Mark Zuckerberg, Sundar Pichai, and Jack Dorsey were asked to respond to a commission of inquiry. At issue is fundamental internet law, Section 230.
The leaders of Facebook, Google, and Twitter on Wednesday faced more than 120 questions from senators from both North American political forces – Democrats and Republicans – about an important Internet law, Section 230, which is largely responsible for the growth of these companies. Basically, this law protects them from the responsibility for the content that users publish on each of the platforms, allowing them to moderate, for example, offensive publications or hate speech.
Several members of Congress expressed concern that this law was out of date and demanded that it be urgently reformed. On the other hand, there are these technological tycoons, who seem more restrained. Sundar Pichai, Google’s CEO, left a warning, suggesting the committee “be cautious” about any changes. Jack Dorsey, who leads Twitter, was blunter and said that not only would the erosion of the core of the law make “ collapse the way we communicate on the internet ”, but also prevent Twitter moderators from making users feel safe in the website.
Mark Zuckerberg ended up taking a different position. Facebook’s chief executive said that ” the Section 230 debate shows that people of all political trends are dissatisfied with the status quo ” and that people want to know that companies “are taking responsibility for fighting harmful content”. Zuckerberg continued: “Changing it is a significant decision. However, I believe that Congress should update the law to make sure everything is working as intended. ”
But instead of focusing on a discussion of a possible revision of the law, the CEOs of the three companies ended up facing pressure from both sides of the commission; Democrats call for more efficient and aggressive control of the sites in question and accuse Republicans of exerting pressure. Republicans, on the other hand, believe that companies should have a more indirect role in issues related to the political discourse.
The contradictory positions seem to put even more tension on the already difficult task of Zuckerberg, Pichai, and Dorsey in protecting their communication channels against abuse. The nearly four-hour session was also marked by a series of distortions, often by the legislators themselves.
Facebook, Twitter, and Google said, during the hearing, that Section 230 helped encourage freedom of expression while enabling content moderation. The CEOs of the three companies were concerned – they claim that any major changes to the law could result in less freedom of speech.
The testimonies take place four years after the episode that involved Russian agents in an attempt to provoke social unrest in order to influence the last presidential race. Throughout the session, the figures of Facebook, Google, and Twitter made it clear that major advances were made in the context of the content moderation practices of the respective companies, hiring more reviewers, spending millions of dollars, and improving technologies and policies so that can identify harmful content more aggressively and consistently across the network.
