Live coverage: Zuckerberg faces second day on Capitol Hill
Mark Zuckerberg will face his second day of testimony before lawmakers in Washington on Wednesday when he appears before the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
The Facebook CEO held his own during a lengthy Senate hearing on Tuesday, the first time the head of the nation’s largest social media company has appeared before a congressional panel.
The 33-year-old Zuckerberg emerged largely unscathed despite sometimes-aggressive questioning from lawmakers that went well beyond the Cambridge Analytica controversy that sparked the appearance to issues including data privacy and perceived bias against conservatives on the social media platform.
Follow The Hill’s live coverage throughout the day Wednesday below.
Walden gavels out
3:05 p.m.
Chairman Greg Walden (R-Ore.) concluded the hearing Wednesday afternoon after roughly five hours, thanking Zuckerberg for his testimony.
“I suppose you don’t want to hang around for another round of questions,” Walden joked. “Your staff — several of them just passed out behind you.”
“You have been respectful of our questions and we appreciate your answers and your candor,” he said.
Walden noted that some lawmakers are expected to submit further questions to be answered in writing, asking that Zuckerberg reply to them in a “timely manner.”
The chairman also asked Zuckerberg to suggest other tech executives that the committee could invite to testify on data privacy and other issues, like net neutrality.
– Morgan Chalfant
“I’ve got a copy of the Constitution I want to give you at the end of this hearing,” Duncan said to Zuckerberg.
Zuckerberg corrects earlier testimony on ads based on search history
2:16 p.m.
Zuckerberg resumed the third part of his testimony Wednesday with a correction of his earlier remarks.
He explained that the company does track browsing activity to deliver targeted ads but does not hold onto that data, so users can’t retrieve it from their personal file.
“We only store them temporarily,” he said, “and we convert the weblogs into a set of ad interests that you might be interested in those ads, and we put that in the ‘download your information’ [feature] and you have complete control over that.”
“So I just wanted to clarify that for the record,” he added.
“I appreciate that,” Chairman Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.) responded.
– John Bowden
GOP rep presses Zuckerberg on ‘Diamond and Silk’
1:31 p.m.
Rep. Billy Long (R-Mo.) conveyed a question from YouTube hosts Diamond and Silk to Zuckerberg during Wednesday’s hearing.
“Do you recognize these folks?” Long asked, as an aide displayed a picture of the women.
“I do,” Zuckerberg responded. “I believe, is that Diamond and Silk?”
“Their content was deemed by your folks to be ‘unsafe,’ ” Long continued. “Diamond and Silk have a question for you, and that is, ‘What is unsafe about two black women supporting President Donald J. Trump?’ “
“Well congressman, nothing is unsafe about that,” Zuckerberg responded, before being pressed by Long about how many conservative websites had been “pulled down” by his company’s content moderators.
Long also questioned the Facebook CEO about “FaceMash,” a website Zuckerberg created during his sophomore year at Harvard University that allowed students to view and rate pictures of female students. The website played a role in “The Social Network,” a 2010 film about the creation of Facebook that Zuckerberg has criticized as inaccurate.
“What was FaceMash, and is it still up and running?” Long asked.
Zuckerberg characterized it as a “prank website.”
“There was a movie about this … of unclear truth,” Zuckerberg said.
– John Bowden
GOP rep grills Zuckerberg on opioid sales on Facebook
12:55 p.m.
Rep. David McKinley (R-W.Va.) grilled Zuckerberg over opioid dealers using the social media giant to distribute drugs, saying the platform was hurting its users.
“Your platform is still being used to circumvent the law, and allow people to buy highly addictive drugs without a prescription,” McKinley told Zuckerberg.
“With all due respect, Facebook is actually enabling an illegal activity and, in so doing, you are hurting people. Would you agree with that statement?” the congressman asked.
“I think that there are a number of areas of content that we need to do a better job policing on our service,” Zuckerberg replied.
“Today the primary way that content regulation works here … is that people can share what they want on the service, and then if someone sees an issue they flag it to us, and then we will review it,” he continued.
McKinley went on to ask Zuckerberg why Facebook had not taken down posts for opioid markets on the website.
“When are you going to take down these posts that are done with illegal, digital pharmacies?” the congressman said.
“Right now when people report the posts to us, we will take them down and have people review,” Zuckerberg said.
“I agree that this is a terrible issue, and respectfully, when there are tens of billion pieces of content that are shared every day, even 20,000 people reviewing it can’t look at everything,” he continued.
The exchange comes a week after Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Scott Gottlieb called on social media platforms to eliminate the online opioid trade.
– Julia Manchester
Dem rep questions whether Facebook can continue to operate as a ‘self-regulated’ source of political discourse
12:32 p.m.
Rep. John Sarbanes (D-Md.) questioned whether Facebook can continue to operate in the way it has been until now, regulating itself.
“I think a lot of Americans are waking up to the fact that Facebook is becoming sort of a self-regulated superstructure for political discourse,” Sarbanes told Zuckerberg.
He suggested the crossroads of such a decision is quickly approaching: Will lawmakers need to decide how to monitor speech on the platform or will the company continue to control such matters?
“The question is, are we the people going to regulate our political dialogue or are you, Mark Zuckerberg, going to end up regulating the political discourse,” he continued. “We need to be free of that undue influence.”
– Olivia Beavers
Zuckerberg defends ad targeting system
12:26 p.m.
Lawmakers of both parties have been voicing unease about Facebook’s targeted ad system and how it profits off of users’ aggregate data.
Zuckerberg offered a defense of the system after being pressed by Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.) about what would happen if the company shifted away from using personal data to deliver tailored ads.
“For people using the services, it would make the ads less relevant to them,” Zuckerberg said.
“For businesses, like the small businesses using advertising, it would make advertising more expensive because now they would have to pay more to reach more people and efficiently because targeting helps small businesses be able to afford and reach people as effectively as big companies who typically have the ability to do for a long time. It would affect our revenue, too.”
The Cambridge Analytica scandal has put the ad system in the spotlight in recent weeks.
– Harper Neidig
Dem: Facebook has made it ‘practically impossible’ for Americans to remain untracked by companies
Zuckerberg distinguishes between Obama campaign, Cambridge Analytica cases
11:55 a.m.
Zuckerberg distinguished between the ways in which the Obama campaign and Cambridge Analytica used data from the survey app when questioned by Rep. Gregg Harper (R-Miss.).
Harper suggested that users should be equally outraged that the Obama campaign used the app to harvest data for political targeting in 2012 as they are with Cambridge Analytica.
However, Zuckerberg noted a key difference in the two cases.
Those who agreed to use the app built by the Obama campaign consented to their information being used by the campaign for political targeting, he said, while those who signed up with the app built by researcher Aleksandr Kogan did not know that it would be given to Cambridge Analytica.
“The big difference between these cases is that, in the Kogan case, people signed into that app expecting to share the data with Kogan, and then he turned around, in violation of our policies, and in violation of people’s expectations sold it to a third party firm, to Cambridge Analytica,” Zuckerberg said.
But, Zuckerberg acknowledged that Facebook has since realized it needed to adopt a “more restricted platform” so that Facebook users consenting to using an app give it access to only their information, not that of their friends.
“But that’s the way that the platform worked at the time,” Zuckerberg said.
– Morgan Chalfant
Butterfield pushes Zuckerberg on diversity
11:45 a.m.
Rep. G.K. Butterfield (D-N.C.), a former chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, pressed Zuckerberg over the lack of diversity among employees at Facebook.
Though he said he was encouraged by the slight bump in African-American representation at the company, Butterfield noted that there are no black executives listed on Facebook’s leadership page on its corporate website.
“This does not reflect America,” Butterfield said while holding up a printout of the five-member leadership team.
Zuckerberg acknowledged the issue and promised that Facebook was taking it seriously.
“Congressman, this is an issue that we’re focused on,” he said. “We will certainly work with you. This is an important issue.”
Facebook appointed its first black board member in January, tapping American Express CEO Kenneth Chenault.
– Harper Neidig
Dem rep. lists Zuckerberg’s history of apologizing for mistakes with Facebook
11:40 a.m.
Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) began her line of questioning with Zuckerberg by listing his history of apologizing for matters that went awry with the social media platform.
“You have a long history of growth and success, but you also have a long list of apologies,” she said during a House hearing on Facebook’s transparency and data collection.
“In 2003 it started at Harvard. ‘I apologize for any harm done as a result of my neglect,’” she read.
She then listed off five other apologies Zuckerberg issued over the course of a decade, including his most recent one related to “the Russian manipulation of the election and the data that came from Facebook initially.”
“This is proof to me that self-regulation simply does not work,” she concluded before jumping into her questioning.
– Olivia Beavers
Zuckerberg grilled on internal audits
11:37 a.m.
Pennsylvania Rep. Mike Doyle (D), who chairs the Communications and Technology subcommittee, repeatedly questioned Zuckerberg over why lawmakers should trust Facebook to properly conduct an internal audit of third-party apps.
“I’m just concerned that despite this consent decree, Facebook allowed developers access to an unknown number of user profiles on Facebook for years,” Doyle said.
“Potentially hundreds of millions,” Doyle added. “Potentially more. And not only allowed, but partnered with individuals and app developers such as Alexander Kogan, who turned around and sold that data on the open market.”
“It strikes me that there’s a real trust gap here,” Doyle concluded. “Why should we trust you to follow through on these promises when you have demonstrated repeatedly that you are willing to flout both your own internal policies and government oversight when the need suits you?”
“Congressman, respectfully, I disagree with that characterization,” the Facebook chief responded.
Doyle went on to call for a regulatory agency to “protect the digital privacy and ensure companies protect our users’ data.”
– John Bowden
Zuckerberg says statement from Obama campaign staffer about special treatment from Facebook is inaccurate
11:30 a.m.
Zuckerberg said that a statement from a former Obama campaign staffer saying the campaign got special treatment from the social media platform was false.
Zuckerberg was responding to questions from House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) on the issue.
“One of the lead digital heads of the Obama campaign said recently, ‘Facebook was surprised we were able to suck out the whole social graf, but they didn’t stop us once they realized what we were doing. They came to the office in the days after the election, recruiting, and were very candid that they allowed us to do things that they wouldn’t have allowed someone else to do because they were on our side,'” Scalise said.
“We didn’t allow the Obama campaign to do anything that any developer on the platform wouldn’t have been otherwise been able to do,” Zuckerberg responded.
“So she was making an inaccurate statement, in your point of view?” Scalise asked.
“Yes,” Zuckerberg replied.
– Julia Manchester
Blackburn accuses Zuckerberg of ‘filibustering’
11:14 a.m.
Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) appeared to lose patience with Zuckerberg during her line of questioning, telling him she wouldn’t allow him to “filibuster” as she launched into a discussion about privacy legislation.
“I can’t let you filibuster right now,” Blackburn said. She asked Zuckerberg whether he would help Congress pass legislation she and other House lawmakers are offering that would place restrictions on internet service providers and tech companies sharing browsing history.
Zuckerberg said he was not “directly familiar” with the details of the bill, called the Browser Act.
“Let’s get familiar with the details,” Blackburn said. “This is only thirteen pages.”
– Morgan Chalfant
Zuckerberg stands by commitment to extend GDPR around the world
11 a.m.
Zuckerberg is again promising to provide privacy protections for Facebook users around the world once a new European Union data law goes into effect next month.
The law will only apply to European countries, but privacy advocates have been urging Facebook to extend the changes that will be required to rest of the world. Rep. Gene Green (D-Texas) asked the Facebook CEO to affirm the commitment he made last week.
“Yes, congressman, all the same controls will be available around the world,” Zuckerberg said.
“We’re going to put at the top of everyone’s app when they sign in, a tool that walks people through the settings, and gives people the choices and asks them to make decisions on how they want their settings set,” he added.
The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) will go into effect on May 25 and will require internet firms to be more transparent about their data policies and give users more control over their own information.
– Harper Neidig
Zuckerberg says regulation ‘inevitable’
10:42 a.m.
Zuckerberg told Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.) that some form of regulation on Facebook and other tech companies is “inevitable,” but stressed that there needs to be a careful discussion around what those rules may be
“I think that it is inevitable that there will need to be some regulation,” Zuckerberg said. “My position is not that there should be no regulation, but I also think that you have to be careful about what regulation you put in place.”
Zuckerberg said, for instance, that some rules could be easy for large companies like Facebook to comply with, but more difficult for smaller start-ups with less resources to manage.
“I think these are all things that need to be thought through very carefully,” Zuckerberg said.
– Morgan Chalfant
Dem lawmaker compares Facebook data collection to controversial FBI surveillance on civil rights activists
10:40 a.m.
Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) told Zuckerberg he believes there are similarities between Facebook’s data collection practices and a federal government’s controversial covert operation in the 1960s, known as COINTELPRO, that improperly surveilled black civil rights activists.
“I was personally a victim of COINTELPRO. Your organization, your methodology in my opinion is similar,” Rush told Zuckerberg.
“Mr. Zuckerberg, what is the difference between Facebook’s methodology and the methodology of the American political pariah J. Edgar Hoover?” he asked, referring to the former FBI director who oversaw the program.
Zuckerberg pushed back against the characterization, saying the option to share information on the social media platform and then later remove the data makes Facebook data collection far different from that of surveillance.
“Congressman, this is an important question because I think people often ask what the difference is between surveillance and what we do. I think the difference is extremely clear: it’s that, on Facebook you have control over your information,” he replied.
“The content that you share, you put there. You can take it down anytime. The information we choose to collect, you can choose to have us not collect. You can delete any of it and of course, you can leave Facebook if you want. I know of no surveillance organization that gives people the option to delete the data they have or even know they are collecting.”
– Olivia Beavers
Zuckerberg says ‘enforcement error’ made in barring Diamond and Silk
10:38 a.m.
Zuckerberg was responding to questions from Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) on recent revelations that Trump supporters Diamond and Silk were blocked from Facebook after the company labeled their content “unsafe to the community.”
“In that specific case, our team made an enforcement error, and we have already got in touch with them to reverse it,” Zuckerberg told Barton.
“You need to work with Congress and the community to ensure that it is a neutral, safe, and to the largest extent, private platform. Do you agree with that?” Barton asked.
“I do agree that we should work to give people the fullest free expression possible. When I talk about giving people a voice, that’s what I care about,” Zuckerberg responded.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) similarly grilled Zuckerberg on the issue Tuesday.
– Julia Manchester
Zuckerberg won’t commit to changing default user settings to minimize data collection
10:30 a.m.
Zuckerberg would not commit to changing all of Facebook’s default user settings to minimize data collection and use.
Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.), the top Democrat on the panel, asked whether Zuckerberg would commit to changing the default settings “to minimize, to the greatest extent possible, the collection and use of user data.”
Zuckerberg would not say “yes.” “This is a complex issue that deserves more than a one-word answer,” he said.
“That is disappointing,” Pallone replied.
– Morgan Chalfant
Zuckerberg apologizes — again
10:17 a.m.
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg in his opening statement again took responsibility for the Cambridge Analytica data scandal that impacted millions of Facebook users.
At the same time, he stressed that the social media company is taking steps to ensure that user information is safeguarded.
“We didn’t take a broad enough view of our responsibility, and that was a big mistake. It was my mistake, and I’m sorry,” Zuckerberg said, echoing his apology before senators the day prior.
“I’m committing to getting this right, and that includes improving the way we protect people’s information,” Zuckerberg said.
– Morgan Chalfant
Pallone wants privacy legislation
10:16 a.m.
Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.), the committee’s ranking member, came out swinging in his opening statement, saying Republican inaction is to blame for the stream of privacy breaches that have dominated the news recently.
“By not doing its job, this Republican-controlled Congress has become complicit in this nonstop cycle of privacy by press release,” Pallone said, arguing that Facebook and the rest of the major internet platforms need to be regulated.
“We need comprehensive privacy and data security legislation,” he added. “We need baseline protections that stretch from internet service providers to data brokers to app developers and to anyone else who makes a living off our data.”
We heard a few senators voice support yesterday for new privacy laws, but Zuckerberg refused to endorse the idea, saying only that he supported greater privacy protections in theory.
Pallone’s frustration may come from the lack of action Congress has taken since grilling the former CEO of Equifax last year following that company’s massive data breach.
“We all know the cycle by now: our data is stolen and the company looks the other way; eventually reporters find out, publish a negative story, and the company apologizes. Congress then holds a hearing; and then … nothing,” Pallone said.
– Harper Neidig
Chairman Walden gavels in
10:10 a.m.
Chairman Greg Walden (R-Ore.) began the hearing by asking Zuckerberg for suggestions for how Congress can help assure Americans of their data security on Facebook.
While he made no mention of the possibility of regulations, he stressed that lawmakers want to be certain that consumers are “adequately informed about how their online activities and information are used.”
“And we ask that you share any suggestions you have for ways policymakers can help reassure our constituents that data they believe was only shared with friends or certain groups, remains private to those circles,” Walden said.
“These issues apply not just to Facebook, but equally to the other internet-based companies that collect information about users online,” he said.
– Morgan Chalfant
Copyright 2023 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
