near or far covered. leaving every competitor, threat and challenge outmaneuvered. comcast business outmaneuver. emily: i am emily chang in san francisco and this is "bloomberg is a turf war brewing between apple and facebook? apple takes anotr at the worldwide developers conference. why it is part of a larger break in policy and practices for both companies. plus, a former apple and google executive joins us to talk about apple's moves to curb tech addiction and whether other tech giants will follow suit.

match group ceo mandy ginsberg joins us. what she thinks about facebook trying to get in on online dating. first, to our top story. tim cook personally called out facebook in the midst of the cambridge analytica scandal, saying -- he would not be in the same position. zuckerberg called cook's remarks extremely glib. now apple did it again at its worldwiddevelopers conference, showcasing a new system that will make it more difficult for companies to gather information on users. and apple's software updates later this year the safari web , browser will show a pop-up wind asking users for permission before loading share buttons for social networks, including facebook. the announcement came the same day that facebook disputed a new york times report about how it shares data with mobilephone makers. the report says it struck deals with mobilephone manufacturers that allows them full access to

information about users and their friends. joining us, st miller. we have got our bloomberg tech executive editor tom giles. stefanie, craig federighi said this was apple's answer to clever and relentless data companies, saying this would make it dramatically more difficult for them to gather data on us. is this going to hurt facebook? stephanie: it is hard for me to imagine it will, in the same way it has been hard to imagine any of this news could really hu at the end of the day, people re like facebook and the products and services it offers. so people read these stories or hear that apple might be making it harder for facebook to follow users around the web, but at the end of the day, people still use book in droves. emily: tom, is a more syic? tom: this definitely gives apple the opportunity to claim some moral high ground.

apple has done this before. they had the standoff with the fbi. they really want to be known as a company that cares about your data, your privacy, and is willing to go to the mat. they did that with the fbi and definitely made hay in light of the controversy surrounding facebook. my question is, to what extent are people going to pay attention when apple giv you don't want to share thisno information with facebook? how much will peopleake advantage of that and pay heed? emily: that said these companies , have completely different business m mark zuckerberg pointed that out. apple sells fairly high-end devices. facebook makes money on advertising. caroline hyde spoke with tony fadell, a former apple and google executive who has been talking about the problem of tech addiction, the responsibility of companies like apple. he says this move is a good one.

>> facebook, people are saying they are exploiting that and not being as good to their customers or users as they should be. i think this war is always going to be there of, are you serving your useor your advertiser customer? apple is taking the high road here, saying it is about security and privacy and not being tracked. i think they are absolutely right about that. we can see what facebook is doing in the press about apologizing and trying to fix things. i think they have a long way to go. emily: let's talk about the bigger picture here now that we also have this new york times report that facebook share user data, friend data, with phone makers without disclosing it. is public trust degradnd yet people continue to use it? at some point, are those people a risk? are they likely to use the next best thing that comes along, if their trust in facebook and how much they like facebook continues to decline?

stefanie: it is hard to see right now with so many users. part of the currency of facebook is the network of users, so if t like it, i could not get those connections on another platform. it is really hard to replicate. the company has made a number of acquisitions, and one can argue that these acquisitions, such as whatsapp, are helping the bottom line. at the end of the day, a lot of it is growth and power comes -- a lot of its growth and power comes from organic growth as a company that connects people, which is what mark zuckerberg truly believes is the mission of this company.so it is harmaginea competitor in that network space being a viable option right now. emily: tom, what do you make of facebook's response to this particular story? they are really pushing back hard.

they say they merely gave this information to manufacturers so they could re-create facebook like experiences. one of the partners was apple, and tim cook was on npr talking about how we are not in the data business, we were just trying to make it easier for people to share. tom: right, we are not really doing anything with that information. stakes are high right now for facebook. it is very much in the crosshairs of a lot of lawmakers. they want to know, were we lied to? mark zuckerberg, when he testified in d.c., was he telling the truth ending up front about who has access to information on facebook, these third parties, device makers, etc.? two, they are concerned about the consent decree. the ftc handed down rulings in 2011, and the question is whether these types of arrangements whereby device

manufacturers have access to certain information, is that something that is in violation of the ftc rulings? which could end up costing facebook money, not so much money it will hurt the company, but again, it is a pr nightmare. generally speaking, you are talking about reputational damage that continues to hpen and chip away at the company. so far, sheryl and zuck have been very clear about things. the question is if you keep hammering away at it, will eventually happen? emily: stefanie, do you think this violates the ftc consent decree? is facebook going to face a fine? stefanie: i think probably they violated the consent decree many different ways, first with the cambridge analytica developments and now this. the biggest fine the ftc has handed out today is $100

million, so if they wanted to make waves, they could do a record-setting fine, say $5 billion on facebook, a rounding error to a company that had $40 billion cash on hand in 2017. i do think there will be regulatory action that will feel meaningful to regulators and i do agree there is reputational risk at stake. when i talked to investors, it is -- who cares? emily: exactly. tom, $5 billion for a company the size of facebook, no big. tom: not a big deal, exactly. the question is, is there a viable alternative? if you leave facebook, where do you go? as we talked about before, people are going to instagram. guess who owns facebook? and twitter does not serve the same social purpose as facebook. emily: let's talk about the alternatives, stefanie. we have for years talked about whether teens are as attracted to facebook as they once were, and there is some evidence that

amonyounger users, facebook has already lost them. what are some trends you are seeing in the younger demographic? stefanie: for many demographics, the richer content, whether photos or video, is what is most interesting and captures people's attention the most. this is the point. facebook is building out those platforms and its own branded platform, also instagram and others. whatsapp, even though it is not a social network tool per se, it does help connect people for free. maybe that is not as big of a deal in the united states when we are a big company with one network, but in a place like europe with different regulations, the ability to communicate via pp acros a disparate continent of a number of countries actually provides some security for facebook among skeptical users on that continent and here as well.

emily: we are looking at potentially more regulation, especially in europe. is it going to happen? tom: definitely. we are seeing an era, particularly in europe, where european editors are going to -- regulators are going to find a creative way to make us think about privacy in a different way. in germany, they are talking about to what extent we can talk about privacy as an antitrust issue, so we repackaged the idea of anti-competitive behavior and say to facebook, you can't force us to give up privacy in exchange for letting us have access to your social network on which you have a monopoly. i do think there are going to be some inventive ways. you are hearing more and more about different approaches to antitrust here in the u.s. everyone we talked to, analysts and investors alike, do see the prospect of regulation, but they see it as hurting facebook around the edges, not striking

at the heart of its business model. when you talk about facebook's bunessod they want to reach that mass of hundreds of millions of users, billions in total, where e are you going to be able to go? advertisers really do still want to reach audiences through the facebook platform, the google platforms, duopoly very much in play. facebook is thinking about alternative business models. this story was broken about how they are exploring whether or not you want to have people say, if you don't want to see ads, there is going to be some other way to compensate -- emily: pay for an subscription. tom: i'm not sure how popular that will be, but it would give people concerned aboutvacy another way to access facebook. does facebook replicate the full amount of revenue? who knows? subscription models are working for a lot of people.

emily: tom giles and stefanie millal carkets. thank you both. coming up, our exclusive interview with mandy ginsberg. how the company is responding to facebook's push to launch its own dating services, next. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: last month, facebook announced it would be rolling out a new dating feature. a fairly bold move as the social network tries to win back public trust over how the company uses customer data. >> it is going to be in the facebook app, but it is totally

optional. if you want, you can make a dating profile. i know a lot of you are going to have questions, so i want to be clear we have designed this with privacy and safety in mind. your friends are not going to see your profile. you are only going to be suggested people who are not your friends who have opted in to dating who set your preferences. emily: a lot of disclaimers, mark zuckerberg. match group owns the dating apps tinder, match, okcupid, plenty of fish. shares fell more than 10% on that news, but the company says it is not worried about facebook putting the moves onts busine. according to data, millennials are using twitter more than any other dating app. joining us, mandy ginsberg, match group ceo. why aren't you worried? mandy: we have been in the dating business for 20 plus years and our philosophy is we come to work every day and if we

can deliver great products and deliver what people are looking thento connect and meat, we should not be worried as a market leader. i think for our biggest growth engine, which is tinder, which is geared at twentysomethings, there are two facts. i'm not sure twentysomethings are going to go to facebook to date. i don't think it will get infected. and two, people really do want to separate their dating life from facebook. emily: you put out a pretty snarky statement when facebook announced this. i know you have been an important developer and worked with facebook on dating features in the past. do you feel betrayed? is there any bad blood there? mandy: we have deep partnerships with facebook today, on the advertising and development side. we work with facebook all the time. i don't think it is hugely surprising. we see in our data, we survey thousands of single people in america, and we see that people meet and connect on facebook all

the time, it is just more implicit. now they're clutching launching something more explicit, so we will see. emily: facebook is 2 billion people, and even though they are having problems, 2 billion people still seem to be using it. they have a lot of data on a lot of people that could help match people up. does the potential scale concern you? mandy: it is a double-edged sword. i have been in the dating category for over 10 years. we have really grown through product innovation and chipping away at the stigma year after year. there are still people resisting the category. so if we have the ability, particularly for older users internationally, to say facebook is doing it, maybe people will be more open to trying a dating app. people use three to four dating apps at a time, so it is not a one-size-fits-all industry for sure. emily: i want to ask you a bigger philosophical question. do you think online dating is good for society? it seems like it would be hard

to deal with swiping left and right and being a millennial would be kind of stressful. that is the silver lining for me, not being a millennial. [laughter] mandy: before tinder, people in their 20's were not on dating apps. they met at bars and restaurants. they would go out. i think what tinder did and other apps is open people up to so many other possibilities -- emily: can it make dating harder or worse? mandy: at the end of the day, you still have to meet for a beer or coffee and see if there is chemistry, so that doesn't change. emily: now you know you have 30 other people in your pocmay: yok about, not just millennial dating, but match is ages 30 to 50. if you get divorced around 45 and you are working all the time, how are you going to meet people? i think it has created such an opportuniteet peop that theyer wave t ote. you mentioned our time, our 50 plus app. where you going to meet people?

it is very hard with your social circle. my goal is that we oup those opportunities for every age group. emily: people's views of online dating are directly correlated to the level of success they had. some people have said, i have been on match for 10 years and it has not changed. where is innovation in online dating going to come from? mandy: i think we are constantly innovating all of our products. if you look at the last three quarters, we have launched location on match, which is missed connections, where you can see who has crossed paths. we are launching video units so you can get a much better sense of who pple are. we feel like every single one of our products, we have to constantly innovate. ultimately the holy grail is to , figure out how do you predict if you are going to have chemistry when you mt face-to-face? all the product innovation is around helping people get a better sense of if someone is interesting to them.

emily: match and bumble don't have chemistry at this point. you have sued bumble for patent infringement. arguing that bumble and tender are basically identical. bumble responded saying, dear match group, we swiped left on you. what is your response to that? mandy: i took over in january and last year at the end of the year, we were granted a patent, which we felt great about. this allowed us to protect our ip for tinder where you swipe and unlock communications. this is the opt in we were talking about. after we were granted that patent, which is a big coup, we wanted to make sure we protect our ip's. there are multiple businesses we sued and bumble was one of them. we feel ke it is important to protect the ip of the people who are working hard to create innovation on the products. emily: you did try to buy them. would you still want to acquire bumble?

mandy: bumble has done a great job building a brand, especially in the u.s. over the last decade, we have been a highly inclusive business. we talked to businesses all the time. you never know. we look at great businesses. they have created a good system. emily: so that is not a no, for sure. what about hinge? another one in that niche market. mandy: hinge has gotten interesting traction, particularly in the new york market, among some others. there is a real hunger and appetite for people who are looking. tinder brought all these new people into the category and as people are aging, they are looking for something more serious, different options. hinge is an example of an app that is more serious. emily: or could you build it? mandy: there are three different ways to grow. grow existing businesses. the second thing is incubated. we incubate inside match group, we have an incubation team working on three or four big projects globally.

not just in the u.s. the third one is acquisition. we are constantly looking at acquisition, not just in the u.s. we see real opportunity in the asian market. stigmas are eroding and there is a lot of growth and opportunity there. society is changing, theiew on dating. emily: what does the future of dating look like? mandy: i feel like i'm in the best business because at the end of the day, i allow people to connect and meet and have babies and get married and they never would have met otherwise. emily: or swipe left. mandy: it is really about creating that chemistry. one of the inventions we can build -- i think there is going to be a lot more video. location is going to be key and the power of location is going to be good to go to a lot of apps. i think the future is bright. emily: mandy ginsberg, ceo of match group. thank you for stopping by.

coming up, skyhigh. how british lawmakers may have cleared the way to resolve the drama of who gets to buy sky. that is next. and "bloomberg technology" is live streaming on twitter. check us out and be sure to follow our global breaking news network at tictoc on twitter. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: fox has gotten approval in the.kfor its keover bid of sky media. u.k. lawmakers said the acquisition can go through , provided it sells off sky's news division. the move could pave the way for fox to increase its bid for sky to keep comcast at bay. plans murdoch also has with disney as part of a sale of most of fox, which comcast is

also trying to buy. snap's new company executive comes from his favorite recruiting ground, amazon. the social media company hired derek andersen to be its new vice president for finance. a role he previously held at amazon. andersen will report to snap's new cfo, who came from amazon. payment processing firm ayden bv is heading towards one of the biggest european fintech ipo's in years. shareholders plan to raise $1.1 billion, valuing ayden bv between $7.1 billion and $8.3 billion. the payment software will soon add ebay tan impressive list of tech giants, including netflix, bloomberg, and facebook. ebay had previously been a part of the rival paypal. coming up, the government needs to overhaul its strategies on cyberattack. our conversation with crowdstrike ceo george kurtz next. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: i am emily chang in san francisco and this is "bloomberg technology." being hacked, just the threat of the cyber attack is enough to keep companies up at night. the bank of england, a new internal watchdog report has identified cyberattacks as a major risk that could lead to the demise of the institution. on this side of the atlantic, a u.s. state department report says the government needs to overhaul its strategies for stopping cyberattacks. that is coupled with concerns that u.s. elections are increasingly at risk for the current primary and november's midterm elections. for more on this, i want to get to bloomberg's caroline hyde in london with a special guest. caroline: the special guest is

george kurtz, the ceo of crowdstrike, helping analyze these threats and the banks that are exposed. talk to us first about u.s. election midterms in november. what are the threats you are seeing ahead of that and where are the actors coming from? george: when you think about the electoral process, they are highly targeted from actors around the globe, whether it is rtnly russia has been active in the pt. what most people need to be concerned about is protecting the process and making sure the results are not skewed, whetr it is electronic results were or even skewing what people think about the electoral process and who they are voting for. we have seen a lot of that in the past. caroline: how does a company like crowdstrike get employed? are you hearing more from governments, particularly the u.s. of the ections? is this a new area of demand?

george: a lot of governments are well aware of the problem and are trying to take precautions. caroline: what precautions can they take? george: when you think about the process, there is two areas. one is the voting machines themselves. some are paper ballots, but a lot is going to electronic voting, so making sure that is protected. as well as the reconnaissance of what is happening behind the scenes and making sure the election process is fair and not impacted one way or the other. caroline: talk to us about reconnaissance. talk to us what crowdstrike does to alert any anomaly. orge: we collect 100 billion discrete events per day. in two days, we handle more events than twitter has tweets in a year, so it is a massive amount. what we are doing using machine learning and artificial intelligence is trying to find the bad stuff before people know it is bad, which ultimately protects our customers from breaches.

caroline: how many bad events per day? george: on average we stop about three breaches per hour. there is a lot more malware that we block and lots of events that happen, but at the end of the day, customers are trying to protect against those breaches. caroline: we are talking about banks in the u.k., saying we are trying to stop their openness to cyberattacks. where are threats coming from? individuals, state-sponsored? george: when you look at banks, they are highly targeted because that is where the money is that. e-crim nationstate, even north korea has been targeting the banking system. when you can't get money in and out of the country, when you can carone: is isy tomware --

distinguish when it is a nation or a lone actor who happens to be based in north korea? george: it is really hard now. the lines are blurring. it used to be more well-defined how nation state actors operate. even e-crime actors are taking the vulnerabilities that have been exposed by government and weaponize in that as ransomware. caroline: ransomware has been such a hot talking point. is that the main area that as an individual i need to be wary of? what are the key threats and how are they changing throughout 2018? george: there is certainly the financial threat, whether that is getting your credentials compromised and having somebody logged into your back account. that is what we call busess email compromises, kind of a fake email, looks like it came from the ceo to the cfo saying to wire money. than we see ransomware.

in europe and the u.k. and the u.s., lots of big companies have been hit and knocked off-line for weeks. a massive amount, millions of pounds of damage, from ransomware. caroline: in the u.k. and eu more broadly, we have seen federal regulation. gdpr, general data ptection regulations, saying yohave to alert users within 72 hours. how reasonable is it to expect a company can know and can quickly ensure they have alerted the regulators? george: if they have good visibility, they can identify that very quickly. that is an important concept because that is where the action is at, their computers and desktops and things that work in the cloud. that can b wthright technology. when we think of our ransomware, you have a massive percent of revenue, then you have e-crime on the other end saying, what if i charge a company 5 million

pounds instead of a 50 million pound fine? will they do it? i think there will be interesting examples of a company being tested to not disclose information when that happens. caroline: that will be a tough one for them to contend with. what about infrastructure hacking? you mentioned north korea earlier, about how they are going for the banks. they are also going for infrastructure. you said you noticed it in the united states. how you end up knowing if north korea is behind it? what do they want to do -- is it just disruption they want to cause, power? george: any nation state actors have various motivations. first is information gathering, which is obvious. the second one is maintaining a strategic advantage if there was a conflict, so being able to implant malware that they could activate that would disrupt those critical infrastructure systems. that is basically why they are doinit. terms ohow hard it is

figure out who is who, they said earlier it is becoming more and more difficult to figure out is it a nationstate, is it e-crime, who is it? there are various means to try to associate who is doing what, but it is part art and part science. caroline: george kurtz, ceo of dse,aking art a science and science an art potentially. emily: caroline hyde in london, thank you so much. at the bloomberg invest summit in new york, noted short seller carson block said fraudulent chinese companies pose a risk the chinese markets and investors should weigh whether to allocate capital to them. he also thinks china's ai mar has caught up to the united states. >> china's artificial intelligence is apparently on par with the u.s. this is obviously a major area of strategic competition. this is about the future. song to that report, the entity in china that has the

leading development of ai is baidu. this is our strategic competitor. at the end of the day, none of these companies will act solely as private companies. emily: coming up, apple moves to help curb tech addiction. we hear frea been championing the cause. tony fadell joins usn the show, next. and if you like bloomberg news, eck us out on thrao, bloomberg radio app, bloomberg.com, and in the u.s. on sirius xm. this is blooer ♪

emily: at the worldwide developers conference, apple rolled out new features to curb the length of time customers use its devices, including time limits that will switch some apps off and new parental controls. the man who helped start the revolution has been speaking out about the dangers of tech addiction. tony fadell, a former apple and google executive who is now a principal at future shape, joined caroline hyde from paris. tony: it is a great step forward for the customers, for the industry to really address and acknowledge that there may be an issue. we had tim cook going on record saying he was very surprised when he got the tool and how much he was using his devices, more than he thought. now it is no longer an open secret. we are talking about it and moving ahead with these new tools, such as screen time from apple. it is a great first step, but there is a lot more we can do and should do, because this is a

problem that is not going to go away anytime soon. caroline: what further steps could be taken then? tony: interestingly, if you look at it, the data they are going to be telling you about how much you are using these devices is really about your iphone and ipad together, which is great. it is not actually going into your time on a computer. most adults and older kids actually are spending 30% to 50% or more time on a computer, so to only have one part of your digital life bng reprented by data, along with your tv or watch, all of those things need to be put into this data package to see how much you are really using devices in general, not just the ones in your pocket. caroline: what about going across platform? how do you see that working out? many don't just have one particular apple product, they might have android as well.

tony: that is a really interesting question. i think that is something we are going to have to grapple with. for the most part, most people are android platform or they are apple platform or what have you. right there, if we can fix that, that is 2 billion users we can get going. we do need to address that. that is going to be a little more difficult because it requires the two companies working together on platforms and those kinds of things. hopefully that might happen over time. caroline: in many parts, this is your advice. you said you were having conversations with those inside apple about these concerns. did they really action what you advised? are you still having conversations? did you speak to tim cook himself? tony: over email, i did, but i also spoke to he who work with tim who i have known for years. i don't know if it was based on my advice or what they were already working on.

it was great to see these steps being taken. but again, i think we need to go further, and that means these new tools also need to be available to third parties. so apis for control and data so that third parties can create specific solutions for different types of people who have different types of needs. apple can't make these kinds of specific differences in the platform, but s why th have the app store, to allow third parties to make customized things, so you can think of a digital weight watchers or of being able to combine your physical activity with your digital activity in one calendar. apple is not providing that today and maybe they don't need to, but they should allow third parties to access it so we can get a more robust solution for various needs. roline: talko us about other third parties. interestingly, there seems to

have been tension brewing between facebook and apple. in wwdc, we saw a demo of facebook.com being blocked via the apple new products. how do you see that falling out? tony: i think if you look at it, there is a set of companies who are in the position to really enable security and privacy of your data and your devices, and that's companies like apple. facebook in some ways, people are saying they are exploiting that and not being as good to their customers or their users as they should be. so i think this war is ever going to be there of, are you serving your user or your advertiser customer? i think apple is taking the high road here, saying it is about security and privacy and not being tracked, and i think they're absutely right.

we can see what facebook is doing in the press about apologizing and trying to fix things. i think they have a long way to go, but i think the industry in general has a long way to go to address these issues, and we are waking up to it and no longer letting it be. we are going to be having this incredible, detailed conversation about this stuff, not just here in europe like with gdpr, but with all kinds of other regulators around the world because they are going to want to know how consumers are being prected. caroline: how are you concerned about your own data? you have said your children are not allowed to use social media to a certain extent. what would it take to hear from facebook or other companies for you to feel more at ease about your privacy? is a regulatory reaction you are waiting for? tony: i think for my children -- obviously they are not old enough yet -- but as time progre, they're going to have to earn back the trust of parents as well as the other consumers who use their service.

as far as i'm concerned, to rebuild trus ame and they are going to have to be very transparent about what they are doing and live by those rules. it may take quarters and years to win users back or get new users because of this. facebook is not the only one. there is many other culprits. they just happened to be the lightning rod right now. caroline: interestingly, facebook came back at what apple had been saying at wwdc, calling it cute virtue signaling. do you think apple has gonefahee signal? tony: i don't want to really comment about that because i'm not on either side of it. at the end of the day, everybody is going to trade jabs. some are right, some are wrong, some are for media purposes. let's let those games play out. what we really need are real solutions as opposed to firing back and forth on pr statements.

caroline: are you surprised by this game that seems to be brewing in silicon valley, or not so much? it ebbs d flows. my 25 years in silicon valley, there is egos involved and people are taking hard stances. when the government is peering in and customers are peering in, it is easy to make your position well known and take some shots along the way. it is business as usual. i think there is much more at risk these days and it is not about companies and share prices, it is about you and your privacy and security. i think it is worth these types of battles, even if sometimes they are less than professional. caroline: as you mentioned before, you feel apple is taking the high road. do you think it could become a selling point for apple's products, that it has taken this stance in terms of privacy and addiction?

tony: if you look at apple through the course of history, it has always been on the right side of the user. this is just a continuation of that. we are seeing more and more companies stating their intentions as well. i believe that many customers trust apple, trust the brand t do the right thing. they have always done it in the past, i believe they will in the future. yesterday's announcements were all along those same lines. emily: that was tony fadell, speaking with caroline hyde. coming up, twitter has seen massive growth thanks to video and live streaming. why are they reorganizing the teams in charge of the unit? this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: xs six more chinese banks listed to arrange the hong kong listing. the ipo is expected to be the biggest in nearly four years. the smartphone maker is considering taking $10 billion from the share listing. goldman sachs and morgan stanley are leading the deal. twitter has announced a broad reorganization within the mpany. the social media platform has dissolved its live video team and consolidated the unit into its content partnerships team. video has become a standout for twitter. the number of daily video views has almost doubled in the last year and made up the majority of ad revenue. for more, we are joined by selina wang, who covers the company. so video is doing we they are dissolving the unit? selina: it certainly comes at an incredibly strange time, only weeks since they announced dozens of deals with players like disney and abc and the new bloomberg tictoc live streaming service.

twitter's mainline is this does not impact their overall commitment to live video and this is simply a reorganization so they can execute faster. but forces inside the company say the story is little different and there has been some internal dissension about how much they should be focusing on live video as a standalone product. as you know, the former chief operating officer was really spearheading twitter as becoming the future live destination for all live content. that was really his focus on driving the future growth of the country. now with jack dorsey back at the helm, he would like to fold live video back into the broader content strategy. emily: twitter says they are taking steps to streamline to enable increased efficiency to better align with their vision. es this mean more or less deals? as you said, they just struck a number of deals and partnerships. selina: some of the people who

struck those deals are no longer at the company. the person they hired a year ago to spearhead live video has left the company and the head of news partnerships has left the company. i don't necessarily think it means more or less deals will be struck, but it may mean brands and advertisers are less happy about the new deal outcome they are going to get. we have not seen twitter create a dedicated tab for live video, have not made it easier to surface. from jack's perspective, he wants the platform to be content agnostic, so it is notbo video, live, photo, tweet. it is about, anything relevant to you surfaced to your feed and not focused on specific content areas. emily: twitter was added to the s&p 500. analysts are mixed on the stock, but still up more than 60% this year. with twitter, you never know. the winds are always changing.

do you think we could see an inflection point in investor sentiment? selina: i don't think this reorganization alone will see an inflection point. there has been a change of ties in terms of sentiment among investors and analysts about this cpany ovethe past six months to a year as they have started to execute promises they were making. eyre doing a betr jobr to use, streamlining the content delivered to people. i do think the reorganization does raise questions about the commitment they have the video, which is driving down more than half their advertising revenue and to the brands and partners that have already signed on to dedicate a lot of resources to the platform. emily: so what's next for twitter? selina: i have been hearing they have been working very hard on some product changes, so i'm expecting they are going to unveil something new in the near future. they have also been executing on this transparency center that

facebook has also been hard at work on. they are really gearing up for the midterm elections. they need to make sure all the candidates are verified. they need to tamp down on content that is trying to impact and manipulate the type of conversation that is happening on the platform. as jack has been saying over and over, he wants twitter to be a happy and healthy and nice place again. emily: selina wang, thanks so much. bloomberg lp operates a mobile breaking news network on twitter called tictoc. that does it for this edition of bloomberg technology. tomorrow we will bring your reaction and analysis following tesla's annual shareholder meeting and talk to a leading tesla investor on elon musk's strategy ahead. this is bloomberg. ♪

announcer: the following is a paid advertisement for the bissell cross wave cap pro -- pet pro. ♪ ["blue danube waltz"] ♪