The Washington PostDemocracy Dies in Darkness

Want to understand how dominant tech companies have become? Look at the number of issues they lobby on.

( <a href="">tommyboy124photogroup</a> )
Placeholder while article actions load

A firing this week by a Washington think tank has exposed the deep and often hidden influence in the nation’s capital of tech companies who are driving key governmental decisions affecting consumers both on and off the Internet.

On Wednesday, the New America Foundation — a think tank funded by Google as well as one of its co-founders, Eric Schmidt — ousted members of its Open Markets program, its anti-monopoly research arm, that had openly criticized the Web giant’s growing power. Google and New America have said this specific decision was not motivated by the group’s remarks. But critics say the episode highlights the tech industry’s enormous power to set the terms of public debate in Washington.

Barry Lynn: I criticized Google. It got me fired. That’s how corporate power works.

The funding of think tanks is just one way Silicon Valley is expanding its influence in Washington.

A Washington Post analysis shows just how broad tech companies’ interests have become in the nation’s capital. According to corporate disclosures that were submitted to the Senate Office of Public Records and screened by the Center for Responsive Politics, some of these tech giants are regularly setting records in their spending on lobbying and are pushing as many as 100 issues — or more — every year. The proliferation of issues in Silicon Valley's lobbying portfolio helps illustrate the industry's growing influence on everyday consumer life.

To take one example, Amazon’s earliest lobbying efforts in 2008 focused on just a handful of issues, including electronic payments, the taxation of online sales and consumer product safety — all matters that deal directly with Amazon’s core business as an e-commerce company. (Amazon chief executive Jeffrey P. Bezos also owns The Washington Post.)

But that portfolio soon grew in accordance with Amazon’s sprawling business interests: By 2010, as hacking and data theft was on the rise, it had begun lobbying on cybersecurity issues; in 2012, its lobbyists began addressing international postal regulations. A year later, it expanded again to consider online wine sales and flying drones. As it moved into streaming music and mobile apps, Amazon added copyright issues and music licensing to its filings, as well as mobile payments processing.

Most analyses of corporate lobbying focus on spending. And it’s true that Silicon Valley has devoted ever-increasing amounts of money to lobbying over the past decade. Just last month, Google reported that it spent more than it ever has on lobbying in a single quarter — joining Uber, Amazon and Apple, who also set new spending records. Google’s latest report reflected as much as a 40 percent increase from the same period the year before — a massive spike in spending.

But as many longtime Washington hands can attest, lobbying involves much more than simply throwing money at a problem, which is why analyzing the range of issues a company lobbies on can be just as informative. It provides an indication of a company’s policy priorities, and evidence of how a company’s strategy is evolving over time.

The rapid proliferation of issues in Uber's lobbying portfolio closely tracks its rise as a transportation and technology behemoth. Its earliest reports, from 2013, disclose the company's outreach on “innovation in the transportation marketplace.” But as Uber faced mounting questions about how it classified its drivers as contractors, not employees, it started to tell government officials more about its self-described role as a job creator and contributor to highway safety. By 2016 it was lobbying on the defense budget and issues related to its drivers' access to military bases; this year, it finally added self-driving cars to the list.

Google may have begun as a narrowly focused search engine whose earliest priorities in Washington were limited to issues such as spyware and online pharmacies. But by 2009, as it ramped up its investments in YouTube and moonshot projects, Google was meeting with officials on patents and copyright, as well as geothermal and other renewable energies. Google made no mention of surveillance in its lobbying disclosures leading up to the summer of 2013, when former NSA contractor Edward Snowden uncovered details of the agency’s massive spying apparatus. But by that October, the company began routinely lobbying on issues “related to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and national security orders,” the secret, controversial government demands for user data.

Facebook began as a social network for college students, and its earliest lobbying disclosures in 2009 list only a handful of issues, including information security, privacy and the international regulation of software. But as the company expanded into a global media platform, so did its priorities on Capitol Hill. By 2012, Facebook was lobbying elected officials and federal agencies on freedom of expression and children's privacy. And the company's expanding business interests were present too, on issues such as online advertising and high-tech worker visas.

Facebook started lobbying on issues tied to terrorism in the spring of 2015, tracking the rising profile of the Islamic State. Throughout the year, the social network met with federal officials as lawmakers urged social media companies to play a larger role reporting extremist content on their networks. Since the first terrorism-related lobbying disclosure, Facebook and other tech platforms have become more assertive in policing speech not just from violent, extremist groups abroad, but also from hate groups with followings in the United States.

These lobbying shifts paint the portrait of an industry that’s evolved from its early days of providing new and relatively self-contained services into enormous, market-dominating behemoths that touch almost every aspect of our modern existence.

Amazon, Apple and Uber declined to comment. Facebook and Google didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Read more:

Google spent the most it ever has trying to influence Washington: $6 million

Why it matters that Apple is speaking up on net neutrality

The rise of the $1,000 smartphone