The Questioning Center LLC
The Questioning Center LLC
Our job is to facilitate the flow of information from the source to the public. As journalists, we will report on basis of objectivity over bias. Any implicit bias will be made aware of within discussion. We strive to work with the people in order to restore trust in media.
During the antitrust hearing in congress the world's richest man (worth $182.7 billion according to Forbes) gave a brief testifying to democratic lawmakers. Alongside other tech CEOs including Mark Zuckerberg and Tim Cook, they were inquired by congress on matters relating to the privacy of Americans data and where it all ends up. Bezos was questioned about the incident where Amazon was accused of using private data from third-party sellers to steal or “better” their own products to then be sold to consumers worldwide. Democratic representative Pramila Jayapal (WA), asked Bezos the probing question regarding the scandal, “You have access to data that far exceeds the sellers on your platform with whom you compete … you have access to the entirety of sellers’ pricing and inventory — information past, present, and future — and you dictate the participation of third-party sellers on your platform, so you can set the rules of the game for your competitors but not follow those rules yourself. Do you think that’s fair to the mom and pop businesses who can sell on your platform?” Jeff Bezos, unable to answer the simple yes or no question, stated “I can’t guarantee you that that policy has never been violated.” Answering this question halfheartedly, can Americans, business, and the U.S. government trust anything that Jeff Bezos and Amazon has to state?
Did Amazon really use third-party data to benefit their own margins? Is Amazon stealing business from “mom and pop” shops and other online retailers? Can the U.S. government fairly tax the richest man in the world?
Hong Kong security chief reveals plans to implement brand new, state run policing unit to enforce security plan. John Lee Kai-chiu, Hong Kong security chief, told the South China Morning Post, “The new body will have intelligence-gathering capability, we’ll have investigation capability, we’ll have an action arm,” he says.This would mean that Beijing plans to send state run policing units to enforce security law measures. He also says this unit will be long term and implemented on day one of the bill passing. “Lee is very pleased to make Hong Kong look like a police state. This does nothing good to our city,”, says a HK lawmaker. Wu Chi-wai, chair of Hong Kong’s Democratic Party, remarks “This shows that [Lee] does not care about Hong Kong and the people of Hong Kong. He only knows how to please the Chinese Communist Party,”, she says. As Hong Kong still allows protesting against the bill, many believe that could all end soon when the bill is enacted. How will Hong Kong’s democracy and Basic Law be upheld with this new police force?
What will this new policing unit mean for those protesting the security bill? Will Hong Kong’s Basic Law cease to have meaning? Can democracy be restored in this great city?
The Questioning Center strives to keep an equal flow of stories, news, and information around our world. We covered the unknown and create the known reality.