♪ emily: welcome to bloomberg technology. i'm emily chang. u.s. stocks fall amid concerns of a resurgence of covid-19 cases in the world. infections on the rise in china, brazil. iran saying it may need to go back into lockdown. texas reporting a surge in hospitalizations as well. the former national security advisor john bolton's book. hit the press the trump administration suing to prevent the book from being

published. meantime, facebook is making a big change to its ad business, announcing it will allow people to opt out of seeing political ads on facebook and instagram. users will be able to mute electoral ads and ads on social issues as well. for more, i want to bring in purses and strategies founding partner, who was before that president obama's reelection campaign digital director. teddy, good to have you back on the show. facebook may the controversial decision to not fact-check political ads, not fact-check speech from politicians. what is your take on this now middle ground, saying you can turn off political ads if you don't want to see them? teddy: thanks for having me. i think the truth is it is not much of a middle ground. what it's doing is putting the onus on the user to do the work. they are saying we won't provide any fact checking or any standards whatsoever on our platform, but you the user can

click on a few buttons and hopped out if you make that decision. the thing i think that is really key is that advertising is a relatively small fraction of the content that a person encounters on facebook or instagram or twitter in a given session. they have made very clear they have no intention of doing anything about disinformation or hate speech or abuse on the organic content that is shared. this is them saying we are not doing anything about disinformation. if you don't like ads from politicians, whether or not they are truthful, you can opt out, but there is nothing preventing you from getting a piece of disinformation shared from you from a friend or neighbor. the core problem with the platform persists. emily: interesting to note this announcement about political ads is a footnote at the end of an op-ed on usa today written by mark zuckerberg.

where they were announcing a new voter registration campaign. zuckerberg writing, " for those of you that already made up your mind and want the election to be over, we hear you, so we are introducing the ability to turn off political ads and we will still remind you to vote." zuckerberg saying their goal with this new voting information campaign is to get 4 million people registered to vote. i wonder, that is great but are they missing the real problem? teddy: yeah, totally. like you just hinted at, i'm glad they will register voters. i hope they register four million and more. i hope they do voting reminders, and let people know how to vote. this is an election where people want to vote by mail for the first time because of covid. i hope they contribute constructively to let people know how to do that, with the deadlines are. all that kind of stuff which can have a really big impact on whether people actually do it or not.

is a, i think advertising relatively small piece of the overall facebook ecosystem. they are letting you say i don't want to hear from donald trump, joe biden. but they are doing nothing about things you will hear organically from your friends, family, neighbors. i think it is important to note, they are doing nothing about the other actors on the political ecosystem that is not really campaigns or interest groups. for example, breitbart is orioussly a quite not right wing news website. they are not classified as a group, so they can still be on your feet. it essentially changes the makeup of the political content a person will receive on facebook or instagram. it does necessarily do anything about information. it probably doesn't do anything about disinformation. it allows a few uses to say i want to hear less from candidates themselves. i think it's a problem. a problem for democracy, a

problem for the whole political discourse if a truthful ad from joe biden a person can opt out of that, but a piece of disinformation from some crazy uncle, a person cannot opt out of that. you run the risk that you are actually worsening the overall mix of information and disinformation a person receives on facebook or instagram. emily: interesting. as a person who ran the digital side of president obama's reelection campaign, you know how important a platform like facebook is. do you think this will materially impact the ability for president trump, vice president joe biden to reach voters in this election? teddy: yes is the answer. it is going to be interesting to see how my people actually use this. if you look at facebook put out a blog post late last night where you explain how you actually go through the process of opting out. it is not the most intuitive thing. it is a couple of clicks. it is not going to be a big banner that says you can opt out. you have to find the button,

find the menu of options. my guess is that not all many people avail themselves of it. it matters who does. i was talking to a friend earlier who said the kinds of people that campaigns desperately need to reach are the kind of people that are often most fed up with politics. if it is the case that the undecided voter or the demobilized voter who either campaign is going to try to be reaching, if it is the case they are the ones most likely to use the tool, that is a big deal for campaigns in those parties. with theso obsessed white house and understandably so given the person who is in it but it does not just affect donald trump and joe biden. this effect people running for state house, this affects people running for dogcatcher, running for mayor. this could affect local interest groups that are trying to do something good in their community. essentially, i think what it's going to do is be a hamstring.

anybody who does not already have an audience. donald trump will probably be just fine on facebook. tens of millions of followers. he's got a hold disinformation network supporting him from the u.s. and abroad. if you or someone who's inspired by the protest or fed up by the handling of covid-19 and want to start something new and either run for office or start some policy initiative, a facebook ad is a huge part of the way you grow an audience and get traction. this will affect them too. this is not just about the big guys. some of this will have a big effect on the little guys, the people really need to have every tool at their disposal when they think about how to grow. emily: speaking of the big guys, this could be the most critical election in our lifetime if it was not the last presidential election. i'm curious what your thoughts are now on how president trump, how biden continued to reach

voters and have their campaigns make an impact. we are seeing so much of trump right now and president biden, vice president biden has not been breaking through. what are the chances that he can break through, especially given all of these changes continuing to happen in the digital ecosystem? teddy: i think one of the problems, one of the many problems with the digital ecosystem we have right now is it gives an advantage to have whoever is the most incendiary, whoever is the most emotional, whoever is the most provocative. people pay attention to donald trump's tweets because they are, in my opinion, nutty. you pay attention to something nutty the same way you pay attention to a car crash as you drive by it. it's very difficult for people who are urging certain kinds of moderation, people who are urging continuity, people who dignityng kindness and

and empathy. those are not the sort of grabbiest messages out there. the dynamic we have here in the states is reflected in country after country after country. this is something i have said many times. wonle say that donald trump the internet. they also say modi wins the internet in india. they say that bolsonaro wins the internet in brazil. all of these people who happened to be far-right, autocratic types, but it can happen on the far left too, they are people that had a posture of insurgency against an entrenched elite and peddling a message that appeals to people on facebook and they cannot find it in the local newspaper or their equivalent of cable news because it is not one they heard before. i think the problem for biden, coming back to the united states, is he is not saying a lot of stuff that is shocking. he's not saying a lot of stuff that is usually incendiary. i'm a democrat, but he saying a

lot of stuff that is true and common sense. and appealing but lesso of a riveting way than a president that you cannot believe the u.s. president is saying. that is a structural problem that will keep him at a disadvantage on facebook, twitter, youtube, all of these platforms. does not have all that much to do with advertising. it has to do with the core mechanics of how the algorithms promote content. more engaging, that people share more. that is a real advantage. now, i think abide in campaign -- the biden campaign does not need to be in despair because their objective is not to get more twitter followers than donald trump or more retweets. they are out there to win an election. i think the internet will continue to be more of an optical than a benefit for them but that is when they have to overcome and i think there are other patterns to the white house than just the retweet path

donald trump took a few years ago. emily: always interesting to get your thoughts on these issues. teddy goff, former digital director of president obama's reelection campaign. thank you so much for stopping by. after uber and lyft, san francisco is coming for doordash in a new lawsuit. i will talk to the san francisco dish attorney about that coming up -- district are turning coming up. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: u.s. stocks falling for the first time in four days after increasing concerns about rising covid-19 case is around the world, overtaking the optimism about the economy reopening.

i want to bring in abigail doolittle who has been following all of the market moves. break it down for us. abigail: a different result than yesterday because yesterday there were virus concerns as well but the end of the day stocks pulled past those worries and finished prior. today, stocks never got out of their own way. the s&p 500 opened up about half a percent on midmorning news about texas hospitalization surge which sent stocks lower. fluctuating. at the end of the day, mainly lower. the nasdaq 100, tech was one of two-out performers. gaining, but the russell 2000, more domestic we oriented, really underperforming. highlighting the concerns around the virus, down 1.8%. there was a bid for bonds and a bid for the haven yen overall. something to pay attention to. typically we don't talk about the dow transports but over the last number of days, there has been a bull-bear battle.

the dow transports let on the way down back in january amid virus concerns. transportations of goods and services really so sensitive to the virus, over the last five days, that index really underperforming. telling you investors are very concerned about the virus and what it could do to the economy even if there is never a true shutdown once again. emily: interesting. talk to us about what happened in tech stocks. chips. abigail: chips outperformed. this is 5g hopes. qualcomm getting a boost, saying cheaper phones maybe 5g chips faster than 4g at the end of the year with the snapdragon being in the cheaper phones. gains really giving up. stocks up just 1%. apple down slightly on the day and that is also sensitive to 5g. i am sure we will talk about apple again soon. chips was one bright spot in an otherwise neutral to risk off

day. emily: ok, abigail doolittle for us in new york. thanks so much for breaking it down. while a lawsuit in california against uber and lyft for ms. classifying workers is in water, san francisco is coming for doordash. why doordash specifically? i spoke to the san francisco district attorney about a new lawsuit filed against doordash. take a listen. mr. boudin: we understand that the crimes that do the most damage to public safety and trust are the crimes that most district attorney offices do not investigate or pursue at all. crimes like ms. classifying workers or wage theft on a massive scale which exactly what our lawsuit alleges doordash has been doing for years. we know in order to keep the public safe and in order to build trust in the criminal justice system, we have to start enforcing the laws equally.

it is not enough to simply prosecute people arrested on street corners. we need to make sure we are investigating crimes committed in corporate board rooms. emily: this is based on a controversial law that went into effect on january. that delivery driver should be considered employees. what do you think doordash was doing wrong? mr. boudin: i don't view the law as controversial. we've had all three branches of california government speak to it. i understand there is opposition within some tech companies, but the reality is the california supreme court has ruled on the issue. the california legislature has codified the supreme court ruling. the governor has spoken to the issue as well. the allegation is that doordash is systematically and intentionally misclassifying its employees as independent contractors. and is doing so in order to avoid fairly competing with other companies and avoid

complying with laws that protect workers and require paying into state unemployment and workers compensation. emily: what about uber, what about instacart? all of these companies fall under a similar umbrella. will you take action against them too? mr. boudin: we are certainly not going to limit our economic crimes against workers unit which i created a few weeks ago to one lawsuit. emily: so, are you actively working or pursuing cases against those companies as well? mr. boudin: my colleagues in the attorney general's office and a number of city attorney's office is filed a similar lawsuit against uber and lyft a few weeks ago. i do expect from my office or other government agencies around the state that some of the other companies you list will be required to comply with the law and determines who is an employee, who is an independent contractor.

we have seen a number of these companies engage in flagrant violations much to the detriment of their employees, the public as a whole and the state of california. emily: in a response, doordash gave us a statement saying today's action seeks to disrupt the essential services doordash provides, serving hundreds of thousands of people the valuable work opportunities, depriving local restaurants of desperately needed revenue and making it more difficult for consumers to receive prepared food, groceries and other essentials safely and reliably. what is your response to that? mr. boudin: it misstates the core issue which is doordash's refusal to abide by the law and pay its fair share. it's unfair to other companies that follow along. it is unfair to employees who have been many instances been paid less than minimum wage and given no benefits that the law requires. it's unfair to the taxpayers of california who are left paying the bill when we have massive so shortages in unemployment and there is no payment in the on

and plummet fun because companies have illegally refused to contribute. emily: you are saying these workers deserve minimum wage, sick leave, even restitution. what would doordash have to do to make this right? are you talking about years of back pay? mr. boudin: the statute provides remedies that are quite clear and we lay them out in detail in the complaint we filed in court yesterday. i believe the statute contemplates $2500 in penalties per violation which can be doubled in some instances if the violation is against an employee who is disabled or in other some other protected class. emily: doordash had been fighting this law along with other companies. if the law is overturned, what about that? /mr. boudin;l assembly bill five is the lot -- mr. boudin: assembly bill five is the law at issue. doordash, uber and lyft, other companies are very welcome to

engage in lobbying in the legislative process to change the law if they disagree with it. what they cannot do and will not be allowed to do on my watch is flagrantly violate the law as it exists. emily: have you been talking? mr. boudin: we have gotten a lot of feedback, overwhelmingly supportive. many people have reached out over social media and other means urging us to expand the lawsuit to include other companies you mentioned. people feel that it is outrageous that they have had tips given to them garnished by their employer, that they have been mistreated, they have been forced to sign contracts on occasion, and they have been basically working in conditions that make it impossible for them to get the full benefits of being an employee. emily: some other things your office partnering with airbnb and lyft to fight domestic violence. i would love to hear other issues and potential cases you are exploring that pertains to

the tech community. mr. boudin: san francisco is an long has been home to the tech industry. it is a great part of this city's economy and workforce and cultural identity. we are eager to work with all those companies that contribute to the city and follow the law. i'm really excited about our partnership with airbnb that provides no-cost housing in emergency circumstances to victims of domestic violence. or our partnership with lyft that allows victims of sexual assault to get free transportation to a hospital where they can have a rape kit collected. those kind of partnerships promote public safety, just as our lawsuit against doordash does as well. emily: san francisco district attorney. we will continue to follow developments in that case. moving on to a bloomberg scoop. the founder of the electric trucking company nikola exaggerated the capabilities of

the debut truck. our ed ludlow broke this story and joins us now. what can you tell us about what happened here? 1,: so on december t 2016, in salt lake city, the executive chairman unveiled the nikola 1, the company's first truck. it was displayed as a hydrogen fuel cell ev. at that time he told the audience they had to chain the truck down to stop it from being driven off by people. they drove it off the stage. he said it was not a pusher which is industry parlance, basically meaning a prototype that cannot operate under its own power. it needed to be pushed onto the stage. what sources told me is that's exactly what it was. it had several components missing from it, including the components related to the motor, gears,, and the fuel-cell.

there was no fuel cell it according to sources. le ass essentially immovab sources describe it. i guess it is important to add that trevor milton, when i spoke to him this morning, pushed back against that saying he never deceived anyone. that he did say at that time and in interviews the following day that it was a working, operational vehicle. emily: right, so how does he explain some of these inconsistencies then? this is a company that has taken off in part because of how this truck was debuted. it is considered a potential real competitor or has been considered a real potential competitor to tesla. ed: he says on the fuel-cell, there was no fuel-cell in that prototype. but he also says he never said there was a fuel-cell within it. there was a last-minute pivot several weeks before the event

where they moved from a natural gas system to a hydrogen fuel cell system. he says he never actually stated there was a fuel-cell inside the prototype unit he says the components i mentioned which we believe were missing were removed on purpose for safety reasons. the other said he said was at the time of the event was they had tested it and he recently told us that it had been tested. when i spoke to him this morning, he said they had tested it with these components missing and without power. they basically let it roll down an incline with those pieces missing. his explanation was also safety. that by removing the motor, the gears, the trucks could not run away and therefore hurt anyone. that is kind about he sums the situation. emily: so, what is nikola actually plan to do? what's next? ed: nikola has different stages of goals.

the first is to build a factory electric semi-truck which it is in germanyia plant which is already built. that will be in cooperation with another company. at the same time, they are looking to build a factory in arizona about 30 miles south of phoenix where they will eventually build a hydrogen fuel cell semi-truck. that is much further into the distance. they are not expecting to make any serious revenue on any of these products until around 2023. goals,re more realistic but the break umbrella point people are picking up on his nikola wants to develop a hydrogen network that it can use to fuel these hydrogen fuel-cell trucks. just as you go to the gas station and get gas for your car, they will have a broad network across the u.s. and beyond as hydrogen stations that will make the logistics of filling up these trucks and economic viability more realistic. emily: ok.

bloomberg's ed ludlow, thank you for bringing us that scoop. coming up, our continued coverage of the challenges facing black ceos in silicon valley, people in a position of power that sometimes feel powerless. we will discuss with a ceo. ♪

emily: welcome back to bloomberg technology. protests over the recent death of george floyd rayshard brooks have triggered a national conversation about race. tech companies and venture capitalists have joined in with messages of solidarity, committing millions to investments towards minority groups. but how much of this action will create real change? ceoing us to discuss is the of lucid works, which builds ai powered search products.

thanks for joining us. you have been working in silicon valley for 20 years and i know you have had a lot of different kinds of experiences. i wonder if there are times when you believe you have encountered subtle or even overt racism. >> yeah. first off, biased and racial experiences are just part of the culture we live in. silicon valley has its own particular set of challenges. in theeone who grew up bay area, among the diversity and cultural richness of the bay the context was quite jarring. of diversity, this myth of meritocracy that tends to limit the scope of individuals and their backgrounds aired -- backgrounds. coming up in this environment,

it was very clear to me that not only was i different in terms of the way i looked, there was not an organic extension of the bay experience i had growing up. the disconnect from the community that is here has been displaced and what has been created is where i see the biggest divide. that translates to race and culture very differently. emily: the way i understand it, you have been confused with your deputy, who is white, on numerous occasions and you realize this was not a coincidence. >> is one of those experiences that, when you are raising money for company, it is hard. you are working every single day to keep operations going.

andadded challenge i faced a lot of minorities face is just the way we have built up venture capital around what is called pattern matching there's a certain expectation of patterns and networks and it's often jarring when those things don't fit. experienced is we walk in the room in the immediate reaction is go to my white colleague. it is not just a mistake. i can forgive a mistake, and when you are in the mode of entrepreneurialism, you tend to ignore things. but it was the disadvantage it would create the discomfort in the room. you can see the person really in their head. it's terrible, the optics are terrible, and now they are distracted from what they are here to talk about.

you create this disadvantage out itthe great russiagate and is one fueled by a sense of sorrow that they made a mistake. this --we have disadvantage out of the gate and it is fueled by one sense of sorrow that they made a mistake. these micra aggressions make it even harder for people who might not fit the traditional mold. some of have talked to the women who have tried to change or they are to avoid issues of sexism. for example, putting their hair up before a meeting with investors, not getting their nails done, they bring a man to the meeting. have you done anything similar like that? where you felt you had to change to you are to get what you need or want? >> that's a heavy question. my entire career has just been one of never feeling entirely

comfortable with myself. i was 18 years old when i started working. to add race to the context, it was what you would call up from representative. what i found was the hurdle has just created another set of adversity. there were times, and i don't say this proudly, but there were deftly times when you were in that tunnel vision. ask yourself what do you need to do to be different do you need another ceo or another founder. there are deftly those moments and they are painful. -- definitely those moments and they are painful. all entrepreneurs and founders face it aired entrepreneurs of

color, there's always this what if question. ?hat if i looked different i think it is completely natural to have those feelings personally. gun older in terms of who i am, the music, and the culture. it was definitely a process for ,e to get to that point released trying to stay true to understand it is someone's experience. so many conversations are happening within companies about how to address this. do you think that what we are

seeing now, these new commitments, these measures of solidarity. is this the time we are going to see real change, or is this skeptical? >> i would say i am cautiously optimistic. in the world in general, these are not new. i was very disturbed after the floyd incident. say you need a statement. these were not things that were new in my life but all of a sudden it was ok to talk about. one thing that makes me optimistic is people are istening and the difference change cannot happen when we are trying to rationalize until someone else's story. the number of people who are simply listening today playing

back with a here, that encourages the diversity of people speaking up. because of the energy, we feel way more optimistic about what is happening. but we recognize this is a -- not a new topic. we see this in our company every day. but again, listening is what creates change. i think we have been very defensive around the conversation, particularly the phase -- phrase black lives matter, and there has been a shift in the overall echo chamber that is very positive for me. for a lot of us who have been down the forefront of this for a long time and have sort of heard these conversations before. we have not seen the level of

changed one would expect and that's where the skepticism comes from. emily: i want to talk about how important it is from a product perspective. thepeople who are making products that we all use on a daily basis is important that people of all backgrounds make those products. how important do you believe it is to make sure that people developing the artificial intelligence and come from a variety of backgrounds making sure you get the product right. >> there are a ton of opportunities to make mistakes and the first one is if we are representative in the way we are thinking about experience. we help drive search results

that are personal to you and we drive recommendations. we let companies determine how to craft that journey. of ising we are fortunate the scope had impact the specific brand you are experiencing. so this is different then companies trying to build things like siri or facebook, broad reaching ai is going to adapt to language. so ensuring that you have representation is key. we look at our customers first and try to understand their objectives. the objective is always being more productive, customer spending more money and we try to optimize the objectives. now we are going into voice, a fascinating topic when it comes to how we identify ourselves. risk of a technology company not having

representation of the fraud or cultural elements. it's a background of input into efforts to ensure we do not create that unintentional bias. we cannot just previously rely on the internet to provide input. to be intentional from the organization to ensure biases do not show up. some important given that this technology is going to influence our lives for decades to come. thank you so much for sharing your story with us. energy andte your the fact that you got so personal. great to have you on the show. apple is under renewed attacks in the eu over antitrust concerns.

our own mark gurman will be next. ♪

emily: apple is facing a set of pros -- probes from margrethe vestager as she seeks to rewrite the rules on big tech. latest.deo has the > the commission has launched a probe into apple that could see the tech company handed out yet another fine by eu regulators. this time the commission led by is lookingestager into the apple pay and apple store systems aired europeans

wants to figure out whether or not apple has used this dominant position in the market and detriment to its rivals. , the first, however time apple has run into problems at the european commission. recordalready handed a fine for not paying taxes and by the way apple has said it has always complied with the rules. point, this goes beyond apple in particular. withes into the tension the tech companies. argued they are treated unfairly by europeans because of the lack of innovation. compete ontime, they taxation and antitrust. europeans will say this is not entirely accurate but they want to see them operate in the eu and pay fair taxation.

it could trigger an escalation in the tensions we are seeing between the united states and .urope there emily: joining us to discuss his mark gurman. you have got developers piling on and sharing their concerns about apple in a similar vein. what are they saying? mark: you are right, and the timing couldn't be worse for apple. they are working on their annual developer conference where they bring a bunch of developers together and developers are really pushing back on apples so card monopolistic tendencies. there are some applications the in app purchases system which was basically subscriptions and other upgrades. theyey use apple system,

have to give 30% of that tap. emily: apple in a statement has called this european commission baseless, coming from companies that only want a free ride and don't have to play at the same rules as anyone else. we don't think it is right and we want to maintain a level playing field. think of apple's response to all of this? the response is essentially the same response they gave when spotify led the european union to probe apple over antitrust concerns last year. apple is basically saying they are the storekeeper and invest a lot of money into making that happen. they feel that without the platform, a lot of these companies want exist. position and some of

the tactics they use are quite dated. hasexample, the 30% cut existed from 2008, 12 years ago. that was well before a lot of these apps and services even existed. that's before things like spotify and uber existed. some of these policies are basically from a different era and they all agree there needs to be some adjustment here. is also facing antitrust scrutiny in the united states. facebook,rberg of sunder pichai, all of them have said they will testify how big a risk is the scrutiny? not just about europe, but in the united states as well? question.'s a good

nine out of 10 situations regarding apple and antitrust are not necessarily an issue. they are not the market leader in any particular area for hardware. problem is on the app store he can -- and the concern is that apple has their own services that competes with services like spotify and dropbox etc.. apple, obviously, has nobly to get a 30% cut to. -- has nobody to give a 30% cut to. i think it will be a change at some point either reducing their rates or allowing competing services. there are ways around this. long-term, what hardware revenue is still strong and we have other things coming down the pipeline that long-term will not be significant.

emily: all right. bloomberg's mark gurman there for us as we get one day closer to the worldwide developer .onference still ahead is tictoc, turning a new leaf. onceideo app sensation accused of downplaying political content is now embracing black lives matter. more on that next. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: tictoc is loosening it's grip on political speech. the applet has been accused of downplaying political speech and removing post-e did not fit its image are now making more room for these kinds of videos. for more, i want to take you to shelley banjo.

they are known for these catchy memes and goofy videos but in recent days have taken a more dramatic turn. talk to us about this change of heart and what you are seeing. over 10 billion views of videos with the #black lives matter have been seen on the site and there has just been this kind of outpouring and complete change of tenor. the app has been growing in terms of users with thousands of downloads around the world, so part of it is just this maturation of the platform and the fact that there are more older users on the site and the fact that the protests and the movement have still erected all across assets of life and media.

but there is a complete change for tictoc in the sense that this just used to be a place of lighthearted content and could mark a change of what's to come with the platform. talk to us about the ties tictoc has to china and what happened in the past. are some awful stories about tictoc downplaying content for people who are overweight, for people who are disabled. what about that? >> that's exactly right and that's what really caught my eye on this story last year, i was in hong kong and covering some of the protests and there were a lot of accusations that tictoc was suppressing content regarding the hong kong protest. time the spokesman for the company said that video, for

example, has a video a video of police holding guns or teargas or people crying because they have been hit by teargas fast-forward almost one year later you are seeing the same type of images in the u.s.. the reason people take it so seriously is because they are part of a large u.s. startup by valuation. a large chinese start by valuation they have been subject to a number of investigations and questions. part of the reasons the questions arrive was at the decisions they make to amplify content or suppress certain continent continue to seem like they dovetail with the priorities of the government. so it is around concentration

camps, or like you mentioned, overweight, gay, disabled people. emily: how will they whether the controversies? whether or not they take a stand, do you expect that tictoc would face some of those similar issues? >> i think they will, and they are already adding tons of staff in washington dc crating these transparency sensors around the world where they want to invite people into take them behind the algorithm and show them why they make the decisions they have. the company is definitely , and as they it get older, they are preparing himself for that kind of fight. emily: thank you so much for that reporting something we will

continue to follow your -- follow. bloomberg: daybreak australia is next. this is bloomberg. ♪ save hundreds on your wireless bill

without even leaving your house. just keep your phone and switch to xfinity mobile. you can get it by ordering a free sim card online. once you activate, you'll only have to pay for the data you need- starting at just $15 a month. there are no term contracts, no activation fees, and no credit check on the first two lines. get a $50 prepaid card when you switch. it's the most reliable wireless network. and it could save you hundreds. xfinity mobile. you say that customers maklet's talk data.s. only xfinity mobile lets you switch up your wireless data whenever. i accept! 5g - everybody's talking about it. how do i get it? everyone gets 5g with our new data options at no extra cost. that's good. next item - corner offices for everyone. just have to make more corners in this building. chad? your wireless your rules. only with xfinity mobile.

now that's simple easy awesome. switch and save up to $400 a year on your wireless bill. plus get $200 off a new samsung galaxy s20 ultra. >> good evening from bloomberg world headquarters. i am sherry in new york. best shery ahn in new york. -- i am shery ahn in new york. di: beijing has already threatened retaliation against potential sanctions from washington. new