Source Code: Your daily look at what matters in tech.

source-codesource codeauthorIssie LapowskyNoneWant your finger on the pulse of everything that's happening in tech? Sign up to get David Pierce's daily newsletter.64fd3cbe9f
×

Get access to Protocol

Your information will be used in accordance with our Privacy Policy

I’m already a subscriber
Politics

‘Rammed it through’: Trump's Twitter order riles staffers and tech reformers

The hasty move angered many Section 230 reformers who believe the administration's actions undermine their cause.

President Trump in the Oval Office

President Donald Trump signed an executive order Thursday threatening to strip tech giants of their protections under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.

Photo: Doug Mills/The New York Times/Bloomberg via Getty Images

After Twitter slapped a fact-check label on two of President Trump's tweets about mail-in ballots late Tuesday, the president ordered his staff to respond.

"The direction from on high was: 'Do something,'" a White House official with direct knowledge of the situation told Protocol.

What came next involved an old draft of an executive order that had been kicking around Washington since last year, one that threatened to strip tech giants of critical legal protections enshrined under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. That law shields tech platforms from being held liable for what other people post and gives them the ability to moderate those platforms "in good faith."

"They picked this [order] off the shelf and essentially rammed it through," said the official, who requested anonymity because the White House had not authorized the interview. Referring to a draft that leaked late Wednesday, the official said, "It reads like a rough draft, and in a lot of ways, it is."

The president signed the executive order on Thursday, with Attorney General William Barr standing by his side. Trump and Barr said Congress will introduce companion legislation soon. The White House didn't respond to Protocol's request for comment.

The first sign that such an order was coming came Wednesday evening when White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany announced the president's intentions to reporters. The leaked draft, which was obtained by Protocol and largely mirrors the executive order formally announced Thursday, riled some White House officials and regulators, who say Trump and the White House Office of Digital Strategy circumvented the normal policy process in order to retaliate against Twitter.

Ironically, the hasty move also angered many lawyers and academics who have been fighting for Section 230 reform for years — and believe the administration's actions undermine their cause.

"Lots of people are upset with the tech industry for a lot of reasons, many legitimate and many illegitimate," said Mary Anne Franks, a professor at the University of Miami School of Law and president of the Cyber Civil Rights initiative, which fights against online revenge porn. "For someone to deliberately exploit that ambiguity makes it harder for us to have real, principled tech reform."

As described, the executive order requires the Department of Commerce to petition the FCC to conduct a review of Section 230 — a roundabout chain of command required because the White House cannot directly order the FCC, an independent agency, to do anything. It's unclear if the FCC even has the jurisdiction to conduct that review, said a former FCC official, a question that might need to be resolved in court.

The order also asks the FTC, another independent agency, to review allegations of anti-conservative bias collected by the White House and consider bringing legal action against the social media companies based on its findings. And it requires the U.S. attorney general to convene a group dedicated to rooting out bias on social media.

That provision could prove to be the most significant headache for companies like Facebook and Twitter, as it empowers states that have already expressed an interest in wielding consumer protection laws against companies accused of bias.

According to the White House official and a former FCC official, the executive order was originally authored by James Sherk, a special assistant to the president for domestic policy. The draft had been circulated to agencies like the FCC and the FTC for feedback last year, but according to the former FCC official, who was involved in those discussions and also requested anonymity to speak candidly, the draft had been "panned by all the agencies."

Little came of those conversations, at least until this week, when Twitter fact-checked President Trump's tweets. "Twitter is completely stifling FREE SPEECH, and I, as President, will not allow it to happen!" Trump tweeted Tuesday.

According to the White House official, the order had support within the Office of Digital Strategy, particularly from its chief digital officer, Ory Rinat, as well as from White House social media director Dan Scavino. But as of Wednesday, it hadn't gone through the traditional policy process, during which the staff secretary typically adjudicates concerns before an executive order heads to the president's desk.

By Thursday, the White House official said, the administration was trying to fast-track those procedures. "The policy process is racing to catch up with this thing," the official said.

Even Republican FCC Commissioner Michael O'Rielly on Thursday tweeted that he hadn't seen the executive order yet. "Everyone take deep breath on EO, which I haven't seen," he wrote.

O'Rielly offered a soft rebuke of the draft order. "As a conservative, I'm troubled voices are stifled by liberal tech leaders," O'Reilly said. "At same time, I'm extremely dedicated to First Amendment, which governs much here."

Meanwhile, some of Section 230's chief critics raced to distance themselves from President Trump's proposal. "I don't know anyone interested in Communications Decency Act reform who thinks an executive order is the way to improve the status quo," said Carrie Goldberg, a New York-based lawyer who has represented online harassment victims in cases against companies like Grindr. "There are a number of serious reform proposals, all of which contemplate congressional action. We want to see reform done the right way."

Goldberg is part of a growing group of lawyers and scholars interested in reforming Section 230 so that companies can be held liable for some of the harassment and online harms that take place on their platforms.

At a Department of Justice summit on Section 230 in February, Goldberg, Franks and others spoke passionately about how Section 230 has enabled the worst forms of online harassment, leaving victims with no legal recourse to go after the platforms that host that harassment. They talked about women tormented by revenge porn, men targeted with rape threats by abusive exes, and tens of millions of reports of child sexual abuse imagery flooding the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children every year. None focused on political bias.

With the executive order, the president has staked out perhaps the one corner of Section 230 reform that not even the reformers have embraced.

"The harms I'm talking about that so desperately require redress could not be more different than what Trump is fighting for," Goldberg said. "While my clients want the right to hold companies accountable when their lives are overturned by the weaponization of tech, Trump wants to bully these companies away from moderating the speech of the powerful."

Franks agreed: "The tech industry has essentially allowed people like Trump and other powerful people to harass and intimidate and threaten and chill the speech of other people," Franks said. "That's the free speech issue here."

Annie McAdams, a Houston-based personal injury lawyer who has brought liability cases against Facebook and Salesforce, said she welcomes any government review of Section 230, but she condemned the retaliatory nature of the White House's proposal. "If a private business facilitates unlawful activity, the court should be knocking on the door," McAdams said. "If it's simply the president doesn't agree with how a private business does business with regard to him, that's dangerous ground."

The order is likely to face opposition from courts. Moreover, the White House official said, the president's order is no guarantee that the FTC or FCC will undertake the reviews he's asking for.

"This is asking agencies he doesn't control to enact a policy they haven't traditionally been that interested in," the official said.

The former FCC official predicted that the order "isn't going anywhere," though it could "open up an Overton window" in how conservatives approach taking on Big Tech.

But no matter what happens with the executive order, Franks worries it could still have the desired effect. Already, she noted, Mark Zuckerberg has gone on Fox News to ding Twitter for fact-checking Trump. Franks fears the "theatrics" of Trump's proposal will spook tech platforms into submission.

"It's a little bit like a domestic abuse dynamic. As long as you keep me happy, I won't hurt you," Franks said. "What I really hope people understand is … he's going to hurt you anyway."
Protocol | Workplace

Silicon Valley has a new recruitment strategy: The four-day workweek

Everything you need to know about how tech companies are beta testing the 32-hour week.

Since the onset of COVID-19, more companies have begun to explore shortened workweeks.

Photo: Matteo Colombo/Getty Images

At software company Wildbit, most employees are logged off on Fridays. That's not going to change anytime soon.

To Natalie Nagele, the company's co-founder and CEO, a full five days of work doesn't necessarily mean the company will get more stuff done. She pointed to computer science professor Cal Newport's book, "Deep Work," which explains how a person's ability to complete meaningful work cuts off after just about four hours. That book, Nagele told Protocol, inspired the company to move to a four-day workweek back in 2017.

Keep Reading Show less
Sarah Roach

Sarah Roach is a reporter and producer at Protocol (@sarahroach_) where she contributes to Source Code, Protocol's daily newsletter. She is a recent graduate of George Washington University, where she studied journalism and mass communication and criminal justice. She previously worked for two years as editor in chief of her school's independent newspaper, The GW Hatchet.

When the COVID-19 crisis crippled societies last year, the collective worldwide race for a cure among medical researchers put a spotlight on the immense power of big data analysis and how sharing among disparate agencies can save lives.

The critical need to exchange information among hundreds of international agencies or departments can be tough to pull off, especially if it's medical, financial or cybersecurity information that is highly protected by regulatory guardrails.

Keep Reading Show less
James Daly
James Daly has a deep knowledge of creating brand voice identity, including understanding various audiences and targeting messaging accordingly. He enjoys commissioning, editing, writing, and business development, particularly in launching new ventures and building passionate audiences. Daly has led teams large and small to multiple awards and quantifiable success through a strategy built on teamwork, passion, fact-checking, intelligence, analytics, and audience growth while meeting budget goals and production deadlines in fast-paced environments. Daly is the Editorial Director of 2030 Media and a contributor at Wired.
Power

The game industry comes back down to Earth after its pandemic boom

Game company earnings reports this week show a decline from last year's big profits.

The game industry is slowing down as it struggles to maintain last year's record growth.

Photo: Cyril Marcilhacy/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The video game industry is finally slowing down. After a year of unprecedented and explosive growth due to the COVID-19 pandemic, big game publishers and hardware makers are starting to see profits dip from their 2020 highs and other signs of a return to normalcy.

This week alone, Sony and Nintendo both posted substantial drops in profit compared to this time a year ago, with Sony's operating income down more than 40% and Nintendo's down 17%. Grand Theft Auto maker Take-Two Interactive saw a dip in revenue and said its forecast for the rest of the fiscal year would not match last year's growth, while EA posted a revenue bump but an operating income decline of more than 43% compared to this time a year ago. Ubisoft, which reported earnings last month, saw its sales and bookings this past quarter drop by 14% and 21%, respectively, when compared to a year ago.

Keep Reading Show less
Nick Statt
Nick Statt is Protocol's video game reporter. Prior to joining Protocol, he was news editor at The Verge covering the gaming industry, mobile apps and antitrust out of San Francisco, in addition to managing coverage of Silicon Valley tech giants and startups. He now resides in Rochester, New York, home of the garbage plate and, completely coincidentally, the World Video Game Hall of Fame. He can be reached at nstatt@protocol.com.

Allocations wants to make it easier to invest in startups as a group

Now valued at $100 million, it's emerging from stealth to challenge Carta and Assure in the SPV market.

Kingsley Advani, CEO of Allocations, wants to make it easier to form SPVs.

Photo: Allocations

Software is eating the world, including the venture industry. Carta and Assure have made it easier than ever for people to band together on deals. AngelList's venture arm debuted new ways to create rolling funds. But the latest startup to challenge the incumbents in the space is Allocations, a Miami-based startup that's making it easy to create and close special purpose vehicles, or SPVs, in hours.

"If you look at Pinduoduo and group shopping, SPVs are group investing," said Kingsley Advani, Allocations' founder and CEO. Instead of one investor having to cough up millions, multiple people can write smaller checks in an SPV and invest as a cohort. It's a trend that's taken off in 2021 as investors compete to get into hot startups.

Keep Reading Show less
Biz Carson

Biz Carson ( @bizcarson) is a San Francisco-based reporter at Protocol, covering Silicon Valley with a focus on startups and venture capital. Previously, she reported for Forbes and was co-editor of Forbes Next Billion-Dollar Startups list. Before that, she worked for Business Insider, Gigaom, and Wired and started her career as a newspaper designer for Gannett.

Protocol | Fintech

How BankProv switched from community banking to crypto banking

BankProv is almost 200 years old, but it's competing with new banking startups by going after the newest area of finance — crypto.

BankProv's main office in Amesbury, Massachusetts hearkens back to its past. But the bank is looking to the future.

Photo: Google Street View

When BankProv was started, horse and buggy was state of the art for moving money. Now it's looking to use bitcoin and ether.

The bank was founded in 1828 as the Provident Bank — a name it kept until last July — and now wants to be a key provider for crypto companies that need banking services.

Keep Reading Show less
Tomio Geron

Tomio Geron ( @tomiogeron) is a San Francisco-based reporter covering fintech. He was previously a reporter and editor at The Wall Street Journal, covering venture capital and startups. Before that, he worked as a staff writer at Forbes, covering social media and venture capital, and also edited the Midas List of top tech investors. He has also worked at newspapers covering crime, courts, health and other topics. He can be reached at tgeron@protocol.com or tgeron@protonmail.com.

Latest Stories