Students,0 4, 2018, survivors will march on washington. They will be joined by students from around the country who want nothing more than to be safe in their schools. When i ask what i ask of President Trump and my colleagues and especially speaker of the house paul ryan and Senate Majority leader Mitch Mcconnell is this meet with these students. Let them share their stories. Facetoface with you. In theat this can happen hometowns in your own districts. Know that gun violence is an everyday tragedy in our country. What if these were your kids or your grandchildren . What would you do then . We know what we need to do to safer from guny violence can we know the solutions. We just need the courage to act. It is time. It is time for republicans in congress to show just a shred of the courage of the Stoneman Douglas students. It is time for speaker ryan to let the house vote, to require background checks on a resale and transfer, to keep guns out of the hands of suspected terrorists, to outlaw bump stocks and unallow automatic rates of fire, to require no one under the age of 21 can buy a gun, and to once again ban assault weapons from our streets. The students of Stoneman Douglas demand action. They will never give up. They are crying out. America has heard it. The world has heard from them. Never again. Congress must hear their cries. Congress must take action and we must do it now. Cspan, where history unfolds daily. In 1979, cspan was created as a Public Service by americas Cable Television companies. Today, we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house the supreme court, and Public Policy events in washington, d. C. And around the country. Cspan is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. Communicators looked at technology and its impact on voting in democracy recently with speakers at the state of the net Conference Held in washington, d. C. Here is a look. Katie hardback is the Global Politics director for facebook. What does that entail . Politics andglobal outrage director means myself and my team, who are situated around the world, work with governments, elected officials, candidates on how to best use facebook to committee came with citizens and we work on facebooks overall efforts in elections, which include protecting the integrity of elections on our platform, whether through preventing foreign interference, safe teachts, etc. , but also people how to use our Civic Engagement tools so that more people can have a voice in the political process. People heard you say what you did and say you did not do a good job in 2016. There are things that happened in 2016 on our platform that shouldnt have. But we can Going Forward take the steps we need to prevent interference on our platform. We did a lot in 2017 with elections in france and germany. We are more than doubling our team here in 2018 to be looking forward to elections, not just here in the United States, but italy, colombia, mexico, and brazil. Recent headlines from a blog post on facebook, tell me if these are fair, when it says facebook admits social media sometimes harms democracy. Is that a fair headline . What we are trying to do is bring outward the discussion of the hard questions that we have to grapple with. Things on our platform did happen in 2016 that shouldnt have. But theres also a lot of positive aspects that facebook can bring to democracy and a social media can bring to democracy. We are try to take a critical look at ourselves to understand when we need to be yet to get better but also to reach the Broader Community. We know we cannot do it without them. And we want to make sure that anything we are doing have a positive impact. Facebookspoint is response billy over and it is up to the individual to figure out . I think the Broader Community has unique roles roles to play, not just online, but across the board. We are try to take steps to help People Better identify whether it is false news, to provide them different perspectives, where parties stand on the issues. We do Public Service announcements to help people think through how they might be able to detect what is or is not false news. So we are try to do everything we can, but also engaging the Broader Community so that everyone can do their part. Is there a censorship issue here . One of the things we are deftly tried to do we dont take down false news. We might to downright get so it doesnt get as much reach. But if people want to share it or read it, even if they go through all of our warnings, they can still do so on our platform. So we are trying to strike that balance. It is more helping people be critical consumers of news and information versus being arbiters of truth ourselves. Can you be a candidate in todays world and not be on facebook, have a facebook presence . There are candidates that do. Facebook has become a critical tour desk tool for candidates to speak with our citizens, to engage with them and get their message out. What are you doing here at the state of the net conference . We are here on a panel discussing the role of social media and democracy. What point did you want to make in your presentation . That we are facebook are taking our responsibility seriously, protecting the integrity of elections on our platform while launching products that will help more people have a voice in the democratic process. What is one of those products . For instance, our prospective product. If someone takes a link about get toction, people will see where the different parties or candidates stand on the issues. That is something we hope to potentially bring here to the United States for the midterms. As we go through the election process, we look forward to having you back on the communicators. Thank you so much. And now joining us is dr. The marshall with center for Cyber Security and privacy protection. What is that . Interdisciplinary Cyber Security and Privacy Research and to some degree Advocacy Center centered on top of our educational role. We are trying to provide a range of services to the business, legal, and educational communities to understand the needs for a greater Cyber Security and the mechanisms by which better security and privacy goals can be achieved. This is a law school in cleveland. Whats the connection between Cyber Security and the law . The law has been rather late in coming to the Cyber Security table. We perceived a gap in the understandings that lawyers needed in order to be able to properly advise and support their business as well as personal clients in achieving their goals now that so much business is run on the internet or through computerized information systems. So there are huge issues that lawyers need to understand. Has the law kept up with Cyber Security . Been proactive when it comes to Cyber Security . Insufficiently. And in part, its because many of our lawmakers are lawyers who were not trained in any of these technical subjects. Also, the view has been that perhaps its better for the law to have a light touch rather than interfere with the innovative capacity of our business sector. Theproblem there is that market has not adequately addressed Security Issues or to some degree privacy issues as well. There really is a role for informed government policy. So we need the policymakers to be better informed. We need the lawyers to be better informed. And the commercial sector as well as the lives of average americans will be better if we foster greater Cyber Security and privacy protection. Specifically here at the state of the net conference, what are you speaking on . Election Cyber Security, my area of set specialty. Elections and Voting Systems. Boat ere an unhappy votinge an unhackable system . Use paperan be if we Ballot Systems where the voter marks a paper ballot or directs a machine, even with software, to mark a paper ballot, the voter can affirm these are my choices and he can make confirmed and it can be confirmed by a machine and we can check to see if the machine has cheated or it has been hacked. Unfortunately, large numbers of voters in this country are using softwarebased Voting Systems that have no paper records or no votercreated paper records so the machines can cheat. Presumptively, they are cheating because it is easy to cheat and it is almost undetectable in many cases. Part of what senator klobuchar was speaking about in the beginning of this Conference Today was the importance of our recognizing and addressing the proud the problems with the election vulnerabilities. Funded our election offices at the liberal the level that is needed in order to protect them from hacking, whether from cyber criminals or nationstate actors, like russia, or just domestic partisans. You said presumptively, these machines can be hacked or have been hacked. Do we have proof of an election outcome based on hacking . Another very good question. Part of the trouble of our laws lookmake it difficult to to see if they have been hacked. They have been lawsuits in 2016, jill steins lawsuit which saw which for zicksought which sought forensic information. They must be able to audit and a evaluate foror hacking errors. We are preventing our own election boards and equipment from being evaluated. Would be able we to discover whether hacking had occurred. But, in many other cases, some cks leave no ha trace. As senator klobuchar was saying earlier today, we have proof of nationstate, particularly russian, attacks particularly on our voter registration. We were looking a little more the a part because, department of Homeland Security contacted me in early july of 2016 and wanted to know what they should be doing. I sort of laid out different kinds of problems that i thought they should be attending to. Im very happy that they did start paying attention. What were some of those recommendations that you gave to dhs . I said you should be watching russia in particular. And you need to Pay Attention to and set up operations that will allow you to be able to discern whether there are probes or a on electiontacks offices or election networks. We need to know early enough so we can put a stop to it. We dont have that kind of capability in most states, certainly not for election jurisdictions. They are so underfunded. They have never had the security , say, a Large Company would have that would have significant attractiveness to hackers. Banks, of course, are highly attractive for also its of cyber criminals. So our Health Care Institutions because the Health Care Records are marketable at a very high dollar eight. Dollar rate. Most people before 2016 kept denying that elections were attractive because they kept saying things like theres no financial value. We would say, meaning my colleagues in the Election Integrity movement, would say the u. S. Economy and the u. S. Military and the u. S. Budget, the largest in the world, this is not value that someone would throughcontrol manipulating our election systems . Why would you say are banks but not our government . Why would you say not our elections . Unfortunately, the deniers had control over the decisionmaking and to the information came out in 2016. The commonwealth of virginia returned a complete paper ballot. They did. Congratulations. Congratulations to them. That is what most Computer Security specialists and their voting Security Specialists would say. That is exactly what needs to happen nationwide. No matter what happens in virginia, and many other states have moved to this system, there will be that votercreated paper record that can be checked on the Voting System. We just need to make sure that auditing thatalid is routine, not just in terms of litigation. Just like business entities in the government as well, we must audit our systems constantly to determine whether they are cheating on us, whether they have been programmed to cheat, where they whether they just have a malfunction. You audit. Thats why we have big auditing entities right now and compulsion for businesses to use internal and external auditing. We need to do this for our elections. This is basic quality assurance. No one should be fearful of auditing elections and to build it into our processes. That is the security. That is the transparency for the mac in public, for the Voting System vendors so they can show which ones are actually able to count correctly, for the Election Officials who have charged by law to deliver honest, fair, transparent elections. So, yes, that is the answer. We dont have to completely ditch computerbased election equipment. We just have to use the proper checks on that equipment. And then we also have to invest in our election system excuse me, our offices, so they have the kind of equipment and Network Architectures inhouse so they can prevent cyber hacking to the greatest degree possible. But if it occurs, they will be able to discover it and recover. Thats the resilience aspect. Senator klobuchar was mentioning the bipartisan bill that she and Lindsey Graham are sponsoring. They have a similar one in the house. That seeks to fund the paper Ballot Systems in all the states that dont have them with the audit, plus the Election Security consulting to upgrade our election offices. Its a travesty that we could think we could run Fair Elections in this day and time without those two components. So why are we doing it . [laughter] im very hopeful that we will be addressing this problem. A finally, when you see voting machine hacked within minutes i was there. I was with the speakers. Do you have suspicions about the 2016 election . I have suspicions about any election equipment and is elections that are run without the auditing capacity and routine auditing. Why . As i said previously, thats basically saying to the world of hackers come here, hack us, we wont be checking. We are a piece of cake for you. So you can hack our elections completely undiscovered. Thats true for the largest voting your voting jurisdictions of pennsylvania, whole states like georgia. Why would we allow this . Why would any state, why would our nation allow our election system to be run at this level of ineptitude, of denial of the threats . It is a National Security issue. It is a fundamental democracy issue. It is a fundamental fairness issue. We need to address this. Marshall lawf the School Center for Cyber Security and privacy protection. Thank you so much. Now, we wanted to introduce you to ambassador karen kornblum. Where did you get that title . I was ambassador to the organization for Economic Organization development, a Multilateral Organization in paris, france. I did that in the first term of the obama administration. Your background though is rather varied. We want to ask you about some of the digital background. How could you use that over at the oecd . I have been working on internet policy for do for two decades. When i got to the oecd, i knew that it had been part of the process of taking the u. S. Framework for regulating the internet and socializing it overseas. That consensus, the International Consensus was beginning to fray as russia and china and other countries are coming in and wanted more heavy handed relation of internet by some of these countries that wanted to have more authoritarian control. Internete oecd policymaking principles that said we need to have a free flow of information across countries, but we need to have individual countries be able to do their own policymaking, whether its Consumer Protection or privacy, that countries can do their own regulations. Countries, and has to be free flow and has to have respect for human rights. We got 44 countries to sign onto that. That was an interesting time. We will be talking today about , at that creative time, we were talking about internet freedom. We were seeing the internet being used to disrupt countries in the middle east and bring democracy. So there was that kind of attitude. And now we see something very different. Lets go back to that era. That was the arab spring. Exactly. We also saw where egypt could flip a switch and cut off internet traffic to that country. I thought the internet was borderless. Thats really interesting. It can be borderless. Is what we need to focus on it turns out that the medium we thought would give voice to the voiceless, and in many cases did, and power to the powerless, can also be used by dictators, by terrorists, by dark political money to undermine democracy. And we have got to address that problem. Do you think the 2016 election was undermined . Via thenternet internet . We have gotten a lot of internet data. We have data on twitter where there was 200 million bots. Facebook, one of the troll factories in russia was responsible for 146 million ad impressions. We have only 138 million voters. The scale of this is quite amazing. When you look at what that means for our democracy, whether it made a difference or not, is an interesting debate. About what it means for a democratic debate the example that really sticks with me is there were two fake a groups set up in texas. One is called heart of texas, a secessionist group. The other is united muslims of america. Both fake groups set up on facebook by russian trolls. They organized dueling rallies of americans on the same day in may in houston in front of an islamic center. That doesnt sound like democracy to me. It is something we really need to address. Historically, can you compare what is happening on the internet today to the advent of television and Television Advertising . Is there a connection . Thank you for making that connection. It is interesting to look at the history of television. There are a lot of differences, but we did as a society have debates about how to make sure that this new technology was not going to undermine democracy. All kinds of things from the palace candle on the radio where discharge these where discharge is were being paid off to air music became a big scandal. It was decided that on broadcasts, you had to say he was paying you for contact content if the content is in organic. We have not had the debate on the internet. If you are paying for an ad, you had to disclose who you are. Theres all kinds of searchable information on who is running an ad on television. Most people dont realize this, but we dont have that same transparency on the internet, which is shocking because the internet was supposed to be this medium that would bring more transparency. To makeere a movement that transparency more readily available . Absolutely. There are some interesting. Proposals. Here is the honest ads act efforts to work on bots. Theres already a bots act that senator blumenthal got past that deals with bots in terms of ticket sales. You can regulate them in terms of ticket sales because it is consumer fraud. And so you can another areas. There are interesting conversations going on. You began at the fcc. Will kind of work were you doing there . When i got to the fcc, Vice President al gore had said he wanted to make this new information superhighway be able to enable a girl in carthage, tennessee, to be able to read any books you wanted in the library of congress. I got to the fcc. I have worked in congress and i understand how a budget is passed. I had the pleasure working with a whole bunch of educators and technologists and people at the sec who knew how all this real tory policy works, and members of congress, olympia snowe, and ed markey. Something that became known as the eve rate the erate. Program. A 2 billion if you are a teacher in a classroom, you had no phone. Goa kid was sick, he had to to the Principals Office to make a phone call, leaving your class behind. We now have Internet Connection 90 to 99 in all classrooms. That was probably the highlight in my career. The funniest thing ive done. You are recently quoted as saying, prior to 2016, there was internet utopia. Were we naive . I think maybe we didnt keep up the policy dialogue and thinking what bad things could happen and how do we prevent the from happening . I think a bunch of people figure that out, some bad actors. We now need to have the societal conversation. There is araid of is red herring that says everything that happens on the internet is free speech. Of some of what we are seeing is fraud. Really put ond to our policy hats and figure out how to address this. Themselvestforms have power to do some things. It would be better if they could do some things on their own before we get into regulation. Such as . Such as more transparency along the lines of the honest ads act. Such as bots im sure you saw timese was a new york piece yesterday talking about fooled 2irm in florida million followers on social media. Fors the internet powerful democracy . That story has yet to be told. It has done age of medicine amount of good. Im still an internet optimist. But i think we have to be realists, too. We have to make sure we cant just hope that this new technology will be good for democracy. We have to make sure it is. Thats not an option. We have to make sure that it furthers democracy and it is not used to undermine us. Is it fair to call facebook and twitter and google searches the new new york times, the news . C world withey just came out results that trust in the platform has gone down to almost a sixyear low. Whereas trust in journalism has gone up. In general, the proliferation of the news outlets and the propaganda that disguises itself as journalism has brought down trust in journalism over the years. I wonder if people are trying to realize what real journalism is. We have to make that distinction. The journalism has a masthead, corrections. Cking, we have to make a distinction about what that kind of journalism is. It can gain our implicit trust. This is one of the things you were talking about at the state of the net conference . Yes, but i dont like that description of what is happening. Voters,ining humans, naturally using social media. What is really happening is manipulation. Pages, itse fake sounds like they are telling you real facts. If you look at myanmar, it isnt just us or about russia. There is a genocide. Most people get their news from facebook. There are news items going out from the military, from radical clerics, attacking the rohingya, saying they are doing things they are not, and manipulating people into terrible acts of violence. Concern is the manipulation happening forcing us into a bottle. What are you doing today . I run a roundtable on digital politics. The former ambassador to the Economic Organization for cooperation and development has been our guest. Thank you. What do you do for a living . I work at upturn. We work at the intersection of technology and social change. Technology is really driving these forces of social change. And can impact certain communities more than others. People need a voice in how technology is built, deployed, and discovered. Try and make sure policy conversations are really grounded and how it works. Give me an example of how technology is affecting social services. It plays a role in so many Different Things in society. We are talking about elections. Facebook, wento see a stream of content, news outlets we follow, organizations we support. So many messages are being sent online that we cant possibly see it all. They are using Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence to predict what we are interested in. There is so much more of that. Same things we like and agree with, they are not that great for democracy. We are becoming more polarized and we dont really have a shared narrative about important policy issues like discrimination or immigration, that we need to debate as a society and make sure were not going backward. Were all pretty where aware of how we get into our own little tribe sometimes. How is that affecting those who arent creating the technology, what is the possible change that could be made . In the early days of the this platform was going to give people a voice that didnt have one. What we have seen in the past year, year and a half, that is not always the case. There are so many forces that can really drown out those voices, malicious actors that are trying to overpower those voices of communities, that are trying to fight for their rights. Governments are coming in and trying to react to problems we saw in his last election in a way that can really backfire this last election in a way that can really backfire. After the hubbub of fake news and he wanted concern about hate speech online, a lot of concern about hate speech online, laws can be enacted to contentely police the going up online. And take them content that might not comply with these laws down content that might not comply with these laws. We can turn to Machine Learning tools to flag the content might be problematic what content might be problematic. This technology is still in its early days. It is hard to understand the context of messages that are political. A lot of people who might be thating legitimate dissent, could be a problem for communities that happen had a voice. The content and messages might be getting taken down. They dont have any way to fight against that, to make sure they are not being targeted by the government to make sure their voices arent heard. Howre trying to think about we are making sure as Technology Advances this people who need to have their voices heard, and fight for some of their protections we party granted, felt that those protections we havfe al we have already granted, we dont let protections erode. Is there any censorship in their . There is a concern. We are at the risk of cutting off the nose despite the face, trying to tamp down misinformation and malicious actors online, we are suppressing speech, critical for democracy. Dont want to tip too far in either direction. Upturn is an issue that concentrates on . We do work in areas like criminal justice, making predictions about people to ,ecide who stays in jail telling police where to focus their efforts in the community. This is problematic because the tools that are being used are based on Machine Learning. It learns from patterns in the past. Patterns in the past we want fixed, not repeated. Without appropriate governments governance and oversight, p patterns like discrimination we will have repeat patterns like discrimination. We try to make sure that policymakers and local governments and National Governments are thinking through how these technologies are being used, the purpose, if we agree purposean appropriate for that technology, and making sure there are safeguards so we dont make so we dont inadvertently hurt people they are trying to help. If people want to learn more, where did they go . Website. And we put out a newsletter that andlights how Technology Information is intersecting in all areas, including the economy, online, criminal , and if anyone in the public who wants to keep up to date with these issues. Teamupturn. Org. We have a policy analysis with that group who is our guest. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] cspan. Org toto and look under the series link on the homepage. Cspan, where history unfolds daily. In 1979, cspan was created as a Public Service by americas Cable Television companies. To bring youtinue unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and Public Policy events in washington dc and around the country. Cspans brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. Sunday night on afterwards. Talking about growing up with survivalist parents in the idaho mountains that were both educated. And a lot of people have seem to taken to heart this idea that to learn something, you have to have a degree, an institution in place to teach it. I am grateful to my parents that i was not raised to think that. When i went to college when i was 16, it felt like suppan i could do. I it felt like something could do. University. Into my parents took it too far. I was underprepared for university. I didnt know what the holocaust was. People thought i was denying it. I wouldnt say this was the ideal education. Watch afterwards, on cspan tv. Up next, wyoming