This is now the fourth hearing in a serious of ridiculous hearings on a free speech of internet companies.
A significant portion of this hearing was a waste of time because the First Amendment protects private individuals' and corporations' free speech rights.
And if consumers were not getting the search results they wanted, We're not giving the videos that they wanted to see.
They might start moving to your competitors.
Isn't that right?
Every Monday when I run my management meetings yes we worry about users have a lot of choices we hard to earn their trust every week.
Now I'm gonna realtime Google search.
For a very similar term.
I'm going to change one word so I'm going to search for Congressman Steve King, and I'm going to hit the news tab.
First article that pops up is from ABC News, and it says "Steve Kings racist immigration talk prompts calls for congressional censure".
That's a negative article.
But you don't have the people at Google sitting there thinking, and trying to modify search results every time Steve King comes up a negative article appears.
That's not what's happening, right?
We always operate for any query with the same set of principles.
We are trying to reflect what is currently, if it is news-worthy, what is currently being discussed.
About that phrase.
So let me just conclude here by stating the obvious.
If you want positive search results, do positive things.
If you don't want negative search results, don't do negative things.
And to some of my colleagues across the aisle, if you're getting bad press articles and bad search results, don't blame Google or Facebook or Twitter.
Consider blaming yourself.
I yield back.
FTC vs. Qualcomm: Why you should care
Netflix's price hikes are coming quick
CES 2019: What tech to expect
Taking a ride with Elon Musk inside Boring Company's tunnel
Biggest hacks of 2018
The huge Marriott cyberattack may have been the work of Chinese...
How to cut the cord like a pro
US congressman demands to know if Google is tracking him