3 ms·

Sure, but the claim here wasn't (as I read it) that this is unusual, but that it's unjust. If prosecutors are selecting the highest ROI targets based on some c

by md_ 6y ago

Sure, but the claim here wasn't (as I read it) that this is unusual, but that it's unjust. If prosecutors are selecting the highest ROI targets based on some calculation of which cases they can win and which cases have the biggest consumer or market impact (or are most egregious), that doesn't seem especially problematic. If they're selecting targets for prosecution based on who has political connections and who does not, however, that's very different. Taken to the extreme, it's "whataboutism" to ask about racial disparities in criminal prosecutions; if a defendant is guilty, who cares if some other accused perpetrator of a different race wasn't prosecuted for a similar offense? The impartial application of law--at least with respect to considerations like race or political connectedness--can certainly conflict with the pragmatic considerations of prosecutorial strategy, and I don't think it's simply "whataboutism" to question that tension.

gfodor 6y ago
Well, the burden of proof seems to be on the person making claims going after big tech vs other industries is politically motivated. I would prefer the DoJ step in to take actions against companies that are abusing their power to massively violate the world's privacy through surveillance systems which have unimaginable capabilities for shaping global human behavior. It's hard to think of a more worthy target of anti-trust law than the companies which are poised to control the minds and behavior of billions due to their market power.
- md_ 6y ago
  Agreed. But I read the parent’s comment as being about the legitimacy of such a claim itself—that the claim of political bias is not merely lacking proof but “whataboutism” and thus illegitimate or irrelevant, even if proven. :) Of course one might view these cases as legitimate, and bemoan that similar prosecutions don’t happen against companies in other industries, as well. The effect of political bias may be to suppress cases that should be brought, not to bring cases that shouldn’t be.

by md_ 6y ago

gfodor 6y ago

Well, the burden of proof seems to be on the person making claims going after big tech vs other industries is politically motivated. I would prefer the DoJ step in to take actions against companies that are abusing their power to massively violate the world's privacy through surveillance systems which have unimaginable capabilities for shaping global human behavior. It's hard to think of a more worthy target of anti-trust law than the companies which are poised to control the minds and behavior of billions due to their market power.

md_ 6y ago
Agreed. But I read the parent’s comment as being about the legitimacy of such a claim itself—that the claim of political bias is not merely lacking proof but “whataboutism” and thus illegitimate or irrelevant, even if proven. :) Of course one might view these cases as legitimate, and bemoan that similar prosecutions don’t happen against companies in other industries, as well. The effect of political bias may be to suppress cases that should be brought, not to bring cases that shouldn’t be.