What Happens When The Internet Hires A Lobbyist?
“There seems to be a sense in Silicon Valley that people  are more 
idealistic…that’s not Michael.” 
posted on December 17, 2013
 
 
_Charlie Warzel _ (http://www.buzzfeed.com/charliewarzel) 
BuzzFeed Staff 
 
WASHINGTON — It’s loud and cramped on the second-floor  balcony of a 
bustling pizza place in D.C.’s Penn Quarter. You can barely hear  Reddit’s 
animated, gesticulating co-founder, Alexis Ohanian, over the sound of a  sea of 
patrons dining below; through the din, it’s almost as if he’s mouthing  his 
words. And you can barely even see the party’s host, Michael Beckerman, the  
low-key former Republican staffer standing with his hands clasped and head 
bowed  — a powerful new industry’s new man in the capital. 
“You’re all living in a district that has tremendous influence in people’s 
 lives,” Ohanian reminds the 30-odd partygoers in attendance. “It might 
not  necessarily be you with the influence, but you could be sitting next to 
that  person, and that means you all have a great responsibility.”  
He talks about traveling across the country and meeting young 
entrepreneurs.  He talks about “meeting students who feel very personally about 
why the 
internet  is so important.” He asks — in fact, “all” he asks — is that we “
give a damn.”  It’s an idealistic speech and one Ohanian has practiced a 
lot; he motions for  the crowd to come closer, but they don’t budge. The 
crowd, comprising mainly  internet activists and lobbyists, has heard it 
before. 
 
What’s new is that Ohanian and his allies atop even larger tech companies  
have begun to play the traditional Washington game of lobbying — buying and  
wheedling influence, playing both sides. That’s Beckerman’s job: He is the 
 president and CEO of the Internet Association, the one-year-old lobbying  
organization for internet companies. The gathering, a book party sponsored 
by  the Association for Ohanian’s memoir-cum-entrepreurial-guidebook, Without 
 Their Permission, is the latest in a series of cooperations between the 
two  men. On the surface, the two are an unlikely pair — Ohanian the untucked, 
 ruffle-haired Oscar to Beckerman’s suit-clad, well-coiffed Felix — but  
nonetheless, here they are, together: the politician and his fixer, the 
career  outsider and the consummate insider.
 
 
Formed in late 2012, with the backing of companies like  Google, Amazon, 
Facebook, and eBay, the Internet Association is the internet’s  unified — and 
severely belated — attempt to create a powerful trade and lobbying  
organization to distribute money and levy influence in Washington, much like 
_TechNet_ (http://www.technet.org/) , which formed in the late 1990s to  
represent 
technology issues in Congress. As long as there have been tech  
superpowers, there has been tech lobbying. But the new generation of tech  
companies — 
internet companies — has been somewhat averse to organizing. They  see 
themselves as “disruptors,” not players. 
The Internet Association’s foundation was laid in the wake of the attempted 
 passages of the Stop Online Privacy Act (SOPA) and PROTECT IP Act (PIPA), 
which  resulted in a massive but disorganized lobbying effort by America’s 
largest tech  companies — and which mobilized Ohanian, then an otherwise 
occupied venture  capitalist, as an activist.  
Beckerman has the standard lobbyist résumé. He’s a 12-plus-year veteran of  
Capitol Hill and a former senior staffer for both Republican congressman 
Fred  Upton and the House Energy and Commerce Committee. “I was on the Hill 
for PIPA  and SOPA, and it became incredibly clear then that any wrong policy 
decision by  the federal government could take all the work we’ve done to 
make the U.S. the  center of innovation and end it just like that,” he said in 
an interview. 
Unlike Ohanian, whose caffeinated, bordering-on-goofy demeanor mimics that 
of  a politician crossed with an idealistic undergraduate, Beckerman is a 
quiet  professional with a business card and firm handshake always at the 
ready. He  wears a fitted suit, but without a tie. Sitting with Beckerman last 
month in  BuzzFeed’s offices, he carefully straddled the line between 
Washington  maneuverer and internet executive. He deftly sidestepped questions 
like 
a  seasoned Hill staffer while making sure to distance himself just enough 
from his  roots by touting the Association’s “outside-the-Beltway approach” 
to  lobbying. 
“I’ve always viewed Michael as a fixer, if that makes sense,” one former  
committee colleague told BuzzFeed. “There seems to be a sense in Silicon 
Valley  that people are more idealistic and attack problems with broad 
brushstrokes, and  that’s not Michael. He sees a problem and likes to tackle it 
as 
efficiently as  possible.”  
When I first met Beckerman, on the “Internet 2012” _bus tour_ 
(http://internet2012bustour.com/)  with Ohanian, he had just  left his job at 
the Energy 
and Commerce committee, where, according to the 2010  _Insider’s  Guide to 
Key Committee Staff_ 
(http://books.google.com/books?id=lhXoy389YegC&pg=PA153&lpg=PA153&dq=Michael+Beckerman+-+Deputy+Staff+Director&source=bl&ots=VD4PDUn
h6a&sig=nK7sV3t4ssw-WeNc9u4-nnpWlmo&hl=en&sa=X&ei=yCSvUuPZBoiWkgWpnYGYBg&ved
=0CFQQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Michael%20Beckerman%20-%20Deputy%20Staff%20Director
&f=false) , he was “helping the panel’s Republican  members implement 
their legislative policy agenda, with considerable emphasis on  preventing the 
EPA from imposing greenhouse gas regulations.” Around the time  Beckerman 
moved to the committee, Ohanian’s _TED  talk_ 
(http://www.ted.com/talks/alexis_ohanian_how_to_make_a_splash_in_social_media.html)
  about how the “lesson of 
Mister Splashy Pants,” a Reddit meme, “is a  shoo-in classic for 
meme-makers and marketers in the Facebook age,” was going  viral.  
For the last year, this contrast has been mostly irrelevant. Both men have  
been making similar cases, just in different styles and using different  
Rolodexes. But in 2014, this will change. The Internet Association is about to 
 start raising, and spending, money.
 
And the group represents a commitment to a deep change in  the way tech 
companies conduct themselves — and are perceived. They have acted  primarily as 
progressive political forces, fighting and responding for issues  around 
privacy and online freedom; they haven’t been seen in Washington fighting  for 
tax breaks, preferential labor law, or other typical corporate demands.  
The rise of the Internet Association represents the end of an era in which  
internet companies’ public political participation has been elective and 
limited  mostly to _social  causes_ 
(http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/our-position-on-californias-no-on-8.html?m=1)
 . The Internet Assocation’s role 
will most likely shift from  message-bearer to money-router.  
A recent _FEC  filing_ 
(http://images.nictusa.com/pdf/810/13031101810/13031101810.pdf#navpanes=0)  
shows that, to date, it’s raised just $25,000 — 
donations from  Rackspace executives, one of the Association’s member 
companies, and from  Facebook’s own PAC. That number will rise significantly, 
however, in the months  leading up to the midterm elections — at least, that’s 
the 
plan.  
Previews of tech’s political-moral crisis abound: Last month, it was 
reported  that Google — now the company with the country’s _eighth  largest 
lobbying budget_ 
(http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/4/4394234/google-eight-biggest-record-lobbying-washington)
  — gave an undisclosed donation to Heritage 
Action, a  conservative group that was, in part, responsible for orchestrating 
the recent  government shutdown. Its CEO, in response to July’s Supreme Court 
decisions on  gay marriage, issued the following statement: “Marriage 
between a man and a  woman matters for children, civil society and limited 
government and we  encourage all citizens and their elected officials to stand 
up 
for it.”  Previously, Google _has  described_ 
(http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/our-position-on-californias-no-on-8.html)
  Proposition 8 as “
chilling and discriminatory,” saying in a public  statement that “we see this 
fundamentally as an issue of equality.” 
A look at Google’s _political  contribution policies_ 
(http://www.google.com/publicpolicy/transparency.html)  indicates that the 
company has considered 
these  tensions and has given itself ample room to maneuver:  
We base our giving decisions on a number of factors, most importantly, the  
policy stances of individual candidates. Other factors we consider  include:
* demonstrating a commitment to an open Internet
* serving as  congressional leaders
* serving on committees that work on legislation that  is important to 
Google and our users
* serving in states and congressional  districts where Google has 
operations and employees.

Earlier this year, Mark Zuckerberg’s political lobbying group, FWD.us,  
dedicated to the cause of immigration reform, elements of which would make  
hiring foreign applicants easier for tech companies, came under scrutiny for  
funneling donations to an organization that _ran  ads_ 
(http://thinkprogress.org/immigration/2013/04/26/1925921/mark-zuckerbergs-new-political-group-spend
ing-big-on-ads-supporting-keystone-xl-and-oil-drilling/)  in support of the 
controversial Keystone XL pipeline. This unabashed  attempt to court 
moderate and conservative politicians was classic Beltway  politics. For tech 
insiders, however, it was jarring.  
In a _column_ 
(http://www.buzzfeed.com/joshmiller/fwdus-breaks-its-first-promise-to-be-different)
   earlier this year, startup founder Josh Miller 
expressed frustration with  FWD.us’ lobbying tactics: 
Supporters of this lobbying technique defend it by saying, “It’s the way  
Washington works.” But given that Mark Zuckerberg and the other technology  
pioneers who are behind FWD.us have risen to prominence by spearheading  
disruptive innovations, reverting to such traditional lobbying tactics seems  
like a missed opportunity for meaningful change. Technology companies live 
and  die by how innovative their products are, our organizing and lobbying 
tactics  should be no different.
Beckerman seems confident that they will be. “The internet and the Silicon  
Valley approach is different than the D.C. lobbying approach,” Beckerman 
said.  “We’ve made sure to go about this from day one. We’re representing the 
most  innovative companies in the world and not going to do things the same 
way, say,  the Sand and Gravel Association is doing them. We’ve put a lot 
of focus not just  on D.C. but on internet users and on the the towns that 
lawmakers are from. It’s  more about showing how the internet impacts daily 
life than anything else.” 
But the Internet Association is an all-purpose tech lobbying machine, so 
its  conflicts have the potential to be both larger and more complicated than  
FWD.us’. Now, through Ohanian and others, it benefits from vague public 
support  from people who don’t want oblivious or conflicted representatives to 
pass  legislation that will either make their internet worse or more 
expensive. But  even if you discount FWD.us-style influence buying, it’s hard 
to 
imagine Reddit  users, for example, rallying with SOPA-like fury behind wonky 
issues like  government procurement.
 
At the party after Ohanian’s speech, evidence of a divide  was subtle but 
present. Leading lobbyists from Google, Twitter, and Facebook all  popped in 
but didn’t stay long. A representative from the Retail Federation  asked for 
a signed copy of Ohanian’s book, as did one suit-clad attendee who  seemed 
excited to see Ohanian’s speech and introduced himself as “an offshore  
energy guy.”  
Previously, BuzzFeed asked Beckerman about the seemingly inevitable tension 
 that the Association would face once it started wielding its power. He 
seemed to  agree that some sort of conflict was inevitable, but suggested that 
the issue  was overblown — an optics or PR problem, but not a big one. While 
some  politicians whom tech companies had allied with on social issues are “
terrible,”  he said, on business, tax, and regulatory issues, the issue was 
less scandalous  than obvious: Google, Apple, and Facebook are some of the 
largest companies in  the world. Their political identities and 
relationships will be — and in fact  already are — complicated.  
In a call a few days after the party, Beckerman addressed the 
oft-speculated  issue of Ohanian someday running for office. “I think it’d be 
great, and 
I think  it’s probably going to happen. I think it’s just a matter of time 
before Alexis’  generation and other founders with this understanding of 
the internet will run.  I think Alexis has an incredibly important voice in 
all this. Not just for  himself, but for others like him,” he said. 
After his speech, BuzzFeed asked Ohanian if he thought the Internet  
Association had made a difference in its first year. “This might be a cop-out,  
but it’s too hard to tell,” he said, citing a “dysfunctional” Congress. When 
 asked if he was worried that its priorities might diverge from his — if,  
perhaps, his tireless support and partnership may someday put him, the face 
of  the movement, in a difficult position, he was unsure. “I don’t have an 
answer  for you,” he hedged, “but I’m expecting there to at some point be a 
 crossroads.” 
“That’s not me spiting businesses,” he said, carefully. “I’m a business 
man,  I invest in businesses. It’s pointing out the fact that the best 
interests of  businesses don’t always represent the best interest of people. 
And I’
m a fan of  people more than I am a fan of businesses.” 
The party was winding down, and extra copies of Ohanian’s book were being  
loaded back into boxes for the next leg of his four-month book tour. “It’s 
a  low-visibility operation right now,” one partygoer from the telecom 
industry  said of the Association’s impact so far in Beltway politics. “A lot 
of 
the big  tech lobbyists came tonight and left early.” Lobbyists from 
Facebook and Twitter  showed up in the waning minutes of the party as well; 
their 
presence was noted,  and they left. 
He surveyed the crowd. “All that’s left is the techno-utopians,” he said,  
“which only gets you so far.”

-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to