19 Questions Mark Zuckerberg Strangely Couldn’t Answer During His Senate Hearing

[Prorootect]

19 Questions Mark Zuckerberg Strangely Couldn’t Answer During His Senate Hearing
Posted on April 11, 2018Author GOV'T SLAVES 1

Jay Syrmopoulos--Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg looked uneasy as he gave testimony for five hours on Tuesday before 44 U.S. Senators. Wednesday, he appeared before before 55 members of the House of Representative regarding the role of Facebook and to how the company can address consumer data-privacy concerns in the wake of the Facebook/Cambridge Analytica scandal.
The New York Times reports that Zuckerberg has trained for weeks to face the three congressional committees in the two separate hearings on Tuesday and Wednesday, but he was clearly unprepared for a number of questions directed at him by the members on Capitol Hill, some of which required technical expertise and specific figures that the Facebook CEO was unable to provide.
When pressed for an answer, Zuckerberg on Tuesday relied on a number of variations of “If you’d like, I can have my team follow up with you after this,” without ever actually committing to provide a response.
The Business Insider put together a list of things Zuckerberg was unable to answer and agreed to follow up with senators about:

• A list of applications that Facebook has previously banned because data was transferred in violation of Facebook’s terms. Sen. Chuck Grassley
• The number of audits Facebook has conducted to ensure deletion of improperly transferred data, or “anything about the specific past stats, that would be interesting.” Sen. Chuck Grassley
• The number of accounts linked to the Internet Research Agency, a pro-Kremlin propaganda group, that Facebook has taken down. Sen. Dianne Feinstein
• Whether any Facebook employees worked with Cambridge Analytica while the data analytics company was working with Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. Sen. Maria Cantwell
• Whether the feature for adults using Facebook Messenger on Android to opt into using the app in combination with messaging and allow Facebook to collect data about their calls or texts holds true for minors as well. Sen. Roger W icker
• A detailed explanation of whether — and, if so, how — Facebook tracks a user’s internet-browsing activity even after they have logged off of Facebook’s platform. Zuckerberg said that Facebook uses cookies for security and ad-measuring purposes but that he wanted “to be precise” in his response. Sen. Roger Wicker
• How Facebook discloses to its users the tracking practices that take place after users log off. Sen. Roger Wicker
• Whether the specific “unverified divisive pages” on Facebook that Leahy displayed during the testimony are groups created by Russians. Sen. Patrick Leahy
• A breakdown by state of the 87 million profiles Facebook estimates to have had data swept up in the Cambridge Analytica scandal. Sens. Amy Klobuchar and Dean Heller (Heller asked for Nevada specifically)
• Whether there’s overlap with the 126 million users who may have seen content shared by Facebook groups associated with the Internet Research Agency and those affected by the Cambridge Analytica scandal. Zuckerberg said that an investigation was underway and that Facebook thinks it’s possible there could be a connection. Sen. Amy Klobuchar
• Whether it’s possible that the data Cambridge Analytica stored is in Russia. Sen. Amy Klobuchar
• An explanation of how Facebook treats data on devices not logged into it. Sen. Roy Blunt
• Whether Facebook’s bug bounty program will address impermissible sharing of information and not just unauthorized access to it. Sen. Jerry Moran
• Why Facebook moved for the dismissal of a discrimination lawsuit against it that argued that its tools allowed advertisers to not target certain groups, including people of color, for some housing and employment opportunities. Sen. Cory Booker
• How long Facebook keeps users’ data after they delete their Facebook or Instagram account and whether that data can sit in backup copies. Sens. Dean Heller and Cory Gardner
• A breakdown of the principles that Facebook will use to guide the development of artificial-intelligence practices, details about those practices, and how they could help users. Sen. Gary Peters
• A list of the firms other than Cambridge Analytica to which Aleksandr Kogan sold the Facebook user data he collected. Zuckerberg identified Eunoia but said there may have been a couple of others. Sen. Tammy Baldwin
• More information about how Facebook is accounting for organizations based outside the US when providing transparency about political ads. Sen. Tammy Baldwin
• Whether the government or federal officials can track what a person’s doing, with or without a warrant, on the social network. Sen. Cory Gardner

In what was almost a foregone conclusion once these hearings were announced, there was a direct push to have Zuckerberg agree to engage in policy conversations surrounding various forms of data-privacy legislation/regulation, including the Honest Ads Act (Klobuchar), the My Data Act (Sen. Richard Blumenthal), and the Consent Act (Sen. Ed Markey), and acknowledging that government regulation of social media is “inevitable.”

#BREAKING: Facebook CEO Mark #Zuckerberg tells House panel that regulation of his industry is `inevitable’​

— Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) April 11, 2018​

A number senators asked Zuckerberg to follow-up, according to Business Insider, asking the Facebook CEO to do the following:

• Submit regulation proposals to prevent a monopoly in the industry (though exactly which industry was unclear). Sen. Lindsey Graham
• Implement a 72-hour rule to notify users of a data breach. Sen. Amy Klobuchar
• Discuss the details of allowing civil-rights organizations to audit the companies dealing in areas of credit and housing. Sen. Cory Booker
• Discuss whether there should be financial penalties when large data providers like Facebook are breached. Sen. Maggie Hassan
• Send a Facebook representative to a meeting of chief executives and senior leaders to discuss the sale of illegal drugs online. Sen. Shelley Moore Capito
• Discuss creating legislation that unequivocally says users own their data and that makes a “stronger affirmative opt-in requirement” for Facebook. Sen. Todd Young

The Congressional record will remain open for 14 days after the hearings, allowing for members of Congress to submit questions in writing, during which time Zuckerberg is able to make corrections to his testimony.


1 Comment
One Reply to “19 Questions Mark Zuckerberg Strangely Couldn’t Answer During His Senate Hearing”

August
April 11, 2018 at 5:08 pm
Zuckerberg “I stole Facebook from those creepy twin brothers…ask them”.

 

[Prorootect]

WATCH: Cruz Targets Facebook For Alleged Political Bias Against Conservatives. Zuckerberg: That's A Fair Question.
dailywire.com: WATCH: Cruz Targets Facebook For Alleged Political Bias Against Conservatives. Zuckerberg: That's A Fair Question.
ByDaily Wire

On Tuesday, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) targeted Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, pointing out that accusations of political bias could be substantiated. He started by asking whether Facebook considered itself a neutral public forum or engaged in political speech, then segued to citing numerous instances of Facebook appearing to display hostility for conservatives. Cruz specifically asked about the fifteen to twenty-thousand people working on security and content review and whether Zuckerberg's company was engaged in censorship.

Zuckerberg admitted that with Facebook being located in the leftist bastion of Silicon Valley, it was a fair question as to whether the company was biased.

The transcript and video are below:

Cruz: Let me ask the question again. Does Facebook consider itself to be a neutral public forum, and representatives of your company has given conflicting answers on this. Are you a First Amendment speaker expressing your views, or are you a neutral public forum allowing everyone to speak?

Zuckerberg: Senator, here’s how we think about this: I don’t believe that — there’s certain content that clearly we do not allow: hate speech, terrorist content, nudity, anything that makes people feel unsafe in the community. From that perspective, that’s why we generally try to refer to what we do as a platform for all ideas.

Cruz: Let me try because the time is constrained. It’s just a simple question. The predicate for section 230 immunity under the CDA is that you are a neutral public forum. Do you consider yourself a neutral public forum or are you engaged in political speech, which is your right under the First Amendment?

Zuckerberg: Well, Senator, our goal is certainly 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.

Cruz: Well, Mr. Zuckerberg, I would say there are a great many Americans who 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, Gizmodo reported that Facebook had purposefully and routinely suppressed conservative stories from trending news, including stories about CPAC, including stories about Mitt Romney, including stories about the Lois Lerner/IRS scandal, including stories about Glenn Beck. In addition to that, Facebook has initially shut down the Chick-Fil-A Appreciation Day page, has blocked a post of a Fox News reporter, has blocked over two dozen Catholic pages, and most recently blocked Trump supporters Diamond and Silk’s page with 1.2 million Facebook followers after determining their content and brand were “unsafe to the community.” To a great many Americans that appears to be a pervasive pattern of political bias. Do you agree with that assessment?

Zuckerberg: Senator, let me say a few things about this. First: I understand where that concern is coming from; as Facebook and the tech industry are located in the Silicon Valley, which is an extremely left-leaning place. And this is actually a concern that I have, 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, and I think that it is a fair concern that people would wonder about it.

Cruz: Let me ask you this question: Are you aware of any ad or page that has been taken down from Planned Parenthood?

Zuckerberg: Senator, I’m not, but let me just finish.

Cruz: How about MoveOn.org?

Zuckerberg: Sorry?

Cruz: How about MoveOn.org?

Zuckerberg: I’m not specifically aware of those.

Cruz: How about any Democratic candidate for office?

Zuckerberg: I’m not specifically aware, I’m not sure.

Cruz: In your testimony you say that you have fifteen to twenty-thousand people working on security and content review. Do you know the political orientation of those fifteen to twenty-thousand people engaged in content review?

Zuckerberg: No, Senator, we do not generally ask people their political orientation when joining the company.

Cruz: So as CEO, have you ever made hiring or firing decisions based on political positions or what candidates they support?

Zuckerberg: No.

Cruz: Why was Palmer Luckey fired?

Zuckerberg: That is a specific personnel matter that seems like it would be inappropriate to speak to here.

Cruz: You just made a specific representation that you didn’t make decisions based on political views. Was that accurate?

Zuckerberg: Well, I can commit that that was not because of a political view.

Cruz: Do you know of those fifteen to twenty-thousand people engaged in content review, how may if any, have ever supported financially a Republican candidate for office?

Zuckerberg: Senator, I do not know that.

Cruz: 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 that 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 users, whether they are “good and positive” connections or ones that those fifteen to twenty-thousand people deem “unacceptable” or “deplorable"?

Zuckerberg: Senator, you’re asking about me personally? Senator, I think there are a number of things that we would all agree are clearly bad: foreign interference in our elections; terrorism; self-harm, those are things—

Cruz: I’m talking about censorship.

Zuckerberg: Oh, well, I think that you would probably agree that we should remove terrorist propaganda from the service. So, that, I agree, I think is clearly bad activity that we want to get down, and we’re generally proud of how we do with that. Now what I can say, and I do want to get this in before the end here, is that I am very committed to making sure that Facebook is a platform for all ideas. That is a very important founding principle of what we do, and we’re proud of the discourse and the different ideas that people can share on the service, and that is something that as long as I’m running the company I’m going to be committed to making sure is the case.​

...watch the video on the website...

 

[CharlieBrown]

That bit about not allowing hate speech is comical. I've reported things and everytime they come back with it being no violation regardless the crap the people spew back and forth. In one case it was the profile of one of the four idiots that live streamed the torture of the disabled kid in Chicago. I asked them to shut her profile down as there was nothing but hateful racist comments and fb threats going on back and forth. Still they were OK with it and did nothing, they let all the comments remain. Another time I reported comments on a South African news site's fb page and again nothing was done. They don't care at alll because that won't make them anymore money. Just like with youtube what they view as objectionable depends on their political beliefs and their larger agenda..

 

[Digmor Crusher]

Another dog and pony show, American politicians have neither the will or the desire to make any significant changes to internet privacy laws, money talks loudest to them.

 

[SumTingWong]

As far as I know, Ted Cruz has some connections with Cambridge. All FaceBook users data got compromised by Cambridge even you haven't use " This is my daily life " app.

 

[AtlBo]

Another dog and pony show, American politicians have neither the will or the desire to make any significant changes to internet privacy laws, money talks loudest to them.

Wise statement. It's true, and FB being an American company is probably lodged in the very front of their minds.

I still thought this was an important first step toward the "education of Congress". I think we'll see some welcome regulation in the form of simple user statements and clearer/simpler access to settings choices and user options. They still have got to get to the primary issue of computing which is in my opinion ethical software development. That will be where the big fun starts when we see Gatesless MS in front of Congress to explain how the platform supports ethical programming standards. In that vein also probably how it supports "securability" expectations of computer users. Probably see Apple too.

Not sure when, but I think we'll see this sooner or later. BTW, I thought some of the Senators asked the questions that should give Zuckerberg pause for thought. Cruz hit hard with his questions and they were fair, so I hope Zuckerberg heard what he was saying. I know I wouldn't want to be on Ted's short list of troublemakers.

There will be more, but I guess Zuckerberg and Facebook are off the hook for now, as long as FB pushes forward as ZB says they are and will...

 

[Prorootect]

Ted Cruz Grills Mark Zuckerberg - youtube video:



mark-zuckerberg-pants-on-fire-at-senate-hearing.jpg

mark-zuckerberg-pants-on-fire-at-senate-hearing.jpg

44624-ZUCK.jpg

44624-ZUCK.jpg

Two pictures above source: thepeoplescube.com: Zuckerberg Injured During Senate Hearings
thepeoplescube.com: The People's Cube - Political Humor & Satire

 

[Deleted member 178]

People offered their full life on a silver plate to Facebook, it was like that from the start...if Facebook wasn't the giant it is now, no one who harass him.