mr. zuckerberg: i do notmr. zuckerberg: -- mr. zuckerberg: i do not. rep. sarbanes: president trump at 5.9 million advertisements approved and secretary clinton at 66,000 ads. times as much on the current campaign which raises questions about whether the advertisement approval processes or inappropriately bypassed in the final months and weeks of the election by the trump campaign. i am worried the embeds may have facilitated that. can you say with certainty that facebook or any facebook employees working at campaign embeds did not grant special approval rights to the trunk campaign to allow that to upload a large number of facebook ads in the final stretch? mr. zuckerberg: we apply the same standard to all campaigns. rep. sarbanes: can you say that there were not special approval rights granted? there were not special approved rival -- rights granted from the support folks in the donald trump campaign? mr. zuckerberg: yes. when i am saying -- rep. sarbanes: i will take you at your word. the reason this is important and we need to get to the bottom of it, i

mr. zuckerberg for your testimony. mr. zuckerberg, you stated your go with facebook is to build strong communities and that sounds good. you have stated on the record that you did not live up to the privacy expectations and i appreciate that. this committee, you must know this, this committee is counting on you to write a wrong. i hope you get it. facebook is here to stay. you have an obligation to protect the data you collect any data you use. congress has the power to regulate your industry and we have the power to penalize this -- misconduct. you and your team know how i feel about racial diversity. in corporate america. sheryl sandberg and i talk about that all the time. the congressional black caucus has been focused on holding your industry accountable, not just facebook but your industry, accountable for increasing african-american inclusion at all levels of the industry. ofnow you have a number diversity initiatives in 2017, you increase the black representation. , a smallrom 2% to 3% increase but better than none.

mr. zuckerberg: mr. chairman, thank you. as i mentioned, we're now conducting a full investigation into every single app that had access to a large amount of information, before we lockdown platform to prevent developers from accessing this information around 2014. we believe that we're going to be investigating many apps, tens of thousands of apps, and if we find any suspicious activity, we're going to conduct a full audit of those apps to understand how they're using their data and if they're doing anything improper. if we find that they're doing anything improper, we'll ban them from facebook and we will tell everyone affected. as for past activity, i don't have all the examples of apps that we've banned here. but if you'd like, i can have my team follow up with you after this. mr. grassley: you have ever required an audit to ensure the deletion of improperly transferred data and if so, how many times? mr. zuckerberg: mr. chairman, yes, we have. i don't have the exact figure on how many times we have.

mr. zuckerberg. the only regulation that was since thented -- commit millions of rules have been created in response to an abuse of freedom. oftentimes, that response is more extreme than that abuse. that's what i fear could happen. this national discussion is very important. not only for the last two days, but that it continues -- west we over respond. andconsumer and industry whatever industry it is sure that response ability. -- h-share that responsibility that is hostility. hare that responsibility. his answers are very reassuring to me -- i'm wondering what your answer would be to how quickly you would come down on an illegal drug site -- give it your best. don't wait for somebody to flag it. look for it. make it a 30. -- make it a priority. letter -- be better than this. mr. zuckerberg: i miscommunicated if i left the goingsion that we weren't after tools to fight this content and were only relying on people to flag it for us. -- at only focus on ads lot of people share this stuff in groups, to

mr. zuckerberg.first, i believe that our democratic institutions are undergoing a stress test in our country. and i believe that american companies post something to something toe america. i think the damage done to our democracy relative to facebook and its platform being weaponize are incalculable. enabling the cynical manipulation of american citizens for the purpose of influencing an election is deeply offensive, and it is very dangerous. when our private information on offer without can -- putting our private information on offer ishout concern for misuses irresponsible. i invited my constituents going into the weekend to participate in his hearing today by submitting what they want to ask you, and so my questions are theirs. mr. chairman, i would like unanimous consent to place all their question in the record. rep. walden: without objection. rep. eshoo: these are a series of yes-no questions. do you think you have a moral responsibility to run a platform that protects our democracy? yes or no?

mr. zuckerberg. he trade front and facebook, the first day for mark zuckerberg, not the greatest public speaker. betty: it seemed like he got a lot of likes from people watching the testimony. they felt that he was very well made some amenable arguments. he continues to really stand by that business model which many say is sort of the whole reason why we are in this mess in the first place. at supported business model. if that's the case, it will raise questions about of anybody can change at facebook. yvonne: let's get to the first word news with paul allen. paul: trade talks between u.s. and china has seemed to have broken down after washington demanded beijing curtail support. stop subsidizing businesses and links. beijing offered to narrow the gas and importing more memory chips and luxury goods. thathite house has advised president trump has the authority to fire special counsel robert mueller. the president complained after fbi agents raided the office of his personal lawyer. he said it was a di

mr. zuckerberg for your testimony here today. mr. zuckerberg, you have stated that your goal with facebook is to build strong communities and certainly that sounds good. you've stated here today on the record that you did not live up to the privacy expectations and i appreciate that, but this committee and you must know this, this committee is counting on you to right a wrong and i hope you get it. in my opinion facebook is here to stay and so you have an obligation to protect the data that you collect and the data that you use and congress has the power to regulate your industry and we have the power to penalize misconduct. but i want to go in a different direction today, sir. you and your team certainly know how i feel about racial diversity in corporate america and sheryl sandberg and i talk about that all of the time. let me ask you this, and the congressional blauk caucus has been very focused on holding your industry accountable, not just facebook, your industry accountable for increasing african-american inclusion at all levels

mr. zuckerberg: yes. rep. cardenas: something was brought to my attention recently that apparently facebook does in information toy augment the information you have on users to build around them. we recentlyrg: announced we are stopping working with data brokers as part of the at system. rep. cardenas: but you did do that to build your company? mr. zuckerberg: it is an industry practice, and examining our systems, we decided is not a think will want to be a part of. rep. cardenas: but you did engage in that as well? mr. zuckerberg: yes, until we announced we are shutting it down. rep. cardenas: it is my understanding that when the guardian reported on the cambridge analytica consumer issue, facebook started to see them they went forward with the story. did something like that happen? believeerberg: i don't -- i believe they may have been a factual inaccuracy. rep. cardenas: you checking the guardian and saint you do not to go with that story because it is not 100% factual? mr. zuckerberg: yes. rep. cardenas: t

mr. zuckerberg is going to determine whether those bills passed or not. he can go home and spend 10 may $lobbyists or he can go back, and use his considerable talent and authority and impressive mind to solve this problem. let's start with the user agreement. i say this gently. his user agreement socks. sucks. spot me 75 iqy points and still win and he knows as much as i know that the purpose of that facebook user agreement is to cover facebook's were on. i believe he can do better. zuckerberg, would go back home until my $1200 an hour lawyer, you you all take a break and let us take a crack at writing this thing and non-swahili english. that is a start. then i would recommend he sit-down and right all of us a letter within the next two weeks about what additional privacy controls he is going to implement. he says he is willing to do it, let's get specific. is he going to give me the right to erase my data? is he going to give me better control of my data? is he going to agree to contact me before he shares my data? is he going to give me the right to cha

mr. zuckerberg for your testimony here today. mr. zuckerberg, you have stated that your goal with facebook is to build strong communities and certainly that sounds good. you've stated here today on the record that you did not live up to the privacy expectations and i appreciate that, but this committee and you must know this, this committee is counting on you to right a wrong and i hope you get it. in my opinion facebook is here to stay and so you have an obligation to protect the data that you collect and the data that you use and congress has the power to regulate your industry and we have the power to penalize misconduct. but i want to go in a different direction today, sir. you and your team certainly know how i feel about racial diversity in corporate america and sheryl sandberg and i talk about that all of the time. let me ask you this, and the congressional blauk caucus has been very focused on holding your industry accountable, not just facebook, your industry accountable for increasing african-american inclusion at all levels

mr. zuckerberg. we'll go back and forth as we always do. remember, it's four minutes today so we can get to everyone. mr. zuckerberg, you describe facebook as a company that connects people and as a company that's idealistic and optimistic. i have a few questions about what other types of companies facebook may be. facebook has created its own video series starring tom brady and has over 50 million views. that's twice the number of viewers that watched the oscars last month. also facebook's obtained exclusive broadcasting rights for 25 major league baseball games this season. is facebook a media company? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i consider us to be a technology company because the primary thing that we do is have engineers who write code and build products and services for other people. there are certainly other things that we do too. we do pay to help produce content. we build enterprise software, although i don't consider us an enterprise software company. we build planes to help connect people

mr. zuckerberg, welcome, thank you for being here. mr. zuckerberg, does facebook consider itself a neutral public forum? >> senator, we consider ourselves to be a platform for all ideas. >> let me ask the question again. does facebook consider itself to a neutral public forum and representatives of your company have given conflicting answers on this. are you a first amendment speaker expressing your views or a neutral public forum allowing everyone to speak? >> senator, lehr is how we think about this. i don't believe that -- there are certain content that clearly we do not allow. right? hate speech, terrorist content. nudity, anything that makes feel feel unsafe in the community. from that perspective that's why we generally try to refer to what we do as a platform for all ideas. >> the time is constrained. it's just a simple question. the predicate for section 230 immunity under the cda is that you are a neutral public forum. do you consider yourself a neutral republican forum or are you engaged in political speech which is your right un

mr. zuckerberg,>> mr. you so committed that facebook has o grown so big so fast.no it's no longer a company that ad you started in your dorm room. instead, it's one of the great u american successcce stories. that much influence comes with enormous social responsibility on which you have failed to act and to protect and to consider. shouldn't facebook by default protect users' information? why is the onusth on thee user opt in to privacy and security e settings? >> congressman, as i ngsaid, evg time a person chooses to share,er they are going to the service choosing they want to share a photo, write a message and every time there's's a contl right there, not buried in the i settings somewhere but right there when they are posting about whoo they want to share i with. >> mr. zhuszh berks i only have a fewmo more second. november 2017 propublica reported that facebook was still allowing housing advertisers to systematically exclude advertisements to specific racial groups and explicitly pro -- this isis one

mr. zuckerberg, welcome. thanks for being here. mr. zuckerberg, does facebook consider itself a neutral public forum? >> senator, we consider ourselves to be a platform for all ideas. >> let me ask the question again. does facebook consider itself to be a neutral public for number? are you a first amendment speaker expressing your view or are you a neutral public forum allowing everyone to speak? >> senator, here's how we think about this. i don't believe that -- there are certain content that clearly we do not hall lou, right. hate speech, terrorist content, nudity, anything that makes people feel unsafe in the community. from that perspective that's why we generally try to refer to what we do as a platform for all ideas. >> the time is constrained. it's just a simple question. the predicate for section it 30 immunity under the cda is that you're a neutral public forum. do you consider yourself a neutral public forum or are you engaged in political speech which is your right under the first amendment in. >> well, senator, our goal is c

mr. zuckerberg, i want to follow up on a question asked by mr mr. mcnerney, where he talked about visiting websites and the fact that facebook can track you. and as you visit those websites, you can have that deleted. i'm informed that there's not a way to do that, or are you telling us that you're announcing a new policy? >> congressman, my understanding is that if we have information from you visiting other places, then you have a way of getting access to that and deleting it and making sure we don't store it anymore in the specific question that the other congressman asked, i think it's possible that we just didn't have the information that he was asking about in the first place, and that's why it wasn't there. >> well, 3 billion user accounts were breached at yahoo in 2013 145 million in ebay on went 14 150 million in equifax in 2015 76 million at jpmorgan chase in 2014 the list goes on and on. the security of all that private data is gone likely sold many times over to the highest bidder on the dark web. we live in an information age. data brea

mr. zuckerberg? the truth. mr. erberg is on capitol hill right now, lobbying members of congress, and that is certainly hiprerogative. i am not really interested in being lobbied. i am interested in solving the problems. i come in peace. i don't want to hurt facebook or regulate them have to death. but i think it is clear that our digital pr milk and honey.t all there are some problems. there is a privacy problem.e th a propaganda problem. there ma be antitrust issues we need to talk about. i think it is swell that i can hago on facebook and seemy high school buddies had for dinner saturday night, but is it a fair bargain that in return, i have to give up my perdata to just about anybody in the milky way that facebook wants to sell it ? it doesn't sound like a good deal. katty: a lot of people are asking that same question. you say you come in peace, but does congress ha to wield at least the threat of regulations in order to get the truth from mr. zuckerberg? >> mr. zuckerberg is a bri young man. he has built a won

mr. zuckerberg for your testimony here today. mr. zuckerberg, you have stated that your goal with facebook is to build strong communities and certainly that sounds good you've stated here today on the record that you did not live up to the privacy expectations and i appreciate that. but this committee and you must know this, this committee is counting on you to right a wrong and i hope you get it. in my opinion, facebook is here to stay and so you have an obligation to protect the data that you collect and the data that you use and congress has the power to regulate your industry and we have the power to penalize misconduct but i want to go in a different direction today. you and your team certainly know how i feel about racial diversity in corporate america and sheryl sandberg and i talk about that all of the time let me ask you this and the congressional black caucus has been very focused on holding your industry accountable. not just facebook, your industry accountable for increasing african-american inclusion at all levels of the

mr. zuckerberg, welcome. thanks for being here. mr. zuckerberg, does facebook consider itself a neutral public forum? >> senator, we consider ourselves to be a platform for all ideas. >> let me ask the question again. does facebook consider itself to be a neutral public for number? representatives of your company have given conflicting answers on this. are you a first amendment speaker expressing your view or are you a neutral public forum allowing everyone to speak? >> senator, here's how we think about this. i don't believe that -- there are certain content that clearly we do not allow. hate speech, terrorist content, nudity, anything that makes people feel unsafe in the community. from that perspective that's why we generally try to refer to what we do as a platform for all ideas. >> the time is constrained. it's just a simple question. the predicate for section 230 immunity under the cda is that you're a neutral public forum. do you consider yourself a neutral public forum or are you engaged in political speech which is your right u

mr. zuckerberg. i want to get something in the record before i move to questions. you suggested in your testimony that the facebook notified the trump and clinton campaigns of attempts to hack into those campaigns but representatives of both campaigns in the last 24 hours have said that didn't happen. so we're going to need to follow up on that and find out what the real story is. >> you want me -- >> i would like to move on. you can provide a response to that in writing if you would. let me ask you, is it true that facebook offered to provide what, i guess you referred to as dedicated campaign inbeds to both of the presidential campaigns? >> congressman i can quickly respond to the first point too. >> yes or no. i don't have time. were there inbeds in the two campaigns, were there offers of inbeds? >> congressman -- >> yes or no. were there inbeds offered to the trump campaign and clinton campaign. >> we offer sales support to every campaign. >> sales report, i will refer to that as inbeds. i gather

mr. zuckerberg. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. zuckerberg, i wanted to follow up on a statement that you made shortly before the break just a few minutes ago. you said that there's some categories of speech. some types of content that facebook would never want to have any part of, and it takes active steps to avoid disseminating, including hate speech, nudity, racist speech. i assume you also meant terrorist acts, threats of physical violence, things like that. beyond that, would you agree that facebook ought not be putting its thumb on the scale with regard to the content of speech assuming it fits out of one of those categories that's prohibited? >> senator, yes. there are generally two categories of content that we're very worried about. one are things that could cause real world harm, so terrorism certainly fits into that. self-harm fits into that. i would consider election interference to fit into that, and those are the types of things that we -- i don't really consider there to be much discussion around whether those are goo

mr. zuckerberg, thank you for being here. mr. zuckerberg, does facebook consider itself a neutral public forum? . >> we consider ourselves a platform for all ideas. >> let me ask the question again: does facebook consider itself a neutral public forum. representatives of your company are giving conflicting views. this neutral public forum allowing everyone to speak? >> senator, here's how we think about this. i don't believe that -- there are certain content that clearly we do not allow. hate speech, terrorist content, nudity, anything that makes people feel unsafe in the community. from that perspective, that's why we generally try to refer to what we do as a platform -- >> let me try because the time is constrained. just a simple question. the predicate for section 230 under the cda is that you're a neutral public forum. do you consider yourself a neutral public forum or engaged in political speech which is your right under the first amendment? >> well, senator, our goal is certainly not to engage in political speech. i'm not th

mr. zuckerberg? mr. zuckerberg is a bright young man. he has built a wonderful company.knows that company better a thbody else. he understands if he doesn't, he will have to talk about the issues. the first one i call the privacy issue, the second one the propaganda issue. poison is being spread on the internet. how do we stop that, and how do we define poison? i would like mr. zuckerberg to make suggestions about how he will address this issue. let me tell you about what i am most worried aut. i am most worried at mr. zuckerberg and his colleagues don't have control, that they can't solve these problems. that these problems are bigger than they want to admit. that is why i will ask you, i -- ask him that he be forthcoming. gri think it is t he is lobbying congressmen, but mostco of my eagues don't want to be lobbied. they want to understand the problem and try to solve it. >> senator, what about the responsibility on the part of users to have read the terms and conditions and got up to speed with the suggestion that nothing is for free and their data was part of the dea

it's been going on for the lastjust over four hours with just a few breaks, mr zuckerberg still very being grilled and our correspondent dave lee has been following this story throughout the day from capitol hill. mark zuckerberg began this session doing what he's done several times over the last few weeks, apologising for his company's role in this scandal in which can be allegedly scooped up tens of millions of users' data by using a fraudulent app on the platform. after that it was hisjob to app on the platform. after that it was his job to convince senators he was his job to convince senators he was the man to steer facebook away from this crisis without owner is impact on the facebook business model. judging by the mood in the room i'm not sure he achieved that, many senators believe facebook has become incredibly powerful, incredibly quickly, perhaps too much so, but investors seemed happy, stock was up 4.5% during the testimony. mr zuckerberg made some interesting concessions. notably he said members of his team had been interviewed by the office of special counsel robert muel

mr. zuckerberg, thank you for being here. you have a real opportunity this afternoon to lead the industry and demonstrate a meaningful commitment to protecting individual privacy. we have learned over the past few months, and we learned a great deal that is alarming. foreign actorsw are abusing social media platforms, like facebook, to interfere in the elections and take millions of americans personal information without their knowledge in order to manipulate public opinion, and target individual voters. specifically, on february 16, special counsel mueller issued an indictment against the russian taste internet research agency, and 13 of its employees, for interfering operations targeting the united states. indictment, 37 page we learned the ira rent a coordinated campaign through 470 facebook accounts and pages. the campaign included ads and false information to create this court and harm to secretary clinton's campaign. the content was seen by an estimated 157 million americans. 17, newsater on march broke that cambridge a

mr zuckerberg is shy, awkward and usually wears t—shirts and jeans. looking looking nervous schoolboy in an ill—fitting uniform. he recognised the company made a huge error in a not to tell users that they had been targeted by cambridge analytica. why didn't you inform those 87 million? we did take action. we took down the app. we demanded that both the app developer and cambridge analytica delete and stop using any data that they had. they told us they did this. in retrospect, it is clearly a mistake to believe them. that was the second act of repentance. next up, he accepted that he was wrong to describe the idea of russian interference in the presidential election as crazy. one of my greatest regrets in running the company is that we were slow in identifying the russian information operations in 2016. we expected them to do a number of more traditional cyber attacks, which we did identify and notify the campaigns they were trying to hack into them, but we were slow in identifying the type of new information operations. as one senator pointed out, m

mr. zuckerberg. you have told told the world t facebook was deceived by alexander cogan when he sold user information to cambridge analytica, correct? >> yes. i want to show you the terms of service that alexander cogan an provided to facebook. and note for you, that in fact, facebook was on notice that he does so that information. have you seen these terms of service before? >> i have not. who facebook was responsible for saying those terms of service that put you on notice? that the information could be sold? >> senator, our review team would be responsible for that. >> has anyone been fired on the review team? >> senator, not because of this. class doesn't that term of service conflict with the ftc order? that facebook was under at that very time that this term of service was in fact, provided to facebook and we will note that the ftc order specifically requires facebook to protect privacy. isn't there a conflict there? appears that we should have been aware that this app developer submitted a ter

mr. zuckerberg, thank you for being here.ou have a real opportunity this afternoon to lead the industry and demonstrate a meaningful commitment to protecting individual privacy. we have learned over the past few months and we've learned a great deal that is alarming. we've seen how foreign actors are abusing media platforms like facebook to interfere with elections and take millions of americans personal information without their knowledge in order to manipulate public opinion and target individual voters. specifically, on february the 16th, special counsel mueller issued an indictment against the russia-based internet research agency and 13 of its employees for interfering operations targeting the united states. through this 37-page indictment we learned that the ira ran a coordinated campaign through 470 facebook accounts and pages. the campaign included ads and false information, to create discord and harm to secretary clinton's campaign and the content was seen by an estimated 157 million americans. a month later on march

mr. zuckerberg back here again, sir? >> i don't know that's necessary. i'm not ready to go down that path. there are others that could certainly share their thoughts with us, though. >> [ inaudible question ] >> i think he was genuine and forthcoming. obviously, members had a lot of questions, some of which didn't have answered. he'll have ten days to answer. >> [ inaudible question ] >> well, i wish paul ryan well. he and i were both elected the same year. only three of us left, mike simpson, me, and paul ryan. now it's down to two. he served with incredible ability and done a macizing this for the country. it's a great disappointment he'll be hanging up his elective spurs, as it were. >> naur[ inaudible question ] >> i always worry about that. we went through a change in speaker during that process. and it came out okay. and so paul is terrific, he'll still stay engaged and given us a legislative platform i think very powerful to run on. >> [ inaudible question ] any thoughts about regulation? potential reforms in regulation? >> these are the issues we

mr zuckerberg made some interesting concessions., he said members of his team had been interviewed by the office of special counsel robert mueller in his ongoing investigation into russian meddling, and also mr zuckerberg didn't rule out the idea that facebook could one day be a paid service, although he did say there would always be a free version of the site available to users. dave lee, bbc news, in washington. russia and the united states have failed to win support at the un security council for rival proposals on an investigation into chemical weapons use in syria. the threat of military action is looming in response to a suspected chemical attack in rebel—held douma. president donald trump says he's spoken to british prime minister theresa may about a coordinated response. on the ground in syria, chemical weapons inspectors are planning to visit the site of the alleged attack. here's our middle east editorjeremy bowen. outside damascus, the war goes on. this was the aftermath of the conventional attack in idlib, the rebel held

mr. zuckerberg, thank you for being with us. my question is going to be sort of a follow-up on what senator hatch was talking about. and let me agree with basically his advice that we don't want to overregulate to the point where we're stifling innovation and investment. i understand with regard to suggested rules or suggested legislation that at least two schools of thought out there, one would be the isps, the internet service providers, who are advocating for privacy protections for consumers that apply to all online entities equally across the entire internet ecosystem. now, facebook is an edge provider on the other hand. it's my understanding that edge providers such as facebook may not support that effort because edge providers have different business models than the isps and should not be considered like services. so do you think we need consistent privacy protections for consumers across the entire internet ecosystem that are based on the type of consumer information being collected, used or shared regardless of the enti

mr. zuckerberg, good afternoon. let me just cut to the chase, if you and other social media companies do not get your act in order, none of us are going to have any privacy anymore. that's what we're facing. we're talking about personally identifiable information that if not kept by the social media companies from theft, a value that we have in america being our personal privacy, we won't have it anymore. by the advent of technology and of course all of us are part of it. from the moment we wake up in the morning until we go to bed, we're on those hand held tablets. and online companies like facebook are tracking our activities and collecting information. facebook has a responsibility to protect this personal information. personal information. we had a good discussion yesterday. we went over all of this. you told me that the company had failed to do so. it's not the first time that facebook has mishandled it users' information. the ftc found that facebook's privacy policies had deceived users in the past. and in the

mr. zuckerberg. i want to start with what i hope can be a quick round of questions just so i make sure i understand your previous testimony. specifically with regard to the process by which cambridge analytica was able to purchase collected data and a personality quiz. mark: yes. senator baldwin: and could gain access to people that took the quiz but their network. is that correct? mark: the terms of the platform their time could share information and some basic information about their friends as well. and we have since changed that. senator baldwin: 87 million you earlierrs -- testified about the two types of ways you game data. one is what is voluntarily shared by facebook members and users. , in orderher is to improve your advertising whatever that means, the data facebook collects in order to customize or focus on that. was alexander kogan able to get both sets of data. mark: it was just a subset of what was entered by the person. a subset of the 95 categories of data that you keep. ,ark: the app

mr. zuckerberg: congresswoman, i believe -- >> yes or no? mr. rg: i don't believe that is what we are tracking. >> you acknowledged you are doing that for security purposes. and commercial purposes. you are collecting data outside of facebook. when someone goes to a website and it has the facebook like or share, that data is being collected by facebook, right? mr. zuckerberg: congresswoman -- >> yes or no? mr. berger berger -- mr. zuckerberg: yes, in order to share with your friends -- >> so for those that don't even have facebook, i don't think the average american understands that. emily: roger, is it true that other internet companies do similar things, like google, and if so what is so bad about this? , roger: i think there are a million things wrong with it. yes, lots of internet companies do it. i use a product on my phone and computer to block trackers exactly like this. page i land on, there will be half a dozen, 15 different trackers people try to insert into my browser as i am searching around the web. in my mind, the whole thing is a m

mr. zuckerberg. do you know who palinteer is. >> some people have referred to them as stafford analytical. do you agree. >> senator, i have not heard that. >> do you think palanteer analytical press reports how to do these tactics? >> senator, i don't know. >> do you think palenteer data from facebook? >> senator, i'm not aware of that. >> okay. >> do you think that during the 2016 campaign as cambridge analytica was providing support to the trump campaign under project alamo were there any facebook people involved in that sharing of technique and information? >> senator, we provided support to the trump campaign similar to what we provide to any advertiser or campaign who asks for it. >> so that was a yes? is that a yes? >> senator, can you repeat the specific question? i just want to make sure i get specifically what you are asking. >> during the 2016 campaign, cambridge analytica worked with the trump campaign to refine tactics and were facebook employees involved in that? >> senator, i don't know

mr. zuckerberg, the u.s. immigration and custom enforcement has proposed a new extreme vetting initiative which they have renamed visa life cycle vetting that sounds less scary. they've already held an industry day that they tied on the federal contracting website to get input from tech companies for the best way, and i'm quoting, exploit publicly available information such as media blogs, public hearings, conferences, academic websites social media websites such such as twitter, linkedin to gather information regarding targets. basically what they want to do with these targets is to determine -- and i'm again i'm quoting the isis' own document isis then directed to develop processes that determine and evaluate an applicant's ie target's possibility of becoming a positively contributing member of society as well as their ability to contribute to national interests in order to meet the executive order, that is the president's executive order. and then i.c.e. must also develop a mechanism or methodology that al

mr. zuckerberg along with his wife also established the chan zuckerberg initiative for philanthropy causes. i turn to you, welcome to the committee and whatever your statement is orally, if you have a longer one, it will be included in the record. so proceed, sir. >> chairman grassley, chairman thune, ranking member feinstein and nelson and members of the committee, we face a number of important issues around privacy, safety and democracy. and you will rightfully have hard questions for me to answer. before i talk about the steps we're taking to dress them, i want to talk about how we got here. facebook is an idealistic and optimistic company. for most of our existence, we focused on all of the good that connecting people can do. and as facebook has grown, people everywhere have gotten a powerful new tool for staying connected to the people they love, for ming voices heard and for building communities and businesses. just recently we've seen the me-too movement and the march for our life organized in part on facebook. after hurricane harvey, people came together to raise more than $20 mill

i was struck by a comment that mr zuckerberg made yesterday when he was talking about the the russian threat to democracy around the world but particularly through the twenty sixteen u.s. presidential election and he said that the russians are constantly improving especially their bots and the threat level is always increasing and he said we have to stay one step ahead of them he sounded like the secretary of defense from the pentagon do you think he's aware of the responsibility that he has or or the position he finds himself in in this nexus of so many huge factors that are coming together do you think you realize where he is i think he now realizes this but before he was able to brush it off by saying look we're social media so anybody can post anybody's opinion but now they are just too big and when they hit that kind of scale then the question becomes well who's able to decide what is news and what isn't news facebook is now where people go if you're under forty to get your news and there needs to be some kind of regulation but he doesn't know how to do that because he and he thi

we will look at the news about mr zuckerberg but first, passwords.g passwords away from the ones you a lwa ys passwords away from the ones you always forget to using biometrics like your face and your thumbprint. if you go to china everyone's face is stored on a central database so you can use voice is stored on a central database so you can use voice recognition. we've been asking people to tell us what they think. martin has said, if people worked on their memories they would struggle less. probably true. one viewers says, you are correct, biometric is the safe way forward, steve says passwords are here to stay for some time, i don't think we'll get away from them for some time. i think something here is use something like a password manager which is safe and secure as long as you've got a good password for your master key on your phone or on your desktop. what did you make of mr zuckerberg and his testimony? ten hours of testimony. although it felt like ten hours! he got an easy ride with the senate but yesterday with the house much tougher questi

mr. zuckerberg in 2004, facebook has exploded over the past 14 years.acebook currently has over 2 billion monthly active users across the world, over 25,000 employees, and offices in 13 u.s. cities and various other countries. like their expanding user base, the data collected on facebook users has also skyrocketed they have moved on from schools, likes, and relationship statuses today, facebook has access to dozens of data points ranging from ads that you've clicked on, events you've attended, and your location based upon your mobile device it is no secret that facebook makes money off this data through advertising revenue, although many seem confused by or altogether unaware of this fact facebook generates -- generated $40 billion in revenue in 2017 with about 98% coming from advertising across facebook and instagram. significant data collection is also occurring at google, twitter, apple, and amazon and even an ever-expanding portfolio of products and services offered by these companies grant endless opportunities to collect increasing amounts of inf

mr. zuckerberg for coming out today. it is not easy to testify before congress two days in a row, and we appreciate his cooperation. it is very clear that facebook has made significant mistakes around protection of user data. i think we still have a lot more to learn about what happened at --ebook and changes to miss changes that mr. zuckerberg will make. these breaches of trust take time and real action to fix. users and lawmakers need to know that facebook is taking this seriously. only time will tell in this case. let's be clear, facebook was the focus of today's hearing, but the issues we dug into applied to many other companies as well. we will widen our lens to examine the entire tech industry , determining the right balance between services and the maintenance of personal privacy will be one of the challenges of our time. we have a lot of work to do. understand our responsibility and duty, and i think we are up to the task. i try to put the best interests and the protection of consumers at the forefront of what th

mr. zuckerberg. i want to start with what i hope can be a quick round of questions just so i make sure i understand your previous testimony. specifically with regard to the process by which cambridge analytica was able to purchase facebook users' data it was an app developer, he collected data via a personality quiz. is that correct? >> yes. >> and he is able to gain access of not only the people who took the quiz, but their network. is that correct, too? >> senator, the terms of the platform at the time allowed for people to share their information and some basic information about their friends as well. and we since changed that. as of 2014, now that's not possible. >> in total 87 million facebook users. you earlier testified about the two types of ways you gain data. one is what's voluntarily shared by facebook members and users. and the other is in order to, i think you should improve your advertising experience, whatever that means. the data facebook collects in order to customize or focus on tha

mr. zuckerberg.but my biggest worry with all this is that the privacy issue and what i call the propaganda issue are both too big for facebook to fix. and that's the frightening part. >> brennan: too big for facebook to fix. does that mean that lawmakers like you need to seek regulations to fix it for them? >> it may be the case. i'd rather do it with facebook and other social media platforms. we've got to talk about the initial market. is it fair for me to give up all of my personal data to facebook, apparently everybody else in the western hemisphere, in exchange for me being able to see what some of my high school buddies had for dinner saturday night. who owns my data? do i own it or does facebook own it? the service agreement with facebook, it's written in swahili. nobody understands it. should i have the right to opt in as opposed to opt out, put the burden on facebook? should i have the right to erase my data? should i have the right to demand that facebook get my permission before it sells th

mr. zuckerberg. thank you for enduring so far. i'm sorry if we plowed old ground. i had to be away for a bit. myself and others were in zimbabwe a few days ago. we met with opposition figures. they talked about, their goal is to be able to have access to state-run media. many african countries, many countries around the world, third world countries, small countries, the only traditional media is state-run. we asked them how they get their message out. it is through social media. facebook provides a very valuable service in many countries for opposition leaders or others who simply don't have access unless maybe just before an election to traditional medi media. so that's very valuable, and i think we all recognize that. on the flip side, we have seen with the rohingya muslims, the example of this state can use similar data or use this platform to go after people. you talked about what you are doing in that, hiring more traditional, or local language speakers. what else are you doing in that regard to

mr. zuckerberg, thank you for being with us. my question is going to be sort of a followup on what senator hatch was talking about, and let me agree with basically his advice that we don't want to overregulate to the point where we're stifling innovation and investment. i understand with regard to suggested rules or suggested legislation that at least two -- there are at least two schools of thought out there. one would be the isps, the internet service providers who are advocating for privacy protections for consumers that apply to all online entities equally across the entire internet eco system. now, facebook is an edge provider on the other hand. it's my understanding that many edge providers, such as facebook, may not support that effort because edge providers have different business models than the isps and should not be considered like services. so do you think we need consistent privacy protections for consumers across the entire internet eco system that are based on the type of consumer information being collected, used

mr. zuckerberg for being here today. add my lime to the rural broadband list as well i have one part of iowa that we need more help on that front thank you. you may recall last week mr. zuckerberg that you set out to visit every state in the country to meet different people one of the places you visited was my home state of iowa and you visited a district i probabl proudly represent and some of my constituents you said you want to quote personally hear more of those voices and give everyone a voice. i'm going to do the same thing in a second that some of my colleagues did and ask you some of the questions my constituents asked me to address with you i submit those for the record, chair. >> without objection. >> the issue is about trust, that's what i'm hearing from my constituents and my colleagues that's really the question, how can we be guaranteed for example, that when you agree to some thing today that you are going to be able to follow through and we are going to be able to hold you accountable and without perhaps

mr. zuckerberg: a person would be able to download your information -- i clarified with my team that the weblogs are not able to download your information. we can only store them temporarily. we convert them into a set of ad interests that you might be interested in and we put that in your download information and you have complete control of that. >> we go now to the gentleman from california, mysteries. -- mr. reese. facebookckerberg, failed its customers. you've apologized and we appreciate that. we have a responsibility to figure out what went wrong here and what could be done differently to better protect consumers'private digital data in the future. notify theebook not