what if i don't want to receive those commercial advertisements so your chief operating officer ms sandberg suggested on the in b.c. today show that face book users who do not want their personal information used for advertising might have to pay for that protection pay for are you actually considering having facebook users pay for you not to use that information. senator people have a control over how their information is used in ads in the product today so if you want to have an experience where your ads aren't aren't targeted using all the information that we have available you can turn off third party information what we've found is that even though some people don't like ads people really don't like ads that aren't relevant and while there is some discomfort for sure with using information in making ads more relevant the overwhelming feedback that we get from our community is that people would rather have us show relevant content there than not so we offer this control that they are referencing. some people use it is not the majority of people on facebook and i think that that's that's

ms. sandberg to say. is that correct? >> yes, senator. to be clear, we don't offer an option to not pay for ads. we want to offer a free service that everyone can afford. >> therefore, you consider my personally identifiable data the company's data, not my data. is that it? >> no, senator. actually, the first line of our terms of service say that you control and own the information and content that you put on facebook. >> well, the recent scandal is obviously frustrating, not only because it affected 87 million but because it seems to be part of a pattern of lax data practices by the company going back years. so back in 2011, it was a settlement with the ftc and now we discover yet another incidence where the data was failed to be protected. when you discovered the cambridge analytica had fraudulently obtained all of this information, why didn't you inform those 87 million? >> when we learned in 2015 that cambridge analytica had bought data from an app developer on facebook that people had shared it with, we did take action. we took down

ms. sandberg to say. is that correct? >> yes, senator. although to be clear, we don't offer an option today for people to pay to not show ads. we think offering an ad supported service is the most aligned with our mission of trying to help connect everyone in the world. pause we want to offer a free service that everyone can afford. that's the only way we can reach billions of people. >> so, therefore, you consider my personally identifiable data, the company's data, not my data. is that it? >> no, senator. actually, at the first line of our terms of service say that you control and own the information and content that you put on facebook. >> well, the recent scandal is obviously frustrating, not only because it affected 87 million but because it seems to be part of a pattern of lax data practices by the company going back years. so, back in 2011, it was a settlement with the ftc and now we discover yet another instance where the data was failed to be protected. when you discovered the cambridge analytica that had fraudulently obtained al

ms. sandberg to say. is that correct? >> yes, senator. although to be clear, we don't offer an option today for people to not show ads. we think offering an ad-supported service is the most aligned with our mission of trying to help connect everyone in the world. because we want to offer a free service that everyone can afford. >> okay. >> that's the only way that we can reach billions of people. >> so, therefore, you consider my personally-identifiable data then company's data, not my data. is that it? >> no, senator. actually, at the first line of our terms of service say that you control and own the information and content that you put on facebook. >> well, the recent scandal is obviously frustrating not only because it affected 87 million, but because it seems to be part of a pattern earn of lax -- pattern of lax data practices by the company going back years. so back in 2011 it was a9 settlement with the ftc, and now we discover yet another incidence where the data was failed to be protected. when you discovered the cambridge analyti

what if i don't want to receive those commercial advertisements so your chief operating officer ms sandberg suggested on the in b c today show that face book users who do not want their personal information used for advertising might have to pay for that protection pay for are you actually considering having facebook users pay for you not to use that information. senator people have a control over how their information is used in ads in the product today so if you want to have an experience where your ads aren't aren't targeted using all the information that we have available you can turn off third party information what we've found is that even though some people don't like ads people really don't like ads that aren't relevant and while there is some discomfort for sure with using information in making ads more relevant the overwhelming feedback that we get from our community is that people would rather have us so relevant content there than not so we offer this control but you they are referencing. some people use it it's not the majority of people on facebook and i think that that's that

ms. sandberg to say. is that correct? >> yes senator though to be clear we don't offer an option for people to not show ads. we think offering ads is the most aligned with the mission of trying to connect everyone in the world because we want to offer a free service that everyone can afford. that's the only wayig we can reh billions of people. >> so therefore you consider my personally identifiable data the company's data, my--not my data. it said that? >> no, senator. the first lines of our service say you can control and all the information and conduct you put on facebook. >> the recent scandal is obviously frustrating not only because it affected 87 million but because it seems to be part of a pattern of lax data practices by the company going back years so back in 2011 it was a settlement with the ftc and now we discover yet another instance where the data was failed to be protected. when he discovered cambridge analytica had fraudulently obtained all of this information why didn't you inform those 87 million? >> what

ms. sandberg's hands out of it, bringing someone in to truly get to the bottom of it. is that enough >> no, it's not enough you look at what mary barry did or jamie dimon did, they specified what they did wrong. at one point, when maxine waters tried to grill ken lewis, jamie reframed it and said this is what you should be asking us, if i should be so audacious, and you should hold a tougher standard to us, pointed out what jpmorgan did wrong, and took personality accountability that's not what is happening here this is like brenda lee, since she was 16 years old, singing "i'm sorry." she's been doing it, now 75 years old. no one believes she's really sorry. it's an act. the same thing here. he's getting away with a false contrition it's not very convincing but because congress won't have enough time in either the house tomorrow or the senate today to push him hard, and they don't have the technology to know he can't do what he purports to do, and they have every time apologized and failed to live up to past apologies. >> part of your point is well taken. 43 senators t

ms. sandberg or raised dairy goats on the sand dunes wanted to expand her heard so she was the force behind a warm ramjet when a climate for them to spend their later years as well as a better climate for her dairy goats. in the 1940s he was in demand with winning a pulitzer prize with his abraham lincoln biography and there was a lot of interest in him with a variety of writing projects. his editor was very projects at him and mrs. sandburg was concerned about him that he might be getting burnt out and wanted to refocus his attention and it was successful and paid off. five years after they moved here carl sandburg one another pulitzer prize for his collection of poetry of complete ponds. carl sandburg had grown up in illinois. he was born in 1878 and he was the product of an immigrant childhood. his parents were swedish emigrants and he was the first of their sons born in america. he lived in this american melting pot at the time. the industrial revolution was going to take place shortly and he met people from all the country through his neighborhood and through just his childhood around

ms. sandberg, suggested on the nbc "today" show that facebook users who do not want their personal information used for advertising, might have to pay for that protection. pay for it are you actually considering having facebook users pay for you not using that information >> senator, people have a control how information is used in the product today if you want to have an experience where your ads are not targeted using the information we have available, you can turn off third party information. what we found is that even though some people don't like ads, people really don't like ads that are not relevant, and while there is some discomfort, for sure, with using information in making ads, more relevant, the overwhelming feedback that we get from our community is that people would rather have us show relevant content there than not. so we offer this control that you are referencing. some people use it it's not the majority of people on facebook. and i think that that is a good level of control to offer. what shesryl said in order to nt run ads at all, we still need some sort of business model.