Social Media “Companies Have Blood on Their Hands”

> NOW WE'RE GOING TO SHIFT BACK TO AMERICAN POLITICS AND ANOTHER SIGN OF DONALD TRUMP'S DWINDLING INFLUENCE.

YOUTUBE HAS BECOME THE LATEST SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORM TO SUSPEND HIS ACCOUNTS SAYING ONE OF THE VIDEOS INCITED VIOLENCE.

FACEBOOK, TWITTER AND INSTAGRAM HAVE ALREADY TAKEN ACTION AGAINST TRUMP.

BUT WHAT RESPONSIBILITY DOES SILICON VALLEY BEAR FOR LAST WEEK'S CAPITOL HILL RIOT?

ROGER McNAMEE HAS WRITTEN A DAMNING ARTICLE CALLED 'PLATFORMS MUST PAY FOR THEIR ROLE IN THE INSURRECTION.'

HERE HE IS TALKING ABOUT IT.

CHRISTIANE, THANKS.

ROGER, WE'VE GOT BASICALLY TWO MAJOR TRAGEDIES.

YESTERDAY ANOTHER 4400 PEOPLE DIED BECAUSE OF COVID AROUND THE UNITED STATES.

AND THEN WE HAVE WHAT HAPPENED ON JANUARY 6th, WHICH IS A SIGNAL FOR A DEMOCRATIC TRAGEDY OF SORTS.

HOW RESPONSIBLE IS FACEBOOK FOR THESE?

SO FACEBOOK PLAYS A FUNDAMENTAL ROLE IN BOTH OF THOSE TRAGEDIES.

INTERNET PLATFORMS, I WOULD ALSO INCLUDE YOUTUBE, TWITTER AND INSTAGRAM IN THE SAME ACCUSATION I'M MAKING ABOUT FACEBOOK HERE.

THEY ESSENTIALLY HAVE BUILT BUSINESSES BASED ON GRABBING THE ATTENTION OF PEOPLE AND HOLDING IT.

AND THEY DO THAT BY PRESENTING THEM WITH EMOTIONALLY INFLAMMATORY CONTENT.

SO WHEN WE LOOK AT FACEBOOK, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT PEOPLE HAVE A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING IS THAT HATE SPEECH AND DISINFORMATION AND CONSPIRACY THEORIES ARE CORE TO THE BUSINESS.

THE CONSEQUENCE OF THAT IS THAT COVID DISINFORMATION FLOURISHED ON FACEBOOK.

AND THE PEOPLE WHO MOST EMBRACED IT, IF YOU THINK ABOUT QANON CONSPIRACY THEORY, FACEBOOK HAS ADMITTED THAT THERE WERE 3 MILLION PEOPLE WHO JOINED FACEBOOK GROUPS AND FACEBOOK PAGES DEVOTED TO QANON.

THEY ALSO REPORTED -- ACTUALLY IT WAS FOUND OUT BY 'THE WALL STREET JOURNAL' THAT FACEBOOK DID AN INTERNAL STUDY THAT SHOWED THAT 64% OF THE TIME THAT SOMEBODY JOINED AN EXTREMIST GROUP LIKE QANON ON FACEBOOK, THEY DID IT BECAUSE FACEBOOK RECOMMENDED IT.

WHICH MEANS THAT 2 MILLION OF THE PEOPLE ON THOSE FACEBOOK GROUPS FOR QANON WERE RADICALIZED BY FACEBOOK.

IF YOU ROLL FORWARD TO JANUARY 6th AT THE CAPITOL, YOU'RE GOING TO FIND THE THEME OF ALL THOSE PEOPLE WAS A BELIEF IN QANON.

SO IT WASN'T JUST THAT THEY RADICALIZED ALL THOSE PEOPLE.

FACEBOOK GROUPS ALSO PROVIDED THE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR ORGANIZING THE INSURRECTION.

AND IT WASN'T JUST FACEBOOK.

OTHER PLATFORMS WERE INVOLVED AS WELL.

BUT FACEBOOK WAS THE CENTRAL ONE, THE MOST IMPORTANT ONE.

YOUTUBE BECAME THE MOST RECENT OF THE PLATFORMS TO DEPLATFORM PRESIDENT TRUMP.

ALL OF THESE MOVES BY TWITTER, BY FACEBOOK, BY YOUTUBE, BY PINTEREST, ARE THESE EFFECTIVE?

TOO LITTLE TOO LATE?

MUCH TOO LITTLE, MUCH TOO LATE.

BUT THE CORE POINT HERE IS THESE COMPANIES I DO NOT BELIEVE ARE DOING THIS OUT OF A SENSE OF CIVIC RESPONSIBILITY.

I BELIEVE THEY RECOGNIZE THAT THEY HAVE EXTREME LEGAL JEOPARDY HERE.

AND IT COMES IN TWO FORMS.

FIRST, BY RADICALIZING THE PEOPLE WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE JANUARY 6th INSURRECTION AND THEN BY PROVIDING INFRASTRUCTURE FOR ORGANIZING IT, THEY WERE AT LEAST ACCESSORIES TO AN INSURRECTION.

AND I THINK IF YOU LOOK BACK AT THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES, INSURRECTION AGAINST A BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT, SO INCITEMENT TO INSURRECTION WOULD BE VIEWED AS AS GREAT A CRIME AS ANY ELECTED OFFICIAL COULD POSSIBLY COMMIT.

SO THE NOTION THAT YOU ARE AN ACCESSORY TO THAT IS A HUGE PROBLEM LEGALLY.

BUT IT GETS WORSE.

WHILE THE JANUARY 6th ONE WAS PLANNED EVER SINCE THE ELECTION AND DONE SO IN PLAIN SIGHT, THERE WERE FURTHER INSURRECTIONS.

WE SHOULD ANTICIPATE THIS WEEKEND AND THROUGH THE INAUGURATION THAT THERE WILL BE OTHER EVENTS.

APPARENTLY AT STATE CAPITOLS AROUND THE COUNTRY.

AND I THINK ALL OF THESE PLATFORMS LOOKED AT THIS AND REALIZED THAT IF THOSE WENT OFF AND IF THEY HAD NOT DONE ANYTHING TO ATTEMPT TO SUPPRESS THEM, THAT THE LEGAL JEOPARDY WOULD HAVE JUST BECOME SO GREAT THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO RECOVER FROM IT.

SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT DROVE THEM.

I LOOK THEM AT YOUTUBE AND THEY DESERVE NO CREDIT AT ALL.

THEY'RE PUTTING ON A SEVEN-DAY ESSENTIALLY A PAUSE ON TRUMP.

THEY'RE TRYING TO GET RID OF A PUBLIC RELATIONS PROBLEM WITHOUT ACTUALLY GETTING TRUMP OFF THE PLATFORM.

AND THAT'S JUST SO CYNICAL, BECAUSE IT'S NOT LIKE THIS PROBLEM IS MAGICALLY GOING TO DISAPPEAR IN SEVEN DAYS.

HE HAS CREATED LITERALLY AN ARMY OF PEOPLE WHO DO NOT BELIEVE IN THE CONSTITUTION, DO NOT BELIEVE IN DEMOCRACY, AND AS A CONSEQUENCE -- AND BY THE WAY, MANY OF THEM ARMED TO THE TEETH.

AND FOR THESE PLATFORMS TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS IS IN MY MIND JUST MORALLY REPREHENSIBLE AND PROBABLY LEGALLY UNJUSTIFIABLE.

YOU'VE SEEN FOR THE PAST SEVERAL DAYS THE CHALLENGE, THE PUSHBACK FROM A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN DEPLATFORMED OR CONSERVATIVE GROUPS OR CONSERVATIVE POLITICIANS HAS BEEN, HEY, THIS SHOULD BE A FIRST AMENDMENT ISSUE.

THIS IS THE MODERN DAY TOWN SQUARE.

YES, IT'S NOT A PUBLIC SIDEWALK BUT THIS IS WHERE I CAN EXPRESS MY OPINION AND SHOULD A TECH EXECUTIVE IN SILICON VALLEY OR ELSEWHERE BE GIVEN THE POWER TO SILENCE SPEECH.

WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE FIRST AMENDMENT DEFENSE WE HEAR NOW?

THERE ARE A SERIES OF ISSUES WITH IT.

AT THE MOST BASIC LEVEL I ACTUALLY AGREE THAT NO ONE IN CORPORATE AMERICA, NO PRIVATE COMPANY SHOULD HAVE AS MUCH CONTROL OVER SPEECH IN AMERICA AS THESE COMPANIES HAVE.

THAT IS A HUGE PROBLEM AND I THINK AS YOU KNOW I HAVE BEEN FIGHTING AGAINST THAT FOR FOUR YEARS.

THAT IS A PROBLEM FOR ANOTHER DAY.

THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT GUARANTEE A RIGHT TO INCITE INSURRECTION.

IT DOESN'T GIVE YOU A RIGHT TO HARM OTHER PEOPLE.

THERE ARE LIMITS TO SPEECH, EVEN FOR GOVERNMENT.

AND SO WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST HERE IS THAT THOSE ARE INSINCERE ARGUMENTS.

THEY'RE INSINCERE ARGUMENTS LARGELY COMING FROM PEOPLE WHO ADVOCATED THE INSURRECTION.

AND JUST AS THEY ARE ALSO CALLING FOR REDUCING THE TENSIONS AND EVERYBODY HAVING A KUMBAYA MOMENT, I JUST THINK ALL OF THAT IS NONSENSICAL AND WE SHOULD JUST KEEP OUR EYE ON THE PRIZE HERE, WHICH IS THAT THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES ATTEMPTED WHAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN AN IN AN EARLIER AGE WAS A CAPITAL CRIME AND WAS AIDED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS.

IT'S NOT JUST THE RIGHT THAT HAS THIS TENSION NOW.

I MEAN YOU SEE OVERSEAS ANGELA MERKEL SAYING, HEY, I DON'T THINK TECH EXECUTIVES SHOULD HAVE THIS KIND OF POWER.

SHE'S PROBABLY CONCERNED BECAUSE EVERY LEADER IS PROBABLY CONCERNED THAT I COULD BE DEPLATFORMED FOR SOMETHING I SAY, RIGHT?

I SEE HER PERSONAL INTEREST IN THIS.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME YOU HAVE THIS RARE UNIFICATION OF AN EVENT THAT LITERALLY IMPACTED EVERY MEMBER OF CONGRESS AT THE SAME TIME.

YEAH.

I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH ANGELA MERKEL.

I DO NOT THINK THAT THESE WHITE AND SOUTH ASIAN MEN IN CALIFORNIA SHOULD BE DETERMINING WHAT IS SPEECH AROUND THE WORLD.

BUT LET US BE CLEAR.

THE NOTION THAT ANGELA MERKEL LOSES HER ACCESS TO INTERNET PLATFORMS BECAUSE THEY SAY SO IS MANIFESTLY UNFAIR.

BUT THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN FOR THESE REASONS.

THIS IS LITERALLY A ONE-OF-A-KIND EVENT.

WE ARE HAVING A REVOLUTION IN THIS COUNTRY.

WE ARE HAVING A CIVIL WAR.

AND PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO USE LANGUAGE THAT MAKES IT SEEM LESS THAN IT ACTUALLY IS.

THIS IS -- IF EVER THERE IS A ONE-OFF EVENT, THIS IS IT.

THIS IS APPEAR EMERGENCY.

AND WE HAVE TO STAY FOCUSED ON THAT POINT AND RECOGNIZE THAT THESE COMPANIES ARE CO-CONSPIRATORS.

THEY ARE ENABLERS OF AN INSURRECTION AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT.

COULD THIS TYPE OF SPEECH GO BACK UNDERGROUND?

IS THAT GOOD?

ONE OF THE THINGS PEOPLE ALWAYS TALK ABOUT IS, LOOK, I WANT TO KNOW EXACTLY WHERE THE CRAZY PERSON IS BECAUSE I CAN DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

THIS IS A SUPER IMPORTANT QUESTION.

WHEN I LOOK AT THIS, I LOOK AT THE JANUARY 6th INSURRECTION.

AND WHAT I SEE IS THAT THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE THERE WERE CIVIL WAR REENACTORS.

THEY WERE THERE BECAUSE SOCIALLY SPEAKING THEIR CIRCLE WAS ALL THERE AND THEY FELT LIKE THIS WAS THE PLACE TO BE.

MIXED IN WITH THEM WAS A VERY SMALL NUMBER OF PROFESSIONALS.

OFF DUTY POLICE, FORMER MILITARY PEOPLE WHO HAD TRAINING, WERE VERY WELL ORGANIZED, PEOPLE WITH EAR PIECES, PEOPLE WHO BROUGHT IN ZIP TIES FOR TAKING HOSTAGES, BROUGHT IN TASERS FOR INCAPACITATING HOSTAGES, PEOPLE WHO BROUGHT IN WEAPONS AND BOMBS.

IN MY MIND WHEN YOU SHUT DOWN THIS KIND OF STUFF ON THE OPEN PLATFORMS, YOU DISCOURAGE THE CIVIL WAR REENACTORS FROM PARTICIPATING IN A CIVIL WAR.

YOU REDUCE IT TO PEOPLE WHO WERE NOT PLANNING WHAT THEY WERE DOING ON FACEBOOK.

IT'S HARD FOR ME TO IMAGINE THAT THE PEOPLE WITH THE ZIP TIES AND THE PEOPLE WITH THE BOMBS WERE DOING THAT ON FACEBOOK.

I SUSPECT THEY WERE ALWAYS IN THE ENCRYPTED SURFACES.

AND THAT PROBLEM ABSOLUTELY WILL REMAIN.

BUT RIGHT NOW THERE ARE LITERALLY MILLIONS OF AMERICANS WHO ARE SYMPATHETIC WITH THAT INSURRECTION.

AND THE REASON THEY ARE IS BECAUSE THEIR LIFE TAKES PLACE IN A TRUMAN SHOW CRAFTED BY FACEBOOK, MAINTAINED BY FOX AND OAN AND NEWSMAX.

WE HAVE TO PIERCE THAT.

WE HAVE TO GET EVERYONE TO LIVE IN THE REAL WORLD BECAUSE DEMOCRACY IS ABOUT HAVING DIFFERENT VALUE SYSTEMS APPLIED TO A SHARED SET OF FACTS.

AND BECAUSE OF FACEBOOK, BECAUSE OF GOOGLE, BECAUSE OF TWITTER, THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE REALITY AVAILABLE TO ANYONE WHO WANTS IT.

AND I BELIEVE WE NEED TO ADDRESS THAT PROBLEM.

WHAT YOU DO WITH THE SMALL NUMBER OF REALLY DANGEROUS PEOPLE, THAT IS A PERSISTENT LAW ENFORCEMENT ISSUE THAT'S BEEN WITH US FOREVER AND WILL BE WITH US FOREVER FROM NOW.

YOU'VE SAID ONE OF THE WAYS TO TRY TO FIX THIS IF YOU COULD SUGGEST TO THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION IS FOCUS ON SAFETY, PRIVACY, COMPETITION.

BREAK THOSE THREE THINGS DOWN FOR US.

HOW WOULD WE CHANGE THIS INDUSTRY TO CARE ABOUT SAFETY?

SO WE WENT THROUGH THIS EXPERIENCE BEFORE.

IN THE 1870s, THERE WERE HUGE FIRES IN U.S. CITIES THAT LED TO THE CREATION OF BUILDING CODES BECAUSE THEY REALIZE THE PEOPLE WHO BUILD BUILDINGS HAVE BEEN ENORMOUS RESPONSIBILITY, BUT WE NEED THEM, THEY'RE PART OF OUR ECONOMY.

SO WE SET UP BUILDING CODES AND MADE THE ARCHITECTS, CONTRACTORS AND ENGINEERS PERSONALLY LIABLE TO ENSURE THAT THEIR INCENTIVES WOULD BE TO BUILD BUILDINGS SAFELY.

THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO DO HERE TO MAKE TECHNOLOGY SAFE.

WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT IS PRODUCTS LIKE FACEBOOK ARE OBVIOUSLY UNSAFE BECAUSE OF WHAT'S HAPPENED ON COVID BUT IT'S MORE THAN THAT.

THINK ABOUT SMART DEVICES, WHETHER IT'S ALEXA OR SMART TELEVISION OR BABY MONITORS THAT CAN BE HACKED, WHERE PEOPLE CAN BREAK INTO YOUR LIFE WITHOUT YOUR PERMISSION.

THINK ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENED WITH ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND FACIAL RECOGNITION.

WE'RE BIASED AGAINST PEOPLE OF COLOR AND AGAINST WOMEN HAS REAL WORLD CONSEQUENCES IN LAW ENFORCEMENT AND IN JOBS AND MORTGAGES THAT CANDIDLY ARE NOW BLAMED ON BLACKS BOXES.

WE NEED TO REQUIRE THAT EVERYONE IN TECHNOLOGY PERSONALLY GUARANTEE THEIR WORK AND THAT THE CORPORATIONS DO AS WELL.

BUT THERE HAS TO BE A PERSONAL GUARANTEE TO SHIFT THE INCENTIVES.

WHEN PEOPLE TALK ABOUT 230 OF THE COMMUNICATIONS DECENCY ACT, THAT IS PART OF THE SAFETY THING BUT IT'S A RELATIVELY SMALL PART.

WE DO NEED TO AMEND 230 BUT WE NEED TO HAVE THIS PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY THAT GOES INTO THIS.

IT HAS TO CHANGE THE CULTURE FROM THE CURRENT MOVE FAST AND BREAK THINGS.

WHEN WE TALK ABOUT PRIVACY, THIS IS A SEPARATE CATEGORY AND THERE'S ALREADY A LOT OF PROGRESS.

THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA HAS A PRIVACY LAW.

BUT MOST IMPORTANT, APPLE, FOR THE iPHONE IN THE NEW VERSION OF THE IOS, WHICH IS THE OPERATING SYSTEM, IS IMPLEMENTING SOMETHING CALLED OPT-IN PRIVACY WHERE CORPORATIONS WILL BE REQUIRED TO ASK YOUR PERMISSION BEFORE USING YOUR DATA.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE IMPLEMENTED NATIONWIDE AND NOT JUST ON SMARTPHONES AND IT NEEDS TO BE DONE RETROACTIVELY.

CANDIDLY, I BELIEVE THIS IDEA THAT CORPORATIONS CAN CONVERT YOUR LIFE INTO DATA AND THEN USE IT TO MANIPULATE YOUR BEHAVIOR, THAT THAT SHOULD BE ILLEGAL.

LASTLY, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT COMPETITION, PEOPLE TALK ABOUT ANTITRUST LAW AS THOUGH BREAKING THESE COMPANIES UP WILL SOLVE THE PROBLEM.

IT TURNS OUT ANTITRUST LAW IS ESSENTIAL AND THERE'S A LOT OF PROGRESS HERE, BUT THERE'S MORE TO IT THAN THAT.

WE REALLY WANT TO ENCOURAGE ALTERNATIVE BUSINESS MODELS TO HAPPEN, SO WE NEED TO CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE STARTUPS CAN EXPERIMENT WITH DIFFERENT IDEAS.

TO DATE THESE COMPANY OR MONOPOLIES CAN BLOCK EVERYTHING.

THEY SHOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO OPERATE MARKETS THE WAY AMAZON DOES AND THEN COMPETE WITH THE MOST SUCCESSFUL PRODUCTS IN THE MARKET BY COPYING THEM.

AMAZON DOES THAT ROUTINELY, GOOGLE DOES THAT ROUTINELY.

FACEBOOK HAS USED TECHNOLOGY TO SPY ON COMPETITORS AND COPY THEIR PRODUCTS.

NONE OF THAT SHOULD BE ALLOWED.

SHERYL SANDBERG, THE CEO OF FACEBOOK, AFTER THE ATTACK SAID I THINK THESE WERE LARGELY ORGANIZED ON PLATFORMS THAT DON'T HAVE OUR ABILITIES TO STOP HATE AND DON'T HAVE OUR STANDARDS AND DON'T HAVE OUR TRANSPARENCY.

YOUR THOUGHTS.

I THINK SHERYL SANDBERG IS ATTEMPTING TO DIFFUSE A VERY SERIOUS LEGAL PROBLEM BY GASLIGHTING EVERYONE.

THERE ARE LITERALLY THOUSANDS OF EXAMPLES OF POSTS ON FACEBOOK.

I THINK YOU CAN STILL SEE THEM TODAY, THAT WERE FOR THE ORGANIZATION OF THE JANUARY 6th INSURRECTION TAKING PLACE ON FACEBOOK.

YOU KNOW, FACEBOOK HAS TENS OF THOUSANDS OF HUMAN MONITORS AND HAS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE.

THEY HAVE FAILED MISERABLY TO BLOCK COVID DISINFORMATION AND FAILED MISERABLY RELATIVE TO THIS INSURRECTION.

THE REASON THEY DID SO IS BECAUSE FACEBOOK DOESN'T REALLY WANT TO ELIMINATE HATE SPEECH, DISINFORMATION AND CONSPIRACY THEORIES.

THOSE THINGS ARE A LUBRICANT FOR ITS BUSINESS.

I AT ONE TIME KNEW SHERYL SANDBERG VERY WELL AND I HAD ENORMOUS RESPECT FOR HER.

I DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY IT IS AT THIS MOMENT OF NATIONAL CRISIS SHE CANNOT SEE THAT THE INTERESTS OF THE UNITED STATES ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE PROFITS OF FACEBOOK AND THAT SHE SHOULD BE ACTUALLY MAKING THAT COMPANY TRANSPARENT.

THEY ARE NOT TRANSPARENT ANYWAY.

THEY ABSOLUTELY HIDE WHAT THEY'RE DOING FROM REGULATORS, FROM RESEARCHERS, FROM EVERYBODY.

AND AT THIS PARTICULAR MOMENT IN TIME, THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT.

SHOULD FACEBOOK BE TRIED AS AN ACCESSORY, SO TO SPEAK?

THEY SAY, LOOK, WE'RE JUST A PLATFORM, WE'RE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENS, EVERYTHING THAT EVERYONE SAYS.

BILLIONS AND BILLIONS OF PEOPLE, ALL THE COMMENTS.

YOU SHOULD THINK OF US AS A UTILITY, THAT WE'RE LIKE THE TELEPHONE SERVICE.

WE JUST BRING YOU THE SERVICE.

WHAT HAPPENS ACROSS THE SERVICE IS UP TO OTHER PEOPLE.

SO I THINK THE CORE ISSUE I LOOK AT HERE IS THIS NOTION THAT THEY ARE A UTILITY, I THINK THERE'S ACTUALLY AN ARGUMENT THEY SHOULD BE TREATED AS A UTILITY.

IN WHICH CASE ALL OF THEIR OPERATIONS WOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC SCRUTINY.

WE'D BE ABLE TO LOOK AT THEIR ALGORITHMS.

WE'D BE ABLE TO DETERMINE THE PROFIT MARGIN THEY WERE ALLOWED TO EARN AND WE'D HAVE AN EXTRAORDINARY AMOUNT OF CONTROL.

THAT IS MANIFESTLY NOT TRUE TODAY BUT I THINK THAT WOULD BE A WELCOME CHANGE.

I THINK THE MORE IMPORTANT POINT FOR THIS ARGUMENT IS THAT NO ONE IS ENTITLED TO PARTICIPATE IN AN INSURRECTION AGAINST THE COUNTRY.

I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT SECTION 230 PROVIDES THAT WITH PROTECTION HERE.

THE REASON THAT I BELIEVE THAT IS TRUE IS THAT THIS ISN'T AN ISSUE OF SPEECH.

THIS IS ACTUALLY THE ISSUE OF A BUSINESS CHOICE, TO AMPLIFY DANGEROUS CONTENT SO HATE SPEECH, DISINFORMATION, CONSPIRACY THEORIES.

BECAUSE THEIR ALGORITHMS ARE DESIGNED TO MAXIMIZE ATTENTION, THAT KIND OF CONTENT GETS AMPLIFIED DISPROPORTIONATELY, HAS MUCH MORE IMPACT THERE THAN IT HAS EVER HAD IN ANY MEDIA BEFORE.

THESE COMPANIES, THERE IS BLOOD ON THEIR HANDS.

THERE'S NO WAY TO DODGE THAT.

THE LAW MAY NOT HAVE A WAY OF HANDLING IT TODAY, BUT WE AS CITIZENS SHOULD HOLD THEM RESPONSIBLE AND SHOULD ABSOLUTELY INSIST ON PUNISHMENTS IN OTHER FORMS AND ON REGULATION IN OTHER FORMS THAT PROTECT US FROM ANYTHING LIKE THIS HAPPENING AGAIN.

ROGER, THANKS SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

IT'S BEEN A GREAT PLEASURE.

THANKS FOR LETTING ME TALK ABOUT THIS.