quite unintentionally, create a much bigger moat around the companies that are already there, , google and facebook, and increasingly forced advertiser to concentrate their advertising dollars on discoveries that they can be quite sure our complaint which again are likely to be google and facebook and the largest companies. and so while that regulation is clearly well-intentioned, i think there is growing sense that this is a complicated area to weigh into and that begin the law of unintended consequences actually apply here. my suspicion is people who wait and see what happens, but i do think it will have an immediate impact on privacy in the united states and that companies will have a tendency to adopt something closer to a global standard instead of trying to vulcanize each country into completely different standards. >> moving to something that is a bit more bipartisan, at least for now, on the 5g front since we're all in this global race and the u.s. is kind of neck and neck with companies, or countries, sorry, like china and south korea, and all of the major carriers have put out trials and

america than we do from the russians we hack everyone everywhere you have any idea how much data google facebook and apple have on every single one of us privacy consultant dylan khurrana went through this on his twitter feed and dissected every piece of info google and facebook had collected on the businesses you bought from the products you bought every app and extension you've ever used every photo you've ever taken on your phone every photo on my phone what the hell is google going to do with that many photos of back temples. you know just people go and i figure what the house i thing is if i did this in a photo of it i could be going to be sitting around a fire and. but that's not all your google hangout session they also have your google calendar all the events you've ever added yes they've been monitoring your google hangout sessions and in case you forgot just last week microsoft announced they will be banning your skype or x. box live a live account for offensive language which means they are watching and analyzing everything you say on skype or x.-box this is out and out that you you k

there google and facebook, and increasingly force advertisers concentrate their advertising dollars on those companies that are can be quite sure compliant, which again, are likely to be google and facebook largest companies. while the regulation is learly well intentioned, i think there is a growing sense that this is a complicated area again, law o, and, of unintended consequences may here.ly apply so my suspicion is people will wait and see what happens, but i it will have an immediate impact on privacy in the united states, and the have a tendency to adopt something closer to a standard instead of vulcanize each country into completely different. a bit more bipartisan at least for now, global 're all in this race and the u.s. is kind of neck and neck with companies countries, sorry, like china and south korea, and all of the major carriers have put trials and are really putting out, or at least publicly saying they are putting effort into this and spectrum and so who you urious as to think will win the race on the carrier side and how to help the competitiveness. > well, i think al

risk was the isp and telecom carriers were subject to a much tractor regulatory regime than facebook or google. simplistically they would be subject to the opt in requirement while facebook would be subject to the opt out and that asymmetry would be very challenging and interestingly there is always a suspicion it was facebook and google that was behind pushing for that regulation. once the privacy rules were rolled back in november but then consequently when title ii was rolled back some of the urgency disappeared and now we're back to to a more level playing field where at this point the ftc has jurisdiction again and everyone will be treated the same way. the risk to the telecom operators is relatively small but the risks to the providers now is but that there is real chance that the next step in the process could be that everyone is subject to the opt in requirement that isn't terribly different from today but like those edge providers it would be very profound. >> you also mentioned net neutrality which is often wrapped up in the privacy debate during the tom wheeler area and one -- era a

google. emily: would you agree that facebook's loss could be google's gain? bob: i'm not convinced. think we will see a lot of advertisers rethinking where they are going. there is youtube as well, so there are different places. emily: so facing similar challenges in terms of what the advertisers, who kind of content the advertising is against, what they want to be associated with, maybe not white nationalism or terrorism. bob: i think we will see rethinking. advertisers are realizing, if we want to reach people, these of the platforms and calculate drive changes in the platforms. that's what they are doing with youtube, that is what they will do more with facebook and google, but the regulation issues will become a big issue in how google interprets gdp, and will they bring it to the u.s. we have seen facebook moving away from that. if they started a gdp our standards as a worldwide standard, which is some companies have done, that will be the important difference as well. there is a trust issue that i think will play out over not just months, but more like quarters and years. coll

meanwhile, upstarts have changed the industry with more advertisers going direct to facebook and googlempany has lost a third of its value, prompting this farewell statement. his critics say he ran the company like a private fiefdom, when he actually owned less than 2%. a pay packet of £70 million in 2015 drew outrage from politicians and rebellion from shareholders. some of whom told the bbc this weekend it was time for change. for many in the world of advertising, sir martin sorrell was more of a money man than an ad man, treating it like a professional service rather than a creative industry. but he was a powerful advocate for it, and in his departure, british business has lost a true giant. simon jack, bbc news. two teenagers have been arrested after five people were struck by a car in essex on saturday afternoon. three people remain in hospital following the incident in canvey island. a 17—year—old boy and an 18—year—old man, both from the area, are being questioned by essex police on suspicion of causing serious injury by dangerous driving. a group of mps, peers, business leaders,

facebook. that has been pretty apparent in the way that google has not really done anything since the cambridgecal scandal with facebook and sat back and said, this is good news for us because we look like a more professional tech company in the system. emily: i did get off the phone o and we alphabet ce asked her about future privacy regulations. what she had to say about gdr, the new regulations -- gdpr, the new regulations coming out of europe. she said we are working on gdpr for the past months. i asked how this would impact the business. she said much of our ad business is reliant on keywords. we have committed to requirements. my interpretations of that is she is indicating it is not going to impact her business very much. what is your take? >> i think it will impact the business. search ads are different from the kind of ads we see drawn by facebook. clearly we will see some impact here. emily: how much? >> that is the big question. they are adult and how they handle things, but let's be honest, there was an interesting story that the wall street journal wrote that google has more data o

and on to google if you think facebook knows a lot aboutery search and everywhere your android phone has ever been. that could be a bit of a cloud over the stock, but the effects are a topic that rises to everyone's surface and then just kind of floats away. >> how big a cloud, kevin? does it mean an impressive eps growth of 22% or so, does it mean that kind of print is irrelevant and could see 10-15% down if they start to get hit with the same thing as facebook did? >> well, if you look at where google money's comes from, it's the world's biggest business fly wheel, this paid search and advertising off the search, it's just a monster, and if people started to feel uncomfortable using that and started to look at alternatives, and there are alternatives, most people don't think about it, yeah, that would be a pretty big deal >> victor, how would you characterize the risk right now? one thing that occurred to me when it came to the facebook discussion was presumably whatever might be done on a regulatory basis or privacy, you know, data handl

probably the one difference would be facebook, which the investments are viewed a bit more defensively obviously with googlethey're investing in things like ai, new hardware and other businesses that down the road could drive revenue growth attached to these investments. whereas with facebook, a lot of these investments are to shore up the core business we're certainly below their guidance in terms of expense growth and expect to see some positive surprises throughout the year as we progress. >> ken, you think about changes to the news feed and the way they're trying to engage their users on the platform again, you think about increased spending and you think about this idea of doing more self policing on their sights to me that sounds like a situation where demand, advertisers, is going to outpace supply that sounds positive from what facebook, long term, will be able to get from advertisers. >> in the end as far as what advertisers are willing to go along with in terms of those pricing increases has to be consistent with the performance thatfacebook is able to delive to them. the data targeting, policing

legislators are looking at broad privacy regulations that would cover google and facebook. and europe is launching more stringent privacy regulations next month. >> the higher leveluestion i whether or not europe is going to keep after google and facebook a intensively as it has, we know that google paid a massive fe last ar, 2.6 billion euros. >> google and youtube aren't as exposed to privacyks r as facebook is. the wall street journal just ported that google has more total user data than facebook. julia borstyn. >> more about alphabet's earn mgs, and what itns for the stock longer term.da el, welcome, nice to have you here. >> great to see you, sue. you. >> said you were looking for solid growth i seems from this report that you got it. >> i think the rort looks solid, sue, i think the company is executing nicel on their core search business, and seeing continued momentum on the youtube platform as well as the google cloud platform, wn we think about the medium to long term for this company, there's several growth engines underneath that we think can help sustain attracti

both google and facebook can share their users data with third party. users can't control what happens with their data once it's been shared what's more interesting is how that data is used and used to target and attempt to influence and manipulate not just the people who have the data access but almost everybody i think it is true that in some ways they control so much that it's like like a dictatorship but a kind of hidden dictatorship it's working with soft power rather than rather than hard power with influence and nudge rather than coercion and unforced. there are ways of escaping some of this influence data protection activists progress commence checking your privacy settings regularly and turning off apps that facebook shares data with. the fed isn't enough to survive has another piece of advice. if i personally love to play with the data that's being collected about me because you know like your points are using these technologies you are generating there is there are plug ins there are things that you can do that can send noise into the data th

important parts of how facebook works is we do not sell data advertisers do not get access to people's individual data. according to group data by the end of twenty seventeen google and facebook had an eighty four percent share of global digital media that's excluding china traditional media and ad agencies just can't compete basically a duopoly has formed in the world's advertising industry yet google and facebook share none of the responsibility of traditional media and insist on being called technology companies that's the spine making more from ads than every newspaper magazine and radio network in the world combined and it's all because of targeted ads using our data artificial intelligence in the shape of algorithms is also up ending previous advertising models but even industry insiders admit they don't exactly know how it all works and this lack of transparency means advertising can end up next to inappropriate or illegal content earlier this year major advertisers pulled spending from google's you tube for exactly this reason and it's questions too about whether companies are being billed correctly but the only way to find out is by asking google and fac

have a very long lasting impact on the effort chinese markets because we have to face of still google facebook twitter they're all going to make also in the future of their money with our data and since now soccer burke has announced that all of those apps will be revealed maybe updated yes this could mean that at the end they could make less money with it all right daniel coupe following the story for us from the frankfurt stock exchange good to talk to you. it appears the w. is looking to begin a new chapter in its corporate history and it plans on doing so without c.e.o. let's hear reports he'll have to step aside for that mr d.c. is currently the brand manager inside the larger management restructuring in the wake of the gates scandal. it's the most important job in the german car industry as miller took over the helm the fox dog back in twenty fifteen his mission dragging the company actually to the diesel gate crisis and by some measures at least he succeeded last year v.w. sold more cars than ever before this is kind his lips pursed in blue coat considering the journey so far which has

they have better data than facebook and i think more people have to use google than use facebook they're in a different place even though we all know that these guys are under some regulatory headwinds and again, if you want to get, you know, big government all over the tech sector, google seems to be the place. obviously, problem europe, by the way, just to be clear. european commission has been a leader in this i'm not saying its leader good it's leader. it's going to happen here. follow what happened in europe. >> yeah. what you're seeing in the after-hours is just fisticuffs over whether or not you believe that capex are spend is going to lead to higher growth in the future or not. everything look good the margins came out and they were the lowest since 2012 the stock soldup. a kerfuffle if you will. that's what's happening in after-hours. i think we'll know tomorrow morning who won. >> you look like you're about -- you have that game playing look on your face. >> do you think that there are concerns about potential regulations that's sort of keeping alphabet -- >> keeping fires at b

price has fallen about a third as the company struggles to compete with digital rivals like google and facebook is mr sorrell talking to the bbc last month about those issues. what we have is this long—term structural issue around technological disruption, and the impact it is having on our clients, and the short—term pressures which have exacerbated. you can't moan about it. you can try and analyse it and understand it. we have to try to find the areas, the geographic areas and the functional areas, where we can have growth. because the economy. . . can have growth. because the economy... the paradox is that the economies of the world are growing at around 3— 4%. last year it was closer to 3%, this year it is closer to 4%. the world is not a bad place at the moment. yet we are not seeing the growth. it is notjust us. we used to see 3% plus across the industry. sometime last year it started to degrade. that was sir martin sorrell, speaking to the bbc just a month ago. with me is the advertising consultant bob wootton. what you make of his sudden departure? i would start by saying he has done a

writing to facebook, google and twitter, jeremy hunt said that they were collectively turning a blind eye to a whole generation of children being exposed to harmful material. he said it was unfair to parents and morally wrong. yes, the government are appearing to do something but they are not actually doing anything. this is about bullying, cyber bullying. we have no control over anything, and to say to google and facebook, it is your responsibility, it is not, it is our responsibility, it is our government. if we are going to do something about it, then we've got to do something about it. ok, this is how this app works. google, which owns youtube, said it understood the concerns of parents and had introduced a family link to set the ground rules for children, including screen time limits. we allow them to have 30 minutes, in the evening, like at six, after dinner. probably everyone, to be honest, is using the internet too much. that includes parents. it is not so much pressure, we do not have an outlet any more. we rely too much on the internet. it is having a lot of an effect on our

the senators have been pressuring companies like google, facebook and twitter to work more closely with intelligence agencies in order to secure the internet and protect it from foreign influence. if you know anything about the history of the internet, this outrage would be funny comics of the problem is that comes with possible danger because what is pushing people to do is to hand over even more power and more control than they already have but there's another aspect to the story. the outrage is based on a deeply flawed premise if this idea that if there was ever a point in the internet history when it was the use of the weapon. the notion that the internet is some kind of democracy machine is a myth. the internet was designed by at the pentagon as a weapon of surveillance and social control from the very beginning going back to the 1950s when it was developed by the weighing of the pentagon that we know now. it was an informatio information then and today privatized in commercial form much more powerful than today and anyone in the 1960s or 70s could have imagined yet for years we ha

. >>> las empresas demandadas son google, facebook, twitter, las se le han ayudado al creciente poder no eche el monto de la compensación que busca, están solicitando que la corte conforme un jurado para que determine la culpabilidad de las empresas en juicio, en la querella demandadas como plataformas para promover y llevar a cabo su acto terrorista, que ha permitido que isis ejerza un gran impacto en cómo lo persigue, la demanda establece que el estado islámico utiliza las sociales para dictar, inicio de abril federal hizo una demanda contra las empresas por familiares de víctimas de la masacre en orlando. >>> fue aceptado ayer por la policía de san mateo por violar a una mujer de su apartamento, de acuerdo con las utilidades en abril 2017 la víctima había denuncia del asalto sexual por parte del sospechoso, donde además la vio obligado tener sexo oral, la policía cree que existe otra víctima del hombre. >>> este finde arrestaron a una lo suyo por actos sexuales ilícito, descuenta que dicen las autoridades sobre picasso. >>> ofensivo y criminal, se describe al jefe de la del condado

in silicon valley because it is not just about facebook, it is about all the other companies, google, facebook these companies that are becoming enormous and permeating our lives and they are having to take on responsibility and accountability? well, it is something that they will have to consider, it will help detect public confidence as well as investor confidence. we have seen we will go down this route, they brought in eric schmidt, who led the company. he also meant toward larry the in a more qualified and experienced ceo when he moved back into the role. —— mental. thank you so much for coming in. -- mentored. we will do more to open our markets. that's the pledge from the chinese leader, xijinping. he was addressing the boao forum in hainan province as his country faces a possible trade war with the us. let's cross to shanghai, where we'rejoined by robin brant. he was listening to that speech, teller small. financial markets have been cheering to a degree since. yes, they have. in asia, looking pretty green in the last hour or so and that is because they like the words coming from xi ji

what is your take on that, and given the results in advertising we did see from google yesterday, is facebook's loss google's gain? how should we think about that >> i mean, clearly, it's just another negative data point. we don't believe that facebook is doing anything unlawful we think zuckerberg's comment about doubling the number of content reviewers and security staff year on year to go after this, these are the things that are unfortunate that are going to get posted but we think they'll be quick to resolve this i don't anticipate this to be a big issue. clearly, just another nagging headwind for the company given everything else that's gone on not a great thing to see, but i don't think it's going to go anywhere >> colin, this seems kind of egregious, though. anybody who was searching, even on google, much less on facebook, for stolen social security, personal information, could have found this. so why facebook with even its basic a.i. capabilities at this point, wasn't seeing it? is that an issue of concern? it seems like they should have been able to find this >> it's a great question

we have great engineers from google, facebook, linkedin.hey could be at those companies and be making a lot of money and be very successful. if they have come to work with us and their families have made that commitment, it's my responsibility to make sure that they end up in a good place, so. scott: but have you ever laid anybody off? ajeet: sometimes, you have to do that. scott: okay. that seems like that would make it harder. you know, i've met your kid, i've met your husband, i've met your--that would just make it more difficult. it's already horribly painful. ajeet: those are always very, very difficult decisions. but you know, that's where there's a difference between a family and a company, you know? a company is a professional team. there is a lot of commonalities between families and a company. scott: but we've just watched you blur that line. i mean, you're blurring the line more than, say, netflix does. ajeet: sure, sure. yeah, and the question, is a company a family? there is--there is a lot of commonalities, but there are some

you still tracked by facebook and google. i don't think a consumer can meaningfully withdraw. don't have a genuine way to help protect from fake news or russian interference illegal pharmaceuticals or pirated content. the consumer can't do it. you don't want to create prioritization. when i can be the one placing it. only zuckerberg knows the algorithm. only they know how to turn it down or up or filter it. google announced today that work in and take down videos that point you toward gun sale. it just proves they have the tools and ability to do it when they want to. you don't see porn on you to be there. they're the ones who know how to do it. if they're allowed the time to suggest and if we sense a society were not responsible for it that can't. >> you recently said that net neutrality should is a dead issue and why are we still talking about it. >> discussed. it's an issue trapped in a perpetual loop that is not making any progress on effectively addressing the things that supposed to because it stuck answer to her purgatory. this issue was trumpeted back to 2004 and has h

facebook. you're still tracked by google. i don't think a consumer can meaningfully withdraw from the social graft or from the digital -- so i don't think considers have any genuine way to help protect them from fake news or russian interference or sex trafficking or illegal pharmaceuticals or pirated content. the consumer can't do it. the infrastructure companies can't do it. we tonight have the ability to -- we don't have the ability to block, and by the way, this is why net neutrality, which is a noble-sounding idea, often may be problematic. you don't want us to block, do any sorting, it should be this nirvana-like openness. so we're not the ones policing it. who is? only zuckerberg knows the algorithm. only google knows the algorithm. only they know how to turn it down, turn it up or filter it, you know? and i notice that google announced today, well, we're going to take down youtube videos that point you toward gun sales. they have the -- it just proves the matter asetterred. they have the tools and the ability to do th

googles, facebooks. you can't discount that. but it's still the cable companies and at&t.control the infrastructure and the wireless networks, control the pipes that those online services need to access. so they still have quite a bit of leverage, you know, going forward. >> time-warner's response to that is simply that the ad dollars are moving away from traditional cable into those digital products and the rise in cable prices for subscribers is to make up for the lost revenue, shep. >> shepard: when are we expecting a decision on the merger? >> the at&t says that the last witness is that ceo on the stand right now. the department of justice has already rested their case, so we could hear a decision from the judge as early as monday or with his $85 billion merger, may want to consider the facts and make a case monday, shep. >> shepard: thanks, edward. wild fires burning a cross parts of oklahoma, scorching hundreds of square miles. dozens of counties under states of emergency. here's what's left of one fire engine battling the flames. the firefighters all made it out ali

else essentially have to put together another one in order to be able to survive in the age of google and facebookg so much data and manipulating the industry >> no. how about google and facebook controlling so much data and manipulating the industry? that's how it's going to go. >> not good for marketers. >> he did a seefrs acquisitions and various things that were somewhat -- he didn't do a great job on the internet stuff, i would say. i don't know who could do that this is what's happening fa facebook is splitting up the digital ad market. that's it. it's very hard to think of a counterforce in this area unless publishers get together in some manner it's extraordinarily difficult to compete with the two of them in this area. >> as julia said, his deal apparently means he's able to compete with the firm after this you think we've heard the last of him what would you expect him to do? >> you never want to count sir martin out he just had a kid at 73. i'm not saying it's a good or bad thing but this is not an individual who is looking to hang up his cleats the noncompete, his company will not go d

year/ >> caterpillar was not alone in selling off. 500biggest drags on the s&p , microsoft, google and facebooknderlying all of this is the lack of upward momentum and underlying core earnings. related this is tech ech not type one -- t related and not top line related. toemmanuel macron came washington with the not so secret gold of selling president trump -- goal of selling president trump on the iran deal. he cautioned president trump on tearing up the deal, which he called insane. >> there was an interesting moment where president trump said perhaps president macron might have some sense of idea what exactly president trump will decide on may 12 when he announces whether or not the united states will remain in the deal. >> emmanuel macron just concluded his address to a joint session of congress. >> emmanuel macron greeted warmly by a joint session of congress. he has some interesting things to say about trade and the global economy. at one point he said that he hoped that at one point the united states will rejoin that deal regarding the paris climate accord agreement. >> the critics have

melissa: yeah. >> when facebook was dragged down to congress a lot of people were saying, why facebook? google has 8 gigabytes. facebook has 650 megabytes. that is about 160 hours. there are a lot of people, scott galloway, professor at nyu has been very vocal about this. europe has all the downside of big tech. they have all the people complaining, and none of the upside which are bragging rights to numbers like this. he is one of the more vocal people that said, listen these companies may face more regulatory pressure than investors are pricing in right now. david: in deference to my friend deirdre, can i jump in here? we have a profit jump of 73%, 73% in first three months of the year. this extraordinary jump in profits. >> liz, reconcile those two things. when you hear about that kind of profit, you hear about what a target google has on its back? >> first of all, as far as the profits are concerned i think we have to take a step back and look at the fact there were several accounting changes in this quarter. for one thing they may have written up and flowed through the income statement an

and facebook for what you would call performance, to drive specific sales. and apart from googleook, those are the two of the most important ways in which advertisers are not only joining sales online, but driving visits into an automobile dealership and coupons. it is going to be an important part of what advertisers do and it will continue to be. the bigger issue -- go ahead. emily: so, right. i want to ask you from a reputational perspective. in terms of trust, users might opt in to this, but even when users opt in or check a box, they do not understand how their data is being used. facebook has not done a good job about being clear about how the data is being used. will this fundamentally undermine trust in facebook and thus impact engagement? michael: yes, it will undermine trust but at facebook, there is a lot that facebook can do to reestablish that trust. first of all, it is less about privacy and it is more about control. facebook needs to be explicit in allowing people to have control. second of all, facebook needs to be clear to its users, what information they have on

now, google even cheaper doesn't list any costs facebook also spent $1.5 million on private jets forckerberg and sheryl sandberg spent $2.2 million on security. that is believed to be the second highest among all fortune 100 companies for 2017 so why these big increases well, facebook said the costs were necessary to address, quote, safety concerns due to specific threats facebook paid to install a security system at zuckerberg's various homes. they don't list the number of security guards that protect him and his family but media has reported he has a team of 16 guards working in various shifts at his home so many, in fact, local residents have complained about the parking spots they take up he took his road trip across america last year to learn about the rest of the country which turned out to be very expensive. >> do they have to file numbers? can we assume sergei doesn't have security? and if they do, they pay for it themselves >> they pay for it themselves to avoid this scrutiny. they say it's worth it to us to pay for it ourselves rather than having everyone know what we spend

google. lo que tienes que hacer es no utilizar siempre la de facebook o google porque asÍ vas a evitar que mÁsd y va en tu contra porque se te olvida. javier: aparte hay que tener contraseÑas para el banco para facebook, instagram. es un problema. [risas] carolina: vamos a ver todo lo que tienes que saber en el dÍa de hoy. javier: una semana despuÉs del accidente que terminÓ con la vida de una familia de cinco miembros en california, las autoridades creen que se tratÓ de un acto intencional. informaciÓn de software de la camioneta indica que se detuvo en un terreno plano antes de avanzar hacia el acantilado. los tres desaparecidos pudieron haber sido arrastrados al mar. carolina: sale de la cÁrcel el llamado " niÑo rico" tras cumplir dos aÑos por violar su voluntad bajo palabra. ethan couch fue condenado por matar a cuatro personas mientras conducÍa borracho. el jurado estimÓ que las comunidades de las que disfrutaban su vida le impedÍan distinguir entre el bien y el mal. a partir de hoy el joven llevarÁ un grillete electrÓnico con su tobillo y no podrÁ salir de la casa entre las 9:00 p.m. y l

we have no control over anything, and to say to google and facebook it's your responsibility — it isn'tibility. it's our government. if we're going to do something about it, then we've got to do something about it. google — which owns youtube — said it had introduced an app called family link to help parents limit screen time. facebook said it shared mr hunt's ambition to create a safe and supporting environment for young people online. it's no wonder public concern around these issues is swelling. we allow them to have like 30 minutes in the evening, like at six, after dinner. it's not so much pressure, but i think everyone's — we don't have an outlet anymore. we rely too much on the internet and it's having an effect on our communication skills. probably everyone, to be honest, is using the internet too much. that includes parents. technology companies have felt under seasin technology companies have felt under seas in recent days. it is becoming clear that the latest plunge in their remorseless battle for trust is public health and well—being of children hooked on theirfree product.

of course but i will google and facebook there are obviously two very different strategies of collecting data one google being more of an engine but they can also be invasive as they create these apps right in control of apps that have more and more information about us and our activities whereas facebook is pretty clear that if you're posting on facebook if you're posting something that you're basically telling people where you are or your your beliefs your thoughts are you're you're sharing things publicly so what is the danger with all you know all this section of sector of data mining if we're putting things out there that really is public information. but what we see happening now is i mean edward snowden's revelations were very very clear in confirming that these platforms have actually been penetrated by the national security agency and various other agencies in various ways some of them some of it's through backdoor some of it is through kind of direct kind of agreements with these companies and so on and so forth but what's very clear is that these companies like facebook and go

we have no control over anything, and to say to google and facebook it's your responsibility — it isn'tng about it, then we've got to do something about it. google — which owns youtube — said it had introduced an app called family link to help parents limit screen time. facebook said it shared mr hunt's ambition to create a safe and supporting environment for young people online. it's no wonder public concern around these issues is swelling. we allow them to have like 30 minutes in the evening, like at six, after dinner. it's not so much pressure, but i think everyone's — we don't have an outlet anymore. we rely too much on the internet and it's having an effect on our communication skills. probably everyone, to be honest, is using the internet too much. that includes parents. technology companies have felt under siege in recent days. it is becoming clear that the latest plunge in their remorseless battle for trust is the public health and well—being of children hooked on theirfree product. you have been watching newsday. good morning. yesterday was the last time we will see anywhere in

this is about bullying, cyber bullying, we have no control over anything, and to say to google, and facebookis our responsibility, our government, if we have to do something then we have to do something. ok, this is how the app works. google, who owns youtube, says it understood the concerns and introduced a family link to set the ground rules for children, including screen time limits. and when you see this, it is time to go out and play. studies found that children between five and 16 were spending more than six hours a day in front of computers and televisions. that is more than twice the time spent in front of screens 23 years ago. at the moment young people only need to tick a box confirming they're at least 13 years old, before using facebook or youtube. so, are children, and adults for that matter, spending too much time online? we allow them to have 30 minutes in the evening, like six o'clock, after dinner. probably everyone is using the internet too much, including parents. it's not so much pressure, we don't have outlets any more, we rely too much on the internet and it's having an