Technology chiefs face both parties’ ire
Republicans accused Facebook and Twitter of meddling in the election to harm President Donald Trump by censoring conservatives with warnings on GOP tweets about mail-in balloting.
Democrats criticized the companies for failing to rein in Trump’s efforts to delegitimize the election and the rise of hate speech and white nationalism and took aim at their GOP colleagues for putting on a “political sideshow” to browbeat two of the nation’s leading technology CEOS.
The bipartisan grilling from lawmakers before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday – the second virtual appearance from Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter’s Jack Dorsey in less than three weeks – reflected growing and collective ire about “Big Tech.”
The panel’s chairman, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., opened the hearing with a call to reform Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
The committee is moving forward with a bill from Graham and Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-conn., called the EARN IT Act, which would strip away some of the decades-old legal protections that shield tech companies from liability for what users post on their platforms.
“I don’t want the government to take over the job of telling America what tweets are legitimate and what are not,” Graham said. “But when you have companies that have the power of government, have far more power than traditional media outlets, something has to give.”
Zuckerberg and Dorsey defended using labels to fact-check posts about the election, arguing that, though their platforms have made some enforcement mistakes, their policies are fair.
“We are facing something that feels impossible,” Dorsey said. “We are required to help increase the health of the public conversation while at the same time ensuring that as many people as possible can participate.”
Both CEOS expressed willingness to work with lawmakers to reform Section 230.
“We are well overdue,” Zuckerberg said. “We would benefit from clearer guidance from elected officials.”
The broadsides from the left also intensified during Tuesday’s hearing. Blu
UPS truck.
The company said its online pharmacy will offer commonly prescribed medications in the U.S., including creams, pills, as well as medications that need to stay refrigerated, like insulin. Shoppers have to set up a profile on Amazon's website and have their doctors send prescriptions there. It won't ship medications that have a high risk of being abused, like some opioids.
Most insurance is accepted, Amazon said. But Prime members who don't have insurance can also buy generic or brand name drugs from Amazon for a discount.
They can also get discounts at 50,000 physical pharmacies around the country at Costco, CVS, Walgreens, Walmart and other stores.
Health economist Craig Garthwaite sees several reasons Amazon may become an attractive option for patients looking to fill prescriptions.
Amazon might be able to make price shopping for prescriptions more pleasant, and it might be competitive on the pricing of generic drugs, said Garthwaite, who teaches at Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Management.
Amazon's prescription business could be appealing to the uninsured or people who have plans that make them pay a high deductible first before their coverage starts, said John Boylan, an analyst who covers Walgreens for Edward Jones.
Boylan said Amazon's move will mostly affect smaller drugstores that don't have either the retail giant's purchasing power or deals that major drugstore chains have with insurers to funnel patients to their stores for prescriptions.
Amazon has eyed the health care industry for some time. Two years ago, it spent $750 million to buy online pharmacy Pillpack, which organizes medication in packets by what time and day they need to be taken.
It also has formed a venture named Haven with Jpmorgan Chase and Berkshire Hathaway to focus on improving the care their employees receive.