10月28日,美国两党参议员对Facebook、推特(Twitter)和谷歌(Google)进行了长达三个多小时的抨击,称这些科技巨头传播虚假信息、挑起暴力、压制保守派的声音。
参议院商业、科学和交通委员会(Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation)研究了1996年《通信规范法》中的第230条款,考虑该条款是否给予大型科技公司太多豁免权。据了解,该法律让互联网公司对用户发布的内容免责。尽管对具体原因存在分歧,两党议员都同意这项法律应该被修改甚至撤销。
民主党人一再批评这些公司未能删除其产品服务中的有害信息。同时,共和党人抨击这两家公司涉嫌压制保守观点并影响选举。
威斯康星州的共和党参议员罗恩•约翰逊说:“你们觉得大家不信任你们(指科技公司)。我跟大家一样,我也不信任你们。”
Facebook的首席执行官马克•扎克伯格、Alphabet的首席执行官桑达尔•皮查伊和推特的首席执行官杰克•多尔西在听证会上试图为公司辩护。他们一再表示,公司一直在积极处置有害内容。他们称,公司在政治上持中立态度,也在努力保卫着总统选举。
以下是听证会的要点:
激烈交锋
整场听证会有一大特点:议员们表达了他们的失望,而公司高管们则尽量表现得“不冒犯”。
科罗拉多州的共和党参议员科里•加德纳指责推特的首席执行官多尔西允许伊朗的阿亚图拉•阿里•哈梅内伊在推特上质疑大屠杀的推文一直保留,而特朗普总统的推文却老是被打上标记。
得克萨斯州的共和党参议员特德•克鲁兹批评推特屏蔽了《纽约邮报》(New York Post)一篇暗示拜登与乌克兰腐败有关的文章,却允许《纽约时报》(New York Times)持续报道特朗普的税收问题。在《纽约邮报》关于拜登的文章发表一天后,推特为其解除了屏蔽。克鲁兹更是直截了当地质问多尔西:推特是否有能力影响选举。
多尔西回答说:“不能。我们只是交流渠道的一部分。”克鲁兹反驳道:“多尔西先生,我觉得你的开场白听起来很荒谬。”
明尼苏达州的民主党参议员艾米•克罗布彻表示,她对谷歌对美国司法部反垄断诉讼的“不服”感到担忧。她还质疑Facebook有意向用户推送争议内容,以促使用户在平台上花费更多时间。
扎克伯格不同意克罗布彻的描述,他说Facebook会向用户展示被认为对他们有意义的内容,比如“当你的表姐有了孩子的时候”,克罗布彻马上打断了扎克伯格的话,说她讲的不是什么表姐和孩子,而是阴谋论等“损害性的”内容。
“第230条”之外
听证会原本计划集中讨论《通信规范法》第230条,但参议员们经常偏离主题,转而讨论数据隐私、反垄断和政治广告等其他议题。
推特、谷歌和Facebook的首席执行官们都表示,他们看到国内外的活动人士试图干预美国大选,而特朗普总统则将这个问题轻描淡写或置之不理。他们还表示,其已经与科技行业的其他部门和执法部门协调,定位并删除了这些贴文。
扎克伯格说:“联邦调查局向我们公司和公众发出警告:在大选前几天或几周内,注意黑客和行踪泄露的可能性。如果大选前莫名出现一些文档,应当怀疑其可能属于外国操纵大选的企图之一。”
科技公司的麻烦
这场关于科技行业的虚拟听证会,最终被一些暂时性的小问题所破坏。就连首席执行官也遇到了麻烦。
由于一个技术性问题,扎克伯格缺席了开庭陈述,导致听证会推迟了几分钟。在扎克伯格现身并解释说他无法接通电话后,委员会主席、共和党参议员罗杰•威克开玩笑说:“我知道这种感觉,扎克伯格先生。”
民主党参议员理查德•布卢门撒尔的声音在一句话说到一半时突然减弱。威克提醒了布卢门撒尔这个问题,听证会被迫暂停,直到他的声音恢复。
低潮时刻
听证会上,一些议员逐渐偏离主题。
例如,田纳西州的共和党参议员玛莎•布莱克本问皮查伊,谷歌是否还雇佣着软件工程师布莱克•莱莫因。此前被泄露的内部电子邮件显示,这位谷歌的员工在处理某些政治问题时,将布莱克本比作“恐怖分子”和“暴力暴徒”。“他说了很多关于我的不友善的话。”布莱克本认为他应该被解雇,暗示互联网公司在审查保守派言论时存在不公平的现象。
此外,还有一个“莫名其妙的时刻”:约翰逊参议员对多尔西感到失望,因为推特未能删除一条包含约翰逊勒死邻居狗的谣言推文。作者在推文中承认,狗被勒死是假的——可能是为了说明错误信息如何传播而编造的。
他极为严肃地抱怨这条推文称:“这肯定会影响我连任的可能性。”(财富中文网)
编译:杨二一
10月28日,美国两党参议员对Facebook、推特(Twitter)和谷歌(Google)进行了长达三个多小时的抨击,称这些科技巨头传播虚假信息、挑起暴力、压制保守派的声音。
参议院商业、科学和交通委员会(Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation)研究了1996年《通信规范法》中的第230条款,考虑该条款是否给予大型科技公司太多豁免权。据了解,该法律让互联网公司对用户发布的内容免责。尽管对具体原因存在分歧,两党议员都同意这项法律应该被修改甚至撤销。
民主党人一再批评这些公司未能删除其产品服务中的有害信息。同时,共和党人抨击这两家公司涉嫌压制保守观点并影响选举。
威斯康星州的共和党参议员罗恩•约翰逊说:“你们觉得大家不信任你们(指科技公司)。我跟大家一样,我也不信任你们。”
Facebook的首席执行官马克•扎克伯格、Alphabet的首席执行官桑达尔•皮查伊和推特的首席执行官杰克•多尔西在听证会上试图为公司辩护。他们一再表示,公司一直在积极处置有害内容。他们称,公司在政治上持中立态度,也在努力保卫着总统选举。
以下是听证会的要点:
激烈交锋
整场听证会有一大特点:议员们表达了他们的失望,而公司高管们则尽量表现得“不冒犯”。
科罗拉多州的共和党参议员科里•加德纳指责推特的首席执行官多尔西允许伊朗的阿亚图拉•阿里•哈梅内伊在推特上质疑大屠杀的推文一直保留,而特朗普总统的推文却老是被打上标记。
得克萨斯州的共和党参议员特德•克鲁兹批评推特屏蔽了《纽约邮报》(New York Post)一篇暗示拜登与乌克兰腐败有关的文章,却允许《纽约时报》(New York Times)持续报道特朗普的税收问题。在《纽约邮报》关于拜登的文章发表一天后,推特为其解除了屏蔽。克鲁兹更是直截了当地质问多尔西:推特是否有能力影响选举。
多尔西回答说:“不能。我们只是交流渠道的一部分。”克鲁兹反驳道:“多尔西先生,我觉得你的开场白听起来很荒谬。”
明尼苏达州的民主党参议员艾米•克罗布彻表示,她对谷歌对美国司法部反垄断诉讼的“不服”感到担忧。她还质疑Facebook有意向用户推送争议内容,以促使用户在平台上花费更多时间。
扎克伯格不同意克罗布彻的描述,他说Facebook会向用户展示被认为对他们有意义的内容,比如“当你的表姐有了孩子的时候”,克罗布彻马上打断了扎克伯格的话,说她讲的不是什么表姐和孩子,而是阴谋论等“损害性的”内容。
“第230条”之外
听证会原本计划集中讨论《通信规范法》第230条,但参议员们经常偏离主题,转而讨论数据隐私、反垄断和政治广告等其他议题。
推特、谷歌和Facebook的首席执行官们都表示,他们看到国内外的活动人士试图干预美国大选,而特朗普总统则将这个问题轻描淡写或置之不理。他们还表示,其已经与科技行业的其他部门和执法部门协调,定位并删除了这些贴文。
扎克伯格说:“联邦调查局向我们公司和公众发出警告:在大选前几天或几周内,注意黑客和行踪泄露的可能性。如果大选前莫名出现一些文档,应当怀疑其可能属于外国操纵大选的企图之一。”
科技公司的麻烦
这场关于科技行业的虚拟听证会,最终被一些暂时性的小问题所破坏。就连首席执行官也遇到了麻烦。
由于一个技术性问题,扎克伯格缺席了开庭陈述,导致听证会推迟了几分钟。在扎克伯格现身并解释说他无法接通电话后,委员会主席、共和党参议员罗杰•威克开玩笑说:“我知道这种感觉,扎克伯格先生。”
民主党参议员理查德•布卢门撒尔的声音在一句话说到一半时突然减弱。威克提醒了布卢门撒尔这个问题,听证会被迫暂停,直到他的声音恢复。
低潮时刻
听证会上,一些议员逐渐偏离主题。
例如,田纳西州的共和党参议员玛莎•布莱克本问皮查伊,谷歌是否还雇佣着软件工程师布莱克•莱莫因。此前被泄露的内部电子邮件显示,这位谷歌的员工在处理某些政治问题时,将布莱克本比作“恐怖分子”和“暴力暴徒”。“他说了很多关于我的不友善的话。”布莱克本认为他应该被解雇,暗示互联网公司在审查保守派言论时存在不公平的现象。
此外,还有一个“莫名其妙的时刻”:约翰逊参议员对多尔西感到失望,因为推特未能删除一条包含约翰逊勒死邻居狗的谣言推文。作者在推文中承认,狗被勒死是假的——可能是为了说明错误信息如何传播而编造的。
他极为严肃地抱怨这条推文称:“这肯定会影响我连任的可能性。”(财富中文网)
编译:杨二一
For more than three hours on October 28, Democrat and Republican senators took jabs at Facebook, Twitter, and Google, saying that they disseminate misinformation, spark violence, and suppress conservative voices.
The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation explored whether Section 230, a law that protects Internet companies from being held liable for what users post, gives Big Tech companies too much immunity. Lawmakers from both parties agree that the law should be changed or even revoked, though they differ about why.
Democrats repeatedly criticized the companies for failing to remove harmful information on their services. Meanwhile, Republicans hammered the companies for allegedly suppressing conservative views and influencing elections.
“You think that people don’t trust you,” said Sen. Ron Johnson, a Republican from Wisconsin. “I agree with that. We don’t trust you.”
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai, and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey spent the hearing trying to defend themselves from the attacks. Time and again, they said they're at war against harmful content, that they are politically neutral, and that they’re working to safeguard the presidential election.
Here are the highlights from the hearing:
Heated exchanges
The hearing was marked by intense exchanges between lawmakers expressing their frustration and executives trying to be as inoffensive as possible.
Sen. Cory Gardner, a Colorado Republican, took Dorsey to task for allowing Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei tweets questioning the Holocaust to remain untouched on Twitter while the service routinely flags President Trump’s tweets.
Republican Texas Sen. Ted Cruz criticized Twitter for blocking a New York Post article that suggested Biden had ties to corruption in the Ukraine while allowing a New York Times story about Trump's taxes to remain. One day after the Post article about Biden was published, Twitter reversed its stance on blocking it. But Cruz also asked Dorsey point-blank whether Twitter has the ability to influence elections.
Dorsey responded by saying, “No, we are one part of a spectrum of communication channels people have.” Cruz snapped back, "Mr. Dorsey, I find your opening answers absurd on their face."
Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar, from Minnesota, said she was concerned about Google’s “defiant” response to the Justice Department's antitrust lawsuit against it. She also questioned Zuckerberg about Facebook’s alleged interest in pushing divisive content to users because it provokes them to spend more time on the platform.
Zuckerberg disagreed with Klobuchar’s characterization, saying Facebook shows users content that it thinks will be meaningful to them like “when your cousin had her baby.” Klobuchar stopped Zuckerberg mid-sentence, saying she’s not talking about cousins and babies but rather the “corrosive” content like conspiracy theories.
Beyond Section 230
Though the hearing was supposed to focus on Section 230, senators often veered off topic to discuss other issues including data privacy, antitrust, and political ads.
The CEOs of Twitter, Google, and Facebook all said they continue to see foreign and domestic actors trying to interfere with the U.S. election, contrary to President Trump’s minimizing or dismissing the problem. The CEOs added that they have coordinated with the rest of the tech industry and law enforcement to identify and remove such posts.
“One of the threats the FBI has alerted our companies and the public to was the possibility of a hack-and-leak operation in the days or weeks leading up to this election,” Zuckerberg said. “That if a trove of documents appeared, that we should view that with suspicion that it might be part of a foreign manipulation attempt.”
Tech troubles
The virtual hearing about the tech industry ended up being marred by tech hiccups. Even the tech CEO had troubles.
Zuckerberg went AWOL from the opening statements because of a technical snafu that ended up delaying the hearing for a few minutes while the CEO tried to fix the problem. After Zuckerberg appeared, and explained he had trouble connecting, Sen. Roger Wicker, the Republican chairman of the committee, joked, “I know the feeling, Mr. Zuckerberg.”
Later, Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal’s audio was muted halfway through a sentence. Wicker alerted Blumenthal to the issue, and the hearing briefly paused until he was unmuted.
Low moments
Some lawmakers used the hearing to go off in odd tangents.
For example, Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee asked Pichai if Google still employed software engineer Blake Lemoine. In leaked internal emails, the Google employee likened Blackburn to a "terrorist" and a "violent thug" in her approach to certain political issues. “He has had very unkind things to say about me,” said Blackburn, implying that he should be fired and later suggesting that Internet companies unfairly censor conservative voices.
In another odd moment, Sen. Johnson became frustrated with Dorsey because Twitter did not remove a tweet that contained a lie about Johnson strangling his neighbor's dog. The author admitted in the tweet that the dog strangling was false, likely to show how misinformation can be spread.
“That could definitely impact my ability to get reelected,” he complained in complete seriousness about the tweet.