>>> WELCOME BACK TO "VELSHI & RUHLE."
RUHLE." MARK ZUCKERBERG IS FACING
CRITICISM.
CRITICISM. ZUCKERBERG GAVE A SPEECH AT
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY DEFENDING
FACEBOOK’S PRACTICES, PAINTING
HIS NETWORK AS AN ASHRBITOR OF
FREE SPEECH.
FREE SPEECH. >> BELIEVE THE LONG JOURNEY
CONFRONTING IDEAS THAT
CHALLENGED US.
CHALLENGED US. I AM HERE TODAY BECAUSE I
BELIEVE THAT WE MUST CONTINUE TO
SEND FOR FREE EXPRESSION.
>> JOINING ME NOW IS FACEBOOK’S
VICE PRESIDENT GLOBAL AFFAIRS
AND COMMUNICATIONS, NICK CLAG.
>> THANK YOU FOR JOINING ME.
MARK ZUCKERBERG IS SAYING WHAT
FACEBOOK STANDS FOR IS THE
CELEBRATION OF FREEDOM OF
SPEECH.
SPEECH. SINCE FROM A BUSINESS
PERSPECTIVE, FACEBOOK HAS SPENT
THE LAST 12 YEARS AGGRESSIVELY
TRYING TO DO BUSINESS IN CHINA.
>> I THINK MARK ZUCKERBERG’S
SPEECH WAS QUITE OPEN.
HE DID WANT FACEBOOK SERVICES TO
BE AVAILABLE TO FOCUS IN CHINA
AND TRIED VERY HARD TO DO THAT
AND LOOKED AT ALL SORTS OF
DIFFERENT WAYS TO MAKE IT
POSSIBLE.
POSSIBLE. IN THE END IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE.
>> BUT IT WAS NOT FACEBOOK’S
DOING.
DOING. IT WAS CHINA WHO WOULD NOT LET
YOU IN.
YOU IN. CAN YOU BE THE VOICE OF FREE
SPEECH AND TRYING TO DO BUSINESS
IN A NATION THAT WOULD NEVER
ALLOW IT?
ALLOW IT? FACEBOOK DID NOT DECIDE TO LEAVE
CHINA.
CHINA. >> CORRECT, EXACTLY, THE POINT
THAT SERKZUCKERBERG WAS MAKING A
IN RECENT TIMES IT IS BECOMING
INCREASINGLY CLEAR THAT CHINA IS
DEVELOPING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT
APPROACH TO THE INCIDENT BASED
ON TOTALLY DIFFERENT VALUES AND
DESECRATING ITS OWN OF CLOSED
INTERNET AND HEAVY CONTROL OF
SURVEILLANCE OF WHAT PEOPLE DO
ON THE INTERNET AND CHINESE
SOCIAL MEDIA MEDIA LIKE TIK-TOK.
THE DIFFERENT VALUES THAT DRIVES
AMERICAN STYLE INTERNET AND OPEN
GLOBAL INTERNET BASED ON THE
VALUE OF FREE EXPRESSION.
IT HAS BECOME CLEAR OVERTIME.
THE FACT THAT YES, SINCE IT WAS
NOT POSSIBLE AND SINCE NOW IT IS
SO OBVIOUS THAT THOSE TWO SETS
OF VALUES ARE VERY DIFFERENT IN
MANY WAYS OPPOSING TO EACH
OTHER, HE’S SPEAKING OUT OF THE
VIRTUE OF KEEPING AN OPEN GLOBAL
INTERNET AS IT IS BASED ON
STRONG AMERICAN FREE EXPRESSION
VALUES.
VALUES. >> ARE THE VALUES OR PRACTICES
DIFFERENT WHEN THEY RELATE
SPECIFICALLY TO MARK ZUCKERBERG,
WHEN HE GAVE THOSE REMARKS, THE
STUDENT JOURNALISTS IN THE ROOM
WERE NOT ALLOWED TO ASK ANY
QUESTIONS.
QUESTIONS. >> I WAS NOT THERE.
>> IT WAS REPORTED BY THE AP.
YOU CAN BE THERE AND I WAS NOT
THERE EITHER BUT I KNOW IT IS
REPORTED.
REPORTED. >> SURE, SURE.
I THINK THE WAY IN WHICH THE
QUESTIONS WERE GATHERED FROM
STUDENTS THAT THEY WIPE DOWN THE
QUESTIONS AND THEY WERE PICKED
BY SOME OF GEORGETOWN
UNIVERSITY, SOMETHING THAT THE
UNIVERSITY ITSELF DECIDED ON IT.
IT FEELS NOT A FACEBOOK’S
DECISION AND WHICH THEY SELECTED
THE QUESTION WAS LEFT TO THE
UNIVERSITY AS WELL.
>> OF COURSE, YOU DO UNDERSTAND
HOW THAT WOULD BENEFIT MARK
ZUCKERBERG.
ZUCKERBERG. THE WAY IT SHOULD WORK, MARK
ZUCKERBERG GIVES THE SPEECH AND
BASED ON THOSE REMARKS, YOU THEN
ASK QUESTIONS.
ASK QUESTIONS. IF PEOPLE WRITE DOWN THE
QUESTIONS BEFORE, THEY HAVE NO
IDEA WHAT HE’S GOING TO SAY.
HIS COMMUNICATION TEAM CAN
CHERRY PICK THOSE QUESTIONS SO
HE CAN ANSWER WHATEVER THE HECK
HE WANTS.
HE WANTS. >> THAT’S NOT THE WAY THE
PRACTICE AT GEORGETOWN
UNIVERSITY WORKS.
UNIVERSITY WORKS. BY THE WAY, FROM MY EXPERIENCE
IN MY PLACES IF YOU HAVE A LARGE
CROWD, INSTEAD OF HAVING
EVERYBODY SHOUTING OVER AFTER
THE SPEECH, YOU GET PEOPLE TO
SUBMIT THOSE QUESTIONS.
IT IS NOT LIKE ZUCKERBERG WENT
INTO HIDING.
INTO HIDING. HE’S DONE A NUMBER OF TV WHERE
PEOPLE ASKED HIM QUESTIONS.
IT IS NOT WHERE THIS SPEECH IS
NOT BEING WELL SCRUTINIZED OR
ANALYZED OR CERTAINLY HE’S BEEN
QUESTIONED BY FOLKS EXTEND
SIFRLYSIFR EXTENSIVELY
SIFRLYSIFR EXTENSIVELY ON IT.
ON IT. >> MARK BENIOFF WHO HAVE SAID
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.
WHETHER IT IS FACEBOOK OR
GOOGLE, BENIOFF IS SAYING GET
REAL.
REAL. YOU ARE NOT JUST A PLATFORM, YOU
ARE A PUGBLISHER AND YOU NEED TO
BE REGULATED AND TREATED JUST
LIKE ANY MAGAZINE OR NEWSPAPER
OR US HERE AT MSNBC.
>> IT IS RIGHT THERE NEEDS TO BE
NEW RULES FOR THE ROAD AND NEW
REGULATIONS WHETHER IT IS
LAWMAKERS IN D.C. OR BRUSSELS OR
ELSEWHERE.
ELSEWHERE. IT IS FAIR GIVEN THIS.
IT IS A HUGE INDUSTRY BUT IT IS
A YOUNG INDUSTRY.
FACEBOOK ONLY BEEN A DECADE AND
A HALF OLD.
IT IS CLEAR WHETHER IT IS ON THE
RULES THAT PREVAIL ELECTIONS OR
HOW PEOPLE CAN MOVE THE DATA OR
PERSONAL DATA FROM ONE SERVICE
TO ANOTHER WHETHER IT IS RULES
ABOUT WHAT IS OR WHAT’S NOT
ACCEPTABLE.
ACCEPTABLE. THAT’S WHERE SOMETHING PEOPLE
HAVE FEROCIOUS.
HAVE FEROCIOUS. COUNTRIES IN EUROPE OR NORTH
AMERICA COMING UP WITH RULES OF
ALL BIG PLAYERS THAT FACEBOOK
HAS TO ABIDE BY.
WHAT WE DISAGREE IS REGULATIONS
IS THE WAY FORWARD.
WE DON’T THINK SOME OF THESE
DIFFICULT QUESTIONS OF WHAT IS
OR WHAT IS UNACCEPTABLE.
HOW YOU PROTECT OUR ELECTIONS OR
OUR ANSWERS BREAKING UP.
IT DOES NOT DEAL WITH THOSE
ISSUES.
ISSUES. REGULATIONS, YES?
REGULATIONS, YES? BREAK UP, NO.
IT IS KIND OF THE VIEW THAT WE
TAKE.
TAKE. TO THE EXTENT THAT MARK BENIOFF
WAS SAYING THAT REGULATION IS
NEEDED, I THINK MANY PEOPLE
INCLUDING FOLKS HERE AT FACEBOOK
WOULD AGREE WITH.
>> YOU SPEND TENS OF MILLIONS OF
DOLLARS LOBBYING IN D.C., WHAT
DO YOU THINK LAWMAKERS SHOULD
DO.
DO. MARK BENIOFF THINKS THAT 230
SHOULD BE DONE AWAY WITH.
DO YOU THINK 230 SHOULD BE TAKEN
AWAY BECAUSE MARK DOES?
>> I DON’T THINK ANY -- FOR
THOSE OF YOU WHO DON’T KNOW WHAT
230 IS.
230 IS. IT DOES MEAN THEA COMPANY LIKE
FACEBOOK ARE NOT LIABLE FOR
INDIVIDUAL POST ON OUR SERVICE.
FACEBOOK AND GENERALLY ARE NOT
LIKE NEWSPAPERS.
LIKE NEWSPAPERS. HE DOES NOT SAY I WANT THIS
CONTENT TO BE PUBLISHED ON THAT
DAY BECAUSE THERE IS NO POINT OF
SOCIAL MEDIA.
SOCIAL MEDIA. IT IS PEOPLE SPONTANEOUSLY
EXPRESSING WHAT THEY WANT TO
THEMSELVES AND THEIR FAMILIES
AND FRIENDS AND COMMUNITIES AND
SO ON.
SO ON. CRUCIALLY 230 IS ALSO THE LEGAL
BASE -- CAN I FINISH?
I WAS JUST GOING TO COME TO IT.
THAT’S WHAT 230 ALLOWS US TO DO.
MANY PEOPLE FORGET WHAT SECTION
230 ALLOWS COMPANY LIKE FACEBOOK
TO DO IS TAKE ACTION AGAINST
HATE SPEECH AND INSIGHTMENT TO
VIOLENCE AND INTIMIDATION.
CONTENTS THAT WE DO NOT WANT ON
OUR PLATFORM AND WHERE IN SOME
AREAS, TERRORIST RELATED
CONTENTS.
CONTENTS. WE BECOME INCREASINGLY
SUCCESSFUL.
SUCCESSFUL. ABOUT 99% OF ISIS RELATED
MATERIAL IS NOW REMOVED BEFORE
ANYONE REPORTS IT.
THAT’S WHAT SECTION 230 ALLOWS
US TO DO.
US TO DO. YES, GIVE PEOPLE THE FREEDOM TO
BROADLY SPEAK AND SAY WHAT THEY
WANT BUT ALSO ALLOWS US TO PUT
GUARD RAILS AND BOUNDARIES ON
WHAT CAN BE CIRCULATED ON OUR
APPS AND SERVICES.
>> A COLLEAGUE OF MINE, BEN
COLLINS WHO FOCUSES ON THE DARK
WEB FOUND THIS.
THE COMMENTS ON A FACEBOOK LIVE
STREAM OF MR. ZUCKERBERG’S
SPEECH WERE OVERWHELMINGLY
POSITIVE AND A LOT OF THE
COMMENTS USED VERY SIMILAR, VERY
STRANGE LANGUAGE.
STRANGE LANGUAGE. FACEBOOK COMMUNICATIONS TEAM,
YOUR TEAM SAID YOU WERE NOT
MODERATING COMMENTS SO IF YOU
WERE NOT MODERATINGEINGEING COMM
WHAT’S GOING ON HERE?
IS THAT A GLITZ?
>> I HAVE NO IDEA WHY THEY WOULD
GENERATE THOSE COMMENTS.
THERE IS A RANKING OF SYSTEM
WHERE THE WAY WHICH THINGS ARE
SURFACED OR RANKED INCLUDING ALL
SORTS OF SIGNALS.
>> UM, I WANT TO SHARE A COMMENT
THAT WE SAW AFTER THE SPEECH IN
RESPONSE.
RESPONSE. THE DAUGHTER OF DR. MARTIN
LUTHER KING, SHOW POSTED A PHOTO
OF HER FATHER AND WROTE THIS.
"I HEARD MARK ZUCKERBERG’S
SPEECH, I WOULD LIKE TO HELP
FACEBOOK BETTER UNDERSTAND THE
CHALLENGES
CHALLENGES CHALLENGES, MLK FACED FROM DISIN
INFORMATION CAMPAIGNS LUNCHED BY
POLITICIANS.
POLITICIANS. THESE CAMPAIGNS CREATED AN
ATMOSPHERE FOR THIS."
WHAT’S YOUR RESPONSE TO HER?
>> HUGELY RESPECT TO DR. KING.
WHAT SHE SAYS THAT SHE WILL BE
HERE AT FACEBOOK SPEAKING TO
EMPLOYEES NEXT WEEK.
WE LOOK FORWARD TO LISTENING AND
UNDERSTANDING AND LEARNING MORE
FROM HER.
FROM HER. I WOULD SAY THAT WHAT DOES
REVEAL SETTING ASIDE THE
SPECIFIC CIRCUMSTANCES AROUND
HER FATHER IS THAT OF COURSE THE
POLITICIANS ARE PEOPLE GENERALLY
SAYING VIRAL THINGS OR UNTRUE
THINGS.
THINGS. THE QUESTION WE FACE TODAY AND
FACEBOOK WAS AROUND AT THAT TIME
AND IN A SENSE THAT POLITICIANS
CERTAINLY IN ELECTION TIME
THINKS THE OTHER SIDE IS NOT
BEING STRAIGHTFORWARD.
BEING STRAIGHTFORWARD. THE QUESTION I THINK WE FACE
TODAY IS WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE
AS A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE FOR A
PRIVATE COMPANY LIKE FACEBOOK.
A PRIVATE COMPANY WHERE MANY
PEOPLE THINKS HAS TOO MUCH POWER
ALREADY AND ADJUDICATING OF WHAT
POLITICIANS CAN OR CAN’T SAY.
WE BELIEVE IT IS NOT APPROPRIATE
FOR PRIVATE COMPANY TO SET
SPEECH FROM POLITICIANS.
OF COURSE, POLITICIANS CAN USE
ADS WHICH BREAK OUR COMMUNITY
STANDARDS AS FAR AS HATE SPEECH
IS CONCERNED.
IS CONCERNED. IT DOES NOT AFFECT OUR APPROACH
TO VOTER SUPPRESSION OR
INTIMIDATION AND MAKE SURE IT
DOES NOT HAPPEN.
BUT, I THINK THE RISK IS
IS -- FACEBOOK WAS NOT AROUND
BACK THEN.
BACK THEN. IN THE MODERN DAY AND GIVEN OF
COURSE THE POLITICAL DEBATE IS
ALWAYS ANGRY AND AGGRESSIVE AND
POLITICIAN SAYING HALF TRUTH AND
EXAGGERATION AND
EXAGGERATION AND MISCHARACTERIZATION EACH OTHER
VALUES AND BACKGROUND AND
CHARACTER.
CHARACTER. IS IT FACEBOOK THAT PEOPLE WANT
AS A PRIVATE COMPANY TO STEP IN
AS A REFEREE, AN UMPIRE AND
ADJUDICATE WHAT POLITICIANS CAN
OR CANNOT SAY ABOUT EACH OTHER.
WE BELIEVE AS A MATTER OF
PRINCIPLE THAT’S NOT THE RIGHT
ROLE FOR A PRIVATE COMPANY.
>> NICK CLEGG, THANK YOU SO MUCH
FOR JOINING US TODAY REGARDING
MARK ZUCKERBERG’S FREEDOM OF
SPEECH YESTERDAY.
SPEECH YESTERDAY. >> JOINING ME NOW, BEN WHITE.
I WISH YOU CAN SEE BEN’S
SNEAKERS TODAY.
SNEAKERS TODAY. THEY ARE FRIDAY’S SHOES.
GENTLEMEN, WHAT DO YOU THINK?
>> THE ISSUE IS NOT NECESSARILY
OF THE BATTLE OF IDEAS THAT MARK
ZUCKERBERG MENTIONED AT
GEORGETOWN.
GEORGETOWN. THE ISSUE IS LIES.
RUSSIAN INTELLIGENCE IS NOT
PUTTING STUFF ON FACEBOOK AND
DID NOT PUT STUFF ON FACEBOOK IN
2016 AS PART OF THE COMPETITION
FOR IDEAS.
FOR IDEAS. IT WAS PART OPF AN ATTACK ON THE
UNITED STATES.
UNITED STATES. THE QUESTION AND THE CHALLENGE
FOR ALL OF US, NOT JUST TECH
COMPANY LIKE FACEBOOK, BUT THOSE
OF US IN JOURNALISM AS WELL ARE
TO MAKE QUALITATIVE JUDGMENT AND
RECOGNIZE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
WHAT’S TRUE AND WHAT’S NOT TRUE
AND WHAT’S MALICIOUS AND WELL
INTENDED.
INTENDED. IT IS HARD AND IT IS SLIPPERY
SLOPE AND IT IS DIFFICULT BUT
THAT’S A CHALLENGE THAT WE ALL
NEED TO STEP UP TO.
>> WHAT DO YOU THINK?
>> YEAH, I AGREE WITH JOHN.
IN THE EXTENT THAT NICK COULD
SAY THIS AND MARK ZUCKERBERG
COULD SAY THIS.
IT DOES NOT MATTER.
FACEBOOK IS A PUBLISHER, THEY
ARE A SOURCE OF ENORMOUS AMOUNT
OF NEWS THAT AMERICANS CONSUME.
THAT’S HOW A LOT OF PEOPLE GET
THEIR NEWS.
THEIR NEWS. THEY GET A LOT OF FAKE NEWS THAT
WAY AND A LOT OF MISINFORMATION
THAT WAY AND IMPACTS OUR
DEMOCRACY AND IMPACTS THE
RESULTS OF OUR ELECTIONS.
THEY HAVE TO TAKE THAT
RESPONSIBILITY WHETHER THEY WANT
IT OR NOT.
THEY CAN SPEND ALL THE MONEY
THEY WANT ON LOBBYIST AND MAKE
ARGUMENTS HOW FACEBOOK IS NOT A
PUBLISHER.
PUBLISHER. BUT THE FACT IS THE WORLD WE
LIVE IN WHERE FACEBOOK IS
PROVIDING A LOT OF PEOPLE
INFORMATION, NEEDS TO BE
MONOSTORED BYMONO
MONOSTORED BYMONO MONITORED BY FACEBOOK.
FACEBOOK HAS A RESPONSIBILITY TO
GET RID OF THEM.
CONGRESS AT THIS POINT THAT IS
THE RESPONSIBILITY TO FORCE THEM
TO DO THAT.
>> STEPH, WHAT NICK CLEGG SAYS
DO YOU WANT A PRIVATE COMPANY
WHERE SOME PEOPLE THINK IT IS
TOO POWERFUL TO EXERCISE THAT
POWER, NOT EXERCISES JUDGMENT IS
ALSO AN EXERCISE OF POWER.
THEY ARE A MASSIVE PLATFORM.
IF THEY ARE BECOMING THE CONDUIT
FOR HOSTILE FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE
SERVICES WHICH IS WHAT WE SAW
HAPPENED IN 2016, THAT’S
DANGEROUS FOR OUR COUNTRY.
>> ARE PEOPLE BUYING THIS
ARGUMENT ANYMORE.
ARGUMENT ANYMORE. FACEBOOK IS A NEW COMPANY, WE
ARE A YOUNG COMPANY.
YEP, I HEAR YOU.
THERE ARE COMPANIES THAT MAKE
$110 MILLION EVERY DING-DONG
DAY.
DAY. >> YES.
>> YES. >> IT IS RIDICULOUS.
THE IDEA THAT THERE ARE SOME NEW
PLAYERS AND NEW THINGS ON THE
HORIZON AND A START UP IN
SILICON VALLEY, ONE OF THE
BIGGEST AND PROFITABLE COMPANIES
IN THE WORLD.
ONE OF THE BIGGEST
DESEMINEGOTIATOR OFDEISSIMILARDI
DESEMINEGOTIATOR OFDEISSIMILARDI OF THE WORLD.
THEY NEED TO PLAY BY THE RULES
AND RESPONSIBILITIES.
AND RESPONSIBILITIES. IT IS THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO
NOT DISINFORMED THE AMERICAN
PUBLIC.
PUBLIC. >> JOHN, IT IS NOT ON FACEBOOK
IF THEY HAVE TO FOLLOW THE
RULES.
RULES. THEY ARE FOLLOWING THE RULES
RIGHT NOW THAT ARE SET FOR THEM.
THE RULES HAVES TO BE CHANGED SO
IT IS IN THE HANDS OF LAWMAKERS.
>> WELL, RIGHT?
NICK CLEGG SAYS YES, REGULATIONS
WE ARE OPEN TO THAT.
IT IS A CHALLENGE THAT GOES
BEYOND TECH COMPANIES.
IF WE WATCH PRESIDENT TRUMP SAY
SOMETHING AT THE WHITE HOUSE
WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY RIDICULOUS.
WE AS JOURNALISTS HAVE A CHOICE,
WELL, PRESIDENT TRUMP SAY THIS
AND SOMEBODY ELSE SAYS THAT.
THEY’RE HAVING AN ARGUMENT.
THAT’S NOT AN EASY THING TO DO
AND AS I SAID IT IS A SLIPPERY
SLOPE WHEN YOU GET TO CLAIMS AND
COUNTER CLAIMS.
COUNTER CLAIMS. SOMETIMES WE CAN TELL THAT TWO
PLUS TWO DOES NOT EQUAL FIVE AND
SO WE NEED TO SAY SO.