New survey on credit card use and consumer debt. As always, we will take your calls and you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter as well. Washington journal is next. Host the house and the senate come back into session today after a 5 week after a 6week break. This is the washington journal for september 9. Several state attorneys general will announce they will investigate google over antitrust concerns. This as another group of attorneys general plan to investigate facebook over its practices and congress expressed concerns over these two companies and discussing more regulation of these companies. What do you think about this new round of investigations . Do you think larger tech firms need more regulation. If you say more regulation of these companies needed, 2027488000. If you say no new regulation needed, call at 2027488001. If you say less regulation is needed, 2027488002. You can post on our twitter feed at cspanwj an facebook, you can post there, too, at facebook. Com cspan. Folks at gallup did recent polling on this idea of regulation of Tech Companies and heres what the poll found. Windows asked of this question, 48 saying more government regulation of big Tech Companies like facebook and google are needed. Those saying regulation should not change, 40 and 10 expressing they think a decrease of regulation is needed. The poll also saying those that defined themselves as liberals more than conservatives favor tighter controls. The poll asked about overall. Iews of Technology Companies 15 expressing a very positive view, 31 saying somewhat positive when it comes to those with no opinion, 22 . 23 saying they were negative of these companies and when it comes to very negative responses , 10 . It is today in washington, d. C. Attorneysates general will announce efforts on regulating google. It is one of the lead stories. Who writes about Technology Policy joins us on the phone to express the story now. Good morning. Guest good morning. Host could you give us the genesis, thus part of these looks by attorneys general . Guest this is a big deal and we will see this unfold on the steps of the Supreme Court later today. There are two points you pointed out. The one being announced that todays event will see more than put their voices behind an antitrust investigation of google and the extent to which the advertising empire might be harming competitors and consumers. The second probe, which will not be reflected on stage, but certainly hangs over this conversation is with facebook. The attorney general of new york is leading that bipartisan probe and that will explore weather the social networking giant poses concern both of these things have the potential to be huge for the Tech Industry. The state ags are so powerful in their own right. We typically think about the federal government playing a role of antitrust, but the states can do it just as much. Host on the google side, the announcement that extends today, could you dive deeper into what these attorney generals will look at attorneys general will look at . Guest we know a few things. To the probe has more than 40 state ags. It is bipartisan and being led by ken paxton, who is a republican, but there is an executive committee running the show. One of the early focuses is advertising. Far theremember, is by Biggest Company when it comes to market revenue for online advertising. That advertising only beefs up googles locker to lucrative line and it is able to do that because of the data it collects. There is an early focus on that, but there are a lot of state ags part of this organization who have pet issues with respect to google. Like paxton others in texas who question weather the companys search results are biased against conservatives, which is something google has denied. It will be interesting if some of these issues in the eyes of the states become part of this broader antitrust probe. Takesif an investigation place and states decide to take action, what can they do versus what the federal government can do . Guest it is a great question and it remains to be seen because it hinges on the harm. Figuring out what the states plan to look at and weather they find charges that google violated competition law with respect to advertising, for example. The state sort of had three options. A sort of them had Competition Laws on the books and some of them have statutes that allow them to go after things like deception. It is that latter bucket of things that states often have used to penalize companies for things like privacy violations and the third option available is to use federal antitrust law. The state attorneys general have the ability to bring cases to protect citizens by tapping antitrust law and we have seen them do things like that when they challenged mergers that have gone through. A really is all tied to the harm and it could be the case that there is so much political pressure and so much legal pressure coming over the coming months that this never makes it to the court room, never makes it to an official series of charges, but becomes a settlement that resolves some competition concerns. Host if the states are doing this on their own, does it change anyway the interest to the congress has on looking up these issues for these types of companies . Guest i think the biggest question isnt so much congress, but other agencies in washington because the department of justice and the federal trade commission individually announced specific action on big tech and antitrust. The doj in july said it was going to take a close look at search advertising ecommerce and social media and while it did not name any company explicitly, that pretty much tracks with facebook and google and amazon and we got the first the amazon last week federal trade commission is embarking on a similar review similar to that and we know from facebook there is an antitrust investigation happening. It could be the case that all these folks team up and we get one major push by regulators to look at big tech or they could operate individually, which complicates the picture. I think that is going to be the big thing to watch more so than what is happening on capitol hill. Ont tony romm reports washington Technology Policy for the Washington Post. Thank you for your time in explaining this issue. When it comes to your view on regulation of these companies e facebook and google if you say more regulation, 2027488000. If you say no new regulation,. 027488001 perhaps you are one that said less regulation is needed, 2027488002. You can post on our facebook page. Several of you doing so before the start of the show. You can read on our twitter feed at cspanwj. It was in july the senate the house looked at a hearing about practices of Companies Like facebook. It included an exchange between a legislator and facebooks washington, d. C. Corporate folks who talked about the size of the company and the impact of the company. Here is a bit of that exchange. [video clip] is facebook, in your view, a monopoly . No, congressman, it is not. I assume the reason is because in your view, facebook has a number of competitors in your view and a number of products the company offers. Would that be a fair katter whatn categorization of of your view . Yes. Social media platform by active users in the world . Do you know . I dont. I know we have 2. 7 billion users. I can tell you it is facebook. Do you know the thirdlargest company is whatsapp . What company owns whatsapp . We do. Facebook. Correct . Yes, congressman. Fourthlargest social media networking platform in the world by active users is facebook messenger. I wont make you answer the question. Suffice to say that service is also owned by facebook. Instagram. Gest is what company owns instagram . Facebook does. Okay. Skepticismerstand because when a company owns 4 of the largest 6 entities measured by active users in the world in that industry, we have a word for that. That is monopoly or at least monopolypowered. Host if you are interested in learning more, go to our website, cspan. Org, to find out more. John says more regulation is needed. Go ahead. Caller absolutely. Needs more regulation. I dont have a facebook account or twitter account or instagram account. I think they are all a bunch of garbage, to tell you the truth. That is my comment. Host if you dont have these various accounts he has left us. You can also make the case if you want on the phone lines or as many of you posted on facebook itself on the topic saying this is don thompson saying i dont know about regulating them necessarily, but you can make the case for busing google and amazon up into smaller entities. We go to chris on facebook saying regulation to protect privacy would be nice. When it comes to other regulations, no. Steve rogers says if more needed,on is regulations only impede lawabiding citizens. Scott hannigan saying they will only regulate themselves as a monopoly. They may enjoy current physical monopolies allowing them to write their own regulation. John harold also on facebook saying no when it comes to regulation. Less regulation across the board is needed, let the people vote with their dollars. If you dont like big Tech Companies, walk away from them. One of googles Vice President for government a fails affairs appearing on the senate side back in july. This exchange talking about charges of censorship and it was the google Vice President for Government Affairs talking about the platform and the efforts it makes to monitor content. [video clip] googleplatform such as search or youtube deal with massive amounts of information and to manage these volumes, we rely on algorithms and implement testing and evaluation by thirdparty graders. None of our systems are designed to filter out individuals or groups based on political viewpoints. Operating at the scale we do, we are bound to get criticism from both sides and we do. From time to time, political ads may violate advertising guidelines and we have disallowed ads from republicans and democrats. Our knowledge panels, which help you find quick facts when you search for informations about Hillary Clinton or the California Republican party may reflect erroneous information from the web and will need to be corrected. We work hard to learn from our mistakes and improve products, but these must ask mistakes have affected both parties. As technology plays an essential role in the lives of americans, we know users expect the highest degree of integrity and we must day. That expectation every if we dont, users will go elsewhere. Host that was on the senate side if you want to take a look at that exchange. Onn go to our website top of other Tech Companies. If you want to see more about some of the concerns legislators have, go to our website at cspan. Org. Greensburg, kentucky, is next. Caller good morning to you. I think there should be more regulation on them. When they broke them up, the man got richer because they own stock in all of them. The guy who owns facebook is going to get richer. Host you say more regulation, but dont caller break up the companies. If you break them up, they will get richer. Host lets hear from mark in new jersey. Also an advocate of more regulation. Tell us why. Caller i think the Tech Companies have too much power. The political process is completely polluted by things like facebook and google with their power and i believe we should break them up. It happened with the Big Oil Companies and google and facebook are way too powerful. They just do too much. Host when you say too powerful, how do you define that or view that when you say they are too powerful . On facebook,ler for instance, there is probably accounts theot russians and the chinese placed on there and it is affecting our whole political process. It is poisoning the well. There has to be more regulations in my opinion. Host that is mark in new jersey calling for more regulations. His is Charles Spring hill, tennessee, saying no new regulations. Caller good morning. Host you are on, go ahead. Caller i am more concerned , nbc,fox news, abc, cbs cspan and public tv than i am facebook. Facebook is not a necessity. Facebook is an us if fox news is still on the air, and i have heard them destroy my people for decades without any regulations, i am opposed to anything against twitter. It gives twitter gives me the platform to speak my mind against politicians and it is the politicians who want these internet sites regulated. Tech you dont view these companies as too big or too powerful, as someone categorize them. These companies, you go to these sites voluntarily. I do not go to facebook for anything. A lot of Bad Information from fox news over the decades. We should give fox news and hate radio credit for the current status of race relationships in america. Host juan in alexandria, virginia, saying more regulation is needed. Caller good morning, yes, more regulation is needed. It hooves the government to. Egulate this type of activity i think the government should have strong oversight on how these Companies Use our information. Has been done in europe prohibit the use and miss abuse misuse of private information. Host do you think the european model can work in the United States . Caller absolutely. Host why is that . Caller i think we have we have privacy. It is even more compelling because on to the 14th amendment, we have a right to privacy and i think we are not exercising the full benefits of that amendment, the rights we have as citizens to protect our data. Europe is taking a strongly forward and we should follow that. Host what do you think about the idea that users willingly offer their data when they decide . To use these sites . Caller if you believe everybody reads the sign print when they sign up on facebook, i have a bridge to sell you. Nobody reads that stuff. When people sign up and consent, they dont understand what they are consenting to. There are pages of fine print you have to read to use these applications. There should be more transparency, more explanation and Regulatory Framework to provide users and private citizens the ability to waive off the ability for companies to use that data. If they monetize it, part of the dividend should come back to the user. Host in texas, no new regulation needed. You are next up. Caller i believe there is no need for any new regulations. If they have regulations already , use it. Contract, read that contract and understand it. N host does it Say Something to you that attorneys general are concerned and members of congress are concerned about the operating policies of some of these companies . Caller no, sir. All of it is in that contract. And understand it, if something goes wrong, that is on me. I dont have any problems with. Hat host some of you have said more regulation is needed. I dont know if we received any with less regulation, but if you want to call on those fronts, it is 2027488000 if you say more regulation is needed. If you say no new regulation is needed and if you say less regulation is needed, 2027488002. Last year Donald Graham, the former publisher of the Washington Post posted an oped taking a look at federal site federal oversight of the government here is some of the argument he makes from the oped saying i worked in regulated industries for years and the regulation can be fairly described as odd. Talkators often cannot facetoface with those being regulated to understand the consequences of what they are doing. Is there a set of regulators in washington who would understand how google or facebook is put together . Facebook and google argue they have one goal in their businesses, innovating to satisfy customers. Regulation introduces a different goal, not offending the regulators. Almost inevitably, this hurts accompanys performance. Money, time, and above all, management attention are focused. Lsewhere Donald Graham writing that. We will hear from earl in north hi. How are you doing this morning caller . Host fine, go ahead. Caller i am for more regulation based on the fact that i see these people who regulate or if itconservatives is going to be open forum, let it be open forum and if it is not going to be open forum, let them know up front either on the liberal side or conservative side. Host it is First Amendment and expression issues when it comes to how these Companies Operate . Caller yes. Peoples open forum, let put what they want. If not, let them know what you will be taking out and what you will be putting in. Host do you think new rules will change these issues or change the practices of these companies . Why is it that a new set of rules will do that . Caller i am trying to figure out how to word it. You cannot go in and say we are going to be open forum and allow people to go in, that is the problem with the russian thing. Them putting this stuff in and nobody was regulating. Hisasnt our president or crew, it wasnt clinton or her crew. If it was going to be open forum, it should be open forum. Host if a company violates these rules, how should they be punished . Do you think that goes far enough if it is just monetary or punishment by money . Caller there is no regulation to say it right now, but we need regulation that says here is how we punish you for breaking the rules. Host that is earl in North Carolina giving his thoughts. When it comes to the category of no new regulation, reston, virginia, is next. Caller i wanted to say if you add these regulations to big companies, Small Companies will have to comply. As an independent software engineer, i dont want to contact a lawyer anytime i want to put up a website. Eart from the hat you w as an independent, what do you think congress should look at as far as practices and would you have concerns about some of these practices . Caller the concerns i have with the e. U. s regulation, they are saying we should have regulations like that, that is a whole framework. Now it is fi