Kirsten Grind

Even before Donald Trump was re-elected, his best-known backer, Elon Musk, had come to him with a request for his presidential transition. He wanted Trump to hire some employees from Musk’s rocket company, SpaceX, as top government officials — including at the Defense Department. That request, which would seed SpaceX employees into an agency that is one of its biggest customers, is a sign of the benefits that Mr.

Elon Musk’s influence over the federal government is extraordinary, and extraordinarily lucrative. His companies were promised $3 billion across nearly 100 different contracts with 17 federal agencies in 2023. Musk’s rocket company, SpaceX, effectively dictates NASA’s rocket launch schedule. The Defense Department relies on him to get most of its satellites to orbit. His entanglements with federal regulators are also numerous and adversarial.

Facebook's newly formed Oversight Board—a group of 20 lawyers, professors and other independent experts who consider appeals to decisions made by the company—has been charged with interpreting Facebook’s numerous detailed rules governing everything from the depiction of graffiti to swearing at newsworthy figures.

When choosing the best video clips to promote from around the web, Alphabet’s Google gives a secret advantage to one source in particular: itself. Or, more specifically, YouTube. Google executives in recent years made decisions to prioritize YouTube on the first page of search results, in part to drive traffic to YouTube rather than to competitors, and also to give YouTube more leverage in business deals with content providers seeking traffic for their videos. A Google spokeswoman, Lara Levin, said there is no preference given to YouTube or any other video provider in Google search.

Google has increasingly re-engineered and interfered with search results to a far greater degree than the company and its executives have acknowledged. Those actions often come in response to pressure from businesses, outside interest groups and governments around the world. They have increased sharply since the 2016 election and the rise of online misinformation. Google’s evolving approach marks a shift from its founding philosophy of “organizing the world’s information,” to one that is far more active in deciding how that information should appear.

The tech giant, trying to navigate an age of heightened political disagreement, struggles to tame a workplace culture of nonstop debate