♪ emily: i'm emily chang and this is "the best of bloomberg technology," where we bring you interviews from the week in tech. the end of net neutrality. the fcc votes to kill obama-era rules for equal access to the internet. a massive merger that could shake the media landscape for decades to come. disney is buying fox assets for more than 52 billion dollars. we will hear from disney ceo bob iger. and the twins joined the ranks of the world's billionaires. thanks to bitcoin.

they explain why they took a chance on cryptocurrency. first, to our lead. net neutrality is no more. the fcc voted to repeal the obama era internet protections designed to keep rock band providers from favoring content. vote was 3-2 to end the protections. the book -- vote came amid protests from defenders of the rules, who say this will create have sent have-nots when it comes to accessing content. the fcc chair held -- heralded the return to what he calls a free-speech market approach, saying it is time to restart internet freedom. the light touch framework that has governed the internet for most of its existence. joining us now, one of the most of its existence. people who voted to repeal it, brendan carr, who was nominated by president trump. you said today is a great day, many say it is an awful day.

what don't they understand? >> thank you for the question. it is a great day for consumers, innovation and freedom. there is a lot of apocryphal rhetoric out there. we are voting to go back to the 2015 regulatory framework, the title i framework that the commission had in place for the 20 years before 2015. this is not moving toward some mad max version of the internet where isps will have complete free reign to dictate your online experience. the 2015 framework has long legal protections for consumers. consumers will benefit that -- from those. emily: a number of groups say they will sue on the basis of broken process, flawed legal reasoning, willful rejection of evidence and regard for public

-- disregard for public input. the attorney general eric schneiderman saying this is not just an attack on our internet, but on all new yorkers and the integrity of every american's voice in government. we will fight back. what is your reaction to these comments? >> any time the fcc acts in internet regulation, there are integrity of every american's lawsuits over the decision we make. the supreme court broadened internet access and found that the fcc did have the authority and that is the only classification the supreme court has ever found. it is a procedural matter and a substantive legal matter is on a sound legal footing. i'm confident in where we go from here. emily: we spoke with the former fcc chair that oversaw net neutrality and look at what he told us.

>> for the first time since 1934, with this decision, the fcc is washing its hands, walking away from that congressionally mandated responsibility, and they are only doing it for the most important network that will define the rest of the 21st century. it is an inconceivable kind of action. emily: what do you make of this accusation that the fcc is absolving itself of responsibility, rather than taking responsibility? brendan: that is simply not the case. we are going back to the same framework that was in place in 2015. your viewers can remember the internet of 2015. there were protections. those protections will be back in place. the federal trade commission is going to be fully empowered for the first time in two years to police isps conduct with respect to consumers. the fcc decision stripped the

fcc of 100% of authority to protect from isps. another piece of that is online privacy protections. the ftc is the nations premier consumer protection agency and has been prohibited from taking action because of the title two decision. consumer protection agency and the consumer is gaining protections. this is not a situation where there are no rules in place. emily: comcast has said they won't invoke paid prioritization, but let's say they do. what would happen? brendan: what happens here is there is a misconception about what title ii did. right now, it is not stopping providers from blocking websites, creating fast lanes, paid prioritization. there are reasons that stuff is not taking place today. it is market forces regulating the conduct and after our decision, those forces stay in place. there are a lot of people who don't believe in market forces and that is fine, there are positive laws in place.

federal antitrust law prevents isps from entering agreements that unfairly block, throttle or create anti-competitive pay prioritization. there will be rules out there that will be able to police any of this conduct that people are talking about. emily: what about the fake comments in the public comment section? does that give you positive? one million comments were written, potentially by a robot, to counter the vast majority of comments that were against this repeal? brendan: it doesn't, here is why. we have run an open and transparent progress -- process. it is clear how we run our rulemaking and record. we have an open record. anyone can file a comment. we don't require identification that would discourage robust conversation.

we have filings, that shows the passion people have in the issue. emily: the vast majority of those comments were against this repeal. brendan: there was a wide range of views expressed and the question we have to confront is a threshold legal matter for the fcc. did congress, when they set up title two, did they intend the internet to be in one or the other? when you look at that legal determination we have to make as commissioners, this is clear this is a title i information service. emily: when will we see lawmakers actually enact this into law? brendan: our decision today goes into effect as soon as the omb and other government agencies review the transparency rule we adopted, and it will take effect

shortly after. that is the timeline we are looking at. emily: how do you see the internet -- let's say the internet five years from now, being different. shortly after. it already seems like so much power is consolidated in the hands of a few powerful companies, many of those were against this repeal -- but how does the internet look different from you -- to you in five years? brendan: that is why this is such a great decision. title two is a monopoly style regulation, a lot of the debate has been about at&t, comcast, hands of a few powerful verizon, the big isps. our record shows they have been unfairly impacted. when i talk to consumers, they want more competition and that is where title two heads in the wrong direction. unfairly impacted. there are thousands of small isps that are trying to provide consumers service for the first time or provide competition to larger providers. those are the ones who have been hurt worse by this decision.

when we repeal this rule, those providers will have an easier time competing, getting money and consumers will benefit as a result of the increased competition from repealing title two. emily: that was fcc commissioner telsa getting its biggest truck order yet from pepsi. for 100 vehicles worth an estimated $102 million. walmart and anheuser-busch have placed orders. production starts in 2019. consumer edge forecasts the tesla truck could generate $300 billion in annual revenue for the company. coming up, the disney is about to become an even busier -- bigger force in hollywood after reaching a deal to take over fox assets. what does it mean for the future of moviemaking? if you like bloomberg news, you can listen on the bloomberg radio app, bloomberg.com and on

sirius xm. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ emily: this week marks 37 years since apple became a public company. steve jobs was 25 and held the chairman title. the company sold 4.6 million shares at $22 apiece and since then, shares of apples are up more than 40,000% with a market cap of $800 billion. a mega-media deal has been reached after weeks of speculation. disney is snapping up a large chunk of 21st century fox assets worth $52 billion. bloomberg tv, up with bob iger in l.a. he explained how the deal came about. >> a year ago, i didn't see this one coming either. we have known each other a long time, have a lot of respect for one another and occasionally get together to amuse about the business.

had a get together, we were talking about the disruptive had a get together, we were talking about the disruptive forces we were seeing and the relative position of our companies and left thinking there might be an opportunity for us to do something with him. i thought about it for a few weeks, called him thereafter and suggested maybe we should get together and talk about it, and we did spend some time analyzing whether there was something to be done and what the value proposition might be for shareholders of both companies and ultimately, rolled our sleeves up, got into a negotiation and here we are today. what we are doing is creating not only a great company, but a great role -- global opportunity for consumers to not only consume great content made by both entities, but to consume it under circumstances that are innovative and compelling and much more user-friendly. that is what the user today demands. >> stepping down in 2020 one versus 2019 previously, what is the future for james murdoch? bob: we have talked a lot about potential role for him. he will be integral to the integration process and we will

continue to talk about where there is a role for him at this company. we have had a great relationship and he has been helpful. i look forward to talking to him more about it. jonathan: a lot of people thinking james murdoch could be a part of that, is that something you could see happening? bob: i am now extended through 2021 and the board of the company will have ample time to consider its options in terms of my succession and reading gauging in the planning process for that. it is premature to speculate on that. it would ultimately be a board decision. emily: we're joined by bloomberg's chris palmeri in l.a.. eiger said he didn't see this deal happening and there was speculation about it for some time. walk us through the nuts and bolts. chris: thankfully, the bulk of what we know of fox is that most of its entertainment assets are

going to disney. the fox studio, the national geographic's channel, fx, a big satellite provider in europe, it is a massive chunk of fox now merging with disney. emily: what do you think of this idea that james murdoch could be successor, even if years from now. chris: there was a lot about this going into the announcement that he would be named as some senior role at disney. kind of a surprise today was that nothing happened. neither side ruled it out, and bob iger said he expects him to have an advisory role in integrating the two companies, but nothing clear yet. bob now saying he will stick around for four more years. it is hard to say at this point that james murdoch has any real

clear path to the ceo of disney. emily: this is disney's biggest acquisition ever. how does it fit into the context of their m&a? chris: previously, it was about content. they made smaller technology deals, but it was basically about bringing all these wonderful characters, pixar, marvel, lucasfilm into the film division and here, it is a much broader play. it is really a doubling down on the film and tv business at this very pivotal moment where things are changing so rapidly. we will see a lot of exciting things out of disney from a technology standpoint. bob iger has a multi pronged strategy, an online version of espn launching next year, a disney branded channel in 2019 with all this marvel and star wars content, and hulu, which they will now control a 60% stake, will be the adult version of what they are trying to do and that is where fox programming comes into play.

they are trying to create an online choice for everybody. emily: that was bloomberg's entertainment reporter chris palmeri. coming up, t-mobile's big plan for the small screen. we will hear from the telecom giant as it prepares to take on tv. apples roughly $400 million bet on facial recognition technology. we will break down the investment. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ emily: t-mobile u.s. has announced plans for a disruptive new tv service set to launch in 2018 and signed a pact to acquire layer three tv to build out the strategy.

we caught up with the chief -- officer in denver and discussed the deal. >> this is a market that is filled with pain points. if you talk about it, it is the most hated industry in america. eight of 10 companies with the worst customer service ratings in america are paid tv most hated industry in america. companies. with our brand as the uncarrier and solving pain points in wireless, we are poised to make a difference in this $100 billion paid tv market. emily: at&t and verizon have explored the market as well as, a step beyond the wireless companies. business, how is this different than what they are doing? mark: what you see from at&t is more of the same. their way of getting into this was to buy directv, a traditional satellite-tv company, and create bundles that people don't want.

to get a decent deal on at&t wireless service, you have to drill a satellite dish into your house and be fed linear, one-way, uncontrolled tv services from outer space. it is no wonder people are leaving this industry in droves. there is negative growth of 2.5% in this industry, but that doesn't tell the whole story. millennials and generations he customers are leaving at rates of 25% a year. they are abandoning old fashion tv like satellite. at&t's strategy is wrong. what we are offering to do is bring together the best of mobile video and home tv and create something that is totally disruptive in a market that needs disruptions really badly. emily: your ceo is saying he expects a deal to close in a matter of weeks. what are your regulatory concerns given the doj's opposition to at&t and time warner? mike: we don't expect any. we will close it after the new year.

this is really exciting for us. we just met with the team at layer three tv, who will be a key ingredient of this new strategy. what incredible technology and an incredible team because we are going to build a service that people have never seen before. think about the services that we are forced to live with today's linear tv. you get this program guide and a little veep had remote control. that pales in comparison to the engagement of social media fed mobile video that our customers have come to love. we will bring together these worlds and make tv not an island of its own anymore and really change things up. emily: the possibility of a sprint-t-mobile tie up has been simmering for years. what is the status of that and what are the chances of it happening in this regulatory environment? mike: as you know, we looked

long and hard at it. it is a shame it didn't come through because there are benefits to a merger like that. we were looking at layer three tv and the launch of t-mobile into the tv experience with or without that deal. it made sense if we did that deal and it makes sense by itself. this marketplace is a market that is moving way too slowly and it is not serving customers without that deal. needs. it is a $100 billion market that we are in an incredible position to disrupt as standalone t-mobile. emily: you are saying a sprint/t-mobile merger will not happen him off the table? mike: i'm not saying that. i'm saying we looked hard at it and it didn't happen. we are doing now as a team is what you would expect us to do. we are focusing on running this great company and boy, it is a great company in a great space.

we are the only ones with service revenue growth. we just finished 18 quarters of acquiring more than one million subscribers a quarter. the main thing people need to know is as you look at t-mobile as a standalone company, all these worlds are converging. we like to say that all content and communications are landing on the internet and the internet is transitioning to mobile. he we are, the leading and only growing mobile company. we are in a great spot. emily: that was t-mobile's coo mike sievert. apple's appetite grows. investing nearly $400 million in finisar, a maker of laser technology that is critical for new iphone x features like facial recognition. apple confirmed it bot shazam for an undisclosed amount. we spoke with mark gurman. mark: this is part of apples billion dollar pledged to invest in manufacturing in america. this has come on the heels of

president trump's proclamation about everything being manufactured in the u.s. there are investing $390 million in finisar. they make lasers they can put in air pods to little black circles in air pods, those are lasers shooting into your ears. if you take them out of your years, they stop playing. it is a laser used for facial id. it is an extremely important component for apple's latest string of products. emily: it is currently in the iphone x? >> they are, now they are going to invest in it and put a choke hold on that market of sensors so they can use them in products president trump's proclamation down the road. emily: how many jobs are they creating? >> lots of jobs. finisar will be up to reopen in texas and hire a bunch of people to work at that facility.

emily: will this element alleviate supply chain problems? >> that $90 million will ensure money is invested in the components apple will need. emily: right now, this tech is being used in the animoje tech. >> it is based in face id and that replicates with an emoji. and iphone x can scan your face, knows it is you, then the lasers can be used for animojes. it knows if you are smiling, shaking your head, it is also used in air pods. there is broad application for the tech. emily: gene munster says it gives a competitive edge when it comes to ar. mark: apple has been ahead of the pack in ar. they are one of the first companies to recognize the importance of ar over pr for glasses and phones.

they are investing more deeply in this technology, more than samsung or google has done in recent history. emily: we reported on apple buying shazam. how does this new news give us more insight into their m&a strategy? mark: that is a good question because you see two different hats right now. you see apple doing more investment in order to prepare for its future, but also big-time acquisitions said as what you saw with shazam. they bought the whole company, but -- technology, resources, integrate the company. the other arm are these big investments. not full on acquisitions, but giving companies money to have enough resources to build components apple needs down the road. i think we will see more on both paths. emily: coming up, the winklevoss twins may have missed out on becoming billionaires, but bitcoin has them joining the club. a reminder, all episodes of bloomberg technology are live

streaming on twitter. check that out at 5:00 in new york, 2:00 p.m. in san francisco. this is bloomberg. ♪ ♪ is this a phone?

or a little internet machine? it makes you wonder: shouldn't we get our phones and internet from the same company? that's why xfinity mobile comes with your internet. you get up to 5 lines of talk and text at no extra cost. so all you pay for is data. see how much you can save. choose by the gig or unlimited. xfinity mobile. a new kind of network designed to save you money. call, visit, or go to xfinitymobile.com.

hi >> welcome back to the best of bloomberg technology. bitcoins massive rally is helping some of the overshadowed competitors. this is the second and fourth-largest cryptocurrency surged to all-time highs. this is on optimism that is quite beautiful track institutions to the fledgling market. two people riding high on the wave are the cofounders

of the bitcoin cryptocurrency exchanges gemini thought to be among the biggest photos of the bitcoin. >> we think that bitcoin is like gold 2.0. whatever your reasons for investing in gold, whether it is scarce, durability, portability, but ability. we think that bitcoin matches gold in all of those categories, it is not scarce. it is fixed. you can send it around like you send any mail. it is hard to do that with the codes. the market cap of bitcoin is 300 million. the market capital of gold is 6 trillion. we think that it is one billion in bitcoin, 300 times more correct today and i think there is a chance that it will be 20 times more valuable. >> it is very possible, anybody who likes the characteristics of gold in their portfolio definitely will be attracted to gold.

>> i'm glad you talked about that because jeff curry had a note talking about that and etf flows have not seen outflows of gold per se and there is a different kind of dynamic than what the coin will be. so you can be 20 times more correct than you are now? we could see another 20 or even 30 fold an increase in the price of the coin, how do you get there? even people who were positive on bitcoin, may say we could see a sharp correction and that it might go back up. but it could be a rocky road to get there. >> i think part of that is creating access to it. we built gemini.com, this is a licensed exchange custodian, we launched two years ago, we are unsure headquarters in new york area in a secure easier for hedge funds to get involved, we have some of the world's most sophisticated market makers, phase two of that

is creating a futures contract which we have done with placebo. this is a bitcoins futures contract that allows institutions that are arbitrating to get exposure to bitcoin and crash and that should set up in cash. to touch ort have feel bitcoin to get exposure to it. i think the next phase of that would be something like a product. >> what you guys had introduced, you had a filing with the fcc. this is of etf filings, are you planning to refile, what is the next step in the process? >> we are in process, we don't have to refile because we are on appeal. this approval rating is right now and we are waiting to be heard by the commissioners. >> what is the next up with the cme? that is right around the corner, it will be based differently as i understand. this is from a combination of different exchanges.

>> that is right, the gemini option really loves our product because we think it is simple and they're easy to understand. we certainly welcome them to the party, they settle on a blended index, it is a different flavor, we will do more products in this market. >> when the contract are being launched, one of the issues is that daily by k modem. the connections be very difficult for the exchange, what have you done to address other like that? >> option mechanisms are very tried and true, we price assets in all kinds of places. the mechanism is very straightforward and simple and it will naturally organically grow. we are not really concerned and we have run auctions every day, even holidays and through the weekend.

so those might be more thinly traded. on weekdays that is really where you want to focus on whether contract will settle. >> it is the largest global liquidity event in the entire bitcoin market, it may be small. >> 1.3 million averages. >> that is the key, if you look at 4:00 and you look at the constituents of another blended 4 million,ou look at millionion, three actually- it's

quite large. a lot of these options are so fulfilling, so that you have a contract price into it so it does the reason for it or the relevancy of it. it is sort of like unfair to take a snapshot of time before there is something tied to that price. >> of course, you guys are just one exchange and many times you see pretty divergent prices on these different exchanges which can make it more difficult to transact in bitcoin. what do you think causes more price stability and does bitcoin need to be transactional at something more than it is right now? >> that depends on which exchanges you are talking about, not all exchanges are created equal, we are the most regulated bitcoin exchange in the world. when you look at the prices across u.s. exchanges, it is a very small deviation, they very much track each other, you're talking about unregulated offshore exchanges in different jurisdictions that are highly risky. of course they will be risk, sometimes people can't get their fiat currency in and out. once we are talking about coin-based, going based is u.s. based. >> its price had been quite different at times from some of

the other exchanges. >> i dig it is all about getting more sophisticated players into the ecosystem, the bitcoin futures product that we had been building and that is live right now, the first ever -- there will be a two-sided market which will reduce volatility in the long run, increased price discovery and increase the credit. emily: that was tyler and his brother, the winklevoss twins, they are cofounders of gemini -- wells is riding high on the cryptocurrency spite? tom metcalfe covered billing is and what for bloomberg enjoined is now. i want to start up with the with the lost twins, how do they amass such a stake and how big

is it? >> they had that famous dispute with mark zuckerberg. there used that to guarantee all sorts of various investments and one of them was in 2013, they bought $11 billion worth of bitcoin. that $11 million was with about a billion but it has risen to 1.7 billion which has effectively made them both billionaires but as long as you think they can liquidate that, they can. emily: now, is it true the vast majority of bitcoin wealth is held by a very small number of people? >> it is some really interesting reports out of their, dozens of whales and effectively 40% of the currency and that to me is the most interesting point where point of contention here. if somebody really wants to sell out, they had a big million dollars bitcoin holding, there is a limited number of bitcoin players. any of their sales would really influence it. at least in terms of other equity markets and much more limited volumes and trade. works do those wells hold an

-- those and do any of "whales" hold an oversized amount of influence that is uncertain in this rapidly development market? >> you can see big fluctuations, no no knows when they're coming and to be honest i don't know why and how but when you see a few of the big sales, what is driving the current price of, plenty of investors coming in. it is the big was out there were causing this. been: you've also tracking a business called company" that has been

on an even wilder ride then bitcoin, explain. >> is the first traded company that says it will invest in bitcoin, your watch and market cap, is incredible. when you look there, he was in the hundreds of millions and then this week if allowed to 12 million and now it has fallen about 35%, 4.5 billion. as the stock is traded over-the-counter, these numbers should necessarily -- they are not authentic even as typically embrace. what i mean is on paper, the founder set this up in june and built a billion dollars stock only on paper. this is based on very thin volumes of a million or two dollars. emily: there is a story about the involvement of women in the cryptocurrency market which was initially dominated by men. but the subhead of this story is that bitcoin is very welcoming to anyone who drink the kool-aid. >> exactly, the whole nature of it is to be an open opportunity so that anyone who has a chance of changing the future of finance. emily: that was bloomberg's tom metcalf. coming up, jerry brown explains why they are leading the charge on climate change, but he was

-- and how silicon valley has joined the effort. lies, goodbye islands under pressure from tax authorities, this book declares it will no longer final taxes through its irish subsidiary. this is bloomberg. ♪

him him him him ♪ ♪ emily: emmanuel macron hosted the one planet summit in paris. the review progress 20 goes. jerry brown was among the attendees, david westin caught up with him and asked about california's role in combating global warming, take a listen. >> we are not going to convert donald trump, mitch mcconnell or the koch brothers or mr. mine, they are in a cabal of denial. destructive of science, they are pulling back on research, there tried to prevent california and other places that want to go on

pathways, and hey want to resurrect coal, which is dying. that is all true, in competitions such as this, it does mobilize commitment even if it doesn't exist before it comes here. these statements will be reflective of real commitments to dollars, this is through this morning, west africa, indonesia and for other countries that are named. so these are real things. we're doing stuff. are converting people. we have to do it one company, one stay, one nation at a time. yes, there are a lot of people that are talking and what have you but the world is going in the wrong direction, it is going to hell, not to heaven. we need to wake people up, just because the cynical complacency of the powerful of skewers the truth, there are many others from denmark and sweden and romania and some of the other

countries, there are a lot of people and there are more of the -- all the time. there wereore than two years ago. it is a real battle but i will and weything i can will move toward a future that is sustainable and not the destructive past that the cynics and those that don't understand climate science are rather stupidly moving the world toward. yes, we're making progress -- is the one on the right track it? no, we are taking steps and we'll have a similar conference and we will keep going as long

as we can and eventually, i believe we will win, truth come sustainability in the science as we know all understand it. >> governor, i have to ask you about edwin lee, we received word that edwin lee, the mayor of san francisco passed away in an untimely way. i don't know any of the details but give us your thoughts on edwin lee. >> he was a really good guy. i knew him, i didn't know him for a long time but he was really a politician and i spoke spoke thehink language of the people. he was really genuine, he had integrity, working hard in a very difficult city that is divided along many different lines, he will be missed, he was a good guy, he presented california and the city untimely. these things happen, we all know the time in the hour and i will miss and the quite a lot.

emily: that was governor jerry brown of california speaking with bloomberg's david westin. as david and the governor were just discussing, san francisco mayor ed lee has died. we had a close working relationship with the tech industry in the city since taking office in 2011, looking to lower startups and keep major tax friends in san francisco through various proposals including taxes and housing. he also trumpeted san francisco as a city for undocumented immigrants and proposed the executive order and shipping subsidies of federal funding. he was 65 years old, he was a guest on our show several times and he will be missed. ♪

♪ emily: facebook is changing its tax structure. they will pay taxes in every country that it is. they were routing u.k.-based disaster island and given the state it is currently locked in a battle with the internal revenue service that may cost of more than $5 billion. plus interest and penalties related to its irish operations.

bloomberg's sarah frier joined us with more. >> these companies exist on the internet. right? so they have been able to be very creative about where they decide to book that revenue. most of the self-service advertising revenue will be routed through island but beyond that this is a big win for the individual countries for italy placermany and france, will startces that to collect taxes from facebook. in many cases, the actual tax rate of facebook has been just

as note. they were trying to best they can to manage the tax issues, of course there is talk of repatriation of cash, it will only get a little harder for them, that said, in terms of numbers, this move does this early mean that this is overall taxes will go up. >> it could end up being about the same rate for them, and it is just going to be very competent to implement. in the report that broke the news, they said it might not operationalfully 2019, so thisof change is a long way and facebook is just letting us know. emily: what do you make of the timing? is and reservoir thickness and many other things in this moment of time?

>> this is a very critical moment for the company where they have to make sure that they are on the good side of the governments they are working with. in some of these jurisdictions, there are elections for the have come under pressure for the way information is spread on their platform, they have been asked to tackle isis accounts that is burning in europe, the company is working with government and regulars on those issues and also they were not going to be able to use the same tax breaks in island for much longer. let's we also have an excellent story out about agnes, how does propagated, where you actually interview someone who has created very hard to fit and inflammatory news and you talk about how facebook is cited that bad on that front. this is your to talk about an interesting piece in buzzfeed about how steve bennett and manipulate the weaknesses in twitter's policies, all this does kind of tied together. what was the gist of this article and how did bennett and twitter? manipulate >> bill gross of the story was that bennett and breitbart were trying to seek refuge -- retribution to twitter. there were upset.

especially the writers of breitbart. savanna went on this hunt for legal and financial and editorial ways to really damage with his reputation and devalue them. they wanted to find out ways to sue them to get short-sellers really galvanized about this company. i think at the pinpoint of this, it shows that philosophical conundrum. like how they maintain his open platform while not allowing abuse and harassment to run rampant on the site. >> do some instead they succeeded. >> no matter what they do, they will always be people seeking intense backlash. they wanted to be between the free-speech party. then went to be the arbiter of what the appropriate information is. this puts them in very murky territory, they want to be an open town hall for people to say whatever they want to say and they are hands off. been: which in a way has existence. their

i profile man basically saw this as a call to action that this book was neutral. this content is vital and how do you make the best viral content? is outrageous, it is something that will spark emotion, it is partisan. he was building a website that went even further than conservatively was an often beard into fake news. and from what we were talking about, they had to make the same decisions, how much of this content. do we

remove ranking in the newsfeed algorithm which is similar to twitter's removal -- these half measures that the companies have done, this basically is this year -- this is his very popular conservative website and does get crushed by facebook spaces efforts. emily: it won't be viral. is that what you're saying? sarah: the thing with facebook is that they are trying to dampen the stiff-arm going viral but they don't want to be the arbiter of truth just like twitter doesn't want to be the arbiter of truth and they don't want to us was of a site this can't go on our platform, that brings up free-speech concerns him in a facebook and twitter are not governmental bodies, they understand their power over global conversation, data want to be seen as censoring anybody's ideology, they want to appear biased. >> this is about the president being on twitter and using it to inflame, harass and many people have questions of whether he should be on the platform at all. >> i spoke to on trust and safety council that don't like that he is on the platform because it could be inciting violence, if you are a regular

that the belief is twitter would kick them off. but twitter does try to weigh the newsworthiness of tweets and weigh that against the disparagement, the content of the actual tweets and in the case of donald trump we have heard from the executive chairman, we heard that they like the trump is using this platform. they like their global leaders are turning to twitter as their first much medication because that is good for twitter user numbers, engagement, it is good for keeping them in the news, there will to put that over these concerns of uses that shop is not a healthy addition to twitter. emily: this is from a former facebook executive, not a venture capitalist speaking at a conference at stanford business school.

he says,"i feel tremendous guilt, it is at a point where we have created tools that are ripping apart the social fabric of how society works," he never said facebook by name but people believe he is quite clearly talking about this book. this book has now come out and really hit back on the comments is a very unusual move to talk about talk about this. >> the companies is usually silent, is using this moment to cement how he wants people to think about him and his contributions, he was big on the facebook growth team back in the day, so this is a moment for him to come out and speak, they are probably worried he is using it a little opportunistically. emily: for something out of this world, astronauts on the international space station normally hectors see movies out in theaters but they are getting one notable exception. disney has arraigned a special wars: theof "star

jedi" aboard the space station. and that doesn't for this edition of the best of bloomberg technology, we will bring you all the latest in tech throughout the week, you can to end each day. remember, all episodes of bloomberg technology are now live streaming on twitter, check us out at technology, weekdays. that is all for now, this is bloomberg. ♪

him him him carol: carol massar. him him ♪him ♪ wel him himcome him to