Bulletin
Investor Alert

The Conversation Archives | Email alerts

Oct. 23, 2021, 3:21 p.m. EDT

The easy way to rein in Facebook and Google: stop them from gobbling up potential competitors

new
Watchlist Relevance
LEARN MORE

Want to see how this story relates to your watchlist?

Just add items to create a watchlist now:

  • X
    Meta Platforms Inc. (FB)
  • X
    Alphabet Inc. Cl C (GOOG)

or Cancel Already have a watchlist? Log In

By Peter Martin

Few of us who have survived the last year aren’t grateful for technology.

Zoom, email, connected workplaces and solid internet connections at home have made it possible to work, shop, study and carry on our lives in a way that wouldn’t have been possible had the pandemic hit, say, 20 years earlier.

But parts of big tech—the parts that track us and drive us to think dangerous and antisocial things just so we keep clicking—are doing us enormous damage.

Although it might seem like we can’t have the best of both worlds—the connectivity without the damage—I reckon we can. But we are going to have to change the way we think about big tech.

The first thing is to recognize that big tech is intrinsically weak. Yes, weak. The second is that it has only become strong each time we have let it.

By “big tech” I mean Facebook /zigman2/quotes/205064656/composite FB -2.33% and Google /zigman2/quotes/205453964/composite GOOG -2.67% and related companies such as Instagram and YouTube (owned by Facebook and Google respectively).

The firms that came before them were indeed weak in the sense that they didn’t have a guaranteed future. Think back to  NetscapeMyspaceMSN  and all those other monoliths we were told at the time would become natural monopolies.

Terrified of losing its edge

Much of the behavior revealed by Facebook whistleblower  Frances Haugen  this past month is that of a market leader terrified it is losing its edge.

It switched what it showed away from news toward posts that inflamed and enraged people in 2018, with “unhealthy side effects on important slices of public content” in part because users had  begun to interact less with it .

Facebook knew that “we make body image issues worse,” in the words of one of its  memos , but did little to change the way Instagram worked. In part this was because teens spent 50% more time on Instagram than Facebook. Instagram looked like the future.

When engagement on Instagram started flagging, Facebook developed plans for  Instagram Kids , seeing preteens as “a valuable but untapped audience.”

Now read this: Under pressure, Facebook unveils new controls for teens using its platforms

These don’t sound like the actions of a company confident of staying on top.

Nor does its initial  purchase  of Instagram in 2012 when it could have started its own photo-sharing service on mobiles, leveraging all that it had.

Facebook also bought  WhatsApp  in 2014 because its own messaging platform, Messenger, was losing ground.

It couldn’t grow anything like as big by itself, because when firms grow beyond a certain size they turn sluggish, bureaucratic.

Google got bigger by buying  DoubleClick  (the platform it uses to sell the advertisements that drive its income) and all manner of emerging platforms including  Android, YouTube, Waze and Quickoffice .

They are the actions of a hungry company, but not one supremely confident of staying at the top.

/zigman2/quotes/205064656/composite
US : U.S.: Nasdaq
$ 333.12
-7.94 -2.33%
Volume: 14.75M
Nov. 26, 2021 1:00p
P/E Ratio
23.78
Dividend Yield
N/A
Market Cap
$926.66 billion
Rev. per Employee
$1.47M
loading...
/zigman2/quotes/205453964/composite
US : U.S.: Nasdaq
$ 2,856.12
-78.23 -2.67%
Volume: 849,606
Nov. 26, 2021 1:00p
P/E Ratio
27.51
Dividend Yield
N/A
Market Cap
$1891.60 billion
Rev. per Employee
$1.35M
loading...
1 2
This Story has 0 Comments
Be the first to comment
More News In
Economy & Politics

Story Conversation

Commenting FAQs »

Partner Center

Link to MarketWatch's Slice.