'Who the hell elected you?' U.S. Senate tech hearing becomes political showdown

[webfact]

'Who the hell elected you?' U.S. Senate tech hearing becomes political showdown

By Nandita Bose and David Shepardson

 

Committee Chairman Roger Wicker (R-MS) speaks to U.S. Senator John Thune (R-SD) during the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee hearing 'Does Section 230's Sweeping Immunity Enable Big Tech Bad Behavior?', on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, U.S., October 28, 2020. Greg Nash/Pool via REUTERS

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A U.S. Senate hearing to reform an internet law and hold tech companies accountable for how they moderate content quickly turned into a political scuffle as lawmakers not only went after the companies but also attacked each other.

 

Lawmakers are split on ways to hold Big Tech accountable under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act - which protects companies from liability over content posted by users but also lets the firms shape political discourse.

 

Republican lawmakers used most of their time during the hearing to accuse the companies of selective censorship against conservatives. Democrats primarily focused on insufficient action against misinformation that interferes with the election.

 

In response to a limited number of questions discussing the law, the chief executives of Twitter Inc <TWTR.N>, Facebook Inc <FB.O> and Alphabet Inc's <GOOGL.O> Google said it was crucial to free expression on the internet. They said Section 230 gives them the tools to strike a balance between preserving free speech and moderating content, even as they appeared open to suggestions the law needs moderate changes.

 

All three CEOs also agreed the companies should be held liable if the platforms act as a publisher but denied being the referees over political speech - a claim that angered some Republicans.

 

Senator Ted Cruz went after Twitter's Jack Dorsey after the CEO said Twitter has no influence over elections.

 

"Who the hell elected you and put you in charge of what the media are allowed to report and what the American people are allowed to hear," Cruz said, referring to the platform's decision to block stories from the New York Post about the son of Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden. Ahead of the hearing, the senator released a picture on Twitter titled "Free Speech showdown Cruz vs Dorsey" that showed him and Twitter's Dorsey pitted against each other.

 

Democratic Senator Brian Schatz said he did not have any questions, calling the hearing "nonsense". "This is bullying and it is for electoral purposes," he said.

 

Other Democrats including Tammy Baldwin, Ed Markey and Amy Klobuchar also said the hearing was held to help President Donald Trump's re-election effort.

 

Trump, who alleges the companies' stifle conservative voices, tweeted "Repeal Section 230!" during the hearing.

 

Twitter's Dorsey, who drew the most amount of criticism from Republicans, warned the committee that eroding the foundation of Section 230 could significantly hurt how people communicate online. Pichai said Google operates without political bias and that doing otherwise would be against its business interests.

 

Zuckerberg, who briefly had difficulty with his internet connection at the start of the hearing, said he supports changing the law but also warned that tech platforms are likely to censor more to avoid legal risks if Section 230 is repealed. Biden has expressed support for revoking the law.

 

NO MORE "FREE PASS"

Republican Senator Roger Wicker, who chairs the committee, said it was important to shield companies from liability without giving them the ability to censor content they dislike.

 

"The time has come for that free pass to end," he said.

 

Wicker also criticized Twitter's decision to block the New York Post stories about Biden's son and Facebook's move to limit their reach.

 

He and other senators such as Cory Gardner went after Twitter for not taking down tweets from world leaders that allegedly spread misinformation but going aggressively after Republican President Donald Trump's tweets.

 

U.S. lawmakers are not the only ones pushing for reform. The European Union's executive Commission is drafting a new Digital Services Act that, in addition to tackling market abuses by dominant platforms, would also address liability for harmful or illegal content. Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager is due to unveil her proposals on Dec. 2.

 

(Reporting by Nandita Bose and David Shepardson in Washington; Additional reporting by Diane Bartz in Washington and Douglas Busvine in Frankfurt; editing by Kirsten Donovan and Lisa Shumaker)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-10-29

 

- Whatever you're going through, the Samaritans are here for you

- Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking COVID-19 updates

[candide]

7 minutes ago, webfact said:

but also warned that tech platforms are likely to censor more to avoid legal risks if Section 230 is repealed

This is an interesting argument.

[riclag]

sixty five times they censored  the POTUS  biden- 0

"Twitter, Facebook have censored Trump 65 times compared to zero for Biden, study says"

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/twitter-facebook-have-censored-trump-65-times-compared-to-zero-for-biden-study-says

 

 

dorsy your a  liberal activist!

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/06/why-jack-dorsey-will-never-appease-conservatives

Ya think the swing voted doesn't see this  bias lol!

Thanks webfact for your post

 

 

Edited October 29, 2020 by riclag
txt txt txt

[Susco]

3 minutes ago, riclag said:

sixty five times they blocked   the POTUS  dems-0

"Twitter, Facebook have censored Trump 65 times compared to zero for Biden, study says"

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/twitter-facebook-have-censored-trump-65-times-compared-to-zero-for-biden-study-says

 

Ya think the swing voted doesn't see this  bias lol!

dorsy your a  liberal activist

 

 

 

ONLY 65 times you will mean, as I reckon it should have been a multiple of that, given that most of his tweets and posts are lies and conspiracies.

[JusticeGB]

Freedom of the Internet doesn't mean that bosses of the Internet can impose their political views on posts they disagree with on political issues. 

[stevenl]

15 minutes ago, riclag said:

sixty five times they censored  the POTUS  biden- 0

"Twitter, Facebook have censored Trump 65 times compared to zero for Biden, study says"

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/twitter-facebook-have-censored-trump-65-times-compared-to-zero-for-biden-study-says

 

Ya think the swing voted doesn't see this  bias lol!

dorsy your a  liberal activist!

 

Thanks webfact for your post

 

That's what happens when you spout lies and conspiracies on public platforms. He should use his own.

He was lucky many lies went unchallenged, finally Twitter et al have taken their responsibilities serious.

[Sujo]

5 minutes ago, JusticeGB said:

Freedom of the Internet doesn't mean that bosses of the Internet can impose their political views on posts they disagree with on political issues. 

They can restrict the lies and thats what they do.

 

Stop lying and the posts stay up.

[JusticeGB]

3 minutes ago, Sujo said:

They can restrict the lies and thats what they do.

 

Stop lying and the posts stay up.

So stop all politicians posting?

[2530Ubon]

25 minutes ago, riclag said:

sixty five times they censored  the POTUS  biden- 0

"Twitter, Facebook have censored Trump 65 times compared to zero for Biden, study says"

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/twitter-facebook-have-censored-trump-65-times-compared-to-zero-for-biden-study-says

Person 'a' killed 40 people but person 'b' killed 0. The numbers mean nothing - the substance does. One person lies, another doesn't. One person killed, another person didn't.

[candide]

28 minutes ago, riclag said:

sixty five times they censored  the POTUS  biden- 0

"Twitter, Facebook have censored Trump 65 times compared to zero for Biden, study says"

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/twitter-facebook-have-censored-trump-65-times-compared-to-zero-for-biden-study-says

 

 

dorsy your a  liberal activist!

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/06/why-jack-dorsey-will-never-appease-conservatives

Ya think the swing voted doesn't see this  bias lol!

Thanks webfact for your post

 

 

Does Biden post messages such as the flu being more lethal then Covid-19? Or that children are totally immune?

 

According to you, which of Biden's tweets or Facebook posts should be censored or tagged?

[Sujo]

40 minutes ago, JusticeGB said:

So stop all politicians posting?

why. Show me bidens lies on twitter.

[allane]

Newspapers and magazines decide all the time not to cover certain people or events, not to follow up on some tips, or not to publish stories that someone else submits to them. The difference with the internet is that "stories" (posts) go "live to air" as we used to say when I worked in radio. The social media sites can only remove a story after it has already been viewed by some people.

Perhaps an alternative is some sort of "pending" status, where nothing is seen by the viewing public until it has been approved by the site operator.  That would require a lot of manpower, probably more than what the companies can afford.  That said, they are private companies, just like a newspaper or magazine.  I don't feel that they have any obligation to allow any unfiltered post from anyone anywhere.

[connda]

Much ado about nothing.  No changes will happen.  The US government can not stifle free speech but the Big Tech proxies can.  They provide a service for DC especially after all the correct politician are in place.

[connda]

1 hour ago, webfact said:

Democratic Senator Brian Schatz said he did not have any questions, calling the hearing "nonsense". "This is bullying and it is for electoral purposes," he said.

 

Translated:
"I'm in the pocket of Big Tech."

[candide]

It's quite obvious that Facebook is politically biased! ????

The top-performing link posts by U.S. Facebook pages in the last 24 hours are from: 1. Dios Es Bueno 2. Dan Bongino 3. Dan Bongino 4. Dan Bongino 5. Dan Bongino 6. Dan Bongino 7. Donald Trump For President 8. Fox News 9. Dan Bongino 10. David J. Harris Jr.

https://mobile.twitter.com/facebookstop10

 

[stevenl]

9 minutes ago, connda said:

Translated:
"I'm in the pocket of Big Tech."

He was exactly right. This hearing is just pandering to the electorate. It is too late though, this won't make a difference.

[onthedarkside]

A reported off-topic post and reply to it have been removed.

 

[onebir]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

"Who the hell elected you and put you in charge of what the media are allowed to report and what the American people are allowed to hear," Cruz said

"The public by adopting our platform en masse, while politicans, who should have been dealing with anti-trust issues, just stood by and took the fat campaign contributions we and other monopolies shovelled their way"

-- Jack Dorsey (if he told the truth)

[Chomper Higgot]

2 hours ago, riclag said:

sixty five times they censored  the POTUS  biden- 0

"Twitter, Facebook have censored Trump 65 times compared to zero for Biden, study says"

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/twitter-facebook-have-censored-trump-65-times-compared-to-zero-for-biden-study-says

 

 

dorsy your a  liberal activist!

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/06/why-jack-dorsey-will-never-appease-conservatives

Ya think the swing voted doesn't see this  bias lol!

Thanks webfact for your post

 

 

Trump only has to stop lying, hate baiting and disseminating dangerous misinformation (ie comply with the terms of service) and his posts won’t be deleted.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

He was exactly right. This hearing is just pandering to the electorate. It is too late though, this won't make a difference.

It’s not pandering to the electorate, most adults in possession of a balance mind understand that breaching terms of service has a consequence.

 

This charade is for the benefit of an audience of one.

 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, riclag said:

"Facebook official who said platform is reducing distribution of Hunter Biden story has worked for top Dems"

 

"Policy communications director previously worked for House Majority PAC and DCCC"

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/facebook-spokesperson-top-democrats-new-york-post

And who at Fox News rejected the Hunter Biden nonsense, did they too previously work for the Dems?!

[Jeffr2]

Cruz is a horrible politician.  Time for these swamp creatures to leave.  1,000 dead yesterday from the virus and this is what they are focusing on? Jeez.

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/05/28/media/trump-social-media-conservative-censorship/index.html

 

 

Quote

 

In fact, according to CrowdTangle, a data-analytics firm owned by Facebook, content from conservative news organizations dominates Facebook and often outperforms content from straightforward news organizations. 

Additionally, over the last month on Facebook, Trump has captured 91% of the total interactions on content posted by the US presidential candidates, according to CrowdTangle. Biden has captured only 9%.

 

 

https://www.newsmediaalliance.org/fake-news-oxford-study/

Conservatives Are Biggest Sharers of Fake News on Social Media, Study Says

[Tug]

16 hours ago, riclag said:

sixty five times they censored  the POTUS  biden- 0

"Twitter, Facebook have censored Trump 65 times compared to zero for Biden, study says"

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/twitter-facebook-have-censored-trump-65-times-compared-to-zero-for-biden-study-says

 

 

dorsy your a  liberal activist!

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/06/why-jack-dorsey-will-never-appease-conservatives

Ya think the swing voted doesn't see this  bias lol!

Thanks webfact for your post

 

 

Well if donald stopped lying inciting violence and spreading conspiracy bs along with a deadly virulent virus maybe they wouldent pull his posts joe Biden doesent behave in the same manner pretty simple imo I’m glad they are starting to realize their platforms have the power to corrupt and ruin a democracy 

[Jeffr2]

16 hours ago, riclag said:

sixty five times they censored  the POTUS  biden- 0

"Twitter, Facebook have censored Trump 65 times compared to zero for Biden, study says"

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/twitter-facebook-have-censored-trump-65-times-compared-to-zero-for-biden-study-says

 

 

dorsy your a  liberal activist!

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/06/why-jack-dorsey-will-never-appease-conservatives

Ya think the swing voted doesn't see this  bias lol!

Thanks webfact for your post

 

 

If you are a true conservative, you should read this.  Or, listen to it on tape.  But as a Fox News person, don't think you'd like this.

 

Fox News is a terrible source for good information. 

 

https://www.cfr.org/book/corrosion-conservatism

[animalmagic]

16 hours ago, riclag said:

sixty five times they censored  the POTUS  biden- 0

"Twitter, Facebook have censored Trump 65 times compared to zero for Biden, study says"

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/twitter-facebook-have-censored-trump-65-times-compared-to-zero-for-biden-study-says

 

 

dorsy your a  liberal activist!

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/06/why-jack-dorsey-will-never-appease-conservatives

Ya think the swing voted doesn't see this  bias lol!

Thanks webfact for your post

 

 

A shallow comparison to simply use number of times each have been censored and provides no real context; to do so would require providing information on how many Twitter and Facebook posts each has personally made on a daily and monthly basis.  Followed by an examination of the censored articles to see if they did contravene the posting policy; it would be better if this was done by a completely impartial observer who does not use either platform.

The study, as reported in the link, is amateurish in its methodology and conclusions; it seems designed to find ammunition rather than provide information.

[Jeffr2]

6 minutes ago, car720 said:

The real problem is not the internet.  It is the people who use it and unbelievably seem to have forgotten that in the end it is still just a computer game.  We now have 'social' behaviour of a kind that was unheard of not so long ago. E.g. courts making decisions based on 'social' behaviour.  Why can people not understand that 'social media' is just a game that we play on our computers and not a life reality.

Well put.  Sadly, a lot get their news from social media.  The worst place for news.  And, they don't fact check.  If they read something they like, true or not, they'll believe it.  Sometimes only reading the headline.  Crazy times.

[TKDfella]

17 hours ago, Sujo said:

They can restrict the lies and thats what they do.

 

Stop lying and the posts stay up.

Nope not true. I put a video of a certain Democrat saying something to which I politely, yes politely, disapproved of and I was warned that I would face a 30 day ban if I did it again. The post was taken down. 

[klauskunkel]

self deleted

Edited October 30, 2020 by klauskunkel

[TKDfella]

1 minute ago, klauskunkel said:

Jack Dorsey (if only): "And who the hell are you to swear at me, punk?!"

Where is the expletive?

[klauskunkel]

1 minute ago, TKDfella said:

Where is the expletive?

my mistake, already deleted