Do you think of vaccines that have been approved for COVID-19 work?
Just yes or no.
Do you think the vaccines that have been approved work?
Yes, but I don't I don't think we're here to discuss our own personal opinions.
Facebook has family and friends neighborhood.
But it is right next to the one where there is a white nationalist rally every day.
YouTube is a place where people share quirky videos.
But down the street anti vaxxers, COVID deniers, QAnon supporters And flat authors are sharing videos.
Twitter allows you to bring friends, and celebrities into your home.
But also, whole across [UNKNOWN] terrorists and worse.
Some people say that the problem is that, social networks are polarising us but, that's not at all clear from the evidence, or research.
Polarization was rising in America, long before social networks were even invented.
And it's falling or stable in many other countries where social networks are popular.
Others claim that algorithms feed us content that makes us angry because it's good for business but that's not accurate either.
I believe that the division we see today Is primarily the result of a political and media environment that drives Americans apart.
And we need to reckon with that if we're going to make progress.
Dorsey, did you personally decide to ban President Trump from your platform?
We have a process that we go through to get there, and that came after a warning
And did you make the final decision?
Ultimately a final responsibility.
But you were actively onboarding our children onto your ecosystems with apps like Youtube Kids, Facebook Messenger Kids.
And now we're hearing Instagram for kids.
These applications introduce our children to social media far too early, and include Manipulative design features intended to keep them hooked.
Hey, Mr. Pichai, you mentioned that you have children, and that I've also read you limit their screen time.
But what do you say when one of your children doesn't want to put their phone down?
Congressman, the struggle is the same particularly through COVID.
It's been hard to moderate it and I do take advantage of the parental controls and the digital well being tools.
We can limit the time under apps and so we have provisions in place.
I don't mean to cut you off Mr.
Pichai, you know, but the last thing overworked Parents need right now, especially right now, are more complex to dues, which is what parental controls are.
I mean, they need child centric design.
By default, Mr. Zuckerberg, I understand your children a younger vote when they start using social media, what will you say when they're craving their tablet over spending time face to face with you or with friends?
Congressman, we haven't gotten to that point yet, but we're designing all of these tools.
We design messenger kids that the parents are in control.
I think we've proven that that can be a good and safe experience.
And I think that was one of the things that that made us think that We should consider doing this for Instagram as well by having it so that we have a parent controlled experience, and as you said child centered experience for people under the age of 13.
I'm gonna reclaim my time only because connecting with others is one thing.
Adding filters, no breaks for kids to take And manipulating the design of these apps for our children is another.
Look, this committee is ready to legislate to protect our children from your ambition.
Okay, so if you think the vaccines work, why have your companies allowed accounts that Repeatedly offend your vaccine disinformation policies to remain up.
I mean, according to report just 12 accounts on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram account for 65% of all the vaccine misinformation on your platforms, you're exposing 10s of millions of users To this every day.
I don't have the stats on YouTube, but my understanding is it's similar.
So my question is, why in the midst of a global pandemic that has killed over half a million Americans that you haven't taken these accounts down that are responsible for the preponderance of vaccine disinformation on your platforms?
Will you all commit to taking these platforms down today, Mr.
Congressman, yes, we do have a policy against allowing.-
Why don't you take the sites down today you still have 12 people up on your site doing this when you take them down.
Congressman, I would need to look at the and have our team look at the exact examples to make sure.
Tomorrow because those still exist, we found them as early as last night.
Mr. Pichai, how about you?
We have remote over 850 1000 videos to help
The people that are spreading this information on your platforms.
There's about 12 Super spreaders.
We have clear policies and we take down content.
Some of the content is allowed, if it's people's personal experiences, but we definitely.
Thank you Mr. Dorsey.
I see my time is getting expired Mr. Dorsey We take these slides down.
You got about 12 super spreaders when you take them down?
Yes, we remove everything against our policy.
You've censored and taken down accounts of conservatives, Christian, and even pro life groups.
At the same time, liberals, tyrants and terrorists continue to have unfettered access on Twitter.
You're able to take down the account of a sitting United States President while he was still president.
But you continue to allow state sponsors of terror to use Twitter as a platform.
For example, here's oxy coding that that is being sold on your site.
Here's Ritalin that's being sold on your site.
Here's zanic An arrow that's being sold on your site.
Should you not be held liable when people are dying because your people are allowing these sales to take place?
We did with manufacturers, we do it to the stores, why aren't we doing it to the salesman that allows this to take place?
Congressman, I don't think we're allowing this to take place.
We're building systems that take the vast majority of this content off our systems and what I'm saying.
Three years mark, we've been doing three years this has been going on and you said you were going to take care of it last time.
But all you do is wait from Facebook over to Instagram.
They're still doing it now and you're saying we need to do more.
Well, how many more families are going to die how many more children going to be addicted by you still study the problem.
I think you need to live them.
Congressman, we're not we're not sitting in the studying of the problem.
We're building effective systems that work across both Facebook and Instagram.
But what I'm saying is that I don't think that we can expect that any platform will find every instance of harmful content
Will be allowing these companies to get our children booked on their destructive product.
For their own profit.
Big tech is essentially handing our children a lit cigarette and hoping they stay addicted for life.
You know in 1994, democratic congressman Henry Waxman chaired a hearing with the CEOs of our nation's largest tobacco companies.
During his opening statement, he stated and I quote, sadly, this deadly habit begins with our kids.
In many cases, they become hooked quickly and develop a lifelong addiction that is nearly impossible to break.
So Mr. Zuckerberg and Mr. Dorsey You profit from your companies hooking users to your platforms by capitalizing on their time.
So yes or no.
Do you agree that you make money off of creating an addiction to your platforms, Mr. Zuckerberg?
Congressman, no, I don't agree with that.
That's what I needed a yes or no?
Because you do Mr. Dorsey?
I recognize that smaller companies just starting up the protection of Section 230 may be invaluable to them.
But you all are no longer just starting out, you're established you're mature companies you exercise enormous, enormous control over the thought processes of not just an entire country but literally the entire world.
You are exercising editorial discretion.
I do think we need to revisit section 230 in the terms of Have you now become actual publishers as opposed to simply carriers of information.