Whats going on with that case and do we expect further attention to that company . Ms. Levine thank you for having me, it is great to be here. Settlement5 billion with facebook, culminating the cambridge Analytical Data scandal, has divided washington. On one hand you have republicans and Industry Groups saying the 5 billion fine, because it was the largest in the history of the agency, it met facebook was being held accountable. On the others, you have democrats and consumer and privacy advocates blasting the ftcs track record on enforcement and saying that because of facebooks size and how much money it has, this wont deter facebook from bad behavior in the future. Right now in washington, we are in this wait and see mode with facebook. Facebook is still doing damage control to convince skeptics and lawmakers who are, by the way, watching facebooks every move to see if there are any other privacy missteps. Facebook is trying to prove itself to these skeptics and lawmakers. At the same time, only three weeks since the ftc fine came down from on high, we have already seen more privacy missteps from facebook, the most recent being that facebook was paying contractors to transcribe user audio without those people knowing, which bloomberg reported. What remains to be seen right now in washington is during the , how muchtech lash these regulatory measures will catch up to Companies Like facebook. In other words, if this is the outcome of a yearlong privacy probe into a problem that affected 87 million people, what is the bar for future missteps from Companies Like facebook and other Large Tech Companies . And when these privacy issues are bubbling up every few weeks or sometimes every few hours or every few days, where is the bar for what will merit a fresh ftc investigation . Host Emily Birnbaum, same question. Ms. Birnbaum almost immediately after we found out the ftc had settled with facebook, facebook disclosed they were also undergoing an antitrust investigation by the ftc, which is ongoing. We dont know very much about how that has played out so far. Shortly after, the department of justice, their antitrust division, announced they are probing some of the top Tech Companies. We can discern which companies they are looking into from their description of the investigation. We found out the department of justice is looking into them for competition issues, antitrust issues, and it is still so far unclear if that is going to result in action, how much this is going to affect these companies, but it is a big deal to be under investigation. It makes you rethink every decision that you make and what kind of acquisitions you are looking at, et cetera. Ms. Levine just want to add about the facebook investigation , facebook is the only company out of the big Tech Companies, facebook, amazon, apple, that has said, yes, we are under antitrust investigation. The other companies have gotten an inkling from reporting that they, too, will be under antitrust investigation, but they are largely in the dark and they dont know what they are under investigation for, if there even is an active investigation for any of those other companies. Facebook is the only one where we know for sure that is happening, and i think the thing to watch is how facebook treats its messaging apps going forward. Instagram was a separate company before facebook bought them. They were fairly successful on their own. We just had a story out in the information today about how facebook got quite popular and facebook said, we want to benefit from how popular you are. And now Mark Zuckerberg is making moves to knit his messaging apps together so the company is harder to unwind, if that is what regulators propose. And you can see these moves that they are making in the background while all this is pending and making all the companies that facebook owns, such as instagram, whatsapp, sort of fall into the facebook umbrella. They will say to joe simons of the ftc, you cant tear us apart, its fully integrated. You have to keep watching the watching those Business Decisions they are making. Host lets go to Emily Birnbaums a point that it is a big deal to be under antitrust investigation. Ms. Levine it is definitely a big deal. Even a little bit of Government Action can hurt your bottom scare shareholders, can really affect the way people perceive the company, even if it is a slight perception that the Company Might not us be as successful in make as much money. They have to be on watch with every business decision, every public pronouncement, because they know they are being watched. They dont want an ftc commissioner say, at this conference you said this, but you were misleading customers because what happened was this. So they have to be careful how they purport themselves going forward. Host the doj and the states are also looking into facebook, is that correct . I think it is astounding just how many layers there are to these antitrust investigations. You have antitrust investigations coming at big tech from all sides in washington right now. The ftc, from the justice department, from both chambers of congress, from a number of state ags that plan to launch a formal investigation next month, as soon as next month. Also, you could actually say that the president ial candidates are another layer of this, because the 2020 democrats are no doubt amplifying antitrust concerns we are seeing in washington on the campaign trail, particularly with the rhetoric around breaking up big tech and the harms of corporate consolidation. Host Emily Birnbaum, before we get onto other topics and the other companies, how did the policy become so political when it comes to the tech company . Ms. Birnbaum i think some people have described that there is this kind of fervor among lawmakers in the u. S. , this concern about the economy, that there is too much corporate consolidation, that people are being you know, they are not getting their fair shake. That has been increasing. You can see that with the rise of Bernie Sanders, the rise of Elizabeth Warren, and so i think these are the largest, most powerful companies in the world, so people will see them and kind of, in that attitude, it will be brought against them. Thinking about the way Bernie Sanders talks about amazon, the way Elizabeth Warren also talks about amazon and also talks about google and facebook. She is trying to use these really popular, ubiquitous companies to explain why we might have a monopoly problem in the u. S. Amber i saw both of you nodding your heads. I want to add there are many ways it becomes politicized. There is a line conservatives have been toting that big Tech Companies are biased against conservatives. This is something they have been laying the hammer on since last summer, and it doesnt seem to be going away. There is a perception that big Tech Companies are too big because there is too much wealth in the hands of two few, but there is also the idea that it is a bunch of liberal type people up in silicon valley, calling the shots on content, and they are all liberal, all democratic supporters. That is not necessarily true that everyone who works at these companies have liberal leadings and lets them bleed into their work. There is not a lot of true anecdotes that these companies are biased against conservatives, but it is a political line that has stuck, and i dont see it going away, especially in the next election. President trump tweeted about google being biased against him just this week. So it is a line we are going to keep seeing, especially on the campaign trail. Host i saw you nodding your head, alexandra levine. Ms. Levine on the topic of the monopoly, it is important to point out that Tech Companies stand by their position that they are not monopolies, and they do actually face fierce competition within each of their respective sectors. So you have facebook saying they compete with snapchat, for example, snapchat and apple as a messaging platform. And then you also have apple saying that its i o smartphone platform is competing with google android. These companies are sticking to their lines that they are not in fact engaging in anticompetitive behavior. Host when it comes to privacy legislation, is this something we will see before the 2020 election . I think that this i think that most reporters on this beat are tired of, or dont want to offer a timeline anymore. There are a couple key efforts in congress right now around privacy legislation. So there is a Senate Commerce working group that has sort of disintegrated and it became a negotiation between the Ranking Member and the chairman, and then there is also a separate effort in the house, and i think they have blown past a lot of timelines they put up publicly , so for instance, Senate Commerce chairman roger wicker, he says, we are going to have something out by labor day. He said that before the recess. Im not going to promise that at all. There is still this california privacy law, which is going to go into effect next year and become enforceable next summer, and a lot of particularly republicans really want to have federal privacy legislation before then. But negotiations have been really difficult. Its a really complicated issue, market moving issue. So there is appetite, bipartisan appetite, in a way there is not on a lot of other issues, but i dont think i would say or anyone else would say there is definitely going to be something before 2020. I if you asked me in january, would have told you for sure this is the top tech item of the year. There is going to be legislation. There has never been so much momentum toward privacy legislation. About over the spring and summer, it fizzed out, for the factors emily described. And with all the antitrust and monopoly talk going on, and so many other issues with tech, the table is getting really crowded and they are not honing in on privacy like they had been last year, when that was the top thing lawmakers were concerned about when it came to tech. Now they are worried about privacy, but a lot of other things too, and it is distracting their focus from actually getting a bill done. Theres also something to be said for the republicans and democrats being on different pages here. Even if democrats and republicans in the senate can agree on the broad outlines of a privacy bill, democrats in the house want to go way further than the senate would be comfortable with, and that is causing a lot of sticking points. Host anything to add . You guys covered it. Host who are the members of congress that we should be watching out for . On privacy legislation . Host yes. When i spoke to people at the beginning of the summer, stakeholders, they said they are looking most closely at the negotiations between senator cantwell of washington and roger wicker. There had been a working group that involved senator blumenthal, senator moran, shatz from hawaii, but cantwell made the decision to step back from that group and enter into bilateral negotiations with wicker. Those are still ongoing, mainly at the staff level, because it is august recess. In the house, you have to Pay Attention to the leaders of the energy and commerce committee, and from what i understand, i think house judiciary is also going to jump into the fray. Host David Sweeney has been very active, from rhode island. Ms. Gold he has been active on privacy, but more active on competition and antitrust. Isis not just tech, he concerned about consolidation across a number of sectors. The most substantive effort out of congress in general when it comes to the competition thing has been his series of hearings on consolidation in the media and Tech Industries and what that does for other competing industries. And he has had a series of hearings there and he has said we can expect legislation to come out of that effort. So he is definitely one to watch. Host does tech policy sometimes Cross Party Lines . You know, you talk about maria cantwell. Microsoft is in her state, of course. Then you have the representatives of silicon valley, et cetera. Does it cross . On the one hand, yes it does. For example, section 230 of the Communications Decency act, which is legal liability shield that gives tech platforms and Internet Companies immunity, lets them off the hook essentially for any content thats posted by users on that platform. And so while there are many done by lawmakers in washington, one thing you are seeing across both party lines are calls from lawmakers, ranging from House Speaker nancy pelosi to senator josh hawley, who has become this very outspoken tech critic, that section 230 may need to be changed. Some suggest it could be eliminated completely, others that it should be modified or tweaked, but it is certainly one thing that spans party lines. I will add, on section 230, 1 really interesting thing here is that on the one hand you have this sort of bifurcation of the internet, where in the conversations around 8chan, for example, on one hand you have fringe, unregulated, anonymous types like 8chan and 8chan was this fringe website that has come to be seen as a breeding ground for domestic terrorism and online violence, and it was the place where several gunmen on several occasions allegedly posted racist manifestoes prior to committing Mass Shootings. On the other site, you have mainstream platforms like your facebook, google, twitter, and for all the talk of the 8chan ns being distinctly fringe and not mainstream, and from all the talk of big Tech Companies saying that using blanket terms like social media or internet when we are talking about violence online is unfairly grouping them with 8chan. The one thing that they actually all have in common is section 230, and they it can stand they can all stand behind section 230. Section 230 has grown increasingly controversial, at the center of this growing debate. Democrats say that section 230 is giving Tech Companies cover for not doing enough to fight things like hate speech, disinformation, while republicans use it to say Tech Companies are biased against conservatives. But in the bigger scheme of things, section 230 is something everyone can agree needs to be looked at more. And that all the Tech Companies can agree that shouldnt change, even if they are fighting with each other on other stuff. They are together on section 230. Host we have heard that jim might be coming to washington for a hearing. I think he is coming to washington. They are calling him before the House Homeland Security committee, which has been increasingly under pressure to do something about these extremist fringe platforms. Jim watkins is the owner of 8chan. He lives in the philippines. He continually defends his website, even after it has been implicated in a string of Mass Shootings this year. And i think that there are a lot of questions around what kind of utility there will be in bringing him before congress. Will this be an Educational Opportunity . The chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee Told reporters a couple of months ago that he had just learned about 8chan. So obviously lawmakers themselves are still in the process of learning with these fringe platforms are, houses the rest of the public. So it could be a learning opportunity. Some extremism experts i talked to have said it could be sort of empowering to have jim watkins walking through the halls of congress, this man who has helped hone and support a fringe, potentially dangerous online community. As it stands right now, 8chan is still offline. It was pulled offline. A couple of services dropped support for the website in light of the el paso shooting, which was preceded by the posting of a manifesto, allegedly connected to the shooter, a white supremacist manifesto. It is still offline. They still say they are working to get it back online. If it does go back online in the mainstream web, it will probably not be as strong as it was before. Host now, ms. Birnbaum i apologize, ashley ms. Birnbaum, you used the term hauled in front of congress when it comes to mr. Watkins. Is this a case of being subpoenaed, of not coming willingly . Ms. Birnbaum he was subpoenaed. They originally said they sent him a letter, sent him communications. They said, please calm, we would like to talk to you about the issue of White Supremacism on your platforms. He responded over emailed and posted publicly, i am available by phone whenever you want. So it appears they did subpoena him. Host and i apologize no, i am fine. I just wanted to emily was saying that Bennie Thompson did not know what 8chan was a couple of months ago and now he is coming before congress, jim watkins, and so much of these congressional hearings, where we do end up having tech executives hauled before congress, there is a lot of hype around them, there is a lot of talk that this is going to be a real lesson for the tech company ceos, that congress is going to hand it to them and they are going to be under the spotlight and they are going to have a hard day. More often than not, it ends up just being a learning experience for the lawmakers, where they get to ask questions, ask anything they want, sometimes completely not germane to anything they want, and it ends up being a little embarrassing for congress, a little enlightening for people watching, but altogether not as big a deal as it seems. Even when Mark Zuckerberg came, ultimately lawmakers, some were a little confused, some asked great questions, but some were definitely just learning about how the technologies work. And that says to me that, despite all the chatter right now about big, bad tech and what should we do about it, we are very much still in the learning and listening mode. And i think the 8chan hearing will be no different. Ms. Gold right, and i think that is how the House Judiciary Committee has also launched an investigation into antitrust issues around tech, and a lot of the things i have heard about it and i am sure both of you have heard about it, is that it is really an Educational Opportunity for a lot of these members. Ms. Levine another thing to watch while 8chan makes its way to that hell is how fresh scrutiny on 8chan will turn up the heat on mainstream platforms like google, facebook, twitter. Because as soon as you were talking about 8chan remaining offline, within days or maybe hours of 8chan going offline, you had prominent voices in the Tech Community blaming these mainstream platforms. For example, facebooks former chief Security Officer came out to stay to say that the mainstream platforms were spreading and amplifying content that was from 8chan and about 8chan. And he is now calling on them to do more, and also do what congress cant do because of First Amendment issues, in saying that they are he suggested, for example, that they maybe ban all content from 8chan or about 8chan across all platforms, so things like that. You also have civil and digital liberties advocates who are saying that twitter should follow suit, follow facebook and youtubes lead in banning White Supremacists altogether. Host Emily Birnbaum, huawei. What is the status of huawei in this country . Wordirnbaum it is the a political football. It is so deeply abhorred by a lot of china hawks on capitol hill who say there is obviously a variety within them, but mainly there is widespread distrust, skepticism, widespread belief that its equipment poses a Real National Security Threat to the u. S. Sometimes it can be difficult to distinguish what is hype and what is evidencebased. We do know that obviously huawei has ties to the chinese government. Inis saying right now it is a life or death moment because of all of these efforts to cut off its relationship with the u. S. I think as of right now, it is still just one of the most prominent instances of a Chinese Tech Company that people are talking about and concerned about right now. Ms. Gold it is very indicative, the way it has been tossed back and forth like a political football, like you were saying, just how close our ties are with Chinese Companies in the u. S. , and how hard it is to extricate ourselves. They just got a 90 date reprieve and wilbur ross, the secretary of commerce, was saying this is because we have people in rural areas who are using huawei equipment and we want to give them a chance to switch to another provider and we dont want to cut off their connection. Just the fact that they wanted to cut them off and realized they couldnt because they are tethered in this way, realizes the danger of assuming any technology that is coming from china is bad. Because we use so much Chinese Technology already, it would be impossible to extricate ourselves from it. And the fact china has become so political, especially with the trade war, it is hurting the tech industry. Alexandra levine, has the fcc been an activist fcc under donald trump . The fcc has most recently been criticized for its record on antitrust, particularly in light of the tmobilesprint merger, which just closed about a month ago, which basically approved this 26 billion merger that left a lot of critics complaining that it was going to raise wireless prices for customers, and it also raised questions about how serious the Trump Administration was about antitrust enforcement. Under ajit pai, they rolled back Net Neutrality rules very early in the Trump Administration, rolled back a lot of obama era regulations that were put in place to ensure what obama officials thought was a more level Playing Field for telecom companies, things that they put in place to lower prices for consumers and making sure big corporations werent taking advantage. I would say at the beginning of the Trump Administration, the thenas pretty active, and they slow down a bit. You havent heard a ton from the fcc lately. My sense is chairman pai is trying to ride it out and see how the rest of the administration goes. What do you think, emily . Ms. Birnbaum yes, i would agree with that. I think the Net Neutrality debate was so highstakes and high drama, and now we are just sort of waiting to hear the results from the court case d. C. On Net Neutrality. They have been focusing on things like broadband mapping and some things where there is least, betweent the commissioners, the republicans and democrats. Host and there is a potential new merger coming online, cbs and viacom, correct . Right. Right, so there is that. Cbs and viacom have been wanting to merge for a while in order to stay competitive with all of these new streaming companies that are posing a threat to the traditional cable industry. If the tmobilesprint merger and other mergers that have been approved under the Trump Administration are any indication, they probably wont have any trouble getting that through. Host what have we not talked about in the last 30 minutes that we need to talk about . What is coming up this fall . Anybody . Primaries. Host Election Security. Talk about Election Security. There is bipartisan agreement that there should be Election Security legislation. Mitch mcconnell has been holding that up. That has been a source of contention for many people. He traditionally does not like to set any roles that would mess with local elections or that would impact how you do elections or how you put money into elections. A lot of people were calling him moscow mitch because of that, but i think it is more complicated. So i think there is a fear for not only hacking in the voting booth, but misinformation campaigns, of course. I dont think the Tech Companies would tell you they are ready for 2020. There were completely blindsided in 2016 and are still making sense of it. There is no way they are ready for 2020. Ms. Levine i think just the fact that we saw this deepfake of Speaker Pelosi emerge earlier in the summer, when we are talking about Election Security and misinformation campaigns, that is a precursor to what experts and people who follow this closely are saying, it is going to keep happening over again, but in ways we might not anticipate right now. So instagram and instagram memes are expected to become a much bigger problem. People digest memes very quickly. Sometimes they seem satirical but they are actually a way to spread misinformation that experts are saying are going to be much more threatening leading up to the election. There is also this question of, is the government ready, is the public ready, are Tech Companies ready . The and the consensus seems to be none of them are ready. It takes a lot to teach the public media literacy. It is a much bigger problems attack all than simply putting out alerts to people. It has to go with over hauling our education system. They are more prepared than they were last election pot they are still but they are still the cheap fake of Speaker Pelosi went online and they are still really struggling and the government has put forward side of a hodgepodge of different ways to address deep fakes and address dis information but none of these things have really moved and many critics are saying that those cannot actually contain the problem. Host unfortunately, we are out of time. Alexandra levine, ashley gould, and Emily Birnbaum have been our guests. Thank you very much. This communicators and all others are available as podcastss. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2019] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] house will be in honor. In order. Cspan hasars, prevented from riding Public Policy events from washington, d. C. , and around the country so you can make up your own mind. Created by cable in 1979, cspan is brought to you by your local cable or satellite provider. Cspan, your unfiltered view of government. During a briefing with reporters this week, state department u. S. Special representative for iran brian hook announced a reward of up to 15 million for any person who helps disrupt the financials operation of irans Islamic Revolutionary guard and it specialized Unconventional Warfare unit. Here is that announcement. The unitedoday, States Government is intensifying our maximum Pressure Campaign against the Islamic Republic of iran. First, we are announcing a reward of up to 15 million for any person who helps us disrupt the Financial Operations of irans revolutionary guard corps