The committee is now adjourned. And with that, I die.
This is a chance for the Tim Cook feud to go nuclear.
Chairman asks for names of other CEOs to talk to.
Walden asks for suggestions about other tech CEOs they can grill. Hoping Zuckerberg screams "TIM COOK!" at the top of his lungs.
Closing with Cramer talking about the risk of going too far with regulation and asking for Facebook to open a center in North Dakota.
Rep. Cramer tells Zuckerberg to hire some Midwesterners to make it more conservative.
Rep. Cramer began by invoking original sin, so this feels very promising.
Rep. Cramer walked in late.
FINAL SPEAKER
The last person here has to top:
“Look, you love America, we know that.”
I brought you a literal Constitution.
He also asked Zuckerberg to institute the First Amendment at Facebook.
Rep. Duncan just offered to give Zuckerberg a Constitution.
Rep. Duncan is waving the Constitution.
Has anything been brought up as much as alleged anti-conservative bias?
What an utter waste of time that was, Rep. Carter.
"Look, you love America."
And then on to movie privacy.
Unexpected pivot to elephant extinction.
Back to opioids.
It's great that someone finally brought up Facebook's tracking pixel.
"With the Facebook Pixel, people browsing the internet may not even see the Facebook logo.”
Slamming Zuckerberg for questions he didn’t answer — about shadow profiles, about court cases, about specific numbers.
Rep. Dingell: She is on Facebook and married to “the King of Twitter.”
Rep. Walters seems to be asking, if the tech companies are based in California, why does the state still have privacy problems?
Another congressman complains about having an ad rejected.
A stern, no-nonsense call for no regulation.
That may have been the friendliest questioning we've seen.
Discussing "the tone." "You truly are doing good."
Rep. Collins explained "Facebook doesn't sell data" before Zuckerberg even needed to mention it.
Every time they bring up Diamond and Silk I think of Prince's immortal "Diamonds and Pearls."
Diamond and Silk again.
Anything they got wrong? Pauses. "I need to think about that more."
Zuckerberg says he likes GDPR's privacy controls.
"I think that GDPR in general is going to be a very positive step for the internet," he says.
Zuckerberg is asked what's right, and wrong, about GDPR.
Another important point about a question from Mullin a few minutes ago:
We are still getting questions about basic ad settings.
The politics of personal responsibility have arrived at this hearing.
Not exactly a hard-hitting line here: “Isn’t it the consumers’ responsibility to some degree to control the content that they release?”
Rep. Mullin: “I want to commend you on your ability to not just invent something but to see it through its growth.”
Rep. Ruiz asks whether there should be a digital consumer protection agency. That idea "deserves consideration," Zuckerberg says.
Rep. Ruiz wondering whether there should be an agency that works on data issues, a “Digital Consumer Protection Agency.”
Zuckerberg clarifies previous testimony asking whether Facebook logged web visits for users. In fact, the company temporarily stores the visits. They are converted into "ad interests," and you can find those interests when you download your information.
Zuckerberg says 200 people are focused on terrorism issues, along with AI tools and reviewers.
She wants to know about recruitment specifically. Zuckerberg has talked about AI tools detecting terrorist content — and does again here.
Rep. Brooks of Indiana asks Zuckerberg how he will keep us safe from terrorism.
He's back in the hot seat.
For those counting, we're about 4.5 showings of The Social Network into these hearings.
If you want to figure out who Diamond and Silk are before they're likely asked about again: here you go.
10 MINUTE RECESS
Facebook, as it's announced, worked with data brokers until very recently "as part of the ad system.” Zuckerberg defends it as “industry standard ad practice.”
The acting CEO of Cambridge Analytica, Alexander Tayler, really did step down today.
Notes the (acting) CEO of Cambridge Analytica stepped down while this was happening.
To answer the congressman's question: yes, we have been here forever.
"Seems like we’ve been here forever, don’t you think?”
“Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this important hearing.”
And we didn't in that question either — instead hearing about "privacy 2.0."
Comparing Facebook to infamous monopolies of history. We really haven't heard the phrase "break up" very much yet.
I want to know more about Rep. Bucshon's son and whether he wound up buying a suit.
Honestly, I want more microphone questions.
Rep. Kennedy asking more questions about the basics of Facebook's ad platform.
Entire line of questioning was about this.
Zuckerberg: ads are a "coincidence."
Does Facebook let executives have their phones during meetings?
Yes.
Rep. Bucshon should definitely spend the next several years investigating who is secretly listening to him.
"I'm skeptical that someone isn't" [listening].
"It's pretty obvious to me that someone is listening to the audio on our phones."
He refuses to believe it's not happening. If it's not Facebook, "who is" doing it?
Rep. Bucshon from Indiana wants to know who is listening to him through his phone.
Rep. said his mother-in-law talked about deceased relative, and then something about him showed up on Facebook.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
We're back to the conspiracy that Facebook listens through your microphone.
Schrader: I’ve logged out of Facebook. Can you still follow me?
Zuckerberg: on security, there may be specific things about how you use Facebook even when you're not logged in that we keep track of to make sure you're not abusing the system.
Representative Schrader is asking about web tracking of logged-out users.
Rep. Schrader: you let other people sell information. “I would disagree that we allow it.”
Demanding statistics on conservative versus liberal takedowns.
Diamond and Silk are back... on a poster board.
There was a “movie about this” of “unclear truth.”
Zuckerberg has been asked a question about "FaceMash," a prank website from 2003 for comparing women.
Rep. says “number of people who are really worked up” in district about Cambridge Analytica “would fit at that table.”
(Brenda's question is about how Facebook can be held accountable. It can't. Sorry Brenda!)
"Brenda from Muscatine has a question as well." — Loebsack
You might have guessed: Zuckerberg pointed that out.
"Is it possible for Facebook to exist without selling your data?" asks Loebsack. (Facebook does not sell data.)
Rep. Loebsack just called him "Mr. Zuckerbird."
Jesus, take the wheel.
Completely lost count of questions about conservative and religious content, but add one more here.
Zuckerberg very eager to answer anything about rural broadband.
This is not true but
Clarke asks whether lack of diversity is making the company less “culturally competent” in enforcement.
"Thanks to Mr. Zuckerman for coming today" — Rep. Clarke.
Rep. Bilirakis says a constituent had personal information posted on Facebook and company failed to act.
Oh no, we are back to opioids.
How do you not want to dig in on "shadow profile"?
We are back to asking Zuckerberg about whether Facebook has a responsibility to protect people's privacy, for the 84th time in the past day.
Rep. Tonko: Cambridge Analytica “just the beginning,” “the dam is still broken.”
What exactly are these "security purposes"? And does Facebook deny that this has advertising benefits as well?
Rightly raising the question: how many people could possibly think to do that?
Walking through the confusing process for non-users to opt out.
"You're collecting data about people who are not even Facebook users" is a blistering and fair criticism from Rep. Lujan.
"How many data points does Facebook have on the average user and non-user," on the other hand, is a good question from Rep. Lujan — and one that Zuckerberg won't answer.
Rep. Lujan adopts my least favorite rhetorical strategy, which involves asking Zuckerberg if he is aware of a random fact from many years ago. "Yes or no?!"
Rep. Lujan asking about specific research on scraped data. Zuckerberg not familiar with it.
The fake accounts are "extorting people for money," he says.
Rep. Kinzinger says he has had his photos stolen to create fake accounts.
“I just put on your website Andrew Kinzinger, and he looks a lot like me.”
It's more of a hobby, really.
Zuckerberg says they’re “not in the business” of handing over “a lot of information to the Russian government.”
Rep. Kinzinger: what information does Facebook make available to Russian state agencies, especially law enforcement? Zuckerberg answers generally, says they work with law enforcement if there's a "valid legal process."
Rep. Welch kind of yelled the word "privacy" a lot to no clear end.
More context on that browsing history answer:
Congress might consider addressing the opioid crisis outside of a Facebook data privacy hearing.
I enjoyed this rhetorical gambit from Rep. McKinley: "You are hurting people! Would you agree with that statement?" (Zuckerberg disagreed.)
“Facebook is actually enabling an illegal activity” and “you are hurting people.”
"Should Facebook sell Oxycontin?" is my favorite non sequitur question of the week. Thanks to Rep. McKinley of West Virginia.
My understanding is that Facebook does track your web visits for retargeting purposes — if a site has a "like" button, and you click it, Facebook knows where you were.
GDPR: when will Americans have protections? “As quickly as possible” but no date.
Rep. McNerney: Facebook does not have browsing history? Seems to say that's correct, although that was a little squishy — talking about it in context of what he received in downloaded information.
It didn't wake up to that responsibility until the site was more than a decade old.
Zuckerberg says Facebook thought it had “a responsibility” to understand how content was affecting users’ moods.
Rep. Olson references infamous Facebook experiment on user moods. Wants to know why that was a good idea.
Zuckerberg goes back to the first question. He says he meant the DNC and RNC were informed, not the campaigns.
Wants to know whether the Trump campaign got special treatment on Facebook ads. Zuckerberg says “we apply the same standards.”
Huh? Rep. Sarbanes: Facebook said it told Clinton and Trump campaigns about Russian meddling, but that’s in dispute. But he wouldn’t let Zuckerberg answer the question.
Zuckerberg says Facebook lets people stop targeted ads but “most people don’t do that.” He argues because they want the relevant ads — would like to see the citation for that.
“What do you think [legislation against targeting ads] would do to the internet?” “It would make the ads less relevant.”
A very long but basic question: other tech companies target ads? Yes.
Rep. Guthrie is talking about basketball timeouts.
“You watch where we go.”
“You’re collecting data outside of Facebook.” When someone visits a website with a Facebook share system, they’re still being tracked. Castor says Americans still don’t understand that.
Rep. Castor comparing Facebook to “stalking” kids and following people around the neighborhood.
Again: did Cambridge Analytica incident violate FTC agreement? “We do not believe it did,” Zuckerberg says. Rep. Lance says he thinks it was a violation.
Zuckerberg says there are plenty of people who argue Facebook has inappropriately taken down liberal content.
And complaining about nonexistent "censorship" of conservative content.
And we're back.
While you're waiting, you can catch up on how Twitch users are annotating the streams of Zuckerberg testifying. (It seems to involve a lot of robot emotes.)
Time for a quick break.
Again, after a slightly confusing line of questioning, a zen koan: “We don’t sell data to advertisers.”
Harper is totally misrepresenting what the Obama campaign did. The Obama campaign got users' consent; Cambridge Analytica didn't. It's that simple.
Rep. Harper: “Shouldn’t they be equally outraged by the Obama campaign's” use of data? (No.)
Lawmakers still attempting to draw parallels between Obama campaign on Facebook (which explained what data it was collecting) and Cambridge Analytica (which secretly bought data).
Will you commit to providing numbers on employee retention by race? Zuckerberg says “we try to include a lot of importation information” in updates, and will look into it.
Butterfield holding up leadership team photos. “This does not reflect America.”
“I think we know that the industry is behind on this,” Zuckerberg says.
Rep. Butterfield asking about racial diversity in tech industry, citing small improvements at Facebook. Will he convene a meeting with other executives to increase diversity? Zuckerberg says it's "a good idea."
"In my opinion, Facebook is here to stay" — futurist Rep. Butterfield of North Carolina.
Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers is worried that there is not enough religious and conservative content on Facebook.
Among other good policy points: really pushing Zuckerberg on whether GDPR rules will be "exactly" the same for other countries. Answer still a little bit wobbly.
It's remarkable how different today feels from yesterday. The last several members of Congress have seemed deeply informed about how Facebook works, where it has failed, and what's at stake.
Have you set any deadline for auditing apps? Expect it to take “many months,” Zuckerberg says. Years? “I hope not.”
Proof that “self-regulation does not work,” she says.
She's reading them all.
Rep. Schakowsky: “You have a long list of apologies.” Going back to Harvard.
(He says Cambridge Analytica incident was not a violation of the decree.)
The 2011 privacy agreement with the FTC getting a ton of play today. "We take a broader view of what our responsibility for people's privacy is," Zuckerberg says.
Rep. Latta: can you tell whether China or Russia has scraped information? Zuckerberg says they’re not aware of that. Got this question yesterday, too.
"Why should we trust you to follow through on these promises?" —Rep. Mike Doyle (D-PA)
Do you routinely learn about violations through the press? “Sometimes we do.”
Having trouble following Scalise.
Scalise is, again, trying to argue that Facebook's algorithms are biased against conservative content. Unclear what information he's trying to cite here.
Rep. Scalise: would you agree that we need more computer programmers? Yes, Zuckerberg says.
“It’s a public service announcement we just made,” Scalise says.
“I don’t remember” if an FTC agreement with Facebook in 2011 included a financial penalty, Zuckerberg says. Representative says the FTC can't do it for first-time offenses.
Representative arguing that lawsuits haven't resulted in financial penalties for Facebook. Zuckerberg saying he's not familiar with them.
Zuckerberg again admits that not many people have deleted their accounts in anger.
"We need some rules and regulations," says Blackburn, who is a staunch conservative Republican.
Which is true BTW!
Blackburn trying to make a point that other kinds of businesses have substantially stronger privacy protections.
"Who owns the virtual you?" Rep. Marsha Blackburn asks.
Zuckerberg's notes yesterday on GDPR: don't say we already comply with GDPR.
Credit to "Mean" Gene Green for asking deeply informed and relevant questions about extending GDPR protections to Americans.
Zuckerberg says: at the top of everyone’s app there will be a tool that walks people through their settings.
Is it just me, or is this a stronger commitment than what we heard yesterday?
GDPR requires new rules. “We’re going to extend that to the world.”
That's an unequivocal yes on a question where Zuckerberg had seemed less committed before.
GDPR question: Facebook has committed to abiding by privacy rules in Europe. Is Facebook going to make the same settings available? “Yes, all the same controls will be available around the world.”
Has anyone reached out to Scott Adams for comment?
“I see an app, I want it, I download it… just take me to the good stuff in the app.” Same.
Wow, Rep. says he is referencing "my technology guru" — Scott Adams, of Dilbert.
Rep. Burgess: "I've consulted my technology guru in the form of Scott Adams, author of Dilbert." Take me now, Jesus.
Zuckerberg mentions other elections — French presidential, Alabama special election — and says AI tools were successful there.
“We’re doing a number of things” — deploying new AI tools, especially.
"This has become a top priority for our company to prevent that from ever happening again," Zuckerberg says.
Engel asks whether Facebook can now detect when foreign entities try to buy political ads.
Does Facebook plan to sue Kogan or Cambridge Analytica? Facebook is “looking into” it.
"Even if someone isn’t logged in, we track certain information like how many pages they’re accessing as a security measure.”
For ads, also runs a “third-party network” that tracks for ad targeting.
How does tracking work across different devices? Zuckerberg couldn’t easily answer this yesterday. He says we track “certain information for security reasons and for ad reasons.”
Who’s going to conduct app audits? Internal investigations, followed by working with third parties for suspicious apps.
Representative talking about his parents and "the positive benefits" of them being on there, but says there are some "issues."
In contrast to those last questions, now we've got: "First of all, I want to thank Facebook.”
"It might be useful to clarify what happened here,” Zuckerberg says about Cambridge Analytica. Rep. says she “doesn’t have time for a long answer.”
Dang, which one of Zuckerberg's friends took a personality quiz???
“Was your data included in the data sold to the malicious third parties?” Zuckerberg says yes.
Do you have a moral responsibility to run a platform that protects democracy? Yes, Zuckerberg says.
Eshoo: “I think the damage done to our democracy” is “incalculable.”
And now here's Rep. Eshoo, who represents Silicon Valley.
We are now reading the former Michigan state lottery commissioner's candidate announcement into the record.
A surprising number of people formulating some version of "how would you regulate yourself?" Upton's question was, “What regulatory environment would you want” if you were launching a startup to take on “the big guy”?
Okay, so what are the eight apps Americans use to communicate every day? And how many of them are owned by Facebook?
Rep. Upton: “Some would argue that a more regulatory environment might ultimately stifle new platforms and innovators.” Zuckerberg himself tried to make this argument yesterday.
Zuckerberg again fielding a question about racial discrimination in housing ads. Was brought up a handful of times yesterday.
"I only have a few more seconds." — great news from Rep. Rush.
Of course, Facebook still collects information about you even if you do leave, which Zuckerberg didn't mention.
“I know of no surveillance organization” that lets people remove information, Zuckerberg says.
The representative's question is: how is Facebook different from J. Edgar Hoover?
“Your organization, your methodology, in my opinion, is similar.” Says Facebook is “truncating” rights through “invasion” of privacy.
Rep. Rush talking about the FBI in the 1960s, mentioning COINTELPRO spying operations.
Talking about data collection on teenagers. "Teens often do want to share their opinions publicly.”
Chilling, from Zuckerberg: "The reality that we see is that teens often do want to share their opinions publicly."
After Ted Cruz's line of questions yesterday, expect more on this.
Again, Facebook does not censor conservative news. The publisher that consistently gets the most engagement on Facebook is Fox News.
Rep. Barton says he got a question through Facebook: please ask Mr. Zuckerberg why conservative bloggers are being "censored." The example he brings up Zuckerberg says was an "enforcement error."
Punting that conversation to a follow-up.
Yes or no from Pallone: Will you commit to changing default settings to limit data use as much as possible? Zuckerberg says it's a "complex issue that deserves more than a one-word answer."
Unfortunately, Pallone's first question is whether Facebook "limits" the amount of data collects. The only way Zuckerberg could answer "no" is if the company collected... an unlimited amount of data.
Pallone says he doesn't see how changes really limit data use.
I'm enjoying the extreme saltiness of Rep. Pallone.
Pallone again: says Facebook has been optimistic, but he doesn't have faith in “corporate America” or GOP “corporate allies.”
By the time this is all over, "we don't sell your data" is going to be a banner at the top of the News Feed.
As we saw yesterday, Zuckerberg eager to say 1) we don’t “sell” data, 2) users can control what data they share.
Walden: Did it ever cross your mind that you should be clearer with users about how Facebook data is used? Why wasn't that "higher priority"? Zuckerberg says they try, "it's a broad system."
Walden will not stop until he has listed every feature of the Facebook platform.
Messenger lets you send money. “Is Facebook a financial institution?” Zuckerberg says no, even if we provide those tools.
Shoutout to payments on Facebook Messenger
First question now. Rep. Walden: "Is Facebook a media company?" Zuckerberg, after answering this for years: we're a tech company.
Shoutout to the Tom Brady series on Facebook Watch.
Once again, Zuckerberg is explaining what Facebook is doing to prevent another Cambridge Analytica — changes to the platform, app audits, “but there’s more to do.”
(These are the same opening remarks Zuckerberg made yesterday.)
Zuckerberg’s opening statement: “You will rightfully have some hard questions for me to answer.”
Pallone: "If all we do is have a hearing and nothing happens, then that's not accomplishing anything. I've seen it over and over again ... we have the hearing and nothing happens."
“Excuse me for being so pessimistic, Mr. Chairman.”
Pallone says he wants additional hearings with more companies handling information.
Pallone is saying we need comprehensive privacy protections and regulations. It's one of the strongest statements we've heard over the past day from any lawmaker.
Republicans are meanwhile rolling back privacy regulations, Pallone says. Calls them "complicit" in the cycle of "privacy by press release."
“Many of us can’t give [Facebook] up easily,” and "this ubiquity comes with a price.”
Rep. Pallone: “Facebook has become integral to our lives.”
Says he wants clarification on “the considerable confusion” about how Facebook data is used off the platform.
"What exactly is Facebook?" Rep. Walden asks.
"While Facebook has certainly grown, I worry it may not have matured.” Mentions the "move fast and break things" mantra.
"Does Congress need to clarify whether consumers own or have any real power over their own data?"
Opening statement from the chairman: here examining "alarming reports" of breaches of trust, and "the fundamental relationship tech companies have with their users."
Here we go, starting now.
There's no better way to preview today than to watch our video team's recap of yesterday's weirdest moments.
Zuckerberg is expected to appear in 15 minutes. Judging by the length of yesterday's hearing, expect to hear from about 6,000 of this nation's House representatives.
You're a little early! Zuckerberg is expected to testify at 10AM ET today. In the meantime, you can catch up with our coverage of Facebook and the Cambridge Analytica scandal here.
Event Details
Liveblog Tips
- When new posts are available, a button appears on top of the page
- Scroll to the bottom of the page to load older posts
- Click on a timestamp to link to a specific update