Florida. I recognize the gentleman from north dakota for five minutes. Bezos, my colleagues brought up they were discussing thirdparty sellers this policy specifically noted possible loopholes that allow amazon to review nonpublic and aggregate data to inform private rams even in instances where there are only a few thirdparty sellers. Where exactly does amazon draw the line . Data would bee more than one seller . The person seeing the report would have no way of knowing how rs are inside that group or what the breakdown would be between those sellers. That is different from a list or product ranking which we do make public. Does amazon allow the use of aggregate data to inform private label amazon brands when there only a few sellers for a product . Does amazon look at i could dictate up when there are only two sellers of a product . Yes, sir. Isand my correct amazon conducting an internal investigation on the use of thirdparty data . Are basically trying to understand some of the anecdotes we saw in that wall street journal article. Will you commit to informing this committee on the outcome, including the exact circumstances of when amazon is allowed to view aggregate data . Yes, we will do that. Allowed to view and or use aggregate data . Yes, we will do that. Now i want to move just really quick, music can be used to drive revenue. Obviously theres a reason its important now. Ill talk about twitch for a second. News reports have indicated that twitch users are receiving notice and takedown requests pursuant to the digital millennial copyright act. My understanding is that twitch allows users to stream music but does not license the music. Is that correct . Im going to have to ask that i could get back to your office with an answer to that question. I dont know. So, that would be great. And then i just have two more questions related to that. If twitch is responding to dmca notice and takedown requirements, should, one, twitch consider proactive licensing music instead of retroactively adhering to those notices . These are the questions im concerned in. Im primarily concerned about small up and coming, making it easy for them to get cease and desist notices out as well and as we continue to move forward. Yes, congressman, thats an important issue and we understand it. And i will get back to your office on that. All right. Earlier this year, google announced plans to retire Third Party Cookies that websites attach to users web browsers. And this allows users to be tracked across the internet. The consequence of that change is that it will put other participants at a disadvantage because they can no longer track users. At the very, very danger of being procookie, because im not when i use my computer as well, and i understand there are legitimate Privacy Concern with Third Party Cookies, but i want to focus on the competition aspect. Did this action also place google at a disadvantage or does google have alternative means of collecting the data to inform activities . This is an area where we have focused on user privacy, and users clearly dont want to be tracked with Third Party Cookies. In fact, other browser windows including apple have also implemented these changes. With we are doing it, thoughtfully giving time for the industry to adapt because we know publishering depend on revenue in this area. But its an important change, and i think we have to be focused on privacy to drive the change forward. But you have other way of collecting that information, correct . On our firstparty services, we dont rely on cookies. And obviously when people come and type into im not asking if you rely on cookies. Im asking if you have other ways of collecting through gmail or consumer facing platforms, right . We dont use data from gmail for ads, congressman. To the extent on the services where we provide ads and if users have consented to ads personalization, yes, we do have data. Thank you. I yield back. The gentleman yields back. I recognize the gentle lady from florida for five minutes. Thank you so much. During discussions of changing facebooks platform policy in 2012, you said that, and i quote, in any model im assuming we enforce policies against competitors much moore strongly. It sounds like facebook weaponizes its policies to target competitors. Why would facebook enforce its policies against competitors more strongly . Congresswoman, when we were a much smaller company, we saw that this is 2012, now. This was in 2012, so please go right ahead. Sure. Weve had policies in the past that have prevented our competitors, which at the time we were primarily worried about larger competitors from using our platforms to grow and compete with us. So, we had some of those policies. We continually reviewed them over time, and since 2013, a senior facebook employee identified me as a fast growing apple on facebook and said we would restrict their access. Was this another example of enforcing facebooks policies against competitors much more strongly . Message me . Im not familiar with that specific example, but we did have that policy. Lets move to another one. In 2014, other facebook product managers openly discuss removing pinterests access to facebooks platform tools as one employee said, i am 100 in favor of the idea of moving it from pinterest, but i am not recommending removing it from netflix going forward. Why would facebook product managers want to restrict pinterests access to facebook but not netflix . Congresswoman, im not familiar with that exchange. I dont think i was on that. Why do you think you would have to be on that, but why do you think they would make that decision or would make a decision like that . Well, congresswoman, as i said, we used to have a policy that restricted competitors from using our platform and pinterest is a social competitor with us. Its one of the many competitors that allow people to share all right. Mr. Zuckerberg, these examples and supporting documents strongly suggest that facebook does weaponize its platform policies, enforcing them selectively to undermine competitors. But lets move on. Mr. Cook, i am concerned that apples policies are also picking winners and users in the app economy and that apple rules mean apple apps always win. Mr. Cook, in 2019, apple removed from the apple store certain apps that helped parents control their childrens devices. Do you remember what justification apple cited . Yes, congresswoman, i do. It was that the use of technology called mdm, mobile device management, placed kids data at risk. So, we were worried about the safety of kids. Okay. All right. So, you were concerned about that the app basically undermined kids privacy. But another app that used this same tool was appure, an app controlled by the Saudi Arabian government. Do you recall apples position on this . Im not familiar with that app. Okay. Apple allowed this saudi app to remain. There are two types of apps that use the same tool. Apple kicks one out and said that that was one that was helping parents but keeps the one owned by a powerful government. If that is correct, mr. Cook, that apps that supposedly did the same thing, why do you why would you keep the one owned by a powerful government . Id like to look into this and get back with your office. It sounds like you applied different rules to the same apps. We apply the rules to all developers evenly. Do the fact that apple had its own let me just ask you this. Did the fact that apple had its own parental control apps that were competing with these Third Party Apps contribute to apples decision to kick them off the apple store, mr. Cook . What do you think about that . It did not. Theres over 30 Parental Controls on the app store today so, theres plenty of competition in this area. I would point out that this is not an area where apple gets any revenue at all. We do mr. Cook, i didnt ask anything about revenue. That was not my question, but im out of time, and thank you so much. Mr. Chair, i yield back. Thank the gentle lady, for yielding back. I yield to mr. Jordan for five minutes. Thank you, i yield to the gentleman from florida. Thank you for yielding. Just as mr. Pa chi gave information, you have given testimony to congress saying there is not editorial manipulation that disadvantages conservatives and just like in the case of google there have been whistleblowers from facebook that not only have offered evidence indicating the testimony was not truthful but theres even video that suggest content moderators you employ are out there disadvantaging conservative content. Im wondering if you are familiar with the experiences of zack mcilroy and ryan el wig and what is your response to the very damning Video Evidence and the testimony from them that the culture that you lead within facebook is one that disadvantages conservatives and leads to content manipulation . Congressman, im somewhat familiar with the concerns they have raised. As ive said, we aim to be a platform for all ideas. We got into this because we want to give everyone a voice. I certainly do not want our platforms to be run in a way that has any ideological bias, and i want people to be able to discuss a range of issues. When people raise concerns like that, we do look into them to make sure that everyone in our operation is behaving and upholding the standards that we would like. And if the behavior that they cited is true, then that would be unacceptable in our operation. And following the release of those videos and that evidence from project veary tas, when yo describe the information facebook undertook to root out the corrosive effects on your platform . Congressman, i would have to get back to you with more details on that, but i know that we have ongoing training in what we do, and we certainly will look into any complaints that come up. And we want to make sure that how we run the content review teams that its done in a way that reflects the values of the company around giving a voice and being a platform for all ideas. Im concerned that the content review does reflect the values of the company but those values dont give everyone a voice. They prejudice against concern content. While i appreciate training as a prophylactic endeavor to try to guide future content, it seems disingenuous for you to suggest that these videos come out that are very damning that show the people that you trust with content moderation admitting on video that they disadvantaged conservatives, they they label people who support the president , for you to then come to us many months later after that was all over the news and the internet and say, well, youll get back to us and do a little training. It seems to suggest that you dont take these allegations and this evidence very seriously. So, ill ask the question, perhaps, in a different way. Would you revise in your prior testimony at energy and commerce, you said this does not happen, it cannot happen. Would you at least be willing to acknowledge based on the irrefutable evidence before us that you dont seem to have investigated that it is that at facebook your employees do have the power to disadvantage conservative viewpoints and they in fact have used that power in ways that we need to rout out . Congressman, my testimony in the past and today is about what our principles are as a company and what we try to do. Of course when you have tens of thousands of employees, people make mistake, people have some of their own goals. So time and its our job in running the company to make sure that we minimize errors and that we make sure that the companys operations reflect the principles that we intend to run it on. And when you fire people as a consequence of their politics, do you think that impacts the culture and empowers the content moderators to also treat people worse as a consequence of their politics . Congressman, im not sure what youre referring to. Im not aware of any case where we have fired someone on behalf of their politics. I would say that would be an inappropriate thing for us to do. Why did you fire paul . Congressman, im not sure its appropriate to get into a specific personnel issue publicly. I mean, i could just tell you that i only have ten minutes. It doesnt allow him to talk to anyone except government officials. Ooip government official. Ive seen the messages where you have specifically directed mr. Lucky to make statements regarding his politics for the benefit of your company. I think both in the case of the content moderators and the case of the testimony you just gave regarding mr. Lucky and firing people over their politics, theres serious question as to whether or not youre giving truthful testimony here or whether its lying before long. I see my time has expired and ill yield back. Gentleman yields back. I recognize the gentlelady from pennsylvania. Thank you. I wanted to focus a little bit on googles acquisition of youtube and some of the consequence ossoff that move for Consumer Privacy and composition. Its my understanding google paid 1. 65 billion more that acquisition. So, could you tell us why google was willing to pay so much more beyond the initial proposed bid and was this the result of any harm . Congresswoman, we acquired youtube in 2006 and this is relevant for my time as ceo. But i recall is we saw it as a new emergent area and we saw it as opportunity. Was mr. Page in charge of that decision . Or you dont know . Okay. Im pretty sure Senior Leadership team at the time looked into it. I would encourage the subcommittee to take whatever steps to hear from that. Google is the top online site where americans watch videos including childrens videos. As im sure youre aware federal law prevents companies from collecting data on children under 13. The federal trade Commission Found that google spent years knowingly collecting data on children under 13 on youtube and offering advertisers the ability to target those users directly. Did youtube use the data it illegally acquired to target ads to children . We are you know, this an area, take it very seriously. Im a parent too . We make sure we have clear policies. We enforce them rigorously. Just in q4 of 2019 we removed almost close to a million videos potentially for concerns around child safety. So, it is an area we are enlisting rigorously and will continue to do so. Im more concerned about the fact youre investing rigorously in luring in advertisers like toy makers ma tell and hasbro by telling them youtube is the number one website regularly visited by kids. So, that sounds like youre targeting the kids and then targeting advertisers to bring them on board. Is that correct . There are scenarios to be family viewing and content oriented towards families and there are advertisers which are interested in connecting with those users. But everything here we obviously comply with all the applicable regulations. Okay. Lets look at some of the content that is specifically for children. If a show like sesame street doesnt want to show ads for junk food on youtube, does youtube allow it to make that choice . Today we have choices for both creators in terms of tools and preferences and we have extensive tools for advertisers. And although for users we give a choice they can either use youtube as a Subscription Service without seeing those types of ads or they can use it for free with ads. So, we give choice. And for us, it is most importance that youtube is a place where people come to learn and we find increasingly small and Medium Business use youtube. Okay. Lets go back to content thats designed for children. So, if theres an organization like sesame street that wants to provide childcentered content, but they dont want that content to be sullied, shall we say, with junk food ads or something, my understanding is you say the content creators can do that. But weve got a recent report from the wall street journal saying youtube hasnt been honoring that request and its been making it difficult to independently audit that and report back to the content creators about whether or not youtube is honoring those. Is that correct . Im not familiar with the particular report, but im happy to understand it better and have my office follow up with your staff, congresswoman. I would appreciate that. My time has expired. I yield back. The gentlewoman yields back. The share will now recognize himself for five minutes. Mr. Bezos, thank you for being here today. In your Opening Statement you reviewed your written testimony, you indicated amazon accounts for less than 1 and less than 4 of the retail in the u. S. When you refer to retail, i take it based on the empirical studies youre referring to a broad definition of retail that includes restaurants, bars, gas stations. Its a fairly all encompassing view of retail. I wonder if you know what percentage of amazons sales are represented in the terms of Online Retail sales, ecommerce, markets . The figures ive seen. With all respect, i dont accept is ecommerce is a different market. Ive seen the outside studies were amazons share of the ecommerce channel. Thats consistent with the data ive seen. The latest figure i saw was 40 . In terms of how we define it whether its a stream or a channel, nonetheless, factually its an important distinction i want to make sure we clear here. Obviously i suspect you understand more than most that the early stages of a start up where entrepreneurs are undertaking risks to bring products and services to market, over the course of the investigation, weve heard from start ups who rely on service with respect to concerns about the way in amazon uses confidential information. Weve also heard amazons Cloud Computing arm, aws, the notion that that computing arm identifies start up, best technologies, and rolls out replica products ander is viss. Mr. Bezos does amazon use confidential information to build competing services . No, sir, not that im aware of. Aws does often they do keep expanding their services. Aws started 15 years ago let me just clarify that, mr. Bezos. I appreciate that. Apologies for interrupts. Last week, one of amazons former engineers posted online that he and his team proactively identified growing businesses on aws, they built competing products and targeted products to the businesss customers. Theres been public reporting on that strategy. So, i guess i wonder if you can comment on that and how you would account for those statements. Well, i think there may be categories databases of different kinds and so on where we see an important product for customers and make our own Product Offering in that arena. But it doesnt mean we stop servicing the other companies that are also making those products. We have competitors using aws, and we work very hard to make them successful. Netflix is one example. Hulu is another and so on. I think the concern, mr. Bezos, with respect is that the pattern emerges across the different components in amazon, whether its the market or whether its the Cloud Service as i mentioned. In addition there was an article, im sure youre aware, in the wall street journal regarding the alexa front, according to news reports, alexa fund invested in for example defined crowd corp. Does that ring a bell . No, sir, im afraid it doesnt. Well, ill represent to you according to the wall street journal, and ill just quote from them, when Amazon IncorporatedVenture Capital fund, it gained access to the start up finances and other confidential information. Four years later in april amazons unit launched Artificial Intelligence product that does what defined crowd does said defined cloud. Are you aware of those al gase. I read that article but i dont know the specifics of that situation. I would be happy to get back to your office with more information bt that. I would appreciate i certainly would welcome that to the extent you all can follow up with the subcommittee with respect to this particular article and the different episodes that are referenced both in terms of defining crowd corp. Theres another nucleus you might be familiar with. The reason i ask these questions, the reason it matters to me is we are very concerned about this innovation kill zone that seems to be emerging. I represent boulder and fort collins, ent tremendous preneuros and founders shared these stories with our field hearing just earlier this year and they are extremely dependent on Big Technology firms including in terms of investment and capital yet they live in constant fear that the platforms could steal their Core Technologies or ideas making it impossible to compete because of those existing advantages. I see my time has expired but well be following up with respect to the episodes i referenced w. That, i yield back. The gentlemans time has expired. And the gentlewoman is recognized for five minutes. Thank you, mr. Chair. Facebook acquired whatsapp in 2014 and at the time, the deal was critical for countering the App Store Power of apple and google who choke off facebooks access to mobile devices. Does apple have the power to exclude apps from the app store . If you look at the history of this, congresswoman, weve increased the number of apps from 500 to 1. 7 million. So, theres a very wide gate from the app store. And theres fierce competition for developers. And we want every app we can on the platform. Okay. So, but mr. Cook, then what youre saying is that apple can exclude apps from the app store n. Fact, it has. In 2018, apple introduced an app called screen time which helps people limit the amount of time they or their kids spend on their iphones. Is that correct . It sounds right. Okay. But before screen time existed, there were other apps in the app store that gave parents control over their kids phone usage, apps like our pact and kids locks. And parents depended on them. Soon after you introduced screen times, however, you removed the competing apps from the app store. One mother wrote to apple saying, and i quote her, i am deeply disappointed that you have decided to remove this app and others like it, thereby reducing consumer access to muchneeded services to keep children safe and protect their Mental Health and wellbeing. Mr. Cook, why did apple remove competing apps right after you released screen time . We were concerned, congresswoman, about the privacy and security of kids. The technology that was being used at that time was called ndm, and it had the ability to sort of take over the kids screen, and a third party could see it. So, we were worried about their safety. Okay. Thank you. I appreciate that. Today we have i appreciate that, but the timing seems coincidental. If apple wasnt intending to harm competitors to help its own app, why did phil promote the screen time app to customers who complained about the removal of rival parental control apps . Congresswoman, i cant see this email. Im sorry. My eyes are not good enough to read it. But i see screen time as just an alternative. But there are over 30 parental control apps that are in the app store today. So, theres vibrant competition for Parental Controls out there. Well, mr. Cook, the fact is that apple sidelined screen times competition by keeping them out of the app store. And while apple claims these competitors werent meeting apples privacy standards, these apps creators say that you admitted them back in six months later without requiring significant privacy changes. And of course, six months is truly an eternity for Small Businesses to be shutdown, even worse if all the while a larger competitor is actually taking away customers. And this is not the first time Something Like this seems to have happened, mr. Cook. Let me give you another example of the harm thats been caused to your competitors n. 2010, apple introduced an online bookstore called the ibookstore where it offered ebooks and the only major publisher that didnt agree to join ibookstore was random house. Random house wanted to offer its own ebooks through its own apps and submitted their apps to be added to the app store. Amidst continued negotiations between apple and random house, senior vp eddie q. Said, it prevented an app from random house from going live in the app store. Q. Himself cited this app rejection as a factor in finally getting random house to give in and join ibookstore. Is it fair for apple to use its power over the app store to pressure a business to join apples own app . I cant see the email, so i dont know the context of it. But there are reasons why an ad might not initially go through the app store gate. It may not work properly. There may be other issues with it. So, its very difficult to see. What i would say though, on a macro basis, the gate to the app store is very wide. We have 1. 7 million apps in it. Its become an economic miracle okay. With over 138 billion of commerce just snt United States. I really, really appreciate that sentiment. I want to say to you apple enjoys enormous power to which apps can reach consumers. Even some of the largest in the country fear your power. Our evidence suggests your company has used the power to boost your business. This is fundamentally unfair and harms Small Businesses that rely on you to reach customers. It stifles the innovation that is the life blood of our economy. Ultimately it reduces the competition and choices that are made available to consumers, and that is a great concern to all of us. And i yield back. The gentle lady yields back. That concludes that round. In light of the request of mr. Gaetz for a third round and because many of my colleagues would like to get more answers on a number of issues, well proceed to a final round. My expectations, we will conclude within the hour. Ill recognize myself for five minutes. Mr. Zuckerberg, weve seen the dominance of several of the companies appearing before us today that its not just harmful to our economy and competition but its harmful to the founding principles of our democracy. Facebook and google are designed to keep users on their platforms whatever the cost because disinformation, propaganda and hateful speech are good for engagement, theyre good for business. But over100 years ago the Supreme Court oliver windal holmes jr. Wrote would not protect a man from falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing panic. Do you agree with that principle, that there are limits to harmful and false speech, and that are particularly important when it comes to the health and safety of the public . Congressman, i certainly do, and i actually think that our policies go further than just limiting those types of things. Well, mr. Zuckerberg, you have a billion users and almost 50,000 employees so you agree you have a responsibility to remove harmful lies from your platform, correct . Congressman, i think we have a responsibility to limit the spread of content thats going to be harmful for people. And also i would like to add that i do not believe that we have any incentive to have this content on our service. Except that, mr. Zuckerberg, with all due respect, except that it is often the most engaging. Its the most it brings the most likes or brings the most activity which of course produces great profit. So, you do have an incentive. The more engagement there is, the more money you make on advertising. Let me ask you a question. Let me give you specific examples that illustrate by concerns. These are some of the top ten most shared aspects on 2020. Trump suggests injection of disinfectant to beat the coronavirus. Coronavirus hype biggest hoax in history. U. S. Hospitals getting paid to label for cause of death as coronavirus. In the Public Health crisis of our lifetime, dont you agree that these articles viewed by millions on your platform will cost lives . Congressman, with respect, we certainly have policies that prohibit false information about covid that would lead to imminent harm, and weve been quite aggressive about taking that down as some of the questioning from the other side of the aisle has shown so far. Im proud of our efforts here. Mr. Zuckerberg, with all due respect, the problem is facebook is profiting off and amplifying disinformation that harms others because its profitable. This isnt a speech issue. Its about facebooks Business Model that prioritizes engagement in order to keep people on facebooks platform to serve up more advertisements. Ill ask you specifically what are you doing right now to protect people from demonstrably false claims related to the deadly pandemic . Congressman, ill certainly answer that, but i have to disagree with the assertion that youre making that this content is somehow helpful for our business. It is not what people want to see, and we rank our what we show in feed based on what is going to be the most meaningful to people and is going to create longterm satisfaction, not just whats going to get engagement or clicks today. If thats true, mr. Zuckerberg, how do you explain that on monday the second most popular post on facebook was a breitbart video claiming that you dont need a mask and hydroxychloroquine is a cure for covid. And in the first five hours after being posted on facebook, it wracked up 20 million views and over 100,000 comments before facebook acted to remove it. Congressman, a lot of people shared that and we did take it down because it violates our policies. After 20 Million People saw it over the period of 5 hours. Doesnt that suggest, mr. Zuckerberg, that your platform is so big that even with the right policies in place, you cant contain deadly content . Congressman, i dont think so. I think we have on covid misinformation in particular a relatively good track record of fighting and taking down lots of false content as well as putting up authoritative information. We have built a Covid Information Center with authoritative information from Health Officials thank you, mr. Zuckerberg. One more question. I appreciate that. Mr. Zuckerberg, a television runs a false political advertisement, theyre held liable for that. Why should facebook or any other platform be different . While you may not be a publisher, youre responsible maybe not for the first posting but you take the posting and apply algorithms that decide how to disseminate that which is a business decision, not a First Amendment decision. Its hard to understand why facebook should not be responsible for those business decisions. In term of political ads, we follow a lot of policies off fcc guidelines on broadcasters and their requirements to run political ads equally from all different sides. I think this did yeah. I think these examples unfortunately mr. Zuckerberg are just the tip of the iceberg. Its not just about covid. Facebook hosts countless pages and ads dedicated to conspiracy theories and calls to violence including content that led to the White Supremacy rally in charlottesville in 2018. Facebook gets away with it because youre the only game in town. Theres no competition forcing you on your platform. Allowing this to spread can lead to violence and strikes at the heart of the american democracy. With that, i recognize the gentleman from florida for five minutes. In 2016, there was an internal google meeting. You attended that meeting along with sergey brin. A video of that meeting was leaked to breitbart and camp walker lamented trumps victory, compared trump voters to extremists, and there was attempt to mange the trump win in the populist movement in history. I know you testified in response to my questions and mr. Jordans questions that you dont intend this time to engage in election nearing on behalf of the former Vice President , but given the Video Evidence of senior members of your team in your presence saying that they had the intent to make the Trump Victory a blip, why should we believe that testimony today . Congressman, we do not have a view on we respect the democratic process. We are deeply committed to it. As a company, we take pride in the information we provide to help people participate in free elections and we are deeply committed to it. Do you remember that meeting . 2016 . Yes, i do. It was in the context of the election. Across both sides there was a lot of opinions. And as you know, elections are kind of a polarizing moment generally in the country, and there was a lot of rhetoric about certain issues which were i understand rhetoric. I guess the question is when the senior members of your team in your presence said that they did have the intent to change the outcome in a subsequent election and then since that moment in time where weve seen all these conservative websites and conservative viewpoints censored, you can understand why people would be concerned. After your employees and top executives said in your presence that they intended to malk the Trump Victory a blip, what action did you take as the ceo to protect and preserve the knew trail of your platform . Congressman, no one had a view on ever interfering with the elections or so on. But what i can tell you is we made it very clear about two years ago. We announced new community guidelines, orbit and google, clearly make it clear that employees obviously are free to have their political views, but none of that should ever they shouldnt bring that as they work on any of our products. And if we found any evidence that people are using political agenda to manipulate any of our unfortunately theres a string of events here. We had the 2016 meeting where people demonstrated intent to hurt the president. Then we have the testimony different from the testimony from december where people say people can manipulate blacklists and you have the outcome where sites like bright bart and gateway pundit and others see that retreatment. It doesnt take Sherlock Holmes here to see what google is doing. Mr. Bezos, i am deeply moved by your personal story. I am not accusing you of someone that would traffic in hate. B but it seems you have empowered people who do. Im talking about the Southern Poverty Law Center who can receive donations on your amazon smile platform have said the catholic family news, catholic family ministries, federation for American Immigration reform, Family Research council, Jewish Defense league, and even dr. Ben carson are extremists and should be treated differently. Dr. Carson is on the cabinet as one of the most renowned minds in america. Im just wondering why you would place your con i if dense in a group that seems to be so out of step and seems to take main stream Christian Doctrine and label it as hate. Amazon smile is a program that allows customers to designate a certain fraction of their purchases to go to charity that we then pay for and they can select from any one of millions of charities. And we use the Southern Poverty Law Center data to say which charities are extremist organizations. We also use the u. S. Foreign office to do the same thing. Why since theyre common catholics and jewish people groups, why would you trust them . Sir, im going to acknowledge this is an imperfect system no doubt. And i would like suggestions on additional sources my suggestion would be a divorce from the splc and i see im out of time. I yield back. The gentleman yields back, i recognize mr. Johnson. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Facebook is dominant not just in the social media market but also in its digital surveillance capabilities. In 2012, facebook had several tools that allowed it to conduct digital surveillance including trackers, facebooks like button, facebook log in, and a series of application programming interfaces or apis. Mr. Zuckerberg, these tools provide facebook with insights into its competitors websites and apps, isnt that correct . Yes or no . Congressman, i think broadly the answer to what youre saying is yes. Okay. We every other company here do Market Research to understand what people are finding valuable. All right. Okay. So, youre going beyond the scope of my question. I appreciate that answer though. Mr. Zuckerberg, a few days before facebook acquired instagram, a facebook Vice President emailed you suggesting ways to improve facebooks, quote, competitive research, end quote. By building a custom model, facebook could improve its understanding of its competitors and, quote, make more bold decisions on whether they are friends or foes, end quote. Mr. Zuckerberg, how does facebook improve research to distinguish friends from foe . Congressman, im not sure exactly what he was referring to in that email there. But he is one of the people involved in running our analytics organization. And i think its natural that he would as part of his responsibility be focused on Market Research and understanding more there. Certainly isnt it true that facebook after that conversation purchased the web Analytics Company in 2013 to give facebook more capability to monitor its competitors . Congressman, i think you have the timing correct. We purchased onavo as part of broader Market Research. And that would give you the capability to monitor your competitors, correct . Congressman, it gave aggregate analytics as to what people were using and what people were finding valuable. Sort of like the type of product you would get from nielsen or come source, these other third parties that provide data. Mr. Zuckerberg, that acquisition gave you nonpublic Real Time Data about engagement, usage and how much time people spend on apps. And when it became public that facebook was using onnavo to conduct digital surveillance, your company got kicked out of the app store. Isnt that true . Congressman, im not sure i would characterize it in that way. I think onavo did get kicked out of the app store, isnt that true . We took it out after they changed policies. And it was because of the use of the surveillance tools. Congressman, im not sure that the policy was worded that way or that thats exactly the right characterization of it. Okay. Let me ask you this question. Let me ask you this question. After onayvo was booted out of the app store, you turned to other surveillance tools such as Facebook Research app, correct . Congressman, in general, yes, we do a broad variety of so, also isnt it true mr. Zuckerberg that facebook paid teenager to sell their privacy by installing Facebook Research app . Congressman, im not familiar with that, but i think its a general practice to be able to that the Companies Use to have different surveys facebook and understand data and what preferences are. Facebook research app got thrown out of the app store too, isnt that true . Congressman, im not familiar with that. Okay. Well, over nearly a decade, mr. Zuckerberg, you led a sustained effort to surveil competitors to benefit facebook. These were steps taken to abuse data, to harm competitors, and to shield facebook from competition. You tried one thing and then you got caught, made some apologies, then you did it all over again. Isnt that true . Congressman, i respectfully disagree with that characterization. I think every Company Engages in research to understand what their customers are enjoying so that they can learn and make their products better. Thats what we were trying to do. Thats what our Analytics Team was doing. I think it allows us to make our Services Better for people to be able to connect in a lot of different ways which is our goal. Did you use that capability to purchase whatsapp . Congressman, it was one of the signals that we had about whatsapps trajectory, but we didnt need it. Without that, it was pretty clear that whatsapp was a great product. And it was a competitor the gentlemans time has expired. I now recognize the gentleman from florida, mr. Steube. Thank you. I have a question for all four, yes or no answer. Do you believe that the Chinese Government steals technology from u. S. Companies . Start with mr. Cook. I dont know of specific cases where we have been stolen from by the government. So, you dont believe that the Chinese Government is stealing technology from u. S. Companies, or youre just saying that not from yours . Im saying i know of no case on ours where it occurred, which i can only speak to firsthand knowledge. Do you believe that the Chinese Government steals technology from United States companies . Congressman, i have no firsthand knowledge of any information stolen from google. Mr. Zuckerberg . Congressman, i think its well documented that the Chinese Government steals technology from american companies. Thank you. Mr. Bezos . Youre on mute. Mr. Bezos, i believe youre on mute. Im sorry. I was saying i have heard many reports of that. I havent seen it personally, but ive heard many reports of it. So, of all the different products amazon carries you havent seen it in the products on amazon or your company or yourself . Certainly there are knock off products if thats what you mean. There are counterfeit products and all of that. But the chinese the answer is the Chinese Government stealing technology, thats the thing i read reports of but dont have personal experience with. Its no secret that europe increasingly seems to have agenda of attacking large Successful Tech Companies yet europes approach to regulation in general and antitrust in particular seems to have been much less successful than americas approach. As you all know from direct experience, this is a country where its possible to start a company and seerns tremendous success. Do you have any recommendations on how congress can better protect u. S. Firms and u. S. Companies from aggression and Government Intervention abroad, not just in europe but in china as well . Anybody that would like to chime in . Ill open it up to any of you. None of you have any recommendations on how congress can better protect u. S. Companies like yourself . In the emails that your company produced to the committee, theres one from david wayner in 2014 where hes describing under the mergers and acquisitions advice within the company where you need to engage in a land grab. He says i hate the word land grab but thats the most convincing argument and we should own that. He goes on to describe market cap each year. Does that refresh your recollection . Yes, congressman. Thanks for the opportunity to address this. And frankly correct the record because i believe what he was referring to was a question that was incoming from investors about whether we would continue to acquire different companies. I dont think that that was that wasnt referring to an internal strategy. It was referring to an external question that we were facing about how we would how investors should expect us to act going forward. And i think he was discussing the fact that as mobile phones were growing in popularity, there were a lot of new ways that people could connect and communicate that were part of this overall broader space and market around Human Connection and helping people stay connected and share their experiences. Mr. Zuckerberg, it seems to be both internal and external because then in an email from you in 2012 we see a similar sentiment expressed. You write, we can likely always just buy any competitive start ups. So, is your desire to limit competition by purchasing your competitors consistent with the message to your investors that the way youll run your company is through digital land grabs . Congressman, im not sure i agree with the characterization of how we communicated with investors. Its your words, mr. Zuckerberg. But i think the broader point is that there were a lot of new ways that people can connect that were created by smartphones. This is about your merger and acquisition strategy. You went on to say one thing about start ups is you can often acquire them. So, im not interested in how people connect. Im interested in how you acquire businesses to limit competition. The gentlemans time has expired but the witness may answer the question. Congressman, in order to serve People Better and help people connect in all the ways they would want, we innovated and built a lot of new use cases internally and acquired others. And that, i think, has been a very successful strategy at serving people well. And a lot of the companies that weve been able to acquire have done have gone on to reach and help connect many more people than they would have been able to on their own. Youve grabbed a lot of land. I yield back. I recognize the chair of the full committee, mr. Nadler, for five minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Cook, weve heard from businesses that apple is canvassing the app store to determine whether it can extract commissions from apps that have changed their Business Models in response to the pandemic. Businesss th businesses that relied on in person interactions have moved on and apple is looking for its cut. My staff has heard from some of the affected businesses. They say youre calling them up demanding your 30 . Isnt this pandemic profiteering . We would never do that, mr. Chairman. The pandemic is a tragedy, and its hurting americans and many people all around the world. And we would never take advantage of that. I believe the cases that youre talking about are cases where something has moved to a Digital Service which technically does need to go through our commission model. But in both of the cases that im aware of, we are working with the developers. To zoom out and give you Historical Context on this, we entered the app store market. The cost of distributing software was 50 to 70 . So, we took the rate in half to 30 and weve held nit that same level over time or lowered it. Its now responsible for 2 million jobs across america, and 84 of the apps on the store are distributed for free where 100 of the proceeds go to the developer. Only that 16 is subject to a commission of either 15 or 30 . And school is about to start around the country. Millions of parents and students will attend school online. They will rely on apps to talk to teachers, tutors, and Virtual Learning tools. Are these Online Learning tools next on apples are they on apples list to monetize . Theyre not, mr. Chairman. We would we will were very proud of what weve done in education. We are serving that market in a significant way and including tons of donations. And we will work with the people that happen to move from a physical move from a physical to a Virtual World because of the pandemic. Weve done a lot to address covid in general as a company. Weve sourced and donated 30 million masks, turning our supply chain into something that would be great for america. Weve designed a face shield, donated 10 million of those. Were donated significant amounts of money across the u. S. Thank you, thank you. Thank you. Weve heard that apple is now trying to extract commissions from various apps that previously didnt pay you anything. You approved, were told, the email and days later threatened to kick it out of the app store unless it figured out a way to give you a cut of revenue. The coo of base camp testified before our committee this year. He was concerned over apples disty bugs over devices. He seems to sbrn right. He says Apple Services have required to cut apple in. But you didnt enforce your rules this way. So, would you comment on this please . Yes, mr. Chairman, i would. Hey is in the store today and were happy that theyre there. I believe they have a version of their product is for free, so theyre not paying anything on that. I would also say that 30 i hope you give me time to explain this or 15 is for lots of Different Services from programming languages to compilers to 150,000 apis. It has been an economic miracle to allow the person in their basement to start a company, a global company, and serve 175 countries in the world. It is amazing. Likely the highest job creator in the last decade. I see. And you havent changed the rules in such a way as to make apps pay when they werent paying before. I know of no case where weve done that. Im sure weve made errors before. We get 100,000 different apps submitted a week and we got 1. 7 million on the store. But across that peer of time weve never raised commissions from the first day the app store went into effect back in 2008. Weve only lowered thank you. I see my time is expired and i yield back. Chairman yields back. Thank you for the question. I recognize the gentleman from north dakota, mr. Armstrong. Thank you mister chairman. Mr. Pichai, google announced it would not allow third parties to buy youtube ads. That means advice on youtube are conducted only through google demand side products. Google justify this change by citing privacy and user experience. My understanding is that double sided a concern that third Party Digital ad participants would develop user profiles based on this theory. Its also my understanding that even under the gdpr, you allow users to provide consent which would authorize this type of activity. It seems that this policy, regardless of the Privacy Concerns, reduced competition for demand side platforms on youtube. Do you agree . Congressman, we are always looking to improve the youtube experience. Part of being able to integrate this space and what weve been able to innovate and youtube where users gets capable ads. If they find ads not to be relevant, they can skip pass those ads. Monetizing youtube is what allows hundreds of thousands of creators earning a livelihood. Many of them are small and Medium Businesses. We want to support that wealth and so we are focused on that. Allowing this type of integration is what allows us to create that user experience. After google stopped allowing third parties to buy google at the at ex, google limit to the interoperability of thirdparty analytics on youtube. You now allow the requiring abuse of at some data. Its based on user privacy once again. Other Market Participants may not have access to that data what it does not disappear does it . Congressman, this is consistent with how Many Services be at facebook or snapchat or pinterest, you work to buy ads on their properties. I understand that, the excuse is privacy but the data does not disappear. You just have greater control over it right . Congressman, its a service we provide to our users. We obviously want to make sure we protect the privacy of users there. We do monetize with ads. We give users a choice of either consuming it as a Subscription Service or using it with ads. Weve been very focused on making youtube a great platform for creators and i think the model is working well. Its really helped many small and Medium Businesses to invest on the platform. As well as grow their businesses. Regardless of the intent, was the lesson competition are not . The action resulted in smaller competitors not being able to participate in placing ads on youtube. Is that correct . Congressman, we see robust choice for advertisers. There are several all internet areas. Theres obviously facebook. Theres amazon with their ads marketplace. Theres Companies Like snapchat, pinterest and twitter or new competitors that have emerged. Thats why we see advertising costs declined by 40 in the last ten years. We see dynamism in the marketplace. Heres my issue. There are policies that actually protect user privacy. Apples policy, microsoft just came out on facial recognition policy. My concern is that your one were using privacy, were trying to use privacy as a shield. What your company is really doing is using it as a cudgel to beat down the competition. When were talking about privacy, its a great word that people carry about, but not when its utilized to control more of the marketplace and squeeze out smaller competitors. With that i yield the remainder of my time to mr. Gaetz. I thank you for yielding. Mr. Bezos, we were cut short in our last conversation. I want to declare this up. You dont believe doctor ben carson is an extremist do you . No sir i dont. Help me understand why you would partner with a group that labels him as someone worthy of an extremist watchlist . I want you to hopefully appreciate that were trying to make it possible for people to donate millions of different charities. We need to have some source of data to use. I accept what youre saying that the u. S. Foreign asset office are not perfect and i would like a better source if we could get it. That is what we use today. Thats breaking news. Its great to hear that you do recognize the infirmities in the southern law have a lot center. I guess mr. Sucker brick and mr. Pichai company use them as well. Mr. Zuckerberg, do you believe doctor ben carson is an extremist . No congressman. So, why would you trust the people who think he is . Congressman, im not aware of where we work with the organization that you are saying. Gentlemans time has expired. I recognize the gentleman from maryland, mr. Raskin, for five minutes. Thank you mister chairman. I read mr. Acosta years the paranoid style of american politics. I suppose it is futile to try to cure the obsessive persecution complex and victim all edgy of some of our colleagues. They should check out these Top Performing facebook link posts by the United States pages today or yesterday or any day for the last week. In seven out of the ten for each day, they are right wing sites. Then shapiro, fox news, then been geno, who lives matter and so on. If facebook is out there trying to repress conservative to speech, theyre doing a terrible job at it. So i dont understand the endless whining about how facebook and twitter are somehow discriminating against conservatives. The removal of donald trump and donald trump junior from twitter was all about their spreading disinformation. False statements about covid19. That was an absolute Public Health measure which i hope all of us would endorse. We dont want anybody, including the president of the United States, spreading false information about covid19. They essentially destroy their own case when they pick that as their cause for going after all of you. I dont understand for the life of me the line of questioning about electioneering taking place by some of your companies. If you are opposed by electioneering by corporations, as i am, and opposed to citizens united, then you have no problem. Citizens united is what gave corporations the power to go out and spend money. If you dont like the way some companies are spending money, then either start your own company or tell them what is wrong with it. But the idea that electioneering is something you are opposed to strikes me is something that is completely inconsistent with the history and facts. I want to go to mr. Cook if we could. First, a quick question. Are any of your Companies Benefit corporations . That is that something you have considered doing . As any of you considered becoming a benefit corporation . I will take your silence as no. Mr. Cook, im hung up on this 30 question that several members have talked to you about. You say sometimes its 15 , sometimes its 30 , can you explain when its 15 and when its 30 and why its 15 sometimes and whites 30 others . Sure. Thank you for the question congressman. 84 of the time, its zero. 16 of the time its 15 or 30. Its 15 if its in the second year of a subscription. So you just graduate from your first year, you are taking notice essentially. The second year its 15 and its 30 after the . Is that right . No. If its a subscription product, its 30 in the first year ended in drops 15 and the second year and every year thereafter. I got you. Okay. What troubles me is what one business woman told me when i was looking at this. She said i pay around 25 of my income to uncle sam, to the government. Then, i pay 30 of my income to apple. So i get half of it and its very hard to make ends meet. I just wonder look, all of you are in business and tremendously successful at what you do. Obviously, this model has worked for you. But the question is does this model actually squeeze out the next generation of entrepreneurs . And is it an unjust arrangement because you are the 10,000 pound gorilla and they are just trying to get started . I dont think so. In fact, keep in mind weve gone from 500 apps to 1. 7 million. So theres a lot of apps on the store and a lot of people are making a very good living from it. Youve said that. Forgive me for interrupting, what you said that several times. That, to me, might just underscore the monopoly nature of your business. That Everyone Needs to go through you. Theres really no alternative. I dont blame you for taking them all, but that doesnt mean that the terms being dictated are in fact fair terms. So, how would you defend that bargain substantively . Whether you look at it from a customer point of view or a developer point of view, there are enormous choices out there. If you are a developer, you can write for android. You can write for windows. You can write for xbox or playstation. If you are a customer and you dont like the setup, the curated experience of the app store, you can buy a samsung. I appreciate that. Forgive me for cutting you off again. I have a final question for mr. Zuckerberg. You spend a lot of take your time speaking to our conservative colleagues who had this persecution complex that you are somehow going after them. Will you have time to meet with this Broad Coalition of civil Rights Groups that are engaged in a boycott because of what they think is the proliferation of hate speech and holocaust revisionist and other affiliated topics on facebook . Congressman, yes. Ive already taken the time to meet with them. I think the topics they are pushing on are important on a lot of the goals we agree. These are issues around fighting hate that we have focused on for years. We are committed to continuing to improve the way our Company Works and just continually Getting Better on these issues. I appreciate that. Thank you mr. Zuckerberg. I now recognize the gentleman from ohio, mr. Jordan, for five minutes. Thank you. Mr. Cook, is the cancel culture mob dangerous . Its something im not all the way up to speed on. If you are talking about where someone with a different point of view talks and they are canceled, i dont think thats good. I think its good for people to hear different points of view and decide for themselves. I agree with that. I want to reference a letter. Barry weiss, who resigned as an editor from the new york times, wrote a letter explaining why she resigned. I will read three sentences for all of you. She says, first of all my own forays into wrong thick made me the subject of constant bullying by my colleagues who disagreed with my views. She later says, everyone lives in fear of the digital thunder dome. The online venomous excuse as long as it is directed at the proper targets. The targets are not only conservative. Miss vice is actually center left. Shes not conservative. The targets are anyone who disagrees with the mob. Are the rest of you concerned about the cancel culture mob and what it is up to . Mr. Pichai . Congressman, i couldnt hear very well for the moment. We build platforms which allow for freedom of expression. We take pride in the fact that across our platforms, including youtube, there are more Diverse Voices than ever before. It is something. Thats fun. Im just concerned about it. Again, im not just concerned because conservatives gets attacked, im concerned that anyone gets attacked for expressing viewpoint. I thought we had a First Amendment and yet, they constantly get attacked. How about you mr. Zuckerberg . Yes congressman. I believe strongly in free expression. Giving up people a voice is an important part of what our services do. Im very worried about some of the forces of illiberalism that i see in this country that are pushing against free expression. I think that this is one of the fundamental democratic traditions that we have in our country. It is how we make progress over the long term on a number of issues. Our company is committed to doing what we can to protect mr. Peoples voice. Thank you mr. Zuckerberg. Mr. Bezos . Yes, sir. Im concerned in general about that. I find a little discouraging that it appears to me that social media is a nuanced destruction machine. I dont think that is helpful for a democracy. Do you agree with the terms she used . Digital thunder dome . I see that, yes. I see it to. I guess my point is, you are for pretty important guys leading four of the most Important Companies on the planet. It would short be helpful if you spoke out against this. Mr. Cook, there was a 1984 Super Bowl Ad and black and white that had this big brother type figure as the narrator saying over the screen to the workers, our unification of thoughts is more powerful weapon on than any fleet or army on the earth. It seems to be straight out of the soviet union. Then you see a women coming in and smashing the screen. Busting the group think. Busting the mob thank. Do you remember that ad mr. Cook . I remember it very well. It was apple versus ibm at the time. Yes. But the point was, mob thank, cancel culture, group thank, is not what this country is about. We are seeing it play out every single just take the sports world for goodness sake. In the last few weeks, drew brees had to bowed to the mob because he simply suggested you should stand for the anthem. There is a football coach at Oklahoma State who wore the wrong tshirt fishing with his boys. He got in all kinds of trouble. James harden gets attacked for supporting the police. Why dont we just let the First Amendment work . That is all we are asking. You are four individuals who have so much influence, it would your help if you are out there criticizing what the cancel culture mob is doing to this country. People see it every single day. I hope you will do it. You all said you disagree with it, i hope you will really speak out against it and be fair. With all viewpoints. I yield back. The gentleman yields back. I recognize the general gentlelady from washington. Thank you mister chairman. Mr. Pichai, i direct my questions to you. Many of us feel a deep urgency to protect independent journalism. I wanted to talk a little bit about ad revenue and independent journalism. Google makes most of its revenue through selling advertising and goggles Advertising Exchange is a quote, realtime marketplace to selling display advertising space. Correct . Yes congress woman, thats correct. Over 2 million websites including newspapers use that exchange. Correct . We are very proud to support publishers. We dont know the exact numbers, but yes that seems correct. Thats an estimate put forward forth by a tech expert. Your own website says you have access to over 2 million sites. What is googles share of the Ad Exchange Market . Congressman, im not exact are familiar. Ive seen various reports. We are popular choice. Great, let me put it up for you. If you look at the screen you will see that 50 to 60 according to Online Platforms and Digital Advertising market study that was released. In order to exchange websites and advertisers go through a middleman like google ads. If you look at the slide, you can see that the share of this by side market that google has is 50 to 90 according to the same study. I want to simplify how these exchanges work. Lets say in seattle, a mom and pop business wants to buy online at space in the seattle times. The company would need to go to a middleman likable adds, which would then vivid for a space on an ad exchange. The problem is that google controls all of the entities. So its running the marketplace, its acting on the by side and its acting on the sill side at the same time which is a Major Contract conflict of interest. It allows you to set rates very low as a buyer of at space for newspapers, depriving them of their ad revenue. Then it also allows you to sell high to Small Businesses who are dependent on advertising on your platform. It sounds a bit like a stock market, except unlike a stock market, theres no regulation on your Ad Exchange Market. If there were regulation, it would actually prohibit insider trading. That means the broker cant use the data in the Broker Division to buy and sell for their own interests. Instead, brokers have to serve the clients. Does google have a similar obligation to serve its clients . The businesses that are selling and buying at space. Congresswoman, if i could explain this for a minute. We paid over 14 billion dollars to publishers. We are deeply committed to journalism. In this area, on an average, we pay about 69 of the revenue went publishers use goggles side websites. Its a low business margin for us. We do it because we want to help support publishers. I understand that, what im trying to get at is that when any Company Controls both the buy and sell side. I worked at long wall street long ago. This ad exchange is essentially the same thing. Without accountability, it isnt meaningful to just care about the newspapers. We are seeing them die everywhere and ad revenue is a big reason. Let me put up a graphic that shows that goggles ad revenues increasingly coming from ads on google owned sites and less from other websites. Can you explain the trend . I cant quite see if this is net revenue or gross revenue. When it comes to non google properties, we share the majority of revenue back to publishers. On our own properties, we have the inventory. I would need to understand more, i just quickly looked at it. We can send it to you and make sure you have it. Google has not made its search traffic volumes public and bears so theres no way for us to know exactly whats happening. There is no way for businesses to verify whether they have been treated fairly or left behind in favor of google owned companies. Is google staring advertising revenue to Google Search . Congresswoman, users on Google Search, thats where our source of revenue comes from. We work hard to earn their trust. We know competition for information is just a click away. Thank you mister pichai. I want to make the point that independent journalism is incredibly necessary for our democracy and we want to do what we can to protect it. I want to ask one last question of mr. Zuckerberg. Over 1100 companies and organizations pulled their advertising business from facebook as part of the stock meat for Profit Campaign to protest the spread of hate speech and disinformation. But you at a staff meeting earlier this month told employees you are not going to change your policies or approach because of a threat to any percent of your revenue. My guess is all these advertisers will be back on the platform soon enough. Mr. Zuckerberg, are you so big that you dont care how you are impacted by a major boycott of 1100 advertisers . No congresswoman. Of course we care. But, were also not going to set our content policies because of advertisers. I think that would be the wrong thing for us to do. Weve cared about issues like finding hate speech for a long time and weve invested billions of dollars. We have tens of thousands of content reviewers. We built a systems that proactively identify the majority, were nine at 89 of the hate speech removed before it is even reported to us. We will continue Getting Better at that. I think the results we put up will be recognized by people since i believe they are industry leading. I think our advertising is also the most effective for many Small Businesses. Thank you mr. Zuckerberg, my time has expired. I would just say that i know you commissioned your own civil rights audit. I dont think that you implemented all those recommendations yet. I hope you will move quickly to implement those. This is a critical time as weve watched the body of john lewis leave us here in the capital, that we focus on civil rights. Thank you mister chairman, i yield back. Before i call on the next witness, i want to recognize mr. Pichai who i think wants to make a correction for the hearing. , there was a question earlier about information with respect to china. I just wanted to acknowledge on record that in 2009, we had a well publicized cyberattack which originated from their. I wanted to correct that. Thank you mister pichai, the record will reflect that. I recognize the gentle lady from pennsylvania for five minutes. Thank you mister chairman. In march 2020, amazon announced it would start delaying shipments of non essential products in order to better serve customers and meet needs while helping to ensure the safety of their warehouse workers. In practice, however, it appears that this policy was applied selectively as amazon continue to designate its own products as essential even as it delayed competing products from thirdparty sellers. Essential items were supposed to include medical supplies, household staples, high demand products and many factors were considered were used when determining eligibility for being essential. Weve had several people report that amazon continued to ship nonessential items like hammocks, fish tanks, floaty etc. Mr. Bezos, were amazon devices like fire tv, echo speakers and ringing doorbell designated as essential during the pandemic . I dont know the answer to that question. What i can tell you is that we had there was no playbook for this. We moved very quickly. Demand went through the roof. It was like having holiday selling season but in march. We had to make a lot of decisions very rapidly. Our goal was to limit it to essential supplies, but im sure we did not do that perfectly. Okay. I know the ring doorbell has two competing products including our low and you feet. Do you know if they were designated as essential . I do not. Okay. Are you able to testify to Congress Today whether amazons profit factor was a factor in giving essential classification distinction . No. Not to my knowledge. We were working to two objectives. One was to get essential products to customers and the second was to keep our frontline employees safe. We did a tremendous amount of work in both categories. Thats what we were focused on. We were not focused on profitability at that time. Pushing out the elusive clorox wipes i guess. At any rate, moving along, lets talk about the fees amazon charges sellers. According to a recent report, seller fees netted amazon almost 60 billion in 2019. Nearly double the 35 billion in revenue from a double u. S. , amazons massive Cloud Computing division. Five years ago, amazon took an average of 19 of each sale made by thirdparty on its site. Today, amazon keeps an average of 30 . Doesnt amazons ability to hike those fees so steeply suggest that amazon enjoys market power over those sellers . No, i dont believe so congresswoman. When you see it go from 19 to 30 , its that more sellers are taking advantage of our Incremental Services that we offer. But today, 60 of sellers are going through thirdparty sellers up from zero 20 years ago. Right, i think a little more concerning is the 11 height. Since 2014, amazons revenue from cellar fees has grown almost twice as fast as its overall sales. Seller fees now account for 21 of amazons total revenue. Mr. Bezos, arent seller fees now effectively subsidizing Amazon Retail division . Congresswoman, i dont believe so. When you see fees going up, whats really happening is that sellers are choosing to use more of our services that we make available. They are, you know, previously they were shipping their own products. They wouldve had cost doing that. Buying Transportation Services to the customer through the Postal Service or through ups or whoever it would be. Lets talk about the fulfillment centers. Right, okay. Weve got fulfillment by amazon and a year ago we asked whether a merchant who is enrolled in fulfillment by amazon is a factor in if they can be awarded the by box. At that time, amazon said no. But the evidence is indicating, and your own documents are showing, that being enrolled in that program is a major factor and effectively forces sellers to pay for fulfilments services from amazon if they want to make sales. Mr. Bezos, as amazons by box algorithm every favored thirdparty sellers who by Fulfillment Services from amazon over other sellers . I think, directly or indirectly im not sure, but indirectly i think the buy box disfavor products which can be shipped with prime. Especially if youre a prime member, the buy boxes trying to pick the offer. If we have multiple offers from multiple sellers for the same item, the customer wants to buy that item. The buy box tries to pick the offer that the customer we predicted would most like. If you are a prime member, and includes if the item is eligible for prime. Thank you mr. Bezos. I think my time has expired. Before i recognize our last two colleagues, i think mr. Zuckerberg would like to clarify something for the record as well. Chairman, thank you. In response to congressman johnsons question, i said i was not familiar with the Facebook Research app. I wasnt familiar with the name for it, but i want to be clear that i do recall that we used a app for research that has since been discontinued. I would be happy to follow up with his staff on any more details than he would like on that. Thank you mr. Zuckerberg. The records shall so reflected. I recognize the debt gentle men from colorado. Thank you chairman. I want to direct a few questions to you mr. Zuckerberg. I want to talk about the app store and at development. Taking a step back, my understanding from your testimony is that apple has to operate by the same rules that the App Developers operate by in terms of being able to access the app store. Is that correct . We have 60 apps on the app store. They go through the same rules that the 1. 7 million do. Okay. Here is why i asked the question. My understanding is the App Store Review guidelines tell App Developers not to submit copycat apps. Is that correct . Im not totally familiar, but i believe thats the case because we were getting a number of apps that were essentially the same thing. A sort of cookie cutter. I could represent to you that weve reviewed the guidelines and they say that App Developers should have original ideas, that copycat ideas are not fair and that apples customers do not want those. On the other hand, the app developer agreement which you require every developer to agree to does give apple the right to coffee other apps. The question is why one rule for the developers they compete with you and the opposite rule for apple . Congressman, im not familiar with that. I can follow up with your office on it. I would appreciate if you could follow up with our office. My understanding is that the app developer agreement explicitly says that apple can use any information that inactive l upper the provides for any purpose. Obviously, we have complaints from a number of App Developers who have testified before our committee. We heard from a Company Called tile which said apple had access to confidential information about the apps distributed by the app store. Given that, juxtaposed against the language in the exclusive agreement, you can understand why we would have concerns about anti competitive conduct. Congressman, we run the app store to help developers, not hurt them. We respect innovation. Its what our company is built on. We would never steal somebodys ip. But i will follow up with your office on more detail on this. I appreciate that mr. Cook. I think to the extent that apple is going to commit, i would ask mr. Pichai similar questioning because this is consistent across several platforms, within the developer agreement which says you have access to the data which will not use it to replicate your own map. That would certainly, in my view, the reflection of a step away from any type of anti competitive conduct. It sounds like youll follow up and we can learn more with respect to that issue. Mr. Pichai, similarly, there was an article just today or yesterday rather from the verge. The title is google reportedly keeps tabs on usage of rival android apps to develop competitors. I will quote from the article. Google said that the data doesnt give information about how people behave while they are using individual apps, but it wouldnt say whether it had been used to develop competing apps. First, i take it you would confirm that google does have access to confidential information or competitive Sensitive Information on android app devices. Congressman, if i can clarify this. Today we have an api which is available for developers as long as users consent. This gives us System Health metrics. This is how we can launch digital features on android. This is how we understand which apps are using a battery. It will show for crashing or Quality Control or digital wellbeing or better usage. This data is available through a public api and other developers can use it as long as the users to give consent to it. Mr. Pichai i just want to clarify. The article refers to this data as Sensitive Data about other apps including how often they are open and for how long they are used. Im not asking how you use that information, im just asking whether or not the article is correct. That you have access to that data. Yes, with user consent and the apis, we do. Its critical for us to have access to that so we can maintain, this is how we understand and improve resources, use of applications. Understood. My time is limited. I want to get to this core question. Given that google does have access to that data, does google use that data to develop competing apps . If your answer is no, will google commit to making the necessary changes within its android Developer App agreements to ensure that developers have that sense of clarity . That, in fact, the data will not be used for google to develop a competing application. Congressman, we look at trans and we published a number of results in the booster. We try to understand whats happening in the market in various ways. I appreciate your concern about making sure there is clarity in this area and we will continue to investigate. I want to follow very quickly, mister chairman if youre willing. I want you to answer that fundamental question. Does google use that information to develop competing apps . I understand the purposes youve described in terms of how you use the information. Im asking if one of those is to develop competing apps . The gentlemans time has expired but the witness may answer the question. Congressman, because we try to understand what is going on in the market and we are aware of popularity of apps, i want to be accurate and my answer. But in general, the primary use of the data is to improve the health of android. Any data that we get, we have user consent for it and we make it available through an api to other developers as well. The gentlemans time has expired. I now recognize the gentlelady from georgia. Thank you mister chairman. Gentlemen, thank you so much for spending so much of your time with us today. We really appreciate it. Many of you have mentioned john lewis today. I know all my colleagues and i will burn carry on his fight for equality. Can you commit to ensuring racial and gender equity Major Companies including black leadership and women in your senior ranks . Just a yes or no answer please. Mr. Zuckerberg . Yes. Mr. Cook . Yes, i am very personally committed. Thank you. Mr. Bezos . Absolutely, yes. Thank you. Mr. Pichai . U. S. Weve made public commitments to this regard. Thanks very much. Mr. Zuckerberg, in 2004 there were dozens of social media companies. Facebook distinguished itself from competitors by focusing specifically on privacy. You have a short clear Privacy Policy thats just 950 words. It made a promise to users, and i quote, we do not and will not use cookies to collect private information from any user. You said we will not. Thats a commitment about the future and that was 2004. Mr. Zuckerberg, today, does facebook use cookies to collect private information on users . Congresswoman, my understanding to that is no. We are not using cookies to collect private information about people who use our services. I believe we have upheld that commitment. Thank you. Mr. Zuckerberg, do you think your company would be as successful if it had started with todays cookies policy in place . Congresswoman, im not sure exactly what you are referring to. In general, cookies is not a big part of how were collecting information. We primarily use them to make sure that someone can stay locked in on the web. We use them, to some degree, for security to make sure that you dont have someone trying to log in under a lot of different accounts for one computer or Something Like that. Mr. Zuckerberg, once again, you do not use cookies . Congresswoman, we do use cookies. Yes, we do use cookies. Mr. Zuckerberg, the bottom line here is that you broke a commitment to your users. Who can say if you may or may not do that again in the future . The reality is that facebooks marketplace power grew and facebook sacrificed its users policy. Mr. Bezos, my colleagues have touched on counterfeit goods and i share their concerns very deeply. Im also concerned about stolen goods. Mr. Bezos, are stolen goods sold on amazon . Congresswoman, not to my knowledge. More there is more than 1 million sellers, so im sure there have been stolen goods at times. Really mr. Bezos . There is not . Im sorry . That surprises me. With over 1 million sellers, im sure that it has happened. But certainly, i dont think its a large part of what we are selling. So basically mr. Bezos youre saying yes. I guess so. I want to ask you about information that you require from sellers to prevent the sale of stone goods. Do you require a real name and address, yes or no . For sellers . Once again, do you require a real name and address from sellers . I believe we do. Let me get back to your office with id rather give you the act accurate answer. I think we do. Yes you do require a name and address. Do you require a phone number . Yes or no. I dont know if its required. I think we often have it, but i dont know. So briefly, how do you verify that each of these pieces of information is accurate . I dont know the answer to your question. So, you dont know how many people work on verifying seller verification before the seller is allowed to sell on amazon . No congresswoman, i dont. I will ask you sir, will you commit to reporting all reports of counterfeit goods to Law Enforcement . Will you track largescale vendors organ engaged in organized retail crime . To the degree that we are aware of it, we will certainly pursue it. In fact. Sir, can you make a blanket commitment . Can you just make a blanket commitment . Whether you are aware of it or not. A blanket commitment to what . Im sorry, congresswoman. Reporting all sales of counterfeit goods to Law Enforcement and victims to trace largescale offenders involved in retail crime . If were aware of it, i see no reason why we would not report it. We want the corrected authorities to be involved. Thank you so much. I yield back my time. Thank you gentlewoman. I want to thank the witnesses for our testimony today and colleagues on both sides of the aisle. We also want to acknowledge the extraordinary work of our team led by slate bond, lena khan, amanda lewis, phil baron brooke, and a lion heart and joe venue i have done an extraordinary job throughout this investigation and preparation for the hearing today. Today, we had the opportunity to hear from the decisionmakers from for the most powerful companies in the world. This hearing has made one fact clear to me, these companies as they exist today have a monopoly power. Some need to be broken up, only to be properly regulated and held accountable. We need to ensure the Anti Trust Laws first written more than a century go work and the digital age. When these laws were written, monopolistic were men named rockefeller and trying to get. Their control of the marketplace allowed them to do whatever it took to crush independent businesses and expand their own power. The names have changed, but the story is the same. Today, the men are named zuckerberg, koch pichai and bezos. Once again, their control of the marketplace allows them to do whatever it takes to crush independent business and expand their own power. This must end. This subcommittee will next published a report on the findings of our investigation. We will propose solutions to the promise before us. As a Great AmericanSupreme CourtLuis Brandeis once said, we must make our choice. We may have democracy or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we cant have both. This concludes todays hearing. Thank you again to our witnesses for attending. Without objection, all members will have five legislative days to submit additional written questions for the witnesses or additional materials for the record. Without objection, this hearing is adjourned. [indiscernible conversations] they are attempting to enter the marketplace. And have so much more power they engage in strategies to keep it by acquiring. [indiscernible] give any answers that actually helped . Acknowledged some of the behavior that is tremendous concern. Did you learn anything new today . Im sure i learned a lot. I have to go back through my notes, but most of what we learned today was to confirm what we learned, the documents that we have reviewed. The witnesses we have interviewed. Evidence that has been collected from stakeholders and experts in the field. I think an acknowledgment of some of the anticompetitive practices were at the heart of what is important to hear from the ceos. A report is likely to come out in august or september. Any specific areas that you will focus on in the report . Looking at the market dominance of these large platforms and the behavior they engage in. Their Acquisition Strategies to acquire competitiveness and maintain their large dominance in the marketplace. Consumers, workers, innovation, people entering the marketplace. All things that they are designed to promote. Are there more questions you have . Oh, yes. [laughter] thank you. Here is a look at our live coverage on thursday. On cspan, the houses back at 9 00 a. M. Eastern for general speeches followed by legislative business at 10 00. Members are working on the 2021 spending package that covers several departments, including defense, commerce, health and human services, transportation, and housing. On cspan two, the Senate Returns at 10 00 a. M. Eastern to consider the nomination of Deputy White House budget director derek can. And on cspan3, secretary of state mike pompeo testifies before the Senate ForeignRelations Committee about the state departments 2021 budget request followed by the Funeral Service for the late congressman john lewis in atlanta. On washington journal, jamie raskin joins us to discuss william barrs