What Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg did and didn’t address in hearings

Mark Zuckerberg’s apology trip reached a crescendo today when he went to Washington to affirm prior to 2 congressional panels. His very first look, on Tuesday, was with the Senate Judiciary and Commerce committees. The list below day, Zuckerberg dealt with the House Energy and CommerceCommittee

His objective: to assure lawmakers, financiers and users of the world’s biggest social media that Facebook’s CEO guided concerns connected to information personal privacy, phony news and foreign election tampering. The trip followed a scandal emerged last month including Cambridge Analytica, a digital consultancy that incorrectly utilized information from 87 million user accounts without authorization to assist its customers sway public belief– consisting of apparently dealing with behalf of the Donald Trump project in the 2016 governmental election.

< div class ="shortcode video v2" data-video-playlist="[{" id="" of="" our="" favorite="" moments="" from="" zuck="" congressional="" testimony="" ceo="" mark="" zuckerberg="" is="" grilled="" in="" washington.="" a="" few="" senators="" get="" some="" zingers.="" news="" video="">

Now playing:
Watch this:

Seven of our favorite moments from Zuck’s congressional…

2:42

The scandal raised questions about Facebook’s handling of personal information for its 2.2 billion users — and whether the social network can be trusted to protect all that data. The morality of Facebook’s business model even came into question: it’s an ad-supported site, which means it makes its money by targeting ads based on what it knows about its users.  

Congress was eager to get  Zuckerberg on the hot seat, for the chance to interrogate the 33-year-old billionaire on everything from data privacy to election integrity, and to get his take on whether it was time for the tech company to abide by new regulations.

Over almost 10 hours of combined hearings, Zuckerberg endured a skewering. He was asked — and declined to answer — what hotel he stayed in. The question, by Sen. Dick Durbin, was meant to drive home the point of individual privacy. Zuckerberg admitted he was among the up to 87 million people who had their data exploited by Cambridge Analytica. And over and over again, he apologized for Facebook’s transgressions, promising the company would take a “broader view of its responsibilities.”

Zuckerberg, trading in his trademark T-shirts and jeans for a suit and tie, also took the blame for all the negativity surrounding Facebook. His oft-repeated refrain: “I started Facebook, I run it, and I’m responsible for what happens here.”

He answered a lot of questions, but were they enough to give people the explanations they deserve? Days before the hearings, we posed six questions for Zuckerberg, hoping he’d answer them during the grilling from Congress. 

Let’s revisit them and see what he actually answered.

1. Why should Facebook users keep trusting and believing you when it comes to privacy?
Part of Facebook’s “breach of trust,” as Zuckerberg called it, was that the company knew about Cambridge Analytica’s violations three years ago, but it didn’t disclose them to the public until The New York Times and The Guardian were set to run stories. So the question of Facebook’s ability to be forthright about data misuse is reasonable.

On Tuesday, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a Democrat from Minnesota, asked Zuckerberg if he’d be willing to support legislation that would require him to notify users of a breach within 72 hours. Usually, when Zuckerberg was asked to support legislation, he dodged the question by saying “The details matter” and offered to follow up later. But in this case, Zuckerberg answered, “Senator, that makes sense to me.” (Then he offered to follow up later.)

But when it comes to privacy, Zuckerberg’s policies might not be enough. While he was testifying on Tuesday, a block away at the Capitol Building, protesters shouted, “Zuckerberg, you’re absurd!” and “The internet is getting dark, and we owe it all to Mark!”

The organizer of the protest, Daniel Taylor, said the campaign was called #DeleteFacebook, for the hashtag that began trending on Twitter with the onset of the Cambridge Analytica scandal. Facebook’s biggest problem is transparency, Taylor said. “They knew for three years [about Cambridge Analytica] They needed to get captured. Honestly, I’m not exactly sure they might get back our trust.”

2. Is Facebook simply too huge and complex for you and your group to handle?
Zuckerberg was asked a type of this concern a number of times. He consistently depended on the response that since there’s a lot material produced by over 2 billion individuals a month, Facebook is buying expert system innovation to assist cops what’s published on the network. But Zuckerberg has stated it will take years for AI to end up being reliable sufficient to do that. In the meantime, Facebook prepares to double the variety of individuals dealing with security and material small amounts to 20,00 0 in 2018 from 10,00 0 in 2015.

But on Wednesday, Zuckerberg stated even all those individuals would not suffice to patrol a website as big asFacebook

Rep David McKinley, a Republican from West Virginia, raised prohibited opioid listings on Facebook and asked Zuckerberg why the social media had not removed the listings.

“Respectfully, when there are tens of billions or 100 billion pieces of content that are shared every day, even 20,000 people reviewing it can’t look at everything,” Zuckerberg responded. “What we need to do is build more AI tools that can proactively find that content.”

McKinley doubled down on the seriousness of repairing the issue.

“You said before you were going to take them down, and you haven’t,” McKinley stated. “They’re still up.”

3. You’ve stated it will take “years” to repairFacebook Can we wait that long?
Zuckerberg formerly stated repairing Facebook would take years, despite the fact that he wants he might “snap his fingers” and it would be done. In their concerns, legislators mainly went into nitty-gritty information, instead of big-picture master strategies or stages of his strategy.

4. You’ve considered the concept of an independent “Supreme Court” for Facebook to settle disagreements about appropriate speech and material. What would that appear like?
Zuckerberg wasn’t particularly inquired about this, and he didn’t discuss it.

5. How’s the fact-checking effort going?
Zuckerberg just clearly discussed fact-checking of stories shared on the website as soon as at each hearing. The very first time remained in action to a concern fromSen Jeff Flake, a Republican from Arizona, who inquired about allegations Facebook is assisting to sustain genocide inMyanmar He stated part of their efforts because nation is fact-checking material.

At the House hearing,Rep Morgan Griffith, a Republican from Virginia, asked how Facebook identifies false information. Zuckerberg discussed reality checkers as part of that procedure.

There’s a concept that Facebook’s fact-checking efforts may be in chaos, which comes from a report by the Tow Center for Digital Journalism at Columbia’s Graduate School of Journalism that stated Facebook’s fact-checking partners desire more openness. In their report, reality checkers stated they discovered through a dripped e-mail that their efforts might minimize a phony story’s exposure on Facebook by 80 percent. But the reality checkers were hesitant of that figure and stated they had no proof to back it up.

Since the report, Facebook’s validated the 80 percent figure, however still hasn’t supplied a method. Zuckerberg didn’t offer anymore context in his hearings.

6. Big tech business– Facebook, Google and Twitter– have actually stated they collaborate when it concerns security and information security. Specifically, how has Facebook dealt with other business?
Zuckerberg didn’t speak about dealing with Google or Twitter on security.

He did speak about dealing with other huge tech business, however. G.K. Butterfield, a Democrat from North Carolina and member of the Congressional Black Caucus, asked how the market might collaborate to promote more variety in tech. He proposed a conference of the big-tech CEOs to set out a method.

“I think that that’s a good idea, and we should follow up on it,” Zuckerberg stated. “From the conversations that I have with my fellow leaders in the tech industry, I know that this something that we all understand that the whole industry is behind on.”

But wait, there’s more

In addition to those concerns, there are others Zuckerberg wasn’t asked– or that he evaded. Here are 4 of them. We brought these concerns as much as Facebook, however the business didn’t instantly react to an ask for remark.

1. Could Facebook alter its service design?
Facebook’s huge chest of user information is the factor it’s a $480 billion business. Last year, the social media made about $40 billion in advertisement income.

That user information is likewise the factor Facebook’s under such analysis now. Facebook meant perhaps presenting a paid variation of the service that would probably not be ad-supported, however Zuckerberg stated, “There will always be a version of Facebook that is free.”

Still,Rep Anna Eshoo, a Democrat from California, asked point blank, “Are you willing to change your business model in the interest of protecting individual privacy?”

Zuckerberg responded, “Congresswoman, I’m not sure what that means.” The 2 accepted follow up.

2. What about that whistleblower?
Out of whatever gone over, there was one noteworthy name that wasn’t discussed throughout the hearings, either by Zuckerberg or the legislators: ChristopherWylie

Wylie is the entire factor Facebook remains in this firestorm. If the previous Cambridge Analytica expert had not dripped the story, it’s not likely Facebook would have revealed anything about its users’ information going out into the world.

Wylie stated throughout a Q&A last month that he legally does not comprehend why the social media is, in his viewpoint, attempting to frame the story versus him. “I’m actually really confused by Facebook. I don’t really understand what their play is right now,” he stated. “They make me out to be this suspect, or some kind of nefarious person.”

Zuckerberg didn’t provide him any responses today.

3. Is it actually okay that Facebook can track you online even when you’re not visited?
Sen Roger Wicker, a Republican from Mississippi, asked Zuckerberg about reports that Facebook can track a user’s internet browser history when they’re not signed into the network.

It’s real. That’s in fact among the most effective aspects of Facebook’s “Like” button. It’s not simply for child pictures. When you check out a website that has Like buttons– shopping pages or posts, for instance– Facebook gets information on when you checked out the page, in addition to “browser-related” info, according to Facebook’s aid center. This occurs even if you’re not logged into Facebook– though if you are visited, Facebook will get more of your information, the business states.

Facebook likewise has actually something called “Pixel” to determine how reliable advertisements are, by offering Facebook info on when you checked out specific websites and took particular actions, like purchasing something.

But when he was asked by Wicker, Zuckerberg appeared unpleasant. “I want to make sure I get this accurate so it would probably be better to have my team follow up afterwards,” he stated.

4. Where does Facebook base on personal privacy policy?
Zuckerberg got several concerns about making information collection an opt-in option. But he was likewise pushed about the personal privacy of minors (the youngest age to develop a Facebook account is 13, according to the business’s guidelines).

Sen Edward Markey, a Democrat from Massachusetts, raised a piece of legislation he’s dealing with that would present a kids’s online personal privacy “bill of rights.” It would need adult authorization prior to Facebook information on anybody under 16 might be “reused for any other purpose other than that which was originally intended.”

Zuckerberg stated he concurred “as a general principle,” however would not dedicate to supporting the legislation. “I don’t know if we need a law,” he stated.

Do you have concerns you want Zuckerberg would have responded to? Let’s hear them.

Cambridge Analytica: Everything you require to learn about Facebook’s information mining scandal.

iHate: CNET takes a look at how intolerance is taking control of the web.