Transcripts For CSPAN3 Hearing On The Digital Age Disinformation 20240713

Testifying on ways to counter the problem. Good morning everyone. In morning, everyone. The subcommittee on Consumer Protection and congress commerce, wilbur come to order. We will begin with member statements and i will begin by recognizing myself for five minutes. Good morning, and thank you for joining us here today. Given whats going on in the world, its really impressive to see the turnout that is here today and i welcome everyone. In the two plus decades since the creation of the internet, we have seen life for americans and their families transformed in many positive ways. The internet provides new opportunities for commerce, education, information and connecting people. However, along with these many new opportunities, we have seen new challenges as well. Bad actors are stocking the online marketplace using deceptive techniques to influence consumers deceptive designed, to for them. Deceptive designs for them in the giving away, personal information, stealing their money and in gauging another unfair practices. The federal trade commission forced to protect americans from many unfair and deceptive practices, but a lack of resources, authority and even a lack of will has left Many American consumers feeling helpless in this digital world. Adding to that feeling of helplessness, new technologies are increasing the scope and scale of the problem. Deepfakes, manipulation of video, dark patterns, bots and other technological technologies are hurting us in direct and indirect ways. Congress has unfortunately taken a less a fair approach to regulation of unfair and deceptive practices online over the past decade and platforms have let them floor. The result is failure to respond to respond to the threat posed by deepfakes and other evidence as evidence by facebook scrambling to announce a new policy as wholly inadequate. We will talk about that later, since it would have done nothing to prevent the alternative, the video of Speaker Pelosi that amassed millions of views and prompted no action by the Online Platform. Hopefully our discussion today can change my mind about that. Underlying all of this is section 230 of the Communications Decency act which provides Online Platform links like facebook a legal liability shield for thirdparty content. Many of argued that this liability shield resulted Online Platforms not adequately policing their platforms, including online piracy and extreme content. Thus, here we are with big tech wholly unprepared to tackle the challenges we face today. A top line concern for this subcommittee must be to protect consumers, readiness, regardless of whether theyre online or not. But too long, big tech has argued that ecommerce and digital platforms deserve special treatment, and a light regulatory touch. We are finding out that consumers can be harmed as easily online as in the physical world and in some cases but online dangers are greater. It is incumbent on us, in this subcommittee, in this subcommittee, to ns that apply to in person commerce also applies to virtual space. I think that i think the witnesses for their testimony today. I recognize Ranking Member rogers for five minutes. Thank you to everyone, welcome, i appreciate the cheerleading this effort to highlight online deception. I want to note that chairman walden also held several hearings on platform responsibility. This information is not a new problem. It was also an issue 130 years ago. When Joseph Pulitzer and the new york world and William Randolph led the age of yellow journalism. Big, onlineick platforms today, sensational headline sold newspapers and boosted advertising revenue. With far more limited sources of , themation available American People lost trust in the media. To rebuild trust, newspapers had to clean up their act. Now the pulitzer is associated with something very different. I believe we are at a similar Inflection Point today. Faith in sources we can trust online. To rebuild it, the subcommittee, members of the media are putting a spotlight on abuses and deception. Leadership has already led to efforts by platforms to take action. Just this week, facebook announced a new policy to combat deepfakes. In part by utilizing online intelligence. Ckert forate miss bi being here to discuss this in detail. Deepfakes can be and on with innovation. And preparing people with more information. They can choose to make far more Productive Outcomes when people can make the best decisions for themselves. Rather than relying on the government to make decisions for them. There isnt more regulation and government mandate. As we discuss ways to combat manipulation online, we must ensure that america will remain the Global Leader in ai development. There is no better place in the world to raise peoples of living and make sure that this technology is used responsibly. Software is already available to face swap, lipsynch and create reenactment to fabricate content. Is, we caning as it also be using ai to go after the bad actors and fight fire with fire. We cannot afford to shy away from it. Who would you rather lead the world in Machine Learning technology . America or china . China is sharing its Ai Surveillance Technology with other authoritarian governments like venezuela. Is using tell knology technology to control minorities. The New York Times has reported just last month that china is collecting dna samples and can be using this data to create images of faces. Could china be building a tool to further crackdown on minorities and political dismiss customer imagine the propaganda and lies that could develop with this Technology Behind the great chinese firewall. Where there is no free speech or an independent press to hold the communist party accountable. That is why america must lead the world in ai development. By upholding our american values, we can use this as a force for good and save peoples lives. Can help us detect cancer earlier and were quickly. Clinical trials are already underway, making major breakthroughs to diagnose cancer. The continued leadership of our innovators is crucial to make sure that we have the tools to combat online deception. America should be right in the role for this technology so real people, not an authoritarian state like china are empowered. I am also glad we are putting a spotlight on dark patterns. Laws, that reviews and bots are the latest version of robo calls scams. Reviews and bots are the latest version of robo call scams. We must be careful where we legislate so that we dont harm the practices that people enjoy. I heavyhanded regulation will make it impossible for online retailers to provide discount. This would especially hurt lower and middle income families. In a digital marketplace, Services People enjoy should not get swallowed up by a strict definition of a dark pattern. How we make these distinctions is important. I look forward to todays discussion and i want to thank the panel. I yield back. The gentlelady yields back. Recognizes the next speaker. Relyericans increasingly on internet for fundamental aspects of their daily lives. Consumers shop online for products ranging from groceries to refrigerators. They use the internet to telecommute or check the weather and traffic and they use social Media Networks to connect with family and friends as a major source of news and information. When consumers go online, they assume the reviews of the products they buy or real our bill and that the news and information they are reading is accurate. Unfortunately, that is not always the case. Online actors including nationstates, companies and individuals fraudsters are using on my toes manipulate and deceive americans. Some methods of deception are well known. Today, technology has made it difficult if not impossible for typical consumers to recognize what is real from what is fake. Why are people putting so Much Technology misuse of the trust is know key to taking advantage of people. If that actors can make people believe a lie, they can manipulate us into taking actions we would not otherwise take. In some instances, we can no longer even trust our eyes. Videos can make people appear intact not can be slowed to make people appear intoxicated. The extent of such manipulation has become extreme. Machine learning other rhythms create completely fake videos known as deepfakes that look real. They can show real people say or do things doing things that they never did. Faye swapping technology has been used to place nicholas cage into movies were he never was. Jordan peele created a deepfake supposedly showing president obama insulting president trump. The most common use of deepfakes is nonconsensual privacy. That has been used to make it appear as if celebrities have been videotaped in compromising positions. It was also used to humiliate journalists from india who was reporting on an eightyearold rate victim. Algorithms are behind the glut of social media bots, or Automated Systems who act as if they are real people. These buyers are used by companies and other entities to build popularity of brands. Even more alarming is the use of these bots by both state and nonstate actors to spread this this information. It can influence the fabric of our society and politics. In english and can be very subtle. Darktive design known as patterns capitalize on our knowledge of senses. Have you ever tried to unsubscribe from a mailing list and there is a button that says subscribe that is eager and more colorful than the unsubscribe button . That is by design. Banners have been designed with dirt or here on the screen to tapping them on your smartphone. It is impossible for experts to detect. Computer scientists are working on technology. We are in a technological arms race. As the technology improves, so does the deceptive technology. Unrelenting advances in these technologies and their abuse rates raise 70 questions for all of us. Significante questions for all of us. What steps are companies and regulators taking to mitigate Consumer Fraud and misinformation . I looked over to beginning to answer these questions with our Expert Witness so we can transparency to fight misinformation and deceptive practices. Madam chair, i think this is a very important hearing. I was just telling my colleague hadt a discussion that we with the topic was brought up. I said we are having a hearing on this today. This is something a lot of members hear about. A keeper having the hearing today. Thank you for having the hearing today. The chair recognizes mr. Walden. The making member of the committee for five minutes for his opening statement. Thank you for having this meeting. This is the second hearing of the new year. There was one that started earlier upstairs. We are glad to hear from our witnesses today. Thank you for being here. Internetnything, the presents that actors seeking ample opportunities to manipulate users and take advantage of consumers. They tend to be some of the most horrible in the population. Harmful acts are easily exacerbated. Videosll know, fake spread at breakneck speed. That is why we try to tackle this whole issue with platform responsibility had on. We appreciate the input that we got from many. We legislated on Online Platforms not for filling the Good Samaritan fulfilling their Good Samaritan obligations. We took at how our rhythms info influence consumer behavior. Improving broadband expenses overall areas can benefit from the positive aspects of the internet. Explaining the Online Advertising ecosystem crossborder data flows. A topic we need to continue to work on. Other related issues we face such as cybersecurity and Artificial Intelligence to name a few. Of the invited the heads Tech Industry to explain their practices right in this hearing from. Two of the committees highest profile hearings in recent memory. Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg came and spent about 5. 5 hours at that table to enter some pretest questions on the cameras analytical debacle and to provide the committee with more insight on how facebook collects Consumer Information and what facebook does with that information. We welcome the ceo of twitter, jack dorsey to provide more information on how twitter operates. Chairman elan brought in the ceo of reddit. A trend that we hope will continue. This hearing today helps with that. This group of experts signs a light on practices i hope that can following our series of years, there is proof that some companies are cleaning up their platforms. We appreciate the work you are doing. Following our hearing on Cambridge Analytic up, Basement Book made significant changes to its privacy policies. Is the ability for it users to control and delete information, tim gunn washes entities and invested in programs to promote local news operations. Mr. Zuckerberg was pushed pretty hard on some ads that he saw. Facebook removed those ads. We got a call as mr. Zuckerberg was headed to the airport that afternoon. Also notable through the Global Internet for him to counterterrorism, platforms such as twitter, facebook and youtube have been working together to tackle terrorist content and disrupt them. We thank you for that. This is not to suggest the online ecosystem is perfect. It is far from it. Companys could do more to conduct their platform. I think you are all working on that. That may be clear. This hearing should serve as an important reminder to all Online Platforms that we are watching closely. We want to make sure that we do not harm innovation but when we see issues or identify clear homes to consumers, we do not see online entities taking a puppet action, we are prepared to act. Thank you for having this hearing. This is tough stuff. Taking appropriate action, we are prepared to act. They keeper having this hearing. We need to call on them to call take on things we dont like and stay on the right side of the First Amendment. It is still protected under the First Amendment. If you go too far, we yell at you for taking things done that we like. If you dont take down things we dont like, we yell at you for that. Youre in a bit of a box. Is an issue we0 have to revise. We all get the opportunity to revise and extend our remarks throughout this process and clean up our bad grammar. Isbe some of that we have that reporting. We will leave that for another day. Ideal back. The gentleman yields back. I yield back. The gentleman yield back. All Opening Statements shall be made part of the record. Introducew like to our witnesses for todays hearing. Ms. Monika bickert the Vice President of Global Policy management at facebook. I want to acknowledge and thank you. Are not feeling well today and would like to abbreviate some of your testimony. We thank you very much for coming anyway. I want to introduce dr. Join donovan. Of technologytor and social change project. Also, mr. Justin hurwitz. Anddirector of Governance Technology center at the university of Nebraska College of law. And director of law and economics programs at the International Center for law and economics. Finally, dr. Tristan harris. He is the director for humane technology. We want to think our witnesses for joining us today. We look forward to testimony at this time. The chair will recognize each witness for five minutes to provide their Opening Statements. I would like to explain the lighting system for those who may not know it. In front of you is a series of lights. The lights will initially be green at the start of your opening statement. The light will turn to you when you have one minute remaining. Begin tould please wrap up your testimony at that point, the light will turn red when your time has expired. Bickert, you are recognized for five minutes. Bickert thank you members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. Y name is Monika Bickert i am the Vice President for Global Policy management at facebook and i am responsible for our content policies. I am a little under the weather today. With apologies, i will keep my remarks short but will rely on the written testimony i cemented submitted. We have an important to play at facebook and addressing manipulation and misinformation on our platform. We have our Community Standards that specify what we will remove from the site and our relationship with thirdparty Fact Checkers through which Fact Checking organization can rate content as false. We put a label over that content saying this is false information and distribution. Under the committee standards, there is some types of this information that we move remove. Attempts to suppress the vote or interfere with the census. Newnnounced yesterday a prong and our policy where we will remove videos that are edited or synthesized using Artificial Intelligence or deep learning techniques in ways that are not apparent to the average person that would mislead the average person to believe that the video said something he or she did not in fact say. Manipulated media that does not follow fall under this is still subject to our Fact Checking. Although deepfakes are an emerging technology, one area where internet experts have seen and is in nudity pornography. All that violates our policies against nudity and pornography. We would remove it. Manipulated videos are eligible to be fact checked by these thirdparty Fact Checking organizations that we work with to label and reduce distributional of misinformation. We are always improving our policies and our enforcement. We will continue to do the engagement we have done outside of the company with academics and experts to understand the new ways that these technologies are emerging. We would also welcome the opportunity to collaborate with other Industry Partners and interested stakeholders. Including academics, Civil Society and lawmakers to help develop a consistent industry approach to these issues. Our hope is that by working together with all of the stakeholders, we can make faster progress in ways that benefit all of society. Thank you, i look forward to your questions. Thank you, dr. Donovan, you are recognized for five minutes. Dr. Donovan thank you Ranking Members for having me today. It is an honor to be invited. I lead a team at Harvard Kennedy that researches Online Administration and deception. I have been a researcher of the internet for the last decade. About changes bit in policy as well as the development of platforms themselves and what they were intended to do. One of the things i want to discuss today is online fraud. Beyond malware, spam and phishing attacks, reddit card scams, there is a growing threat from new forms of Identity Fraud from enable technological design. Platform companies are unable to manage this alone and americans need governance. Deception is now a multimillion dollar industry. My Research Team tracks dangers individuals and groups who use influence brands and other people. This emerging economy of misinformation is a threat to security. Silicon Valley Companies are profiting from it. Key political socialist intrusions are struggling to Win Back Public trust. Platforms have done more than just give users a voice online. They have effectively given them the equivalent of their own broadcast station, emboldening the most luscious among us. To recap it with the media manipulation campaign, most malicious among us. Newsrooms, Healthcare Providers and Law Enforcement who are tasked with repairing the damage. We currently dont know the true cost of misinformation. Individuals and groups can quickly weaponize social media, causing others financial and physical injury. For example, fraudsters using president trumps image, name, logo and boys have siphoned millions from his supporters by claimant to be part of his reelection coalition. In an election year, donation and scam donation scams should be of concern to everyone. My friends have studied malicious groups, particularly wiser premises to an foreign actors who use social media to inflame racial division. Even as these imposters are quickly identify to the communities they target, it takes time for platforms to remove and setting comment content. This can create a great strain on breaking news cycles, turning many journalist into unpaid content moderators and drawing Law Enforcement for its false leads. On like an indication technologies need regulatory guard best to prevent them from forg used reticulated manipulative purposes. I provided a longer list for ways you could think about technology differently. Right now, i would like to call attention to deceptively edited audio and video to drive cliques, legs and chairs. This is the Ai Technology commonly known as deepfakes. What i would like to point out is that we argued that she fakes are a wider threat. Fakes are a wider threat. Magic policy, joe biden, this poses another Nancy Pelosi Joe Biden were featured in these videos. The platforms refused to take down this cheap fake. Forms like radio towers have provided application power and platforms like radio towers have provided amplification power. These platforms are highly and month we placed the burden we place the burden on those. Actorsow, malicious jeopardized we make informed decisions about who to vote for and what causes the support. We must expand the public understanding of technology by rding against consumer guarding Consumer Rights against technological abuse and putting across sector effort to curb the distributional harmful and moshes content. Platform Companies Must address the power of amplification and malicious content. Platform Companies Must address the power of amplification. And regulation of Technology Must work, in tandem otherwise work in tandem, otherwise the future is forgery. Thank thank, you and, now mr. Horowitz, you are recognized for five minutes. Thank you, miss chairwoman along with members of the committee, for the opportunity to speak you today, i would also be remiss if i did not thank my colleague christian stout and Research Assistant justin call for help in drafting my written testimony. I am a law professor so i apologize, i have written a short law review article for my main testimony which i will read, i will turn to discussing that. Exterior mike is your mic on you . Put, up the. It will turn to discussing a shortfall review article written for you as my testimony and assigned you to read in a moment, before i turned that i want to a couple both recommendations. If you really want to understand whats at stake with these patterns, you should start by reading the recent book, we engineering humanity. In my spare time, i am a double salesman, i have a copy, here there book discusses how modern technology, Data Analytics combined with hardly programmable environments creating a world in which people are, to use their term, preventable, this book will scare you. If you read that book we should then read the recent, book user friendly, this is just published in november. It discusses the important difficulty of designing technologies that seamlessly operate in line with expectations, that is, user friendly technologies. This book will help you understand the incredible power of user Friendly Design and with hope for what design makes possible as well as appreciation for our difficulties to do design well. Together, these folks will show you both sides of the coin. Dark patterns are something that this committee should be concerned about but this committee should also person topic with great caution. Design is powerful but it is incredibly difficult to do well. Efforts to regulate bad uses of design could easily harm efforts to for good. How is that were having a professor testify . Ive already assigned two books and a law review article, my own, for you to read, i will do it i can to summarize some of the key ideas from that article in the next three minutes or so. Dark pattern is an ominous term and is itself a dark pattern. It is a turn for a simple concept, people behave unpredictable ways, is behavior patterns can be used to program us in certain ways and the concern is that sometimes we can be program to act against our own self interest so, i have some examples and we can look at the first example, this is something from the internet, we will look at this for a moment, who here feels manipulated by this image. It is okay to say yes, i do, the designer of this image is using his knowledge of how people read texan image to make us feel at the images in control of us, it is control how our eyes are following in particular were going to go next. Weird stuff. Lets look at another example. Again, you can definitely tell, from the internet. Again, who feels like this image is manipulative . The image, the previous image was harmless and this one hints at a darker power of dark patterns. Most of you probably mr. Typos in the first line of the second line until the text point of them out to you. What if this had been a contract and district was used to insert a material term or distract you from a material term in the contract that you were agreeing to . This is now gone from weird stuff to scary stuff. On the other hand, the same tricks can be used for good. In the same example, what if district were used to highlight an easily missed but important concern for consumers to Pay Attention to . This could be beneficial to consumers. Design is not nearest exit. All designed influences how decisions are made. It is not possible to regulate bad design without also affecting good design. So, how much of a problem our dark patterns . Research shows that websites absolutely argue about, sometimes suddenly, sometimes, overtly to influence users and other Research Shows us the tactics can be affected and consumers to do things that they otherwise would not do. We have already heard some examples from these so we will not repeat what has already been discussed but rather i would like to leave a few to us ideas but what if anything we should do about. Them first, dark patterns are used both online and off line. Stores use there for plans to influence what people buy. Advertisers make consumers feel a sense of need an urgency for product. By canceling a Subscription Service or returning a product you will likely be routed through a maddening maze of Consumer Service representatives. If these patterns are a problem on line, they are a problem off line to, we should not focus on one of the exclusion of the other. Second, while these tricks are knowing it is unclear how much they actually harm consumers or how much benefit they make and. For setting mandatory disclosure laws, for, instance studies find that they have limited effectiveness but also that they could be used benefit consumers. We should be cautious but regulations that may fail to stop the iconic already in the benefits of good conduct. Third, most of the worst examples of dark patterns very likely fall within the ftcs authority to regulate deceptive acts or practices. Before the legislator takes any action to address these concerns, the ftc should attempt to use existing authority to address them. It is already having hearings on this position. If this proves ineffective, the ftc should report to you, to congress on these practices. Fourth, industry has been responsive to these issues and to some extent has been self regulating. Web browser and operating systems have made many bad Design Practices harder to use, Design Professionals scorn dark practices, and self regulation is encouraged. Fifth, regulators should, yes, last, and building on all of the above, this is an area well suited to cooperation between industry and regulators, efforts of self regulation should be encouraged and rewarded, perhaps even more important, given the complexity of the systems, industry should be at the frontline combatting down. Industry has greater design expertise and ability to experiment and regulators but there is an Important Role for regulation to step in where industry fails to police itself. In a true professor fashion, thank, you i look forward to discussion. Mr. , harris you are recognized now for five minutes. Yes, thank, you chairwoman chao ski and other members, i appreciate you inviting me here. Im going to go off script. I come here because im incredibly incredibly concerned. I actually have a lifelong experience with deception and how Technology Influences peoples minds. I was a magician as a kid and so, i started off by seeing the world this way, and, then i stayed no appeal to standard Persuasive Technology lab, actually with the founders of instagram and so i know the culture of the people who build these products and the way that it is designed intentionally for deception. I think that the thing i most want to respond to here is we have often from these issues as, we have a few bad apples, we have these bad deepfakes so we have to keep the platform. We have this bad content, we have these guide bots. But i wonder argue is that this is actually, not we have these dark patterns, but i wonder argue is that we have dark infrastructure. This is now the infrastructure by which 2. 7 billion people, bigger than the size of christianity, make sense of the world. It is the information environment and if someone came, along private companies can build Nuclear Power plants and all across the United States, and a sort of melting down and they said well, its your responsibility to have hazmat suit, have a radiation kit, that is essentially what we are experiencing it now. The responsibility is being put on consumers one in fact if it is infrastructure, it should be put on the people building that infrastructure. There is specifically two areas of harm i want to focus on even though, when its become these the infrastructure controls all of our lives. We wake up with these devices, we check our phones 150 times a day, the infrastructure going to bed, children spend as much time on these devices as they do at the hours of schools so, no matter what youre putting peoples brains, kids brains in school, you have all the hours they spend on their phones. And lets take the kids issue. So, as infrastructure, this is not the Business Model of this infrastructure is not in line with a fabric of society, how much have you paid for facebook account recently . Are you to count . Zero. How are they worth more than a coating dollars in market value . They monetize our attention. The way they get that attention is by influencing you using and using direct potential trucks to do it. In the way to deal with children as they say, how many likes or followers do you have . So, they basically get children addicted digging attention from other people. They use filters, likes, etc, beautification filters that enhancer salvage had after two decades in declined, to Mental Health girls, high depressive symptoms, an image here will be able to show, went up 170 . 01 0, wit after the year 2010 withe rise of instagram etc. These are your children, your consist earns, this is a real issue. We are hacking the self image of children. On the information ecology front, the business, model think of it as though we are drinking from the flint water system of information. The Business Model polarization, the whole point is that i have to figure out and calculate what keeps your. Attention which means affirmation, not information by, default. It polarizes by default. There is a recent upturn in a study that it costs more money to avert has across the aisle, then those with your same believes. Polarization has a home front advantage, in terms of the business. Model the award of these platforms is to inspire outrage the brain cells, thats the reason why all of you at home have crazier constituents that believe crazier things. And you have to respond to them. Russia is manipulating our veterans. We have totally open borders. Physical borders. We left the digital border wide. Open can imagine a Nuclear Plant that says we are not going to protect Nuclear Plants from russian attacks. This is like facebook not pretend to protecting it from bad actors before the pressure is. There this is leading to a Information Trust meltdown. No one even has to use deepfakes for essentially people to say that must be a fake video. Right, so we are actually at the last turning point. Event horizon. We either protect the foundations of our information and trust environment, or we let it go away. We say that we care about the education of, kids but we allow Technology Companies to basically tell them that the world revolves around clicks and shares. We say that we want to come together but technology is dividing us into echo chambers. We see that america should lead in the global chamber, we allow products to degrade our Mental Health and, our children. Well i am finishing up here, i want to say that instead of trying to design new federal agencies, a master agency, when technology has taken all of the laws of the taken over the physical world, credit pushed it up to a physical world. What happens when you have a no laws for an entire virtual infrastructure. You cant have a new agency that deregulates its new world. Why dont we take existing systems nationalist health, have a digital update that expands their jurisdiction to how do we protect technological platforms in the same jurisdiction . Thank you very much. So now we have concluded our witnesses Opening Statements. At this time we will move to questions. Each member will have five minutes to ask questions of our witnesses. I will begin. I recognize and myself for five minutes. As chair of the subcommittee, over and over again, i am confronted with new evidence that big tech is filled in regulating itself. We have zuckerberg here. I did a review of all the apologies that we have had from him but facebooks latest effort to address misinformation on the platform leaves a lot out. I want to begin with some questions of you must bigger. So the deep fakes policy only covers video as i understand it. Videos that have been manipulated using Artificial Intelligence or deep burning, that cracked . Think you. The policy that we announced yesterday,s confined to the definition that we set forth about Artificial Intelligence being used in a video to make it appear that some one is saying something. I only have five minutes. The video for example Speaker Pelosi was edited to make it look like she was drunk would not have been taken down under the new policy. Is that right . No. It would not fall under that policy. It would still be subject to other policies that address misinformation. As i read the deep fakes policy, it only covers video where a person is made to appear like these said words that they didnt actually say, but it does not cover videos were just the image is altered. Is that true . That is correct about that policy. We do have a broader approach to misinformation that would put a label, we would actually obscure the image, and put it screen over it that says false information and directs people to information from Fact Checkers. Miss speaker, i really dont understand why facebook should treat fake audio differently from fake images. Both can be highly misleading. And they can result in significant harm to individuals, undermined democratic institutions. Doctor donovan, in your testimony you noted that deep fakes are more prevalent than deepfakes. Do you see any reason to treat deep and cheap fakes differently . Microphone. Of course. One of the things that cheap fakes leverage, what is great but social media is that it make things smaller. I understand the need for a separate policies, but also cheap fix issue has not been enforced. Speaking more broadly about social media platforms, there is uneven enforcement. You can still find that piece of misinformation within the wrong context in multiple places. So, the policy on deepfakes is both narrow, and i understand why, but also one thing that we should understand, is that presently there is no consistent detection mechanism for finding deepfakes at this. Point i would be interested to know more about how they will seek out, either on upload, not just facebook. I will have to cut you off at this, point i do want to ask mr. Harris, given the prevalence of deceptive content online our, platforms doing enough to stop misinformation. What can government do to stop such manipulation of . Consumers should government seek to clarify the principle that if it is illegal off like that it is illegal online . A good example of that is other platforms are not doing, enough its because their entire Business Model is misaligned with something the problem. I dont feel and eyes the people responsible for. That we used to have saturday morning cartoon, three protected children from certain types of advertising, place time matter restrictions. When youtube gobbles up that part of the attention economy. We lose those protections. Why not bring the protections of saturday morning. We used to have fair price equal elections ads. Same price for each politician to reach. Someone when facebook hobbles up election, we are basically moving from an for society to a unlawful internet society. That is what we have to change. Thank you. I yield back. The chair now recognizes ms. Rogers, our subcommittee Ranking Member for five minutes. Thank you madam chair. You referenced how misinformation is not a new problem, certainly with the speed of information, how it can travel online, its harm is increasing. I have long believed that the way that information can be transmitted, more sources, more, speech not less. This is important not just in an election cycle, but also around discussions of health, issues disasters. I am worried about this renewed trend, the government could set the parameters, limit speech, expression. Miss specter, how does free speech and expression factor into the content decisions. Can you use can explained your use of thirdparty Fact Checkers . Thank you. We are very much a platform for free expression. It is one of the reasons that we work with thirdparty Fact Checking organizations. When something is false, we share more information on the service. We put a label over it, this is false information. We also show people this is what Fact Checkers are saying about this story. We work with more than 50 organizations worldwide, and those organizations are chosen after meeting high standards for Fact Checking. Think. You as a followup, with a total volume of traffic you have, clearly humans cant keep. Up Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning have a significant role for identifying deepfakes, and other terms the violate youre terms of service, please explain how you use, ai and the potential for using ai to fight fire with fire . We use a combination of technology and people to identify potential information to send to Fact Checkers. We also use people and technology to assess whether or not something has been manipulated. Media that would be covered by the policy release from yesterday. With the Fact Checking program, we use technology to look for things like maybe a person who has shared an image or new story. Friends are commenting on that say dont you know this is a, hoax this is not true. That is the type of thing that our technology can sparked, and sent to Fact Checkers. Its not just technology. We also have ways to flag, something that is false, that can be sent to fact. Actors Fact Checkers can proactively rate something that they are seeing on facebook. Professor horowitz, you briefly described how user interfaces could be used to shape consumer choice, and how it can harm consumers. They can be modified, created structured in any number of ways. Weve heard examples from about font, size placement, the course of interaction with the, website or even just a phone menu system. These can be used to guide users to making an informed, decisions or highlight information that is urged me being attention to. This falls into the category of nudges in behavioral psychology, intensely studied, can be used in many ways. You highlighted in your testimony, can you explain how the ftc could use its existing section five serious concerns on dark pattern practices. Briefly, the ftc has a broad, long history of regulating deceptive, practices it is deception, authority false statements. Statements that, they can use adjudication. They can exit enact rules in order to take action against any entity that deceives consumers online or off. Why do you think they are doing enough . I would love to see the ftc more in this area, especially when it comes to rulemaking and in Court Enforcement actions. The boundaries of their authorities are, unknown untested, bringing suits, litigation, that tells us what the agency is capable of, and this body needs to know that before it tries to craft more legislation, or give more authority to an entity, if we already have an agency that has, power lets see what it is capable of . Okay. Thank you everyone. I appreciate you all being here, a very important subject. I appreciate the chair for hosting this. Having. It i think the Ranking Member. Who yields back. I recognize the chair of the full committee, fives. Ive a lot ask. Here i would ask that your responses be brief. In your testimony as you talked about a variety of technology and techniques that are used to deceive consumers, persuade, trick people into making certain choices. Deep and cheap fakes that show fictional scenarios that look real. Algorithms used to keep peoples eyes locked on their screens. We know thats happening. What is less clear is how and the extent to which these techniques are being used commercially, and on commercial platforms. Doctor donovan, as a research that focuses on the use of these techniques, three have sufficient access to commercial data to understand how this information fraud is conducted and by whom . The brief answer is no. That is because we do not have access to the data as it is, there are many limits on the ways that you can acquire data through the interface. And then the other problem is that there was a very good faith effort between facebook and scholars to try to get a bunch of data related to the 2016 election that fell apart, but a lot of people put an incredible amount of time and money and energy into that effort and it failed around the issues related to privacy and differential privacy. What i would love to see happen is that twitter has started to give data related to deletions and account takedown, we need records of that so that when we do all of these platforms either for financial or social harms, that the deletions are also included in mark because even if you can act like a data scavenger and go back, sometimes when they are deleted theyre gone for good and those pieces of information often the most crucial. Thank, you mr. , harris should the government be collecting more information about such practices, in order to determine how best to protect americans . Yes, heres an example. So, unlike other addictive industries, for, example addictive addiction is part of the deception going on. Here Tobacco Industry does not know what users are addicted to smoking. The alcohol industry does not know exactly who is addicted to alcohol, but unlike, that each tech company doesnt know exactly how many people are checking more than 100 times a day, between certain pages, and who is using it late at night. You can imagine using an existing agency, say the department of health and Human Services to be able to audit facebook on a quarterly basis and say, hey, tell us how many users are addicted between these ages, and then, what are you doing next quarter to make adjustments to reduce that number . Every day, they are the ones issuing the questions, on the responsibility and resources, which in this case would be facebook and theres a quarterly loop between each agency asking questions like that, forcing accountability with companies, in their existing jurisdictions who are trying to figure out, is that a way to scale this to meet the scope of the problem, we realize is happening too many people. This, year facebook is a new policy about how to handle deepfakes, so in your policy, depicts, our videos manipulated through Artificial Intelligence and intended to mislead and are not parody or satire. I get that right . Yes, thats right. No, i understand the twitter and youtube either do not have to use the same definition for deepfakes and that is indicative of a lack of consistent treatment of problematic content in the major platforms. There seems very little consistency across the marketplace which leaves consumers at a law, so let me go to doctor donovan again, is there ways to combat these practices or consumers are not facing different policies on different websites . Youre right again. Ive got, it i think it is possible to create a set of policies but you have to look at the features that are consistent across these platforms. If they do, for instance, use attention to a specific post in their algorithms to boost popularity then we need a regulation around that, especially because bots or unmanned accounts for lack of a better term are often used to accelerate content and to move content across platforms. These are things you usually purchase off off platform in there usually considered a dark Market Product but you can purchase attention to an issue and so as a result, there has to be something more broadly goes across platforms and also looks at the features and then also tries to regulate some of these markets that are not built into the platform themselves. All, right thank, you thank you, madam chair. Thank, you mr. , bergeron you recognize revive minutes. Thank, you sorry madam, chair i have two of these hearings going on at the same time. I appreciate the hearing at the opportunity to discuss the spread of misinformation on the internet, but i want to stress that i am concerned about the efforts to make Tech Companies adjudicators of truth in quotation marks. In a country founded on free speech we should not be allowing private corporations, in my, view or for that matter the government to determine what qualifies as again, in quotation marks, the truth, potentially centering a voice because that voice disagrees with mainstream opinion. That said, i totally understand the difficulty and the challenges that we all face together concerning this issue and how we are together trying to work to address it. Miss bickert, can you provide some more information on how facebook might or will determine if a video mislead, what factors might you consider . Thank, you just to be clear, there are two ways we might be looking at that issue, one was with regard to the deepfakes policy that we released yesterday and we will be looking to see specifically what type of were we seeing Artificial Intelligence and deep warnings . Was that part of the technology that led to change or fabricated video that really would not be to the average person and that would be a fundamental part of determining whether there is this thing. Secondly i asked the question, sorry, i will wait. The question then, i mean, im playing devils advocate here, who is the average person . Congressman, these are exactly the question that weve been discussing and more than 50 experts as weve tried to write this policy and get in the right place. I appreciate youre doing. Im not trying to be difficult here. These are real challenging issues. It is one of the issues reasons that we think generally the approach to misinformation of getting more information out there from accurate sources, is effective. You stated your testimony that was a fact checker rates of photo or video as false or partly false facebook reduces the distribution. Is there a way for an individual who may posted these things to protest a decision . Yes, congressman. They can go directly to the fact checker, and we make sure there is a mechanism for that they can do that either they disputed or they have amended whatever it was that in the article is a problem. Right, because i would say, people with good lawyers can dispute a lot of things but the average citizen in southwest indiana who pose something online, needs to, be in my view, a fairly straightforward process but that, person whoever it might, be like protest and dispute the fact that it distribution has been reduced. Thank you. Y mr. Horowitz, you have discussed the ftcs Current Authority to address the dark pattern, however, i will be interested to know your thoughts on how consumers can protect themselves from these patterns of advertisement. Is the only solution three goverment action or candy Consumer Education help highlight these advertisement practices . The most important thing for any company especially in the online context is trust, trust of the consumers. Consumer education, user education is important but, i think it is fair to say, with condolences, perhaps, to miss backward, facebook has a trust problem. If consumers, if youre just not trusting his platform, of hearing such as this shine a light on those practices then theyre going to have a hard time retaining users and consumers. That puts a great deal of pressure. In addition, stability of practices. If we have one dark pattern, is to constantly change the uterine of races. If we have stability, if we have platforms operate inconsistent unpredictable ways, that helps users become educated, that helps users understand what those practices are and learn how to operate in this new environment, just on the internet is different. We are still learning what it means. And i know you want you went over this, book you talk again about how these dark pattern practices took place before the internet and are currently happening in stores and other areas, mail pieces the politicians, i mean, i just want to reiterate again, this is a broader problem than just the internet. Something thats been around for a while. Yes, dark, provinces practices, they go back to the beginning of time. Basic, fundamentally, they are persuasion, if i want to convince you of my world do, but want to convince you to be my customary, if i want to convince you to be my friend, im going to do things that influence. Im going to present myself to you in ways that are going to try and get you to like me or my product. If you come into my store now for recommendation, what size tire do anything like, our Sales Representative is going to give you information, is when you consistently wrote. My time is expired, my point is that when we look at this problem, we need to take a look, in my, view take a holistic approach about what has happened in the past and with emerging technology how we would address the consistently and not just target specific industries. Thank you. I yield back. The gentleman yields back. I know recognized congresswoman castro for five minutes. Thank you, chairman schakowsky, for calling this hearing. You know, the internet and Online Platforms have developed over time without a lot of safeguards for the public and government here, exercise our responsibility to keep the public safe, whether it is the cars we drive for the water we drink, airplanes, drugs that are for sale, and really the same should apply to the internet and Online Platforms. You know, there is a lot of illegal activity being promoted online where the First Amendment just does not come into play and i hope we dont go down that rabbit hole because were talking about human trafficking, terrorist plots, illicit sales of firearms, child exploitation, i know it we have swampy these Online Platforms, that manipulate the public are the deepfakes, these dark patterns, Artificial Intelligence, Identity Theft but these Online Platforms remember, control these algorithms that steer children and adults, everyone in certain directions and weve got to get a handle on that. For example, mr. Harris, one minute of design technique is the auto play features, now ubiquitous across video streaming platforms, particularly, billions of people to go on to youtube or facebook, this feature automatically begins playing a new video after the current video and. The next video is determined using an algorithm which is designed to keep the viewers attention. This platform driven algorithm drives, often drives the proliferation of illegal activities and dangerous ideologies and conspiracy theories and makes it much more difficult for the average person to try to get truth based content, and im particularly concerned about the impact on kids and you phrased that and i appreciate that. You discuss how the Mental Health of kids today really is at risk. Can you talk more about context in which children may be particularly harmed by these addiction maximizing algorithms what parents can do to protect kids from becoming trapped in the youtube vortex, and what you believe our responsibility is as policy makers . Thank you so much for your question and yes, this is very deeply concerning to me so. Laying it out, with more than two billion, users think of these on youtube as two billion truman shows. Each of you get a channel and a supercomputer is just trying to calculate the perfect thing to confirm your viewers reality. This by definition fractures reality into two billion different polarizing channels, each of which is to bring you to a more extreme view. A quick example is, imagine a spectrum of all of the videos on youtube laid out in one line, and my left side over here have the call, walter conk right rational science out of youtube, and on the other side you have crazy, town you have you opposed, conspiracy theories, alex jones, crazy stuff. No matter what you start, if i am youtube, because start in the calm section we can start and crazy, if i want you to watch more, and im going to steer you that way, or that way . Im always comes to you towards crazy town, so imagine taking the inequality of 2. 1 billion humans and then just tilting it like that, three examples like that, for your kids example, two years ago on you, to if a tiger watch dieting video, it would auto play anorexia videos because those were more extreme. If you watch a 9 11 news video, it would recommend 9 11 conspiracy theories. If you watched videos about the moon landing, it would recommend flatter conspiracy theories. Flutters conspiracy theories were recommended hundreds of millions of times. This might sound funny and oh, look at those people but this is very, serious had a researcher friend who studied this. If the flatter theory is true, it means not just at all of government is lying to you but all of science is lying to you. So, think about that risk for a second, that is like a meltdown of all of our rational epidemic understanding and as you said, these things are auto playing, so, otto play is just like, it hacks your brains stopping hues so as a magician, how do i know if im going to stop . I put a stop and, you and your mind wakes, up regular choice, if i stop, drinking at the want to get to the bottom of the, closet to make a conscious choice, do i want more . But we can design it so the ball never stops. We can just keep refilling the water, and you never stop and that is how we basically have kept millions of kids addicted in places like the philippines, people watch youtube for ten hours a day, ten hours a day. Congre this as a significant cof the public. That is one of the points that i hope people will understand. Doctor donovan says that there is this economy of misinformation now. These Online Platforms are passing. Along there monetizing, making billions of, dollars meanwhile public health, costs long fourth summit costs are adding up for the public. We have a real responsibility to tackle this. Level the playing field. By not acting we are subsidizing our self destruction. Absolutely. Thank you so much. I recognize bridges for five minutes. Thank you for holding this hearing. I apologize, we have another Health Hearing going on upstairs. Now we have to talk between important issues. What slips me, start by asking you, this is off topic, but it is important. In 2018 United States District Court pennsylvania indicted seven russians for conducting a hacking operation into thousand 16 against western targets, including the United States anti doping agency, in response to the revelation of russias state sponsored dumping campaign. These hackers were part of the russian military. According to the indictment, the information was publicized as part of a Disinformation Campaign that was designed to undermine the legitimate interests, the misinformation included personal, medical information about United States athletes. These hackers used fictitious identities and social media accounts to probe victims, and computer networks. The methods that we are talking about today are in the context of perhaps deceiving voters are consumers, harmful for potential affects is quite large. In your testimony you define the dark pattern as the practice of using the desirable behavior, can these dark patterns be used to surveil people . Hack them in the context of butter state operations . Yes, absolutely. This goes to the broader context that this is happening in. We are not just talking about Consumer Protection. We are also talking about a fundamental architecture. All those cues that we were relying on for me to be sitting here. Weve gone through a vetting process, we have identities. We have cues for you to know to rely on. We need to think about trust differently. One example that i will highlight is an Industry Based solution. The reported nature of how we need to think about these things differently in the context of political advertising in particular, how do we deal with targeted, one approach that facebook has been experimenting with is that instead of saying that you cant speak you cant advertised, if i target an ad at speakers, they will allow others to target an ad at another group. Its another way of thinking about how we deal with establishing trust, or responding to untrustworthy information. We need more creativity, more research on how to establish trust in the online environment. Thank you for those observations. If i ever doubted the power of facebook three years ago, that doubt was completely eliminated. The representatives offered to do a Facebook Event in northern texas. It was not a political, it was a business to business, have us facilitate, run the business more efficiently. We want to do a program. We selected it on Tuesday Morning. I asked how big a venue can we get. Thinking maybe 20, 30, and i was told 2000. Expect 2000 people to show up. 2000 people on it Tuesday Morning business to business presentation. There was only standing room. It was the power of facebook getting the word out there that this is what we are doing. It is one of the best events that have been chosen elected representative, the power of facebook, it was brought home to me how exactly the kind of equity that you will be able to rebuild. Recognizing that, do you have a sense of the type of information on your platforms, that needs to be facts act because you have an enormous amount of equity . Yes. Congressman. Thank you for those words. We are can sir and not just with misinformation, that is a concern, that is why we developed the relationships that we have now with more than 50 Fact Checking organizations. We are also concerned about abuse of any type. I am responsible for managing. That whether it is heat propaganda. Child acts ploy patient. Content that encourages eating disorders. That fall violates our policies. We go after that. Do you feel you have been successful . I think we have had a lot of successes. We are making huge strides. There are always more things to do. We have published reports in the past year or so every six months where we show across different abuse types how prevalent this is in facebook, doing a sample, how much conflict we find this corridor and remove, and how much did we find before it was reported to us. The numbers are trending in a good direction in terms of how strong are enforcement measures. Our as policy makers can we assess that fund of data to find out for instance the number of vaccine issues that have been propagated on your platform. . Congressman i can follow up with you on the reports that we have any other information. If i could clarify that question, is that information readily available to consumers or no . The report i just mentioned are publicly available, we can follow up with any, detailed requests as well. I recognize mr. Vrc for five minutes. Thank you. Medicare outside of Self Reporting, what can be done to help educate communities that maybe specifically targeted by all of these different platforms . I was wondering if you could address that specifically. I think that a great deal of my constituency, and even on the republican side, their constituency, might be targeted based on things like recent, income religion, and what have you. Is there anything outside of Self Reporting that can be done to just help educate people more. So many things here. In the 2016 election russia targeted African American populations. I dont think people realize, every time a campaign is discovered, had we back notify people, all of whom who were affected, and say you were the target of an influence operation. Every week we hear reports of saudi arabia, iran, israel, china, russia, all conducting different influence operations. Many veterans may say that is a Conspiracy Theory, but facebook is the company that knows exactly who was affected. They can actually back notify, every time there is a influence, operation letting these communities know they were targeted. We have to move from this is a Conspiracy Theory to this is real, how do you wake people up from a halt that they dont know they are in . If this show them the techniques that were used on them to manipulate. Them every time these operations, happen it has to be made visible to. Then we have a pentagon to protect our physical borders, we dont have a pentagon to protect our digital borders. So we depend on how many people these but decides to higher for these. Teams when a sample is that the city of los angeles spends 45 of its budget on security. Facebook spends 6 of its budget on security. Its under spending california by four times. Are they solving the problem . They have to point to fake accounts that they took down. Figure camps. So they have 2. 7 real accounts. And then two point to poland fake accounts. I am sure that they got all of them. Miss pecker, you know, given the fact that these foreign agents, these foreign actors are targeting people specifically by their, rice every economics, in the country that they live, in facebook doing anything to gather information or to look at how specific groups are being targeted, if African Americans are being targeted for political misinformation . If whites living in rural america, if they are being targeted for political misinformation, people based on their legs, like if you could gather information, if these foreign actors could gather information based on things that they like so lets say that you were white, and he lived in rural america, you liked rule america news. You like these other, things you are more likely to believe in these serves of conspiracy theories. Are you sure that some of the things that people are sharing, the likes and dislikes are not being used as part of that scheme . Could you answer both of those . Yeah. Thank you for the question. Broadly speaking, there are two things that we dont. One is training send tools to help, people especially those that might be most at risk recognize ways to keep them safe from everything from hacking to scams and other abuse, secondly when we remove influence operations under the coordinated and authentic behavior, we have removed 50 set that works in the past year, and every time we do that we are public about it because we want to expose exactly what we are seeing. We will include examples in our. Post we say here is the network. Its in this country. Targeting people in the other. Country these are examples of the types of posts, the more we can shine a light on this the more we can stop it. Specifically targeted, because of these programming that they like. African americans targeted specifically because russian actors think that they leanest because equate in politics, you think that this information has to be analyzed more carefully, instead of relying on instead of leaving it up to the user to figure it out . Especially for those who work odd, hours and dont have time to digest what they immediately read, dont have the opportunity to go back and analyze something very, deeply as far as what you are saying. Congressman, i appreciate the. I will say, attribution is competent complicated, and understanding the intent behind some of these operations is complicated. We think that the best way to do that is to make them public. We dont just do this ourselves, we work hand in hand with academics, and security firms, study the steps of. Things they can, see it sometimes as we say, as we take down a, network we have this collaboration, network with these groups. We name these groups. They look at. This and together they shine a light on who these actors, are why they do what they do. Recognize mr. Latta for five minutes. Thank you mister. Chair thank you for putting together this. Hearing thank you for the witnesses before us. It is important for americans to get this information. In 2018 the experts out there estimated that, were successful in stealing over 30 billion dollars from americans different scams on the internet. It kennedy. Theft Friends Family imposture seems. The federal trade commission in the irs sell for a senior event, so that seniors could be educated on the threat of these scams, how to recognize, avoid ward off and recover from them. Congress recognized that a lot of these, scams were manipulative, those Illegal Robocalls that ban these skill scams, through robocalls signed this law, the president signed over the christmas holiday, i am glad that we were able to get this done. I continue to be concerned about the scammers that adapt the changes in the law, using different techniques like cheap and deepfakes. I dont want to pick on. You i appreciate you being here today, especially because you are a little under the weather. I also appreciate reading your testimony last night. I facebook to keep in contact with families and neighbors and friends, in your testimony, you walked us through facebook judge efforts to recognize misinformation, and what the company is doing to combat malicious actors using manipulative media. Anythingk doing specifically to protect seniors from being targeted on the platform or teaching them how to recognize fake accounts or scams . Guest thank you for the question. We are indeed. That includes both inperson trainings for seniors, which we have done and continue to do. We also have a guide that can be more broadly to stupid that is publicly available, a guide for seniors on the best way to keep themselves safe. More broadly, and as somebody who was a federal criminal prosecutor for 11 years looking at that behavior, this is something we take seriously across the board. We dont want anybody to be using facebook to scam somebody else. We look proactively for that sort of behavior and we remove it. Congressman a quick followup. Important. Is we have learned that seniors do not report things because they are afraid. I have been taken, i do want to tell my relatives or friends because they are a friend of losing what they might have, noticed on the money side, but how they can get out there. So i think it is important that we always think about our seniors. At the workshop we had in the district last year, the f. T. C. Stated that one of the best ways to combat scams is educate individuals on how to recognize illegal behavior so that they can turn that into educating their friends and neighbors. In addition to your private sector partnerships with facebook, would facebook be willing to partner with agencies like the f. T. C. To make sure the public is informed about scammers operating under platform . Guest congressman, i am very happy to follow up on all of that. I think it is important for. The public to understand the tools available to keep them safe online. Ms. Donovan we should also consider the ways people are targeted by age, reverse mortgage scams, retirement funding scams, Fake Health Care supplements, will you do retire, it becomes very confusing. You are looking for information, and if you are looking primarily on facebook and posting about it, you might be targeted by the advertising system itself. So even if you are not informationseeking, facebooks algorithms and advertising are giving other third parties information and then serving advertising to seniors. So it is a persistent problem. Congressman thank you. Again, ms. Bickert, if i could follow up quickly with my remaining 30 seconds, many of the scammers look for ways to get around facebooks policy, including through the refinement after village and techniques. Is facebook dedicating resources to proactively combat scams, instead of reacting after the fact . Guest yes, congressman. We are. Overseeing content policy at facebook for about seven years now, and in that time, i would say that would say that we have gone from being primarily reactive in the way we enforce our policies, to primarily proactive. We are really going after abusive content and trying to find it. Be great ourselves based on how much we are finding before people reported to us. We are now publishing reports to that effect. Congressman my time has expired. I yield back. Chairwoman schakowsky budget too many yields back and i recognize mr. Ohalloran for five minutes. Congressman thank you, chairwoman, for holding this important and timely meeting in todays hearing. I echo the concerns of my colleagues. The types of deceptive online practices that have and discuss today are deeply troubling. Have continually stressed that the top priority for congress should be securing our u. S. Elections. We see dangerous consequences if the right tools are not in place to prevent the spread of misinformation online. This is a National Security concerns. As a former Law Enforcement officer i understand laws can be meaningless if they are not enforced. I look forward to hearing more from our witnesses about the f. T. C. s capability and resources to combat these deceptive online practices. Dr. Donovan, in your testimony, you say that regulatory guardrails are needed to protect users from being misled online. I share your concerns about deception and manipulation online, including the rise in use of dark patterns. Deep fakes and other kinds of bad practices that can harm consumers. Can you explain in more detail, what sort of regulatory guardrails are necessary to prevent these instances . Guest i will going to one very briefly. Is, ifthe Big Questions i post something online that is not an advertisement, i am just trying to inform my known network, the problem is not necessarily always that there is a piece of fake content out there, the problem is the scale. Being able to reach millions, right. 2010, 2011, we lauded that as a virtual platforms. It emboldened many of our important social movements and raced some incredibly important issues raised some incredibly important issues. But it was not false information meant to deceive people or siphon money out of other groups. At that time, too, you were not donations, it was much harder to create networks of fake accounts and pretend to be an entire constituency. So when i talk about regulatory guardrails you have to think about distribution differently than we think about the content. We can also assuage the fears we have about freedom of expression by looking at, what are the mechanisms in which people can break out of their known networks . Is it advertising, the use of fake accounts . How are people going viral, how our posts or information going viral . The other thing i would like to know from the government perspective is, does the f. T. C. Have enough insight into platforms to monitor that, to understand that . If they dont know why and how tens of millions of dollars are being siphoned out of trump campaign, then that is also another problem. We have to think about what is transparency, what does auditing look like, in a meaningful way. Congressman you believe then that the f. T. C. Has adequate authority under section v of the f. T. C. Act to take individuals and Companies Engaged in Deceptive Behavior and practices online . I want to point out a wall street journal report that said that of 200 something million fines, they have collected, they are on the collected about 7,000 since 2015. So. Guest wow. I think you do have to look closer at what the f. T. C. Has access to and how they can make that information actionable. For example, proving there is substantial injury. If only one group has access to the unknown cost or knows the scam, than we have to be a way to expedite the transfer of data in the investigation in such a way that we are not relying on journalists or researchers, or Civil Society organizations to investigate. I think the investigatory powers of the f. T. C. Have to also include assessing substantial injuries. Congressman thank you, dr. Mr. Harris, do you believe the agency has enough resources to responsibly, swiftly and appropriately address the issues . I just want to point out, we flatlin on them on the time. On the other side, the industry continues to expand at exponential rates. Guest i think that issue your pointing to, the problem creating aspects of the technology industry, because they operate at exponential scales, creates exponential issues, harms, problems, scams, etc. So how do you have a small body was such a large capacity . This is what i am thinking about . , how can have a digital update for all of our different agencies which already have jurisdiction over things like public health, and have them ask the questions, but that are forced upon the Technology Companies to use their resources to cultivate, report back, set the goals of what they will do in the next quarter. Congressman thank you mr. Harris. I yield. Chairwoman schakowsky the chair recognizes mr. Carter for five minutes. Congressman thank you, madam chair. Thank all of you for being here. This is an extremely important to all of our citizens. Saying, when we talk about deep fakes and cheap fakes, to me that is somewhat black and white. I could understand it. Mr. Hurwitz, when we talk about dark patterns, i think that is more gray in my mind. , i was a retailer for many years and i grew up in the south. We had a Grocery Store chain, some of you may be familiar with, the piggly wiggly. I always heard that the way they got their name, and i tried to fact check this, i heard they got their name because they arranged their stores because when you went in, you had to wiggle all the way around before you could get back out so you could buy more things. It was like a pic we going through the farmyard or something. That is marketing. Another example is, all of us go to the Grocery Store. When you are in the checkout line, you have all these things up there that theyre trying to get you to buy that are not necessarily you could argue that they are impulse items but you could also make the argument that when you get home you say, geez, i wish i would have gotten that at the Grocery Store. I wish i wouldve gone these batteries or bandaids, or whatever. How do you differentiate between what is harmful and what is beneficial . Guest great question. Because it is gray. As i said previously, dark patterns, the term itself is intended to make us think about, this is dark. There are clear categories. Clear lies, they are false statements where we are talking about classic deception. But when talking about his rural nudges, it becomes more talking about behavioral nudges, it becomes more difficult. Academics have studied it for decades. It is hard to predict when they l be effective and went and when they will not. There has to be proof that it is material to consumer harm. If we do not have a demonstrable harm requirement or causal connection there, position is important to any legal claim, if you dont have the facts, you are in a dark water as far as due process. Congressman so do you think we should be instructing the f. T. C. To conduct research on this, as to what is going on here . Guest i think more information is good information. The f. T. C. Is conducting some hearings already. I think greater investigation is very powerful both so that the f. T. C. Understands what they should be doing so they can use the information to establish rules. Materiality is difficult to establish, so the f. T. C. Can issue a rule, a process that makes it easier to substantiate enforcement action subsequently. And to respond to a previous question, to the extent one of the f. T. C. s core powers, even if it lacks enforcement authority, is to report to this body and say, we are seeing this and it is problematic, we dont have the authority, can you do something about it . And perhaps this body will take direct action, or perhaps the platforms and other entities. Ill say, wow, the jig is up we should change our practices before congress does something that could be even more detrimental to us. Congressman did you have something . Guest yes, i have also studied this topic for more than a decade. What is different about this . You have the supermarket aisle, the last minute purchase items. There are two distinctives that are different. The first is that this is infrastructure we live by. You talk about children waking up in the morning and have autoplay, that is not like the supermarket where i okeechobee go, and i am at the very end of it where i owe occasionally go and i have made purchases and i am at the end of it. That is just marketing. In this case, we have children spending 10 hours a day, at the supermarket, your spending 10 hours a day, imagine, and you wake up in the supermarket. There is a degree of intimacy and scope in our lives. Second thing, the degree of asymmetry between the persuader and the persuadee. In this case, you have someone who knows more about marketing, always arranging the shelf spaces, things at the top but i level and others at the bottom level. In the case of technology, we have a supercomputer pointed out vastbrain using those resources of 2. 7 billion peoples behavior to calculate the perfect thing to show you next, and to not be discriminate about whether it is good for you, whether it is true, trustworthy or credible. So it knows more about your weaknesses when you know about yourself. The degree of asymmetry is far beyond anything we have experienced. Congressman you want the federal government to control that . Guest i think we should ask questions about whether that degree of asymmetry, about intimate aspects of your weaknesses, and if the Business Model is to exploit that. It is different when they use it for a forprofit advertising Business Model. The challenge can also go the other way, it can be used to a strength. Mr. Harris used an example earlier of what if autoplay is shifting us towards conspiracy theories . That is a dark pattern. What if instead it was using it was shifting us to greater education . If we say autoplay is bad, then we are taking both those options off the table. It can be used for good. The question you asked about how we differentiate between good uses and bad, that is the question. Congressman thank you madam chair. I yield back. Chairwoman schakowsky is recognized for five minutes. Congressman thank you madam chair. Thank you for holding this very important hearing. Unfortunately, i think most americans dont understand how important this is to every single one of us, especially to our children and future generations. There is an app, tiktok. Five years ago, it was reported that the Parent Company of the Popular Video sharing up tiktok, may have built a deep fake maker. Though there is no indication tot tictoc dish intends introduce this feature, a platform that is so popular with kids, it raises a number of troubling questions. My question to you mr. Harris, in your testimony, you discussed at length the multitude of ways children are harmed by new technology. Can you talk about why this may be concerning . Guest thank you for the question. Deep fakes is a really complex issue. I think if you look at how other governments are responding to this, i dont me to look at china for legal guidance, but they have seen this as so threatening to their society, the fabric of truth and trust this society, that if you post a deep fake without labeling it as a deep fake you can actually go to jail. Not saying that if you post it, you go to jail, but if you posted without labeling it, you go to jail. Imagine a world where Facebook Says, if you post a deep fake without labeling it, we suspend your account for 24 hours, and label your accounts to other people who see your account congressman hold on a second. My colleague on the other side of the aisle just warned, you want to have the government control this . You just give an example where private industry could in fact create deterrence to bad behavior. Not the government, but actual industry. Ok, go ahead. Guest thats right. That is the point, instead of using this a. I. Whackamoles is, how many engineers at facebook, 22 languages in india where there was an election last year. They are controlling the information infrastructure, not just for this country but for every country. And they dont speak the languages of the country they operate in. They are automating that. Instead of trying to use a. I. , where they are missing everything, they have created a digital frankenstein where there is far more content, advertising, variations of text, lies, etc. , then they have the capacity to deal with. You cannot create problems with beyond the scope of your ability to address this. It would be creating Nuclear Power plants everywhere without having a plan for security. Congressman getting back to your example of where industry could dust for example, Facebook Says they will suspend your comfort and for hours, with all due respect, in that example, facebook might lose a bit of revenue as well as the person they are trying to deter from bad action is likely going to lose revenue as well, correct . Guest correct. Maybe that is unacceptable cost. Congressman maybe it is acceptable when you look at it intellectually and honestly, but when you look at it from whether or not private industry will take it upon themselves to actually impact their shareholders revenue, that is where government has a place and space to get involved in say, proper actions and reactions need to be put in place so that people can understand that you cant and you shouldnt just look at this from a profit centered motive, because in the world, sometimes negative actions are more profitable for somebody out there than positive good actions. That is one of the things that is unfortunate. You talk about languages around the world, but the number one target, in my opinion, for these bad actions, for both financial gain and also the tearing down of the fabric of the democracy of the greatest nation of the planet, the United States, is the United States. We are the biggest targets for various reasons. Two main reasons is because we are supposed to be the shining light on the hill for the rest of the world of what a good moccasin should be like. Secondly, we are by far and away the largest economy, the biggest Consumer Group of folks on the planet. So therefore, there is a motive for people to focus on profit and focus on their negative, bad intentions august our interests, the interests of the American People. Is that accurate . Guest that is exactly right. This is a National Security issue. The polarization dynamics are accelerating towards civil war levels. Civil war is coming. What colligan mind says, if you can make it trend one colleague of mine says, if you can make it trend, you can make it true. You can manipulate architecture. We are subsidizing our own selfdestruction if the government does not say these things can be done. Congressman iran out of time. I wish i had more time. Thank you. Chairwoman schakowsky the gentleman yield back and i recognize mr. Soto for five minutes. Congressman thank you, madam chair. It has been my experience that lies can travel faster on the internet than the speed of light, while the truth goes at a snails pace. I suppose that is because of the algorithms we see. I want to start with deep fakes and sheep fakes. We know that the definition of public figures requires actual malice. Some of these just appear to be malicious on their face. I appreciate the labeling, ms. Bickert, that facebook is doing now. That is something we were pondering in our office as well. But why wouldnt facebook simply take down the fake pelosi video . Guest thank you for the question. Give people is to more information so that if something will be in the public discourse, they will know how to assess it, how to contextualize it. That is why we work with Fact Checkers. I will say that in the past six months, it is feedback from academics and Civil Society groups that has led us to come up with stronger warning screens. Congressman would that be labeled under your current policy now as false that video . Guest which video . Congressman the fake pelosi video would it not be labeled as false under your policies . Guest yes, and it was labeled at false at the time. We think we could have gone back to Fact Checkers faster. We think a label we could have put on it could have been more clear. We know have the label for something that has been rated false, you have to click through rate, so it actually obscure the image and says false information, and says, this has been rated false by Fact Checkers. You click on it and see information from the Fact Checking source. Congressman in 2016, there was a fake trump rally put together by russians in florida, complete with Hillary Clinton in a prison and a fake bill clinton. Rally be created today through facebook in the United States by the russians under our existing technology . Guest the network that created that was fake and in authentic, and we removed it. We were slow to find it. I think our enforcement has gotten a lot better. As a data point for that, in 2016, we removed one such network. This past year, we removed more than 50 networks. That is a global number, all over the world, but these are organizations that are using networks of accounts, some fake, some real, in an attempt to obscure who they are or push false information. Congressman could it happen again right now . Guest our enforcement is not perfect however, we have put made huge strides shown by a dramatic increase in the number of networks we have removed. I will say, we do it not just by ourselves, but we work with security firms and academics who are studying this to make sure we are staying on top of it. Congressman what do you think facebooks duty is, as well as other social media platforms, to prevent the spread of lies across the media . Guest could you repeat that. Congressman what do you think facebook and other social platforms duty is to prevent the spread of lies across the internet . Guest i can speak for facebook. We can. Think it is important for people to connect safely and with authentic information. My team is responsible for both. Our approach to misinformation where we try to get people label content that is false and get them accurate information. Then there is everything we also do to remove abusive content that violates our standards. Congressman thank you ms. Bickert at. Dr. Donovan, i saw you reacting to the fake trump rally aspect. Good that still happen now under existing safeguards could it happen . Guest yeah. The reason it can still happen is because the platforms openness is now turning into a bit of a vulnerability for the rest of society. What is dangerous about event like that is, the kind of research we do, we are often trying to understand, what is happening online, and what happens when the interaction between when people start to be mobilized and starts to show up places, that is on order of magnitude much more dangerous. Congressman what do you think we should be doing as government to help support this . Guest there are ways in which i , particularlysing features,tures, group there has to be added transparency about who, what, when and where those events are being organized by. There have been instances in facebook very recently where they have added transparency pages, but it is not always clear to the user who is behind what page and for what reason they are launching a protest. What is dangerous is that actual constituents show up, real people show up as fodder for this. So we have to be really careful that they dont stage different parties, like they did in texas across the street from one another at the same time. We dont want to have manipulation that creates this serious problem for Law Enforcement as well as others in the area. Congressman thanks. Y time has expired chairwoman schakowsky i know recognize the congresswoman for five minutes. Congresswoman thank you very much, madam chair. I appreciate the witnesses here today, especially on this really important issue. Introduced a blockchain motion for congresswoman guthrie to to convenedepartment a group of stakeholders to deploy something on blockchain. Blockchain technologies could have interesting implications in the communication space, including new ways of Identity Verification. This technology is unique in that it can help distinction between credible and noncredible news sources in a decentralized fashion, rather than relying on one company or organization to serve as the gatekeeper. I would like i have a lot of questions i would like six it access to. Mr. Donovan, do you see value in promoting in partial, decentralized methods of Identity Verification as a tool to combat the spread of misinformation . Guest i think in limited cases, yes. Especially in purchasing of advertising, which is allowing you to break out of your known networks and reach other people, especially if those advertising features allow you to target very specific groups. I am interested in learning more about this consensus definition, because i think it might help us understand what is a social Media Company, how do we define their broadcast mechanisms, how do we define them related to the Media Company as well as the other kind of product they build. I think it would also get us a lot further in understanding what it is we say when we say deep fakes or even a. I. Congresswoman the European Commission was silly announced it would be supporting research of advanced blockchain technologies,s support of a more accurate online news environment. Sufficient. R no is to you believe the u. S. Should be keeping pace with europe, yes or no, as far as blockchain. Do you think the European Commission is supporting research to advance Blockchain Technology in support of a more accurate online news, do you believe the u. S. Should be keeping pace with europe regarding this . Guest although this is not my area, i think research is a good thing. Congresswoman ok. Dr. Donovan. Guest more research could help us understand this better. Congresswoman mr. Hurwitz. Guest around the world, many are out facing us on blockchain. Congresswoman mr. Harris. Guest it is not my area but i know that china is working on a decentralized currency and could get all countries which are in dating them to their infrastructure with their huge belt and what plan. That is a major National Security threat and it would change the entire order. More work has to be done in the u. S. To protect against china gating currency china getting currency and changing the worlds currency. Congresswoman it is an anticipated fact by American International it is an undisputed fact by american intelligence agencies that russia interfered in our 2016 campaign. American voters in 2020 will once again be exposed to is, falsehood and misinformation. I was glad to see the recent funding bill included Election Security grants, but this is on the of a much larger solution to. Rotect the most fundamental part of our democracy social Media Companies did you dig clear actions against foreign interference in our elections. How have the resen recent electn evolved . Strategies involve guest i am not an expert, but i would say that we need a Public Awareness campaign to inaugurate the public. Think of it as a cultural vaccine. There is precedent for this. In the 1940s, we had the committee for national morale, and the institute began analysis that did a domestic Awareness Campaign about the threat of fascist propaganda. You have probably seen the videos from the 1947, it was called dont be a sucker. It had us looking at a guy spouting fascist propaganda, he starts to not, than someone taps him on the shoulder and says, son, that is propaganda, and here is how to spot it. This is a threat to our country. We could have another Public Awareness campaign now and have the help of Technology Companies to collectively use their technology to distribute the inoculation campaign. Congresswoman the rest of the panel, do you agree with mr. Harris on this, to have this Public Awareness campaign . Note thatadly, i will there runs the risk of being called a dark pattern if the platforms are starting to label certain content in certain ways. So there is a crosscurrents to our discussion to note. Congresswoman if we dont come to any solutions now i appreciate it. I have run out of time. Guest i would point to the ads library we have in place the past few years that has brought an unprecedented level of openness to political advertising, so people can now see who is behind and add, paid for difficult for most people out there to do that unless it is right in front of them. I went as happening but i think we should have much more exposure about this. Thank you. Recognizeowsky i now our next speaker for five minutes. Your testimonies have been very helpful and i appreciate it. With big power comes big responsibility. I am disappointed that this book is not really stepped up to that responsibility. A letterune has sent to mr. Zuckerberg and i was joined by nearly all the democrats on the medic. In this letter, we noted that we are concerned about the potential comfort of conflict of interest between pittsburghs bottomline and addressing misinformation on its platform. This is monetization policy states that they may face reduced or restricted monetization. It is troubling that your policy does not simply been misinformation. If we see somebody intentionally sharing this information, they will lose the ability to monetize. The response i received from facebook failed to answer many of my questions. I was a debut chance to answer today. Have any project managers does facebook employee whose fulltime job it is to address misinformation . I can tell you that across my team, or engineering teams and their content review teams, this is something that is a priority. Building this network has taken the efforts of a number of people across the country. Does that include Software Engineers . Ms. Bickert it does. You need to have infrastructure. Get things over to the Fact Checking organization. I will ask you to provide that information. Identify misinformation. Ms. Bickert we are happy to try to follow up. Fromonavan on average, the time content is posted on facebooks platform, how long does it take this book to fight suspicious content . Take actionbook to once the review is completed . We actually allow Fact Checking organizations to proactively rate content they see on facebook. If they read something proactively, it happens instantly. We also use technology to fly content to them. We often see they will rated very likely. Rate it very quickly. Im concerned that this book is not prepared to address ms. Misinformation on this platform in advance of this platform. But you commit to having a for combatingdit the spread of disinformation on its platform and the results of this audit to be made available to the public . Very happy we are to as any questions about how we do what we do. We think transparency is important. We are to follow up with any suggestions you may have. I would request a thirdparty audit. The civilalking about rights audit. Ms. Bickert we are happy to follow up with any specific suggestions. Mr. Harris the thirdparty fact massivelyervices are understaffed, underfunded and a lot of people are dropping out of the program. The amount of information flowing through the channel is far beyond their capacity to respond. Fact checking is not the relevant issue. If you look at the clearest evidence of this, s own employees wrote a letter to Mark Zuckerberg say you are undermining your our election with your policy. That says it all to me. Those people closest to the problem, they understand how bad the issue is, we are on the outside. It is like they are exxon but they also own the satellite that was show us how much pollution there is. We would not know from the outside. We can only trust people on the inside. They are still not up to their policy. Thank you, i yield back. I recognize congresswoman dingle. This is a subject that really matters to me. In the past, we treated with little protections people have online as something that is separate from those we have in our daytoday lives. The line between what happens online and offline is virtually nonexistent. Gone are the days when we can separate one from the other. Millions of americans have been affected by data breaches and privacy abuses. The numbers are so large that you cant even wrap your head around them. I have talked to members here and they dont even at times understand what has happened or how people have collected data about this. The resources are to help people protect themselves. What is really happening is that the cost of failure to protect Sensitive Information is being pushed on millions of people who are being breached and not trying to do anything. It is a market externality. That is where the government must step in. Go to the pharmacy to fill up a prescription. You assume the medicine you will get will be said, it will not kill you. If you go outside, you assume the air you breathe is going to be safe or we are trying to make it that way. That is because we have laws that protect people from a long list of known market externality. The burden is not placed on their ability to find out. Is the air you are breathing clean . Any differentbe for market externalities that are digital. I have sent a letter to facebook today that has a lot of questions that did not lend themselves to answers here. I hope they will be answered. I hope to get yes or no answers from the panel on the following question. Thank you for being or even though you are sick. Mr. Harris i dont know about that specific one but the entire surveillance capital system produces vast farms that are all on the Balance Sheet of society. It is the minute version of elections, the breakdown of polarization. Based on the economic definition of externality. It can be problematic. Ms. Bickert i am not an economist but we think user consent is very important. Second question, yes or no, do you believe that have a 400 million pieces of personally identifiable information made public including passport numbers, names, addresses and Payment Information is a market externality . Mr. Harris i dont know if that was specifically qualify but it is deeply alarming. Same answer. Dr. Donavan agreed. Ms. Bickert same answer. Mr. Hurwitz same answer previously. Do you believe that having 148 million individuals identifiable information including credit cards, drivers license and social early numbers made public is a market externality marked externality . It is like an oil spill. Same answer. I would categorize it as an extra now it. You dont think we have to protect people from that . Mr. Harris that is not what i am saying. I have an economics background. Dr. Donavan it is an incredibly important problem. I would echo dr. Donavan. Do you believe having the data of 87 million users taken and used for nefarious clinical purposes is a market externality . Mr. Harris the same answer as before. If i break into your house and sell stuff on the black market, that is not annexed finale but it is a problem. Dr. Donavan it was facilitated by the features built into the platform. It is a huge problem. Ms. Bickert we think that user control and consent is very important. Do you believe that simply asking lever to get to please delete it is an appropriate response . Mr. Harris it is very hard to enforce that. You the data is out there, need to solve the problem on the front end. Ms. Bickert we think it is very important to give people control over the data. The gentle moment gentlewoman yields and i recognize myself for five minutes. Thank you to the chairwoman in her absence and thank you to the panelists. This is a vitally important conversation were having. Policyogy is outpacing and the people. We are feeling the impact on our Mental Health and our economy. We are feeling it in our form of government. This is a very important conversation. I would like to start with a few questions that are often dark pattern on those issues but really do deal with the idea of deceptive and manipulative practices. It is just a basic question. It is really surrounding the platforms that we have and the ability for people with disabilities to use them. Our each of you or any of you familiar with the term universal design . Mr. Harris daily. Mr. Hurwitz mr. Harris vaguely. Dr. Donavan vaguely. Mr. Harris vaguely. Mr. Hurwitz vaguely. There were a lot of vaguelys. Toould like to turn my time a discussion about dark patterns. Congress,le member of virtually everyone has been affected by this in some respect. Many are manipulated into purchasing products they dont need and providing Sensitive Information. Many of us are targeted. While the failure to address dark patterns harms individuals, one of the areas of deeper concern to me is the challenge of us as a society as a whole. Was adge analytica scandal. It was not just an individual that was harmed, it was our society. We see some of the remnants of it to this day. I heard someone say to me yesterday that they hope to this hearing was not just a hearing but a real wakeup call. A wakeup call to our country. My first question is to mr. Harris. Do you believe the oversight of dark patterns and oversight of manipulative practices are wellsuited to industry selfregulation . Mr. Harris absolutely not. I would like to follow up with ms. Bickert. Aes facebook have responsibility to develop interfaces that are transparent and fair to its users . Ms. Bickert we definitely want that. Yes, i think we are working on new ways to be transparent all the time. 230 provideion immunity to facebook over these issues . Ms. Bickert section 230 is an important part of my team being able to do it we do. It gives our team the ability to proactively look for abuse. Does it provide immunity . Yes. Section 230 does provide certain protections. The most important from my standpoint is to go after abuse on the platform but separately, it is also an important use them for people who internet to be able to post a platforms like facebook. One of my concerns for asking that question is we are having a Big Conversation about the balance of freedom of speech in addition to the ability for people to yell fire in a crowded place. I am going to turn it back to mr. Harris. You think we in congress can develop a more as a response to the concerning trends on the internet . You mentioned a digital update of federal agencies. And you talk about that . The problem of humanity is we have paleolithic emotions and accelerating godlike technology. Aen your Steering Wheel goes like youre behind your technology, the system crashes. Behind your technology, the system crashes. Youy category of society say where do we have jurisdiction in these areas . Plan withme up with a where the regulations are going to be. That is the only way i can see scaling this without creating a whole new digital federal agency that will be way behind these issues. I am running out of time. I other question was going to be to ms. Bickert about the role of government. I would like to have a conversation with you about what you see as the role of government against selfregulation and how we can make something happen here. The bigger concern is for us to make sure we are looking at this as in david an individual level but also as a society. I recognize the gentlewoman from new york, ms. Clark. Rep. Clark . Deepfakes currently pose a significant and unprecedented threat. Now more than ever, we need to prepare for the possibility that foreign adversaries will use deepfakes to spread disinformation in our election. Notification should begin to congress a brush or china seeks to do this. Deepfakes have been used to harm individual americans. We have already seen instances of womens images being superimposed on fake pornographic videos. These tools become more ordable and acceptable accessible. We can expect deepfakes to affect credit markets and incite violence. Actdeepfakes accountability requires creators to label deepfakes as altered content. Betweenres cooperation the government and private sector to develop detection technology. I am no working on a second bill to specifically address how Online Platforms deal with deepfake content. Dr. Donavan . Deepfakes. Talkedten costed about deepfakes but can you talk about the National Security applications of cheapfakes such as the policy video pelosi video . Dr. Donavan one of the most effective political uses of a cheap fake is to shift the entire media narrative toward false claims. Particularly, what we saw last week with the biden video is concerning. You have hundreds of newsrooms kick into gear to dispute something, a video and platforms have allowed it to scale to a level where the public is curious and are looking for that are coming into contact with other nefarious actors and networks. What would you say can be done by governments counteract the threat . Government to counteract the threat portion marked with you to have some to counteract the threat . Dr. Donavan we need some labels. I think the cost to journalism is very high. All of the energy and resources that go into tracking, mapping and getting Public Information out there, i think the Platform Companies can do a much better job of preventing that harm upfront by looking at content when it does seem to go wildly out of scale with the usual activity of an account. Proactively look at things. If you see an uptick of 500,000 views on something, maybe then is to be proactive content moderation. Facebook is a Founding Member of the deepfake moderation challenge. We also need to have a definition of what fake is. Also, a policy for which kind of fake videos are actually acceptable. One of the things i did was last summer. You informed congress that facebook is working on a precise of deepfake. Can you update us on those efforts in light of your announcement yesterday . How do you intend to between deepfakes made by hollywood for entertainment and malicious ones . Thank you for the question. The policy we put on yesterday mostsigned to address the sophisticated types of media. This fits within the definition of what many academics would call deepfakes. We do think it is useful to work with others in the industry to actually have common definitions so we are all talking about the same thing. Those are conversations we have been a part of in the past six months. We will continue to be a part of those. We are hoping that working together with industry and other stakeholders will help us come up with a copy of the definition. Withould this come up the definition. The take or the subject matter be the focus . It is often different to tell intent with many different types of abuse. That is why if you look at our policy definition, it does not focus on intent as what the effect would be on the viewer. Thank you very much. I dont back. Thank you for allowing my participation today. Rep. Schakowsky that concludes the questioning. I have things that i want to put and may theord Ranking Member does as well. I did want to make an ending comment. I would welcome her to do the same as she wishes. We had a discussion that took us to the Grocery Store. We are now in this new world we are discussing that is hugely bigger when we talk about facebook. As you say in your testimony, facebook is a community of more than 2 billion people spanning countries, cultures and languages across the globe. Is now such an incredible and justified distrust of how we are being protected. We know in the physical world, we do have laws that apply and that expectations of consumers are that those will be somehow there to protect us. In fact, they are not. We live in the virtual world, the digital world, in a place of selfregulation. It seems that has not satisfied expectations correctly. Institutions, even n we have the authorities the authority to do what we need to do. We dont have a regulatory to i hopeall that in a bipartisan way, we can think about. It may include things like the kinds of audits that you were talking about, mr. Harris. They would not necessarily laws butw regulatory we may need to. Date taket is the away today. Communities that than any country in the entire world that are making decisions for the rest of us and we know that we have been , that the government of the United States of america does need to respond. That is my take away from this hearing. I appreciate hearing from the Ranking Member. I think the chair and i think everyone for being here. I think it is important that we all become more educated. I wanted to bring to everyones attention that the ftc is holding a hearing on january 20 regarding voice cloning. I think it is important that all of us are participating, becoming better educated and helping make sure that we take steps as we move forward. Clearly, this is a new era. On one hand, we can celebrate that america has led the world in innovation and technology and improving our lives in many ways. There is also this other side that we need to be looking at and making sure we are taking the appropriate steps to keep people safe and secure. We will continue this important discussion. Thank you. I would like to insert into i seek unanimous consent to enter the following record, ainto the the sag. Om a letter from our street, a paper written by Jeffrey Westling of the our street institute. Facebook, i seek unanimous consent. Without objection and so ordered. Think all of our witnesses today. We had good participation from our members despite the fact that there were other hearings going on. I remind members that they have 10 Business Days to submit additional questions for the record. To be answered by the witnesses and hopefully in a reasonably short time we hope they will be prompt answers. At this time, the subcommittee is adjourned