Senator Reed: Well technically you could do that I presume or you could invest the resources to do it and as a result, frankly, reporting to us about the nefarious activities of Russia is not going to immediately translate to the thousands or apparently 126 million people who saw the message and thought it was legit. The question of reaching out to individuals who may have seen it is a much more difficult and complex one but we believe our commitment to transparency on this issue generally should address that. Jack Reed: When you discovered a deceptive foreign government presentation on your platform, my presumption from what you’ve said today is that you will stop it and take it down, do you feel an obligation in turn to notify those people who have accessed that, and can you do that and shouldn’t you do that?įacebook General Counsel Colin Stretch: Senator we feel an obligation as you say first to stop the activity, second to investigate it further, to fan out essentially from the account to make sure we’re taking an expansive view of the investigation to try to capture any related activity, third to share threat information with the industry and with the government so that we can all do a better job and fourth to bring the issue to the attention of in this case this committee and the content itself we’ve said we’re supportive of this committee making it publicly available. The first exchange took place during the Senate hearing: In both the Senate and the House inquiries, Congressional representatives asked Facebook’s General Counsel Colin Stretch if the company would directly notify individual users exposed to Russian propaganda through its platform, an idea advanced in two recent articles on Just Security ( here and here ). In back to back hearings of the Senate and House Intelligence Committees on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, the top lawyers for Facebook, Google and Twitter were grilled on the role the technology platforms play in advancing Russian propaganda and what they are doing to address the problem ahead of future elections. “I’m sure as you began your business and they grew, it was the idea of bringing people together and not tearing people apart, as I’m sure the Wright Brothers never intended the airplane be used as a weapon of mass destruction,” remarked Brad Wenstrup, R-OH, to the lawyers for three of the country’s most powerful technology companies.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |