Big Government Isn’t the Solution to Big Tech Censorship

It is no secret that Big Tech and conservatives aren’t close friends these days. Responding to this concern, Republican House members last year assembled a Big Tech Censorship and Data Task Force to hold Big Tech accountable for anti-conservative bias and censorship. 

Now, however, Republicans in Congress are taking things too far by partnering with Democrats to deal with the Big Tech censorship issue with a barrage of antitrust legislation.

Of particular concern is Republican support for “The American Innovation and Choice Online Act,” which would give unprecedented authority to bureaucrats at the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice, allowing them to decide what is lawful, who those laws apply to, and what the penalty for breaking the law will be. 

While conservatives are rightfully upset at big tech companies for doing the bidding of progressives attempting to shut down public debate about their failed policies, we should be aware by now that increasing the power of federal regulators and prosecutors through antitrust legislation is not the right path forward. Allowing the FTC and DOJ to pick and choose which companies succeed and which companies fail is not likely to advance conservative goals.  

Antitrust law in the United States has long been a mixed bag when it comes to helping consumers. While theoretically based on the consumer welfare standard, in practice it has often been used to protect politically connected business from competition, i.e., from having to meet consumer preferences. 

“The American Innovation and Choice Online Act” radically departs from the consumer welfare standard. Rather, it is designed to punish big tech companies that refuse to submit to the wishes of politicians and regulators. And even if they comply, companies’ ability to innovate and use data to improve their offerings will be lessened. As a result, consumers are likely to see an expansion of the cancel culture while receiving inferior and more expensive technology products and services. 

The Act specifies ten different actions that are deemed unlawful, but those actions are only unlawful for certain successful online service providers. With vague definitions for what constitutes “unlawful,” the bill would give unaccountable bureaucrats at the FTC and DOJ tremendous power over the American economy and culture.

The recent campaign to use antitrust laws and enforcement to take down Big Tech, led by FTC Chair Lina Khan, is driven by a partisan agenda rather than sound economic analysis. Or a concern for consumers. According to a recent study by NERA Economic Consulting, industrial concentration in the U.S. has been declining since 2007. Furthermore, the few sectors that have seen an increase in concentration have also experienced an increase in market input, demonstrating that those sectors are still paying attention to their customers.

One design feature of high tech many consumers seem to appreciate that might be affected the Act is their ability to access their most-used tools in one platform – such as Google Maps’ integration with Google. This bill could make it illegal for some companies to continue embedding their products on their own sites.

The bill could also impact consumers’ wallets at a time of record-high inflation. A recent Data Catalyst Institute white paper by economists Cameron D. Miller and Liad Wagman found that if government prevented tech companies from using their platforms in a way that gives them an advantage – which is one of the goals of the “The American Innovation and Choice Online Act” – it would increase the costs of startups that use these platforms. Thus these companies would either pass these costs along to consumers or not be able to bring their products to market. 

The embrace of antitrust legislation by Republicans will not address the concerns of conservatives about Big Tech censorship. Neither does it adhere to the long-established conservative principle that consumers are best served when companies and customers, rather than regulators, determine outcomes in the market.

Republican members of Congress should be wary of abandoning conservative principles to target companies that have been unfair to them. If there is one lesson they should have learned over the last few years it is that using government to fix our problems is not going to turn out well.