populations online, like showing unemployment and housing ads to white people, but not to black people. in our country. should congress pass that bill? those issues are a bias. during my time at pinterest, like i mentioned before, it s difficult to understand how these algorithms react. saying that reels doesn t give african-americans the same distribution at white people and until we have transparency and our ability to confirm ourselves that facebook s marketing messages are true, we will not have a system that is compatible with democracy. i thank senator lee. i agree with you and your line of questioning. i wrote facebook asking them to explain that discrepancy because facebook, i think, is lying
they can t protect us from the harms they know exist in their own system. so i don t think it s just a question of should people have the option of choosing to not be manipulated by their algorithms. i think if we had appropriate oversight or to make facebook responsible for the konconseques of their intentional decisions, i think they would get rid of it because it is causing teenagers to be more exposed to more anorexia content and in ethiopia, it s literally fanning ethnic violence. it encourage reform of these platforms. not picking and choosing individual ideas, but instead making the platforms themselves safer. less twitchy. less reactive. less viral. because that s how we scale bly solve these problems. miss chair, i would simply say let s get to work. we got some things we can do here.
generated content is something companies have less control over. they have 100% control over their algorithms and facebook should not get a free pass on choices it makes to prioritize growth and virality over public safety. they re paying for their profits with our safety. so i strongly encourage reform of 230. i also believe there needs to be a dedicated oversight body bought right now, the only people in the world who are trained to analyze these experiments, to understand what s happening inside of facebook, are people who grew up inside of facebook or pintrest. to bring that information out to the oversight boards that have the right to do oversight. regulatory agency within the federal government.
completely withstand a first amendment challenge. so that may be a constructive way that congress can make a difference here without vi violating the first amendment. making facebook reasonable for their decisions. the algorithms that push the content to you and make it more viral. this is really, really, really interesting today. thank you all very much. we have to turn now to some breaking news though. there is a security incident outside the u.s. supreme court that was taking place just now. we want to make you aware of. u.s. capitol police say they have now removed an individual from a suspicious vehicle parked in front of the supreme court. we re waiting for a briefing from officials in any minute now. let s get over to whitney. she s on capitol hill with the breaking details. what do we know? this all started around ten minutes to 10:00 this morning. police tweeting they were
yes. thank you very much. thank you, chairman. senator cantwell. i think i want to continue on that vein. first of all, the privacy act that i introduced along with several colleagues actually does have ftc oversight of algorithm transparency. i hope you d take a look at that and tell us what other areas we should add. clearly that s the issue at hand here. thank you again for your wi willingness to come forward. the documentation that you say exists, is the level of transparency about what s going on that people haven t been able to see and so your information that you say has gone up to the highest levels at facebook, is that they purposely knew that their algorithms were continuing to have misinformation and hate