Investigation of Competition in Digital Markets

"On June 3, 2019, the House Judiciary Committee announced a bipartisan investigation into competition in digital markets,2 led by the Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial and Administrative Law.3 The purpose of the investigation was to: (1) document competition problems in digital markets; (2) examine whether dominant firms are engaging in anti competitive conduct; and (3) assess whether existing antitrust laws, competition policies, and current enforcement levels are adequate to address these issues.4 The Committee initiated the investigation in response to broad-ranging investigative reporting, and activity by policymakers and enforcers, that raised serious concerns about the platforms’ incentives and ability to harm the competitive process.

As part of the investigation, the Subcommittee held seven oversight hearings that provided Members of the Subcommittee with an opportunity to examine the state of competition in digital markets and the adequacy of existing antitrust laws. A diverse group of witnesses offered testimony on topics related to the effects of market power on the free and diverse press, on innovation, and on privacy. Other witnesses who testified included executives from businesses with concerns about the dominance of the investigated firms. The hearings also provided an opportunity for key executives from Facebook, Google, Amazon, and Apple—including the Chief Executive Officers of these firms— to address evidence that was uncovered during the investigation in a public-facing venue. After each of the hearings, Members of the Subcommittee submitted questions for the record (QFRs) to the witnesses.

The Committee requested information from the dominant platforms, from market participants, from the Federal antitrust agencies, and from other relevant parties, for the purpose of obtaining information that was not otherwise publicly available but was important to assembling a comprehensive record. The Committee also sent requests for submissions to various experts in the field, including academics, representatives of public interest groups, and practicing antitrust lawyers. The responses to these requests were indispensable to staff’s ability to complete this Report and its recommendations for congressional oversight of the antitrust agencies and legislative action.

This Report is intended to provide policymakers, antitrust enforcers, market participants, and the public with a comprehensive understanding of the state of competition in the online marketplace. The Report also provides recommendations for areas of legislative activity to address the rise and abuse of market power in the digital economy, as well as areas that warrant additional congressional attention..."
Digital Markets 

Libra: A Facebook-led Cryptocurrency Initiative

"On June 18, 2019, Facebook announced that, with 28 other members, it had founded the Libra Association, which planned to launch a new cryptocurrency, called Libra. The association released a white paper that outlined the characteristics of Libra and described its goal of creating a cryptocurrency that would overcome some of the challenges faced by other cryptocurrencies and deliver the possible benefits of the technology on a large scale.

President Trump and Treasury Secretary Mnuchin raised concerns about the Libra project, as did several Members of Congress during Senate Banking Committee and House Financial Services hearings, although some Members were more welcoming of efforts to advance financial innovation. The House Financial Services Committee majority has drafted legislation that would effectively block the Libra project..."
Libra and Cryptocurrency

Data, Social Media, and Users: Can We All Get Along?

"In March 2018, media reported that voter-profiling company Cambridge Analytica had exceeded Facebook's data use policies by collecting data on millions of Facebook users. Cambridge Analytica did this by working with a researcher to gain access to the data, so the company itself was not the entity seeking access to the information. This allowed Cambridge Analytica to "scrape" or download data from users who had granted access to their profiles, as well as those users' Facebook friends (whose profiles the first user had access to, but for which the friends did not authorize access).

At this time, it is publicly unknown what data were accessed. Facebook hired a digitalforensics firm to audit the event. Based on media reporting and old Facebook applications, user profile data such as interests, relationships, photos, "likes," and political affiliation may have been accessible, but not all data held by Facebook appear to have been accessed by an outside party. Additionally, as initial access to a user's profile was granted via an app, other information about the user, such as other apps installed on the device and Internet Protocol addresses, may have been accessed. With this information, Cambridge Analytica built profiles of potential voters to test messaging and target advertisements. In addition to ads on Facebook, search engine optimization may have been used to drive users toward ads and other web content (i.e., blogs) outside Facebook..."
Data and social media

Social Jobs Partnership

"Facebook, the U.S. Department of Labor, the National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE), DirectEmployers Association (DE), and the National Association of State Workforce Agencies (NASWA) created the ‘Social Jobs Partnership.’ The partnership’s goal will be to facilitate employment for America’s jobless through the use of social networks..."