Amazon, Google, Apple, and Facebook are battling for the home; what are their strengths, weaknesses, go-to-market strategies, and business models, and who is the favorite? Or does it matter?
Facebook’s Sheryl Sandberg and Twitter’s Jack Dorsey testified in front of Congress; the former had the most to lose, while the latter hinted at exactly what.
Spotify’s new hate policy and Twitter’s behavior policy seem like good things at first glance, but what they suggest about the companies’s power is worrisome. Plus, YouTube’s subscription plans are as confusing as ever.
More on The Moat Map, and how it applies to Uber, YouTube, Spotify and the public cloud.
The Facebook brand is, due to Facebook’s strategic choices, about not respecting privacy. That is why the Cambridge Analytica story is such a problem for the company.
AT&T skipped out on its deal with Huawei, reportedly under political pressure. Expect more tech issues between the U.S. and China, and Apple has the most to lose.
The latest controversy in the basketball world illustrates how the destruction of media business models has far-ranging effects. Then, the Logan Paul controversy, and why the way forward depends on getting core assumptions right.
Society collectively decides what is wrong through laws: that’s a useful bright line for platforms. Then, YouTube is demonstrating its market power, and Google and Amazon are acting like monopolies.
Moderating user-generated content is hard: it is easier, though, with a realistic understanding that the Internet reflects humanity — it is capable of both good and evil.
Harvey Weinstein was a gate-keeper — a position that existed in multiple industries, including the media. That entire structure, though, is untenable on the Internet, and that’s a good thing.