The Senate's Section 230 hearing, with Dorsey, Zuckerberg, and Pichai, only briefly discussed the law, instead letting Republicans berate Dorsey for soundbites

Republican senators unloaded on Twitter's Jack Dorsey, but had little to say about reforming the foundational internet law.

Wired 2020-10-29 Gilad Edelman

Discussion

@realdonaldtrump Donald J. Trump on x
Why isn't Biden corruption trending number one on Twitter? Biggest world story, and nowhere to be found. There is no"trend", only negative stories that Twitter wants to put up. Disgraceful! Section 230
@reckless Nilay Patel on x
“Mr Dorsey who the hell elected you?” screams Ted Cruz, for the video he will tweet later. (The answer is that people freely choose to use Twitter in a market? And they could leave? But Cruz does not care for anything but creating viral Twitter moments.)
@b_fung Brian Fung on x
A few quick impressions from today's #Section230 hearing. The exchange between Dorsey and Gardner really illustrates how confusing social media policies (and their enforcement) are to most people.
@jack @jack on x
Thank you members of the Commerce Committee for the opportunity to speak with the American people about Twitter and §230. My remarks will be brief to get to questions. §230 is the most important law protecting internet speech. Removing §230 will remove speech from the internet.
@jack @jack on x
That concept of “good faith” is what's being challenged by many of you today. Some of you don't trust we're acting in good faith. That's the problem I want to focus on solving. How do services like Twitter earn your trust? How do we ensure more choice in the market if we don't?
@tedcruz Ted Cruz on x
What @jack told the Senate, under oath, is false. I just tried to tweet the @nypost story alleging Biden's CCP corruption. Still blocked. 18 USC 1621 makes it a felony to lie under oath to the Senate. https://twitter.com/...
@politico @politico on x
Sen. Ted Cruz teed off on Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey over the platform's decision to temporarily block an unproven New York Post report about former Vice President Joe Biden's son Hunter https://www.politico.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@senjohnthune Senator John Thune on x
Appreciate @Jack working on an idea that was generated from Stephen Wolfram's testimony at a hearing I convened on algorithm transparency in June 2019. “Algorithmic choice” is an idea worth exploring. https://twitter.com/...
@philipwegmann Philip Melanchthon Wegmann on x
Jack says the New York Post can log back onto its account, delete their original offending tweet, and then “tweet the exact same material from the exact same article.”
@jack @jack on x
And finally, much of the content people see today is determined by algorithms, with very little visibility into how they choose what they show. We took a first step in making this more transparent by building a button to turn off our home timeline algorithms. It's a good start.
@politico @politico on x
Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey today defended the company's decision to leave up tweets from Iran's leader threatening armed attacks against Israel while putting fact-checking and violence labels on tweets from President Trump https://www.politico.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@epoe187 Bo Winegard on x
One of the things that I hate most about modern politics is that it incentivizes preening for the cameras and posing for social media. Few politicians embody this more than Ted Cruz, the very paragon of a political narcissists whose own career triumphs over good governance. https…
@martijn_grooten Martijn Grooten on x
“Who died and made these men kings?” If you read one thing on those tech hearings, let it be this piece by @zeynep https://zeynep.substack.com/ ...
@b_fung Brian Fung on x
Per Dorsey, Twitter has no general misinformation policy, but it does have specific misinfo policies on Covid and elections. They apply to world leaders, but also don't, in that a world leaders policy protects them. Except when tweets to a domestic audience could cause harm.
@caitlin__kelly Caitlin Kelly on x
“I have derailed many a conversation by bringing up some controversy dominating my Twitter timeline, realizing my interlocutor has no idea what I'm talking about, and then watching their eyes glaze over... Which brings us to the Senate Commerce Committee” https://www.wired.com/..…
@thetomzone @thetomzone on x
REPUBLICAN SENATOR: mister zuckerman i tried to tell siri to tweet “i am against abortion” and it tweeted “i am an ass abortion.” JACK DORSEY: i'm not mark zuckerbe- REPUBLICAN SENATOR: mister zuckermark how many tweets on ass abortions have you sent out
@robbysoave Robby Soave on x
Jack Dorsey is trying to maintain that Twitter does not have the power to influence the election, which is plainly untrue. What he should say is of course the speech that occurs on the platform can impact the result—but this isn't nefarious. It's just democracy.
@kellen_browning Kellen Browning on x
Here's our final tally of questions at the Section 230 hearing. Republicans dominated with Qs about censorship, most lobbed at Jack Dorsey of Twitter. Democrats focused on misinfo and largely questioned Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook. @nytimes @nytimestech https://www.nytimes.com/..…
@redsteeze Stephen L. Miller on x
Twitter should have ignored both of them as well as journalists demanding they become fact checkers and content police over the past four years. Dorsey didn't and here we are. It's a mess completely of his own company's doing. https://twitter.com/...
@evanderburg Eric Vanderburg on x
Analysis: Two words describe the Senate's latest Big Tech hearing: Worthless and petty https://i.securitythinkingcap.com/ RkXpXF https://twitter.com/...
@jack @jack on x
There are three solutions we'd like to propose to address the concerns raised, all focused on services that decide to moderate or remove content. They could be expansions to §230, new legislative frameworks, or a commitment to industry wide self-regulation best practices.
@kfury @kfury on x
Today's stunning dichotomy is Ted Cruz asking Jack Dorsey “Who the hell elected you?” and Marsha Blackburn asking Sundar Pichai if he'd gotten around to firing an employee who badmouthed her in an internal email.
@wired @wired on x
In theory, the hearing was about Section 230. In reality, it was mostly an opportunity for Republicans on the committee to berate Twitter CEO @Jack Dorsey for supposedly discriminating against conservative users—especially Donald Trump. https://www.wired.com/...
@jack @jack on x
The first is requiring a service's moderation process to be published. How are cases reported and reviewed? How are decisions made? What tools are used to enforce? Publishing answers to questions like these will make our process more robust and accountable to the people we serve.
@amydiehl Amy Diehl, Ph.D. on x
Vijaya Gadde, Twitter's head of legal, policy & trust, pitched the idea to stop selling political ads altogether. Within days, @jack signed off on the global ban. This is why women are critical in leadership—disrupting white-male-group-think. @vijaya https://www.politico.com/...
@sencorygardner Cory Gardner on x
Hey @Jack - this is what I was talking about. The Ayatollah consistently denies the Holocaust and yet this is not considered misinformation by Twitter. https://twitter.com/...
@tonyromm Tony Romm on x
Dorsey is calmly explaining himself, and Gardner is trying his damnedest to get him to react, and the disparate approach is striking and obvious
@hawleymo Josh Hawley on x
This level of idiocy confirms the widespread impression that Jack's primary food source is weed https://twitter.com/...
@hawleymo Josh Hawley on x
Nothing like lying under oath https://twitter.com/...
@zeynep Zeynep Tufekci on x
Because the tech CEOs actually hold the power here—which is the core problem. My latest for @insight on what's been happening with all these tech “hearings”, and why they feel more like WWF than accountability. https://zeynep.substack.com/ ... https://twitter.com/... https://twit…
@ceciliakang Cecilia Kang on x
and save for a very few earnest lawmakers, i cannot count the number of times on my hand that Section 230, the purpose of the hearing, was discussed in any detail https://twitter.com/...
@zeynep Zeynep Tufekci on x
You know what's one of the key goals of some legislators in these hearings? To generate a cute little clip of them being soooo tough on Zuck or Dorsey that they can use for FB ads, or, even better, go viral (with the help of the engagement algorithms.)🙄 https://zeynep.substack.co…
@fboversight @fboversight on x
Today Zuck avoided being questioned on: Antitrust, privacy, data protection, voter suppression, NYU ads observatory, the EndSARS hashtag, the Rohingya genocide, Cambridge Analytica remaining questions, reports that Facebook is scaling back policies after the Election, and more...
@martinsfp Martin Sfp Bryant on x
“Over the course of the hearing, Dorsey fielded more questions from Republicans than those two combined... And yet Facebook and Google are far more embedded in American life, and play a far greater gatekeeping role, than Twitter could ever dream of.” https://www.wired.com/...
@nxthompson @nxthompson on x
The Tech CEOS screw up all kinds of things. There are many ways they could improve the damn algorithms. But no one makes them seem more sympathetic than Ted Cruz. https://www.wired.com/...
@evanderburg Eric Vanderburg on x
Big Tech's Section 230 Senate hearing was like Jack Dorsey's beard: An inexplicable mess that needed a serious trim https://i.securitythinkingcap.com/ RkXWvS https://twitter.com/...
@hawleymo Josh Hawley on x
I think we all know what @Facebook is waiting for, and it isn't a fact check. It's the election. The suppression of Hunter Biden story will continue until the election is over. And @Facebook censorship of conservatives will continue as long as Congress lets it https://twitter.com…
@ashleymayer Ashley Mayer on x
Jack Dorsey sees your private island memes and raises you living on a deserted island for the past several months.
@adrjeffries Adrianne Jeffries on x
Ron Johnson just asked Jack Dorsey about this tweet https://twitter.com/...
@jack @jack on x
The second is requiring a straightforward process to appeal decisions made by humans or algorithms. This ensures people can let us know when we don't get it right, so that we can fix any mistakes and make our processes better in the future.
@nancyscola Nancy Scola on x
Here's Republican FCC Commissioner @BrendanCarrFCC on what Twitter did for Facebook with its handling of the New York Post-Hunter Biden situation. https://www.politico.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@johnhendel John Hendel on x
“Inside Twitter's headquarters, Gadde and Dorsey work from spaces next door to each other. Said one Twitter official: 'I can't imagine a world where Jack looks at her and says, 'No."" New today via @nancyscola https://www.politico.com/...
@jack @jack on x
§230 gave internet services two important tools. The first provides immunity from liability for user's content. The second provides “Good Samaritan” protections for content moderation and removal, even of constitutionally protected speech, as long as it's done “in good faith.”
@shannonpareil Shannon Bond on x
Can I live in this simulation instead of the one we're in right now? “The dream with this sort of thing is that Congress shows up with a full command of the issues, and asks the CEOs good-faith questions about matters of policy and law.” https://www.platformer.news/ ...
@caseynewton Casey Newton on x
Wrote about the bad 230 hearing and how no one is talking about the time Congress DID amend 230, to terrible effect https://www.platformer.news/ ... https://twitter.com/...
@carnage4life Dare Obasanjo on x
@CaseyNewton Neither party considers reduction in freedom of speech to be a loss. No one is going to stake their career to argue that losing Craigslist's Casual Encounters is a huge loss to the world. The only problem is they want to censor different things. Neither cares about f…
@digiphile Alex Howard on x
@BrendanCarrFCC As @CaseyNewton noted today, the impact of FOSTA-SESTA was that many online personals sites shut down because of legal exposure: https://www.platformer.news/ ... Why wouldn't increasing liability if they failed a harder “good faith” standard prompt ICSs to over-mo…
@andymci Andy McIlwain on x
“I still believe that Section 230 can be modernized in a way that makes the internet better. If Senate Republicans had their way, though, the internet would only become smaller.” A Section 230 hearing goes awry by @CaseyNewton https://www.platformer.news/ ...
@whoreganizer Reading Gramsci on x
Hi reporters/journalists/other writers—If you are covering #Section230 hearings and not mentioning the devastating negative impacts of FOSTA-SESTA on sex workers, or the EARN IT Act's potential ones, you're doing sex working and other marginalized communities a major disservice!
@evan_greer Evan Greer on x
“FOSTA-SESTA did not come up once today's hearing — even though, in a sane world, that's where the hearing would have begun.” @CaseyNewton with some solid reporting on today's #Section230 hearing (which was not really a section 230 hearing) https://twitter.com/...
@erinisaway Erin Taylor on x
like without Section 230 internet platforms will begin to censor anything they consider a legal liability, $ is seen after FOSTA/SESTA and how quickly FB/Twitter/Insta/the sites go on - started deplatforming sex workers.
@whoreganizer Reading Gramsci on x
if one more person refers to the negative impacts of fosta/sesta on sex workers as “unintended consequences” i swear to fucking god
@mala @mala on x
Mark Zuckerberg calling for rewriting Section 230 and also saying that Facebook is the only service that can afford to moderate the Internet is everything you need to know about the dangers of rewriting Section 230.
@politico @politico on x
Sen. Marsha Blackburn today asked if a Google engineer who has criticized her still has a job. “He has had very unkind things to say about me and I was just wondering if you all had still kept him working there,” she said https://www.politico.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@facebookstop10 @facebookstop10 on x
The top-performing link posts by U.S. Facebook pages in the last 24 hours are from: 1. Dios Es Bueno 2. Dan Bongino 3. Dan Bongino 4. Dan Bongino 5. Dan Bongino 6. Dan Bongino 7. Donald Trump For President 8. Fox News 9. Dan Bongino 10. David J. Harris Jr.
@caseynewton Casey Newton on x
Sen. Mike Lee just said he considers fact checking a form of censorship
@dee_bosa Deirdre Bosa on x
Brutal day for big tech Facebook -5.5% Alphabet -5.5% Microsoft -5% Apple -4.6% Amazon -3.8%
@brendancarrfcc Brendan Carr on x
Courts have misread Section 230 as providing social media companies with carte blanch to censor content while maintaining their statutory immunity protections. That's not what Section 230 says.
@nycsouthpaw Southpaw on x
How it started How it's going https://twitter.com/...
@markwarner Mark Warner on x
We can and should have a conversation about Section 230 - and how it has enabled platforms to turn a blind eye as their platforms are used to facilitate discrimination, civil rights violations, enable online frauds targeted at vulnerable users, and more. https://colorofchange.org…
@thetomzone @thetomzone on x
Sen. Marsha Blackburn demands to know whether Google has fired a specific engineer, Blake Lemoine, who criticized her in the past
@budrykzack Herbert West Retweeter on x
Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey faces tough questions over his claims that Twitter can cure Tsarevich Alexei's hemophilia https://twitter.com/...
@issielapowsky Issie Lapowsky on x
The process Jack described is...not that hard? Certainly not so idiotic it suggests Jack only eats weed. https://twitter.com/...
@alexstamos Alex Stamos on x
Here are the interaction numbers for the top ten Facebook pages belonging to members of the Senate Commerce Committee. Data for the last 12 months. (Many Senators have both an official page named “Senator X” and a campaign page under their name) https://twitter.com/...
@mcwm @mcwm on x
amazing combo of an extremely low-res webcam AND a printed out tweet https://twitter.com/...
@rmac18 @rmac18 on x
Incredible that we get a four-hour Senate hearing 6 days before an election to litigate individual tweets.
@micsolana Mike Solana on x
ok this actually changes everything https://twitter.com/...
@willoremus Will Oremus on x
Today's GOP-led Senate hearing—bringing in Zuckerberg, Pichai, & Dorsey to defend their content moderation under threat of gutting Section 230, days before the election—feels like a last-ditch effort to spook them out of enforcing their rules on misinfo & foreign interference.
@jameeljaffer Jameel Jaffer on x
Appalling. To state the obvious, a legislator genuinely interested in protecting free speech would not be asking a question like this. https://twitter.com/...
@realdonaldtrump Donald J. Trump on x
The USA doesn't have Freedom of the Press, we have Suppression of the Story, or just plain Fake News. So much has been learned in the last two weeks about how corrupt our Media is, and now Big Tech, maybe even worse. Repeal Section 230!
@realdonaldtrump Donald J. Trump on x
It's amazing. Twitter refuses to allow the any mention of the Biden corruption story which was carried so well on @TuckerCarlson last night. It's the biggest story and Big Tech, together with the Lamestream Media, isn't allowing a word to be said about it.
@thedextriarchy Adi Robertson on x
A few of the entities/people I would love the Senate to ask about Section 230: - Wikipedia - The Organization for Transformative Works - Basically any consumer complaints site - Harassment campaign victims - Newspapers with comment sections - Yelp
@joshconstine Josh Constine -SignalFire on x
Dear @Jack & Mark, Today's congressional hearing on “biased censorship” was designed to bully you into allowing election interference & voter suppression. Don't let them work the refs Keep labeling, downranking, & blocking misinformation You owe democracy at least that much. http…
@sencorygardner Cory Gardner on x
I don't like the idea of unelected elites in San Francisco or Silicon Valley deciding whether my speech is permissible on their platforms, but I Iike even less the idea of unelected Washington bureaucrats trying to enforce some kind of ‘politically neutral’ content moderation. ht…
@robbysoave Robby Soave on x
A Big Tech hearing as pointless and performative as every other one https://reason.com/... via @reason
@destiny3650 @destiny3650 on x
Zuckerberg & Jack were unable to name a leftist individual or entity that they have censored on their platforms currently! Leftists do everything right in the eyes of the Demon!!! Conservatives are for God & Country, so that makes us conspiracy theorists!https://www.breitbart.com…
@exis10tial Ben on x
Millions of unemployed are struggling, businesses of all sizes are dying, a global pandemic is spiraling out of control, and the US Senate is having hearings about social media posts that hurt their feelings.. https://twitter.com/...
@sohrabahmari Sohrab Ahmari on x
A thread. .@andymstone, the ex-Democratic operative who said Facebook is “reducing circulation” on our Hunter Files reporting, said that step is being taken pending fact-checking. It was a bizarre standard, seemingly not applied to countless anti-Trump stories that collapsed.
@senjohnthune Senator John Thune on x
The Facebook employee who is in charge of election integrity on the platform is a former Biden staffer. And, according to Mr. Zuckerberg, he isn't even aware of it. Is there someone to balance this ideology in a similar election integrity role at his company? **crickets**
@b_fung Brian Fung on x
Yet Zuck continues to cling to the notion that Facebook is simply an innocent bystander in a laissez-faire marketplace of Good Ideas and the platform is simply where Good Ideas go to rise to the top. It's a simplistic model that's years behind the curve in media and academia.
@marshablackburn Sen. Marsha Blackburn on x
.@Facebook violated its own fact checking policy when it censored the @nypost.
@senblumenthal Richard Blumenthal on x
My Republican colleagues have been silent. When confronted w/Trump's lies, they've seemingly lost their phones & their voices. Their one reaction: this hearing, which is strategically timed before the election & designed to browbeat the platforms that have labeled disinformation.
@senjohnthune Senator John Thune on x
My question: Are Silicon Valley CEOs the legitimate referees of what kind of political speech gets amplified or suppressed? Zuckerberg: I certainly think not, I do not want us to have that role @Jack: No To underscore: tech companies are not the referees over our democracy.
@carnage4life Dare Obasanjo on x
The fact that she is referencing an internal mailing list discussion by Google employees that was leaked to alt-right sites is why I fully support anyone who questions the value of debating politics at work. https://twitter.com/...
@anildash @anildash on x
These tech CEOs should treat the bad-faith argument from Republicans trying to game the refs about misinformation as the bullshit it is, and fight back as hard as they would against any competitor they wanted to destroy. https://www.vox.com/...
@marshablackburn Sen. Marsha Blackburn on x
Big tech has made themselves the arbiters of free speech for the American people. The time has come for these platforms to stop removing content they simply don't agree with while hiding behind Section 230's liability shield. https://www.blackburn.senate.gov/ ...
@thetomzone @thetomzone on x
senator blumenthal says his colleagues want to browbeat tech companies into supporting trump and the timing of the section 230 hearing is “inexplicable.” commerce voted unanimously to hold this hearing.
@markwarner Mark Warner on x
That's why It saddens me that some of my colleagues have joined in on this Administration's concerted bid to bully platforms into allowing dark money groups, right-wing militias, & even Trump himself to abuse social platforms to sow disinformation & suppress voter participation.
@normative Julian Sanchez on x
The argument for repealing 230 is, essentially: Bully platforms into engaging in much more censorship out of fear of the ruinious expense of having to knock down thousands of ultimately frivolous lawsuits.
@jeffjarvis Jeff Jarvis on x
Perfect. Just perfect. This is the epistemology of the Republicans and the root of their case against the platforms: “If you erase lies and hate, you erase our speech.” https://twitter.com/...
@jennfranconews Jennifer Franco on x
Sen. Ted Cruz to Twitter's CEO during today's hearing on social media regulations before Senate panel: “Mr. Dorsey, who the hell elected you and put you in charge of what the media are allowed to report and what the American people are allowed to hear?"https://twitter.com/...
@donaldjtrumpjr Donald Trump Jr on x
That's a ridiculous statement. Millions of people get their news from Twitter and if Twitter is suppressing some of the biggest news of the day not allowing it to trend and locking out conservative accounts of course they are able to influence elections. https://twitter.com/...
@senatorwicker Senator Roger Wicker on x
Today I will chair a @senatecommerce hearing featuring the CEOs of Facebook, Twitter, & Google. They will have to answer for their content moderation practices, which have disproportionately affected conservatives. Tune in at 9AM CT/10AM ET here. https://www.commerce.senate.gov/ …
@senmikelee Mike Lee on x
“Zuckerberg was unable to answer the question and told Lee he needed time to think about it.” https://www.foxnews.com/...
@naral @naral on x
🧵 During today's hearing with major tech CEOs, Republicans parroted bogus claims that conservatives are being “censored” online. That's because they rely on spreading disinformation to keep them in power, and good content moderation threatens that power. https://www.nytimes.com/.…
@senatorwicker Senator Roger Wicker on x
At today's @SenateCommerce #BigTech hearing, Facebook and Twitter confirmed they had no evidence the @nypost story on Hunter Biden was Russian disinformation - yet they suppressed it anyway. Watch the clip. https://twitter.com/...
@carodjah @carodjah on x
The president hasn't been restricted in any sense of the term. Nor have conservatives. Nor have bigots and racists and those who spread hate speech. The people I've seen most restricted are transgender people daring to stand up for themselves. https://twitter.com/...
@mattyglesias Matthew Yglesias on x
Amazingly this was at the hearing about the need for technology companies to adopt a broad view of the social value of free speech https://twitter.com/...
@kevinroose Kevin Roose on x
how it started: how it's going: https://twitter.com/...
@pierce David Pierce on x
OMG “We are unable to make contact with Mr. Mark Zuckerberg. We are told by Facebook's staff he is alone.”
@mollywood Molly Wood on x
These hearings are not about Section 230 anymore. They're about the right to spread misinformation. One party says it's being silenced, and one party (plus researchers, academics and FB EMPLOYEES) say the platforms are spreading dangerous misinformation. Only one side has proof. …
@nxthompson @nxthompson on x
Why does section 230 allow tech companies to moderate content? Bc the previous law was like one saying swimming pools were liable for drowning deaths if they had lifeguards, but not if they didn't. The point of 230 is to fix those nuts incentives. https://www.wired.com/...
@rmac18 @rmac18 on x
Beyond the lack of coherent direction and political pandering from the Senators, these hearings with group lineups of CEOs are just not effective. It should be one CEO facing a line of questioning about specific topics with time for follow ups. Or else we get these charades.
@willsommer Will Sommer on x
Sen. Ron Johnson is so angry about this obviously satirical tweet about him, he just read it at the Senate tech hearing. Johnson says he wants the tweet taken down— “That could definitely affect my ability to get re-elected.” https://twitter.com/...
@caseynewton Casey Newton on x
“More than 50 former intelligence officials signed a letter casting doubt on the provenance of a New York Post story on the former vice president's son.” https://www.politico.com/... https://twitter.com/...
@rmac18 @rmac18 on x
Dorsey and Zuckerberg say that they have no evidence of the Hunter Biden NYPost story originating from Russian intelligence.
@rmac18 @rmac18 on x
Dorsey getting pressed heavily for his earlier answer to Cruz in which he said “no” when asked if Twitter could influence an election. Ofc Twitter, like any other medium that disseminates info, can influence. Dorsey is cornered by the fact that he gave such a definitive answer.
@mattyglesias Matthew Yglesias on x
From tech to sports to hollywood the consistent conservative view is that free enterprise is sacrosanct unless an industry features an empowered workforce that has left-of-center views, in which case some kind of mandatory political neutrality principles apply.
@caseynewton Casey Newton on x
Every Republican question about 230 comes down to asking “Why do people who break your rules face more consequences than people who do not break your rules?”
@davidmackau David Mack on x
cancel culture is out of control!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!! https://twitter.com/...
@max_fisher Max Fisher on x
The future of American governance is bad-faith politicians having show arguments with disingenuous tech CEOs, forever https://twitter.com/...
@kantrowitz Alex Kantrowitz on x
“Stop censoring people” “Fire your employees who criticize me”
@mmasnick Mike Masnick on x
I think it's disgusting that sitting US Senators would be asking companies about the political ideology of their employees. https://twitter.com/...
@snlester Simon Lester on x
How about Twitter makes its own choices, and then people decide whether they want to use Twitter, some alternative form of social media, or no social media at all? https://twitter.com/...
@matthewstoller Matt Stoller on x
Both sides in the Section 230 debate argue that the law is critical to the modern internet. It's just that the proponents of Section 230 don't realize that it's not 2005 anymore and the modern internet is a disaster.
@ceciliakang Cecilia Kang on x
In questioning about Facebook groups as breeding ground for hate groups, Zuckerberg responds that vast vast majority of groups aren't problematic. Mark Zuckerberg often uses this math defense, that we're mostly good. But with blns of users across apps, the even 5 percent is huge
@tayhatmaker Taylor Hatmaker on x
*has 7 minutes with one of the most powerful men in the world and can ask them anything* WHY don't my friends have MORE followers
@kevincollier Kevin Collier on x
I don't know enough about the history of congressional hearings, but it's painfully obvious to anyone who watches the tech ones that most who participate are only interested in generating an isolated clip of themselves getting an own in. Just do a tiktok, man. Save us the time.
@thedextriarchy Adi Robertson on x
The one thing I *really* wanted from this hearing was to get a better sense of where Facebook stands now on 230 legislation, because it so famously flipped on SESTA/FOSTA. This looks less and less likely to happen.
@thedextriarchy Adi Robertson on x
I'm legitimately curious about whether there are meaningful ways to legislate against harassment and other literally illegal and clearly harmful things. Schatz is right that... this is not that. There is just no way to have a good faith discussion amid the weird bias complaints.
@thedextriarchy Adi Robertson on x
To loosely paraphrase Ted Cruz's last statement, how dare the CEO of a company select what can be posted on its website.
@kevinroose Kevin Roose on x
This hearing is mostly a bad-faith parade of grievances, but there is also some absurd denialism by the CEOs, saying they're not referees (they are!) and that feed-ranking algorithms are neutral and detached from human decisions (they aren't!)
@kateconger O...K on x
The 230 reform that Twitter and Facebook seem to find most palatable is publishing more transparency reports. I don't know how a startup competes under those requirements: https://twitter.com/...
@tayhatmaker Taylor Hatmaker on x
Zuckerberg says he agrees with Dorsey, that social networks should have more transparency around moderation and algorithms. He points to FB's transparency reports (aggregated info on enforcement of its rules) but Facebook's algorithm is a huge black box
@howardmortman Howard Mortman on x
.@jack Dorsey of @twitter in DC over the years ... https://twitter.com/...
@antoniogm @antoniogm on x
Yup. Which is why this entire discourse is so absurd on all side: from the opportunistic politicians crafting sound bites, to the chattering-class journos and academics making careers out of what's a rounding error on a dashboard. https://twitter.com/...
@antoniogm @antoniogm on x
I've said it before: if you've never worked at a company like these, and stared at dashboards full of nine-figure numbers as part of your day job, you likely have no idea what you're talking about. And you definitely have no idea about potential product solutions.
@nxthompson @nxthompson on x
Wow. @brianschatz speaking truth. Points out that this hearing is a sham and it's a waste of time and money to try to bully tech CEOs a week before an election for partisan aims. “I'm not going to use my time to ask any questions because this is nonsense.”
@donie Donie O'Sullivan on x
Cruz, whose dad was falsely implicated by Trump in 2016 in the JFK assassination, tells @jack Twitter shouldn't be shutting down any stories.
@atrupar Aaron Rupar on x
I guarantee you this 20-second clip will run on Fox News's primetime programming tonight https://twitter.com/...
@tonyromm Tony Romm on x
Cruz left out the people who own and run the NY Post as he ran down all of its other qualities
@issielapowsky Issie Lapowsky on x
Dorsey live troubleshoots for the NY Post re: how it can tweet its Biden story. Cruz is yelling so loud it's echoing on his own computer.
@tonyromm Tony Romm on x
Cruz just claimed Google manipulates search results to manipulate the election. This is false.
@sarahfrier Sarah Frier on x
Blumenthal says Republicans “seem to want to bully and browbeat the platforms here to try and tilt them in president Trump's favor,” though the election and human health is on the line if they ignore Trump's misinformation.
@issielapowsky Issie Lapowsky on x
Kind of a joke to cherry pick a single FB staffer who worked for Biden. Joel Kaplan, a Republican, is the top of the heap when it comes to Facebook's political work.
@alexstamos Alex Stamos on x
When you make tens of billions of decisions, even 99.5% accuracy gives plenty of examples for any group of any persuasion to nutpick and paint as a symbol of bias. Anyway, we need mandated transparency/safe harbor to allow for real empirical research.
@caseynewton Casey Newton on x
An hour into this Section 230 hearing, it must be said: we are not getting anywhere
@sam_l_shead Sam Shead on x
Zuck getting told to follow up ON THE RECORD to future questions was brilliant. Don't think I've ever heard someone say “alright” so sheepishly before
@mmasnick Mike Masnick on x
So @SenBlumenthal talks about how he was a critic of #Section230 going back to when he was AG of Connecticut. He leaves out this is because he got mad about Craigslist ads. Then he complains about GOP “bullying and browbeating” platforms. The same thing he's done for 15 years.
@alexstamos Alex Stamos on x
Any discussion about content moderation needs to be grounded in the reality that the controversial calls are a tiny portion of what is necessary to make any social feature at all usable. FB Q2 numbers: Organized Hate - 266k Spam - 1.4B 5000x difference
@issielapowsky Issie Lapowsky on x
Zuck said he's going to follow up with Thune on providing a list of news articles FB has suppressed “There's probably already a record of this that could be reviewed.”- Zuck Dorsey said he'd also be open to sharing a list. Wouldn't be surprised if these requests go unanswered.
@issielapowsky Issie Lapowsky on x
Klobuchar starts with a conciliatory note to the witnesses, thanking them for encouraging voting, chastising the Republicans for not passing the Honest Ads Act and accusing them of politicizing what “should actually not be a partisan topic.”
@nancyscola Nancy Scola on x
One nugget way down at the bottom here: Twitter source says that if Trump isn't re-elected, he'll no longer be covered by its “world leaders” policy — meaning that if he violates Twitter's rules, he faces enforcement actions like everyone else. https://www.politico.com/...
@mmasnick Mike Masnick on x
So @jack is explaining how narrow Twitter's content moderation policies are regarding misinformation and @CoryGardner's response is “But why aren't you moderating THIS PARTICULAR TWEET” that clearly does not violate Twitter's policies, as Jack just explained.
@lanceulanoff Lance Ulanoff on x
I miss Hoodie Mark Zuckerberg. https://www.c-span.org/... https://twitter.com/...
@reckless Nilay Patel on x
Cory Gardner muffs Sundar Pichai's name, the second senator to do so. He is the CEO of one of the richest and most powerful companies on earth, and his name is easy to pronounce. It's not an accident that they won't learn.
@politico @politico on x
Vijaya Gadde flies under the radar in a world that worships tech CEOs. But she's quickly moving Twitter toward a tougher line on speech—and infuriating conservatives along the way. https://www.politico.com/...
@cwarzel Charlie Warzel on x
these issues (230, content moderation) are extremely important but the only takeaway from this circus right now is that these lawmakers don't want to work on a covid relief package for struggling americans but feel it's a great use of time to vent about shadowbans and bias. https…
@atrupar Aaron Rupar on x
The entire premise of this hearing is that everyone is Very Unfair to dear leader Trump https://twitter.com/...
@issielapowsky Issie Lapowsky on x
Dorsey remarkably doesn't take the bait and do the whole mea culpa thing: “There are certainly things that we can do much faster. But generally, we believe that the policy was enforced in a timely manner, and in the right regard.”
@thetomzone @thetomzone on x
SEN WICKER: I needed a new heel for my shoe. So I decided to go to Morganville, which is what they called Shelbyville in those days. So I tied an onion to my belt, which was the style at the time. DORSEY: Uh huh. WICKER: Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days,
@reckless Nilay Patel on x
Twitter is a long con to make powerful people say “tweet” in somber and serious tones
@ceciliakang Cecilia Kang on x
Zuckerberg is most agreeable among CEOs for reforms of 230. “Congress should update the law to make sure it is working as intended.” -Making content moderation systems more transparent -separating good actors form bad actors.
@rmac18 @rmac18 on x
Facebook: “We connect people.” Facebook CEO: “Hello is my video on, can you hear me, I am alone here. Hello?”
@ceciliakang @ceciliakang on x
Mark Zuckerberg having trouble getting connected. 5 minute break for now
@jamestitcomb James Titcomb on x
Dorsey's last appearance in front of Congress he got criticised for not wearing a tie. Very smart to make it impossible to tell this time https://twitter.com/...
@issielapowsky Issie Lapowsky on x
Jack kicks off with a 3-point plan for updating Section 230: requiring transparency into moderation practices, requiring appeal process, and enabling people to choose the algos that rank their content.
@mmasnick Mike Masnick on x
So @jack suggests that letting people choose their own moderation algorithms is a worthwhile approach. Yup. https://knightcolumbia.org/... But, it's also not a solution the government can mandate. But it can *fix other laws* to stop the ability of companies to block that.
@ceciliakang Cecilia Kang on x
Sundar again has good room mood the ceramics are like a still life portrait
@jack @jack on x
Requiring 1) moderation process and practices to be published, 2) a straightforward process to appeal decisions, and 3) best efforts around algorithmic choice, are suggestions to address the concerns we all have going forward. And they're all achievable in short order.
@kevinroose Kevin Roose on x
Excited for today's Senate hearing on the censorship of conservative voices by tech platforms! https://twitter.com/...
@issielapowsky Issie Lapowsky on x
Following Wicker's accusations about political bias, Cantwell is more or less skipping right over all of that to talk about foreign election interference online. “I know that some people think that these issues are out of sight, out of mind I guarantee you, they're not.”
@markscott82 Mark Scott on x
I do not see Zuckerberg, Dorsey or Pichai making the same efforts to provide themselves for questioning fro other democratically-elected lawmakers in Berlin, Brasilia or Bnagkok — despite, arguably, these companies having a greater effect on those democracies than in the US.
@markscott82 Mark Scott on x
In Europe, the debate has focused almost exclusively on platforms not doing enough to stop misinformation, etc. That includes voluntary code of conduct, as well as domestic legislation requiring 24 hour takedowns of harmful content or hefty penalties.
@markscott82 Mark Scott on x
I find it amazing how this debate around platform liability has gone down very different paths in US and Europe. It's just night and day, and does a disservice to all social media users in both US & Europe.
@markscott82 Mark Scott on x
In US, the political battle has focused on how Silicon Valley is allegedly censoring right-leaning content and voices (there's no evidence of that, tbh). Left-leaning voices say platforms aren't doing enough to clamp down on misinformation/hate speech
@rmac18 @rmac18 on x
me loggin into the tech hearing https://twitter.com/...
@jameeljaffer Jameel Jaffer on x
Unsurprisingly, @zeynep's new substack newsletter is great. https://zeynep.substack.com/ ...
@mathewi Mathew Ingram on x
“The crisis is a crisis of attention more than a crisis of speech. Rarely in human history has it been possible to speak more, to more people, with such ease. This has made a form of censorship easier, one based on meddling with attention and credibility” https://zeynep.substack.…
@prateekwaghre Prateek Waghre on x
There's going to be deluge of newsletter analysis of the section 230 hearing over the next few days (guilty) But, before any of that-read @zeynep's post which may be among the most relevant ones about the hearing without actually being about The hearing https://zeynep.substack.co…
@digiphile Alex Howard on x
What's missing from this hearing: “we have to debate everything from the dominance of few social media companies over the public sphere to the problem of regulating attention in an age of information glut” https://zeynep.substack.com/ ... A healthier Congress would have done so, …
@nancyscola Nancy Scola on x
“Speech is one of the most anthropologically complex things imaginable.” I profile Vijaya Gadde, the Twitter exec who's architecting Twitter's new — and controversial — approach to how people tweet. https://www.politico.com/...
@nancyscola Nancy Scola on x
Inside Facebook headquarters, some aren't impressed by Twitter's recent crackdown on high-profile political tweets. https://www.politico.com/... https://twitter.com/...

Chronicles

The Senate's Section 230 hearing, with Dorsey, Zuckerberg, and Pichai, only briefly discussed the law, instead letting Republicans berate Dorsey for soundbites

Related Coverage

Discussion