w/ energized antitrust enforcers. Break it up already.”
Jason Kint, CEO of Digital Content Next, tweeted, “Two things: (1) they threatened this in Australia, too. It’s not that they can’t offer their services, it’s that it won’t be as profitable and (2) they just disclosed (see next tweet) they apparently even keep track of our data so they’re antithetical to the right to privacy.”
FFTF tweeted, “It’s almost like their entire business model is built on harvesting and exploiting user data.”
Accountable Tech tweeted, “Surveillance advertising is Big Tech's toxic business model that is fueling the spread of disinformation and extremism online. We must act to uproot this underlying architecture and #BanSurveillanceAdvertising.”
Further, they tweeted, “Didn't take long for them to call Facebook's bluff” in response to German and French ministers announcing that they wouldn’t miss Facebook.
Kairos tweeted, “Sounds like if Meta/Facebook can't freely access data that users in Europe want to keep private, then they will bully rather than accommodate this reasonable need.”
Pivot Podcasts tweeted, “.@karaswisher responds to Meta’s threat to shut down Facebook and Instagram in Europe over data regulations: ‘They can threaten all they want, but I think it'll just highlight the need for user data protection everywhere.’”
UltraViolet tweeted, “European leaders are calling Facebook's (@Meta) bluff and they're right to do so. The company only cares about profit, of which Europeans account for roughly 25% of the company’s revenue. Pulling out of Europe would hurt Facebook more than Europeans.”
As Employees Try Again to Unionize, Amazon Doubles Salary For Corporate Workers
Amazon’s planned price hikes for Prime membership caused the company’s stock price to skyrocket Friday (even as other tech firms sustained significant losses), at the same time that the company announced it would raise maximum base pay for corporate and tech workers, from $160,000 to $350,000. The timing of this news feels like a slap in the face to employees in Alabama and NYC, whose efforts to unionize have been repeatedly blocked. In November, the National Labor Relations Board ordered a second election after ruling Amazon interfered with a previous vote, installing a new mailbox for ballot turn-in. Voting in the new election began Feb. 4. Progressives have repeatedly pointed out that Amazon profits while its employees struggle to earn a living wage and advocate for better working conditions.
COVERAGE
Axios, Amazon raises base salary cap to $350,000 for corporate, tech workers
GeekWire, Amazon more than doubles max base pay to $350k for corporate and tech workers, citing labor market
The Guardian, Amazon chews through the average worker in eight months. They need a union
Morning Consult, Amid Amazon Warehouse Union Push, Nearly 4 in 5 Voters Support Collective Bargaining
New York Times, Amazon Warehouse in Alabama Is Set to Begin Second Union Election
NPR, Amazon warehouse workers in Alabama vote for second time in union effort
Washington Post, Amazon workers in Alabama say they’re torn over historic union vote
The Verge, Amazon workers at a second warehouse in NYC say they have filed a petition to unionize
Gizmodo, Amazon’s New York Union Drive Might Be Coming at Just the Right Time
SHRM, Workers Seeking to Unionize Amazon Facility Allege Labor Law Violations
RESPONSES
The Open Markets Institute tweeted, “Along with breaking up large corporations & establishing rules of fair conduct, antitrust reform must grant all workers (and businesses confronting powerful entities like Amazon & McDonald’s) the freedom to organize.”
The American Economic Liberties Project tweeted, “Corporate monopolies like @amazon leverage their market power to abuse working people, suppress wages, and obstruct their efforts to unionize.”
Left Voice tweeted, “Despite Amazon’s union busting, workers at three warehouses are fighting to unionize. If successful, they could help create fighting forces for the working class.”
The Teamsters tweeted, “#Teamsters are committing all levels of our union to unite with core platforms of member engagement, worker and community engagement, antitrust enforcement and policy reform, and global solidarity to address Amazon’s widespread and systematic exploitation of workers.”
Fight for 15 tweeted, “A deliberately high turnover rate due to your workplace's back-breaking and barbaric conditions also serves as a union-busting tactic. At @Amazon, cruelty is the point, but it won't work forever.”
Reporter Ron Miller tweeted, “Amazon raised its base pay from $160K to $350K, a $190K raise, but it's low wage employees demanding a living wage who are contributing to inflation. For reference a warehouse worker making $15/hr makes $600 a week or $31,200. If I'm one of those workers, I'm livid right now.”
A Second Hearing for FCC Nominee Gigi Sohn, More FCC Deadlock
A second hearing on Gigi Sohn’s nomination to the FCC was held this Wednesday. Progressive groups have derided opposition to Sohn’s nomination, repeatedly pointing out that it is baseless obstruction. In support of her nomination, many progressive groups issued statements supporting Sohn's confirmation this week, including this letter from the Open Tech Institute (among others).
COVERAGE
Reuters, Biden faces Republican opposition in trying to fill key FCC position
CNET, Biden's pro-net neutrality pick for FCC calls Republican criticism 'unfair' and 'false'
Bloomberg, FCC Nominee Sohn Says Her Opponents Aim to Hamstring Agency
RESPONSES
Public Knowledge voiced their support for Sohn’s nomination, and their disgruntlement with the “need” for a second hearing, in a statement, saying: “To be clear: The hearing scheduled for next Wednesday seems like nothing more than an opportunity to give these baseless concerns raised by industry an opportunity to hobble the appointment of a consumer champion to the Commission.”
The Open Tech Institute decried the “unconscionable” obstruction of Sohn’s nomination, pointing to a breadth of endorsements from across the political spectrum, saying in a statement that “[t]he hearing that Chair Cantwell noticed last night is a gift to AT&T, Comcast, and the other companies that have worked for years to weaken the FCC’s authority and who benefit from a deadlocked agency.”
The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights supported the nominations of Sohn to the FCC (and Alvaro Bedoya, to the FTC) in a statement, commending their qualifications and saying their appointments were necessary to help implement key provisions of the Infrastructure and Jobs Act.
Free Press Action lamented Sohn’s second hearing, saying her qualifications were stellar and that she’d already fully demonstrated her capability during the last hearing. They added: “Committee members should also reject any specious claims that Sohn needs to recuse herself from issues facing the FCC… The recently concocted double standards that Wicker and others are applying to Sohn’s work from more than a decade ago haven’t been applied in the same way to nominees who previously worked for the companies or their high-priced law firms.”
Free Press also criticized Senate Commerce Chairwoman Cantwell’s decision to hold this second hearing, saying that she had “caved” to GOP and industry pressures.
FFTF sent a letter to Democratic leadership, requesting Sen. Cantwell be removed from her position as Chairwoman of the Commerce Committee due to her obstruction of Sohn’s nomination.
Journalist Karl Bode said in a Twitter thread: “Hollywood's justification for trying to kill Gigi Sohn's appointment to the FCC? She tried to (gasp) bring more competition to the cable box. This is the level of dumb performative bullshit that passes as thoughtful policy consideration in the U.S.”
NTIA’s Broadband Infrastructure Investment
The National Telecommunications and Information Association, tasked with disbursing and providing guidance to states for deploying $65 billion in funding for broadband infrastructure, this week received a wave of responses from groups to its request for comment on how to best effectively distribute the funds. Groups including OTI, Public Knowledge, and the Bipartisan Policy Center advocated for the need to connect rural or inadequately served areas, make pricing affordable, and maintain transparency during implementation.
The funding includes $42.45 billion for broadband deployment, mapping, and adoption projects, allocated directly to individual states. However, Republican state leadership has sought to put politically-motivated guardrails on distributing this funding, possibly derailing the entire investment.
COVERAGE
The Hill, We cannot let GOP partisanship derail infrastructure investments
Law360, Awaiting Gov't Jackpot, States Bulk Up Broadband Expertise
NextTV, NTIA Advised To Let All Broadband Tech Flowers Bloom
RCRWireless, NTIA to host webinars on navigating new broadband funding
RESPONSES
New America’s Open Technology Institute issued a series of recommendations for distributing IIJA funding, saying, “To ensure this unprecedented down payment on the future of connectivity in this country truly serves those most in need, effective rules and guidelines must be put in place. Such rules will have to address the many serious issues within today’s broadband marketplace…”
Public Knowledge released a statement strongly supporting the new initiative, highlighting the need to keep broadband options affordable and invest in device voucher / digital literacy programs for previously unconnected communities.
The Bipartisan Policy Center released an expert Q&A on opportunities and challenges inherent to implementing the IIJA, saying that “[f]ederal agencies will have to be strategic to ensure investments are impactful at delivering on their stated goals and are distributed equitably and efficiently.”
The Communications Workers of America released a statement supporting broadband infrastructure funding in the IIJA, as well as in the American Rescue Plan Act.
The Benton Institute for Broadband & Society said in a series of recommendations to the NTIA on distributing funding: “Universal, affordable, open, high-performance broadband is an important ingredient for a more just America, a healthier society, and an economy that offers true opportunity for everyone. We urge the NTIA to prioritize investing public dollars equitably, including targeting disadvantaged communities.”
In a statement, Common Cause stressed the need for deployment of funding to build “future-proof” networks, to close gaps in affordability and connectivity for communities historically “left behind” by broadband deployment.
A coalition of groups sent a letter to NTIA head Alan Davidson, encouraging funding for connecting underserved areas via a “technology neutral approach,” allowing broadband providers to determine what technologies best serve a given community.
Signatories included The App Association, BroadbandNow, Connect Americans Now, and Voices for Innovation (amongst others).