Fifteen years ago in All Politics is Global, I developed a typological theory of global economic governance, arguing that globalization had not transformed international relations but merely expanded the arenas of contestation to include policy arenas that had previously been the exclusive province of domestic politics. In my model, what truly mattered to global governance was the distribution of preferences among the great powers. When great power coordination was achieved, then effective governance would be the outcome. When great power coordination was not, then global governance would exist in name only. Demands for greater content moderation across platforms have increased as the modern economy has become increasingly data-driven. Can any standards be negotiated at the global level? The likeliest result will be a hypocritical system of “sham governance.” Under this system, a few token agreements might be negotiated at the global level. Even these arrangements, however, will lack enforcement mechanisms and likely be honored only in the breach. The regulatory center of gravity will remain at the national level. Changes at the societal and global levels over the past fifteen years only reinforce the dynamics that lead to such an outcome.

Does the First Amendment forbid reforms to save and improve newsgathering, production, and distribution? All features of the news ecosystem are currently under threat, but some interpretations suggest that the First Amendment either forbids relevant government action or has no relevance. Debates about potential reforms of the businesses and structures wreaking havoc on news and information in the United States often hit a roadblock: the assumption that the First Amendment bars government from playing a role in media systems and news industries.1 Victor Pickard calls this “First Amendment fundamentalism.”2 We can understand why internet tech platforms invoke the First Amendment against any regulation and measures requiring them to pay for news posted on their sites but gathered by others. Avoiding regulation makes their work easier and their bottom line richer. But the First Amendment is not such a bar.