The leading magazine of the Graham family published a report claiming that regulating Big Tech would endanger US national security – and took money from Big Tech to do so.
Foreign Policy – an influential international affairs magazine controlled by the Graham family that oversees the Washington Post’s reporting on Watergate – sent an email to subscribers in May warning against a slate of antitrust motions Was.
The email, a flashy graphic of a foreign policy logo and a bald eagle next to the Kremlin, warns that a new “assessment” finds that a bipartisan no-confidence motion under consideration in Congress “could exacerbate existing vulnerabilities in data privacy, cybersecurity, and cyber security.” And false and misinformation.”
“The brief, produced by FP Analytics, the in-house policy research division of Foreign Policy magazine, highlights the need to ensure that any new legislation targeting the technology industry is to protect American citizens, companies, and government agencies from national security. addresses the issues.” Reads email.
While there is no mention of an external sponsor in the email, readers who click on the message in its entirety will find that the “assessment” is prepared “with support” and “in partnership” with a group called the Computer and Communications Industry Association. Was – a longtime tech lobbyist funded by companies including Meta, Google, Amazon and Apple.
Big Tech veterans have a financial interest in defeating antitrust bills warning against foreign policy reports, including a proposal from Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Min.) and Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Which will stop the tech giants. By promoting your own products in search results.
CCIA communications director Heather Greenfield declined to say how much the group paid for foreign policy when contacted by The Post. He also denied the presence of conflicts of interest.
“The report was prepared entirely by FP personnel and the draft material was not shown to the CCIA before it was published,” Greenfield said. “Organizations regularly sponsor analyzes by FP’s Analytics Division because of the high quality of their work.”
Foreign Policy did not respond to multiple requests for comment from the Post.
The 52-year-old publication has a relatively small but influential audience and often publishes commentary by authoritative names such as Richard Haas, chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations, CNN host Fareed Zakaria and political scientist Yasha Maunk.
It was purchased in 2008 by Graham Holdings, a $3 billion conglomerate that also controls the website Slate, several local television stations and other media ventures. The company’s president, Donald Graham, served on Facebook’s board from 2009 to 2015.
Graham is the son of the late Washington Post publisher Katherine Graham—whose steadfast leadership of the newspaper helped lead to the downfall of President Richard Nixon. He sold the paper to Jeff Bezos in 2013 for $250 million.
FP Analytics, the foreign policy division that published the CCIA brief, describes itself as “capable of putting public and private sector clients at the forefront of policy-sized discussions”.
The division maintains that it is editorially independent of the magazine and lists BP, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and a diplomatic academy affiliated with the United Arab Emirates government as clients.
Its report claimed that the proposed antitrust bill “could result in a series of unexpected consequences – rather than strengthening – the global competitiveness of US tech companies by ignoring broader threats to US technology leadership, including new national security risks”. to introduce and privilege foreign competitors.”
For example, the Klobuchar-Grassley bill could strengthen the market position of foreign competitors for US tech firms, which may not respond to “misinformation and misinformation” like US companies, the report said.
Supporters of the bill, such as the Liberal Center for American Progress, disagree, arguing that increased competition in the tech space will help “maintain dynamic, competitive US markets that are a major source of economic and global power.”
The CCIA’s work with foreign policy is the latest in a series of Big Tech-backed campaigns against antitrust bills gaining momentum in Congress. In recent weeks, the CCIA has also bought television ads claiming that antitrust bills would make inflation worse by “breaking the products American consumers love.”
The CCIA spent $22 million on television commercials during the week of May 27 alone, according For advertising data firm AdImpact.
Other Big Tech-linked campaigns have also sought to portray antitrust bills as national security risks.
In April, a high-profile troupe of former US military and intelligence, including former Obama administration Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and former National Intelligence Director James Clapper, signed a letter warning that the antitrust bill was “in the fight against cybercrime.” could hinder major US technology companies and the national security risks posed by the growing digital authoritarianism of Russia and China.”
Panetta, Clapper and several other signatories neglected to mention that they currently work for firms funded by Google and other Big Tech customers.
Garrett Ventry, consultant and former senior associate to Sen. Grassley and Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.), said, “Big tech acting like they care about national security is like five people claiming to care about your diet.” Huh.” Post . “It’s laughable.”
