[ad_1]
Mr. Dorsey stumbled upon his opening, forgetting to turn on his microphone and read a cell phone that he held in his hand. He added that he also tweeted his opening remarks on his Twitter account.
Although Ms. Sandberg made constant eye contact with the senators, Mr. Dorsey seemed to be reading his phone between the questions.
The leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee took a more positive tone towards Facebook and Twitter early in the hearing, congratulating them for the efforts they have made over the past year to fight campaigns of misinformation and foreign interference on their platform.
The chairman of the committee, Richard Burr, Republican of North Carolina, and the vice-president, Mark Warner, Democrat of Virginia, declared that the companies seemed to take the problems seriously but that they could not solve their problems alone.
"My instinct is to applaud the diligence of your security teams and to credit you with taking the issue seriously," Burr said in his opening remarks. "But I'm not sure your success is the big story here."
Warner said Congress may need to take action to help companies respond to foreign interference at their sites.
"You've improved and I'm glad you started, but the Russians are improving too," said Warner. "They have become more difficult to follow. Worse, now that the Russian gaming book has come out, other opponents, like Iran, have joined the fray.
– Cecilia Kang and Sheera Frenkel
Credit
Eric Thayer for the New York Times
An unwelcome visitor
The accusations of political bias were quick to fall at the door of the Senate courtroom on Wednesday morning. While Senators made introductory statements about threats to democratic elections, Alex Jones, one of the most well-known theorists of the right-wing conspiracy on the Internet, was standing just outside the courtroom doors to bend the party.
"The real electoral interference is through Facebook, Google and other organizations that ban people," Jones told a bank of cameras. "They outright ban people and block the conservatives involved in their own First Amendment political speech."
Facebook and YouTube banned Jones and his site, InfoWars, from their platforms in early August, sending traffic to the website.
Jack Posobiec, an ally of Mr. Jones, quickly emerged from the crowd, the microphone in hand, to conduct his own interview before rolling the cameras. He complained of being prevented from testifying. And he claimed that his words had been repeated many times.
"Think about it in America, think about it in America," he said.
Yet despite Jones' efforts, social media executives and interlocutors attracted by them were a second clear violin on Capitol Hill, where elsewhere Senators had gathered for the second day of hearings of Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh confirms to the Supreme Court.
– Nicolas Fandos
Senators note Google's empty seat
The chairman of the intelligence committee, Senator Richard Burr, a Republican from North Carolina, opened the hearing by wondering if Twitter was sufficiently transparent about how it regulated its platform. The committee's co-chair, Senator Mark Warner, a Democrat from Virginia, asked if companies could solve the problems themselves on their platforms or if the government needed to intervene and regulate technology companies.
Both Burr and Warner criticized Google for failing to send their executive director.
"I am deeply disappointed that Google, one of the most influential digital platforms in the world, has chosen not to send its own leaders to engage this committee," Warner said.
Ms. Sandberg and Mr. Dorsey arrived at the Senate Intelligence Committee nearly one hour before the start of the hearing. The two men were accompanied by a number of Facebook and Twitter members, including Brandon Borrman, vice president of communications for Twitter, and Joel Kaplan, vice president of global public policies for Facebook.
Leaders waited in the Senate antechamber until the hearing began at 9:30 am The Senate Intelligence Committee set up three Chairs, including one for Larry Page, director of Google's parent company. , Alphabet. Mr. Page's chairman should remain empty during the hearing.
– Sheera Frenkel
Five things to watch
How will Ms. Sandberg and Mr. Dorsey respond to allegations of bias?
The afternoon audience involving Mr. Dorsey will focus on moderating content on Twitter. If this hearing in the House resembles the last hearing in July on allegations of anti-Conservative bias online, expect Republican lawmakers like Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, who sits in the Senate, to lay similar charges.
The claims of political bias were backed by President Trump last week and became an increasingly loud rallying cry by Republicans. This topic has also been used by lawmakers to raise funds, including by Ms. Blackburn and Representative Kevin McCarthy, the second-ranked Republican from California, as well as Mr. Trump.
This topic could also be addressed at the Senate hearing. Lawmakers may wonder what policies govern harassment and hate speech, and how they apply to people like the far right conspiracy theorist Alex Jones. Last month, Facebook suspended Jones for violating company policies, but Twitter did not do so. Mr. Dorsey will almost certainly talk about new efforts to eliminate dehumanizing content. Facebook will talk about its results on hate speech and its algorithms block legitimate content.
Will there be new discussions on the regulation of technology companies?
It's hard to imagine what the regulation of social media companies would look like, but more and more lawmakers from both parties are suggesting that something must be done to overthrow corporate power.
Senator Ron Wyden, Oregon Democrat, recently spoke on the need to reassess the general protections of responsibility for social media known as Section 230 of the 1996 Decent Communications Act. Republicans have joined Democrats in a call for privacy regulation and a new antitrust control of companies like Google.
Will there be new information on foreign interference in elections?
Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, owned by Google, have recently discovered foreign influence campaigns related to Russia and Iran on their platforms. Until now, they have not been able to link these campaigns to the mid-term elections of November.
It is possible that companies present new information that would link the foreign activity on their sites to the next elections. And expect legislators from the Senate commission that companies ask for updates and more details on how these influence campaigns could disrupt the integrity of elections in the United States.
What will companies boast about?
Sandberg and Dorsey will be eager to describe the efforts they have made over the past year to eliminate misinformation and foreign interference on their sites. Both companies have revised their policies on political advertising, allowing the public to see who buys ads. They promised to hire tens of thousands of content moderators. They also applied artificial intelligence to detect fake accounts and rid their sites of robots that spread false information.
How will leaders perform under pressure?
Ms. Sandberg and Mr. Dorsey have been preparing for hearings for weeks. Dorsey also made several media appearances regarding the company's decision to keep Mr. Jones on Twitter.
How they meet with lawmakers and the public, who will be able to watch online hearings, could affect corporate reputation and frustration on the part of legislators. Executives have been trained to apologize for foreign interference and Facebook debacle with Cambridge Analytica, and to respond directly to questions and data to back them up.
– Cecilia Kang
A year of pressure
In the year since the Congress first called Facebook, Twitter and Google to testify to foreign interference, technology companies have demonstrated their willingness to prove they are taking the threat seriously.
Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Facebook, said during a breathtaking two-day hearing in April, that sanitizing misinformation was a top priority for his company. In the months that followed, Facebook put in place numerous safeguards designed to clearly label political ads and detect fake accounts that spread misinformation.
Legislators have welcomed these changes, calling them a good start. Senate Intelligence Committee staff and Facebook officials said they expected Wednesday's hearings to be friendlier than Zuckerberg's.
Twitter has introduced similar measures. Facebook and Twitter have both focused on removing what they call "inauthentic" accounts, that is, false, that propagate misinformation. They have also introduced new rules that require anyone managing a political ad to be controlled, and they have introduced public advertising archives that list every political advertisement on their platforms.
In recent months, technology companies have met twice at the headquarters of Menlo Park, California, to coordinate their efforts before the mid-term. As noted in June, government officials at the first meeting asked if these efforts went far enough. Technology companies say they do not receive enough support from the government, such as early warnings of misinformation spread by foreign entities.
– Sheera Frenkel
Google empty chair
Google will not be represented at the hearing and lawmakers, anxious to point out their frustration with the company, plan to put an empty chair and possibly an identification plate for Google at the witness table.
Mr. Burr insisted that Google send a leader to the audience. With Mr. Page's refusal to appear, the committee was content to have Google director Sundar Pichai testify. But Burr would not accept Google's offer to send his best lawyer, Kent Walker, saying Walker was simply not on par with the other witnesses, Facebook's Sandberg and Dorsey from Twitter.
Google's decision may discourage members of Congress at a time when there is growing concern about the company's competitive behavior and confidentiality issues such as tracking whereabouts. Google has said it wants Walker to be heard at the hearing because he knows best about foreign interference in society.
"I guess Google has carefully calculated its options, but it seems like an extremely risky step to not send people," said Paul Gallant, an analyst at Cowen and Company, a research group. "These audiences are highly publicized and enduring impressions. It does not help that two other companies have sent senior executives. "
– Cecilia Kang
Continue reading the main story
[ad_2]
Source link
