Mediaboss Marketing

Apple CEO Tim Cook will appear on Fox News Sunday this weekend with Chris Wallace, the network announced today. During the interview, Cook will talk about Apples decision to remove Parler from the App Store, as well as the broad idea of big tech restricting free speech.

In a pair of teaser clips shared by Fox News ahead of the full interview releasing on Sunday, Cook and Wallace debated the balance of free speech and objectionable content. Cook doubled down on his previous statements that if Parler implements a moderation policy, the app will be allowed back in the App Store:

Wallace: How did you decide to balance free speech with objectionable content?

Cook: We looked at the incitement to violence that was on there and we we dont consider that free speech and incitement to violence has an has an intersection.

Wallace: What about the argument that by taking Parler off Apple, in addition to what other companies are doing, that youre just driving these people, these views further underground?

Cook: Well, weve only suspended them, Chris. And so, if if they get their moderation together, they would be back on there.

Cook also stated his belief that big tech is not monolithic because there are multiple companies in the industry:

Cook: Big tech is not monolithic. You know, theres several companies. They do different things. For us, were always trying to do the right thing.

Wallace: Isnt Big Tech restricting free speech?

Cook: We have an app store that has about 2 million apps in it. And we have terms of services for these apps. We obviously dont control whats on the internet, but weve never viewed that our platform should be a simple replication of the internet. We have rules and regulations and we just ask that people abide by those.

This comes after Cook appeared earlier this week on CBS This Morning to talk about Apples new Racial Equity and Justice Initiative projects as well as the insurrection at the US Capitol and the subsequent removal of Parler from the App Store.

The Tim Cook interview will air on Fox News Sunday at 9 a.m. ET, but times can vary by market. Watch the two teaser clips below.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Check out 9to5Mac on YouTube for more Apple news:

Read the rest here:
Tim Cook appearing on Fox News Sunday this weekend to talk Parler, free speech, and more - 9to5Mac

Facebook has been claiming to benefit small businesses with this feature for a long time.

Facebook vs Apple: As Facebook and Apples feud over user privacy and restrictions imposed by iOS 14 continues, Facebooks own employees have apparently sided with the iPhone manufacturer. The reports have come soon after the non-profit Electronic Frontier Foundation also sided with Cupertino. The social media giant has been criticising Apple for the past few months over its recent iOS 14, which would bar Facebook from tracking user data without their explicit permission, and this back-and-forth has made things ugly between the two tech giants, even as Apple has for long been a vocal critic of Facebooks data collection methods.

Also read | Facebook is upset with Apple because new iOS update allows iPhone users to opt out of tracking

As per reports, the employees of the social media giant said that it was hiding its bad privacy practices behind small businesses. They are apparently unhappy with Facebooks move to publicly criticise Cupertino, with a report citing an employee as saying that they feel like the social media giant is trying to justify a malafide practice by exploiting people with the help of a sympathetic message.

Apple earlier this year launched iOS 14, which starting next year, would bar Facebook and its products from tracking non-app movements of iPhone users. This is set to hit Facebooks targeted ads feature, a major source of revenue for the social media giant. Facebook recently published a full-page ad in prestigious newspapers like The Wall Street Journal and New York Times to criticise Apple for its iOS 14 provisions, and stated that Cupertinos policies would hurt small businesses which rely on Facebooks targeted ads feature to gain visibility. Facebook has been claiming to benefit small businesses with this feature for a long time, as this has been their most visible and sympathetic pitch behind targeted advertising.

To this, Apple said that it was protecting the interests of its own users and was reinstating within their hands the power to decide who could track their movements and use their data. In this fight, Facebook claimed to stand up for the interests of small businesses, even as Apple made it highly clear that iOS 14 would not stop Facebook from tracking user movement if the user so desires. Instead, Cupertino would just allow users to decide who would be able to access that data, a right which Apple believes is users and theirs alone. Once implemented next year, iOS 14 would not allow iPhone apps to track and sell user data secretly without the customers explicit permission.

Get live Stock Prices from BSE, NSE, US Market and latest NAV, portfolio of Mutual Funds, calculate your tax by Income Tax Calculator, know markets Top Gainers, Top Losers & Best Equity Funds. Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.

Financial Express is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel and stay updated with the latest Biz news and updates.

More:
As Facebook-Apple feud over privacy heightens, FB employees side with iPhone maker - The Financial Express

The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced a vaccine milestone on Wednesday as COVID-19 cases, deaths, and hospitalizations continue to rise.

More than 1,008,025 doses of COVID-19 vaccines have now been administered in the US, and the CDC said it has distributed 9,465,725 doses in total. The news comes just 10 days after the start of an accelerated, ambitious vaccination campaign.

"While we celebrate this historic milestone, we also acknowledge the challenging path ahead," CDC director Robert Redfield said in the CDC press release. "There is currently a limited supply of COVID-19 vaccine in the US, but supply will increase in the weeks and months to come."

The CDC added that the number of vaccines distributed includes doses of both the Moderna and the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines, but the tally of doses administered only includes the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine.

Federal panels and states continue to determine who will be next in line to get the vaccine.

After approximately 24 million healthcare workers and nursing home residents are vaccinated, the CDC is recommending that frontline essential workers and people over 75 are next in line. The next priority group would encapsulate about 49 million people, including teachers, first responders, US Postal Service employees, and grocery store workers.

Ultimately, states decide the order, and a recent Kaiser Family Foundation report confirmed that a majority of states are following CDC priority group guidelines, but Nevada, New Hampshire, and Wyoming are among a handful of states prioritizing other groups, like law enforcement.

Politicians in DC, young and old, have also been among the first vaccinated.

By the end of January, Insider projects that 50 million people within the initial priority groups will be vaccinated, and by March, Operation Warp Speed aims to have 100 million Americans vaccinated.

If distribution is uninterrupted, then a quarter of Americans could be vaccinated by the spring.

"By the time we get through December, January, February, March, April, we hopefully will have been able to get to the people who are listed as priority people," Dr. Anthony Fauci told reporters in November. "I would say starting in April, May, June, July, as we get into the late spring and early summer, that people in the so-called general population, who do not have underlying conditions or other designations that would make them priority, could get them."

Continue reading here:
1 million COVID-19 vaccines administered in US in 10 days - Business Insider - Business Insider

The social landscape could change next year.

Standing behind a podium earlier this month, New York Attorney General Letitia James delivered a blunt message to Facebook.

"No company should have this much unchecked power over our personal information and our social interactions," James said, as she announced a massive lawsuit that alleges the social media giant engaged in illegal anticompetitive behavior to maintain its dominance in social networking. Forty-seven other attorneys general, representing almost the entire country, took part in the Dec. 11 complaint.

The day only got worse for Facebook. The Federal Trade Commission, the country's top antitrust regulator, filed a similar lawsuit against the company.

Stay in the know. Get the latest tech stories from CNET News every weekday.

The lawsuits mark a major turning point in federal and state efforts to rein in Facebook's expansive power. By snapping up rivals, such as photo service Instagram and messaging service WhatsApp, the company quashes competition, critics say. Even some Facebook insiders, such as co-founder Chris Hughes, want the social network to spin off WhatsApp and Instagram. The FTC and state lawsuits set the stage for such a breakup, though legal experts say that's an unlikely outcome. The social network has argued a breakup won't address important issues such as safeguarding user privacy.

An activist in Europe wearing a mask depicting Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg.

Facebook isn't the only social network lawmakers and regulators are targeting. Ireland's Data Protection Commission fined Twitter this year for allegedly violating a European data privacy law. Last week, the European Union unveiled new proposals meant to encourage competition and require online platforms to police offensive content more aggressively. Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, along with Facebook CEOMark Zuckerberg, heard criticism from lawmakers who are looking at changing a federal law that shields online platforms from liability for user content. The Trump administration threatened to ban Chinese-owned TikTok over national security concerns.

"The problem is you have a handful of powerful companies that control the economy, control the public discourse and control all of our data," said Gigi Sohn, a fellow at Georgetown Law's Institute for Technology Law & Policy and a former senior adviser to the Federal Communications Commission.

The unfolding legal battles are likely a precursor to tech regulation in 2021. President-elect Joe Biden has raised concerns about misinformation on social networks, telling The New York Times earlier this year that he isn't a big fan of Facebook or Zuckerberg. That might mean new proposals for regulating tech will be presented to Congress, though it's unclear if any new legislation could pass.

In an op-ed in The Washington Post, Facebook global affairs boss Nick Clegg said it's "inevitable" Facebook and other tech companies will face more regulation in the future. But he cautioned US lawmakers against hindering the flow of online data and building digital barriers the way China has.

"The Biden administration could now help secure what is left of the global Internet from the dark cloud of digital protectionism and keep it open, accessible and safe for generations to come," Clegg said in the op-ed.

Now playing: Watch this: Facebook hit with antitrust lawsuits, hackers steal some...

1:34

Lawmakers have signaled that they're looking more closely at the power big tech companies wield. In July, Zuckerberg testified alongside Google CEO Sundar Pichai, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos and Apple CEO Tim Cook in a marathon hearing before the House Judiciary antitrust subcommittee.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg testified before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial and Administrative Law in July.

The subcommittee's Democratic leadership released a 449-page report in October accusing Amazon, Apple, Google and Facebook of abusing monopoly power. This dominance, the report concluded, has harmed consumers. "In the absence of competition, Facebook's quality has deteriorated over time, resulting in worse privacy protections for its users and a dramatic rise in misinformation on its platform," the report said.

The report also provided a glimpse into what solutions lawmakers are looking at to encourage more competition.

Breaking up the companies is among the proposals, along with halting major tech mergers, barring tech giants from providing preferential treatment to their own products and requiring companies to make it possible for users to transfer their data to other online platforms. The subcommittee also recommended strengthening antitrust laws and enforcement.

Though Facebook denies that it competes unfairly, the social network has called for more internet regulation around harmful content, election integrity and privacy. The company also supports the idea of making it easier to move your data to other services.

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee in November.

Democrats and Republicans have suggested changes to a federal law called Section 230that shields online platforms from liability for content posted by their users. Even Twitter and Facebook agreed the 1996 law needs an update.

"Section 230 made it possible for every major internet service to be built and ensured important values like free expression and openness were part of how platforms operate. Changing it is a significant decision," Zuckerberg told lawmakers in October during a hearing. "However, I believe Congress should update the law to make sure it's working as intended."

In another hearing, in November, Dorsey told lawmakers Congress should consider "additions to Section 230, industrywide self-regulation best practices, or a new legislative framework." Twitter didn't have any additional comment.

Democrats and Republicans have different motivations for changing Section 230. Democrats say social networks aren't doing enough to combat misinformation on social networks while Republicans say their views are being censored. (The companies deny those allegations.) Some politicians, including Biden, say the entire law should be revoked.

Proposed changes to Section 230 include allowing Americans to sue tech companies for censoring political speech and removing legal protections if a company's algorithm amplifies posts involving terrorism. Mark Lemley, a professor at Stanford Law School who directs a law, science and technology program at the university, is skeptical Democrats and Republicans will agree on changes to the law, because their goals are different.

"In a divided government it's not likely they will come to terms on a replacement bill despite their surface agreement," Lemley said. "While it is possible that they will just repeal immunity and do nothing else, I think that is unlikely."

Social networks are under more pressure to safeguard user privacy.

Doing a better job of protecting user privacy and security is another big issue facing social networks. Facebook has been under greater scrutiny since 2018 for failing to protect user privacy after UK political consultancyCambridge Analytica harvested the data of up to 87 million users without their knowledge.

Europe has a law aimed at safeguarding user data and privacy, known as the General Data Protection Regulation, but enforcing the law has been challenging. This month, Twitter was fined 450,000 euros ($547,000) by Ireland's Data Protection Commission for failing to properly notify regulators of a data breach disclosed in 2019.

Though some states have enacted their own privacy laws, the US doesn't have a national privacy law like the GDPR. The conversation around that will likely continue in 2021. Whether lawmakers will come to an agreement is a different challenge.

TikTok has been the target of the Trump administration because it's owned by a Chinese company called ByteDance. In 2021, Trump signed two executive orders, citing concerns that the Chinese government could use the app to spy on Americans. TikTok says it wouldn't hand over US information, which isn't stored in China, to Beijing.

TikTok, which didn't respond to a request for comment, has been working on a deal with Oracle and Walmart to address the US government's concerns, but it's unclear if the deal will be finalized before Biden takes office. Biden has said that he sees TikTok as a "matter of genuine concern," but he hasn't said whether he plans to reverse Trump's executive orders.

Read the rest here:
Battle to rein in Facebook, Twitter and TikTok to heat up in 2021 - CNET

The new investigation could be a much bigger deal. Chinas antimonopoly law allows for a maximum fine of 10 percent of a companys sales from the previous year, which in Alibabas case would be billions of dollars.

In its brief statement announcing the inquiry on Thursday, the State Administration for Market Regulation named only one specific form of anticompetitive conduct by Alibaba that it would look into: exclusivity agreements, which in Chinese are described using a phrase that translates as choose one of two.

Large e-commerce sites in China have for years been accused of blocking merchants who sell on their platform from selling on others, particularly during big sales events such as Singles Day. One of Alibabas main rivals, JD.com, has fought the company in court over the practice.

Galanz, a Chinese appliance maker, made headlines last year when it accused Tmall of suppressing its products in the platforms search results after the brand partnered with a rival e-commerce company, Pinduoduo. Tmall denied the accusations, according to news reports at the time.

Cutthroat practices of this sort have long been common on the Chinese internet. Tencent, for instance, will block people using its popular WeChat messaging service from directly opening links to Alibabas Taobao site the equivalent of Facebook blocking links to Amazon within its Messenger app.

On a very, very macro level, maybe its just because these companies are not competing globally, said Rui Ma, an investor and China tech analyst. Because the Chinese internet giants are jostling for advantages mostly within a single market, it seems like more of a zero-sum game, she said.

Political insiders and investors in China have speculated for years that the nations leader, Xi Jinping, might be tempted to move against Mr. Ma, worried that his influence was a growing affront to the Communist Party.

More:
China Opens Antitrust Investigation Into Alibaba - The New York Times