mr. zuckerberg apologized for his company's negligence and pledged to do better. he also asserted that consumers own their personal information and control it how it can be seen and used. i want to report that. i want to repeat what i said. he also -- this is zuckerberg. he also asserted that consumers, their users, own their personal information and control how it can be seen and used. that's what zuckerberg told our committee hearing. but the reporting in "the new york times" suggest that that's not accurate. while mr. zuckerberg asserted that developers were prohibited from collecting friends' information in 2014, he failed to mention that device manufacturers were still able to access the information. he never revealed these data-sharing agreements in our committee meeting, the hearing in april of this year. as a rut, it's hard to know what's true anymore. and now we learn that facebook gave chinese companies believed to be national security risks, gave them access to user data. what in the word is next and what in the world is going to protect americans' pers

mr. zuckerberg last month. i hope at today we can continue a productive and meaningful debate about these serious allegations. unfortunately, events like these more often than not, tend to get muddled by artisan ship and efforts to score a quick soundbite. the facebook story first broke december 25 -- december 2015. somebody had allegedly transferred data to cambridge analytica and breached policies. according to cambridge press releases, and a recent internal report, facebook requested cambridge and its affiliates to remove any data received from the doctor. cambridge said that they removed the data and filed legal certification to facebook saying as much. i had requested that cambridge analytica appear at this hearing to explain these facts and tell their side of the story. cambridge recently commenced proceedings and therefore determined they could not participate in this hearing. the underlying story has not changed much since 2015. except for two different events. first, cambridge began doing work for the

mr. zuckerberg, passing to commit to advocate with the honest ads act. he assured me the most effective thing he could do is implement the bill policies on the facebook top form since facebook implemented this version of political advertising transparent the, we've seen both as culture doesn't work for election. "the new york times" promoted ads using news articles about politics are being categorized as political advertising. what impact will this change have on the reach of political 2018 elections. >> senator, we don't know. with much of this technology, industry the executives and product managers behind it don't spend a lot of time thinking about scenarios that they don't want to happen. instead they spend most of their timeme thinking about what they wish to effect. in the case of a technology company like facebook that often is nothing to do with the impact on society beyond engagement of the user if you're on a product teamen. i think the company is beginning to learn how to be responsible beyond its primary edict of making money or creating enga

mr. zuckerberg, i asked him to commit to the honest ads act. he assured me that the most effective thing he could do was implement the bills policy on the facebook platform since facebook and permitted his version of political advertising thatparency, we have seen the break things and move fast culture does not work for elections. said thatrk times news articles about politics were being categorized as political advertising. what impact will this change have on the reach of political journalism for the 2018 elections russian mark -- elections? >> we don't know. with much of this technology, it is true that the executives and product -- project managers behind them don't think about scenarios they don't want to happen. they think about what they want to wish to affect. in the case of facebook, that has nothing to do with the impact on society the end engagement with the user or engagement for advertising if you are on the advertising team. i think what facebook as a company is beginning to learn is how to be responsibly -- responsible beyond its

mr. zuckerberg himself testifying earlier this year in front of the joint commission admitted he had not expected users to read the policies. what's more, even if users did actually read the privacy policies they have no way short of cutting the service to object to privacy practices they fine intrusive. deed ignoring for a moment the dominance of facebook as a destination site it's the primary method by which users logon to third-party apps. today facebook serves as the de facto sign on identity provider for the internet. if you want to use tinder or spotify, you need to have a facebook profile. senators, consumers consent to what they do not read or understand, nor practical for them to do otherwise. lastly, senators, the privacy harms at issue are incredible remissive. while this information is not sensitive, photos of our cats or happy birthday and father's day updates users feel quite the opposite. time and time again we see stories emerge from individuals who are convinced facebook eaves dropped on them through their smarts phones to target ads. in consumers eyes facebook was so in

mr. zuckerberg conceded that facebook would not look kind a shell corporation. -- corporation to determine the actual identity of the actual buyer. actor merely funnels money into a domestic show corporation, which then purchases the ad, facebook would be none the wiser. federalately, the election commission and other finance campaign regulators are no better equipped to detect foreign identity laundering in u.s. elections. while foreign corporations and foreign nationals are prohibited from spending money in elections, our lack of affect the disclosure laws would allow upeign interests to set shell companies, hide their identities and engage in illegal and political spending. we would never know it. quite simply, vladimir putin and his oligarchs can use the exact same tactics american special interest used to spend anonymous money in our elections and secure influence. criminals have long used shell companies to obscure ownership and hide assets. have we have learned more and more about russian interference in our own elections and about their playbook abroad, much thanks to previous subc

mr. zuckerberg come in.n europe, the european union is going much further into intrusive regulation. we talked about new agencies before. i want to see the antitrust division do this. do you support a regulatory scheme for silicon valley and big tech? >> before i take the next action, i want to make sure i have all of the information. this bias has to stop. i want to see more transparency. let's get all the facts and put a clear aim at the direction we think is right for the the american public. >> let's turn to the issue of your being the next speaker. chairman of house ways and means brady endorsed you. you have clear momentum behind your back. i have to assume that the house is in the republican hands and that you are the next speaker. that would make you a constitutional officer. you would have to speak to your coordinate body of the senate of any deal done between north korea come before the senate. you know the action with iran was a handshake between president obama and tehran. what's your opinion on

emily: are you going to demand that mark zuckerberg come back? mr.n: first of all we are going to follow up on our demand that he answer the questions we have submitted. for the record, there are some 3000 questions that came from congress to facebook, so i realize they have got to sort through all that and give us a honest and full disclosure and communication back. but clearly, with each one of these revelations, it starts a whole other cycle of what did you know and when did you know it, and did you know it in time to have disclosed it, but didn't. that's not good for facebook. and facebook is a great american company. it's a great innovator. it is like these other companies are. but they have gotten to a place where they are under intense scrutiny now, and they have to get it right, and they have to be fully transparent and improve their communications and their disclosures. that's how you maintain trust. emily: so facebook's spokesperson said the relationships didn't need to be disclosed because they were already public and announced by huawei a

mr. zuckerberg, so that's really wonderful. because then -- it provides -- >> we invited him. >> you can see -- in the computer, you have all the, you know, reporter were there, too. >> wonderful, yes. and so it provides services, additional benefits for the prisoners. so, thank you. and wanted to commend you, congratulations. >> you can see in the computer. >> darshun singh technology center at san quentin, prison. congratulations. that's the reason we were not invited. we need a pass. >> i didn't know that, actually. >> it was a surprise to me. >> a surprise, ok. >> i was there, all -- approved that, you know, so -- yes, so -- i did not know it all. >> excellent. >> thank you, and congratulations. and so i just want to make a statement that i know i speak for my fellow commissioners, and that we are delighted that the california department of public health has committed to retesting parcel a in the coming weeks and that the navy has released a very detailed work plan for retesting parts of g this past friday. the safety and w

mr. zuckerberg for the committee for five hours, this was not disclosed.y felt they had disclosed it in the past. we don't know. we should know. we think this is where companies would benefit from coming before our committee voluntarily and sharing and answering questions. the american people have a right to know more than some legalese in a disclosure agreement that, frankly, nobody reads or understands. they are just ignored. you hit click and agree and off you go. who knows what is behind it? that's what really troues consumer they are not sure they can trust now some of these agreements and how their data are used or not and with whom or not and what has been scraped or not. and i think they are saying in this information age, something needs to change here. my preference is that the tech andanies would realize this come to terms with it on their own. otherwise, they're going to end up in a regulatory scheme that may not be what's good for them or, frankly, the country. frequently, congress tends to overreact, and we don't need to do that if we can get

mr. zuckerberg for the committee for five hours, this was not disclosed. they had disclosed it in the past. we don't know. we should know. you know, this is where companies would benefit from coming before our committee voluntarily and sharing and answering questions. the american people have a right to know more than some legalese in a disclosure agreement that, frankly, nobody reads or understands. and you can't edit it anyway. they are just ignored. you hit click and agree and off you go. who knows what is behind it? that's what really troubles consumers. they are not sure they can trust now some of these agreements and how their data are used or not and with whom or not and what has been scraped or not. and i think they are saying in this information age, something needs to change here. my preference is that the tech companies would realize this and come to terms with it on their own. otherwise, they're going to end up in a regulatory scheme that may not be what's good for them or, frankly, the country. frequently, congress tends to overreact, and we d

mr. zuckerberg actually said he thought there would be reason to start regulating, and put in place. he said he was supportive of the 72 hour notice. and so, i think that we are at a point now, where if we just have certain platforms doing their own regulation, self regulations, we are going to have other ones moving in that are not doing it. and then have all of the slimy ads going to one thing, leading me to voter suppression efforts, you know, in the hearings we've had in judiciary. we've had a number of ads displayed with african-american faces saying, hey, texas, during the trump-clinton election, and you will be able to vote without standing in line. to me, that is clearly criminal and is a voter suppression. and how maybe the russians have used this in the past. >> senator -- >> sorry. >> that's okay. i can maybe go back after senator whitehouse. >> go ahead, senator whitehouse. first of all, i'd like to welcome ken wainstein back who has been a very distinguished public servant, and also a very helpful witness before this committee before. in addition to the csis kremlin play

mr. zuckerberg conceded that they would not look behind a shell corporation. if a foreign actor merely the most money into a domestic shell corporation, which then purchases the icon facebook would be none the wiser. unfortunately, the federal election commission and other regulators are no better equipped to detect foreign identity laundering in your selections for while foreign corporations and foreign nationals are prohibited from spending money in elections, our lack of effective disclosure laws would allow for an interest to set up shell companies, hide their identities and engage in illegal political spending. quite simply, vladimir putin can use the exact same tactics that american special interests use to spend money now elections. criminals have long used shell companies to hide ill-gotten assets. as we havelearned more and more about russian interference in our own elections and about their playbook abroad, much thanks to previous subcommittee hearings, we now see hothw e devices can be used to hide meddling in our elections. last year a homeland sec

mr. zuckerberg actually said, there would be, there are reasons to regulate, and, he was supportive of a 72 hour notice. i think that, we are at a point now, where, if we have certain platforms, if we have regulation -- self-regulation, you will have other ones moving in any way, and then, you will have all the fun things leading to voter suppression efforts, and hearings that we have had in judiciaries -- we have had a number of ads displayed with african-american faces, saying, hey, check this number during the trump clinton election, and you will be able to vote without standing in line. that is clearly criminal, it is voter suppression. russians have used this in the past. >> thank you very much. >> i can maybe go back, after senator ray off -- rayov >> i would like to welcome you back, a very helpful witness before this committee, before. in addition to the csi criminal playbook, which is a very helpful and authoritative source on election and other interference by the kremlin, and the trojan horse report, the parallel efforts -- there is a new report called moscow's gold, russian c

mr. zuckerberg told us, was going to require valid identification and verify the political ad purchaser. however, in response my question, he conceded that facebook would not look behind a shell corporation to determine the actual identity of the actual buyer. if a foreign there merely funnel money into a domestic shell corporation, which then purchases the ad, facebook would be none the wiser. unfortunately, the federal election commission and other campaign-finance regulators are no better equipped to detect foreign identity laundering in u.s. elections. while foreign corporations and foreign nationals are prohibited from spending money in elections, our lack of effective disclosure laws would allow foreign interest to set up shell companies, hide their identities and engage in illegal political spending. we would never know it. quite simply, vladimir putin and his oligarchs can use the exact same tactics american special-interest used to spend anonymous money in our elections and secure influence. the crooks and criminals have long used shell companies to obscure ownership and hide il

mr. zuckerberg, i'm not on facebook.ou, elise jordan, thank you, john holman, thank you r, nick confessore ray. we'll be right back. when it comes to snacking. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ that's why he uses the chase mobile app, to pay practically anyone, at any bank. life, lived victor's way. chase. make more of what's yours. wwow, this is quite the busyo. place. right? this is the product for you. (vo) the new bissell crosswave pet pro vacuums and washes at the same time. it's better than ever for homes with pets. and my brother ray and i started searching for answers. (vo) when it's time to navigate in-home care, follow that bright star. because brightstar care earns the same accreditation best and brightstar care means an rn will customize a plan that evolves with mom's changing needs. (woman) because dad made us promise we'd keep mom at home. (vo) call 844-4-brightstar for your free home care planning guide. ♪ ♪ i love you baby applebee's 2 for $20, now with steak. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. >>> up next, it's been 50 y

your own i can i can follow up with you and just one final observation german grassley i had the mr zuckerberg easy answer to a lot of questions today but there are also a lot of promises to follow up with some of our members. carl nasser from our social media desk is with me call we were both there listening to him at that grid listening to that grilling because finally got back to the area finally that you kind of turning in their homework a little bit late but it's now here honestly there aren't too many new details here but there's a couple of answers buried in there that really are kind of bringing back the curtain a bit showing us really the wide ranging data collection that facebook does we can start with one response to a question of how facebook monitors our digital devices and here facebook is really revealing that attracts us basically anywhere we access the internet so they collect quote information from and about the computers phones connected t.v.'s and other web connected devices that we use with facebook what sort of information well the battery level of your phone the availabl

your i question follow up with you and just one final observation chairman grassley i think the mr zuckerberg has entered a lot of questions today but there are also a lot of promises to follow up with some of our members. nothing from the social media desk joins me now bullet talking right here for that grilling and we kept talking about that sentence i'll get back to you so he has got back to them with five hundred pages into says so what do we learn from them yet there's a lot in there i mean facebook finally turned in its homework right and most of those are details that we basically already knew but there's a couple new things in there some revelations that really kind of pull back the curtain on facebook's wide ranging data collection and we can start with a response to a question that we heard we were listening about how facebook tracks us on our digital devices and this is our response and here facebook is essentially revealing that it's tracking us basically everywhere we are on the internet so it's collecting quote information from and about the computers phones connected t.v.'s and

mr. zuckerberg, i held up the terms of service that i believe were provided to cambridge analytica by you or by you to cambridge analytica, do you recall that moment? >> yes. cambridge analytica provided those terms of service to me to put in the app. >> do you know the origins of those terms of service? >> prince wiley wrote them, my understanding was that this would be a way for us to make a fully commercial app because prior to that it was an academic app. >> those terms of service provided for the sharing of information, do they not? >> yes, they did. and they were not to facebook. >> despite mark zuckerberg is claiming any knowledge of them. >> i do note -- i don't know if we -- if he certainly individually knew about it. but we provided it to facebook. at the very least they have them and could have taken a look. >> mr. patel, facebook emma for years, was the best friend that data brokers could have. in march, facebook announced that it was shutting down the data broker program to quote help improve people's privacy on facebook". according to public report, facebook initially told a

mrs. ruby anderson died. >> officials at zuckerberg sf general said she wasn't a patient at the hospital but>> i'm heather holmes. the san francisco sheriff's office has identified that woman as 75-year-old ruby lee anderson. an autopsy is scheduled to determine just when and how she died. the ceo of the hospital says anderson wasn't a patient at the hospital but lived at a residential care facility for seniors on the campus. she signed herself out of that facility the morning of may 20th saying she would return in the afternoon. she never came back. the next day, care workers filed a missing persons report and the sheriff's office began a search. anderson's body was found by a hospital worker yesterday afternoon that was 10 days after she went missing. the sheriff said deputies never searched the power plant. >> we're looking at that to see if that's a sheriff's department responsibility or the responsibility of the engineers who were in the building 24 hours seven days a week. >> there are evaluating how they go about searching for patients and residents at care facilities there if they di

quote monetization and mr divs like advertising onto whatsapp its founders shares would vest immediately and they could leave without suffering any kind of financial penalty now zuckerberg may be an immoral corrupt but these two founders left without collecting money because there was another cause and their wish that they had to sue to get that money to so they've just left over a billion dollars on the table because they disagree was a calculation that was made at the time of the signing because they were able to still take home twenty twenty one billion dollars apiece so the leave the nine hundred billion millionaire on the table as a don't change is meaningless they knew that they were getting in bed with the flea ridden pig and then they knew that this day was going to happen they knew that from the day one that this day was going to be they left they they had to leave because they found out that facebook was what facebook is and everybody said this would happen google of course also removed from. their own charter that they don't be evil so now they've admitted basically that they can't abide by their own basically principles that they said they were operating by

quote monetization and mr divs like advertising onto whatsapp its founders shares would vest immediately and they could leave without suffering any kind of financial penalty now zuckerbergmay be an immoral corrupt but these two founders left without collecting money because there was another cause and their wish that they had to sue to get that money to so they've just left over a billion dollars on the table because they disagree with much of calculation that was made at the time of the signing because they were able to still take home twenty twenty one billion dollars apiece so the live nine hundred billion millionaire on the table as a don't change is meaningless they knew that they were getting in bed with the flea ridden pig and then they. they knew that this day was going to happen they knew that from the day one that this day was going they left they they had to leave because they found out that facebook was what facebook is and everybody said this would happen google of course also removed from their own charter that don't be evil so now they've admitted basically that they can't abide by their own basically principles that they said they were operating by so he

quote monetization and mr divs like advertising onto whatsapp its founders shares would vest immediately and they could leave without suffering any kind of financial penalty now zuckerbergmay be an immoral corrupt but these two founders left without collecting money because there was another cause and their wish that they had to sue to get that money to so they've just left over a billion dollars on the table because they disagree was a calculation that was made at the time of the signing because they were able to still take home twenty twenty one billion dollars apiece so the live nine hundred billion millionaire on the table as a don't change is meaningless they knew that they were getting in bed with the flea ridden pig and then the. they knew that this day was going to happen they knew that from the day one that this day was going they left they they had to leave because they found out that facebook was what facebook is and everybody said this would happen google of course also removed from their own charter that don't be evil so now they've admitted basically that they can't abide by their own basically principles that they said they were operating by so he's sayin

mr. anderson. >> >> speaking of technologies. we're told a big theme at the worldwide developers conferencek versus mark zuckerberg. us, why don't you tell us tim cook appears and is going after zuckerberg? >> don't you love it when titans battle? it is very interesting for us. at worldwide's developers conference, wellness feature, looking to curb iphone addiction. analysts say you need a phone in the end. what do you curb? curb uses much social media apps like facebook. looks like facebook might be the target here. another unveil, a new siri. sounds more like jarvis, can you do more with it? look for maybe previews of hardware and new macbook and cheaper iphone later on this fall. stuart: apple is up and facebook is down. >> in an up market, what does that say? stuart: well, we were talking with jim anderson as you know. the suspicion is, that facebook will not face regulations which destroy its business model. that is why it is holding close to a all-time high. >> they're talking about breakup from instagram. what about whatsapp. features not included in the breakup. breakup would be different from regulation. t

mr. zuckerberg actually said, he thought there would be a reason to start regulating and put in place. he said he was supportive of a 72-hour notice. and so i think that there are -- we're at a point now that if we just have certain platforms doing their own regulation, self-regulation, then you'll have other ones moving in anyway that aren't doing it. and then you'll have all the slimy ads, leading me to ask about the voter suppression efforts in the hearings we've had in judiciary, we've had a number of ads displayed with african-american faces saying, hey, text this number during the trump/clinton election, and you will be able to vote without standing in line. to me, that was clearly criminal. it's voter suppression. and how maybe the russians have used this in the past. these were ads bought by rubles. >> senator whitehouse. >> i was asking a question. >> i thought it was a statement. >> no, i can maybe go back after senator whitehouse is done. >> go ahead, senator whitehouse. >> thank you very much. first of all, i would like to welcome ken wainstein back, a very helpful witness