Parties have criticisms, but their differences suggest any legislation isn't imminent 


By Ryan Tracy

WASHINGTON -- This week's hearing into Big Tech's market power underscored the deep discontent in Congress toward giant technology companies, but also divisions about what the problems are and how to address them.

In more than five hours of adversarial interrogation before the House Antitrust Subcommittee on Wednesday, the chief executives of Amazon.com Inc., Apple Inc., Facebook, Inc. and Google owner Alphabet Inc. were accused of a range of unfair business practices.

But Democrats focused more on the alleged stifling of competition to preserve their dominance, while Republicans honed in more on the platforms' outsize grip on information and public debate.

Members at times dismissed one another's specific concerns and proposed solutions, making it clear that legislative changes concerning Big Tech aren't imminent.

"We do not need to change our antitrust laws. They have been working just fine," said Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R., Wis.), the subcommittee's top Republican, at Wednesday's hearing. He said law enforcement agencies should be the ones to decide whether they were wrong in permitting tech companies' growth, allowing: "Maybe they made a mistake."

Still, the near-universal enmity was a sign that Capitol Hill inquiries into the companies will continue no matter who controls Congress next year.

"Yesterday's event was a milestone. It makes clear to everybody that the question is no longer should we, could we do something about the platform monopolists but when exactly are we going to do it, and what exactly are we going to do?" Barry Lynn, executive director of the Open Markets Institute, which advocates for breaking up and imposing new rules on tech platforms, said Thursday.

Robert Kaminski, an analyst with Capital Alpha Partners, counted 28 discrete policy issues lawmakers raised, saying it indicates the so-called Tech Lash has room to run.

"The quantity and diversity of issues serve to keep the spotlight on tech for an indefinite amount of time," he said in a note to clients.

The tech industry's supporters dismissed the hearing as lacking in substance.

"This hearing isn't about competition, evidence, or consumers; it's a piece of political theater," said Carl Szabo, general counsel of NetChoice, a trade group whose members include Google, Facebook and Amazon. "We heard odd arguments about how each of these companies is somehow a monopoly in the same overlapping markets."

For now, the near-term threat to the companies remains ongoing investigations by the agencies that enforce U.S. antitrust laws, including the Justice Department and Federal Trade Commission as well as the states.

As did the subcommittee, those agencies have been collecting documents and talking to the companies' competitors during the past year, so evidence cited in the Wednesday hearing may not have surprised them. The Justice Department is expected to sue Google as soon as this summer, and other less-advanced investigations are proceeding into the other companies, The Wall Street Journal has reported previously citing people familiar with the matter.

Lawmakers sought to put pressure on the agencies, in part by disclosing dozens of documents, such as internal company emails and strategy discussions.

"The documentary evidence shows that several of these companies were engaged in serious anticompetitive practices," said Rep. Joe Neguse (D., Colo.), a member of the House panel in an interview after the hearing. "Regulators in many respects across multiple administrations, Democratic and Republican, have been asleep at the wheel."

If the hearing put scrutiny on the record of antitrust enforcers, though, it also offered examples of the arguments they would face in taking one of the tech giants to court.

Lawmakers in both parties said Facebook's strategy to acquire apps such as Instagram and WhatsApp appeared designed to maintain a dominant market position. But courts also would consider the effects of the transaction, as Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg implied when he countered that Instagram "has done wildly well largely because not just of the founder's talent, but because we invested heavily."

The criticism of the CEOs came across a range of topics. Mr. Zuckerberg took heat from Rep. David Cicilline, the subcommittee chairman, concerning the spread of misinformation about the coronavirus pandemic, and from Rep. Gregory Steube (R., Fla.) about the ideological diversity of people who monitor Facebook content.

Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos heard concerns about how his company treats independent retailers from Rep. Kelly Armstrong, a North Dakota Republican, and from Rep. Pramila Jayapal, a Democrat whose district includes the company's headquarters in Seattle.

The House panel is set in the coming weeks to publish a report summarizing its probe into the tech firms and making policy recommendations.

Democrats pushed for a change in laws governing competition, arguing that existing antitrust statues have failed to curb the technology giants. "Their control of the marketplace allows them to do whatever it takes to crush independent business and expand their own power. This must end," Mr. Cicilline said at the close of the hearing.

Republicans' primary concern at the hearing was perceived censorship of conservative speech by social-media companies. Democrats and the tech companies dispute those allegations, pointing in part to the popularity of conservative content on platforms such as Facebook.

To address that issue, some GOP lawmakers have proposed changes to Section 230, a law that immunizes websites from lawsuits for moderating content. Tech companies oppose those efforts. Democrats generally say they are willing to review Section 230 but are skeptical of the Republican proposals.

Lawmakers also have discussed legislation imposing new requirements on tech firms to protect consumer privacy, but this year failed to reach a compromise.

Write to Ryan Tracy at ryan.tracy@wsj.com