mr. zuckerberg, mr. pichai, just on that continuously evolving information on covid, because we are learning more and more about it, and how do you keep up, only about 30 seconds, so if you could quick answer for each of you, if you can. mr. pichai, maybe. >> on covid, we've been really taking guidance from cdc and other health experts proactively. one thing we get to do in youtube is recommend higher quality content. we have show 400 million information panels last year including a lot from cdc and other health organizations. >> okay. thank you. and i yield back four seconds, mr. chair. >> thank you, mr. guthrie. chair now recognizes ms. matsui for five minutes. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman, for having this hearing today. today we have another opportunity here from the leaders of facebook, twitter, and google. and one has become a concerning pattern. the members of this committee are here to demand answers to questions about social media's role in escalating misinformation, extremism, and violen

mr. zuckerberg, mr. pichai, just on that continuously evolving information on covid, because we are learning more and more about it, and how do you keep up, only about 30 seconds, so if you could quick answer for each of you, if you can. mr. pichai, maybe. >> on covid, we've been really taking guidance from cdc and other health experts proactively. one thing we get to do in youtube is recommend higher quality content. we have show 400 million information panels last year including a lot from cdc and other health organizations. >> okay. thank you. and i yield back four seconds, mr. chair. >> thank you, mr. guthrie. chair now recognizes ms. matsui for five minutes. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman, for having this hearing today. today we have another opportunity here from the leaders of facebook, twitter, and google. and one has become a concerning pattern. the members of this committee are here to demand answers to questions about social media's role in escalating misinformation, extremism, and violen

mr. zuckerberg? >> no, congresswoman, i don't think we profit from it. i think it hurts our service. >> congresswoman, certainly not our intent. >> since you all said no, can you please provide how you manage to avoid collecting revenue from ads served on such content? so, i'll be expecting that. there's a difference between the conversation in the living room and discourt and jurying hate crimes and violent. do you acknowledge that such content is having a harmful effect on minority and communities of color? yes or no. i don't have a lot of time. so, yes or no? dorsey. >> yes, i think that's right. if your financial incentive could lead to the creation of a system that promotes commercially-charged content that's been harmful, do you believe you will always need to play more on different topics? mr. zuckerberg? >> i think we can take systemic actions that help to reduce a large amount but there will always be some content that gets through the systems that we will have to react to. >> mr. dorsey? >>

mr. zuckerberg? >> no, congresswoman, i don't think we profit from it. i think it hurts our service. >> congresswoman, certainly not our intent. >> since you all said no, can you please provide how you manage to avoid collecting revenue from ads served on such content? so, i'll be expecting that. there's a difference between the conversation in the living room and discourt and jurying hate crimes and violent. do you acknowledge that such content is having a harmful effect on minority and communities of color? yes or no. i don't have a lot of time. so, yes or no? dorsey. >> yes, i think that's right. if your financial incentive could lead to the creation of a system that promotes commercially-charged content that's been harmful, do you believe you will always need to play more on different topics? mr. zuckerberg? >> i think we can take systemic actions that help to reduce a large amount but there will always be some content that gets through the systems that we will have to react to. >> mr. dorsey? >>

mr. zuckerberg are you there? >> sorry, i was muted. 's an area of which invest heavily, we've been praised by several authorities, we work proactively. >> mr. dorsey, yes or no, do you agree? >> we try to resolve problems quickly as possible. >> but you do have problems and you're trying to resolve them. the problem is, when you're talking about millions of incidences, 90% duplicates from facebook data, that's the least happening while children are being exploited with child pornography on your site, we've got to do better. i think you all, for everything we've talked about, review team like electronic industry with the laboratory, 150 years ago. i told you when you were here before, i don't think it has to do with your company, it needs to be outside. i would say with google, special permission given to moon shots, to target ads against extremists. moonshot directed thousands of individualss to search for content, videos and posts of convicted felons for anti- law enforcement, anti-semitic anarchistsel use. are you aware of this? >> i

mr. zuckerberg and mr. dorsey you have failed to meaningfully change your platforms and stopping insurrectioni, the spreading of the bars and trembling american civil liberties. it may be true that some bad actors will shout to fire in a crowded theater by promoting a harmful content your platforms are handing them a megaphone to be heard in every theater across the country in the world and your business model itself has become the problem and the time for self regulation is over. it is time we legislate to hold you accountable and that is what we will do and i want to thank you, mr. chairman, mr. doyle because i know that you're very serious about moving forward on legislation which we will do and i promise everyone, thank you and i yield back. >> the gentlemen yields back in the chair now recognizes mr. rogers the ranking member of the full committee for five minutes for her opening statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman. ten years ago when i joined big tech platforms i thought it would be a force for good

mr. zuckerberg. yes or not if not, i assume the answer is yes. >> i have seen the study it was about content leading up to the german election >> let me ask you a question custom relates to that you said yes the troubling research i mentioned demonstrates that facebook was not simply allowing this information and extremism to spread, it actively amplified and it spread it this is my point in other words, facebook didn't stop recommending political groups to the united states until after the january 6th insurrection, years after it was made aware of this research. it compels us to reevaluate platform's liabilities back to that "wall street journal" article, facebook's chief product officer, chris cox, championed an internal effort to address division on facebook and proposed a plan that would have reduced the spread of content by hyper active users on the far left and far right. the article alleges mr. zuckerberg that you personally reviewed this proposal and approved it but only after its effectivene

mr. zuckerberg?, congresswoman, i don't think we profit from it. i think it hurts our service >> mr. pincai? >> certainly not our intent and we don't want such content. >> since you all said no, can you provide to me in writing how you managed to avoid from collecting revenue from ads targeted by or served on such content, so i will be expecting that there's a difference between a conversation in a living room and one being pumped out to millions of followers from discouraging voting and covid-19 misinformation to encouraging hate crimes and violence the harms are real and disproportionate do you acknowledge that such content is having especially harmful effects on minority and communities of color, yes or no again? i don't have a lot of time so yes or no. mr. dorsey >> yes >> mr. pichai. >> yes. >> mr. zuckerberg? >> yes i think that's right >> thank you if your financialin sent i've is the human psychology lead to the creation of a system that promotes emotionally charged content that is often harm

mr. zuckerberg and mr. dorsey, do you think the law should allow you the arbiters of truth as they have under section 230 mr. zuckerberg first >> congressman, i think that it is good to have a law that allows platforms to moderate content. but as i've said today, i think that there -- that we'd benefit from more transparency and accountability >> mr. dorsey? >> i don't think we should be -- >> the gentleman'stime has expired. the chair now recognizes mr. cardenas for five minutes. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman i'd like to submit a national hispanic media coalition letter against disinformation on social media. if we could submit that for the record, i'd appreciate that. also my first question is to you, mr. zuckerberg. in 2020 facebook brought in approximately $86 billion of revenue. is that about right, give or take >> congressman, i think that's about right. >> okay, thank you good how much of that revenue did facebook invest in identifying misinformation, disinformation in that portion of your bus

mr. zuckerberg. now, mr. pichai, you are recognized for five minutes. mr. pichai, are you unmuted? >> chairman, and ranking members, and members of the community, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. to begin i want to express my sympathies that lost loved ones to covid or the recent gun violence in boulder and atlanta. in difficult times we are reminded of what connects us as americans, the hope that we can make things better for our families and our communities. and we at google are committed to that work. i joined google because i believed the internet was the best way to bring the benefits of technology to more people, and for the past three decades we have seen how it has inspired the best in society by expanding knowledge, providing opportunities for discovery and connection. i am proud that anybody can turn to google for help. whether they are looking for vaccine information, learning new skills on youtube or using digital tools to grow their business. in 2020 our products held 2 million u.s. businesses and publishers generate 426 million in economic act

mr. zuckerberg? mr. zuckerberg: we are accountable to congress and the public. >> do you think you should be held accountable? nestor zuckerberg: i am not sure what you mean. >> should you be held accountable to congress? zuckerberg: yes. >> the way you run your business. mr. zuckerberg question i guess, and we are. >> mr. dorsey? >> yes, accountable to the public. >> i said to congress and the public. we represent the public. do you agree? >> yes. >> thank you. >> yes, i am here today because i am accountable to congress and the public. emily: did the companies truly take responsibility for misinformation, disinformation on the platform for january 6, for all the misinformation around covid? let's break it down with naomi. did they take responsibility, what did they take response before and not take response ability for? naomi? there was a remarkably different tone among the tech ceos. you saw jack dorsey go the furthest and say, yes, twitter was part of the problem, but the was a larger ecosystem. mark

mr. zuckerberg's changes to section 230? mr. pichai: there are definitely -- matt: we are interrupting our coverage to bring you the results from the seven year treasury auction crossing on the bloomberg terminal now. the seven year notes draw 1.3% even, 1.300%, a lot of the high 40.9 percent. the u.s. awards 53 points -- 57.3 percent on seven year notes to indirect bidders, 24.7% to primary dealers. joining us now for a look at this auction since the difficult seven-year auction is our guest. let me start with you, what do you think about this, it's been steady all day. actually the last few auctions have been healthy. >> good afternoon. it's a pretty soft auction. 2.5 basis points, this indicates a weak demand. at the same time. the follow-through, especially for the auction prices has not been terrible. one of the broader themes is the correlation between equity and fixed income have been returning to normal after being quite distorted through february and march. signaling at least the returns for a stable level of demand acr

mr. zuckerberg, clearly ms. that was shared by her harasser was illegal. do you believe that facebook bears any responsibility for the role it played in her death? yes or no? >> sorry i was muted. congressman, that is a -- it's an incredibly sad story. and i -- i -- i think that we certainly have a responsibility to make sure that we are building systems that can fight and remove this kind of harmful content. in the case of child exploitation content, we have been building systems for a long time that use a.i. and we have thousands of people working on being able to identify this content and remove it. i think our systems are generally pretty effective of this -- -- >> my time is pretty short but would you say yes or no, then >> sorry can you repeat that? >> in the question, yes or no, then, in your responsibility >> congressman, i believe in a the responsibility -- >> let me move on. because i have got very short on time do you believe that facebook should be health accountable for any role in her death? yes or

mr. zuckerberg?i think we are accountable to public -- to congress in the public. >> do you think you should be held accountable? marx i am not sure you -- >> i am not sure what you mean. >> should you be held accountable? >> yes, and we are. ask mr. dorsey. bikes yes, accountable to the public. >> i said accountable to congress and the public. we represent the public. so you agree? >> yes. >> mr. pichai. >> i am here because i'm accountable to public members and congress. >> testy tech hearing. lawmakers demanded yes and no answers. there was not a lot of room for nuanced responses. we did not hear anything new at all. looking at shares of the big three, all in the red. google unchanged. the softness more likely coordinated with the switch to cyclicals and rising yields. i wanted to get a sense in terms of what you think of the hearing. a lot of it is noise. investors know at some point, should they be more focused on regulation? >> that is exactly where our focus is at the moment. these hearings, t

mr. zuckerberg? >> chairman, i think our responsibility is to build systems that can. >> mr. rg, i just want a yes or no answer. okay? yes or no do you bear some responsibility for what happened? >> congressman, our w responsibility is to make sure that we build effective systems. >> okay the gentleman has notak answered the question. mr. pichai, yes or no? >> we all have a deep sense of responsibility but i think we worked hard this election it was one of our most substantive effort. >> is that a yes or a no? >> congressman, it's a complex question. >> okay. we will move on. mr. dorsey?e >> yes, but you also have to take into consideration a broader ecosystem. it's not just about the i technology platforms we use. >> tucker: now, wait a second. do we have news here? did ethereal buddhist techno- god jack dorsey emerge from his haze to admit culpability for the january 6th riot at the capital? of course he didn't. not in a real sense he took no responsibility and he will pay no price. unlike hundreds of other people who were there that day, some of whom did nothing wrong, jack

mr. zuckerberg? >> chairman, i think our responsibility is to build systems that can help -- >> mr. zuckerberg, i just want a yes or no answer. mr. pichai, yes or no? >> we also feel a deep sense of responsibility, but i think we worked hard this election effort, was one of our most substantive efforts. >> is that a yes or no? >> congressman, it is a complex question. >> okay. we'll move on. mr. dorsey? >> yes, but you also have to take into consideration a broader ecosystem. >> as for the investigation into the insurrection itself, a new nbc news analysis of federal election commission filings reveal people allege to be among the january 6th insurrections drastically increased donations to the failed former president after his election loss. more of the insurrections are being arrested including a former new york police officer who is alleged to have played a tambourine in the halls of the capitol. we are learning about a possible insurrection coordination between several domestic extremist groups. the department of justice alleged in court filings one of the members of the oath kee

mr. zuckerberg, pichai, and dorsey? but only jack dorsey being willing to say yes. >> yeah. i mean, you can imagine why the ceo of a major-tech company would not want to say yes to that question. and so i think that they are rightfully, pointing out that it's a complicated ecosystem, that includes human behavior and politics and political rhetoric. but the simple fact is that jack dorsey and probably the other two know, very well, that their platforms do play a role. that the algorithms that amplify that content and make it more powerful are, absolutely, part of that complicated ecosystem. >> one of the things that's in the backdrop of this is this push to regulate social media, that is coming from social networks themselves. facebook's been running a bunch of ads. i have been seeing them, i don't know if you have been seeing them. that basically say the internet's come a long way since we had a brick phone. basically, they have a list of things they would like to be regulated on. what do you make of that effort? that s

mr. zuckerberg. >> our response ability is to build systems -- >> i want a yes or no answer. do you bear some responsibility for what happened? >> our response ability is to make sure that we build effective systems -- >> mr. butch i, yes or no? >> i think we worked hard, this election effort was one of our most expensive efforts. >> is that a yes or no? >> it is a complex question. >> ok, we will move on. mr. dorsey. >> yes, but you have to take into consideration a broader ecosystem. it is not the technology platforms only. >> thank you. i agree with that. host: rebecca kern on all three fronts, they wanted to go beyond the yes or no and all talking about bigger issues at play when it comes to -- elaborate from there. guest: there are a lot of issues at play here and what we did see was like i was mentioning, they are labeling these tweets going into the election as misinformation and providing links to elections -- election centers for accurate information and news websites to redirect, to correct factual information, but facebook and twitter actively did that. they are de

mr. zuckerberg? >> congressman, i think it is good to have a law that allows platforms to moderate content. but, as i said, i think we benefit from more transparency and accountability. >> mr. dorsey? >> i do not think we should be arbiters of truth and i do not think the government should be either. host: to that response? guest: libertarians have a new hero in jack dorsey for putting something specifically -- i do not think the history of free speech and free expression would bear out that we would want government deciding what we see in our newsfeeds. we probably do not want the platforms deciding what is true and what is not true. i think it is difficult to figure out what is appropriate in terms of optimizing content for users in terms of what they enjoy versus any harms we might be seeing if misinformation is being prioritized or if we feel like people are being radicalized. we need to separate questions -- is something good? if not, is the government the answer? rarely, when it comes to speech,

mr. zuckerberg do you think you should be held accountable? am not sure i know what you mean. >> should you be eight held accountable from congress and the public for the way you run your business? mark: yes, and we are. >> yes, accountable to the public. >> i said accountable to congress and the public, so you agree? jack: yes. >> mr. pichai? >> yes, i am here today because i'm accountable to congress and the members of the public. rishaad: the handling of misinformation, bloomberg reported joins us now from san francisco. there was a focus on the platform's response to the capitol riot's. >> this is one of those examples where congressmen was trying to give that you get them to get a yes or no answer, but it is never quite that easy. we did not get enough acknowledgment from the ceos, and jack dorsey said that twitter did play a role, it was a yes, but kind of answer, and the other ceos are trying to elaborate and give more detail. we got a sense that everyone seems to believe that these companies are responsible, but we do not have a clear

mr. zuckerberg? >> congressman, yes.ve a policy against allowing... >> i know you have a policy, but will you take the sites down today? you still have 12 people up on your site doing this. will you take them down? >> congressman, i would need to look at the and have our team look at the exact examples to make sure they-- >> because those still exist. we found them as early as last night. >> brangham: this is what a lot of the hearing was, accusations, and the c.e.o.s trying to defend it. mark zuckerberg repeatedly said that facebook has taken down a bill, and that's billion with a "b," facebook pages that do have disinformation on it about the pandemic. do you think these platforms are doing enough? >> no. i think the point is that they are so huge, and then this gets into the question of the monopoly power and their reach over our communication infrastructure, that even if their financial incentives weren't pushing them to amplify this type of content, there is simply no way they could have safe platforms that didn't p

mr. zuckerberg?i think we are accountable to congress and to the public. >> do you think you should be held accountable? >> i am not sure i understand what you mean. >> should you be held accountable to congress and the public? for their way you run your business? >> yes, and we are. >> mr. dorsey? >> yes, accountable to the public. >> i said the congress and public. do you agree? >> yes. >> do agree mr. pichai echo --? haidi: awkward moments and grilling there for the ceos of facebook twitter and alphabet taking questions from u.s. lawmakers over the handling of misinformation. our west coast reporter ed ludlow has more. ed, with the back-and-forth, what did we learn ultimately echo is there a fix? >> we learned the three ceos are split on the way forward. of course, on the political side, both sides of the aisle, despite it being a bipartisan initiative, have differing views about what to do. the ceos -- mark zuckerberg was clearly the most amenable to adjusting section 230 of the 1996 munication's

mr. zuckerberg? ility is to build systems that can -- >> is that a yes or a no? >> congressman, it's a complex question. >> okay. we'll move on. mr. dorsey? >> yes, but you also have to take into considering the broader ecosystem. it's not just the platforms that are used. >> the ceos are once again in the hot seat in congress addressing their roles their companies played. twitter chief jack dorsey admitting his company played a role in the deadly capitol insurrection. among the lawmakers, the republicans who played no small part that led to the january 6th attack. as "the washington post" notes, more than half of the representatives on the two subcommittees organizing the hearings voted against certifying the 2020 election citing baseless claims. several tweeted the phrase #stopthesteal. >>> joining us is nick confessore. and also with us cara swisher, host of podcasts. karen, let me first start with you, the abominable irony on display here, the idea you would go out of the way to ask the wolves to

mr. zuckerberg do you feel complicit in any way that your platform is assisting in this disaster?have policies and we're working to fight this content. we have policies against scams and pages groups and events like the content you are talking about. we're also seeing the state department use our platform to share factual information with people. >> representative buddy carter says his office found facebook pages and instagram posts offering to take people across the border illegally for a fee. president biden seemed to give the green light for parents to send unaccompanied children to the u.s. border saying he is not going to turn them away. this is the kind of information flowing from the cartels through social media to people in south america and the numbers reflect it. last month 171% more minors showed up without parents at our southwestern border than in february of 2020. it is similar increases for all people showing up at the southwestern border. the internet is forever, the word got out u.s. border is opening and administration having a hard time bottling it up. >> was an

mr. zuckerberg exact words from hisor e-mail. and in which he said that these businesses are but network establish brand meaningful and grow to large scale they could be disruptive to us and buys them with words it is better to buy than compete. i guess i would go to you professor rose, exclusionary conduct can we actually i know you see it as a problem. but can we actually do something about it? >>ro i think we can senator i think what we need, however, is a recalibration of what the antitrust laws and what congress intended when itt passed them ad seeing court decisions that are really nullifying i think that congressional intent and even just basic understanding of what exclusionary conduct is, and -- and a business judgment. the examples you gave are terrific. you know, we basically i think it is almost impossible to successfully bring a predatory pricing, or predatory behavior case at this point. and that shouldn't be. that if you believe in competitive markets you believe in small businesses, if you believe in entrance that

mr. zuckerberg's exact words from his e-mail in which he said that these businesses are nascent but the networks to establish the brands are meaningful and if they grow a larger scale that can be very disruptive to us and then he goes on with the words compete but i guess i would go deep or vÄsterÅs exclusionary conduct i know you see it as a problem. can we do something about it? >> i think we can senator and i believe what we need is a recalibration of what the antitrust laws and what congress intended when they pass it but we are seeing court decisions that are nullifying that intent and understanding what exclusionary conduct is in the business judgment. example is almost impossible in predatory behavior cases and that shouldn't be. if you believe in competitive markets and small businesses and if you believe in that kind of entrance that some here today have talked about you want to give them a fighting chance and you don't want to drive them out of the market. >> mr. rybnicek has this argument that they won 85% of their cases in court so there must not be a problem. to me, to me it means t

mr. zuckerberg. >> our response ability is to build systems -- >> i want a yes or no answer. do you bear some responsibility for what happened? >> our response ability is to make sure that we build effective systems -- >> mr. butch i, yes or no? >> i think we worked hard, this election effort was one of our most expensive efforts. >> is that a yes or no? >> it is a complex question. >> ok, we will move on. mr. dorsey. >> yes, but you have to take into consideration a broader ecosystem. it is not the technology platforms only. >> thank you. i agree with that. host: rebecca kern on all three fronts, they wanted to go beyond the yes or no and all talking about bigger issues at play when it comes to -- elaborate from there. guest: there are a lot of issues at play here and what we did see was like i was mentioning, they are labeling these tweets going into the election as misinformation and providing links to elections -- election centers for accurate information and news websites to redirect, to correct factual information, but facebook and twitter actively did that. they are de

mr. zuckerberg? an, i think it is good to have a law that allows platforms to moderate content. but, as i said, i think we benefit from more transparency and accountability. >> mr. dorsey? >> i do not think we should be arbiters of truth and i do not think the government should be either. host: to that response? guest: libertarians have a new hero in jack dorsey for putting something specifically -- i do not think the history of free speech and free expression would bear out that we would want government deciding what we see in our newsfeeds. we probably do not want the platforms deciding what is true and what is not true. i think it is difficult to figure out what is appropriate in terms of optimizing content for users in terms of what they enjoy versus any harms we might be seeing if misinformation is being prioritized or if we feel like people are being radicalized. we need to separate questions -- is something good? if not, is the government the answer? rarely, when it comes to speech, is governme

mr. zuckerberg, exact words from his email in which he said, that these businesses are nascent, but the networksestablished a brands already meaningful and if they grow to a large scale, they can be very disruptive to have to us. and then he goes on, it is better to buy them compete. i guess i would go to your professor rose. exclusionary conduct, can -- i know you see it as a problem. but can we actually do something about it? >> i think we can, senator. and i believe that what we need, however, is a recalibration of what the antitrust laws intended when we passed them. we're seeing court decisions that are really nullifying that congressional intent and even basic understanding of exclusionary conduct and of business judgment. the examples you gave our terrific. basically, i think it's impossible to have successfully brought predatory pricing or predatory peace -- and natural and be. if you believe in competitive markets, if you believe in small businesses, if you believe in that kind of entrance that some here have talked about, you want to give them a fighting chance and you don't want to al

that is a facebook mark zuckerberg could be in for a grilling when he testifies to the u.s. congress today about january's insurrection mrs arkell burgo who is also being joined by the has of google and twitter we'll ask her questions not just about the role social media played in fueling the violence but in how it helps spread misinformation as well as conspiracy theories while the hearing is widely seen as a sign that the new by an administration plans to take a tougher line on the tech industry. let's get you more on this i'm joined by w.'s public fully ileus who is on the story for you a puppet what are we expecting from today's hearings. well we can expect leyla is that there's going to be a lot of discussion around the current laws in place that essentially govern at big tech companies like facebook google and twitter and essentially have to move forward in that and whether they need to be held more accountable for the spreading of misinformation which stand so sequentially has real world effects such as we'll say the storming of the capital back in january so we can expect differences as well among the c.e.o.'s of