mr. zuckerberg: vonnie: yes -- mr. zuckerberg: yes. rep. doyle: emerging from practices the ftc said were unfair and deceptive, one was making facebook users private information public without notice or consent. claiming that facebook certify the security and integrity of certain apps when it did not. it enabled developers to access information about a user and their friends, correct? mr. zuckerberg: i am not familiar with all of the things the ftc said. rep. doyle: this is part of the consent decree. i am concerned that despite this consent decree, facebook allow developers access to an unknown number of users on facebook for years. potentially hundreds of millions and more. not only allowed but partnered with individuals and app developers such as aleksandr kogan who sold the data on the open market and the cup -- to cambridge analytica. plant tosaid that you audit tens of thousands of developers that may have been improperly harvesting data, and you said you would give all facebook users access to user controls that will be made availabl

mr. zuckerberg: mr. chairman, thank you. as i mentioned, we're now conducting a full investigation into every single app that had access to a large amount of information, before we lockdown platform to prevent developers from accessing this information around 2014. we believe that we're going to be investigating many apps, tens of thousands of apps, and if we find any suspicious activity, we're going to conduct a full audit of those apps to understand how they're using their data and if they're doing anything improper. if we find that they're doing anything improper, we'll ban them from facebook and we will tell everyone affected. as for past activity, i don't have all the examples of apps that we've banned here. but if you'd like, i can have my team follow up with you after this. mr. grassley: you have ever required an audit to ensure the deletion of improperly transferred data and if so, how many times? mr. zuckerberg: mr. chairman, yes, we have. i don't have the exact figure on how many times we have.

mr. zuckerberg: i do notmr. zuckerberg: -- mr. zuckerberg: i do not. rep. sarbanes: president trump at 5.9 million advertisements approved and secretary clinton at 66,000 ads. times as much on the current campaign which raises questions about whether the advertisement approval processes or inappropriately bypassed in the final months and weeks of the election by the trump campaign. i am worried the embeds may have facilitated that. can you say with certainty that facebook or any facebook employees working at campaign embeds did not grant special approval rights to the trunk campaign to allow that to upload a large number of facebook ads in the final stretch? mr. zuckerberg: we apply the same standard to all campaigns. rep. sarbanes: can you say that there were not special approval rights granted? there were not special approved rival -- rights granted from the support folks in the donald trump campaign? mr. zuckerberg: yes. when i am saying -- rep. sarbanes: i will take you at your word. the reason this is important and we need to get to the bottom of it, i

mr. zuckerberg: thank you. before 2014 when we announced the change, someone could sign into an app and share their data and also share basic information about their friends. in 2014 commit a change was we set you will not be able to share any information about your friends. if you and your friend both happen to be playing a game app could have information from both of you because you both signed anin. other than that, people wouldn't be able to share information from their friends. and the apphis poll ultimately sold it to cambridge analytica. it wouldn't be possible today. the act might have information ifut 300,000 people -- , the00 people use this app app might have information about 300,000 people. >> i have to give you all the credit in the world -- i can , when thethe tone representative from illinois said who is going to protect us from facebook -- that threw me back in my chair. that was certainly aggressive. and out of bounds kind of comment. just my opinion. i was interviewed by folks during the brea

mr. zuckerberg: rep. eshoo: will facebook offered to all of its users a blanket opt in to share privacy data with third-party users? mr. zuckerberg: congresswoman, yes to him that is how our platform works. you have to opt in to sign into any app before you use it. rep. eshoo: let me just add that it is a minefield in order to do that. you have to make it transparent, clear, in pedestrian language just once, this is what we will do with your data, do you want this to happen or not. i think that this has been blurred. i think you know what i mean by it. are you aware of other third-party information mishandling that has not been disclosed? congresswoman, no, although we are currently going through the process of investigating -- rep. eshoo: you are not sure? mr. zuckerberg: had access to a large amount of data. rep. eshoo: what does that mean? mr. zuckerberg: it means that we will look into every asset that had an access to a large amount of acid -- rep. eshoo: you are not aware. i only have one minute. wa

mr. zuckerberg: senator, i believe so. warrant can you get a to join a page, to be on a page come up pretending you are a separate user, to like, can the government do that, the fbi, anybody? mr. zuckerberg: i am not sure i fully understand. senator: we can follow up because i have one final question. a couple days ago facebook talked about it would label advocacy as political ads. for instance, if the sierra club were to run a climate change at, that would be labeled a political ad. if the chamber of commerce that would have an impact on climate change impact, that would be labeled as political, which is different than current standards of what is political and what is labeled advocacy. is it your intent to label things political that would be in contradiction to federal law? mr. zuckerberg: senator, the intent of what we are trying to is, theis -- get at foreign election interference we have seen has taken more the an directssue ads th political advertising. isause of that we think it important to extend verification and

mr. zuckerberg, welcome. facebook uses some of the most advanced data processing technologies on the planet, correct? >> we pride ourselves in doing good, technical work. planet, correct? >> so we pride ourselves on doing good technical work, yes. >> thank you. and you use these technologies to flag spam, identify offensive content and track user activity, right? >> among other things. >> 2015 when the guardian first reported on cambridge analytica using facebook user data, was that the first time facebook learned about these allegations? >> congressman, in 2015 when we heard that the developer on our platform aleksandr kogan -- >> was that the first time you heard about it? when the guardian made the report was the first time you learned about it. >> yes. >> do you routinely learn about these violations through the press? >> congressman, sometimes we do. i generally think that -- >> let me ask you this: you had the capability to audit developers use of facebook user data and do more to prevent these abuses,

mr. zuckerberg is going to determine whether those bills passed or not. he can go home and spend 10 may $lobbyists or he can go back, and use his considerable talent and authority and impressive mind to solve this problem. let's start with the user agreement. i say this gently. his user agreement socks. sucks. spot me 75 iqy points and still win and he knows as much as i know that the purpose of that facebook user agreement is to cover facebook's were on. i believe he can do better. zuckerberg, would go back home until my $1200 an hour lawyer, you you all take a break and let us take a crack at writing this thing and non-swahili english. that is a start. then i would recommend he sit-down and right all of us a letter within the next two weeks about what additional privacy controls he is going to implement. he says he is willing to do it, let's get specific. is he going to give me the right to erase my data? is he going to give me better control of my data? is he going to agree to contact me before he shares my data? is he going to give me the right to cha

mr. zuckerberg has arrived. members arriving in the large conference room at that house office building. some 55 members in this committee in the u.s. house. and they too will probably cover many of the issues covered yesterday, including data privacy, the cambridge analytica, the political firm in britain, abusing -- reportedly abusing some 87 million facebook users' data. issues including so-called fake news and criticisms of facebook on censoring conservative views came up in yesterday's hearing. today's hearing starting in about 15 minutes. and today's hearing beginning with news circulating around capitol hill that paul ryan, the house speaker, will announce his retirement this morning with a news conference set for 10:00 a.m. eastern. we want to let you know we will cover that news conference live over on c-span.org. brendan buck, counselor to house speaker ryan, released a statement saying this morning he shared with colleagues that this will be his last year as a member of the house. he will serve out hi

mr. zuckerberg: yes. rep. cardenas: something was brought to my attention recently that apparently facebook does in information toy augment the information you have on users to build around them. we recentlyrg: announced we are stopping working with data brokers as part of the at system. rep. cardenas: but you did do that to build your company? mr. zuckerberg: it is an industry practice, and examining our systems, we decided is not a think will want to be a part of. rep. cardenas: but you did engage in that as well? mr. zuckerberg: yes, until we announced we are shutting it down. rep. cardenas: it is my understanding that when the guardian reported on the cambridge analytica consumer issue, facebook started to see them they went forward with the story. did something like that happen? believeerberg: i don't -- i believe they may have been a factual inaccuracy. rep. cardenas: you checking the guardian and saint you do not to go with that story because it is not 100% factual? mr. zuckerberg: yes. rep. cardenas: t

good morning, mr. zuckerberg. first, i believe that our democratic institutions are undergoing a stress test in our country and i believe that american companies owe something to america. i think the damage done to our democracy relative to facebook are uncalculable. enabling the cynical manipulation of american citizens for the purpose of influencing an election is deeply offensive and it's very dangerous. putting our private information on offer without concern for possible misuses i think is simply irresponsible. i invited my constituents going into the weekend to participate in this hearing today by submitting what they want to ask you, and so my questions are theirs and, mr. chairman, i'd like unanimous consent to place all of their questions in the record. >> without objection. >> so these are a series of just yes/no questions. do you think you have a moral responsibility to run a platform that protects our democracy? ? yes or no? >> congresswoman, yes. >> have users of facebook who are caught up in the camb

chairman welcome, mr. zuckerberg. thank you very much here i was thinking about facebook and how you develop your platform from a social platform amongst friends and colleagues and joining a community and a lot was based upon trust you knew your friends, right but that evolved into this business platform and one of the pilars still was trust and i think you would all -- i think everyone would agree trust is in short supply here and that's why we're here today. now you've constantly maintained that consumers own the data they provided to facebook and should have control over it and i appreciate that. i just want to understand more about what that means. to me, if you own something, you ought to have say about how and when it's used but to be clear i don't just mean pictures, elon musk addresses, facebook groups or pages i understand the data and information consumers provided to facebook can be and perhaps is used by algorithms to form assumptions and inferences about users to better target ads to the individuals. now,

mr. zuckerberg, welcome. thanks for being here. mr. zuckerberg, does facebook consider itself a neutral public forum? >> senator, we consider ourselves to be a platform for all ideas. >> let me ask the question again. does facebook consider itself to be a neutral public for number? are you a first amendment speaker expressing your view or are you a neutral public forum allowing everyone to speak? >> senator, here's how we think about this. i don't believe that -- there are certain content that clearly we do not hall lou, right. hate speech, terrorist content, nudity, anything that makes people feel unsafe in the community. from that perspective that's why we generally try to refer to what we do as a platform for all ideas. >> the time is constrained. it's just a simple question. the predicate for section it 30 immunity under the cda is that you're a neutral public forum. do you consider yourself a neutral public forum or are you engaged in political speech which is your right under the first amendment in. >> well, senator, our goal is

good morning, mr. zuckerberg. first, i believe that our democratic institutions are undergoing a stress test in our country and i believe that american companies owe something to america. i think the damage done to our democracy relative to facebook are uncalculable. enabling the cynical manipulation of american citizens for the purpose of influencing an election is deeply offensive and it's very dangerous. putting our private information on offer without concern for possible misuses i think is simply irresponsible. i invited my constituents going into the weekend to participate in this hearing today by submitting what they want to ask you, and so my questions are theirs and, mr. chairman, i'd like unanimous consent to place all of their questions in the record. >> without objection. >> so these are a series of just yes/no questions. do you think you have a moral responsibility to run a platform that protects our democracy? ? yes or no? >> congresswoman, yes. >> have users of facebook who are caught up in the camb

thank for your testimony, mr. zuckerberg first of all, i wanted to follow up with mr. mckinley's testimony. this is bad stuff, mr. zuckerberg, with regard to the illegal on line pharmacies when are -- those ads. i mean, when are you going to take those off i think we need an answer to that we need to get these off as soon as possible. can you give us a clear answer as to when these pharmacies? we have an epidemic here with regard to the opioids. i think we are owed a clear answer, a definitive answer, as to when these ads will be off, off line >> congressman, if people flag those ads for us, we will take them down now. >> now >> yes, by -- >> at the end of the day. >> if people flag them for us we will look at theme. >> you have knowledge of those ads now. you have knowledge of those ads. will you begin to take them down today. >> the ads that are flagged for us we will review and take down if they violate our policies which i believe the ones that you are talking about. >> if they are illegal, they clearly violate your policy. >> what needs to happen is not just us re

zuckerberg,>> mr. you so committed that facebook has o grown so big so fast.no it's no longer a company that ad you started in your dorm room. instead, it's one of the great u american successcce stories. that much influence comes with enormous social responsibility on which you have failed to act and to protect and to consider. shouldn't facebook by default protect users' information? why is the onusth on thee user opt in to privacy and security e settings? >> congressman, as i ngsaid, evg time a person chooses to share,er they are going to the service choosing they want to share a photo, write a message and every time there's's a contl right there, not buried in the i settings somewhere but right there when they are posting about whoo they want to share i with. >> mr. zhuszh berks i only have a fewmo more second. november 2017 propublica reported that facebook was still allowing housing advertisers to systematically exclude advertisements to specific racial groups and explicitly pro -- this isis one

welcome back, mr. zuckerberg. on the subject of bans, i just wanted to explore a little bit what these bans mean. obviously facebook has been done considerable reputational damage by its association with alexander kogan and with cambridge analytica which is one of the reasons you are having this enjoyable afternoon with us. your testimony says that alexander kogan's app. has been banned. has he also been banned. >> yes, my understanding is he has. >> so if he were to open up another account under a name and you were able to find it out, that would be closed down? >> senator, i believe we are preventing him from building any more app.s. >> does he have a facebook account, still? >> senator, i believe the answer to that is no but can i follow up with you afterwards. >> okay. and with respect to cambridge analytica, your testimony is that first you required them to formally certify that they had deleted all improperly acquired data. where did that normal certification take place? that sounds kind of like a quay we ha

mr. zuckerberg, welcome. thanks for being here. mr. zuckerberg, does facebook consider itself a neutral public forum? >> senator, we consider ourselves to be a platform for all ideas. >> let me ask the question again. does facebook consider itself to be a neutral public for number? representatives of your company have given conflicting answers on this. are you a first amendment speaker expressing your view or are you a neutral public forum allowing everyone to speak? >> senator, here's how we think about this. i don't believe that -- there are certain content that clearly we do not allow. hate speech, terrorist content, nudity, anything that makes people feel unsafe in the community. from that perspective that's why we generally try to refer to what we do as a platform for all ideas. >> the time is constrained. it's just a simple question. the predicate for section 230 immunity under the cda is that you're a neutral public forum. do you consider yourself a neutral public forum or are you engaged in political speech which is your right

thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, mr. zuckerberg for being here. plenty of anecdotal examples including family members of mine who will be verbally discussing items, never having actually been on the internet at this time. the next time they get on facebook and other online apps, ask for things they are verbally discussing with each other will show up. i know you said in the senate that facebook doesn't listen, specifically listen to what people are saying to their phone, whether that is a google phone or apple or another one. the other day, my mother-in-law and i were discussing her brother who had been deceased for about 10 years and later on that evening on her facebook site, she had set to music in memoriam picture collage that came up on facebook, specifically to her brother and that happened the other night. so if you are not listening to us on the phone, who is then do you have specific contracts with these companies that will provide data that is being acquired verbally or through our phones are now through things like alexa or their produc

what do you want to hear from mr. zuckerberg? the truth. mr. zuckerberg is on capitol hill right now, lobbying members of congress, and that is certainly hiprerogative. i am not really interested in being lobbied. i am interested in solving the problems. i come in peace. i don't want to hurt facebook or regulate them have to death. but i think it is clear that our digital pr milk and honey.t all there are some problems. there is a privacy problem.e th a propaganda problem. there ma be antitrust issues we need to talk about. i think it is swell that i can hago on facebook and seemy high school buddies had for dinner saturday night, but is it a fair bargain that in return, i have to give up my perdata to just about anybody in the milky way that facebook wants to sell it ? it doesn't sound like a good deal. katty: a lot of people are asking that same question. you say you come in peace, but does congress ha to wield at least the threat of regulations in order to get the truth from mr. zuckerberg? >> mr. zuckerberg is a bri young man. he has built

thank you, mr. zuckerberg. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. zuckerberg, i wanted to follow up on a statement that you made shortly before the break just a few minutes ago. you said that there's some categories of speech. some types of content that facebook would never want to have any part of, and it takes active steps to avoid disseminating, including hate speech, nudity, racist speech. i assume you also meant terrorist acts, threats of physical violence, things like that. beyond that, would you agree that facebook ought not be putting its thumb on the scale with regard to the content of speech assuming it fits out of one of those categories that's prohibited? >> senator, yes. there are generally two categories of content that we're very worried about. one are things that could cause real world harm, so terrorism certainly fits into that. self-harm fits into that. i would consider election interference to fit into that, and those are the types of things that we -- i don't really consider there to be much discussion around whether those are go

mr zuckerberg made some interesting concessions. notably he said members of his team had been interviewed by the office of special counsel robert mueller in his ongoing investigation into russian meddling, and also mr zuckerberg didn't rule out the idea that facebook could one day be a paid service, although he did say there would always be a free version of the site available to users. dave lee, bbc news, in washington. president donald trump has spoken to british prime minister theresa may about a coordinated response to the suspected chemical attack in syria's rebel held town of douma. they vowed to end such attacks in syria and are weighing the options of military action against the syrian government. chemical weapons inspectors are planning to visit the site of the alleged attack. here's our middle east editorjeremy bowen. outside damascus, the war goes on. this was the aftermath of the conventional attack in idlib, the rebel held province to which many fighters and families have been transferred. only a small fraction of the h

mr. zuckerberg, thank you for being here. you have a real opportunity this afternoon to lead the industry and demonstrate a meaningful commitment to protecting individual privacy. we have learned over the past few months, and we learned a great deal that is alarming. foreign actorsw are abusing social media platforms, like facebook, to interfere in the elections and take millions of americans personal information without their knowledge in order to manipulate public opinion, and target individual voters. specifically, on february 16, special counsel mueller issued an indictment against the russian taste internet research agency, and 13 of its employees, for interfering operations targeting the united states. indictment, 37 page we learned the ira rent a coordinated campaign through 470 facebook accounts and pages. the campaign included ads and false information to create this court and harm to secretary clinton's campaign. the content was seen by an estimated 157 million americans. 17, newsater on march broke that cambridge a

welcome back mr. zuckerberg. on the subject of bans, i wanted to explore a little bit what these bans mean. obviously, facebook has been done considerable reputational damage by association with alexander kogan and with cambridge analytica, which is one of the reasons you're having this enjoyable afternoon with us. your testimony says that alexander kogan's app has been banned. has he also been banned? >> yes, my understanding is he has. >> so if he were to open up another account under a name, and you were able to find it out, that would be closed down? >> senator, i believe we are preventing him from building any more apps. >> does he have a facebook account still? >> senator, i believe the answer to that is no, but i can follow up with you afterwards. >> okay. and with respect to cambridge analytica, your testimony is that first you required them to formally certify they deleted all improperly acquired data. where did that formal certification take place? that sounds kind of like a quasi official thing to form

mr zuckerberg is shy, awkward and usually wears t—shirts and jeans. here he was looking looking nervous schoolboy in an ill—fitting uniform. he recognised the company made a huge error in a not to tell users that they had been targeted by cambridge analytica. why didn't you inform those 87 million? we did take action. we took down the app. we demanded that both the app developer and cambridge analytica delete and stop using any data that they had. they told us they did this. in retrospect, it is clearly a mistake to believe them. that was the second act of repentance. next up, he accepted that he was wrong to describe the idea of russian interference in the presidential election as crazy. one of my greatest regrets in running the company is that we were slow in identifying the russian information operations in 2016. we expected them to do a number of more traditional cyber attacks, which we did identify and notify the campaigns they were trying to hack into them, but we were slow in identifying the type of new information operations. as one senator

mr. zuckerberg, thank you for being here. you have a real opportunity this afternoon to lead the industry and demonstrate a meaningful commitment to protecting individual privacy. we have learned over the past few months and we've learned a great deal that is alarming. we've seen how foreign actors are abusing media platforms like facebook to interfere with elections and take millions of americans personal information without their knowledge in order to manipulate public opinion and target individual voters. specifically, on february the 16th, special counsel mueller issued an indictment against the russia-based internet research agency and 13 of its employees for interfering operations targeting the united states. through this 37-page indictment we learned that the ira ran a coordinated campaign through 470 facebook accounts and pages. the campaign included ads and false information, to create discord and harm to secretary clinton's campaign and the content was seen by an estimated 157 million americans. a month later on mar

senator nelson. >> thank you mr. chairman. mr. zuckerberg good afternoon. let me just cut to the chase. if you want other social media companies do not get your act in order, none of us are going to have any privacy anymore. that is what we are facing. we are talking about personally identifiableso information thats not capped by the social media companies from fast--theft of value we have in america teen our personal privacy, we won't have it anymore. it's the advent of technology and of course all of us are part of it. from the moment that we wake up in the morning until we go to bed we are on those handheld tablets and on line companies like facebook are tracking our act to the these and collecting information. facebook has a responsibility to protect those personal information. we had a good discussion yesterday. we went over all of this. you told me that the company had failed to do so. it's not the first time that facebook has mishandled its users information. the ftc found that facebook's privacy policies had deceived users in the past and in the pre

what do you want to hear from mr. zuckerberg? >> the truth. mr. zuckberg is on capitol hill right now, lobbying members of congress, and that is certainly his prerogative. i am not really interested in being lobbied. i am interested in solng the problems. i come in peace. i don't want to hurt facebook or regulate them have to death. but i think it is clear tr digital promised land is not all milk and honey. there are some problems.er is a privacy problem. there is a propaganda problem. there may be antitrust issues we need to talk about. i think it is swell that i can go on facebook and see what my high school buddies had for dinner saturday nigh is it a fair bargain that in return, i have to give up my personal data to jusabout anybody in the milky way that facebook wants to sell it to? it doesn't sound like a good deal. katty: a lot of people are asking that sameuestion. you say you come in peace, but does congress have to wield at least the threat of regulations in order to get the truth om mr. zuckerberg? mr. zuckerberg is a bright young man.

mr zuckerberg made some interesting concessions. notably, he said members of his team had been interviewed by the office of special counsel robert mueller in his ongoing investigation into russian meddling, and also mr zuckerberg didn't rule out the idea that facebook could one day be a paid service, although he did say there would always be a free version of the site available to users. dave lee, bbc news, in washington. russia and the united states have failed to win support at the un security council for rival proposals on an investigation into chemical weapons use in syria. the threat of military action is looming in response to a suspected chemical attack in rebel—held douma. president donald trump says he's spoken to british prime minister theresa may about a coordinated response. on the ground in syria, chemical weapons inspectors are planning to visit the site of the alleged attack. here's our middle east editorjeremy bowen. outside damascus, the war goes on. this was the aftermath of the conventional attack in idlib, the

firstly, mr. zuckerberg was far more eloquent than i expected. and i thought he held him eve quite well. secondly, there were questions asked of him that were patently unfair about tiny little numbers that he was expected to know, and there was no way that he could possibly have known it. so many permeatations to the problems that could take place with facebook that it was beyond the ability of any human being to be able to answer those questions. and, thirdly and last, he was asked a number of questions both about facebook's dealing with christian information and with racial information. i think he should have said a couple of things. i think he should have said, number one, told the congress that the amount of money that they were going to give or use to rectify the problems. and then in addition, most people i guess could gather that mr. zuckerberg is jewish, so that is well-known. the fact that he's white is quite obvious. but the fact that he is married to an asian and has a mixed child should show the type of person he is, that he is not le

welcome, mr. zuckerberg. do you know who palinteer is. >> some people have referred to them as stafford analytical. do you agree. >> senator, i have not heard that. >> do you think palanteer analytical press reports how to do these tactics? >> senator, i don't know. >> do you think palenteer data from facebook? >> senator, i'm not aware of that. >> okay. >> do you think that during the 2016 campaign as cambridge analytica was providing support to the trump campaign under project alamo were there any facebook people involved in that sharing of technique and information? >> senator, we provided support to the trump campaign similar to what we provide to any advertiser or campaign who asks for it. >> so that was a yes? is that a yes? >> senator, can you repeat the specific question? i just want to make sure i get specifically what you are asking. >> during the 2016 campaign, cambridge analytica worked with the trump campaign to refine tactics and were facebook employees involved in that? >> senator, i don't know

. >> mr. zuckerberg, i come in peace. [laughter] >> i don't want to have to vote regulate facebook, but by of that ll, a lots depends on you. i'm a little disappoint indeed this hearing today. i just don't feel like we're connecting. o let me try to lay it out for you from my point of view. a really smart guy and i think you have built extraordinary american lot ny and you have done a of good. some of the things you have been magical.o are utopia we d digital have discovered has mine fields. there are some impurities in the facebook punch bowl. they got to be fixed. fix them.k you can now, here is what is going to happen. a whole going to be bunch of bills introduced to regulate facebook. they pass you whether or not. spend $10 back home, million on lobbyists and fight go back home and help us solve this problem and, too, one is a privacy problem, one is a propaganda problem. privacy rt with the problem first. let's start with your user agreement. here is what everybody has been today and i l you say this gently. user agr

>> thank you, mr. chairman, mr. zuckerberg, good afternoon. let me just cut to the chase, if you and other social media companies do not get your act in order, none of us are going to have any privacy anymore. that's what we're facing. we're talking about personally identifiable information that if not kept by the social media companies from theft, a value that we have in america being our personal privacy, we won't have it anymore. by the advent of technology and of course all of us are part of it. from the moment we wake up in the morning until we go to bed, we're on those hand held tablets. and online companies like facebook are tracking our activities and collecting information. facebook has a responsibility to protect this personal information. personal information. we had a good discussion yesterday. we went over all of this. you told me that the company had failed to do so. it's not the first time that facebook has mishandled it users' information. the ftc found that facebook's privacy policies had deceived users in the past. and in the

with welcome, mr. zuckerberg. do you know who palintier is? >> i do. >> some people have referred to them as stanford analytica. do you agree? >> senator, i have not heard that. >> okay. do you think palintear taught cambridge analytica, as press reports are saying, how to do these tactics? >> senator, i don't know. >> do you think that palintear has ever scraped data from facebook? >> senator, i'm not aware of that. >> okay. do you think that during the 2016 as cambridge analytica was providing support to the trump campaign under project alamo were there any facebook people involved in that sharing of technique and information? >> senator, we provided support to the trump campaign similar to what we provide to any advertiser or campaign who asks for it. >> so that was a yes. is that a yes? >> senator, can you repeat the specific question? i just want to make sure i get specifically what you're asking. >> during the 2016 campaign, cambridge analytica worked with the trump campaign to refine tactics and were facebook employees involved in that.

mr. zuckerberg, thank you for being here. you have a real opportunity to --his afternoon to lead the industrynd demonstrate a aningfulommitment to protecting individual privacy. we have learned over the past few months and we learned a great deal that is alarming. we have seen how foreign actors are abusing social media platforms like facebook to interfere in elections and take millions of americans personal information without their knowledge in order to manipulate public opinion and target individual voters. specifically, on february 16th special counsel mueller issued an indictment against the russian-based internet research agency and 13 of the employees for interfering operations targeting the united states. through this 37-page indictment, we learned that the ira ran a coordinated campaign through 470 facebook accounts and pages. the campaign included ads and false information to create discord and harm secretary clinton's campaign and the content was seen by an estimated 157 million americans. a month later, on march 1

mr. zuckerberg: congresswoman -- >> yes or no? mr. berger berger -- mr. zuckerberg: yes, in order to share with your friends -- >> so for those that don't even have facebook, i don't think the average american understands that. emily: roger, is it true that other internet companies do similar things, like google, and if so what is so bad about this? , roger: i think there are a million things wrong with it. yes, lots of internet companies do it. i use a product on my phone and computer to block trackers exactly like this. page i land on, there will be half a dozen, 15 different trackers people try to insert into my browser as i am searching around the web. in my mind, the whole thing is a massive invasion of privacy predicated on a lie, on the notion that none of this is going on. as consumers begin to understand the degree to which they are being used as fuel for business models they have no real benefit from the trust erodes much , further. it goes way beyond facebook. i think facebook is in the crosshairs because its impact on elections is so great. bu

mr. rick santelli. tell us about it, rick >> all right, tyler, let's start out with a couple of historic references last time we had 30 billion for a three year was april 14. last time a bigger automobile accident was september of 2014 2.45 right in the middle of the one issue market but it was kind of messy if we look at the under hood here and what we find is 2.85 covering september and november 2017, here is the biggie 47.6 in directs of the weakest since september of 16. there was one strong spot here, direct bidders, 11.6, best since july of 2016 this yields the highest in an auction since may of 2007. i give it a c-minus, it could have gone d-plus not a great way to start an action series. it is the long maturity that should give us more issues in both directions. let's see how they go. melissa lee and michelle, back to you >> we'll bedeparture we are learning more on the fbi raid of the president's lawyers. eam eamon javers. >> the reason for the raid was that officials were lookin

we will look at the news about mr zuckerberg but first, passwords. the guardian says, are ip passwords, why and how? new technology is moving passwords away from the ones you a lwa ys passwords away from the ones you always forget to using biometrics like your face and your thumbprint. if you go to china everyone's face is stored on a central database so you can use voice is stored on a central database so you can use voice recognition. we've been asking people to tell us what they think. martin has said, if people worked on their memories they would struggle less. probably true. one viewers says, you are correct, biometric is the safe way forward, steve says passwords are here to stay for some time, i don't think we'll get away from them for some time. i think something here is use something like a password manager which is safe and secure as long as you've got a good password for your master key on your phone or on your desktop. what did you make of mr zuckerberg and his testimony? ten hours of testimony. although it felt like ten hours! he got an

chairman. >> senator hirano. >> thank you, mr. chairman mr. zuckerberg, the u.s. immigration and custom enforcement has proposed a new extreme vetting initiative which they have renamed visa life cycle vetting that sounds less scary. they've already held an industry day that they tied on the federal contracting website to get input from tech companies for the best way, and i'm quoting, exploit publicly available information such as media blogs, public hearings, conferences, academic websites social media websites such such as twitter, linkedin to gather information regarding targets. basically what they want to do with these targets is to determine -- and i'm again i'm quoting the isis' own document isis then directed to develop processes that determine and evaluate an applicant's ie target's possibility of becoming a positively contributing member of society as well as their ability to contribute to national interests in order to meet the executive order, that is the president's executive order. and then i.c.e. must also develop a mechanism or methodology that al

first i would like to thank mr. zuckerberg for coming out today. it is not easy to testify before congress two days in a row, and we appreciate his cooperation. it is very clear that facebook has made significant mistakes around protection of user data. i think we still have a lot more to learn about what happened at --ebook and changes to miss changes that mr. zuckerberg will make. these breaches of trust take time and real action to fix. users and lawmakers need to know that facebook is taking this seriously. only time will tell in this case. let's be clear, facebook was the focus of today's hearing, but the issues we dug into applied to many other companies as well. we will widen our lens to examine the entire tech industry , determining the right balance between services and the maintenance of personal privacy will be one of the challenges of our time. we have a lot of work to do. understand our responsibility and duty, and i think we are up to the task. i try to put the best interests and the protection of consumers at the forefront of what th

so give mr. zuckerberg a quick break. charles: good evening, i'm charles payne, you are watching "making money." zuk rrp just wrapping up parts of his testimony in front of a joint session of congress committee. deirdre? dierdre: it has been a packed room here today in has been everybody from the press to protesters. even a lady dressed as a troll. she is here to troll mark zuckerberg as he testifies before this joint senate committee. senator dick durbin speaking to mark zuckerberg about whether or not he had a monopoly. and the implication was if you had a competitor you would be forced to get your act together. if you had a car and it didn't function well, people could get cars from other places and you would have an incentive to right things your country. there was an example do you feel sharing the hotel you are staying at this week? underlying -- underlining the privacy concerns. give us a list of everybody you emailed this week, the content. again the answer was no. but the point was made personal data and privacy

zuckerberg or mr zuckerberg the boss of a company at the center of what could be a corrupted and rigged us election he did not exhibit the insider knowledge that you would expect from a movie lineal billionaire i mean how many times did he reply to questions from senators with my team will follow up on this and get back with you and what about that philosopher king treatment that was given to zuckerberg instead of pushing the c.e.o. of the topics of regulation and more transparency concerning how and why our facebook feeds show what they do senators ask for zucker bergs opinion do you think we should regulate you do you think your company is a monopoly well some would say who cares what he thinks he should care what wall makers are thinking take a look at part of what was said today. and yes or no will you commit to changing all the user default settings to minimize to the greatest extent possible the collection in user and use of user's data you make that commitment congressman if we try to collect and give people the ability i'd like true to answer yes or no if you could will you make

mr. zuckerberg has not exhausted himself being forthcoming. my biggest worry with all of this is the privacy issue and what i call the propaganda issue are both too big for facebook to fix and that's a frightening part. >> harris: digital utopia. a peter doocy is live on capitol hill utopia. peter? >> mark zuckerberg kind of working the refs a little bit today, he is behind closed doors with the lawmakers who will question him tomorrow in a session that the world can watch on tv. we've seen his prepared remarks, he is expected to say that the

robert: i can speak for mr. zuckerberg. emily: that is what he said. i can't say why he would say it, but all i can show and demonstrate is there is clear evidence. which waslaw to gdpr, much more onerous -- kathryn tucker, a researcher at m.i.t. compared the european privacy regime to the u.s.. what heard research found is that at effectiveness -- ad effectiveness in europe is up to 60% less effective. 6% less money you can monetize a 60% less money-- you can monetize in europe because of privacy rules. the want of all internet companies to have 60% less money? that means less innovation. -- the big area you mentioned with ai, we released a report to weeks ago looking exactly at the provisions in and how itge bill, is going to negatively affect ai. if europe stays with the gdpr, we can be rest assured they will be a backwater to artificial intelligence. legislation makes it almost impossible to use data for machine learning and analytics in europe. emily: you believe current laws are working? robert: i do believe current laws are working. remember, wh

mr. zuckerberg has note hawsed himself being forthcoming. we had one hearing, mr. zuckerberg sent his lawyer, very bright, very articulate, could talk a dog off a meat wagon but he didn't say anything. my biggest worry in all of this i have many questions of mr. zuckerberg. but my biggest worry with all this is that the privacy issue and what i call the propaganda issue are both too big for facebook to fix. and that's the frightening part. >> brennan: too big for facebook to fix. does that mean that lawmakers like you need to seek regulations to fix it for them? >> it may be the case. i'd rather do it with facebook and other social media platforms. we've got to talk about the initial market. is it fair for me to give up all of my personal data to facebook, apparently everybody else in the western hemisphere, in exchange for me being able to see what some of my high school buddies had for dinner saturday night. who owns my data? do i own it or does facebook own it? the service agreement with facebook, it's written in swahili. nobody understands it. should i have the

>> thank you, mr. chairman. welcome, mr. zuckerberg. do you know who palenteere is? >> i do. >> some people have referred to them as a stanford analytica. do you agree? >> senator, i have not heard that. >> okay. do you think they taught cambridge analytica how to do the tactics, as press reports are saying? >> senator, i don't know? >> do you think palenettere has ever scraped data from facebook? >> senator, i'm not aware of that. >> okay. do you think that during the 2016 campaign as cambridge analytica was providing support to the trump campaign under project alamo, were there any facebook people involved in that sharing of technique and information? >> senator, we provided support to the trump campaign similar to what we provide to any advertiser or campaign who asks for it. >> so that was a yes? is that a yes? >> senator, can you repeat the specific question? i want to make sure i get specifically what you're asking. >> during the 2016 cambridge analytica worked with the trump campaign to refine tactics and were facebook employees involved in that? >> senator, i

mr. zuckerberg, u.s. immigrations and customs enforcement has proposed a new extreme vetting initiative. they have renamed it visa life cycle vetting. that sounds scary. they have held an industry day they advertised on the federal contracting website to get input from tech companies on the best way to, among other things, and i am quoting i.c.e., "exploit publicly available information such as media, blogs, hearings, conferences, academic websites, social media websites to extract pertinent information regarding targets." basically what they want to do with these targets is to determine command again i am quoting i.c.e.'s document. i.c.e. has been directed to develop processes that determine and evaluate an applicant, targets probability of becoming a positively contribute member of society as well as their ability to contribute to national interests in order to meet the executive order, the president's executive order. i.c.e. must also develop a mechanism or methodology that allows them to assess whethe