Transcripts For CSPAN2 Senate Judiciary Hearing On Google C

CSPAN2 Senate Judiciary Hearing On Google Censorship Part 1 July 14, 2024

Threehour hearing. This hearing is called to order. Good afternoon. Let me say to folks are attending i apologize the hearing was delayed in our start time. We had a series of votes on a singapore that just concluded and so welcome. Welcome to our witnesses. This past april the subcommittee held a hearing on social media buys with witnesses from facebook and twitter. As i noted then, in inquiry into big tech censorship practices must take an especially hard look at google. Thats what were doing here today. Googles control over what people here, watch, read, and say is unprecedented. Almost 90 of internet searches in the United States use google. Google domination of the Search Engine market is so complete that, to google, is now a commonplace. With that market power, google can and often does control our discourse. And sometimes Tech Companies talk about their products and the effects of those products as though their forces outside of big text control. As weve heard time and time again, make tack favors defense is a wasnt me, the algorithm did it. But google Search Engine is in some supernatural force. Its a Computer Program written and maintained eye people. So every time we search on google, we see only the webpages that google decides we should see. In the order that google decides we should see them. Type a few letters into the search bar and google will tell you what you should be looking for. The same is true of google subsidiary youtube. The second most visited webpage in existence. When you search on youtube, programs written by people at youtube provide you with the results. When you watch the video, a Program Written by the people at youtube, suggests what you should watch next. And when you submit a video, people at youtube determine whether youve engaged in socalled hate speech, and everchanging vague standard meant to give censorship and air of legitimacy. This this is a staggering amounf power to ban speech, committee manipulate search results come to destroy rivals, and to shape culture. More and more americans are demanding accountability from big tech for that massive power. One thing is certain. Congress never intended to empower Large Technology companies to control our speech when it passed section 230 of the Communications Decency act. That provision section 230 day Tech Companies special privileges that nobody else gets. If the New York Times or the wall street journal or to publish an oped that libeled a private citizen, they can be held responsible. This is the case even when those organizations dont write the content that breaks the law. They can be held responsible merely for publishing it. Not so for Companies Like google and youtube. If someone uses one of the services to commit slander or two transmit classified material or to traffic guns or drugs, far too often google is off the hook. Section 230 makes it immune. Big tech gets a perk, a subsidy, that no one else does. Fox news, msnbc, or anybody else this Community Immunity was part of a a deal. It was a treat. Section 230, the text of it, refers to the internet, as a quote, a a form for a true diversity of political discourse. That was the trade at the heart of section 230. This is because we expected Tech Companies in the business of carrying other speech wouldnt favor any side when they did so. There wouldnt be a conservative internet and the liberal internet. They would be the internet. That market today is falling apart. Big tech continues to reap the benefits of a section 230 subsidy. Of the American People do not. The American People are instead subject to both overt censorship and covert manipulation. I believe its time to rethink that deal. If big tech cannot provide us with evidence, clear, compellg data and evidence that its not playing big brother with its vast immense powers, there is no reason on earth why congress should give them a special subsidy through section 230. And that takes us to the heart of the problem. Big tech is anything but transparent. Google is happy to collect data on everyone everywhere constantly. On you, on me, on all of us. They make sure they know what you search, what you shop for online, what you like. They track your location within a matter of feet so they know when you visit a physical store. But the information sharing is a oneway street. This must change. Google google cannot simply hidd its algorithms. Big big techs algorithms and sh engines only do what humans and Companies Like google tell them to do. Just as big tech needs and wants data on all of us, the American People need and want data on big tech. They need it to profit. We needed to protect free speech. And i hope that today google will start to answer some of our questions fully and candidly so that we can assess how we can Work Together to protect the robust marketplace of ideas that american political discourse has been built upon. Senator coronel. Thank you, mr. Chairman. The counter says july 16 but it feels like groundhog day and the United States senate. A little more than three months ago the subcommittee held a hearing to explore allegations of anticonservative bias in the Tech Industry. My friends on the other side were critical of witnesses from facebook and twitter. They claim a vast conspiracy to silence conservative voices. After listening to some of the comments from that hearing you might think that some liberal mastermind set at the controls of those platforms looking at 510,000 facebook posts and 350,000 tweets posted every minute. And remove anything that might align with the Republican Party platform. I repeat now what i said then. Claims of anticonservative bias in the Tech Industry are baseless. Study after study has debunked suggestions of political bias on the part of facebook, google and twitter. In june of this year the economist released the findings of a yearlong analysis that ran on search results on googles new staff pick a town no evidence that google biased its results because conservative. In april media matters completed a 37 week study into alleged conservative censorship on facebook. Found that rightleaning pages actually outperformed, outperformed, leftleaning pages in terms of overall interactions with users. Earlier this year twitter perform a fiveweek analysis of tweets set by all members of the house and senate. It found no statistically significant difference between the number of times a tweet by a democratic member is viewed as compared to a tweet by a republican member. One of our witnesses, professor Francesca Tripodi come has done own research in this area and she found no evidence that google censors conservative content either in its main search product or on youtube. In fact, she found conservative commentators like mr. Prager, another of the witnesses today, are extremely adept at optimizing their content for a google Search Engine allowed them to capture massive audiences. Undeterred by this evidence here we are again three the initial hearing with facebook and twitter. It is not googles turn to be raked over the coals. Google will be accused of political motives for some comments and actions that are entirely within their rights. Just like we saw at the president s socalled quote social media summit last week. President trump invited a rogues out a social media leading racist and conspiracy theorists to hear about supposedly censorship i Tech Companies. But none of these people have actually been banned from any platform. Each remains free to use the megaphone social media provide to spread their messages of conspiracy and hate. This comes at a cost. Fears of being targeted buys as may Tech Companies hesitant to do with the real problems of racist and harassing content on their platforms. According to a report by vice, twitter is afraid to use a proactive algorithmic approach that uses to remove isis rated content to read the platform of white supremacist content. The reason, twitter is afraid it might also catch content posted by republican politicians. Youtube dragged its feet before taking any action against conservative commentators steven crowder, despite being informed of his twoyear homophobic Harassment Campaign against journalist carla. When you two did finally take action, it took a half measure of removing advertisements from the videos rather than removing him from the platform entirely. Browbeating for a problem that does not exist also this attention away from the real problems with google and other Tech Companies. Last month and year times investigation found that you choose recommendation engine served as a roadmap for pedophiles to find videos of younger and younger girls can sometimes as young as five or six shoes old. That followed a wide report on the way pedophiles use the Comment Section of youtube videos to identify and share videos of children. A recent wall street journal investigation found that youtube is overrun by videos pushing phase claims false claim for catechistic this is after you to stoke the flames of the antithaksin over to the point that measles has returned to this country. Another near times feature documented the radicalization of a young man who followed youtubes recommended videos down and altright rabideau. Google is a big successful company. It employs some of the smartest people in the country. Theres the question in my mind that it can solve these problems, real problems. Unfortunately, as long as we are busy making google defend itself from clear and convincing evidence no less, from bogus claims of ethic at the concertd it has no incentive to address these real issues. Im hoping another of her witnesses can shine some light in this area. Andy parker is a father of journalist alison parker. Alison worked for cbs affiliate wgbh j in roanoke virginia. August 2015, she and her colleague adam ward were conducting a live interview when they were attacked by a gunman. Alison and adam died at the scene. Video of the shooting quickly spread on social media including googles youtube. For the first past four years andy has sent letters to google first met with google. He has flagged videos on youtube. He has begged and pleaded that these videos come down. Despite his efforts, you can still find videos of tragic on youtube to this day. I want google to tell us why that is. I look for to hearing from andy. Is work to shine a light on googles failures honors alison memory. It also provides a great Public Service as a hope this committee the full Judiciary Committee and the senate writ large start to focus on the real problem presented by the Tech Industry and demand action. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you. Now happy to introduce our first witness. Mr. Karan bhatia, currently heads loopholes googles department. He served as deputy undersecretary of commerce or industry and security from 20012003. As assistant secretary of transportation for Aviation International affairs, from 20032005, as deputy u. S. Trade representative from 20052007,2, and as head of general electrics Government Affairs division from 20082018. He is a graduate of Princeton University and columbia law school. Thank you for joining us, mr. Vendee. Would you please stand and be sworn in. Raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony about to give for this committee would be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god . You may make your opening statement. Thank you synergistic my name is karen petit. I lead the Government Affairs and Public Function at google that proves major hazard ice served george w. Bush administration and early in my career i spent time at the Heritage Foundation and Claremont Institute and a coach i was editor of our conservative publication the princeton tory. I am a firstgeneration american. My parents imparted to me and abiding passion for the principles of free speech, democracy, and free markets. And the same passion makes me enormously gratified to work at google. A company that embodies these values every day around the world. Google is a proudly American Company growing across the u. S. We are investing more than 13 billion to expand our presence in 14 14 states this year, creg thousands of american jobs. We are also a Global Company and a big american export of competing vigorously with competitors from around the world. Through our grow with Google Program were proud to work with thousands of small american businesses and abe lincoln to tap commercial opportunity of the internet. We are a company focused on the future as well investing billions annually in r d and innovating new products to all people live better lives. For example, by point Artificial Intelligence to enable earlier detection of cancer or predict natural disaster. But above all we are a company of more than 100,000 people with a wide range of views, nationals and backgrounds, dedicated to the companies mission of organizing the worlds information and they can get universally accessible and useful. We live in an amazing time for the free flow of ideas, never before in history of mankind has it been possible for so many people to share so many ideas with so many others at solo a cost and through so many different avenues for internet platforms have been transformative and powerful tools for the marketplace of ideas. Among the many beneficiaries of the internet have been political groups. From the Tea Party Movement and the United States to the arab spring. The internet has enabled people to spread political messages and build political communities. Providing a a platform for shag a broad range of information is core to our mission. It is also core to our Business Model. Google needs to be useful for everyone, regardless of race, nationality or political leanings. We have a strong business instinct to prevent anyone from interfering the integrity of our products or results we provide to our users. So let me be clear. Google is not politically biased. Biased. Indeed, we go to extraordinary lengths to build our products and a force policies in an analytically objective, a political way. Our platforms reflect the online world that exists. Our job which would take very seriously is to deliver to use the most relevant and for authoritative information out there. And studies that show that we do just that. Objective thirdparty studies including most recently a comprehensive yearlong assessment by the economist of the googles results have found no evidence of bias in either direction. Additionally, in may of this year our Data Scientist and lies daily click through rates on search results to the official websites of members of congress. The data showed no difference in these metrics whether the member was a republican or a democrat. Also analyzed official Youtube Channels for all senators who have been, and we consistently found a a balance between republicans and democrats. Our platforms such as Google Search or you do you with massive amounts of information, i can imagine the we rely on algorithms and temperament testing and evaluation by thirdparty raiders. None of our systems are designed to filter out individuals or groups based on political viewpoints. Operating at the skill we do we are bound to get criticism from both sides, and we do. From time to time political ads may violate our advertising guidelines and we disallowed as for both democrats and republicans. From time to time our knowledge pans which help you find quick facts when you search for information about topics like Hillary Clinton or the california Republican Party may reflect erroneous information from the web and will need to be corrected. We work hard to learn from our mistakes and improve our products but these mistakes have affected both parties and are not the product of bias. As technology plays an increasingly essential role in the lives of americans we know that users expect the highest degree of integrity from our products and that we must meet the expectation every day. If we dont our users will go elsewhere and that is why we invest heavily in the systems and tools that help us serve as the content is most relevant to our users in an analytically objective a political way. Thank you for this opportunity. I look forward to answering your questions. Thank you, mr. Bhatia. My first question will not surprise you. Its a simple question. Does google consider itself a neutral public forum . Senator, we operate a number of platforms and they are constructed and operated to be politically neutral or a political. So let me come does google, the Google Search page, but she spoke of that for a moment, does google consider the Google Search page to be in neutral public forum . We construct it, we build and operate it to be politically neutral. Does google consider youtube to be a neutral public forum . Similarly, senator, we build and construct and maintain it without algorithms to be

© 2025 Vimarsana