One post, authored by Khan’s staff, was published on January 3, 2025, with the title “AI and the Risk of Consumer Harm.” It noted that the FTC was “taking note of AI’s potential for real-world instances of harm — from incentivizing commercial surveillance to enabling fraud and impersonation to perpetuating illegal discrimination.”
What do you mean by “ideological reasons”? You’re using the phrase as if it’s a bad thing, but I struggle to imagine how anyone could exist in a political role such as FTC chair and not bring their ideology into their work.
It is a bad thing. The role of the FTC isn’t to go after companies because the head of the FTC just doesn’t like them - they’re supposed to be looking out for the consumer. Under Khan the FTC just wasted everyone’s time and money by picking fights with “big tech” over things that weren’t illegal and the FTC had no chance of winning.
What do you mean by “ideological reasons”? You’re using the phrase as if it’s a bad thing, but I struggle to imagine how anyone could exist in a political role such as FTC chair and not bring their ideology into their work.
It is a bad thing. The role of the FTC isn’t to go after companies because the head of the FTC just doesn’t like them - they’re supposed to be looking out for the consumer. Under Khan the FTC just wasted everyone’s time and money by picking fights with “big tech” over things that weren’t illegal and the FTC had no chance of winning.