Big Tech is both for and against regulations

Tech companies' calls for or against “regulating technology” do not mean much in and of themselves. The irony is that for years, lobbyists have had a field day with the opposite framing, that “regulation stifles innovation.” After the idea caught on, it effectively paralyzed democratic lawmakers who did not want to be seen as old-fashioned or getting in the way of exciting technologies and digital opportunities. Looking at what companies do in practice, beyond touting support for “regulation,” is revealing. Microsoft’s president Brad Smith supports the regulation of facial recognition systems, yet the company pushes against privacy laws in Illinois. Mark Zuckerberg has created the Facebook oversight board hoping to avoid independent oversight. In reality, the false dichotomy of regulation versus no regulation ignores the benefits tech companies have enjoyed as a result of certain regulatory interventions. To get a sense of whether corporate leaders truly embrace regulation, look to whether they support updated competition requirements, how frequently they forgo business opportunities in order to minimize human rights abuses, and whether they are prepared to be liable for failing to adopt and enforce adequate cybersecurity standards. It is time the debate about regulating technology reached a more sophisticated and substantial level. 

[Marietje Schaake is the international policy director at Stanford University’s Cyber Policy Center.]