Facebook, Twitter and Google leaders faced attacks from Republicans and Democrats on Wednesday as US Senators grilled the tech titans over a key Internet bill that has made their businesses thrive.
Senator Roger Wicker, a Republican from Mississippi who chairs the Senate Commerce Committee, gave one at the beginning of the hearing on Section 230, a law that protects social media companies from liability for content posted and allowed by their users cordial yet combative tone of the discretion when moderating posts that are considered offensive, such as B. Hate speech.
"This liability protection was crucial in protecting online platforms from endless and possibly ruinous legal disputes. It has also given these internet platforms the ability to control, suppress and even censor content in any way that meets their respective standards" Wicker told Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Facebook, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and Google CEO Sundar Pichai at the beginning of the three and a half hour hearing. "It is time for this free pass to end."
Republicans weren't alone in their criticism of the companies and concerns about the law, which is considered the foundation of freedom of expression on the Internet. Democrats have targeted Section 230, saying Facebook, Twitter, Google, and other companies are not doing enough to curb the spread of misinformation and hate speech. Several Democrats accused Republicans of trying to intimidate tech platforms in order to allow misinformation.
"Facts save lives, and there is no two-way round when either side chooses to reject the truth and accept poisonous false information," said Sen. Tammy Duckworth, an Illinois Democrat.
Allegedly on Section 230, the hearing often focused on how Facebook, Twitter, and Google made content moderation decisions, rather than the law itself. Some Republican senators questioned executives about their staff's political leanings. Alleged partisanship has been a consistent theme of Republicans, who accuse tech companies of censoring conservative speeches. The companies have repeatedly denied these allegations.
Concerns about censorship grew after Twitter and Facebook took steps to slow the distribution of a New York Post article about Biden's son Hunter that was referred to several times during the hearing. In a fiery exchange, Senator Ted Cruz, a Republican from Texas, slammed Dorsey after Twitter tried to disable links to the story that circulated about two weeks ago. Dorsey, who had a long beard when testifying, admitted that Twitter acted too quickly, a comment that didn't please Cruz.
"Mr. Dorsey, who the hell voted you and charged you with what the media can report and what the American people can hear?" the senator thundered. "The New York Post is not just a random guy who tweets. The New York Post has the fourth highest circulation of any newspaper in America. The New York Post is over 200 years old. The New York Post was founded by Alexander Hamilton."
At one point, Dorsey said Twitter didn't have the ability to influence the polls because people had other platforms to choose from.
Zuckerberg said his social network had taken steps to tackle hate speech such as banning white supremacists, but agreed that Facebook should review its substantive recommendations. Lawmakers also urged Zuckerberg, who can testify on Capitol Hill, on Facebook guidelines aimed at targeting November 3 posts, particularly those from President Donald Trump. The company will tear down posts that incite violence, Zuckerberg said, adding that it will flag posts that declare victory ahead of schedule and direct users to more authoritative sources.
Facebook, Twitter and Google said during the hearing that Section 230 had helped promote freedom of expression while allowing them to moderate content. The CEOs of all three companies defended Section 230, expressing concerns that major changes could lead to a greater eradication of freedom of expression.
Zuckerberg, who had connectivity issues at the start of the hearing, believes that Congressional 230 should be updated "to ensure that it is working as intended". However, he also raised concerns that changing the language in section 230 could make it more difficult to combat bullying and harassment.
The Facebook CEO said he supported legislative changes that would require content moderation to be more transparent. He also said companies should not be able to hide behind Section 230 to avoid responsibility for "deliberately facilitating illegal activity on their platforms."
Dorsey and Zuckerberg faced the brunt of the attacks. Pichai went relatively unnoticed, although many senators mispronounced his name repeatedly. Lawmakers criticized Google for its impact on local journalism and significantly reduced the industry's advertising revenue. A topic Cantwell had brought up the day before in a report on the impact of big tech on smaller news outlets.
Pichai said his company was trying to help media companies with a handful of initiatives.
Legislative changes to section 230
Politicians and legislators have different views on Section 230.
Some lawmakers, including Wicker and California Democrat Anna Eshoo, want to change Section 230. Others, like Trump and Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, want to lift the protection altogether.
In May, Trump signed an executive order calling for a Section 230 review and placed the Federal Trade Commission in charge of investigating complaints about political bias arising from content moderation decisions by social media companies. The Federal Communications Commission plans to promote a regulation that would reinterpret Section 230.
Separately, Biden informed the New York Times in January that Section 230 was about to be revoked.
Legislators from both parties have submitted bills to revise Section 230. Wicker and two other influential Republicans enacted laws in September limiting the scope of Section 230 protection to cover removal of illegal material, entities promoting terrorism, and self-promoting content.
Eshoo and Rep. Tom Malinowski, a Democrat from New Jersey, tabled a bill in October to remove Section 230 legal protection when a company's algorithm is used to augment or recommend content, civil rights or posts interfere with international terrorism. Senator Josh Hawley, a vocal critic of Section 230 and a Republican from Missouri, has tabled several bills on the matter, including one that would allow Americans to sue tech companies that censor political speeches.
Wednesday's hearing also included fighting between Republicans and Democrats, as expected.
Senator John Thune, a Republican from South Dakota, asked each CEO if they believed he was a "ref" of political speech, and each leader replied no. The Senator tried to shoot down criticism of Republicans from Democrats who claim conservatives are trying to "work the arbiter" when it comes to political speeches.
Senator Brian Schatz, a Democrat from Hawaii, said the entire hearing was a Republican political ploy. "We have to call this hearing what it is. It's a delusion," he said. "I'm not going to use my time to ask questions because that's nonsense."
Correction, 10:34 a.m. PT: In an earlier version, a quote from Sen. Fischer to Sen. Schatz was incorrectly assigned. The material has been corrected.
