A Critique: German Antitrust Case Against Facebook

We now live in a time where we have access to almost everything we need. We can connect with people thousands of miles away with almost no limitations. However, while there are flaws in this system, there is one that is particularly relevant when discussing social media. Facebook is under fire for suspicions that the German people are at a disadvantage because of “an abusive imposition of unfair conditions on users” (Meyer). This means that although we want to connect, there are still some issues to work out, one being privacy. Throughout this critique it will be interesting to explore these issues and learn how they work alongside/ counteract Tanner Mirrlees’ arguments in his chapter on “Governing Global Entertainment Media.”

David Meyer’s article, “Facebook Hit With German Antitrust Investigation Over User Terms” for Fortune.com discusses this discrepancy further. It is well known at this point that Facebook collects data to help with ad targeting, however, the German federal competition authority says that it is difficult for users to understand (Meyer). The issue seems to be that Germany has yet to enforce privacy law, but “the probe marks a major shift in the country’s approach” toward doing so (Meyer). Meyer mentions “Facebook has roughly 80% of the social media market in Germany, giving it clear market dominance” (Meyer). Whether or not this is abuse of market power is yet to be determined, but it appears that the German competition authority is looking into it.

In relation to Tanner Mirrlees’ arguments it seems that this issue would intrigue him due to his discussion on media sovereignty. He says, “media sovereignty is the right and the ability of states to develop and enact policies which influence the conduct of NMCs and TNMCs” (Mirrlees 107). It also appears that in terms of media sovereignty, Germany has focused on attempting to enact, or at least start conversing about privacy law in terms of social media. After all, this is new terrain that is still trying to be understood by the masses and by the governments that must regulate them. Similarly Mirrlees discusses the concept of pluralism, which in mainstream political science “is the most dominant theory of state policy-making” (110). Mirrlees also goes on to say that media policy is integral to the “media’s making of and the public’s imagining of national identities” (Mirrlees 114).

National identity is something that is mentioned many times throughout the chapter because it is fundamental in understanding how a country feels about protecting its people. Although Mirrlees says, “states formulate media policy on behalf of the general ‘national interest’ many policies actually support the particular interests and values belonging to a national interest group” I am not sure that I would completely agree with this statement in. Privacy is something that many people take very seriously and given the ambiguity of Facebook’s terms and conditions the people might be at a disadvantage. That being said, I don’t think that you have to be skeptical of all media policies because some are in place to aid and appeal to the masses.

Karin Matussek speaks about the confusion people are feeling in the article, “Facebook’s Data Dominance Risks European Antitrust Clampdown.” Matussek also notes that a regulator from the European Commission stated that “it is difficult for users to understand and assess the scope of the agreement accepted by them” which might deem this an “abusive practice” under antitrust law “if there is a connection between such an infringement and a market dominance” (Matussek). Although this is one probe there are other antitrust threats to U.S. Internet giants in the EU from Google Inc. to Amazon.com Inc.; France, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Spain “have opened separate investigations” (Matussek).

Based on the information seen in these two articles I might have to agree with Mirrlees’ view on neoliberalism. From his perspective “neoliberalism refers to ‘the sect of national and international policies that call for business domination of all social affairs with minimal countervailing force” (Mirrlees 134). It would seem that companies like Facebook enjoy their dominating social media presence but also disregard policy and the states that they are present in. Mirrlees refers to the state, in terms of neoliberal ideology, as no more than a “night watchman” which seems to assume that national identity and culture play no part in regulating these companies. The German state wants to protect its people and their privacy just as other nations wish to. However, neoliberal ideology is so dominant in today’s society that it is making it easier for corporations to do better than nations.

As a result TNMCs may have a more difficult time doing business in these countries if there is a fundamental ethical issue to deal with. The concept of liberalization also works well here because Neoliberals “believe that ‘cultural’ free-trade is great” when in fact it can do a great deal of harm to countries that host these companies (Mirrlees 135). While free trade from border to border is seen as a positive to Neoliberals, it also undermines governments by saying that NMCs and TNMCs are “best able to support freedom of expression, creativity, and innovation” (Mirrlees 134). I think that all of these things are necessary to have a diverse and happy population, but it also doesn’t mean that a corporation must be the standard to follow. While Facebook is an incredibly powerful company it might have to change the way it looks at international policy. According to Meyer, “Facebook claims it is (within Europe) only under the jurisdiction of the data protection authority in Ireland, where its international headquarters are located” (Meyer). It seems unfair to the people of Germany that they must adhere to terms that are vague and “abusive” (Meyer).

It is important to remember that although we have access to all types of content, we must be sure to create a diverse landscape for all to be a part of. If we simply dominate cultures and entire nations with our corporate policies then we are failing to adopt the ways of others. Diversity is necessary just as media policy is, and they both must be maintained presently and in the near future. Without doing so we may very well be faced with hostile relations and a lack of communication from country to country.

References

Matussek, Karin. "Facebook's Data Dominance Risks European Antitrust Clampdown." Bloomberg.com. Bloomberg, 2 Mar. 2016. Web. 7 Mar. 2016.

Meyer, David. "Facebook Hit With German Antitrust Investigation Over User Terms." Fortune Facebook Hit With German Antitrust Investigation Over User Terms Comments. N.p., 02 Mar. 2016. Web. 8 Mar. 2016.

Mirrlees, Tanner. Global Entertainment Media: Between Cultural Imperialism and Cultural Globalization. New York: Routledge, 2013. Print.