pichai. a. >> we have over a thousand employees and have hired 50% of the workforce outside california. it tends to be proportionate to the areas we are in. but we have over a million in google and groups like [inaudible] and so on and we've made an effort so all viewpoints are welcome. >> mr. zuckerberg, will you answer honestly which is it closer to? >> i don't know the exact number but i would guess our employee base is left-leaning. >> thank you for that honesty. mr. dorsey you started opening comments you don't think people trust you you are neutral and your advice the most incredible answer i've seen so far they asked do they have the ability to influence elections, again does twitter have the ability to influence. you said no. do you still deny you don't have the ability? >> my answer was around other communication channels. >> the question was does twitter have the ability to influence elections and you said no. do you still stand by that? >> you don't think you have the ability by mo

pichai. in these teams there are people who are liberal, republican, libertarian, and so on. we talk widely with third-party organizations and we build up our policies, as the ceo i am committed to running it without any political bias and i am happy to engage more. sen. wicker: the ranking member -- has deferred to senator blumenthal, you are recognized. you blumenthal: thank chairman and ranking member, i want to begin by associating myself with the very thoughtful comment made by the ranking member as to the need for broader consideration of issues competition and local news. they are vitally important, and also with comments made by my colleagues, senator klobuchar, about the need for antitrust review and i assume we will be able -- we will be examining these topics before the judiciary committee. you know, i have been an advocate of reform for section 230 for literally 15 years. when i was attorney general in connecticut, i raised this issue of the absolute community that -- immunity tha

pichai? >> the answer would be yes because we hire them to through the united states. >> okay. all right. and looking at some of your censoring, mr. dorsey, you all have censored joe biden zero times? you have censored donald trump 65 times. so i want to go back to senator gardiner's questions. you claimed earlier that the holocaust denial and threats of jewish genocide by iran's ayatollah don't violate your so-called rules and it is important for world leaders like iran's terrorist leader to have a platform on twitter. so let me ask you this. who elects the ayatollah? >> i don't know. >> you don't know? i think, this is called a dictatorship. so are people in iran allowed to use twitter? or does the country whose leader you claim deserves a platform ban them from doing so? >> i -- dearly love for the people of iran to use twitter. >> iran bans twitter. and mr. zuckerberg you are aware they ban facebook also. so, mr. dorsey, is donald trump a world leader? >> yes. >> okay. so it would be impo

they will appear with google's sundar pichai. bloomberg has obtained the prepared remarks.ning us to discuss, kurt wagner. we have seen testimony of all three ceos. let's focus on zuckerberg and dorsey. all of them defending section 230 and warning that big changes could lead to big changes on free speech for the internet. you would expect, all three ceos, but certain zuckerberg and dorsey, are planning to make the pitch tomorrow. if they were peeled of section 230 were to go through -- if a repeal of section 230 were to go through, suddenly they would lose that legal protection, they would be liable for the things that people post. as a result, they would have to be more cautious about what people post. this whole argument depends on the idea that publicans are feeling that too much is coming down and now these companies will try to counter this argument and say, repealing this will do the exact opposite of what you want. quotes fromng some their prepared remarks, dorsey saying that we should be mindful that repealing section 230 will result in far more removal of online s

pichai next and then mr. dorsey. mr.-- pichai. >> senator, yes, we definitely are robustly are, we've been planning for a while, and we rely on raising up our news sources for moments like that. we've closely partnered with the associated press to make sure we can provide you the most accurate information possible. >> and then, yes, we also have a plan. so, you know, our plan and enforcement around these issues is pointing to more information that specifically state election officials. so we want to give people using the service as much information as possible. >> thank you, senator blumenthal. senator cruz. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank you, mr. chairman, for holding this hearing. the three witnesses we have before this committee today collectively pose, i believe, the single greatest threat to free speech in america and the greatest threat we have to free and fair elections. yesterday i spent a considerable amount of time speaking with both mr. zuckerberg and mr. pichai. i have concerns about the behavior

pichai next and then mr.y >> senator, yes, we definitely are robustly -- we've been planning for awhile and we rely on new sources for moments like that and we've closely partnered with the associated press to make sure we can provide users the most accurate information possible >> yes, we also have a plan. so our plan and our enforcement around these issues is pointing to more information than specifically state election officials, and we want to give the people using the service as much information as possible >> thank you, senator blumenthal senator cruz >> chairman, i want to thank you, mr. chairman, for holding this hearing the three witnesses we have before this committee today collectively pose, i believe, the single greatest threat to free speech in america and the greatest threat we have to free and fair elections we know that facebook is, at the minimum, at least trying to make some efforts in the direction of defending free speech. i appreciate their doing so. google, i agree with the concerns that

from googler pichai make that claim again and again.hat they usually offer us our better ai and,, we will fix it in-house and we will be collaborative. but there's almost never any specifics, was never any real transparency as we just saw in the eclipse. there is almost never any audits. so what we need in a real progressive movement are things like digital public infrastructure, universal jobs guaranteed, ai systems if they are to be used at all to be built and designed by we, the people, especially groups like, for example, events like black lives matter should take power over whether we use facial recognition and ai technologies. what we ally need is a transference of power and governance in the hands of people. this gives as we see big tech spectacularly faid agaiand again i never used as someort of punching bag for this right wing administration that rels on an absence of evidence. we have an opportunity to completely invert the system and transform support not just corporate welfare, but actually all of our interests as americans.

emily: so, mark zuckerberg, jack dorsey, sundar pichai testified before congress this week.n particular is section 230 and the liability these platforms face for content posted on those platforms. in terms of regulation, what do you think needs to happen to get these issues under control? is there any hint of optimism in your mind that that could actually happen satisfactorily? silverthis is, i think, linings are everywhere on the regulatory front. three weeks ago, the house antitrust subcommittee published a bipartisan report in which it labeled facebook, google and amazon as monopolists. this is incredibly constructive. --america, monopoly is all has always been the bad guy. an antitrust case is like playing a videogame and being declared the winner. if you have been so successful you have an antitrust case, that is the grand prize. historically in technology come every major wave, starting in 1956 with the creation of the computer industry. every wave has been driven by an antitrust case. investors in particular should be welcoming this process. i think there are two othe

and literally, within the past couple of seconds, we got alphabet ceo sundar pichai's remarks.we recognize that people come to our services with a broad spectrum of perspectives and we are dedicated to building products that are helpful to users of all backgrounds and viewpoints. he will join twitter ceo jack dorsey and as we said, facebook and google ceo on capitol hill in just about 18 hours. the three will face questions on whether the communications decency act which was passed back in 1996 known as section 230 needs to be updated to reflect the way the world has changed and we are talking about the internet and all that's swirling around there. let's check in on the three stocks, with just about 30 minutes left to trade. we are, actually, it will be about 20 minutes here, we are higher for all three names with twitter seeing the biggest gain, up about 4.6%. senator roger wicker of mississippi is a republican senator and chairman of the senate commerce committee, hosting tomorrow's hearing. he is also the co-sponsor of a bill to update section 230. he joins us now in a fox

pichai and mr. zuckerberg.s well the trio of tech ceos appeared before the senate commerce committee. all happening less than a week before the election. they talked about their roles as content moderators. they tried to fend off accusations of bias coming in from republicans. live now to edward lawrence with more on that hearing. edward? reporter: connell it, wasn't all niceties during the hearing. it became heated at times. at the heart of the debate whether section 230 of the communications decency act should be change or eliminated. senator commerce committee chairman roger wicker says president donald trump and former vice president joe biden want to repeal it. the ceos of twitter, alphabet, google's parent company and facebook admit it needs to be updated but not repealed. >> if we were subject to a larger number of content lawsuits because 230 didn't exist, that would have likely made it prohibitive for me as a college student in a dorm room to get started with this enterprise. >> it opens this hearing w

. >> we'll learn more about what zuckerberg and pichai have not been fielding the heat as much as dorsey, carl. >> let's get to the judge. >> welcome to "the halftime report." we will, as carl said, continue to monitor the section 230 hearing on capitol hill. we do want to get right to the market where stocks have been under significant pressure concerns over covid front and center europe moving closer to tightening restrictions and cases here in the united states continuing to skyrocket. i've got the investment committee here with me now joe along with steve weiss, jenny harrington is back from gillman hill asset management. the virus the big story, the number of new cases hitting an all-time high of 70-plus thousand on a seven-day average. steve weiss, turn to you dow down 10% from its high no, we don't have control of the virus. we don't have stimulus we're not rounding the corner. we are, as dr. scott gottlieb said on "squawk" entering the most difficult phase of the pandemic we have yields lower s&ps down for three straight days what do we do with this today, steve? >> well, i've ta

pichai will say outright bias does not move through their company.hand, republicans are saying platforms are taking down too much information what we are hearing from democrats is that they want to make sure they are cracking down on hate speech ahead of the election that puts these companies in a difficult bind today >> stay right there, julia is joining us from the west coast in this pressure from these companies that have long said they are not media companies to try to refine and scrub their platforms before the election. how much can they do in the space of a few days with so much pressure on them right now in terms of the censorship and the fact that they are trying to walk this line and have free speech and preventing their platforms from generating or spreading harm on their platforms. what we are really seeing here is different approaches from dorsey and zuckerberg. zuckerberg is giving his prepared remarks talking about how he wants to change the regulation and amend 230 he's spoken for many years that he does not want to be the arbiter of

facebook ceo mark zuckerberg along with sundar pichai of google and twitter's jack dorsey are being orderedo go before the panel. they will be asked about combating disinformation and internet safety for children and teenagers. the action comes as congress considers changes to liability protections under the communications decency act. >>> a new survey reveals how consumers feel about shopping this thanksgiving. 76% said retailers should be closed on the holiday. a little more than half of those cited the desire to give employees a well-earned day off. the rest said retail workers should spend the day with their families. this year a growing number of retailers do plan to close on thanksgiving. >>> and for fans of halloween, one town in the midwest is offering up a stay in a ghoulish airbnb. the self-proclaimed mayor of hell, a local town in michigan, is giving a chance for residents to stay in the tiny home. there's a fire pit, outdoor movie screen for scary movies, and gothic seating area. the unofficial mayor of the unincorporated town is offering the mayor's lair for three nights this m

before that night, he sat with us and said guys, i pichai want to do this. but you have to know, it is not going to be easy. they are going to come after not just me, but all of you as well. i need you to know what is coming at you. little did he know -- we kno, right? this is something i feel that i have to do. i remember him telling us that night -- none of us ever said, we do not want to do it. we said absolutely. do this. we knew that he was the last hope for saving the united states of america. [applause] he said, i am going to do this the right way. i do not care how politically advantageous something is. i am going to do the right no matter what. that is what you have seen time and time again with donald trump. this is the reason that he has been so successful. this is the reason that they hate him in washington dc because let's be very clear folks, they do not try and stop you if you are losing. they try and stop you if you are winning. i'll munch on been winning for the present -- united states of america and they hated. -- they hate it. i just have

s in our pichai talk specifically about section 230 and he had to say. let me be clear the up approach or without political bias full stop to do otherwise would be contrary to board their business interests and our mission which comforts us to make information accessible to every type of person no matter where they live or what they believe of course our ability to provide access to a wide range of information is only possible because of existing legal pretty marks like section 2 dodie. i guess ben the 1000000 dollar 1000000000 dollar question here is is he right you have a multi-billion dollar question and no he's well yes he's right and no he's not right he let me break this down yes he's right that section 230 is critically important jack dorsey talked about of at this hearing as well section 23 who has allowed the internet to create all of this vibrancy that it has created and it's because of the protections and that yes yes yes i agree 100 percent but our tech companies are violating the spirit of section $230.00 when they act as publishers and remo

pichai? >> i think we make moderation decisions and we believe in support o maximizing freedom of expression. >> i will take that as three nose and i agree you are not the referees of the political speech and that is why you have to be more transparent and fair with your content moderation policy and content selection algorithms because at the moment it is as i said largely a black box. there is mistrust among the american people whether you are being fair or transparent and this is concerns about the kind of amplification and suppression decisions your platforms make during the period as a result of the election too close to call so i want to underscore again for my democratic friends who keep using this referee an analysis of google, facebook and twitter are not the referees over our democracy. now, the second question. the users should be entitled to the due process and explanation when the content they post has been taken down. >> senator, i think that that would be a good principal to ha

here is jack dorsey -- and mark zuckerberg -- and pichai said -- >>> but republicans in particular arey see as the platform's abuse of those protections and roger wicker has said it's time for that free path to end >> thank you in washington. tim, what should we expect we have seen it time and again maybe it's no coincidence that today these tech stocks did quite well in the session where these stocks shirk off news of any congressional testimony required or any impending changes to 230 but this time around there is common ground when it comes to republicans and democrats when it comes to the read of 230. >> there is, but i don't think they will use that as a next us point to come together at all. going forward there may be, even in a blue wave, there could be more pressure on the companies i point to the ad revenue and get back to where we thought the center of the storm was going to be in may and june, and when we started to hear from facebook pointing out the ad revenues were resilient i think twitter has come back. they were underperforming. i think the expectation when they report

the weekend, sarah, we got word that facebook would be sending mark zuckerberg, along with sundar pichaiof twitter, and jack dorsey, to testify before the senate. we heard reporting on facebook's position on breaking up facebook, that that was a nonstarter for them. quickly, what is the latest from washington about the scrutiny and continuing scrutiny on facebook from congress? sarah: the simplest way to explain it is that our leaders in congress agree that something needs to be done about the social media platforms. they don't agree on what that is. very different criticisms. i think the clearest one has come from the house antitrust committee and we are expecting that report out this week. but, we still have the ftc probe to look forward to. the section 230 hearing is one of the clearest examples of these the verging opinions. liberals thinking that they are not doing enough to protect their users from harm. emily: all right, bloomberg tech's sarah frier who covers social media for us. thank you so much for your reporting. coming up, we will be taking a look at the ipo market and why s

facebook ceo mark zuckerberg, sunder pichai of google and jack dorsey of twitter all in the hot seat, of them reporting earnings results this week. what are you expecting? abigail: the testimony was very colorful in terms of language, as these big-tech internet ceos are trying to defend the section 230 that protects their companies. lawmakers obviously going against them or trying to bring something about. in terms of any change that would actually affect the numbers or fundamentals for these companies anytime soon from this testimony, that is unlikely. so the big picture is what you're talking about, earnings tomorrow for apple, amazon, alphabet, and facebook. and interesting report. they had huge selling pressure. these were the big drags on the day. investors are taking chips off the table, perhaps profit where it has been working. over the last five days, these stocks are down as well. we don't have stocks trading well into the report, sometimes it can raise a red flag. but price for affection, that bar is very high because these are companies that have done very well, so any hicc

jack dorsey, sundar pichai and mark zuckerberg of facebook will appear voluntarily.ulation it will include more against dorsey, zuckerberg's name is being floated, too. they will fact check it. what is interesting, subpoena, not voluntary participation anymore. the central question with two weeks to go until the election is controlling messaging on the platforms, some sort of breach, that is what everyone is trying to get to. you have elizabeth warren advocating and donald trump has said for different reasons. one is financial power and scope and once is ce censorship. the pandemic slowed this down. today, you have news thgoogle i being sued by the department of justice, does it monopolize search responsibility? big battle over companies that will continue on into 2021 and depending who has the white house, we'll see how this goes. >> neil: thank you very much, jacky. names to keep track of there, senator tom tillis joins us, he sits on the judiciary committee, among others, recovered from positive testing of the covid-19. senator, how you feeling now? >> i feel grea

including jack dorsey, mark zuckerberg and sundar pichai.here are recent efforts to shut down the "new york post"'s reporting on hunter biden's laptop. republican critics say twitter, facebook and google should not be protected under 230 because they operate like publishers. democrats say the gop is creating the issue to influence the election. this is amy klobuchar. >> i believe the republicans are politicizing what should not be a partisan topic. >> harris: so, ari fleischer, a few minutes ago zuckerberg said facebook had 4.4 million people vote. they encouraged them to vote and registered up to 400,000 people. they are part of this discussion. >> everybody who has technology is part of the discussion. that's the way times have changed. there is nothing wrong with that. what concerns me you hear somebody talk about transparency and that's laughable when he suppresses information. i think the solution is bigger than what we are talking about. i don't have a lot of faith in the government taking action against the private sector and getting

similarly, those ceos in addition to google ceo sundar pichai, are testifying before the senate commerce committee next week already on this very , and of content moderation section 230 of the communications decency act which is a law that allows social media to moderate content on their platforms and also not be held legally liable for what third parties post on their content. the specific out which over this story, this particular topic has been of interest on capitol hill for a couple of years now. we have had the tech ceos testify on this topic before. they will already be on the hill next week and they might have to go to two committee hearings to discuss this. so, on thursday, we will see the subpoena vote. we don't know for sure that they will actually end up having to use the subpoena because the committee says they are expecting having twitter and facebook voluntarily come in to testify. host: before we go to calls on this topic, there is a story developing today concerning google and the d.o.j. can you tell our viewers about it? guest: absolutely. we have been anticipating the

jack dorsey of twitter, sundar pichai of alphabet and mark zuckerberg will be testifying before the senate commerce committee today about the ways they manage content on their site. it's not the first time they've faced tough questions. you see them in a previous hearing remote, of course, because of the pandemic. this hearing will be unique as it will concentrate on the issue of section 230. that is the part of the law that protects websites from responsibility over what people post. now some people feel it also allows facebook and twitter and youtube too much freedom to take down content. there's a good argument that getting rid of section 230 would encourage websites to take down more not less. president trump and vice president biden and mark zuckerberg are all critical of section 230. the dow fell another 200 points tuesday, 220, continuing its downward trend as investors grow to appreciate how much worse the pandemic has gotten particularly in the midwest, 1,000 people, 132, died overnight nationwide. the resulting lockdowns are slowing the economy, of course. checking predictions wh

already set to testify before the senate commerce committee next week along with google ceo sundar pichai alleged bias and privacy issues. judiciary wants to hear from the tech ceos, about their quote, suppression or censorship of two recent "new york post" articles involving allegations about emails supposedly taken from a laptop belonging to hunter biden, of course joe biden's sown. twitter suspended the account of "new york post" and facebook limited sharing of the story on biden. "new york post" has not tweeted since october 10th. they lost the paper's account for violating the rules, they would reinstated if they deleted tweets that led to the account freeze. the motion for the subpoena also asked ceos to testify about any content moderation policies, practices or actions they may interfere or influence elections for federal office and other decisions to block content on their platforms. at this point no comment from twitter or facebook. this is a motion for a subpoena. when the subpoena goes out obviously the companies, charles, will have to respond. charles: cheryl. thank you very,

you have mark zuckerberg, jack dorsey, sundar pichai, the ceos of facebook, google and twitter up all on capitol hill defending basically this section of law that we're all learning about, section 230 of the communications decency act and they're basically going to say, at least i was readingly zuckerberg's comments a few minutes ago, came out with early comments, this whole thing encourages free expressions, allows the platforms, key word, to moderate content. how do you think this will go for them tomorrow back and forth with lawmakers which could have pretty big implications for the companies long term? >> i think they will defend themselves. i think the republicans will rip them but i think the big part is, this is supposed to be good faith efforts. they have legal immunity on good-faith effort on removing content and i can tell you their removing of content for the last couple of years has been what i would call suspect on the political front. that is are with i think the big fight is going to be on, you know, it is human nature on what gets removed. who is doing the removing? i

jack dorsey, sundar pichai, mark zuckerberg declined an invitation to testify before the senate commerceats voted to issue the subpoenas. >> but it should speak volumes that every member of this committee just voted to issue these subpoenas. big tech are the robber-barons of the 21st century. reporter: republican senators on the committee voted over privacy concerns but also censorship of conservative media has them upset. also they the possibility of changing section 230, that gives social media companies immunity from prosecution. democrats concerned with privacy as well but also the monopolistic power of big tech companies. here is the arguments from both sides. listen. >> following repeated and consistent reports of political bias and the suppression of certain viewpoints, i fear that section 2 '30s sweeping liability protections for big tech are stifling a true diversity of political discourse on internet. >> issue of privacy and media domination by the platforms when they put their foot on the throats of local news media is also an issue. reporter: no hearing has been set, melissa.

: yes, three of the most powerful ceos in the world, mark zuckerberg of facebook, google's sundar pichaind twitter's jack dorsey facing questioning by a senate commerce committee pushing for clarity on whether section 230 of the communications decency act which in essence shields internet companies from liability for user-generated content, whether that needs to be altered to put more responsibility on the companies themselves. what does it mean for the stocks, which have been real winners over the past year? wedbush securities managing director michael pachter and jay jacobs are here to weed through all of this. michael, to you first. what jumped out at you? what do you think was the most significant moments here? >> i think it's theater so the timing of this probably should have been shortly after the 2016 election and possibly again after the 2018 election. when we heard a lot of misinformation and a lot of theoretically others tampering with our elections and posting false narrative, and the senate waited until the week before the election. i'd say probably three or four people on th

i thought sundar pichai escaped the worst of it but on relative basis with jack dorsey and mark zuckerbergat about google and the risk of politics? >> yeah, there is risk there, from anybody watching yesterday's commentary or question and answer whatever you want to call that, dog fight, catfight, i mean there is risk there. yeah, i guess they're lucky that google is lucky and zuckerberg and dorsey were on the call that took a lot of emphasis off the company. that is the thing. if you go into the political space, depending what happens too, in a matter of days that could change the tone as well. so you have to factor that in as an investor to these companies. i think it is worse, maybe a little bit more for some facebooks and twitters. they're under more of a heat lamp than google going forward. there is willingness as i've seen the companies doing it so far, we've seen it for years. this is not the first political history these guys have had. they do okay, come out okay getting in front of congress. i don't think that is going to change. that is something consider going forward that could

mark zuckerberg, jack dorsey and sun car bsun carsundar pichai. they are expected to say law is vital for free expression on the internet. lawmakers have called into question the decisions. in the 8:00 a.m. hour, roger wicker is here. markets are down, dow futures falling once again this morning as investors are watching the rise in the global coronavirus cases, stimulus uncertainty with a deal unlikely until after the election and of course the potential for further lockdowns on the economy. dow industrials down 423 points, nasdaq is down 112, and the s&p lower by 42 points. it is another big earnings day, dow component boeing is out with its earnings this morning. we've got visa and amgen reporting after the bell tonight. nearly 40% of s&p 500 companies have reported earnings. more than 80% have beaten expectations. joining me now is chief investment officer, david bonson. also joining the conversation this morning, dagen mcdowell, also, the co-yo co-author of myw book, james freeman. thanks for being here. david, let me kick it off with you. yo

support and assist -- alix: we have been listening to the senate hearings with mark zuckerberg, sundar pichai, and jack dorsey. they are talking about what took them so long to label a tweet , which goesst china back to what we talked about before, how do you take bias out of content reporting? ,rom an investor perspective what matters is daily active users. monthly active users. bottom line affiliated gross revenue. does a change in section 230 or is ange in how content leaved affect this? eric: if you affect standard user interactions, you have fewer page views. there's less activity overall taking place on the site. second, the liability regime should raise costs, so there's just going to be a smaller profit margin remaining for the services. terms of how these companies would be structured where we to see a removal of 230 or a loosening of 230, depending on your point of view, how different would their operations be? how different with these companies look and feel in terms of their business models? eric: i go back to the notion of thinking about these services as something closer to netf

mark zuckerberg, jack dorsey, sundar pichai spending time on capitol hill this week.he u.s. senate commerce committee this has to do with section 230 of the 1996 communications decency act. protections social media enjoys being liable from users posts. two weeks after the election, september 17th is the date that when dorsey and zuckerberg will appear again before the senate judiciary committee headed by lindsey graham. this is about censorship and limited sharing of the "new york post" hunter biden story. despite getting grilled by lawmakers all three tech companies reporting earnings this week. it will be interesting, neil, to see how d.c. might have prayed into the bottom line. neil: man, you got that all in. susan li, thank you very, very much. dow down about25 points. we'll have more after this. neil: all right. it's all about the virus but not exclusively about the virus. concerns about a spike in cases in the united states and abroad. you know, they're going through rolling shutdowns in much of europe right now. good luck in italy, good luck in france, good luc

i find it ironic how yesterday pope francis declared that civil union is ok in pichai -- the catholicis -- my son is gay, so i understand the lgbt community. i am a single mom, so i oppose this nomination. host: the pope is highlighted in a story in the new york times. the film, which features interviews with the pope, delves into issues francis cares about most. adding that, homosexual people have the right to be in a family. that is in the washington times. a supporter from florida. charlene, you are next. caller: thank you. host: you are on, go ahead. caller: yes, i support the nomination of this charge because of her intellect, because of how she deals with situations as far as using only the law and not her own opinions . how she votes. she stands for the constitution. she is very intelligent. she stops and thinks about it. she doesn't even have to write down comments or things that they say. she has the intellect to address them and she is very unbiased in her opinions. she doesn't jump into the fight between what she thinks and what they think. host: when you hear comments such

big tech in focus ceo facebook as well as twitter, zuckerberg and dorsey as well as ceo google pichainforcement tomorrow morning for hearing section 230 of the act allows companies those companies to moderate potentially harmful content without repercussions they call themed bulletin board all opinions on bulletin board so they can't get sued thinking in terms of section 230 protected them from lawsuits joining me right now florida congressman member of the judiciary, antitrust subcommittee gregg steube great to see you. thanks very much for joining us tell me what you are expecting to hear from tech media giants, and does 230 enable bad behavior from big tech >> unfortunately,s i don't think you are going to hear anything of substance they are going to try to avoid pin pointing questions i am sure their counsel counsel said act like you don't know that was never written to you are level as ceo i don't think you get a lot of information from them but absolutely you are synopsis section 230 the way supposed to work was absolutely correct unfortunatelies that is not what they are he doi

will say erodings foundation of section 230 could collapse how we communicate on the internet and pichail say let me be clear, we approach our work without political bias, full stop republicans have introduced legislation that will limt twile shield to just specific circumstances. senators were supposed to start debating that bill in committee last week, but guys, now that has been punted until after the election as well >> ylan, this complaining about please don't change section 230, is that one of those don't throw me inhe briar patch issues i can't help but think that the more they complain, the more likely congress actually takes action >> they really don't want this to happen. they do see this as just an integral part of their business model and if they are open to massive amounts of litigation for the type of content that they pull down, that could be a significant risk to their bottom line and their ability to move forward. what i would say is that this has become an incredibly partisan issue there is a broad bipartisan big tech backlash, but this is an area that republicans have

they don't have to be the ones deciding this zuckerberg said that and it seemed clear that sundar pichaif the same mindset with that but if you are talking about regulations not coming, and because the democrats and republicans can't agree on this, you are going to continue to see this heat on the companies being brought by certain senators and probably higher up than that and what kind of backlash does that mean for these companies even if you don't get regulation, you will have a lot of americans who are mad at them, angry at them and potentially don't want to use their services >> yeah, look, to me, and i think we've talked about this before, the industry has very clear opportunities for collaboration on some of these difficult issues like what is defined as misinformation and how to treat it when it is introduced into the system so i do think there is a chance to balance the kind of content moderation flourish where you can go from no hold indication to ai powered human engineered efforts. but still have some consistency on fake news or a number of other content categories the indust

. ♪ >> wednesday, jack dorsey, sundar pichai, and mark zuckerberg testified in front of the senate science transportation committee on section 230 of the communications decency act. republicans say they are since hitting -- they are censoring and the democrats say it is hate speech, including interference by foreign countries. on c-span,hearings on demand as he's been dog door, or listen live at the c-span radio app. . >> "washington journal" continues. on thell this week "washington journal," we will focus on key campaign 2020 battleground states with political reporters and analysts on the ground. we will examine what has changed since 2016, what policy issues are motivating voters, and take a look at recent political trends that have given trends -- given clues on how people might vote in the next few days. today, we put the spotlight on ohio. sean richardson joins us for that conversation. -- seth richardson joins us for that conversation. to go, whatx days is the status? 2016: if you look at the election, donald trump won the state by eight percentage points, about 450,000 votes. all