This is what you need to know:.


Download the video player

Facebook, Twitter and Google managers testify before the senators in the Commission for Trade, Science and Transport.

For more than two decades, Internet companies have been protected from liability for most messages posted by their users under a law called Section 230 of the Decency in Communications Act. Today, this shield – and the way in which internet companies moderate the content of their sites – is being challenged by legislators on both sides of the separation of power.

On Wednesday, the leaders of Google, Facebook and Twitter testified before a Senate committee about their mitigation practices.

The hearing, headed by the Commerce, Science and Senate Transportation Committee, is a retreat from Google’s Sundar Pichai, Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter’s Jack Dorsey. But with the elections coming up in 3rd place. With less than a week to go until 11 November, additional pressure is being put on leaders to deal with misinformation without unfairly influencing the election process.

The director of Twitter, Jack Dorsey, made his opening statement during the hearing on the reform of Article 230 of the Decency Standards for Remote Communications Act.

Jack Dorsey, the director of Twitter, gave his opening speech at a distance during the hearing on the reform of Section 230 of the Decency in Communications Act. Greg Nash / Agence France-Presse – Getty Images

Republicans in the committee have expressed concern that Facebook, Google and Twitter are making decisions on how to soften content in order to lean against conservatives, indicating the party’s growing focus on the issue.

They paraphrase anecdotes in which conservative legislators or the media have seen their content restricted or removed on these three services. They have not shown systematic bias in all departments.

Senator Roger Vicker of Mississippi, chairman of the Trade Committee, and Senator Cory Gardner of Colorado both asked Twitter Chairman Jack Dorsey about cases in which Twitter Chairman Trump tweeted but did not do the same for officials of repressive governments.

Mr. Dorsey, your program allows foreign dictators to make propaganda, generally without restrictions, Vicker said, but you tend to restrict the president of the United States.

Many conservatives on the committee were also cautious about making radical changes to legislation. Mr Vicker said he had not yet supported the complete deletion of Article 230, which protects companies from liability for messages downloaded by users. And Mr Gardner, faced with a difficult election campaign, said that legislators should be very careful not to pass laws in such a hurry as to silence the rhetoric.

I don’t like the idea of unelected elites in San Francisco or Silicon Valley deciding whether my speech is acceptable on their agenda, Gardner said, but I even less like the idea of unelected Washington bureaucrats trying to impose some politically neutral moderation on the content.

Senator Ted Cruise, a Texas Republican, was busy tweeting the latest New York Post about Joseph R.’s son. Biden Jr., Hunter. The company initially restricted the distribution of the article.

M. Dorsey, who hell chose you and made you responsible for what the media is allowed to report and what the American people are allowed to hear, said Cruz.

Jack Dorsey, the CEO of Twitter, quickly became the main target of the Republicans at the hearing, who repeatedly asked him how the company deals with certain tweets.

Republicans often complain that internet companies – especially Twitter – falsely block conservative votes. About 80 minutes before the hearing, 16 out of 25 Republican questions were put to Mr Dorsey.

And that was for Senator Ted Cruise, a Texas Republican, Mr. Dorsey’s recent Twitter post in the New York Post on Joseph R.’s son. Biden Jr., Hunter Biden, dramatically emphasizes…

Cruz questioned Dorsey about his decision to block the New York Post on Twitter, and shouted occasionally. Although Twitter later reversed that decision, Cruz complained that Twitter influenced the elections and obstructed the freedom of the press.

Dorsey explained that Twitter cannot influence the mood because Americans have many social media channels. He explained that the decision to block references to the article in the New York Post was wrong and was changed.

Mr. Dorsey, who elected you and made you responsible for what the media is allowed to say and what the American people are allowed to hear? Mr. Cruz said

Mr. Dorsey responded kindly: We realize we have to make more money with confidence, even if the senator interrupted her.

Other Republican senators said they wanted to know why Twitter had tweeted some of President Trump’s tweets with fact checks and warning messages, and criticized Dorsey for not tweeting messages from Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

I don’t understand how one can make a mark on the President of the United States. Did you ever tweet the ayatollah? asked senator Cory Gardner, a Colorado Republican.

Mr Dorsey focused his reactions on more general remarks about the Twitter policy. He pointed out that one of the rules of his companies is to protect against tweets that can cause violence or damage in the offline world. He said Twitter has tweeted a lot of world leaders.

The purpose of our labelling is to create a broader context, to connect the points, so that people can make their own choices, Dorsey said.

Kellen Browning contributed to this story.

Republicans focused their anger on the Senate tweeting about Jack Dorsey. What about Mark Zuckerberg from Facebook? He was more of a target for the Democrats.

About two hours after the hearing, according to New York Times calculations, Zuckerberg was asked 14 out of 21 democratic questions in the Senate Trade Committee. Facebook executives were invited to give their views on the reform of Section 230, the legal shield that protects technology companies from greater responsibility for what their users post and what Facebook is doing to fight the third quarter elections. November to be ready.

Mr Zuckerberg, who has now attended the congress five times, took note of most of the questions and gave a short presentation. He spoke vaguely about the number of Facebook employees focused on moderating the content of the social network (more than 35,000), and noted that the company is spending billions of dollars – more than all of Facebook’s income in 2012 – to ensure election security.

Mr Zuckerberg, who suffered a technical defect at the beginning of the hearing, has also revived his environment since he last testified before the legislators in July. At this antitrust hearing, Mr. Zuckerberg was sitting in an empty, clean room. This time it was surrounded by curtains and a plant. It is not clear whether Mr. Zuckerberg appeared from his home in Silicon Valley or from his other home.

Kellen Browning contributed to this story.

The Democrats urged them to stop the spread of misinformation and extremism in a completely different way than the Republicans did. They also accused the Republicans of holding hearings for President Trump.

First of all, I want to know why this hearing is taking place six days before election day, which is – I think we are politicizing and politicizing the Republican majority, which really shouldn’t be a party political issue, said Senator Amy Klobuchar, a Democrat from Minnesota.

Democrats were broadly open to reforms of Section 230 of the Internet Company Law Shield, which protects companies from liability for user messages. Instead, their complaints focused on the insufficient action of the technical platforms against the disinformation that hampered the elections.

I hope that today we will receive a report from witnesses on what they did to prevent interference in the elections, said Senator Maria Cantwell, a leading Democrat on the Trade Commission. I hope they tell us what kind of hate language and misinformation they have taken out of the books.

Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat from Connecticut, has put pressure on businesses to find out how they would react to President Trump if he tried to delegitimize the election or announce the results too soon.

Mark Zuckerberg from Facebook, Sundar Pichai from Google and Jack Dorsey from Twitter said they all have plans, including working with The Associated Press to get information and results from local officials.

Senator Cruz is likely to criticise the way the platforms have moderated the content of good media.

Senator Ted Cruise during Mark Zuckerberg’s testimony in 2018. Senator Cruz is likely to criticise the way platforms have moderated the content of good media… Tom Brenner, New York Times.

Conservatives have been claiming for years that online social networks censor their opinions. But their data are mostly anecdotal, and conservative representations often work very well on the Internet.

The accusations of censorship will almost certainly play a central role at Wednesday’s hearing. Republicans such as Senator Marsh Blackburn (Tennessee) and Senator Ted Cruise (Texas) are likely to criticise leaders for the way their platforms moderate content published by conservative politicians or right-wing media.

Conservatives have picked up individual cases of moderate content to argue that there is a systemic bias against them on the platforms. In some cases the companies claimed that the content was contrary to their policy, in other cases they claimed that moderation was a mistake.

Recently, Republicans have emphasized Twitter and Facebook to limit the sharing of stories about Hunter Biden, the son of Democratic presidential candidate Joseph R. Biden Jr. Twitter initially claimed that the story contradicted its policy against the exchange of illegal information, but then turned around. Facebook said it limits the scope of the story while waiting for third parties to verify the facts to assess the applications.

In 2017, Twitter removed an ad for Blackburn’s Senate campaign after the company deemed them inflammatory for a rule referring to the sale of children’s body parts, claiming the issue was contrary to their policies. One day later, the company changed its mind.

In 2016, Facebook had to answer conservative questions about whether the conservative news had been removed by the Trend Topics section, which was then run by the conservatives, rather than by the algorithms that controlled their newsletter. The company stated that it had found no evidence that the allegations were true.

In none of these cases was there any evidence of systemic bias towards conservative content. A study conducted by The Economist in 2019 shows that Google has no preference for websites on the left. Posts from commentators such as Ben Shapiro are regularly among the most popular on Facebook. Liberals have also labelled their messages or removed them from platforms – for example, racial justice campaigning groups have said Facebook has removed their content.

Democrats accuse Republicans of raising the issue of manipulating Silicon Valley’s companies to be more cautious about the use of false or misleading information published by conservatives.

There is simply no reason to hold this hearing just before the election, except that it may intimidate platforms that have been susceptible to political stupidity in the past, Senator Brian Schatz, a Democrat from Hawaii, is chirping about Wednesday’s hearing this month.

At Wednesday's hearing, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg will testify before Parliament for the fifth time.

At Wednesday’s hearing, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg will testify for the fifth time in a row for the … Pete Marovich for the New York Times.

It used to be unusual for a senior executive in the high-tech sector to be confronted with difficult questions from legislators on Capitol Hill. But things have changed in recent years. Today, the leaders of Facebook, Google and Twitter are old acquaintances in the Congress public.

At Wednesday’s hearing, Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook will testify before the legislature for the fifth time, Sundar Pichai of Google for the third time and Jack Dorsey of Twitter for the third time. All performances have taken place in the last three years.

The hearing was a godsend for the Washington law firms that train the leaders. WilmerHale, for example, has worked on Facebook for many years and is currently preparing Mr Zuckerberg for all hearings, starting with his first hearing in March 2018.antitrust hearing live,house antitrust committee,congressional hearing live,tech hearing time,tech antitrust hearing,tech congressional hearing,big tech hearing how to watch,big tech hearing time,house judiciary committee,c-span,antitrust hearing summary,antitrust hearing transcript,antitrust hearing live stream,antitrust hearing means,antitrust hearing time,tech antitrust,antitrust hearing meaning,house judiciary antitrust subcommittee

You May Also Like

Retired military leaders want US Supreme Court to rule male-only draft unconstitutional

Ten retired military officers joined forces to obtain a declaration from the…

Social media stardom – How changes to NIL will benefit athlete-influencers across the NCAA

Hannah Cavinder stands on a folding chair in the Fresno State locker…

Karrueche Tran Flaunts Her Fabulous Figure In PrettyLittleThing

Karrueche Tran looks great on new pictures with pieces of her collaboration…

West Ham United 1-3 Liverpool: Mohamed Salah double sends Reds third

were his first in the Premier League after a 7-0 double at…