Explain to Shane

Under Chairwoman Lina Khan’s leadership, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is undergoing a number of process reforms that are poised to make the commission less democratic by allocating more power to the chair herself. If successful, what impact will these reforms have on the future of the commission — and on the laws it’s tasked with enforcing? In the first episode of a two-part discussion, Shane and AEI Nonresident Senior Fellow Mark Jamison co-host a conversation with Bilal Sayyed, former director of the FTC’s Office of Policy Planning and a senior adjunct fellow at TechFreedom. Bilal shares his insights on how Chairwoman Khan’s reforms will reshape long-standing policies around how the FTC is run, and on the challenges companies may face under the new FTC’s scrutiny.

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act shields online intermediaries such as social media platforms from civil liability for content users post — and reply comments — but also allows them to moderate illegal, lewd, or otherwise  harmful content as they see fit. These dual protections afforded to internet-based companies by Section 230 have been credited for the innovation and growth of social media companies, but the law is often criticized across partisan lines. Does Section 230 invite too much content moderation, or too little? And how, if at all, should Section 230 be reformed?Over the past year, our American Enterprise Institute programming has offered a number of different voices on Section 230 reform — some for, some against, and some undecided. On this episode, Shane is joined by Neil Fried, to hear his argument for why Section 230 should be reformed.Neil is a former chief counsel for communications and technology to the House Energy and Commerce Committee. He testified before the committee in June 2020 in favor of Section 230 reform. As the founder of DigitalFrontiers Advocacy, he advises clients on media, technology, and copyright law. His recent writings on Section 230 include “Why Section 230 Is Actually a Rule of Un-Civil Procedure,” “The Myth of Internet Exceptionalism,” and “Why Section 230 Isn't Really a Good Samaritan Provision.”

As countries impose new requirements on data collection and governance, the flow of consumer data between countries and business entities is more restricted than ever. For companies that need to comply with these new regulations, it can be challenging to build compliance tools around a patchwork of national laws without upending their fundamental business models. What does the regulatory landscape of today’s data governance world look like? And where, if at all, can regulators, trade experts, and multinational companies find common ground?On this episode, Shane is joined by Nigel Cory, associate director for trade policy at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF). Nigel discusses how different privacy regimes both in the US and across the globe complicate digital trade, and why there are more barriers to data flows today than ever before.

Today, technology companies are facing some of their largest security, supply chain, and regulatory threats ever. Members of Congress, the administration, and Federal Trade Commission are trying to require that firms allow anyone, anywhere to repair their consumer devices — at a high cost to product quality and individual security. Meanwhile, cyberattacks and data breaches are on the rise, and while trying to get next-generation 5G products off the ground, both software and hardware providers are facing massive semiconductor chip shortages. How are large tech companies navigating these challenges?On this episode, Shane is joined by John Godfrey, Samsung’s acting head of US public affairs and leader of their Washington, DC team. A broadband expert by trade, John is well-versed in a number of issues important to Samsung including “right to repair,” semiconductors, and 5G. John joins the podcast to discuss how Samsung views new regulatory initiatives on Capitol Hill, congressional funding for semiconductor production, and the growth of 5G wireless in the US and beyond.

The potential for a fragmented, decentralized global internet (or “splinternet”) is a concern on many levels. Two aspects of internet governance are at play here: the technical aspects of connectivity (or lack thereof), and content delivery — in essence, what material is permitted, censored, or filtered. As China, Russia, and authoritarian-leaning regimes advance top-down visions of the internet that reflect their national interests, will the internet fragment further? And what would moving away from the status quo of a free, open internet mean for global cybersecurity? To help make sense of these complex questions, Shane is joined by Nick Merrill, director of the Daylight Security Research Lab at the University of California, Berkeley’s Center for Long-Term Cybersecurity. In addition to recent national news appearances, Nick’s work includes The Internet Atlas — a visual indicator of the global internet’s structural risks. He joins the podcast to discuss how individual countries’ internet governance decisions shape user experiences and the global cybersecurity landscape.

Efforts to legislate data protection (or “privacy”) have become a top priority in the US and Europe. But the real issue at hand is data governance — namely the collection, storage, and deletion of data that companies collect about customers. These companies, especially those whose mobile digital applications collect location data, contacts, and other personal information, now face a patchwork of potential legislation to regulate data access and retention. But what if engineers and corporate leaders could work together to limit data collection risks before their products come to market? And what if privacy protections could evolve to meet consumer preferences around information gathering and sharing by both companies and third-party vendors? Would there be more understanding of how the information is used and less concern over the security of the data retained by these companies?On this episode, Shane is joined by Nishant Bhajaria, Uber’s head of technical privacy and governance. Nishant’s upcoming book, Privacy Engineering (releasing in August), will offer a roadmap for company executives and engineers to equip their products with greater built-in privacy protections while increasing transparency and accountability for users. Nishant joins the podcast to share points of interest from his book and explain what industry leaders stand to gain from improved data governance.

Intellectual property (IP) has been a hot topic due to the Biden administration’s support of a proposal to waive the World Trade Organization’s Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) for COVID-19 vaccines and treatments. Some argue IP protections incentivized vaccine manufacturers to produce what are now the world’s antidotes to the pandemic. But others say these protections are slowing down global vaccination and distribution rates — especially in the developing world. Why did the administration take this stance, and what might this signal about its approach to other IP issues?On this episode, Shane is joined by AEI Adjunct Fellow Michael Rosen — a frequent author on IP-related incentives for innovation, and on patent reform in Congress and at the US Patent and Trademark Office. He joins the podcast to discuss the state of IP policy, what the administration’s TRIPS waiver stance means for the future of innovation and public health, and how this issue acts as a proxy for the challenges of IP innovation in technology.

Due to their ability to calculate multiple complex variables at the same time, quantum computers are poised to permanently change how technology exists in society. But with the advent of quantum computing comes several risks to the US across a range of fields, including national security. How can the US sufficiently advance its quantum computing capabilities and manage the risks that come with them?On this episode, Shane is joined by Klon Kitchen, an AEI resident fellow in foreign and defense policy. Klon writes frequently on the intersection of technology and national security, and recently published an AEI report titled “Quantum computing: A national security primer.” He joins the podcast to discuss this report and explain what’s at stake for the US in the race for quantum computing superiority.

Trust is a binding agent for society, but the internet was not designed with trust or user safety in mind. And today, trust in the online ecosystem seems to be at a low. How can we reverse this trend? Many tech companies have trust and safety professionals working behind the scenes on complex issues like content moderation, disinformation, and user privacy. To help unify these efforts and establish best practices, Clara Tsao co-founded the Trust & Safety Professional Association after serving as the Department of Homeland Security’s Chief Technology Officer from 2016–2019. On this episode, Clara joins Shane to explain how the trust and safety industry operates, and how her organization is tackling the challenges of the digital age. 

Following a wave of recent attacks, cyber and supply chain security are high on the United States’ policy agenda. Software “nutrition labels” are one solution cyber experts are considering; what do these “labels” look like, and how can government and industry work together to ensure their effectiveness? On this episode, Shane is joined by Allan Friedman, director of cybersecurity initiatives at the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). For the last several years, Allan has been working to promote the adoption of Software Bills of Materials (SBOMs) across several industries and government agencies. He joins the podcast to explain how SBOMs can enrich America’s cyber toolbox, and how NTIA can promote their use without direct mandates.