BIDEN URGED TO PREVENT INTERNET SHUTDOWN FOR RUSSIA: As foreign tech companies stream out of Russia and the Ukrainian government calls for greater efforts to isolate Moscow from any and all digital technologies, a bevy of civil society groups are asking President Joe Biden to safeguard basic internet access for regular Russians. "Let's not do Putin's dirty work for him," said Peter Micek, the general counsel and UN policy manager at digital rights group Access Now, referring to Russian President Vladimir Putin. Micek said any move to shut off Russian internet access would play into the Kremlin's effort to control Russians' access to outside information. — Drawing a line: In a letter sent this morning to Biden , 41 digital rights groups — led by Access Now and the nonprofit Wikimedia Foundation — pushed the president to avoid new tech sanctions from the U.S. or its allies that would disrupt internet access in Russia, and to tell tech companies around the world not to deny uncensored internet access to the Russian people. The groups warned moving to shut down the internet inside Russia could "hurt individuals attempting to organize in opposition to the war, report openly and honestly on events in Russia and access information about what is happening in Ukraine and abroad." — Clarity needed: The groups also asked Biden to direct the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control to clarify that the tight technology sanctions imposed on the Russia by the U.S. and its allies do not extend to bedrock connectivity technologies like routers, smartphones and the software and services needed to connect citizens to the global internet. The groups cited recent pullouts by internet service providers Cogent and Lumen as evidence companies are worried about running afoul of sanctions. "Unless and until Treasury issues formal guidance, corporate lawyers [and] the general counsels of all these companies are going to say, 'When in doubt, overcomply,'" said Rebecca MacKinnon, the head of global advocacy at the Wikimedia Foundation. MacKinnon and Micek both noted that OFAC has issued general licenses for basic information and communications technologies in past instances where U.S. technology sanctions were applied, including for Iran and in the wake of Russia's 2014 annexation of Crimea. — Congress, take note: Kate Ruane, the head public policy specialist for the U.S. at the Wikimedia Foundation, said it's also incumbent upon Congress to take steps to preserve Russians' access to the internet and other basic electronic communication tools. She said that includes voting against the EARN IT Act (S. 3538), bipartisan legislation to restrict platforms' Section 230 liability protections that critics say will also endanger end-to-end encryption services , which are often relied upon by dissidents. Those services, she said, are "without doubt keeping people in Russia and Ukraine alive right now." TECH SPENDS BIG ON ANTI-ANTITRUST ADS: Four trade groups and advocacy organizations representing the major tech companies spent roughly $2 million on Facebook advertisements opposing tech-related antitrust bills since the start of the year. That number, which comes courtesy of an analysis of Facebook's ad archives by Emily, will likely only increase as legislation to rein in the power of the tech giants moves through the House and Senate. Ad buys from tech trade group NetChoice made up the bulk of that spending. The group, which counts Google, Facebook and Amazon as members, spent around $1.5 million on Facebook ads targeting antitrust legislation since January. The Connected Commerce Council, a business advocacy organization which receives money from Google and Amazon, came in second, with around $300,000 in ad buys opposing antitrust bills. The Taxpayers Protection Alliance spent a little less than $200,000 on similar Facebook ads, while the Chamber of Progress spent around $18,000. Robert Winterton, a spokesperson for NetChoice, said the group has used "a variety of competing ad options to educate Americans unaware of the progressive antitrust crusade against services that they rely on." CCC spokesperson Lou Watson said the group's advertising is geared towards educating small businesses about legislation that could make their digital tools less effective. And Chamber of Progress CEO Adam Kovacevich said his group's ads "educate voters about how the bill would impact them, and highlight Democrats who have raised concerns about the bill." A Taxpayers Protection Alliance spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment. — What they're messaging: The four groups have been relatively unified in their messaging against the antitrust bills, generally arguing that the legislation would give a leg up to China, decimate small businesses and break popular services like Amazon Prime. The ads, which often feature bright yellow "warning" signs and people staring forlornly at their computer screens , received a total of at least 25 million impressions, according to Facebook's ad archives. There was a significant uptick in spending around Jan. 20, when the American Innovation and Choice Online Act (S. 2992) passed the Senate Judiciary Committee. — Facebook 'twofer': Critics of the big tech companies said it's concerning that tech groups receiving money from Facebook funnel that money right back into Facebook. "Using their market share to promote their agenda on the platform they control — how very monopoly of them," said Sacha Haworth, the executive director at the progressive Tech Oversight Project. — A wider lens: The nearly $2 million in Facebook ads only accounts for a small fraction of the spending by the tech lobby targeting antitrust bills now moving through the House and Senate. The Computer and Communications Industry Association, for instance, has not spent money on Facebook advertising — but it has launched a multi-pronged lobbying and PR campaign to agitate against the bills.
| 
Comments
Post a Comment