Placeholder Image

Subtitles section Play video

  • >>> THIS IS AN NBC NEWS SPECIAL

  • REPORT.

  • HERE'S LESTER HOLT AND SAVANNAH

  • GUTHRIE.

  • >> GOOD DAY, EVERYONE.

  • WE'RE COMING ON THE AIR ON A

  • VERY BUSY NEWS DAY TO TELL YOU

  • WE HAVE MARK ZUCKERBERG ABOUT TO

  • TESTIFY BEFORE CONGRESS.

  • HE WILL LIKELY FACE VERY TOUGH

  • QUESTIONS ABOUT HIS COMPANY'S

  • ABILITY TO SAFEGUARD THE

  • PERSONAL DATA OF TENS OF

  • MILLIONS OF FACEBOOK USERS,

  • INFORMATION IMPROPERLY OBTAINED

  • BY THE DATA COMPANY CAMBRIDGE

  • ANALYTICA.

  • >> AND THE 23-YEAR-OLD UNDER

  • INTENSE PUBLIC SCRUTINY, LESS

  • TRUST WITH THE THIRD LARGEST

  • INDUSTRY, LESTER.

  • >> THE CANCELLATION OF THE

  • PRESIDENT'S SCHEDULED FIRST TRIP

  • TO SOUTH AMERICA THIS WEEK AND

  • FALLOUT FROM THE FBI RAID

  • YESTERDAY ON THE OFFICES OF THE

  • PRESIDENT'S PERSONAL LAWYER

  • MICHAEL COHEN.

  • AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE ARE A LOT

  • OF MOVING PARTS, A LOT OF THINGS

  • WE'RE WATCHING.

  • WE'RE MONITORING ALL OF THAT.

  • WE'LL BRING YOU DEVELOPMENTS AS

  • THEY WARRANT.

  • >> MEANWHILE ON CAPITOL HILL,

  • YOU SEE MARK ZUCKERBERG SET TO

  • MAKE HIS OPENING STATEMENT IN

  • JUST A FEW MOMENTS.

  • THIS IS THE JOINT COMMITTEE, ONE

  • OF THE MOST EAGERLY ANTICIPATED

  • HEARINGS IN RECENT MEMORY.

  • NO FEWER THAN 43 U.S. SENATORS

  • SET TO QUESTION MARK ZUCKERBERG.

  • NBC'S JOLENE KENT COVERS THIS

  • FOR US.

  • SHE'S BEEN FOLLOWING FACEBOOK'S

  • STORY.

  • JO, WE EXPECT TO HEAR THE WORDS

  • "I'M SORRY" HERE TODAY.

  • >> THAT'S RIGHT, THE SEVENTH

  • RICHEST PERSON IN THE WORLD, WE

  • EXPECT HIM TO SEVER PERSONAL

  • TIES.

  • HE WILL BE TAKING RESPONSIBILITY

  • AND ISSUING A NEW LEVEL OF

  • ACTION AND ADDRESSING THE

  • PRIVACY CONCERNS THAT COME IN

  • THE AFTERMATH OF THE CAMBRIDGE

  • ANALYTICA SCANDAL THAT MAY HAVE

  • IMPACTED UP TO 87 MILLION

  • FACEBOOK USERS, MOST OF WHOM

  • LIVE IN THE U.S.

  • HIS TESTIMONY, WHICH HE HAS NOT

  • YET SPOKEN JUST YET, BUT HE'S

  • EXPECTED TO ADDRESS NOT ONLY THE

  • SENATORS BUT USERS OUT THERE WHO

  • HAVE BEGUN LEAVING FACEBOOK AND

  • DELETING THIS PARTICULAR APP AND

  • MIGRATING TO OTHER SOCIAL MEDIA.

  • SO WHAT WE'RE EXPECTING TO HEAR

  • IS NOT JUST AN APOLOGY BUT

  • SOLUTIONS.

  • LAWMAKERS HERE ON CAPITOL HILL

  • ARE TELLING ME THEY ARE NOT

  • SATISFIED NECESSARILY WITH WHAT

  • ZUCKERBERG HAS PUT FORTH SO FAR.

  • HE'S ALREADY ROLLED OUT SOME

  • PRIVACY CHANGES WHERE

  • CENTRALIZATION OF YOUR PRIVACY

  • SETTINGS, BUT THERE LIKELY WILL

  • BE SOME REGULATORY SCRUTINY HERE

  • AS WELL, SAVANNAH.

  • >> LET'S BRING IN THE CO-FOUNDER

  • AND EXECUTIVE EDITOR OF THE

  • EXECUTIVE TECH SITE RECODE AND

  • HAS BEEN FOLLOWING FACEBOOK

  • CLOSELY.

  • TARA, WE KNOW HE'S GOING TO

  • APOLOGIZE, WE KNOW THERE IS A PR

  • ASPECT TO THIS, BUT FROM A

  • BUSINESS STANDPOINT, WHAT ARE

  • THE GOALS THAT ZUCKERBERG FACES

  • HERE?

  • >> HE THINK HE HAS TO STAUNCH

  • THE CRITICISM AND AT LEAST HAVE

  • SOME ANSWERS THAT THEY'RE GOING

  • TO FIX THE PROBLEMS THEY

  • CREATED.

  • IT'S A GIANT MESS, AND SAYING

  • I'M SORRY, I'M SORRY, I'M SORRY

  • PROBABLY WON'T CUT IT HERE, BUT

  • HE'LL PROBABLY SAY I'M SORRY IN

  • HIS OPENING STATEMENT.

  • THERE ARE SOME POLITICIANS

  • ASKING QUESTIONS, AND THERE ARE

  • SOME THAT ARE PRETTY HOSTILE

  • TOWARD WHAT FACEBOOK HAS DONE.

  • >> HE'S BEEN NOTED AS A GUY WHO

  • IS NOT NECESSARILY COMFORTABLE

  • IN FRONT OF CROWDS, CERTAINLY

  • CAMERAS, AND THERE IS A LOT OF

  • ATTENTION ON HIM NOW.

  • DOES THAT PLAY IN HIS FAVOR IN

  • SOME WAYS IN TERMS OF

  • PERCEPTIONS?

  • >> I GUESS.

  • I WROTE HIS COLUMN TODAY SAYING

  • THESE ARE BOYS UNDER SCRUTINY

  • AND IT'S REALLY HARD FOR HIM.

  • HE'S A MAN RUNNING A MAJOR

  • COMPANY.

  • HE'S A BILLIONAIRE.

  • HE STARTED ONE OF THE MOST

  • POWERFUL COMPANIES ON THE

  • PLANET.

  • HE SHOULD BE ABLE TO HANDLE IT,

  • AND IF HE CAN'T HANDLE IT, HE

  • SHOULDN'T BE CEO OF FACEBOOK.

  • >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

  • ZUCKERBERG IS NOW BEING

  • INTRODUCED IN OPENING STATEMENTS

  • OF THE CHAIRMAN AND RANKING

  • MEMBERS OF THESE TWO COMMITTEES.

  • THIS IS THE SCIENCE AND

  • TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE.

  • CHUCK GRASSLEY INTRODUCING MARK

  • ZUCKERBERG.

  • >> AS I MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY,

  • HIS COMPANY NOW HAS OVER 40

  • BILLION OF ANNUAL REVENUE AND

  • OVER 2 BILLION MONTHLY ACTIVE

  • USERS.

  • MR. ZUCKERBERG, ALONG WITH HIS

  • WIFE, ALSO ESTABLISHED THE

  • CHAN-ZUCKERBERG INITIATIVE TO

  • FURTHER PHILANTHROPIC CAUSES.

  • I NOW TURN TO YOU.

  • WELCOME TO THE COMMITTEE, AND

  • WHATEVER YOUR STATEMENT IS

  • ORALLY, IF YOU HAVE A LONGER

  • ONE, IT WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE

  • RECORD.

  • SO PROCEED, SIR.

  • >> CHAIRMAN GRASSLEY, CHAIRMAN

  • THUNE, RANKING MEMBER FEINSTEIN

  • AND RANKING MEMBER NELSON AND

  • MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE, WE

  • FACE A NUMBER OF IMPORTANT

  • ISSUES AROUND PRIVACY, SAFETY

  • AND DEMOCRACY.

  • AND YOU WILL RIGHTFULLY HAVE

  • SOME HARD QUESTIONS FOR ME TO

  • ANSWER.

  • BEFORE I TALK ABOUT THE STEPS

  • WE'RE TAKING TO ADDRESS THEM, I

  • WANT TO TALK ABOUT HOW WE GOT

  • HERE.

  • FACEBOOK IS AN IDEALISTIC AND

  • OPTIMISTIC COMPANY.

  • FOR MOST OF OUR EXISTENCE, WE

  • FOCUSED ON ALL OF THE GOOD THAT

  • CONNECTING PEOPLE CAN DO.

  • AND AS FACEBOOK HAS GROWN,

  • PEOPLE EVERYWHERE HAVE GOTTEN A

  • POWERFUL NEW TOOL FOR STAYING

  • CONNECTED TO THE PEOPLE THEY

  • LOVE, FOR MAKING THEIR VOICES

  • HEARD AND FOR BUILDING

  • COMMUNITIES AND BUSINESSES.

  • JUST RECENTLY, WE'VE SEEN THE

  • #METOO MOVEMENT AND THE MARCH

  • FOR OUR LIVES ORGANIZED AT LEAST

  • IN PART ON FACEBOOK.

  • AFTER HURRICANE HARVEY, PEOPLE

  • CAME TOGETHER TO RAISE MORE THAN

  • $20 MILLION FOR RELIEF.

  • AND MORE THAN 70 MILLION SMALL

  • BUSINESSES USED FACEBOOK TO

  • CREATE JOBS AND GROW.

  • BUT IT'S CLEAR NOW WE DIDN'T DO

  • ENOUGH TO PREVENT THESE TOOLS

  • FROM BEING USED FOR HARM AS

  • WELL.

  • THAT GOES FOR FAKE NEWS, FOR

  • FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN

  • ELECTIONS AND HATE SPEECH AS

  • WELL AS DEVELOPERS AND DATA

  • PRIVACY.

  • WE DIDN'T TAKE A BROAD ENOUGH

  • VIEW OF OUR RESPONSIBILITY AND

  • THAT WAS A BIG MISTAKE.

  • AND IT WAS MY MISTAKE.

  • AND I'M SORRY.

  • I STARTED FACEBOOK, I RUN IT,

  • AND I'M RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT

  • HAPPENS HERE.

  • SO NOW WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH ALL

  • OF OUR RELATIONSHIPS WITH PEOPLE

  • AND MAKE SURE WE'RE TAKING A

  • BROAD ENOUGH VIEW OF OUR

  • RESPONSIBILITY.

  • IT'S NOT ENOUGH TO JUST CONNECT

  • PEOPLE.

  • WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THOSE

  • CONNECTIONS ARE POSITIVE.

  • IT'S NOT ENOUGH TO JUST GIVE

  • PEOPLE A VOICE, WE HAVE TO MAKE

  • SURE PEOPLE AREN'T USING IT TO

  • HARM OTHER PEOPLE OR TO SPREAD

  • MISINFORMATION.

  • IT'S NOT ENOUGH JUST TO GIVE

  • PEOPLE CONTROL OVER THEIR

  • INFORMATION.

  • WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THE

  • DEVELOPERS THEY SHARE IT WITH

  • PROTECT THEIR INFORMATION, TOO.

  • ACROSS THE BOARD WE HAVE A

  • RESPONSIBILITY TO NOT JUST BUILD

  • TOOLS BUT TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE

  • USED FOR GOOD.

  • IT WILL TAKE SOME TIME TO WORK

  • THROUGH ALL THE CHANGES WE NEED

  • TO MAKE ACROSS THE COMPANY, BUT

  • I'M COMMITTED TO GETTING THIS

  • RIGHT.

  • THIS INCLUDES THE BASIC

  • RESPONSIBILITY OF PROTECTING

  • PEOPLE'S INFORMATION WHICH WE

  • FAILED TO DO WITH CAMBRIDGE

  • ANALYTICA.

  • SO HERE ARE A FEW THINGS THAT WE

  • ARE DOING TO ADDRESS THIS AND TO

  • PREVENT IT FROM HAPPENING AGAIN.

  • FIRST, WE'RE GETTING TO THE

  • BOTTOM OF EXACTLY WHAT CAMBRIDGE

  • ANALYTICA DID AND TELLING

  • EVERYONE AFFECTED.

  • WHAT WE KNOW NOW IS THAT

  • CAMBRIDGE ANALYTICA IMPROPERLY

  • ACCESSED SOME INFORMATION ABOUT

  • MILLIONS OF FACEBOOK MEMBERS BY

  • BUYING IT FROM AN APP DEVELOPER.

  • THAT INFORMATION -- THIS WAS

  • INFORMATION THAT PEOPLE

  • GENERALLY SHARE PUBLICLY ON

  • THEIR FACEBOOK PAGES, LIKE NAMES

  • AND THEIR PROFILE PICTURE AND

  • THE PAGES THEY FOLLOW.

  • WHEN WE FIRST CONTACTED

  • CAMBRIDGE ANALYTICA, THEY TOLD

  • US THEY HAD DELETED THE DATA.

  • ABOUT A MONTH AGO, WE HEARD NEW

  • REPORTS THAT SUGGESTED THAT

  • WASN'T TRUE.

  • NOW WE'RE WORKING WITH

  • GOVERNMENTS IN THE U.S., THE

  • U.K. AND AROUND THE WORLD TO DO

  • A FULL AUDIT OF WHAT THEY'VE

  • DONE AND TO MAKE SURE THEY GET

  • RID OF ANY DATA THEY MAY STILL

  • HAVE.

  • SECOND, TO MAKE SURE NO OTHER

  • APP DEVELOPERS OUT THERE ARE

  • MISUSING DATA, WE'RE NOW

  • INVESTIGATING EVERY SINGLE ACT

  • THAT HAD ACCESS TO A LARGE

  • AMOUNT OF INFORMATION IN THE

  • PAST.

  • IF WE FIND THAT SOMEONE

  • IMPROPERLY USED DATA, WE'RE

  • GOING TO BAN THEM FROM FACEBOOK

  • AND TELL EVERYONE AFFECTED.

  • THIRD, TO PREVENT THIS FROM EVER

  • HAPPENING AGAIN GOING FORWARD,

  • WE'RE MAKING SURE THAT

  • DEVELOPERS CAN'T ACCESS AS MUCH

  • INFORMATION NOW.

  • THE GOOD NEWS HERE IS WE ALREADY

  • MADE BIG CHANGES TO OUR PLATFORM

  • IN 2014 THAT WOULD HAVE KEPT

  • THIS SITUATION WITH CAMBRIDGE

  • ANALYTICA FROM OCCURRING TODAY.

  • BUT THERE IS MORE TO DO, AND YOU

  • CAN FIND MORE DETAILS ON THE

  • STEPS I'M TAKING IN MY WRITTEN

  • STATEMENT.

  • MY TOP PRIORITY HAS ALWAYS BEEN

  • OUR SOCIAL MISSION OF CONNECTING

  • PEOPLE, BUILDING COMMUNITY AND

  • BRINGING THE WORLD CLOSER

  • TOGETHER.

  • ADVERTISERS AND DEVELOPERS WILL

  • NEVER TAKE PRIORITY OVER THAT AS

  • LONG AS I AM RUNNING FACEBOOK.

  • I STARTED FACEBOOK WHEN I WAS IN

  • COLLEGE.

  • WE'VE COME A LONG WAY SINCE

  • THEN.

  • WE NOW SERVE MORE THAN 2 BILLION

  • PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD, AND

  • EVERY DAY PEOPLE USE OUR

  • SERVICES TO STAY CONNECTED WITH

  • THE PEOPLE THAT MATTER TO THEM

  • MOST.

  • I BELIEVE DEEPLY IN WHAT WE'RE

  • DOING, AND I KNOW THAT WHEN WE

  • ADDRESS THESE CHALLENGES, WE'LL

  • LOOK BACK AND VIEW HELPING

  • PEOPLE CONNECT AND GIVING MORE

  • PEOPLE A VOICE AS A POSITIVE

  • FORCE IN THE WORLD.

  • I REALIZE THE ISSUES WE'RE

  • TALKING ABOUT TODAY AREN'T JUST

  • ISSUES FOR FACEBOOK IN OUR

  • COMMUNITY, THEY'RE ISSUES AND

  • CHALLENGES FOR ALL OF US AS

  • AMERICANS.

  • THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME HERE

  • TODAY AND I'M READY TO TAKE YOUR

  • QUESTIONS.

  • >> I'LL REMIND MEMBERS THAT

  • MAYBE WEREN'T HERE WHEN I HAD MY

  • OPENING COMMENTS THAT WE ARE

  • OPERATING UNDER THE FIVE-MINUTE

  • RULE AND THAT APPLIES TO THOSE

  • CHAIRING THE COMMITTEE AS WELL.

  • I START WITH YOU.

  • FACEBOOK HANDLES EXTENSIVE

  • AMOUNTS OF PERSONAL DATA FOR

  • BILLIONS OF USERS.

  • A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF THAT

  • DATA IS SHARED WITH THIRD-PARTY

  • DEVELOPERS WHO UTILIZE YOUR

  • PLATFORM.

  • AS OF EARLY THIS YEAR, YOU DID

  • NOT ACTIVELY MONITOR WHETHER

  • THAT DATA WAS TRANSFERRED BY

  • SUCH DEVELOPERS TO OTHER

  • PARTIES.

  • MOREOVER, YOUR POLICIES ONLY

  • PROHIBIT TRANSFERS BY DEVELOPERS

  • TO PARTIES SEEKING TO PROFIT

  • FROM SUCH DATA.

  • NUMBER ONE, BESIDES PROFESSOR

  • COGAN'S TRANSFER AND NOW

  • POTENTIALLY CUBE VIEW, DO YOU

  • KNOW ANY INSTANCES WHERE

  • TRANSFERRED TO THIRD PARTY IN

  • BREACH OF FACEBOOK'S TERMS.

  • IF SO, HOW MANY TIMES HAS THAT

  • HAPPENED AND WAS FACEBOOK ONLY

  • MADE AWARE OF THAT TRANSFER BY

  • SOME THIRD PARTY?

  • >> MR. CHAIRMAN, THANK YOU.

  • WE'RE NOW CONDUCTING A FULL

  • INVESTIGATION INTO EVERY SINGLE

  • ACT THAT HAS ACCESS TO LARGE

  • AMOUNT OF INFORMATION.

  • BEFORE WE LOCK DOWN PLATFORM TO

  • PREVENT DEVELOPERS FROM

  • ACCESSING THIS INFORMATION

  • AROUND 2014.

  • WE BELIEVE WE'RE GOING TO BE

  • INVESTIGATING MANY APPS, TENS OF

  • THOUSANDS OF APPS.

  • IF WE FIND ANY SUSPICIOUS

  • ACTIVITY WE'RE GOING TO CONDUCT

  • A FULL AUDIT OF THOSE APPS TO

  • UNDERSTAND HOW THEY ARE USING

  • THEIR DATA.

  • IF WE FIND THEY ARE DOING

  • ANYTHING IMPROPER, WE WILL BAN

  • THEM FROM FACEBOOK AND TELL

  • EVERYONE AFFECTED.

  • I DON'T HAVE ANY EXAMPLES OF

  • APPS WE HAVE BANNED HERE.

  • IF YOU'D LIKE, I CAN HAVE MY

  • TEAM FOLLOW UP.

  • >> HAVE YOU REQUIRED AN AUDIT TO

  • ENSURE THE DELETION OF

  • IMPROPERLY TRANSFERRED DATA AND

  • IF SO, HOW MANY TIMES?

  • >> YES, WE HAVE.

  • I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT FIGURE ON

  • HOW MANY TIMES WE HAVE.

  • OVERALL, THE WAY WE ENFORCED OUR

  • PLATFORM POLICIES IN THE PAST,

  • IS WE HAVE LOOKED AT PATTERN OF

  • HOW APPS HAVE USED OUR APIs AND

  • ACCESSED INFORMATION AS WELL ADD

  • PEOPLE THAT HAVE MADE REPORTS.

  • GOING FORWARD, WE'RE GOING TO

  • TAKE A MORE PRO-ACTIVE POSITION

  • AND DO MUCH MORE REGULAR SPOT

  • CHECKS AND REVIEWS OF APPS AS

  • WELL AS INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF

  • AUDITS WE DO AND I CAN MAKE SURE

  • OUR TEAM FOLLOW UP WITH YOU ON

  • ANYTHING ABOUT THE SPECIFIC PAST

  • STATS THAT WOULD BE INTERESTING.

  • >> I WAS GOING TO ASSUME THAT

  • SITTING HERE TODAY YOU HAVE NO

  • IDEA AND IF I'M WRONG, YOU'RE

  • TELLING ME YOU'RE ABLE TO SUPPLY

  • THOSE FIGURES TO US, AT LEAST AS

  • OF THIS POINT?

  • >> I'LL HAVE MY TEAM FOLLOW UP

  • ON WHAT INFORMATION WE HAVE.

  • >> RIGHT NOW YOU HAVE NO

  • CERTAINTY OF WHETHER OR NOT, HOW

  • MUCH OF THAT'S GOING ON, RIGHT?

  • FACEBOOK COLLECTS MASSIVE

  • AMOUNTS OF DATA FROM CONSUMERS

  • INCLUDING CONTENT, NETWORKS,

  • CONTACT LIST, DEVICE

  • INFORMATION, LOCATION AND

  • INFORMATION FROM THIRD POLICIES.

  • YOUR DATA POLICY IS ONLY A FEW

  • PAGES LONG AND PROVIDES

  • CONSUMERS A FEW EXAMPLES OF WHAT

  • IS COLLECTED AND HOW IT MIGHT BE

  • USED.

  • THE EXAMPLES EMPHASIZE BENIGN

  • USES SUCH AS CONNECTING WITH

  • FRIENDS BUT YOUR POLICY DOES NOT

  • GIVE ANY INDICATION FOR MORE

  • CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES OF SUCH

  • DATA.

  • MY QUESTION, WHY DOESN'T

  • FACEBOOK DISCLOSE TO ITS USERS

  • ALL THE WAYS DATA MIGHT BE USED

  • BY FACEBOOK AND OTHER THIRD

  • PARTIES AND WHAT IS FACEBOOK'S

  • RESPONSIBILITY TO INFORM USERS

  • ABOUT THAT INFORMATION?

  • >> I BELIEVE IT'S IMPORTANT TO

  • TELL PEOPLE EXACTLY HOW THE

  • INFORMATION THAT THEY SHARE ON

  • FACEBOOK IS GOING TO BE USED.

  • THAT'S WHY EVERY SINGLE TIME YOU

  • GO TO SHARE SHOTGUN ON FACEBOOK

  • WHETHER IT'S A PHOTO OR A

  • MESSAGE AND MESSENGER.

  • EVERY SINGLE TIME THERE'S A

  • CONTROL RIGHT THERE ABOUT WHO

  • YOU'RE GOING TO BE SHARING IT

  • WITH WHETHER IT'S YOUR FRIENDS

  • OR PUBLIC OR SPECIFIC GROUP.

  • YOU CAN CHANGE THAT AND CONTROL

  • THAT IN LINE.

  • ABOUT PRIVACY, THIS GETS INTO AN

  • ISSUE THAT WE AND OTHERS IN THE

  • TECH INDUSTRY HAVE FOUND

  • CHALLENGING IS LONG PRIVACY

  • POLICIES ARE VERY CONFUSING.

  • IF YOU MAKE IT LONG AND SPELL

  • OUT ALL THE DETAIL THEN YOU'RE

  • PROBABLY GOING TO REDUCE THE

  • PERCENT OF PEOPLE WHO READ IT

  • AND MAKE IT ACCESSIBLE TO THEM.

  • ONE OF THE THINGS WE STRUGGLED

  • WITH OVER TIME IS MAKE SOMETHING

  • AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE SO PEOPLE

  • CAN UNDERSTAND IT AS WELL AS

  • GIVING THEM CONTROLS IN LINE IN

  • THE PRODUCT IN THE CONTEXT OF

  • WHEN THEY'RE TRYING TO USE THEM.

  • TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THAT WE

  • DON'T EXPECT THAT MOST PEOPLE

  • WILL WANT TO GO THROUGH AND READ

  • A FULL LEGAL DOCUMENT.

  • >> SENATOR NELSON.

  • >> YESTERDAY WHEN WE TALKED I

  • GAVE THE HARMLESS EXAMPLE THAT

  • I'M A COMMUNICATING WITH MY

  • FRIENDS ON FACEBOOK AND INDICATE

  • THAT I LOVE A CERTAIN KIND OF

  • CHOCOLATE.

  • ALL OF A SUDDEN I START

  • RECEIVING ADVERTISEMENTS FOR

  • CHOCOLATE.

  • WHAT IN I DON'T WANT TO RECEIVE

  • THOSE COMMERCIAL ADVERTISEMENTS?

  • YOUR CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER,

  • MS. SANDBURG SUGGESTED ON THE

  • NBC "TODAY SHOW" THAT FACEBOOK

  • USERS WHO DO NOT WANT THEIR

  • PERSONAL INFORMATION USED FOR

  • ADVERTISING MIGHT HAVE TO PAY

  • FOR THAT PROTECTION.

  • PAY FOR IT.

  • ARE YOU ACTUALLY CONSIDERING

  • HAVING FACEBOOK USERS PAY FOR

  • YOU NOT TO USE THAT INFORMATION?

  • >> SENATOR, PEOPLE HAVE A

  • CONTROL OVER HOW THEIR

  • INFORMATION IS USED IN ADS IN

  • THE PRODUCT TODAY.

  • IF YOU WANT TO HAVE AN

  • EXPERIENCE WHERE YOUR ADS AREN'T

  • TARGETED USING ALL THE

  • INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE

  • AVAILABLE, YOU CAN TURN OFF

  • THIRD PARTY INFORMATION.

  • WHAT WE FOUND IS THAT EVEN

  • THOUGH SOME PEOPLE DON'T LIKE

  • ADS, PEOPLE REALLY DON'T LIKE

  • ADS THAT AREN'T RELEVANT.

  • WHILE THERE IS SOME DISCOMFORT,

  • FOR SURE, WITH USING INFORMATION

  • IN MAKING ADS MORE RELEVANT.

  • THE OVERWHELMING FEEDBACK WE GET

  • FROM OUR COMMUNITY IS PEOPLE

  • WOULD RATHER HAVE US SHOW

  • RELEVANT CONTENT THERE THAN NOT.

  • WE OFFER THIS CONTROL THAT

  • YOU'RE REFERENCING.

  • SOME PEOPLE USE IT.

  • IT'S NOT THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE

  • ON FACEBOOK.

  • I THINK THAT'S A GOOD LEVEL OF

  • CONTROL TO OFFER.

  • I THINK WHAT CHERYL WAS SAYING

  • WAS THAT IN ORDER TO NOT RUN ADS

  • AT ALL, WE WOULD STILL NEED SOME

  • SORT OF BUSINESS MODEL.

  • >> THAT IS YOUR BUSINESS MODEL.

  • I TAKE IT THAT, AND I USE THE

  • HARMLESS EXAMPLE OF CHOCOLATE

  • BUT IF IT GOT INTO MORE PERSONAL

  • THING.

  • COMMUNICATING WITH FRIENDS, AND

  • I WANT TO CUT IT OFF, I'M GOING

  • TO HAVE TO PAY YOU IN ORDER NOT

  • TO SEND ME USING MY PERSONAL

  • INFORMATION SOMETHING THAT I

  • DON'T WANT.

  • THAT IS WHAT I UNDERSTOOD MS.

  • SANDBURG TO SAY.

  • IS THAT CORRECT?

  • >> YES.

  • TO BE CLEAR WE DON'T OFFER AN

  • OPTION TODAY FOR PEOPLE TO NOT

  • PAY TO SHOW ADS.

  • WE THINK OFFERING AN AD

  • SUPPORTED SERVICE IS MOST

  • ALIGNED WITH OUR MISSION OF

  • TRYING TO CONNECT EVERYONE IN

  • THE WORLD.

  • WE WANT TO OFFER A FREE SERVICE

  • THAT EVERYONE CAN AFFORD.

  • THAT'S THE ONLY WAY WE CAN REACH

  • BILLIONS OF PEOPLE.

  • >> YOU CONSIDER MY PERSONALLY

  • IDENTIFIABLE DATA, THE COMPANY'S

  • DATA, NOT MY DATA?

  • IS THAT IT?

  • >> NO, SENATOR.

  • THE FIRST LINE OF OUR TERMS OF

  • SERVICE IS A THEY YOU CONTROL

  • AND OWN THE INFORMATION AND

  • CONTENT THAT YOU PUT ON

  • FACEBOOK.

  • >> THE RECENT SCANDAL IS

  • OBVIOUSLY FRUSTRATING.

  • NOT ONLY BECAUSE IT AFFECTED 87

  • MILLION BUT BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO

  • BE PART OF A PATTERN OF LAX DATA

  • PRACTICES BY THE COMPANY GOING

  • BACK YEARS.

  • BACK IN 2011, IT WAS A

  • SETTLEMENT WITH THE FTC AND NOW

  • WE DISCOVER YET ANOTHER INSTANCE

  • WHERE THE DATA WAS FAILED TO BE

  • PROTECTED.

  • WHEN YOU DISCOVERED THE

  • CAMBRIDGE ANALYTICA THAT

  • FRAUDULENTLY OBTAINED ALL OF

  • THIS INFORMATION, WHY DIDN'T YOU

  • INFORM THOSE 87 MILLION?

  • >> WHEN WE LEARNED IN 2015 THAT

  • CAMBRIDGE ANALYTICA BOUGHT DATA

  • FROM AN APP DEVELOPER ON

  • FACEBOOK THAT PEOPLE SHARED IT

  • WITH, WE DID TAKE ACTION.

  • WE TOOK DOWN THE APP AND WE

  • DEMANDED THAT BOTH THE APP

  • DEVELOPER AND CAMBRIDGE

  • ANALYTICA DELETE AND STOP USING

  • ANY DATA THEY HAD.

  • THEY TOLD US THEY DID THIS.

  • IN RETROSPECT IT WAS BAD TO

  • BELIEVE THEM.

  • THAT'S NOT A MISTAKE WE WILL

  • MAKE.

  • >> YOU DID THAT AND APOLOGIZED

  • FOR IT.

  • YOU DIDN'T NOTIFY THEM.

  • DO YOU THINK YOU HAVE AN ETHICAL

  • OBLIGATION TO NOTIFY 87 MILLION

  • FACEBOOK USERS?

  • >> WHEN WE HEARD BACK FROM

  • CAMBRIDGE ANALYTICA THAT THEY

  • TOLD US THEY WEREN'T USING THE

  • DATA AND DELETED IT.

  • WE CONSIDERED IT A CLOSED CASE.

  • THAT WAS CLEARLY A MISTAKE.

  • WE SHOULDN'T HAVE TAKEN THEIR

  • WORD FOR IT AND WE UPDATED OUR

  • POLICIES.

  • >> DID ANYBODY NOTIFY THE FTC?

  • >> NO, SENATOR, FOR THE SAME

  • REASON.

  • WE CONSIDERED IT A CLOSED CASE.

  • >> SENATOR.

  • >> WOULD YOU DO THAT DIFFERENTLY

  • TODAY, PRESUMELY?

  • THE END RESPONSE TO SENATOR

  • NELSON'S QUESTION.

  • >> YES.

  • >> THIS MAY BE YOUR FIRST

  • APPEARANCE BEFORE CONGRESS BUT

  • IT'S NOT THE FIRST TIME THAT

  • FACEBOOK HAS FACED TOUGH

  • QUESTIONS ABOUT ITS PRIVACY

  • POLICIES.

  • WIRED MAGAZINE NOTED THAT YOU

  • HAVE A 14 YEAR HISTORY OF

  • APOLOGIZING FOR ILL ADVISED

  • DECISIONS REGARDING USER PRIVACY

  • NOT UNLIKE THE ONE YOU MADE JUST

  • NOW IN YOUR OPENING STATEMENT.

  • AFTER MORE THAN A DECADE OF

  • PROMISES TO DO BETTER, HOW IS

  • TODAY'S APOLOGY DIFFERENT AND

  • WHY SHOULD WE TRUST FACEBOOK TO

  • MAKE THE NECESSARY CHANGES TO

  • ENSURE USER PRIVACY AND GIVE

  • PEOPLE A CLEARER PICTURE OF YOUR

  • PRIVACY POLICIES?

  • >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.

  • WE HAVE MADE A LOT OF MISTAKES

  • IN RUNNING THE COMPANY.

  • I THINK IT'S PRETTY MUCH

  • IMPOSSIBLE TO START A COMPANY IN

  • YOUR DORM ROOM AND GROW IT TO BE

  • AT THE SCALE WE'RE AT NOW

  • WITHOUT MAKING SOME MISTAKES.

  • BECAUSE OUR SERVICE IS ABOUT

  • HELPING PEOPLE CONNECT AND

  • INFORMATION, THOSE MISTAKES HAVE

  • BEEN DIFFERENT IN HOW -- WE TRY

  • NOT TO MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE

  • MULTIPLE TIMES BUT IN GENERAL A

  • LOT OF THE MISTAKES ARE AROUND

  • HOW PEOPLE CONNECT TO EACH OTHER

  • BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF THE

  • SERVICE.

  • OVERALL, I WOULD SAY THAT WE'RE

  • GOING THROUGH A BROADER

  • PHILOSOPHICAL SHIFT IN OUR WE

  • APPROACH OUR RESPONSIBILITY AS A

  • COMPANY.

  • FOR THE FIRST 10 OR 12 YEARS OF

  • THE COMPANY, I VIEWED OUR

  • RESPONSIBILITY AS BUILDING

  • TOOLS.

  • IF WE CAN PUT THOSE TOOLS IN

  • PEOPLE'S HANDS THEN THAT WOULD

  • EMPOWER PEOPLE TO DO GOOD

  • THINGS.

  • WHAT I THINK WE'VE LEARNED NOW,

  • ACROSS A NUMBER OF ISSUES, NOT

  • JUST DATA PRIVACY BUT FAKE NEWS

  • AND FOREIGN INTERFERENCE, IS WE

  • NEED TO TAKE AN ACTIVE VIEW.

  • IT'S NOT ENOUGH TO BUILD TOOLS.

  • WE NEED TO TAKE A MORE ACTIVE

  • APPROACH.

  • MAKING SURE THE MEMBERS ARE

  • USING THESE TOOLS IN A WAY THAT

  • WILL IF GOOD AND HEALTHY.

  • AT THE END OF THE DAY, THIS IS

  • GOING TO BE SOMETHING WHERE

  • PEOPLE WILL MEASURE US BY OUR

  • RESULTS ON THIS.

  • IT'S NOT THAT I EXPECT ANYTHING

  • I SAY HERE TODAY TO NECESSARILY

  • CHANGE PEOPLE'S VIEW.

  • I'M COMMITTED TO GETTING THIS

  • RIGHT.

  • I BELIEVE THAT OVER THE M COING

  • -- THE COMING YEARS, PEOPLE

  • WILL SEE REAL DIFFERENCES.

  • >> I'M GLAD THAT YOU ALL HAVE

  • GOTTEN THAT MESSAGE.

  • AS WE DISCUSSED IN MY OFFICE

  • YESTERDAY, THE LINE BETWEEN

  • LEGITIMATE POLITICAL DISCOURSE

  • AND HATE SPEAK CAN BE HARD TO

  • IDENTIFY ESPECIALLY WHEN RELYING

  • ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE FOR

  • THE INITIAL DISCOVERY.

  • CAN YOU DISCUSS WHAT STEPS

  • FACEBOOK TAKES AND WHERE YOU MAY

  • DRAW THE LINE OF WHAT IS AND

  • WHAT IS NOT HATE SPEECH?

  • >> YES.

  • I'LL SPEAK TO HATE SPEECH AND

  • THEN I'LL TALK ABOUT ENFORCING

  • OUR CONTENT POLICIES MORE

  • BROADLY.

  • MAYBE IF YOU'RE OKAY WITH IT,

  • I'LL GO IN THE OTHER ORDER.

  • FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE

  • COMPANY, IN 2004, I STARTED IT

  • IN MY DORM ROOM.

  • IT WAS ME AND MY ROOMMATE.

  • WE DIDN'T HAVE AI TECHNOLOGY

  • THAT COULD LOOK AT THE CONTENT

  • THAT PEOPLE WERE SHARING.

  • WE HAD TO ENFORCE OUR CONTENT

  • POLICIES REACTIVELY.

  • PEOPLE SHOULD SHARE WHAT THEY

  • WANTED AND IF SOMEONE IN THE

  • COMMUNITY FOUND IT TO BES OFFIVE

  • OR AGAINST OUR POLICIES, THEY

  • WOULD FLAG IT FOR US.

  • NOW INCREASINGLY, WE'RE

  • DEVELOPING AI TOOLS THAT CAN

  • IDENTIFY CERTAIN CLASSES OF BAD

  • ACTIVITY PROACTIVELY AND FLAG IT

  • FOR OUR TEAM.

  • BY THE TEND OF THIS YEAR WE'LL

  • HAVE MORE THAN 20,000 PEOPLE

  • WORKING ON SECURITY AND CONTENT

  • REVIEW WORKING ACROSS ALL THESE

  • THINGS.

  • WHEN CONTENT GETS FLAGGED, WE

  • HAVE THOSE PEOPLE LOOK AT IT AND

  • IF IT VIOLATES OUR POLICIES THEN

  • WE TAKE IT DOWN.

  • SOME PROBLEMS LEND THEMSELVES

  • MORE EASILY TO AI SOLUTIONS THAN

  • OTHERS.

  • HATE SPEECH IS ONE OF THE

  • HARDEST.

  • DETERMINING IF SOMETHING IS HATE

  • SPEECH IS VERY LIGUISTICALLY

  • NUANCED.

  • CAN TRUST THAT WITH AN AREA LIKE

  • TIENDSING TERRORIST PROPAGANDA.

  • TODAY, 99% OF THE ISIS AND AL

  • QAEDA CONTENT THAT WE TAKE DOWN

  • ON FACEBOOK OUR AI SYSTEMS FLAG

  • BEFORE ANY HUMAN SEES IT.

  • THAT'S A SUCCESS IN TERMS OF

  • ROLLING OUT AI TOOLS THAT CAN

  • PROACTIVELY POLICE AND ENFORCE

  • SAFETY ACROSS THE COMMUNITY.

  • HATE SPEECH, I'M OPTIMISTIC THAT

  • OVER A FIVE TO TEN YEAR PERIOD

  • WE'LL HAVE AI TOOLS THAT CAN GET

  • INTO SOME OF THE NUANCES OF

  • DIFFERENT TYPES OF CONTENT TO BE

  • MORE ACCURATE IN FLAGGING THINGS

  • FOR OUR SYSTEMS.

  • TODAY WE'RE NOT JUST THERE ON

  • THAT.

  • A LOT OF THIS IS STILL REACTIVE.

  • PEOPLE FLAG IT.

  • WE HAVE PEOPLE LOOK AT IT.

  • WE HAVE POLICIES TO TRY TO MAKE

  • IT AS NOT SUBJECTIVE AS

  • POSSIBLE.

  • THERE'S A HIGHER ERROR RATE THAN

  • I'M HAPPY WITH IT.

  • >> THANKS.

  • WHAT IS FACEBOOK DOING TO

  • PREVENT FOREIGN ACTORS FROM

  • INTERFERING IN U.S. ELECTIONS.

  • >> THANK YOU, SENATOR.

  • THIS IS ONE OF MY TOP PRIORITIES

  • IN 2018 IS TO GET THIS RIGHT.

  • ONE OF MY GREATEST REGRETS IN

  • RUNNING THE COMPANY IS WE WERE

  • SLOW IN IDENTIFYING THE RUSSIAN

  • INFORMATION OPERATIONS IN 2016.

  • WE EXPECTED THEM TO DO A NUMBER

  • OF MORE TRADITIONAL CYBER

  • ATTACKS WHICH WE DID IDENTIFY

  • AND NOTIFY THE CAMPAIGNS THAT

  • THEY WERE TRYING TO HACK INTO

  • THEM.

  • WE WERE TRY TO IDENTIFYING THE

  • NEW INFORMATION OPERATIONS.

  • >> WHEN DID YOU IDENTIFY NEW

  • OPERATIONS?

  • >> RIGHT AROUND THE TIME OF 2016

  • ELECTION ITSELF.

  • SINCE THEN, WE -- 2018 IS AN

  • INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT YEAR FOR

  • ELECTIONS.

  • NOT JUST WITH THE U.S. MID TERMS

  • BUT AROUND THE WORLD THERE'S

  • IMPORTANT ELECTIONS IN INDIA,

  • BRAZIL AND MEXICO AND PAKISTAN

  • AND HUNGARY.

  • WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE PROTECT

  • THE INTEGRITY OF THOSE

  • ELECTIONS.

  • SINCE THE 2016 ELECTION THERE'S

  • BEEN SEVERAL IMPORTANT ELECTIONS

  • AROUND THE WORLD WHERE WE'VE HAD

  • THE BETTER RECORD.

  • THERE'S THE FRENCH ELECTION, THE

  • GERMAN ELECTION.

  • >> EXPLAIN WHAT IS BETTER ABOUT

  • THE RECORD.

  • >> WE HAVE A NEW AI TOOL THAT

  • IDENTIFIES FAKE ACCOUNTS.

  • BETWEEN THOSE THREE ELECTIONS WE

  • WERE ABLE TO REMOVE TEN OF,000

  • -- THOUSANDS OF ACCOUNTS.

  • THE NATURE OF THESE ATTACKS IS

  • THERE ARE PEOPLE IN RUSSIA WHOSE

  • JOB IT IS TO TRY TO EXPLOIT OUR

  • SYSTEMS AND OTHER INTERNET

  • SYSTEMS AND OTHER SYSTEMS AS

  • WELL.

  • THIS IS AN ARM'S RACE.

  • THEY GOING TO KEEP ON GETTING

  • BETTER AT THIS AND WE NEED TO

  • KEEP ON GETTING BETTER IN THIS

  • TOO WHICH IS WHY ONE OF THE

  • THINGS I MENTIONED BEFORE IS

  • WE'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE THAN

  • 20,000 PEOPLE BY TEND OF THIS

  • YEAR WORKING ON SECURITY AND

  • CONTENT REVIEW ACROSS THE

  • COMPANY.

  • >> SPEAK FOR A MOMENT ABOUT

  • AUTOMATED BOTS THAT SPREAD

  • DISINFORMATION.

  • WHAT ARE YOU DOING TO PUNISH

  • THOSE WHO EXPLOIT YOUR PLATFORM

  • IN THAT REGARD?

  • >> WELL, YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO

  • HAVE FAKE ACCOUNT ON FACEBOOK.

  • YOUR CONTENT HAS TO BE

  • AUTHENTIC.

  • WE BUILD TECHNICAL TOOLS TO TRY

  • TO IDENTIFY WHEN PEOPLE ARE

  • CREATING FAKE ACCOUNTS

  • ESPECIALLY LARGE NETWORKS OF

  • FAKE ACCOUNTS LIKE THE RUSSIANS

  • HAVE IN ORDER TO REMOVE ALL OF

  • THAT CONTENT.

  • AFTER THE 2016 ELECTION, OUR TOP

  • TRY YOURTY WAS PROTECTING THE

  • INTEGRITY OF OTHER ELECTIONS

  • AROUND THE WORLD.

  • AT THE SAME TIME WE HAD A

  • PARALEGAL EFFORT TO TRACE BACK

  • TO RUSSIA THE IA ACTIVITY.

  • THAT WAS PART OF RUSSIAN

  • GOVERNMENT THAT DID THIS BASIC

  • -- ACTIVITY IN 2016.

  • WE WERE ABLE TO DETERMINE A

  • NUMBER OF RUSSIAN MEDIA

  • ORGANIZATIONS WERE OPERATED AND

  • CONTROLLED BY THIS INTERNET

  • RESEARCH AGENCY.

  • WE TOOK THE STEP LAST WEEK.

  • IT WAS A PRETTY BIG STEP OF

  • TAKING DOWN SANCTIONED NEWS

  • ORGANIZATIONS IN RUSSIA AS PART

  • OF AN OPERATION TO REMOVE 270

  • FAKE ACCOUNTS AND PAGES, PART OF

  • THE BROADER NETWORK IN RUSSIA.

  • IT WAS PRIMARILY TARGETING

  • SPREADING MISINFORMATION IN

  • RUSSIA AS WELL AS RUSSIAN

  • SPEAKING NEIGHBORING COUNTRIES.

  • >> HOW MANY ACCOUNTS OF THIS

  • TYPE HAVE YOU TAKEN DOWN?

  • >> IN THE IRA SPECIFICALLY, THE

  • ONE WE PEGGED BACK TO THE IRA,

  • WE CAN IDENTIFY THE 470 IN THE

  • AMERICAN ELECTIONS AND THE 270

  • THAT WE SPECIFICALLY WENT AFTER

  • IN RUSSIA LAST WEEK.

  • THERE ARE MANY OTHERS THAT OUR

  • SYSTEMS CATCH WHICH ARE MORE

  • DIFFICULT TO ATTRIBUTE TO

  • RUSSIAN INTELLIGENCE.

  • THE NUMBER WOULD BE ON TENS OF

  • THOUSANDS.

  • I'LL BE HAPPY TO HAVE MY TEAM

  • FOLLOW UP ON THAT.

  • >> WOULD YOU PLEASE.

  • IF YOU KNEW IN 2015 THAT

  • CAMBRIDGE ANALYTICA WAS USING

  • THE INFORMATION, WHY DIDN'T

  • FACEBOOK BAN CAMBRIDGE IN 2014?

  • WHY DID YOU WAIT?

  • >> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.

  • CAMBRIDGE ANALYTICA WASN'T USING

  • OUR SERVICES IN 2015.

  • THIS IS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I

  • ASKED OUR TEAM IS WHY DID WE

  • WAIT UNTIL WE FOUND OUT ABOUT

  • THE REPORTS LAST MONTH TO BAN

  • THEM.

  • AS OF THE TIME WLERNED ABOUT

  • THEIR ACTIVITY IN 2015, THEY

  • WEREN'T RUNNING PAGES.

  • WE HAD NOTHING TO BAN.

  • >> THANK YOU.

  • >> THANK YOU, SENATOR.

  • SENATOR HATCH.

  • >> THIS IS THE MOST INTENSE

  • PUBLIC RELATED HEARING FOR A

  • TECH OPERATION.

  • THE RECENT STORIES ABOUT

  • CAMBRIDGE ANALYTICA AND DATA

  • MINING ON SOCIAL MEDIA HAVE

  • RAISED CONCERNS ABOUT CONSUMER

  • PRIVACY.

  • I KNOW YOU UNDERSTAND THAT.

  • THESE STORIES TOUCH ON THE

  • FOUNDATION OF THE INTERNET

  • ECONOMY AND THE WAY THE WEBSITES

  • THAT DRIVE OUR INTERNET ECONOMY

  • MAKE MONEY.

  • SOME HAVE PROFESSED THEMSELVES

  • SHOCKED, SHOCKED THAT COMPANIES

  • LIKE FACEBOOK AND GOOGLE SHARE

  • DATA WITH ADVERTISERS.

  • DID ANY OF THESE INDIVIDUALS

  • STOP TO ASK WHY FACEBOOK AND

  • GOOGLE DON'T CHARGE FOR ACCESS.

  • NOTHING IN LIFE IS FREE.

  • EVERYTHING INVOLVES TRADE OFF.

  • IF YOU WANT SOMETHING WITHOUT

  • HAVING TO PAY MONEY, YOU'LL HAVE

  • TO PAY FOR IT IN SOME OTHER WAY,

  • IT SEEMS TO ME.

  • THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SEEING HERE.

  • THESE GREAT WEBSITES THAT DON'T

  • CHARGE FOR ACCESS, THEY EXTRACT

  • VALUE IN SOME OTHER WAY.

  • THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT

  • AS LONG AS THEY ARE UP FRONT

  • ABOUT WHAT THEY'RE DOING.

  • IN MY MIND THE ISSUE HERE IS

  • TRANSPARENCY.

  • IT'S CONSUMER CHOICE.

  • DO USERS UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY'RE

  • AGREEING TO WHEN THEY ACCESS A

  • WEBSITE OR AGREE TO TERMS OF

  • SERVICE.

  • ARE WEBSITES UP FRONT ABOUT HOW

  • THEY EXTRACT VALUE FROM USERS OR

  • DO THEY HIDE THE BALL.

  • THE CONSUMERS HAVE THE

  • INFORMATION THEY NEED TO MAKE AN

  • INFORMED CHOICE REGARDING

  • WHETHER OR NOT TO VISIT A

  • PARTICULAR WEBSITE.

  • TO MY MIND THESE ARE QUESTIONS

  • THAT WE SHOULD ASK OR BE

  • FOCUSING ON.

  • I REMEMBER YOUR FIRST VISIT TO

  • CAPITOL HILL IN 2010.

  • YOU SPOKE TO THE TASK FORCE,

  • WHICH I CHAIR.

  • YOU SAID THAT FACEBOOK WOULD

  • ALWAYS BE FREE.

  • IS THAT STILL YOUR OBJECTIVE?

  • >> SENATOR, YES.

  • THERE WILL ALWAYS BE A VERSION

  • OF FACEBOOK THAT IS FREE.

  • IT'S OUR MISSION TO TRY TO HELP

  • CONNECT EVERYONE AROUND THE

  • WORLD.

  • WE BELIEVE WE NEED TO OFFER A

  • SERVICE THAT EVERYONE CAN

  • AFFORD.

  • >> HOW DO YOU SUSTAIN A BUSINESS

  • MODEL IN WHICH USERS DON'T PAY

  • FOR YOUR SERVICE?

  • >> SENATOR, WE RUN ADS.

  • >> I SEE.

  • THAT'S GREAT.

  • WHEN EVER A CONTROVERSY LIKE

  • THIS ARISES THERE'S A DANGER

  • THAT CONGRESS'S RESPONSE WILL BE

  • TO STEP IN AND OVERREGULATE.

  • THAT'S BEEN THE EXPERIENCE THAT

  • I'VE HAD IN MY 42 YEARS HERE.

  • IF YOUR VIEW, WHAT SORTS OF

  • LEGISLATIVE CHANGES WOULD HELP

  • TO SOLVE THE PROBLEMS THE

  • CAMBRIDGE ANALYTICA STORY HAS

  • REVEALED AND WHAT SORTS OF

  • LEGISLATIVE CHANGES WOULD NOT

  • HELP TO SOLVE THIS ISSUE?

  • >> SENATOR, I THINK THERE ARE A

  • FEW CATEGORIES OF LEGISLATION

  • THAT MAKES SENSE TO CONSIDER.

  • AROUND PRIVACY SPECIFICALLY,

  • THERE ARE FEW PRINCIPLES THAT

  • WOULD BE USEFUL TO DISCUSS AND

  • CODIFY INTO LAW.

  • ONE IS AROUND HAVING A SIMPLE

  • AND PRACTICAL SET OF WAYS THAT

  • YOU EXPLAIN WHAT YOU'RE DOING

  • WITH DATA.

  • WE TALKED A BIT EARLIER AROUND

  • THE COMPLEXITY OF LAYING OUT

  • THIS LONG PRIVACY POLICY.

  • IT'S HARD TO SAY THAT PEOPLE

  • FULLY UNDERSTAND SOMETHING WHEN

  • IT'S ONLY WRITTEN OUT IN A LONG

  • LEGAL DOCUMENT.

  • THE STUFF NEEDS TO BE

  • IMPLEMENTED IN A WAY WHERE

  • PEOPLE CAN UNDERSTAND IT.

  • WHERE CONSUMERS CAN UNDERSTAND

  • IT.

  • THAT CAN ALSO CAPTURE THE

  • NUANCES OF HOW THE SERVICES WORK

  • THAT'S NOT OVERLY RESTRICTED ON

  • PROVIDING THE SERVICES.

  • THAT'S ONE.

  • THE SECOND IS AROUND GIVING

  • PEOPLE COMPLETE CONTROL.

  • THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT

  • PRINCIPLE FOR FACEBOOK.

  • EVERY PIECE OF CONTENT YOU OWN

  • AND YOU HAVE COMPLETE CONTROL

  • OVER WHO SEE S IT AND HOW YOU

  • SHARE IT.

  • YOU CAN REMOVE IT AT ANY TIME.

  • THAT'S WHY EVERY DAY ABOUT A

  • HUNDRED BILLION TIMES DAY,

  • PEOPLE COMES TO ONE OF OUR

  • SERVICES AND POST A PHOTO.

  • THEY KNOW THEY HAVE THAT CONTROL

  • AND WHO THEY SAY IT WILL GO TO

  • IS WHO SEES THE CONTENT.

  • THAT'S IMPORTANT OPINION THAT

  • SHOULD APPLY TO EVERY SERVICE.

  • THE THIRD IS AROUND ENABLING

  • INNOVATION.

  • SOME OF THESE ARE SENSITIVE LIKE

  • FACE RECOGNITION.

  • I THINK THERE'S A BALANCE THAT'S

  • EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO STRIKE

  • HERE WHERE YOU OBTAIN SPECIAL

  • CONSENT FOR FEATURES LIKE FACE

  • RECOGNITION BUT WE STILL NEED TO

  • MAKE IT SO THAT AMERICAN

  • COMPANIES CAN INNOVATE IN THOSE

  • AREAS OR ELSE WE'RE GOING TO

  • FALL BEHIND CHINESE COMPETITORS

  • AND OTHERS AROUND THE WORLD WHO

  • HAVE DIFFERENT REGIMES FOR

  • DIFFERENT NEW FEATURES LIKE

  • THAT.

  • >> SENATOR CANTWELL.

  • >> THANK YOU.

  • DO YOU KNOW WHO PALANTIR IS?

  • >> I DO.

  • >> SOME PEOPLE HAVE REFERRED TO

  • THEM AS STANFORD ANALYTICA.

  • DO YOU AGREE?

  • >> I HAVE NOT HEARD THAT.

  • >> DO YOU THINK PALANTIR TAUGHT

  • CAMBRIDGE ANALYTICA PRESS

  • REPORTS ARE SAYING HOW TO DO

  • THESE TACTICS?

  • >> SENATOR, I DON'T KNOW.

  • >> DO YOU THINK THAT PALANTIR

  • HAS EVER SCRAPPED DATA FROM

  • FACEBOOK?

  • >> I'M NOT AWARE OF THAT.

  • >> OKAY.

  • DO YOU THINK THAT DURING THE

  • 2016 CAMPAIGN AS CAMBRIDGE

  • ANALYTICA WAS PROVIDING SUPPORT

  • TO THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN UNDER

  • PROJECT ALAMO, WERE THERE ANY

  • FACEBOOK PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THAT

  • SHARING OF TECHNIQUE AND

  • INFORMATION?

  • >> SENATOR, WE PROVIDED SUPPORT

  • TO THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN SIMILAR TO

  • WHAT WE PROVIDE TO ANY

  • ADVERTISER OR CAMPAIGN WHO ASKS

  • FOR IT.

  • >> THAT WAS A YES?

  • IS THAT A YES?

  • >> SENATOR, CAN YOU REPEAT THE

  • SPECIFIC QUESTION.

  • I WANT TO MAKE SURE I GET

  • SPECIFICALLY WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.

  • >> DURING THE 2016 CAMPAIGN, CAM

  • BRIDGE ANALYTICA WORKED WITH THE

  • TRUMP CAMPAIGN TO REFINE TACTICS

  • AND WERE FACEBOOK EMPLOYEES

  • INVOLVED IN THAT?

  • >> SENATOR, I DON'T KNOW THAT

  • OUR EMPLOYEES WERE INVOLVED WITH

  • CAMBRIDGE ANALYTICA.

  • I KNOW WE DID HELP OUT THE TRUMP

  • CAMPAIGN WITH SALES SUPPORT THE

  • SAME OTHER WAY WE DO WITH OTHER

  • CAMPAIGNS.

  • >> THEY MAY HAVE BEEN INVOLVED.

  • MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING YOUR

  • INVESTIGATION WILL FIND OUT.

  • >> I CAN HAVE MY TEAM GET BACK

  • TO YOU ON ANY SPECIFICS THERE

  • THAT I DON'T KNOW SITTING HERE

  • TODAY.

  • >> HAVE YOU HEARD OF TOTAL

  • INFORMATION AWARENESS?

  • DO YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING

  • ABOUT?

  • >> NO, I DO NOT.

  • >> TOTAL INFORMATION AWARENESS

  • WAS 2003.

  • JOHN ASHCROFT AND OTHERS TRYING

  • TO DO SIMILAR THINGS TO WHAT I

  • THINK IS BEHIND ALL OF THIS.

  • GEOPOLITICAL FORCES TRYING TO

  • GET DATA AND INFORMATION TO

  • INFLUENCE A PROCESS.

  • WHEN I LOOK AT PALANTIR AND WHAT

  • THEY'RE DOING AND I LOOK AT

  • WHAT'S APP WHICH IS ANOTHER

  • ACQUISITION AND I LOOK AT WHERE

  • YOU ARE FROM THE 2011 DESENT

  • DECREE AND WHERE YOU ARE TODAY

  • I'M THINKING IS THIS GUY OUT

  • FOXING FOXES OR IS HE GOING

  • ALONG WITH WHAT IS A MAJOR TREND

  • TO TRY TO HARVEST INFORMATION

  • FOR POLITICAL FORCES.

  • MY QUESTION TO YOU IS DO YOU SEE

  • THAT THOSE APPLICATIONS, THAT

  • THOSE COMPANIES PALANTIR AND

  • EVEN WHAT'S APP ARE GOING TO

  • FALL INTO THE SAME SITUATION

  • THAT YOU'VE JUST FALLEN INTO

  • OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS?

  • >> SENATOR, I'M NOT SURE

  • SPECIFICALLY.

  • OVERALL, I DO THINK THAT THESE

  • ISSUES AROUND INFORMATION ACCESS

  • ARE CHALLENGING.

  • TO THE SPECIFICS ABOUT THOSE

  • APPS, I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH WHAT

  • PALANTIR IS.

  • WHAT'S APP COLLECTS VERY LITTLE

  • INFORMATION.

  • I THINK IS LESS LIKELY TO HAVE

  • THE KIND OF ISSUES BECAUSE OF

  • THE WAY THE SERVICES

  • ARCHITECTED.

  • I THINK THESE ARE BROAD ISSUES

  • ACROSS THE TECH INDUSTRY.

  • >> I GUESS GIVEN THE TRACK

  • RECORD WHERE FACEBOOK IS AND WHY

  • YOU'RE HERE TODAY, I GUESS

  • PEOPLE WOULD SAY THEY DIDN'T ACT

  • BOLDLY ENOUGH AND THE FACT THAT

  • P PEOPLE LIKE JOHN BOLTON WAS AN

  • INVESTOR AND IT WAS LAST MONTH

  • THAT THE BOLTON PACT WAS UPSET

  • HOW THE AMERICANS WERE BECOMING

  • LIMP WRISTED.

  • THE FACT THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF

  • PEOPLE WHO HAVE INTERESTED IN

  • THIS LARGER EFFORT AND WHAT I

  • THINK MY CONSTITUENTS WANT TO

  • KNOW IS WAS THIS DISCUSSED AT

  • YOUR BOARD MEETINGS AND WHAT ARE

  • THE APPLICATIONS AND INTEREST

  • THAT ARE BEING DISCUSSED WITHOUT

  • PUTTING REAL TEETH INTO THIS.

  • WE DON'T WANT TO COME BACK TO

  • THIS SITUATION AGAIN.

  • I BELIEVE YOU HAVE ALL TALENT.

  • MY QUESTION IS DO YOU HAVE ALL

  • THE WILL TO HELP US SOLVE THIS

  • PROBLEM?

  • >> YES, SENATOR.

  • DATA PRIVACY AND FOREIGN

  • INTERFERENCE ARE TOPICS WE

  • DISCUSSED AT THE BOARD MEETING.

  • THESE ARE SOME OF THE ISSUES WE

  • DISCUSSED AT THE BOARD MEETING.

  • WE FEEL A HUGE RESPONSIBILITY TO

  • GET THIS RIGHT.

  • >> DO YOU BELIEVE THE EUROPEAN

  • REGULATION SHOULD BE APPLIED

  • HERE IN THE U.S. IN.

  • >> I THINK EVERY ONE IN THE

  • WORLD DESERVES GOOD PRIVACY

  • PROTECTION.

  • REGARDLESS OF WHETHER WE

  • IMPLEMENT THE EXACT SAME

  • REGULATION, I WOULD GUESS THAT

  • IT WOULD BE DIFFERENT BECAUSE WE

  • HAVE DIFFERENT SENSIBILITIES IN

  • THE U.S. AS TO OTHER COUNTRIES.

  • WE'RE COMMITTED TO ROLLING OUT

  • THE CONTROLS AND AFFIRMATIVE

  • CONSENT AND THE SPECIAL CONTROLS

  • AROUND SENSITIVE TYPES OF

  • TECHNOLOGY LIKE FACE RECOGNITION

  • THAT ARE REQUIRED IN GDPR.

  • WE'RE DOING THAT AROUND THE

  • WORLD.

  • I THINK IT'S CERTAINLY WORTH

  • DISCUSSING WHETHER WE SHOULD

  • HAVE SOMETHING SIMILAR IN THE

  • U.S. BUT WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO

  • SAY TODAY IS WE'RE GOING TO GO

  • FORWARD AN IMPLEMENT THAT

  • REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE

  • REGULATORY OUTCOME IS.

  • >> SENATOR.

  • >> THANK YOU.

  • MY QUESTION WILL BE A FOLLOW UP

  • ON WHAT SENATOR HATCH WAS

  • TALKING ABOUT AND LET ME AGREE

  • WITH BASICALLY HIS ADVICE THAT

  • WE DON'T WANT TO OVERREGULATE TO

  • THE POINT WHERE WE'RE STIFLING

  • INNOVATION AND INVESTMENT.

  • I UNDERSTAND WITH REGARD TO

  • SUGGESTED RULES OR SUGGESTED

  • LEGISLATION THERE ARE TWO

  • SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT OUT THERE.

  • ONE WOULD BE THE ISP, THE

  • INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS WHO

  • ARE ADVOCATING FOR PRIVACY

  • PROTECTIONS FOR CONSUMERS THAT

  • APPLY TO ALL ONLINE ENTITIES

  • EQUALLY ACROSS THE ENTIRE

  • INTERNET ECOSYSTEM.

  • FACEBOOK IS AN EDGE PROVIDER.

  • EDGE PROVIDERS MAY NOT SUPPORT

  • THAT EFFORT BECAUSE THEY HAVE

  • DIFFERENT BUSINESS MODELS THAN

  • THE ISPs AND SHOULD NOT BE

  • CONSIDERED LIKE SERVICES.

  • DO YOU THINK WE NEED CONSISTENT

  • PRIVACY PROTECTIONS FOR CONSUME

  • S ACROSS THE ENTIRE INTERNET

  • ECOSYSTEM THAT ARE BASED ON THE

  • TYPE OF CONSUME EVERY

  • INFORMATION BEING COLLECTED,

  • USED OR SHARED REGARDLESS OF THE

  • ENTITY DOING THE COLLECTING OR

  • USING OR SHARING?

  • >> SENATOR, THIS IS AN IMPORTANT

  • QUESTION.

  • I WOULD DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN

  • ISPs WHICH I CONSIDER TO BE THE

  • PIPES OF THE INTERNET AND THE

  • PLATFORMS LIKE GOOGLE OR

  • FACEBOOK OR TWITTER OR YOUTUBE

  • THAT ARE THE APPS OR PLATFORMS

  • ON TOP OF THAT.

  • I THINK IN GENERAL THE

  • EXPECTATIONS THAT PEOPLE HAVE OF

  • THE PIPES ARE SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT

  • FROM THE PLATFORMS.

  • THERE MIGHT BE AREAS WHERE THERE

  • NEEDS TO BE MORE REGULATION IN

  • ONE AND LESS IN THE OTHER.

  • I THINK THERE WILL BE OTHER

  • PLACES WHERE THERE NEEDS TO BE

  • MORE REGULATION OF THE OTHER

  • TYPE.

  • ON THE PIPES, ONE OF THE

  • IMPORTANT ISSUES THAT I THINK WE

  • FACE AND HAVE DEBATED IS --

  • >> WHEN YOU SAY PIPES?

  • >> ISPs.

  • I KNOW NET NEUTRALITY HAS BEEN A

  • HOTLY DEBATED TOPIC AND ONE OF

  • THE REASONS I'VE BEEN OUT THERE

  • SAYING I THINK THAT SHOULD BE

  • THE CASE IS BECAUSE I LOOK AT MY

  • OWN STORY OF WHEN I WAS GETTING

  • STARTED BUILDING FACEBOOK AT

  • HARVARD, I ONLY HAD ONE OPTION

  • FOR AN ISP TO USE.

  • IF I HAD TO PAY EXTRA IN ORDER

  • TO MAKE IT SO MY APP COULD BE

  • SEEN OR USED BY OTHER PEOPLE,

  • THEN WE PROBABLY WOULDN'T BE

  • HERE TODAY.

  • >> WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PRIVACY

  • CONCERNS.

  • LET ME JUST SAY WE'LL HAVE TO

  • FOLLOW UP ON THIS, BUT I THINK

  • YOU AND I AGREE THIS IS GOING TO

  • BE ONE OF THE MAJOR ITEMS OF

  • DEBATE IF WE HAVE TO GO FORWARD

  • AND DO THIS FROM A GOVERNMENTAL

  • STAND POINT.

  • LET ME MOVE ONTO ANOTHER COUPLE

  • OF ITEMS.

  • IS IT TRUE THAT THAT FACEBOOK

  • COLLECTS THE CALL AND TEXT

  • HISTORIES OF ITS USERS THAT USE

  • ANDROID PHONES?

  • >> WE HAVE AN APP CALLED

  • MESSENGER AND THAT APP OFFERS

  • PEOPLE AN OPTION TO SYNC THEIR

  • TEXT MESSAGES INTO THE MESSAGING

  • APP SO YOU CAN HAVE YOUR TEXTS

  • AND FACEBOOK MESSAGES IN ONE

  • PLACE.

  • WE ALSO ALLOW PEOPLE THE OPTION

  • OF --

  • >> YOU CAN OPT IN OR OUT OF

  • THAT?

  • >> YES.

  • IT'S OPT IN.

  • YOU HAVE TO AFFIRMATIVELY SAY

  • THAT YOU WANT TO SYNC THAT

  • INFORMATION BEFORE WE GET

  • ACCESS.

  • >> UNLESS YOU OPT IN, YOU DON'T

  • COLLECT THAT INFORMATION IN.

  • >> THAT'S CORRECT.

  • >> IS THERE PRACTICE DONE AT ALL

  • WITH MINORS OR DO YOU MAKE AN

  • EXCEPTION FOR PERSONS AGE 13 TO

  • 17?

  • >> I DO NOT KNOW.

  • WE CAN FOLLOW UP.

  • >> ONE OTHER THING.

  • THERE'S BEEN REPORTS THAT

  • FACEBOOK WITH TRACK USERS

  • INTERNET BROWSING ACTIVITY EVEN

  • AFTER THAT USER ARE HAS LOGGED

  • OFF OF THE FACEBOOK PLATFORM.

  • CAN YOU CONFIRM WHETHER OR NOT

  • THIS IS TRUE?

  • >> SENATOR, I WANT TO MAKE SURE

  • I GET THIS ACCURATE SO PROBABLY

  • BE BETTER TO HAVE MY FAMILY

  • FOLLOW UP.

  • >> YOU DON'T KNOW?

  • >> I KNOW THAT PEOPLE USE

  • COOKIES ON THE INTERNET AND YOU

  • CAN PROBABLY CORRELATE ACTIVITY

  • BETWEEN SESSIONS.

  • WE DO THAT FOR A NUMBER OF

  • REASONS, INCLUDING SECURITY AND

  • INCLUDING MEASURING ADS TO MAKE

  • SURE THAT THE ADD EXPERIENCES

  • ARE MOST EFFECTIVE WHICH PEOPLE

  • CAN OPT OUT OF.

  • I WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M PRECISE?

  • MY ANSWER.

  • >> WHEN YOU GET BACK TO ME, SIR,

  • WOULD YOU ALSO LET US KNOW HOW

  • FACEBOOK DISCLOSES TO ITS USERS

  • THAT ENGAGING IN THIS TYPE OF

  • TRACKING GIVES US THAT RESULT.

  • >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

  • >> THANK YOU, SENATOR.

  • >> I ASSUME FACEBOOK'S BEEN

  • SERVED SUBPOENAS FROM THE

  • SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER'S

  • OFFICE, IS THAT CORRECT?

  • >> YES.

  • >> HAVE YOU OR ANYONE AT

  • FACEBOOK BEEN INTERVIEWED?

  • >> YES.

  • >> HAVE YOU BEEN INTERVIEWED?

  • >> I HAVE NOT.

  • I HAVE NOT.

  • >> OTHERS HAVE IN.

  • >> I BELIEVE SO.

  • I WANT TO BE CAREFUL HERE

  • BECAUSE THAT -- OR WORK WITH THE

  • SPECIAL COUNSEL IS CONFIDENTIAL

  • AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IN

  • AN OPEN SESSION I'M NOT

  • REVEALING SOMETHING THAT'S

  • CONFIDENTIAL.

  • >> I UNDERSTAND.

  • I WANT TO MAKE CLEAR YOU HAVE

  • BEEN CONTACTED AND HAVE HAD

  • SUBPOENAS?

  • >> LET ME CLARIFY THAT.

  • I'M NOT AWARE OF A SUBPOENA.

  • I BELIEVE THERE MAY BE BUT I

  • KNOW WE'RE WORKING WITH THEM.

  • >> THANK YOU.

  • SIX MONTHS AGO GENERAL COUNSEL

  • PROMISED YOU WERE TAKING STEPS

  • TO PREVENT UNWITTING

  • CO-CONSPIRATOR BUT THESE

  • UNVERIIED DIVISIVE PAGES ARE ON

  • FACEBOOK TODAY.

  • THEY LOOK A LOT LIKE THE RUSSIAN

  • GROUPS USED TO SPREAD PROPAGANDA

  • DURING THE 2016 ELECTION.

  • ARE YOU ABLE TO CONFIRM WHETHER

  • THEY ARE RUSSIAN CREATED GROUPS,

  • YES OR NO?

  • >> SENATOR, YOU ASKING ABOUT

  • THOSE SPECIFICALLY?

  • >> YES.

  • >> SENATOR, LAST WEEK WE

  • ANNOUNCD MAJOR CHANGE TO OUR

  • ADS AND PAGES POLICIES THAT WE

  • WILL BE VERIFYING THE IDENTITY

  • OF EVERY SINGLE ADVERTISER --

  • >> SPECIFIC ONES.

  • DO YOU KNOW WHETHER THEY ARE?

  • >> I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THOSE

  • PIECES OF CONTENT SPECIFICALLY.

  • >> IF YOU DID THIS POLICY OVER A

  • WEEK AGO, YOU'D BE ABLE TO

  • VERIFY THEM IN.

  • >> WE ARE WORKING ON THAT NOW.

  • WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE GOING

  • TO VERIFY THE IDENTITY OF ANY

  • ADVERTISER WHO IS RUNNING A

  • POLITICAL OR ISSUE RELATED AD.

  • THIS IS BASICALLY WHAT THE

  • HONEST ADS ACT IS PROPOSING AND

  • WE'RE FOLLOWING THAT.

  • WE'RE ALSO GOING TO DO THAT FOR

  • PAGES.

  • >> YOU CAN'T ANSWER ON THESE?

  • >> I'M NOT FAMILIAR.

  • >> WILL YOU FIND OUT THE ANSWER

  • AND GET BACK TO ME?

  • >> I'LL HAVE MY TEAM GET BACK TO

  • YOU.

  • I THINK IT'S WORTH ADDING THAT

  • WE'RE GOING TO DO THE SAME

  • VERIFICATION OF THE IDENTITY AND

  • LOCATION OF A MINS WHO ARE

  • RUNNING LARGE PAGES.

  • EVEN IF THEY AREN'T BUYING ADS,

  • THAT WILL MAKE IT HARDER FOR

  • RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE EFFORTS OR

  • OTHER UNAUTHENTIC EFFORT.

  • >> SOME MIGHT SAY IT'S ABOUT

  • TIME.

  • SIX MONTHS AGO I ASKED GENERAL

  • COUNSEL ABOUT FACEBOOK IS A

  • BREEDING GROUND FOR HATE SPEECH

  • AGAINST ROHINYJA REFUGEES.

  • YOU SAY YOU USE AI TO FIND THIS.

  • THIS IS THE TYPE OF CONTENT I'M

  • REFERRING TO.

  • IT'S CALLS FOR THE DEATH OF A

  • MUSLIM JOURNALIST.

  • THAT THREAT WENT STRAIGHT

  • THROUGH YOUR DETECTION SYSTEM.

  • IT SPREAD QUICKLY.

  • IT TOOK ATTEMPT AFTER ATTEMPT TO

  • GET YOU TO REMOVE IT.

  • WHY COULDN'T IT BE REMOVED

  • WITHIN 24 HOURS.

  • >> WHAT'S HAPPENING IN MYANMAR

  • IS A TERRIBLE TRAGEDY.

  • >> WE ALL AGREE WITH THAT.

  • >> YOU AND INVESTIGATORS HAVE

  • BLAMED -- YOU BLAME FACEBOOK FOR

  • PLAYING A ROLE IN THAT GENERAL

  • VISE.

  • WE ALL AGREE SOCIAL SECURITY

  • TERRIBLE.

  • HOW CAN YOU DEDICATE RESOURCES

  • TO MAKE SURE SUCH HATE SPEECH IS

  • TAKING DOWN IN 24 HOURS.

  • >> WE'RE WORKING ON THIS.

  • THERE'S THREE SPECIFIC THINGS

  • WE'RE DOING.

  • WE'RE HIRING DOZENS MORE BURMESE

  • LANGUAGE CONTENT USERS.

  • IT'S HARD TO DO IT WITHOUT

  • PEOPLE WHO SPEAK THE LANGUAGE.

  • WE'RE WORKING WITH SPECIFICS TO

  • TAKE DOWN THEIR ACCOUNT.

  • THIRD, IS WE'RE STANDING THE UP

  • A PRODUCT TEAM TO DO SPECIFIC

  • PRODUCT CHANGES IN MYANMAR AND

  • OTHER COUNTRIES THAT MAY HAVE

  • SIMILAR ISSUES IN THE FUTURE TO

  • PREVENT THIS FROM HAPPENING.

  • >> SENATOR CRUZ AND I SENT A

  • LETTER TO APPLE ASKING WHAT THEY

  • WILL DOING ABOUT CHINESE

  • SENSORSHIP.

  • I WANT TO KNOW WHAT YOU'LL DO

  • ABOUT CHINESE SENSORSHIP WHEN

  • THEY COME TO YOU.

  • >> SENATOR GRAHAM IS UP NEXT.

  • >> ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH ANDREW

  • BOSWORTH?

  • >> YES, SENATOR, I AM.

  • >> HE SAID SO WE CONNECT MORE

  • PEOPLE, MAYBE SOMEONE DIES IN A

  • TERRORIST ATTACK COORDINATING ON

  • OUR TOOLS.

  • WE BELIEVE IN CONNECTING MORE

  • PEOPLE SO DEEPLY THAT ANYTHING

  • THAT ALLOWS US TO CONNECT PEOPLE

  • MORE OFTEN IS DE FACTO GOOD.

  • DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT?

  • >> NO I DO NOT.

  • BOS WROTE THAT AS AN INTERNAL

  • NOTE.

  • WE HAVE A LOT OF DISCUSSION

  • INTERNALLY.

  • I DISAGREED WITH IT AT THE TIME

  • HE WROTE IT.

  • IF YOU LOOK AT THE COMMENTS THE

  • PEOPLE DID TOO.

  • >> YOU DID A BAD JOB OF

  • COMMUNICATING YOUR DISPLEASURE

  • BECAUSE IF HE UNDERSTOOD WHERE

  • YOU'RE AT, HE WOULD HAVE NEVER

  • SAID IT.

  • >> WE TRY TO RUN OUR COMPANY

  • WHERE PEOPLE CAN EXPRESS

  • OPINIONS INTERNALLY.

  • >> THIS IS AN OPINION THAT

  • DISTURBS ME.

  • IF SOMEBODY THAT SAID THIS THAT

  • WORKS FOR ME, I'D FIRE THEM.

  • WHO IS YOUR BIGGEST COME PET

  • TER?

  • >> WE HAVE A LOT OF COMPETITORS.

  • >> WHO IS THE BIGGEST?

  • >> CAN I GIVE A BUNCH.

  • THREE CATEGORIES.

  • ONE IS THE TECH PLATFORMS.

  • GOOGLE, MIMICROSOFT.

  • >> IF I BUY A FORD AND IT

  • DOESN'T WORK WELL, I CAN BUY A

  • CHEVY.

  • IF I'M UPSET WITH FACEBOOK,

  • WHAT'S THE EQUIVALENT PRODUCT

  • THAT I CAN SIGN UP FOR?

  • >> THE SECOND CATEGORY THAT I

  • WAS GOING TO TALK ABOUT --

  • >> I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT

  • CATEGORIES.

  • I'M TALKING A REAL COMPETITION

  • YOU FACE.

  • CAR COMPANIES FACE A LOT OF

  • COMPETITION IF THEY FACE A

  • DEFECTIVE CAR.

  • PEOPLE STOP BUYING THAT CAR.

  • IS THERE AN ALTERNATIVE TO

  • FACEBOOK IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR?

  • >> YES.

  • THE AVER RAJ AMERICAN USES AGTS

  • DIFFERENT APPS TO COMMUNICATE

  • WITH THEIR FRIENDS AND STAY IN

  • TOUCH WITH PEOPLE.

  • >> THE SAME SERVICE YOU PROVIDE?

  • IS TWITTER THE SAME?

  • >> IT OVERLAPS.

  • >> YOU DON'T THINK YOU HAVE A

  • MONOPOLY?

  • >> IT DOESN'T FEEL LIKE THAT TO

  • ME.

  • >> IT DOESN'T.

  • INSTAGRAM.

  • YOU BOUGHT IT.

  • WHY DID YOU BUY INSTAGRAM?

  • >> THEY WERE VERIAL LENDED APP

  • DEVELOPERS MAKING GOOD USE OF

  • OUR PLATFORM AND UNDERSTOOD OUR

  • VALUES.

  • >> IT'S A GOOD BUSINESS

  • DECISION.

  • MY POINT IS ONE WAY TO REGULATE

  • A COMPANY IS THROUGH

  • COMPETITION, THROUGH GOVERNMENT

  • REGULATION.

  • HERE'S THE QUESTION THAT ALL OF

  • US NEED TO ANSWER.

  • WHAT DO WE TELL OUR CON STIMP

  • WENTS GIVEN WHAT'S HAPPENED HERE

  • WHY WE SHOULD LET YOU

  • SELF-REGULATE.

  • WHAT WOULD YOU TELL PEOPLE IN

  • SOUTH CAROLINA THAT GIVEN ALL

  • THE THINGS WE DISCOVERED HERE

  • IT'S A GOOD IDEA FOR US TO RELY

  • UPON YOU TO REGULATE YOUR OWN

  • BUSINESS PRACTICES?

  • >> MY POSITION IS NOT THAT THERE

  • SHOULD BE NO REGULATION.

  • I THINK THE INTERNET IS --

  • >> DO YOU EMBRACE REGULATION?

  • >> I THINK THE REAL QUESTION AS

  • THE INTERNET BECOMES MORE

  • IMPORTANT IN PEOPLE'S LIVES IS

  • WHAT IS THE RIGHT REGULATION.

  • >> YOU AS COMPANY, WELCOME

  • REGULATION?

  • >> I THINK IF IT'S THE RIGHT

  • REGULATION THEN YES.

  • >> DO YOU THINK THE EUROPEANS

  • HAVE IT RIGHT?

  • >> I THINK THEY GET THINGS

  • RIGHT.

  • >> HAVE YOU EVER SUBMITTED --

  • THAT'S TRUE.

  • WOULD YOU WORK WITH US IN TERMS

  • OF WHAT REGULATIONS YOU THINK

  • ARE NECESSARY IN YOUR INDUSTRY?

  • >> ABSOLUTELY.

  • >> WOULD YOU SUBMIT TO US SOME

  • PROPOSED REGULATIONREGULATIONS?

  • >> YES.

  • I'LL HAVE MY TEAM FOLLOW UP WITH

  • YOU SO WE CAN HAVE THIS

  • DISCUSSION ACROSS THE DIFFERENT

  • CATEGORIES WHERE I THINK THIS

  • DISCUSSION NEEDS TO HAPPEN.

  • >> LOOK FORWARD TO IT.

  • WHEN YOU SIGN UP FOR FACEBOOK,

  • YOU SIGN UP FOR TERMS OF

  • SERVICE.

  • ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THAT?

  • >> YES.

  • >> IT SAYS THE TERMS GOVERN YOUR

  • USE OF FACEBOOK AND THE

  • PRODUCTS, FEATURES, APPS,

  • TECHNOLOGY SOFTWARE WE OFFER

  • EXCEPT WHERE WE STATE SEPARATE

  • TERMS AND NOT WHERE THESE

  • APPLIES.

  • I'M A LAWYER AND I HAVE NO IDEA.

  • DO YOU THINK THE AVERAGE

  • CONSUMERS UNDERSTANDS WHAT THEY

  • ARE SIGNING UP FOR?

  • >> I DON'T THINK THAT THE

  • AVERAGE PERSON LIKELY READS THAT

  • WHOLE DOCUMENT.

  • I THINK THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS

  • THAT WE CAN COMMUNICATE THAT AND

  • HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO DO SO.

  • >> DO YOU AGREE WITH ME YOU

  • BETTER COME UP WITH DIFFERENT

  • WAYS BECAUSE THERE AIN'T

  • WORKING?

  • >> SENATOR, I THINK IN CERTAIN

  • AREAS THAT IS TRUE.

  • I THINK IN OTHER AREAS LIKE THE

  • CORE PART OF WHAT WE DO.

  • IF YOU THINK ABOUT THE MOST

  • BASIC LEVEL, PEOPLE COME TO

  • FACEBOOK, INSTAGRAM, WHAT'S APP

  • MESSENGER ABOUT A HUNDRED

  • BILLIONS TIMES A DAY TO SHARE A

  • CONTENT OR MESSAGE WITH SPECIFIC

  • SET OF PEOPLE.

  • PEOPLE UNDERSTAND BECAUSE WE

  • HAVE THE CONTROLS THIS LINE

  • EVERY TIME AND GIVEN THE VOLUME

  • OF THE ACTIVITY AND THE VALUE

  • THAT PEOPLE TELL US THEY ARE

  • GETTING FROM THAT, I THINK THAT

  • CONTROL IN LINE DOES SEEM TO BE

  • WORKING FAIRLY WELL.

  • WE CAN ALWAYS DO BETTER AND

  • THERE SERVICES COMPLEX AND YOU

  • GO AND POST A PHOTO.

  • I AGREE THAT IN MANY PLACES WE

  • COULD DO BETTER.

  • FOR THE CORE OF THE SERVICE IT

  • IS QUITE CLEAR.

  • >> THANK YOU, SENATOR.

  • >> I THINK WE ALL AGREE THAT

  • WHAT HAPPENED HERE WAS BAD.

  • YOU ACKNOWLEDGED IT WAS BREACH

  • OF TRUST AND THE WAY I EXPLAIN

  • IT TO MY CONSTITUENTS IS IF

  • SOMEONE BREAKS INTO MY APARTMENT

  • WITH A CROWBAR AND TAKE MY

  • STUFF, IT'S LIKE IF THE MANAGER

  • GAVE THEM THE KEYS OR IF THEY

  • DIDN'T HAVE ANY LOCKS ON DOORS,

  • IT'S STILL BREAK IN.

  • I BELIEVE WE NEED TO HAVE LAWS

  • AND RULES THAT ARE SOPHISTICATED

  • AS THE BRILLIANT PRODUCTS THAT

  • YOU'VE DEVELOPED HERE.

  • WE JUST HAVEN'T DONE THAT YET.

  • ONE OF THE AREAS THAT I'M

  • FOCUSED ON IS THE ELECTION.

  • I APPRECIATE THE SUPPORT THAT

  • YOU AND FACEBOOK AND NOW TWITTER

  • HAVE GIVEN TO THE HONEST ADS ACT

  • BILL THAT YOU MENTIONED THAT I'M

  • LEADING WITH SENATOR McCAIN AND

  • WARNER.

  • AS WE WORK TO PAS THIS LAW SO WE

  • HAVE THE SAME RULES THIS PLACE

  • TO DISCLOSE POLITICAL ADS AND

  • ISSUE ADS AS WE DO FOR TV AND

  • RADIO AS WELL AS DISCLAIMERS

  • THAT YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE EARLY

  • ACTION, AS SOON AS JUNE, BEFORE

  • THIS ELECTION, SO PEOPLE CAN

  • VIEW THESE ADS INCLUDING ISSUE

  • ADS, IS THAT CORRECT?

  • >> THAT IS CORRECT.

  • I WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT BEFORE I

  • GO INTO THIS MORE DETAIL TO

  • THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP ON

  • THIS.

  • THIS IS AN IMPORTANT AREA FOR

  • THE WHOLE INDUSTRY TO MOVE ON.

  • THE TWO SPECIFIC THINGS THAT

  • WE'RE DOING ARE ONE IS AROUND

  • TRANSPARENCY.

  • NOW YOU'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO

  • GO AND CLICK ON ANY ADVERTISER

  • OR ANY PAGE ON FACEBOOK AND SEE

  • ALL THE ADS THEY ARE RUNNING.

  • THAT BRINGS ADVERTISING ONLINE,

  • ON FACEBOOK TO AN EVEN HIGHER

  • STANDARDS THAN WHAT YOU WOULD

  • HAVE ON TV OR PRINT MEDIA

  • BECAUSE THERE'S NOWHERE YOU CAN

  • SEE ALL THE TV ADS SOMEONE IS

  • RUNNING.

  • THIS CAMPAIGN OR THIRD PARTY IS

  • SAYING DIFFERENT MESSAGES TO

  • DIFFERENT TYPES OF PEOPLE IS

  • IMPORTANT.

  • >> SENATOR WARNER AND I HAVE

  • CALLED OR GOOGLE TO DO THE SAME.

  • WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A PATCH WORK

  • OF ADS.

  • I HOPE YOU'LL BE WORKING WITH US

  • TO PASS THIS BILL, IS THAT

  • RIGHT?

  • >> WE WILL.

  • >> THANK YOU.

  • ON THE SUBJECT OF CAMBRIDGE

  • ANALYTICA, WERE THESE PEOPLE,

  • THE 87 MILLION PEOPLE, USERS

  • CONCENTRATED IN CERTAIN STATES?

  • ARE YOU ABLE TO FIGURE OUT WHERE

  • THEY ARE FROM?

  • >> I DO NOT HAVE THAT

  • INFORMATION WITH ME BUT WE CAN

  • FOLLOW UP WITH YOUR OFFICE.

  • >> AS WE KNOW THAT ELECTION WAS

  • CLOSE AND IT WAS ONLY THOUSANDS

  • VOTES IN CERTAIN STATES.

  • YOU ALSO ESTIMATED THAT ROUGHLY

  • 126 MILLION PEOPLE MAY HAVE BEEN

  • SHOWN CONTENT FROM FACEBOOK PAGE

  • ASSOCIATED WITH THE INTERNET

  • RESEARCH AGTS SI.

  • HAVE YOU DETERMINED WHETHER ANY

  • OF THOSE PEOPLE WERE THE SAME

  • FACEBOOK USERS WHOSE DATA WAS

  • SHARED WITH CAMBRIDGE ANALYTICA?

  • ARE YOU ABLE TO MAKE THAT

  • DETERMINATION?

  • >> WE'RE INVESTIGATING THAT NOW.

  • WE BELIEVE IT'S POSSIBLE THERE

  • WILL BE A CONNECTION THERE.

  • >> THAT SEEMS LIKE A BIG DEAL AS

  • WE LOOK BACK AT THAT LAST

  • ELECTION.

  • FORMER CAMBRIDGE ANALYTICA

  • EMPLOYEE CHRISTOPHER WILEY SAID

  • THE DATA IT IMPROPERLY OBTAINED

  • FROM FACEBOOK USERS COULD BE

  • STORED IN RUSSIA.

  • DO YOU AGREE THAT'S A

  • POSSIBILITY?

  • >> SORRY, ARE YOU ASK IF

  • CAMBRIDGE ANALYTICA COULD BE

  • STORED IN RUSSIA?

  • >> THAT'S WHAT HE SAID THIS

  • WEEKEND ON A SUNDAY SHOW.

  • >> I DON'T HAVE ANY SPECIFIC

  • KNOWLEDGE THAT WOULD SUGGEST

  • THAT.

  • ONE OF THE STEPS WE NEED TO TAKE

  • IS DO A FULL AUDIT OF ALL OF

  • CAMBRIDGE ANALYTICA SYSTEMS TO

  • UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY'RE DOING,

  • MAKE SURE THEY REMOVE THE DATA

  • AND IF THEY HAVEN'T WE'LL TAKE

  • LEGAL ACTION FOR THEM TO DO SO.

  • THAT AUDIT, WE HAVE SEEDED THAT

  • IN ORDER TO LET THE UK

  • GOVERNMENT LET THE GOVERNMENT

  • INVESTIGATION FIRST.

  • WE'RE COMMITTED TO COMPLETING

  • THAT.

  • >> YOU STATED YOU WOULD SUPPORT

  • SOME PRIVACY RULES SO EVERYONE

  • IS PLAYING BY THE SAME RULES

  • HERE.

  • YOU ALSO SAID HERE YOU SHOULD

  • HAVE NOTIFIED CUSTOMERS EARLIER.

  • WOULD YOU SUPPORT A RULE THAT

  • WOULD REQUIRE YOU TO NOTIFY YOUR

  • USERS OF A BREACH WITHIN 72

  • HOURS?

  • >> SENATOR, THAT MAKES SENSE TO

  • ME.

  • I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE OUR TEAM

  • FOLLOW UP WITH YOURS TO DISCUSS

  • DETAILS AROUND THAT AND MORE.

  • >> THANK YOU.

  • >> I THINK PART OF THIS WAS WHEN

  • PEOPLE DON'T EVEN KNOW THEIR

  • DATA HAS BEEN BREACHED, THAT'S A

  • HUGE PROBLEM.

  • I THINK WE GET TO SOLUTION

  • FASTERS WHEN WE GET THAT

  • INFORMATION OUT THERE.

  • THANK YOU AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO

  • PASSING THIS BILL.

  • WE'D LOVE TO PASS IT BEFORE THE

  • ELECTION ON THE HONEST ADS AND

  • LOOKING FORWARD TO BETTER

  • DISCLOSURE THIS ELECTION.

  • THANK YOU.

  • >> THANK YOU SENATOR KLOBUCHAR.

  • >> THANK YOU.

  • I TOLD YOU WHEN I SENT MY

  • BUSINESS CARDS DOWN TO BE

  • PRESENTED THEY CAME BACK FROM

  • THE SENATE PRINT SHOP WITH A

  • MESSAGE.

  • IT WAS THE FIRST BUSINESS CARD

  • THEY EVER PRINTED A FACEBOOK

  • ADDRESS ON.

  • THERE ARE DAYS WHEN I'VE

  • REGRETTED THAT BUT MORE DAYS WE

  • GET LOTS OF INFORMATION.

  • THERE ARE DAYS I WONDER IF

  • FACEBOOK FRIEND S A LITTLE MISAT

  • A TIMED.

  • IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE I HAVE

  • THOSE EVERY SINGLE DAY.

  • THE PLATFORM YOU CREATED IS

  • REALLY IMPORTANT.

  • MY SON WHO IS 13 IS DEDICATED TO

  • INSTAGRAM.

  • HE WOULD WANT TO BE SURE I

  • MENTION THAT WHILE I'M HERE WITH

  • YOU.

  • LOTS OF WAYS TO CONNECT PEOPLE.

  • THE INFORMATION IS AN IMPORTANT

  • COMMODITY AND IT'S WHAT MAKES

  • YOUR BUSINESS WORK.

  • I GET THAT.

  • HOWEVER, I WONDER ABOUT SOME OF

  • THE COLLECTION EFFORTS AND MAYBE

  • WE CAN GO THROUGH LARGELY EVEN

  • YES AND NO AND WE'LL GET BACK TO

  • MORE EXPANSIVE DISCUSSION OF

  • THIS.

  • DO YOU COLLECT USER DATA THROUGH

  • CROSS DEVICE TRACKING?

  • >> I BELIEVE WE DO LINK PEOPLE'S

  • ACCOUNTS BETWEEN DEVICES IN

  • ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT THEIR

  • FACEBOOK AND INSTAGRAM AND OTHER

  • EXPERIENCES CAN BE SYNCED.

  • >> THAT WOULD INCLUDE OFFLINE

  • DATA.

  • DATA THAT'S NOT LINKED TO

  • FACEBOOK BUT SOME DEVICE THEY

  • WENT THROUGH FACEBOOK ON?

  • IS THAT RIGHT?

  • >> SENATOR, I WANT TO MAKE SURE

  • WE GET THIS RIGHT.

  • I WANT TO HAVE MY FAMILY TOLL UP

  • WITH YOU ON THAT AFTER WARDS.

  • >> THAT DOESN'T SEEM THAT

  • COMPLICATED TO ME.

  • YOU UNDERSTAND THIS BETTER THAN

  • I DO.

  • DO YOU TRACK DEVICES THAT AN

  • INDIVIDUAL WHO USES FACEBOOK HAS

  • THAT IS CONNECTED TO THE DEVICE

  • THEY USE FOR THEIR FACEBOOK

  • CONNECTION BUT NOT NECESSARILY

  • CONNECTED TO FACEBOOK?

  • >> I'M IN THE SURE OF THE ANSWER

  • TO THAT QUESTION.

  • >> REALLY?

  • >> YES.

  • THERE MAY BE SOME DATA NECESSARY

  • TO PROVIDE THE SERVICE THAT WE

  • DO.

  • I DON'T HAVE THAT SITTING HERE

  • TODAY.

  • >> THE FTC FLAGGED CROSS DEVICE

  • TRACKING AS ONE OF THEIR

  • CONCERNS.

  • GENERALLY THAT PEOPLE ARE

  • TRACKING DEVICES THAT THE USERS

  • OF SOMETHING LIKE FACEBOOK DON'T

  • KNOW THEY'RE BEING TRACKED.

  • HOW DO YOU DISCLOSE YOUR

  • COLLECTION METHODS?

  • IS THAT ALL IN THIS DOCUMENT

  • THAT I WOULD SEE AND AGREE TO

  • BEFORE I ENTERED INTO FACEBOOK?

  • >> YES.

  • THERE ARE TWO WAYS WE DO THIS.

  • SOMEONE WE TRY TO BE EXHAUSTIVE

  • IN TERMS OF SERVICE AND PRIVACY

  • POLICIES.

  • MORE IMPORTANTLY, WE TRY TO

  • PROVIDE INLINE CONTROLS SO THAT

  • PEOPLE ARE IN PLAIN ENGLISH THAT

  • PEOPLE CAN UNDERSTAND.

  • THEY CAN EITHER GO TO SETTINGS

  • OR SHOW THEM AT THE TOP OF THE

  • APP.

  • PEOPLE UNDERSTAND ALL CONTROLS

  • AND SETTINGS THEY HAVE AND CAN

  • CONFIGURE THEIR EXPERIENCE THE

  • WAY THEY WANT.

  • >> DO PEOPLE NOW GIVE YOU

  • PERMISSION TO TRACK SPECIFIC

  • DEVICES IN THEIR CONTRACT AND IF

  • THEY DO IS THAT A RELATIVELY NEW

  • ADDITION TO WHAT YOU DO?

  • >> SENATOR --

  • >> AM I ABLE TO OPT OUT?

  • AM I ABLE TO SAY IT'S OKAY FOR

  • YOU TO TRACK WHAT I'M SAYING ON

  • FACEBOOK BUT DON'T TRACK WHAT

  • I'M TEXTING TO SOMEBODY ELSE OFF

  • FACEBOOK, ON AN ANDROID PHONE?

  • >> YES, SENATOR.

  • IN GENERAL FACEBOOK IS NOT

  • COLLECTING DATA FROM OTHER APPS

  • THAT YOU USE.

  • THERE MAY BE SOME SPECIFIC

  • THINGS ABOUT THE DEVICE YOU'RE

  • USING THAT FACEBOOK NEEDS TO

  • UNDERSTAND IN ORDER TO OFFER THE

  • SERVICE BUT IF YOU'RE USING

  • GOOGLE OR USING SOME TEXTING

  • APP, UNLESS YOU SPECIFICALLY OPT

  • IN THAT YOU WANT TO SHARE THE

  • TEXTING APP INFORMATION,

  • FACEBOOK WOULDN'T SEE THAT.

  • >> HAS IT ALWAYS BEEN THAT WAY

  • OR IS THAT A RECENT ADDITION TO

  • HOW YOU DEAL WITH THOSE OTHER

  • WAYS THAT IE MIGHT COMMUNICATE?

  • >> SENATOR, MY UNDERSTANDING IS

  • THAT IS HOW THE MOBILE OPERATING

  • SYSTEMS ARE ARCHITECTED.

  • >> YOU DON'T HAVE BUNDLED

  • PERMISSIONS FOR HOW I CAN AGREE

  • TO WHAT DEVICES I MAY USE THAT

  • YOU MAY HAVE CONTACT WITH?

  • DO YOU BUNDLE THAT PERMISSION OR

  • AM AABLE TO SAY WHAT I'M WILLING

  • FOR YOU TO WATCH AND WHAT I

  • DON'T WANT YOU TO WATCH?

  • I THINK WE MAY HAVE TO TAKE THAT

  • FOR THE RECORD BASED ON

  • EVERYBODY ELSE'S TIME.

  • >> THANK YOU, SENATOR.

  • >> THANK YOU.

  • MR. ZUCKERBERG, WOULD YOU BE

  • COMFORTABLE SHARING NAME OF THE

  • HOTEL YOU STAYED IN LAST NIGHT?

  • >> NO.

  • >> IF YOU MESSAGED ANYBODY THIS

  • WEEK, WOULD YOU SHARE WITH US

  • THE NAMES OF THE PEOPLE YOU

  • MESSAGED?

  • >> NO, I WOULD PROBABLY NOT

  • CHOOSE TO DO THAT PUBLICLY HERE.

  • >> I THINK THIS MIGHT BE WHAT

  • THIS IS ALL ABOUT.

  • YOUR RIGHT TO PRIVACY.

  • THE LIMITS OF YOUR RIGHT TO

  • PRIVACY AND HOW MUCH YOU GIVE

  • AWAY IN MODERN AMERICA IN THE

  • NAME OF QUOTE, CONNECTING PEOPLE

  • AROUND THE WORLD.

  • THE QUESTION OF WHAT INFORMATION

  • FACEBOOK'S COLLECTING, WHO THEY

  • ARE SENDING IT TO AND WHETHER

  • THEY ASKED ME IN ADVANCE MY

  • PERMISSION TO DO THAT.

  • IS THAT FAIR THING FOR A USER OF

  • FACEBOOK TO EXPECT?

  • >> YES, SENATOR.

  • I THINK EVERY SHOULD HAVE

  • CONTROL OVER HOW THEIR

  • INFORMATION IS USED.

  • AS WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT IN SOME

  • OF THE OTHER QUESTIONS, I THINK

  • THAT IS LAID OUT IN SOME OF THE

  • DOCUMENTS BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY

  • YOU WANT TO GIVE PEOPLE CONTROL

  • IN THE PRODUCT ITSELF.

  • THE MOST IMPORTANT WAY THIS

  • HAPPENS ACROSS OUR SERVICES IS

  • THAT EVERY DAY PEOPLE COME --

  • >> AS WE REACH THE 4:00 HOUR IN

  • THE EAST YOU'RE WATCHING LIVE

  • COVERAGE OF FACEBOOK CEO SENATE

  • TESTIMONY.

  • SOME YOU HAVE WILL NOW BE

  • RETURNING TO REGULAR PROGRAMMING

  • FOR.

  • FOR THE REST OF YOU, OUR

  • COVERAGE CONTINUES.

  • CONTINUES.

  • >> IN THE PAST, SOMETIMES THAT

  • INFORMATION IS GOING WAY BEYOND

  • THEIR FRIENDS.

  • SOMETIMES PEOPLE MADE MONEY OFF

  • SHARING THAT, CORRECT?

  • >> SENATOR, I THINK YOU'RE

  • REFERRING TO THE DEVELOPER

  • PLATFORM.

  • IT MAY BE USEFUL TO GIVE

  • BACKGROUND ON HOW WE SET IT UP,

  • IF THAT'S USEFUL.

  • >> I HAVE THREE MINUTES LEFT, SO

  • MAYBE YOU CAN DO THAT FOR THE

  • RECORD.

  • BECAUSE I HAVE A COUPLE OTHER

  • QUESTIONS I WOULD LIKE TO ASK.

  • YOU HAVE RECENTLY ANNOUNCED

  • SOMETHING THAT IS CALLED

  • MESSENGER KIDS.

  • FACEBOOK CREATED AN APP ALLOWING

  • KIDS BETWEEN THE AGES OF 6 AND

  • 12 TO SEND VIDEO AND TEXT

  • MESSAGES THROUGH FACEBOOK AS AN

  • EXTENSION OF THEIR PARENTS'

  • ACCOUNT.

  • YOU HAVE CARTOON-LIKE STICKERS

  • AND CONTENT THAT APPEALS TO

  • FIRST GRADERS.

  • ON JANUARY 30th, CAMPAIGN FOR

  • COMMERCIAL-FREE CHILDHOOD.

  • POINTED TO A WEALTH OF RESEARCH

  • DEMONSTRATING THAT EXCESSIVE USE

  • OF DIGITAL DEVICES AND SOCIAL

  • MEDIA IS HARMFUL TO KIDS AND

  • ARGUED THAT YOUNG CHILDREN

  • SIMPLY ARE NOT READY TO HANDLE

  • SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNTS AT AGE 6.

  • IN ADDITION, THERE ARE CONCERNS

  • ABOUT DATA THAT IS BEING

  • GATHERED ABOUT THESE KIDS.

  • AND OTHER CERTAIN LIMITS, WE

  • KNOW, WHICH CHILDREN'S ONLINE

  • PRIVACY PROTECTION ACT.

  • WHAT GUARANTEES CAN GIVE YOU

  • THAT NO DATA FROM MESSENGER KIDS

  • IS OR WILL BE SHARED WITH THOSE

  • THAT MIGHT VIOLATE THAT LAW.

  • >> SENATOR, A NUMBER OF THINGS

  • THAT ARE IMPORTANT HERE.

  • THE BACKGROUND ON MESSENGER KIDS

  • IS WE HEARD FEEDBACK FROM

  • THOUSANDS OF PARENTS THAT THEY

  • WANT TO BE ABLE TO STAY IN TOUCH

  • WITH THEIR KIDS AND CALL THEM,

  • USE APPS LIKE FACETIME WHEN

  • THEY'RE WORKING LATE OR NOT

  • AROUND AND WANT TO COMMUNICATE

  • WITH THEIR KIDS BUT THEY WANT

  • COMPLETE CONTROL.

  • I THINK WE CAN AGREE WHEN YOUR

  • KID IS 6 OR 7, EVEN IF THEY HAVE

  • ACCESS TO A PHONE, YOU WANT TO

  • CONTROL EVERYONE WHO THEY

  • CONTACT.

  • THERE WASN'T AN APP THAT DID

  • THAT.

  • WE BUILT THIS SERVICE TO DO

  • THAT.

  • THE APP COLLECTS A MINIMUM

  • AMOUNT OF INFORMATION THAT IS

  • NECESSARY TO OPERATE THE

  • SERVICE.

  • SO, FOR EXAMPLE, THE MESSAGES

  • THAT PEOPLE SEND IS SOMETHING

  • THAT WE COLLECT IN ORDER TO

  • OPERATE THE SERVICE.

  • BUT IN GENERAL, THAT DATA IS NOT

  • GOING TO BE SHARED WITH THIRD

  • PARTIES.

  • IT IS NOT CONNECTED TO THE

  • BROADER FACEBOOK --

  • >> EXCUSE ME, AS A LAWYER I

  • PICKED UP THE WORD ON THE PHRASE

  • "IN GENERAL."

  • IT SEEMS TO SUGGEST IN SOME

  • CIRCUMSTANCES IT WILL BE SHARED

  • WITH THIRD PARTIES.

  • >> NO, IT WILL NOT.

  • >> ALL RIGHT.

  • WOULD YOU BE OPEN TO THE IDEA

  • THAT SOMEONE HAVING REACHED

  • ADULT AGE, HAVING GROWN UP WITH

  • MESSENGER KIDS SHOULD BE ALLOWED

  • TO DELETE THE DATA THAT YOU'VE

  • COLLECTED?

  • >> SENATOR, YES.

  • AS A MATTER OF FACT, WHEN YOU

  • BECOME 13, WHICH IS THE LEGAL

  • LIMIT.

  • WE DON'T ALLOW PEOPLE UNDER THE

  • AGE OF 13 TO USE FACEBOOK.

  • YOU DON'T AUTOMATICALLY GO FROM

  • HAVING A MESSENGER KIDS ACCOUNT

  • TO A FACEBOOK ACCOUNT.

  • YOU HAVE TO START OVER AND GET A

  • FACEBOOK ACCOUNT.

  • SO I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA TO

  • CONSIDER MAKING SURE THAT ALL

  • THAT INFORMATION IS DELETED AND,

  • IN GENERAL, PEOPLE WILL BE

  • STARTING OVER WHEN THEY GET

  • THEIR FACEBOOK OR OTHER

  • ACCOUNTS.

  • >> I HAVE A FEW SECONDS,

  • ILLINOIS HAS A BIO METRIC

  • INFORMATION PRIVACY ACT, OUR

  • STATE DOES, TO REGULATE THE

  • COMMERCIAL USE OF FACIAL AND

  • FINGER SCANS IN THE LIKE.

  • WE'RE IN A DEBATE ON THAT, I'M

  • AFRAID FACEBOOK IS TRYING TO

  • CARVE OUT EXCEPTIONS TO THAT.

  • I HOPE YOU'LL FILL ME IN ON HOW

  • IT'S CONSISTENT WITH PROTECTING

  • PRIVACY.

  • >> THANK YOU.

  • >> THANK YOU MR. ZUCKERBERG FOR

  • BEING HERE.

  • I NOTE UP UNTIL 2014, THE MANTRA

  • OR MOTTO OF FACEBOOK WAS "MOVE

  • FAST AND BREAK THINGS" IS THAT

  • CORRECT?

  • >> I DON'T KNOW WHEN WE CHANGED

  • IT, BUT THE MANTRA IS CURRENTLY

  • "MOVE FAST WITH STABLE

  • INFRASTRUCTURE" WHICH IS A MUCH

  • LESS SEXY MANTRA.

  • >> IT SOUNDS MORE BORING.

  • BUT MY QUESTION IS, DURING THE

  • TIME IT WAS FACEBOOK'S MANTRA,

  • OR MOTTO TO MOVE FAST AND BREAK

  • THINGS, DO YOU THINK SOME OF THE

  • MISJUDGMENTS, PERHAPS, MISTAKES

  • YOU'VE ADMITTED TO HERE WERE AS

  • A RESULT OF THAT CULTURE OR THAT

  • ATTITUDE, PARTICULARLY WITH

  • REGARDS TO PERSONAL PRIVACY OF

  • INFORMATION OF YOUR SUBSCRIBERS?

  • >> SENATOR, I THINK WE MADE

  • MISTAKES BECAUSE OF THAT, BUT

  • THE BROADEST MISTAKES WE MADE

  • HERE IS NOT TAKING A BROAD

  • ENOUGH VIEW OF OUR

  • RESPONSIBILITY.

  • THE MOVE FAST CULTURAL VALUE IS

  • MORE TACTICAL AROUND WHETHER

  • ENGINEERS CAN SHIP THINGS AND

  • DIFFERENT WAYS WE OPERATE.

  • BUT I THINK THE BIG MISTAKE THAT

  • WE'VE MADE LOOKING BACK ON THIS

  • IS VIEWING OUR RESPONSIBILITY AS

  • JUST BUILDING TOOLS RATHER THAN

  • VIEWING OUR WHOLE RESPONSIBILITY

  • AS MAKES SURE THOSE TOOLS ARE

  • USED FOR GOOD.

  • >> I APPRECIATE THAT BECAUSE

  • PREVIOUSLY YOUR -- OR EARLY IN

  • THE PAST, WE'VE BEEN TOLD THAT

  • PLATFORMS LIKE FACEBOOK,

  • TWITTER, INSTAGRAM, THE LIKE ARE

  • NEUTRAL PLATFORMS AND THE PEOPLE

  • WHO OWN AND RUN THOSE FOR PROFIT

  • NOT CRITICIZING DOING SOMETHING

  • FOR PROFIT IN THIS COUNTRY, BUT

  • THEY HAVE BORE NO RESPONSIBILITY

  • FOR THEIR CONTENT.

  • YOU AGREE NOW THAT FACEBOOK AND

  • OTHER SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS ARE

  • NOT NEUTRAL PLATFORMS BUT BEAR

  • SOME RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE

  • CONTENT.

  • >> I AGREE THAT WE'RE

  • RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONTENT.

  • I THINK THERE'S ONE OF THE BIG

  • SOCIETAL QUESTIONS THAT I THINK

  • WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO ANSWER IS

  • THE CURRENT FRAMEWORK THAT WE

  • HAVE IS BASED ON THIS REACTIVE

  • MODEL THAT ASSUMES THERE AREN'T

  • AI TOOLS THAT CAN PROACTIVELY

  • TELL WHETHER SOMETHING WAS

  • TERRORIST CONTENT OR SOMETHING

  • BAD.

  • IT NATURALLY RELIED ON REQUIRING

  • PEOPLE TO FLAG FOR A COMPANY AND

  • THE COMPANY NEEDING TO TAKE

  • REASONABLE ACTION.

  • IN THE FUTURE, WE'RE GOING TO

  • HAVE TOOLS THAT WILL BE ABLE TO

  • IDENTIFY MORE TYPES OF BAD

  • CONTENT.

  • I THINK THERE ARE MORAL AND

  • LEGAL OBLIGATION QUESTIONS THAT

  • I THINK WE'LL HAVE TO WRESTLE

  • WITH AS A SOCIETY ABOUT WHEN WE

  • WANT TO REQUIRE COMPANIES TO

  • TAKE ACTION PRO ACTIVELY ON

  • CERTAIN OF THOSE THINGS.

  • AND WHEN IT GETS IN THE WAY --

  • >> I APPRECIATE THAT.

  • I HAVE TWO MINUTES LEFT.

  • >> ALL RIGHT.

  • >> TO ASK YOU QUESTIONS.

  • SO, INTERESTINGLY, THE TERMS OF

  • THE -- WHAT DO YOU CALL IT, THE

  • TERMS OF SERVICE IS A LEGAL

  • DOCUMENT WHICH DISCLOSES TO YOUR

  • SUBSCRIBERS HOW THEIR

  • INFORMATION WILL BE USED.

  • HOW FACEBOOK IS GOING TO

  • OPERATE.

  • BUT YOU CAN SEE THAT YOU DOUBT

  • EVERYBODY READS OR UNDERSTANDS

  • THAT LEGALESE, THOSE TERMS OF

  • SERVICE.

  • IS THAT TO SUGGEST THAT THE

  • CONCEPT THAT PEOPLE GIVE IS NOT

  • INFORMED CONSENT.

  • THEY MAY NOT READ IT, IF THEY

  • READ IT, THEY MAY NOT UNDERSTAND

  • IT.

  • >> I THINK WE HAVE A BROADER

  • RESPONSIBILITY THAN WHAT THE LAW

  • REQUIRES.

  • >> I'M TALKING ABOUT I

  • APPRECIATE THAT.

  • WHAT I'M ASKING ABOUT IN TERMS

  • OF WHAT YOUR SUBSCRIBERS

  • UNDERSTAND IN TERMS OF HOW THEIR

  • DATA IS GOING TO BE USED.

  • BUT LET ME GO TO THE TERMS OF

  • SERVICE UNDER PARAGRAPH TWO.

  • YOU SAY YOU OWN ALL THE CONTENT

  • AND INFORMATION YOU POST ON

  • FACEBOOK.

  • THAT'S WHAT YOU'VE TOLD US TODAY

  • A NUMBER OF TIMES.

  • IF I CHOOSE TO TERMINATE MY

  • FACEBOOK ACCOUNT, CAN I BAR

  • FACEBOOK OR ANY THIRD PARTIES

  • FROM USING THE DATA THAT I

  • PREVIOUSLY SUPPLIED FOR ANY

  • PURPOSE WHATSOEVER?

  • >> YES, SENATOR, IF YOU DELETE

  • YOUR ACCOUNT, WE SHOULD GET RID

  • OF YOUR INFORMATION.

  • >> YOU SHOULD OR DO?

  • >> WE DO.

  • >> HOW ABOUT THIRD PARTIES YOU

  • HAVE CONTRACTED WITH?

  • DO YOU USE SOME OF THAT

  • UNDERLYING INFORMATION, PERHAPS

  • TO TARGET ADVERTISING FOR

  • THEMSELVES?

  • YOU CAN'T -- DO YOU CLAW BACK

  • THAT INFORMATION, AS WELL, OR

  • DOES IT REMAIN IN THEIR CUSTODY?

  • >> SENATOR, I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT

  • IT UP.

  • THERE'S A COMMON MISPERCEPTION

  • ABOUT FACEBOOK THAT WE SELL DATA

  • TO ADVERTISERS.

  • AND WE DO NOT SELL DATA TO

  • ADVERTISERS.

  • >> YOU CLEARLY RENT IT.

  • >> WHAT WE ALLOW IS FOR

  • ADVERTISERS TO TELL US WHO THEY

  • WANT TO REACH, AND THEN WE DO

  • THE PLACEMENT.

  • SO IF AN ADVERTISER COMES TO US

  • AND SAYS, ALL RIGHT, I'M A SKI

  • SHOP AND I WANT TO SELL SKIS TO

  • WOMEN, THEN WE MIGHT HAVE SOME

  • SENSE BECAUSE PEOPLE SHARED

  • SKIING-RELATED CONTENT OR SAID

  • THEY WERE INTERESTED IN THAT.

  • THEY SHARED WHETHER THEY'RE A

  • WOMAN.

  • AND THEN WE CAN SHOW THE ADS TO

  • THE RIGHT PEOPLE WITHOUT THAT

  • DATA CHANGING HANDS AND GOING TO

  • THE ADVERTISER.

  • THAT'S A FUNDAMENTAL PART OF HOW

  • OUR MODEL L WORKS AND SOMETHING

  • THAT IS MISUNDERSTOOD.

  • I APPRECIATE YOU BROUGHT IT UP.

  • >> SENATOR, CORNYN, THANK YOU.

  • >>> WE INDICATED WE WOULD TAKE A

  • COUPLE OF BREAKS AND GIVE OUR

  • WITNESS AN OPPORTUNITY.

  • I THINK WE'VE BEEN GOING NOW FOR

  • JUST UNDER TWO HOURS, SO --

  • >> WE CAN DO A FEW MORE.

  • >> YOU WANT TO KEEP GOING?

  • MAYBE 15 MINUTES.

  • DOES THAT WORK?

  • >> ALL RIGHT.

  • WE'LL KEEP GOING.

  • SENATOR BLUMENTHAL IS UP NEXT.

  • AND WE WILL COMMENCE.

  • THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.

  • >> THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE

  • TODAY, MR. ZUCKERBERG.

  • YOU TOLD US TODAY AND THE WORLD

  • THAT FACEBOOK WAS DECEIVED BY

  • ALEXANDER McHOCAN.

  • >> YES.

  • >> FACEBOOK WAS UNNOTICED THAT

  • HE COULD SELL THAT USER

  • INFORMATION.

  • HAVE YOU SEEN THE TERMS OF

  • SERVICE BEFORE?

  • >> I HAVE NOT.

  • >> WHO, IN FACEBOOK, WAS

  • RESPONSIBLE FOR SEEING THOSE

  • TERMS OF SERVICE THAT PUT YOU ON

  • NOTICE THAT THAT INFORMATION BE

  • SOLD?

  • >> SENATOR, OUR APP REVIEW TEAM

  • WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT.

  • >> HAS ANYONE BEEN FIRED ON THE

  • APP REVIEW TEAM?

  • >> SENATOR, NOT BECAUSE OF THIS.

  • >> DOESN'T THAT TERM OF SERVICE

  • CONFLICT WITH THE FTC ORDER THAT

  • FACEBOOK WAS UNDER AT THIS VERY

  • TIME THAT THIS TERM OF SERVICE

  • WAS, IN FACT, PROVIDED TO

  • FACEBOOK?

  • AND YOU'LL NOTE THAT THE FTC

  • ORDER SPECIFICALLY REQUIRES

  • FACEBOOK TO PROTECT PRIVACY.

  • ISN'T THERE A CONFLICT THERE?

  • >> SENATOR, IT CERTAINLY APPEARS

  • THAT WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN AWARE

  • THAT THIS APP DEVELOPER

  • SUBMITTED A TERM THAT WAS IN

  • CONFLICT WITH THE RULES OF THE

  • PLATFORM.

  • >>WELL, WHAT HAPPENED HERE WAS,

  • IN EFFECT, WILLFUL BLINDNESS.

  • IT WAS HEEDLESS AND RECKLESS, IN

  • FACT, AMOUNTED TO A VIOLATION OF

  • THE FTC CONSENT DECREE.

  • WOULD YOU AGREE?

  • >> NO, SENATOR.

  • MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IS NOT

  • THAT THIS WAS A VIOLATION OF THE

  • CONSENT DECREE.

  • AS I'VE SAID A NUMBER OF TIMES

  • TODAY, I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE A

  • BROADER VIEW OF OUR

  • RESPONSIBILITY AROUND PRIVACY

  • THAN WHAT IS MANDATED IN THE

  • CURRENT LAW.

  • >> HERE IS MY RESERVATION, MR.

  • ZUCKERBERG, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR

  • INTERRUPTING YOU, BUT MY TIME IS

  • LIMITED.

  • WE'VE SEEN THE APOLOGY TOURS

  • BEFORE.

  • YOU HAVE REFUSED TO ACKNOWLEDGE

  • AN ETHICAL OBLIGATION TO HAVE

  • REPORTED THIS VIOLATION OF THE

  • FTC CONSENT DECREE, AND WE HAVE

  • LETTERS.

  • WE'VE HAD CONTACTS WITH FACEBOOK

  • EMPLOYEES.

  • I'M GOING TO SUBMIT A LETTER

  • FROM THE RECORD, WITH YOUR

  • PERMISSION, THAT INDICATES NOT

  • ONLY A LACK OF RESOURCES BUT A

  • LACK OF INTENTION -- ATTENTION

  • TO PRIVACY.

  • SO MY RESERVATION ABOUT YOUR

  • TESTIMONY TODAY IS THAT I DON'T

  • SEE HOW YOU CAN CHANGE YOUR

  • BUSINESS MODEL UNLESS THERE ARE

  • SPECIFIC RULES OF THE ROAD.

  • YOUR BUSINESS MODEL IS TO

  • MONETIZE USER INFORMATION TO

  • MAXIMIZE PROFIT OVER PRIVACY.

  • AND UNLESS THERE ARE SPECIFIC

  • RULES AND REQUIREMENTS ENFORCED

  • BY AN OUTSIDE AGENCY, I HAVE NO

  • ASSURANCE THAT THESE KINDS OF,

  • A., COMMITS ARE GOING TO PRODUCE

  • ACTION.

  • SO I WANT TO ASK YOU A COUPLE OF

  • VERY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS, AND

  • THEY'RE BASED ON LEGISLATION

  • THAT I'VE OFFERED.

  • LEGISLATION THAT SENATOR MARCY

  • IS INTRODUCING TODAY.

  • THE CONSENT ACT, WHICH I'M

  • JOINING.

  • DON'T YOU AGREE THAT COMPANIES

  • OUGHT TO BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE

  • USERS WITH CLEAR, PLAIN

  • INFORMATION ABOUT HOW THEIR DATA

  • WILL BE USED AND SPECIFIC

  • ABILITY TO CONSENT TO THE USE OF

  • THAT INFORMATION?

  • >> SENATOR, I GENERALLY AGREE

  • WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

  • I LAID IT OUT EARLIER WHEN I

  • TALKED ABOUT WHAT --

  • >> WOULD YOU AGREE TO AN OPT-IN

  • AS OPPOSED TO AN OPT-OUT?

  • >> SENATOR, I THINK THAT THAT IS

  • CERTAINLY MAKES SENSE TO

  • DISCUSS, AND I THINK THE DETAILS

  • AROUND THIS MATTER A LOT.

  • >> WOULD YOU AGREE THAT USERS

  • SHOULD BE ABLE TO ACCESS ALL OF

  • THEIR INFORMATION?

  • >> SENATOR, YES, OF COURSE.

  • >> ALL THE INFORMATION THAT YOU

  • COLLECT AS A RESULT OF

  • PURCHASING FROM DATA BROKERS AS

  • WELL AS TRACKING THEM?

  • >> SENATOR, WE HAVE ALREADY A

  • DOWNLOAD YOUR INFORMATION TOOL

  • THAT ALLOWS PEOPLE TO SEE AND

  • TAKE OUT ALL THE INFORMATION

  • THAT FACEBOOK -- THEY'VE PUT

  • INTO FACEBOOK OR FACEBOOK KNOWS

  • ABOUT THEM.

  • I AGREE, WE ALREADY HAVE THAT.

  • >> I HAVE A NUMBER OF OTHER

  • SPECIFIC REQUESTS THAT YOU AGREE

  • TO SUPPORT AS PART OF

  • LEGISLATION.

  • I THINK LEGISLATION IS NECESSARY

  • FOR THE RULES OF THE ROAD HAVE

  • TO BE THE RESULT OF

  • CONGRESSIONAL ACTION.

  • WE HAVE -- FACEBOOK HAS

  • PARTICIPATED RECENTLY IN THE

  • FIGHT AGAINST SCOURGE -- THE

  • SCOURGE OF SEX TRAFFICKING AND

  • THE BILL THAT WE'VE JUST PASSED

  • AND WILL BE SIGNED INTO LAW

  • TOMORROW.

  • THE STOP EXPLOITING SEX

  • TRAFFICKING ACT WAS THE RESULT

  • OF OUR COOPERATION.

  • I HOPE WE CAN COOPERATE ON THIS

  • KIND OF MEASURE, AS WELL.

  • >> SENATOR, I LOOK FORWARD TO

  • HAVING MY TEAM WORK WITH YOU ON

  • THIS.

  • >> SENATOR CRUZ.

  • >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.

  • MR. ZUCKERBERG, WELCOME.

  • THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.

  • DOES FACEBOOK CONSIDER ITSELF A

  • NEUTRAL PUBLIC FORUM?

  • >> SENATOR, WE CONSIDER

  • OURSELVES TO BE A PLATFORM FOR

  • ALL IDEAS.

  • >> LET ME ASK THE QUESTION

  • AGAIN.

  • DOES FACEBOOK CONSIDER ITSELF TO

  • BE A NEUTRAL PUBLIC FORUM.

  • THE REPRESENTATIVES OF YOUR

  • COMPANY HAVE GIVEN CONFLICTING

  • ANSWERS ON THIS.

  • ARE YOU A FIRST AMENDMENT

  • SPEAKER EXPRESSING YOUR VIEWS OR

  • A NEUTRAL PUBLIC FORUM ALLOWING

  • EVERYONE TO SPEAK.

  • >> HERE IS HOW WE THINK ABOUT

  • THIS, SENATOR, I DON'T BELIEVE

  • THAT -- THERE ARE CERTAIN

  • CONTENT THAT CLEARLY WE DO NOT

  • ALLOW.

  • RIGHT.

  • HATE SPEECH, TERRORIST CONTENT,

  • NUDITY.

  • ANYTHING THAT MAKES PEOPLE FEEL

  • UNSAFE IN THE COMMUNITY.

  • THAT'S WHY WE TRY TO REFER AS A

  • PLATFORM --

  • >> THE TIME IS CONSTRAINT.

  • IT'S A SIMPLE QUESTION.

  • THE PREDICATE FOR SECTION 230

  • UNDER THE CDA IS THAT YOU'RE A

  • NEUTRAL PUBLIC FORUM.

  • DO YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF A

  • NEUTRAL PUBLIC FORUM.

  • ARE YOU ENGAGED IN POLITICAL

  • SPEECH, WHICH IS YOUR RIGHT

  • UNDER THE FIRST AMENDMENT?

  • >> OUR GOAL IS NOT TO ENGAGE IN

  • POLITICAL SPEECH.

  • I'M NOT THAT FAMILIAR WITH THE

  • SPECIFIC LEGAL LANGUAGE OF THE

  • LAW THAT YOU SPEAK TO, SO I

  • WOULD NEED TO FOLLOW UP WITH YOU

  • ON THAT.

  • I'M JUST TRYING TO LAY OUT HOW

  • BROADLY I THINK ABOUT THIS.

  • >> I WILL SAY THERE ARE A GREAT

  • MANY AMERICANS, MR. ZUCKERBERG,

  • I THINK ARE DEEPLY CONCERNED

  • THAT FACEBOOK AND OTHER TECH

  • COMPANIES ARE ENGAGED IN A

  • PERVASIVE PATTERN OF BIAS AND

  • POLITICAL CENSORSHIP.

  • THERE HAVE BEEN NUMEROUS

  • INSTANCES WITH FACEBOOK.

  • IN MAY OF 2016 GIZMO REPORTED

  • THAT FACEBOOK SUPPRESSED

  • CONSERVATIVE NEWS.

  • INCLUDING STORIES AND MITT

  • ROMNEY, LOUIS LEARNER, GLENN

  • BECK.

  • IN ADDITION TO THAT, FACEBOOK

  • HAS INITIALLY SHUT DOWN THE

  • CHICK-FIL-A APPRECIATION DAY

  • PAGE.

  • HAS BLOCKED A POST OF FOX NEWS

  • REPORTER.

  • HAS BLOCKED OVER TWO DOZEN

  • CATHOLIC PAGES, AND MOST

  • RECENTLY BLOCKED TRUMP

  • SUPPORTERS DIAMOND AND SILKS

  • PAGE WITH 1.2 MILLION FACEBOOK

  • FOLLOWERS DETERMINING THEIR

  • CONTENT AND BRAND WERE, QUOTE,

  • "UNSAFE TO THE COMMUNITY

  • ACCOUNTS.

  • TO MANY AMERICANS THAT APPEARS

  • TO BE A PERVASIVE PATTERN OF

  • POLITICAL BIAS.

  • >> LET ME SAY A FEW THINGS ABOUT

  • THIS, SENATOR.

  • FIRST, I UNDERSTAND WHERE THAT

  • CONCERN IS COMING FROM BECAUSE

  • FACEBOOK AND THE TECH INDUSTRY

  • ARE LOCATED IN SILICON VALLEY,

  • WHICH IS AN EXTREMELY

  • LEFT-LEANING PLACE.

  • AND THIS IS ACTUALLY A CONCERN

  • THAT I HAVE AND THAT I TRY TO

  • ROOT OUT IN THE COMPANY IS

  • MAKING SURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE

  • ANY BIAS IN THE WORK THAT WE DO.

  • I THINK IT IS A FAIR CONCERN

  • THAT PEOPLE WOULD --

  • >> LET ME ASK THIS QUESTION, ARE

  • YOU AWARE OF ANY AD OR PAGE THAT

  • HAS BEEN TAKEN DOWN FROM PLANNED

  • PARENTHOOD?

  • >> SENATOR, I'M NOT.

  • >> HOW ABOUT MOVEON.ORG.

  • OR ANY DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE FOR

  • OFFICE?

  • >> I'M NOT SPECIFICALLY AWARE.

  • I MEAN, I'M NOT SURE.

  • >> IN YOUR TESTIMONY, YOU SAY

  • THAT YOU HAVE 15 TO 20,000

  • PEOPLE WORKING ON SECURITY AND

  • CONTENT REVIEW.

  • DO YOU KNOW THE POLITICAL

  • ORIENTATION OF THOSE 15 TO

  • 20,000 PEOPLE ENGAGED IN CONTENT

  • REVIEW?

  • >> NO, SENATOR, WE DON'T

  • GENERALLY ASK PEOPLE ABOUT THEIR

  • POLITICAL ORIENTATION WHEN

  • JOINING THE COMPANY.

  • >> AS CEO, HAVE YOU MADE HIRING

  • OR FIRING DECISIONS BASED ON

  • WHAT CANDIDATES THEY SUPPORTED?

  • >> WHY IS PALMER LUCKY --

  • >> THAT'S SPECIFIC --

  • >> YOU DIDN'T MAKE DECISIONS

  • BASED ON --

  • >> I CAN COMMIT IT WAS NOT

  • BECAUSE OF A POLITICAL VIEW.

  • >> DO YOU KNOW OF THE 15 TO

  • 20,000 PEOPLE ENGAGED IN CONTENT

  • REVIEW, HOW MANY, IF ANY, HAVE

  • EVER SUPPORTED FINANCIALLY A

  • REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR OFFICE?

  • >> SENATOR, I DO NOT KNOW THAT.

  • >> YOUR TESTIMONY SAYS IT IS NOT

  • ENOUGH THAT WE JUST CONNECT

  • PEOPLE.

  • WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THOSE

  • CONNECTIONS ARE POSITIVE.

  • IT SAYS WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE

  • PEOPLE AREN'T USING THEIR VOICE

  • TO HURT PEOPLE OR SPREAD

  • MISINFORMATION.

  • WE HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY NOT

  • JUST TO BUILD TOOLS, TO MAKE

  • SURE THOSE TOOLS ARE USED FOR

  • GOOD.

  • MR. ZUCKERBERG, DO YOU FEEL IT'S

  • YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO ASSESS

  • GOODERS WHETHER THEY ARE GOOSE

  • AND POSITIVE CONNECTIONS OR

  • ONCES THAT THOSE 15 TO 20,000

  • PEOPLE DEEM UNACCEPTABLE OR

  • DEPLORABLE?

  • >> SENATOR, YOU'RE ASKING ME

  • PERSONALLY?

  • >> FACEBOOK.

  • >> SENATOR, I THINK THERE ARE A

  • NUMBER OF THINGS THAT WE WOULD

  • ALL AGREE ARE CLEARLY -- FOREIGN

  • INTERFERENCE, TERRORISM,

  • SELF-HARM.

  • >> CENSORSHIP.

  • >>WELL, I THINK THAT YOU WOULD

  • PROBABLY AGREE THAT WE SHOULD

  • REMOVE TERRORIST PROPAGANDA FROM

  • THE SERVICE.

  • SO THAT I AGREE.

  • I THINK IT'S CLEARLY BAD

  • ACTIVITY THAT WE WANT TO GET

  • DOWN AND WE'RE GENERALLY PROUD

  • OF HOW WELL WE DO AT THAT.

  • NOW, WHAT I CAN SAY, AND I WANT

  • TO GET THIS IN BEFORE THE END

  • HERE, IS THAT I'M VERY COMMITTED

  • TO MAKING SURE THAT FACEBOOK IS

  • A PLATFORM FOR ALL IDEAS.

  • THAT IS A VERY IMPORTANT

  • FOUNDING PRINCIPLE OF WHAT WE

  • DO.

  • WE'RE PROUD OF THE DISCOURSE AND

  • THE DIFFERENT IDEAS THAT PEOPLE

  • CAN SHARE ON THE SERVICE.

  • AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS AS

  • LONG AS I'M RUNNING THE COMPANY,

  • I'M GOING TO BE COMMITTED TO

  • MAKING SURE IS THE CASE.

  • >> THANK YOU, SENATOR CRUZ.

  • WANT TO BREAK NOW?

  • OR KEEP GOING?

  • SURE.

  • I MEAN, THAT WAS PRETTY GOOD.

  • ALL RIGHT.

  • >> ALL RIGHT.

  • WE HAVE SENATOR WHITEHOUSE IS UP

  • NEXT.

  • WE HAVE BEEN GOING A GOOD TWO

  • HOURS.

  • WE'LL RECESS FOR FIVE MINUTES

  • AND RECONVENE.

  • >> THANK YOU.

  • >>> WE'VE BEEN WATCHING THE

  • TESTIMONY OF MARK ZUCKERBERG,

  • CEO OF FACEBOOK TAKING A

  • GRILLING FROM SENATORS AND THERE

  • ARE PLENTY MORE TO COME.

  • THIS IS A HEARING EXPECTED TO

  • LAST SEVERAL HOURS.

  • AS NOTED, WE'RE ALMOST A COUPLE

  • OF HOURS INTO IT.

  • THEY'RE TAKING SHORT BREAK.

  • WE WANT TO BRING IN NOW JO LING

  • KENT, WHAT IS THE PERCEPTION OF

  • HOW ZUCKERBERG IS HANDLING WHAT

  • BECAME MORE AGGRESSIVE IN THE

  • LAST FEW LINES OF QUESTIONING?

  • >> Reporter: YEAH, AT THE

  • BEGINNING HERE HE WAS NOT PELTED

  • WITH THE AGGRESSIVE QUESTIONS

  • THAT A LOT OF US WERE EXPECTING.

  • BUT HE HAS BEEN -- SENATOR

  • BLUMENTHAL, FOR EXAMPLE, GOING

  • AFTER THE FACEBOOK CEO FOR

  • WILLFUL IGNORANCE OF THE ISSUES

  • RELATING TO CAMBRIDGE ANALYTICA

  • AND SOME OF THE OTHER QUESTIONS

  • THAT HE HAD FOR HIM.

  • BUT THERE ARE A COUPLE OF MAJOR

  • PLOT POINTS HERE I WANT TO HIT

  • ON THAT WE LEARNED ABOUT

  • FACEBOOK THAT WE NEED TO TALK

  • ABOUT.

  • FIRST, FACEBOOK DID NOT DISCLOSE

  • THE ISSUE WITH CAMBRIDGE

  • ANALYTICA TO THE FEDERAL TRADE

  • COMMISSION.

  • THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT WE

  • HAVE HEARD THIS.

  • SECOND OF ALL, FACEBOOK CEO MARK

  • ZUCKERBERG DISCLOSING THAT HE

  • DID WORK -- FACEBOOK IS WORKING,

  • RATHER WITH THE SPECIAL COUNSEL

  • OFFICE, ROBERT MUELLER'S OFFICE.

  • THERE WAS BIT OF WAFFLING OF

  • WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS A

  • SUBPOENA SERVED TO THE COMPANY.

  • THEY DID CONFIRM, FOR THE FIRST

  • TIME, ON THE RECORD, THAT

  • FACEBOOK IS WORKING WITH THE

  • SPECIAL COUNSEL'S OFFICE.

  • WE'RE STARTING TO LEARN A LITTLE

  • BIT MORE AROUND THE LINE OF

  • QUESTIONING, BUT ZUCKERBERG

  • SAYING -- APOLOGIZING FOR THE

  • BEHAVIOR OF THE COMPANY BUT A

  • LIGHTER ZUCKERBERG HERE THAT

  • WE'RE SEEING A LITTLE BIT

  • DIFFERENT OF AN ATTITUDE THAN

  • WE'VE SEEN IN YEARS PAST,

  • LESTER.

  • >> JO LING KENT, AS THEY TAKE A

  • BREAK.

  • SAVANNAH GUTHRIE WITH ME.

  • >> THAT'S RIGHT.

  • AND KARA SWISHER IS JOINING US.

  • A SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT WHO

  • SPENDS ALL DAY LONG THINKING

  • ABOUT THESE ISSUES.

  • DO YOU FEEL THAT ANY SENATOR

  • HERE HAS REALLY LAID A GLOVE ON

  • MARK ZUCKERBERG, YOU KNOW,

  • GRILLED HIM TO THE EXTENT IT

  • WOULD MAKE A REAL DIFFERENCE?

  • OR DOES THIS FEEL LIKE STUFF HE

  • WAS PREPARED FOR AND HANDLING

  • WELL?

  • >> WELL, IF YOU THINK BEING

  • SLAPPED WITH WET NOODLES IS

  • HARD, I GUESS IT'S HARD.

  • THIS HAS BEEN EASY FOR MARK.

  • AND HE'S DONE A NICE JOB

  • ANSWERING VERY EASY QUESTIONS.

  • I MEAN, I THINK ONLY SENATOR

  • BLUMENTHAL AND SENATOR DURBIN

  • NOTED THE ISSUES.

  • THESE ARE BIGGER ISSUES CALLING

  • WILLFUL IGNORANCE, I WOULD AGREE

  • WITH.

  • SENATOR DURBIN BROUGHT UP THE

  • HOTEL ANALOGY.

  • I THINK IT SHOOK MARK A TINY

  • BIT.

  • OTHERWISE IT'S BEEN AN EASY

  • MORNING FOR THE FACEBOOK CEO.

  • HE'S HANDLED IT JUST FINE

  • BECAUSE IT'S EASY.

  • >> WHAT ABOUT THE ISSUE OF THE

  • CONSENT DECREE, WHICH RICHARD

  • BLUMENTHAL BROUGHT UP.

  • DOES FACEBOOK FACE JEOPARDY?

  • PREVIOUS MISGIVINGS?

  • >> I THINK THIS IS AN

  • INTERESTING AREA.

  • I THINK THEY GRIEVED TO A

  • CERTAIN AMOUNT OF THINGS AND THE

  • QUESTION IS CAN THEY PROVE THEY

  • VIOLATED THESE THINGS?

  • OR CAN THEY MAKE THE CAUSE,

  • EXCEL, WE DIDN'T MANAGE IT WELL.

  • WE MEANT TO DO IT.

  • WE HAVE THE RULES IN PLACE.

  • SO THAT'S GOING TO BE THE HARD

  • BAA -- PART IS PROVING THEY

  • MEANT TO DO IT OR WILLFULLY DID

  • IT.

  • I THINK IT'S INTERESTING SENATOR

  • BLUMENTHAL USED THE TERM

  • "WILLFUL."

  • I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT

  • DESCRIPTION RATHER STRONGLY.

  • >> THANK YOU.

  • >>> AND TURNING TO KASIE HUNT

  • WHO IS COVERING THE HEARING WITH

  • US.

  • AS OFTEN HAPPENS, WHEN YOU WATCH

  • A HEARING ON CAPITOL HILL, WE

  • HAVE TWO COMMITTEES HERE AND

  • BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE.

  • THERE ARE SO MANY ISSUES YOU CAN

  • GET INTO.

  • YOU CAN TALK ABOUT PRIVACY,

  • RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE.

  • WE HEARD SENATOR CRUZ TALKING

  • ABOUT CENSORSHIP.

  • EACH SENATOR IS BRINGING HIS OR

  • HER AGENDA TO THE QUESTIONING.

  • >> Reporter: 40 PLUS SENATORS

  • QUESTIONING MARK ZUCKERBERG

  • TODAY IN A RARE JOINT HEARING.

  • AND YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.

  • EACH ONE BRINGING THEIR OWN

  • AGENDA, THEIR OWN SET OF

  • QUESTIONS, AND SOMETIMES, YOU

  • KNOW, FRANKLY, NOT ALLOWING

  • ZUCKERBERG TO FINISH AN ANSWER

  • BECAUSE THEY WANT TO ACTUALLY

  • MAKE A POINT.

  • AND MANY OF MY SOURCES POINTED

  • OUT THERE WERE INSTANCES

  • THROUGHOUT THIS HEARING WHERE

  • MANY OF THESE SENATORS WHO, YOU

  • KNOW, ARE IN THEIR 60s, 70s,

  • EVEN OLDER DON'T NECESSARILY

  • UNDERSTAND THE TECHNOLOGY THAT

  • THEY'RE ASKING ABOUT.

  • AND THAT WAS EVIDENT HERE AND

  • THAT, FRANKLY, YOU KNOW, GAVE

  • ZUCKERBERG AN OPENING TO DEFEND

  • HIS COMPANY.

  • BUT I DO THINK THAT WHAT IS

  • IMPORTANT FROM THE CONGRESSIONAL

  • SIDE OF THIS IS WHAT, AT THE END

  • OF THE DAY, IS CONGRESS GOING TO

  • DO OR NOT DO TO REGULATE BIG

  • TECH?

  • TO POTENTIALLY PROTECT USERS'

  • PRIVACY.

  • MARK ZUCKERBERG HAS BEEN SAYING,

  • YES, WE SUPPORT BEING REGULATED.

  • AND THERE IS SOME TRUTH IN THAT

  • FACEBOOK HAS SUPPORTED -- AMY

  • KLOBCHAR.

  • THERE'S A MIXED RECORD ON STATE

  • HOUSES OR HERE IN THE U.S.

  • CONGRESS.

  • THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME REAL

  • TESTS FOR THESE TECHNOLOGY

  • COMPANIES.

  • ARE THEY ACTUALLY GOING TO STEP

  • UP AND SAY, OKAY, WE'RE WILLING

  • TO ACCEPT SOME RULES THAT WE

  • CAN'T NECESSARILY MAKE FOR

  • OURSELVES.

  • SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM HIT ON

  • THIS, AS WELL.

  • PRESSING ZUCKERBERG ON WHETHER

  • THEY HAVE A MONOPOLY, THAT'S

  • ANOTHER WAY, OF COURSE, THE

  • GOVERNMENT COULD REGULATE BIG

  • TECH.

  • SOME BIG QUESTIONS TO GRAPPLE

  • WITH HERE.

  • AND, YOU KNOW, THIS CONGRESS IN

  • GENERAL IS NOT KNOWN FOR MOVING

  • QUICKLY AND TECHNOLOGY HAS MOVED

  • FASTER THAN THEY HAVE.

  • THEY ARE, IN WAYS, BEHIND THE

  • EIGHT BALL, ALONG WITH MARK

  • ZUCKERBERG.

  • >> I FORGET WHO IT WAS

  • REGULATION.

  • WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO ACCEPT

  • REGULATION.

  • MARK SAID I'LL GET BACK TO YOU.

  • >> I CALL IT AS A RECOVERING

  • LAWYER WEASEL WORDS.

  • WE'LL ACCEPT REGULATION WHERE

  • IT'S APPROPRIATE.

  • THAT'S WHERE ALL THE ACTION IS.

  • WHETHER OR NOT AND I THINK WHAT

  • YOU RAISED WITH KARA SWISHER IS

  • THE OTHER BIG PIECE.

  • THERE'S TWO THINGS FACEBOOK IS

  • FACING.

  • POTENTIAL REGULATION AND THEN

  • PERHAPS MORE CRUCIALLY TO THEIR

  • BOTTOM LINE AND FINANCIALLY IS

  • THIS WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE IN

  • VIOLATION OF THIS AGREEMENT THEY

  • MADE WITH THE FEDERAL TRADE

  • COMMISSION STEMMING FROM ILLEGAL

  • ACTION IN 2011.

  • >> THAT CAN BE BIG FINES.

  • >> HUGE FINES.

  • KARA, LET'S GO BACK TO YOU.

  • I KNOW IT'S SOMETHING YOU COVER

  • A LOT.

  • I MEAN, THAT'S WHERE NOW YOU'RE

  • STARTING TO TALK ABOUT SOME

  • HITTING FACEBOOK WHERE IT HURTS.

  • WE'VE SEEN THE STOCK PRICE TANK.

  • WHEN YOU'VE SEEN RICHARD

  • BLUMENTHAL PUT UP A CHART WITH A

  • TERM OF SERVICE THAT SEEMS TO BE

  • ON ITS SURFACE AND CLEAR

  • VIOLATION OF THE AGREEMENT WITH

  • THE FTC, ONE IMAGINES THAT WAS A

  • DIFFICULT MOMENT FOR MARK

  • ZUCKERBERG.

  • >> YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.

  • I THINK QUESTION IS ARE THEY

  • GOING TO FACE -- THAT'S WHERE

  • FACEBOOK HAD MOST OF THE

  • PROBLEMS IS WITH THE STATES

  • ATTORNEY GENERALS, WHICH IS

  • INTERESTING.

  • MOSTLY TECH COMPANIES HAVE BEEN

  • GIVEN A PASS BY THE FEDERAL

  • GOVERNMENT.

  • NOT JUST -- SINCE FOREVER,

  • PRETTY MUCH.

  • IT'LL BE INTERESTING TO SEE IF

  • THEY FOLLOW UP ON THAT.

  • IF THAT HAPPENS.

  • THESE ARE BIG AREAS, OBVIOUSLY,

  • PUBLIC PERCEPTION IS A LOT.

  • ARE THESE PEOPLE TELLING THE

  • TRUTH.

  • BUT THE STOCK PRICE HAS

  • RECOVERED A LITTLE BIT TODAY

  • BECAUSE MARK IS DOING WELL,

  • LARGELY BECAUSE THE QUESTIONS

  • ARE LIGHT, LIGHT QUESTIONS FOR

  • HIM.

  • SO WE'LL SEE IF IT RESULTS IN

  • ANYTHING.

  • I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU THINK.

  • >> THERE WEREN'T A LOT OF

  • FIREWORKS.

  • LIVE COVERAGE OF THE FACEBOOK

  • HEARING WILL CONTINUE ON

  • NBCNEWS.COM BUT THIS BRINGS OUR

  • LIVE COVERAGE OF THE NETWORK TO

  • A CLOSE.

  • THE HEARING IS, OF COURSE, ONE

  • OF THE BIG STORIES WE'RE

  • COVERING TODAY ALONG WITH

  • POSSIBLE NEW U.S. MILITARY

  • ACTION IN SYRIA, WITH THE

  • RESIGNATION OF PRESIDENT TRUMP'S

  • HOMELAND SECURITY ADVISOR, AND

  • THE STATUS OF THE MUELLER

  • INVESTIGATION IN THE WAKE OF

  • YESTERDAY'S FBI RAID ON THE

  • OFFICES OF THE PRESIDENT'S

  • PERSONAL LAWYER.

  • SAVANNAH, YOU'LL, OF COURSE,

  • HAVE MORE TOMORROW ON "TODAY."

  • AND I'LL HAVE COMPLETE DETAILS

  • ON NBC NIGHTLY NEWS ON THIS BUSY

  • NEWS DAY.

  • I'M LESTER HOLT.

  • NBC NEWS, NEW YORK.

  • HAVE A GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE.

>>> THIS IS AN NBC NEWS SPECIAL

Subtitles and vocabulary

Click the word to look it up Click the word to find further inforamtion about it