DOJ Opens Broad, New Antitrust Review of Big Tech Companies…

The U.S. Department of Justice has announced a new and broad review of on-line tech companies to investigate if their activity is violating antitrust laws.   The DOJ announcement explains: “Review Focuses on Practices that Create or Maintain Structural Impediments to Greater Competition and User Benefits.”

According to the Wall Street Journal, “The new antitrust inquiry … could ratchet up the already considerable regulatory pressures facing the top U.S. tech firms. The review is designed to go above and beyond recent plans for scrutinizing the tech sector that were crafted by the department and the Federal Trade Commission.”

Full Press Release: The Department of Justice announced today that the Department’s Antitrust Division is reviewing whether and how market-leading online platforms have achieved market power and are engaging in practices that have reduced competition, stifled innovation, or otherwise harmed consumers.

The Department’s review will consider the widespread concerns that consumers, businesses, and entrepreneurs have expressed about search, social media, and some retail services online. The Department’s Antitrust Division is conferring with and seeking information from the public, including industry participants who have direct insight into competition in online platforms, as well as others.

“Without the discipline of meaningful market-based competition, digital platforms may act in ways that are not responsive to consumer demands,” said Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim of the Antitrust Division. “The Department’s antitrust review will explore these important issues.”

The goal of the Department’s review is to assess the competitive conditions in the online marketplace in an objective and fair-minded manner and to ensure Americans have access to free markets in which companies compete on the merits to provide services that users want.  If violations of law are identified, the Department will proceed appropriately to seek redress.  (link)

Advertisements
This entry was posted in 1st Amendment, AG Bill Barr, Big Government, Dept Of Justice, Economy, media bias, propaganda, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

97 Responses to DOJ Opens Broad, New Antitrust Review of Big Tech Companies…

  1. Maquis says:

    Been asking President Trump to pursue this for a good while now, hope it bears good fruit.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Bendix says:

      I want antitrust reviews of ALL big companies.
      I’m sick of one company owning almost all the eyeglasses, one company owning nearly all the mattress brands, a handful of companies owning all the television, etc.
      https://www.cbsnews.com/news/luxottica-eyewear-why-are-glasses-expensive/

      Liked by 4 people

        • Peoria Jones says:

          This is what I got when I tried to open your link:

          “Community Quarantined
          This community is quarantined: It is restricted due to significant issues with reporting and addressing violations of the Reddit Content Policy. Most recently the violations have included threats of violence against police and public officials. As a visitor or member, you can help moderators maintain the community by reporting and downvoting rule-breaking content.”

          Liked by 1 person

          • Robert Smith says:

            You just have to acknowledge it twice to get in.

            Liked by 2 people

            • Peoria Jones says:

              Understood, but I wanted to point it out for the crowd. It started with info about Candace Owens. I read quite a way down, and cannot imagine that thread containing “threats of violence against police and public officials.”

              Big tech are trying to remove not only the truth, but also our ability to communicate it with each other.

              Liked by 11 people

              • SwampRatTerrier says:

                We need an “internet” communications system that’s more like Citizens’ Band radio.

                That’s where your communications DO NOT have to go through a Centralized Dictatorship Tech Company.

                How does that smart phone to smart phone transfer of data work where you just touch them together??????

                Liked by 1 person

      • thomas says:

        I agree Social media and google should be looked in to, but if a company makes a superior product ( mattress or tv)and we all buy it is that the companies fault..?

        Like

        • SwampRatTerrier says:

          But Public Forums, such as all television, radio, etc. are completely different animals from tangible products such as toothpicks or salad dressing.

          THE GREAT SALAD OIL SWINDLE

          “By 1962, De Angelis was a large enough player in commodity markets that he thought he could corner the soybean oil market, allowing him to make even more money.”

          https://www.businessinsider.com/the-great-salad-oil-scandal-of-1963-2013-11

          Like

          • sixgeese says:

            The site asks me to turn off my adblocker, which I will not do. I acknowledge that sites need ad revenue. However, without adblocker, firefox slows down to a crawl. I have a 50mbit/set Internet connection, and that should be fast enough to browse the Internet. However, sites to not put a reasonable limit on the ads they want to load, or do not exclude ad sites that take too much to load, or whatever. Firefox is now unusable without an adblocker.

            Like

            • Electra says:

              Yeah. I had to give up on the Daily Caller. After their big remodel a couple of weeks ago, their site has become so slow it’s completely unusable for me. Too many ads, I guess.

              Like

        • Baby El says:

          From the Microsoft antitrust case, it is ok to be a monopoly – and natural monopolies exist.

          It is NOT ok to abuse that monopoly position against other competitors or customers.

          Thus, even though the monopoly may be ok, discriminatory policies may still violate antitrust statutes.

          Like

        • covfefe999 says:

          You can’t allow a phone company to route your calls to other numbers, or prevent you from calling certain numbers, or censoring what you or the other party says.

          Should we allow online services to do such things?

          Liked by 3 people

        • It boils down to protections for platforms that publishers don’t have. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act immunizes online platforms for their users’ defamatory, fraudulent, or otherwise unlawful content.

          This exemption from standard libel law is extremely valuable to the companies that enjoy its protection, such as Google, Facebook, and Twitter, but they only got it because it was assumed that they would operate as a platform, with impartial, open channels of communication—not as a publisher, using censorship as curators of acceptable opinion.

          Big Tech has obviously crossed the line from platform to publisher and needs to be held accountable via the loss of Section 230 immunizations. You seem to be looking at this problem from the wrong angle.

          Like

      • snellvillebob says:

        I want to know why Kroger was charging $1.00 for a Lemon 2 months ago.

        Like

      • cthulhu says:

        Despite the number of brand names, there are surprisingly few manufacturers of all sorts of items — HVAC systems, garbage disposals, home water heaters, and door locks come to mind. Essentially the things that your home uses without particularly being interested in the brand name — could you say offhand whether your garbage disposal is Insinkerator or Badger? You know that the switch is over there and it whirs down underneath your sink. And they all play monopolistic games.

        Good handymen know this because they frequently have to maintain, say, a “York” HVAC system with “Coleman” parts…..or “Luxaire”…..or “Hitachi”…..because they’re all made in the same factories.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Dixie says:

        And now we have one buying up all the small pharmacies….. CVS, which IMO is the perfect example of a company which has risen to a level of incompetence (The Peter Principle). I have been absorbed by them twice in the past year. It’s like trying to avoid the incoming tide complete with rip tides.

        Like

    • USTerminator says:

      Break them up to the minimum of 3 each. Like 3 mini Googles with the same technology to start with. If one decides to de-platform some group of people then people can just use the other mini Google with anti trust prohibit them from collude with one another. If would be good to see if one caters to conservative or liberal will have more users and profit.

      Like

  2. Bogeyfree says:

    Love the logo!

    Think Differently

    Vote MAGA in 2020

    Liked by 1 person

  3. FL_GUY says:

    With the Google expose coming out tomorrow from OKeefe, should prove interesting.

    I suspect the tech giants plans to control the 2020 election are getting ready to go down the drain.

    Liked by 15 people

    • hyacinthclare says:

      Your mouth to God’s ears, Florida.

      Liked by 12 people

    • 🤔 … What to watch …
      ANTITRUST Vs Big Tech ANTI-AMERICANS & ELECTION-RIGGING
      Or
      ANTI-AMERICAN D-rats & Mueller’s MARAUDERS in America’s COUP CONSPIRACY

      Liked by 4 people

    • SwampRatTerrier says:

      FL GUY the Big Tech Giants have already been publicly Bragging that is what they intend to do for 2020 – disappear conservative voices and speech from online.

      Liked by 2 people

      • USTerminator says:

        It is going to take some time to break them up. However, it will be only take 1 judge to put injunction to all big techs prohibit them to de-platform people and impose their system to be neutral. The best one is holding the Executives to personally responsible for their companies like the CFO must be certified all the financial statements after the Enron fiasco. It is only take 1 judge and Barr needs to shop for a good one.

        Like

  4. Eric says:

    These companies are obviously too powerful, but the DOJ may have an uphill climb here proving that they have harmed the consumer.

    Like

    • ilcon says:

      They have harmed consumers, 5 billion worth of violating their privacy.
      They also harm the consumet in the marketplace.

      Liked by 4 people

      • Eric says:

        In anti-trust, I believe you have to show that the companies are “gouging” the consumer. FB and Google are free. Amazon undersells everyone. It sucks, but it’s a hard case to prove they are financially ripping off consumers.

        Like

    • Peoria Jones says:

      Are Conservatives consumers? Plenty of proof of what they’ve done to harm individuals, businesses, and those running for office who do not share their leftist political/social bent.

      Liked by 4 people

    • technoaesthete says:

      Google’s search results are not objective reality. They have weighted the results to their perception of reality. IMHO, that harms the consumer.

      Liked by 9 people

    • POTUS has been busy! The White House gathering extensive evidence of online bias against Conservative / Christian content creators for many months… 1,000’s posted detailed accounts on a special WH site, describing their experiences with bias, banning, censorship, demonetization, and more by Facebook, Instagram, Google, YouTube, Twitter, and others.

      POTUS held a Social Media Summit two weeks ago with many 100’s of independent journalists attending. Many of my favorites had the opportunity to speak at the private meeting with POTUS. They were also invited to a Rose Garden briefing and got to sit in the rows of chairs usually reserved for MSM, meaning the MSM were forced to stand in the back! SO COOL!

      Liked by 2 people

  5. Right to reply says:

    Good! No one single entity should have the power to decide an election, an opinion, or a purchase! They need to go after cable TV next!

    Liked by 8 people

    • Dixie says:

      This is worse and more obvious to the naked eye than the accusation that the Russians interfered with the 2016 election.

      Like

  6. Bucknutguy says:

    Unfortunately anti-trust is a distraction from the real issues of privacy and sensorship. Swamp doing swamp things.

    Liked by 6 people

  7. Dee Paul Deje says:

    Time to ‘Roger Stone’ Jack and Cuckerberg.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. soozword says:

    Hopefully this can be the first step towards eventually addressing privacy and censorship. The “eventually” part is what concerns me given how they have really ratcheted up lately.

    Like

  9. FofBW says:

    Just saying that ‘Big Brother” is watching may give them pause.

    They are getting their lawyers all lined up and the lawyers are happy to take their money.

    Liked by 1 person

    • CM-TX says:

      If this is any indication… they lie w/o fear, b/c they know they’re above the law.

      Liked by 4 people

      • CM-TX says:

        Here Hawley spanks Twitter & Facebook… Give this man an Emmy!!
        (I so want to like him… but we know as good as it sounds– it Never goes anywhere.) 😩

        Liked by 2 people

        • George Hicks says:

          Hawley on Tucker right now

          Like

        • Carrie says:

          It might not get anywhere now, true. But he is asking great questions that no one else asks and we are actually getting some answers, some vague, some not so vague, but it will definitely help in crafting legislation later in helping to control these massive companies. His style is interesting because he keeps asking different questions going in all sorts of different directions keeping them off balance and never getting a rhythm to start the vagueness. We keep watching over and over Elise Stefanik asking Comey those questions about the protocols for informing other departments about intelligence investigations. I think some of these questions Hawley asks might also turn up again soon…

          Like

        • Dixie says:

          Since, generally speaking, congressional member are so old, they know very little about the internet and the inner workings of Twitter, Google, Facebook and Amazon, Hawley was probably speaking the equivalent of “greek” to the rest of the committee.

          Thank you CM-TX for posting both of these video clips. It so seldom happens, it’s nice to find a standout among congresscritters. I read he’s the youngest senator in congress, 39.

          Like

      • Dixie says:

        Senator Hawley from Missouri is awesome. First time I’ve ever seen him referenced.

        Like

    • Dixie says:

      Big Brother is so busy watching us, it doesn’t have time for the real serious problems.

      Liked by 1 person

  10. Lots of Twitter users have the proof of anti-conservative bias if they can get the info to the right people. James Woods? Thomas Wictor?

    Liked by 12 people

  11. History Teaches says:

    Big tech are just another extension of the swamp.

    Doubtful much serious ‘draining’ takes place. Probably will be bogged down for years of legal theater. Expect some superficial minor ‘punishment’ and verbal chastising.

    Then it will be business as usual, though in slightly modified configuration.

    The lawyers on the left have been mostly dominating in all ideological confrontations.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Ray says:

    Antitrust is good but is it a delaying tactic? how about the FBI does something useful for a change and investigates Googles China ties.

    Liked by 5 people

  13. ilcon says:

    They’ve all lied to Congress. Prosecute them all.
    Place them in solitary so they are unable to control their criminal enterprises.

    Liked by 4 people

  14. wlbeattie says:

    Any chance the DOJ will set up some way to contact them regarding registering the bias etc?

    Like

  15. CM-TX says:

    “Review”– 🙄. In other words, expect a naughty list of the horrible, unethical, unlawful things they did… but absolutely zero real consequences.

    It’ll drag out so it has no impact on fixing the actual issues before the election. At most, it results in a shakedown of some hefty fines as a penalty… & as long as the promise to knock it off. They won’t.

    It’ll be paid to the Gov– many will take their cuts in kickbacks, while patting each other on the back. Those who were negatively affected by this VERY orchestrated effort, will NOT see any actual compensation, never-mind any satisfaction from the outcome,

    Somebody should clue them in, we aren’t buying the charade anymore. Their recycled cover-up schemes are predictable & transparent. We also don’t expect a FULLY self-discredited agency to deliver anything beyond BS. They long ago reached a point from which they can NEVER return to regain the public’s trust.

    If they actually wanted to do something about it, given all the evidence has long been gathered by the the public– They would’ve already cancelled all those H1-B visas, & rescinded any gov’t contracts. But they didn’t, & they won’t. 😴

    Liked by 2 people

  16. Carrie says:

    Liked by 7 people

  17. 1970novass396 says:

    JMO but it appears Big Tech believe themselves to find victory over anything The Donald and his DOJ of Justice can throw at them. Maybe they’re too confident. Hell Google associations visited the White House more often during Obama’s 8 years than any group by far.

    Liked by 1 person

  18. tonyE says:

    It’s about time, really.

    While we’re at it, let’s also look at the “entertainment” industry.

    Let’s look at the vertical integration of a few large companies that control production, distribution and retail. Time to do break up the Big Media conglomerates that control cable companies, movie studios, music production, telco companies, ISPs, wireless services….

    BOOM.

    Liked by 5 people

    • SwampRatTerrier says:

      Vertically integrated companies have been busted before.

      The Hollywood studios were forced to sell off all their movie houses.

      Like

  19. Spectre says:

    Purely political. Being part of a mob is okay if it’s our side. Got it.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. John55 says:

    Perhaps the FEC could open an investigation into the tech companies open and aggressive efforts on behalf of the Democratic party. At the very least that seems like it should have to be declared as a campaign contribution.

    Liked by 4 people

  21. TKA says:

    Oh look. Another investigation. How much longer for that bombshell IG report? It’s getting to be a bit obvious that nothing is really different than what has gone on in the past. Enjoy the show.

    Liked by 2 people

  22. Mncpo(ret) says:

    So, last week the President hosts independent media producers on how they are prevented from getting their content out.

    This week the investigation into big tech is announced.

    You know that this investigation has been in the planning/execution stages for a long time.

    Geez, he’s like a stable genius or something.

    Love this guy.

    Liked by 9 people

  23. Blind no Longer says:

    I have my full blown eeyore going tonight about this! I’d like to be optimistic but I know how this will go…just like everything else when it comes to our side of the political spectrum!

    Liked by 1 person

    • covfefe999 says:

      Why would you post this? Does it make you feel better to drag other people down? If we were in the middle of a war, would you say “I know how this is going to go, we’re going to lose just like we always do!” Think about it.

      Liked by 1 person

  24. David R. Graham says:

    Time to de-platform the DOJ, I guess. Maybe the whole USG? Buy a new one?

    Liked by 1 person

  25. Redhotrugmama says:

    Yawn……..another “review”……The democrats get nice fluffy “reviews” (thatbgo nowhere) and republicans get “investigations” that may yield solitary confinement.

    AG Bondo Barr is doing nothing except the bare minimum in order to placate the President and his voters. Nothing more.

    Liked by 1 person

  26. KnowSERENoFear says:

    Federal government has no business in the “antitrust” business. No such thing is enumerated in the Constitution; therefore, the authority is reserved to the several States. And as mentioned above, consumers can change things with their pocketbooks…with much better results than a racket of criminals that comprise our corrupt central government.

    Like

    • Baby El says:

      Falls under the Sherman Antitrust Act which is based on the Commerce Clause of our Constitution.

      See here: https://www.justia.com/business-operations/managing-your-business/legal-compliance/antitrust/

      Liked by 1 person

    • covfefe999 says:

      By your logic we could have no Federal laws. We would have the Constitution and we would have state laws. Well that’s not how it is.

      As for consumers and their pocketbooks:

      NYT: “Without the discipline of meaningful market-based competition, digital platforms may act in ways that are not responsive to consumer demands,” Makan Delrahim, head of the Justice Department’s antitrust division, said in a statement. […] “Congress and antitrust enforcers allowed these firms to regulate themselves with little oversight,” Mr. Cicilline [Dem Representative from Rhode Island] said. “As a result, the internet has become increasingly concentrated, less open and growingly hostile to innovation and entrepreneurship.”

      Are you really OK with Google manipulating searches or Facebook and Twitter censoring and banning conservative speech?

      Like

  27. J Gottfred says:

    I think it is odd after what we have watched with Spy-Gate to trust the Department of Dufus with any serious investigation or to do what is in the country’s best interest….

    Like

  28. SwampRatTerrier says:

    Did anyone else know about this?

    “I hope National Review will at least have the integrity to disclose it is funded by Google when they begin making The Conservative Case for Censoring Conservatives and Driving Them Completely From the Public Square.” – Ace of Spades

    Liked by 2 people

  29. Fred Chittenden says:

    Just google ‘weed killer’ and note how there’s lots and lots of home brew weed killers mentioned for every store bought weed killer. This is analytics at work against capitalist enterprises that the left doesn’t care for — a violation of the trust they were given to treat everyone with a reasonable degree of fairness.

    Same applies to search results skewing against conservatives and conservative causes. Google, et al, are violating the trust they were given to behave in an unbiased fashion…

    Liked by 1 person

  30. Learning says:

    What a great thing to have a smart phone not Google not Apple

    Like

  31. ConservativeInAZ says:

    Can the DOJ go after these tech companies for election tampering? Steering? I’m not sure of the correct term.

    Like

  32. Hey kids while we are fixing problems let us take a whack at financial industry! 😉

    No bank shall have more than (x%) total of the national whole. (I.E. NO bank is too big to fail.)

    Banking, investing, and “wealth management” (to mention just a few) are different industries and thou shalt not mix. (again NO sector is too big to fail.) Management wants to piss the stakeholders money away go for it BUT you aren’t getting propped up or protected from stakeholder wrath.
    Poorly run outfits won’t survive.
    NOTHING should ever be “too big to fail” AND executives need held accountable for their actions.
    Their personal fortunes and liberty if need be.

    These restrictions come under National Security just as should any and everything required for nation defense.

    Liked by 1 person

  33. covfefe999 says:

    I swear just two days ago a Google image search on “Epstein Clinton” brought up nothing but images of Epstein and Trump. But tonight, miraculously, now I see what I requested in the search, Epstein and Clinton.

    Same thing with “Michelle Obama fashion disasters”. Two days ago I saw nothing but her best looks, now tonight her worst, what I was searching for. (And they’re prettty funny btw.)

    I’m not kidding about this. I wish I had done some screen grabs. Did Google turn off their search manipulation?

    Liked by 1 person

  34. rjcylon says:

    Project Veritas is going to have another Google insider blow the whistle tomorrow. This is good timing.

    ‘The Donald’ reddit page was mentioned above, that it’s been quarantined. Reddit has already quarantined other pages that are going against the Marxist cultural revolution, but The Donald is their trophy. This is happening all over the web, online communities that have been active for a long time all getting wiped out, all at the same time.

    All of this is orchestrated, literally the entire tech community is joining forces to prevent a Trump re-election, and silence anyone who has mainstream opinions.

    Like

  35. snellvillebob says:

    It is time to bring email and online activities under the shelter of personal papers. This means a warrant would be required to read or collect information about them. Lots of jerks would soon be unemployed.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s