Top
policy
executives
from
Meta,
Microsoft,
and
Google
testified
before
the
Senate
Intelligence
Committee
on
Wednesday
about
what
they’re
doing
to
protect
US
voters
from
foreign
election
threats
in
2024.
But
the
elephant
in
the
room
was
the
pressure
campaign
social
media
companies
have
faced
from
the
right
to
take
a
more
hands-off
approach
when
it
comes
to
labeling
or
demoting
misinformation.
With
48
days
until
the
US
presidential
election,
Committee
Chair
Mark
Warner
(D-VA)
called
in
tech
companies
to
discuss
the
threats
they’re
seeing
so
far
and
how
they’re
responding.
Warner
took
pains
to
emphasize
that
his
chief
concern
was
with
foreign
malicious
activity,
not
domestic
—
seemingly
in
an
effort
to
find
common
ground
with
his
Republican
colleagues.
He
stressed
the
bipartisan
interest
in
preserving
election
integrity,
pointing
to
bipartisan
funding
for
election-related
upgrades
and
election-related
AI
deepfake
laws
that
have
passed
in
both
red
and
blue
states.
But
Vice
Chair
Marco
Rubio
(R-FL)
said
the
issue
of
foreign
influence
online
is
“complicated”
by
the
fact
that
foreign
agents
often
seek
to
amplify
preexisting
views
that
Americans
hold.
He
worried
that
taking
down
those
who
amplify
legitimate
American
viewpoints
casts
a
stigma
on
people
who
truly
hold
those
beliefs.
Rubio
pointed
to
the
lab
leak
theory,
for
example,
a
minority
hypothesis
about
the
origin
of
the
virus
that
causes
covid-19.
The
theory
was
widely
panned
by
the
scientific
community
in
the
early
days
of
the
pandemic
but
came
to
be
taken
more
seriously
with
more
time
and
information,
even
if
it
wasn’t
wholly
adopted.
Foreign
actors
are
often
amplifying
views
real
Americans
hold
— just
very
fringe
ones
Platforms
like
Meta
have
historically
tended
to
follow
the
lead
of
the
scientific
community
and
government
in
these
sorts
of
cases.
Now,
some
are
making
a
show
of
pushing
back.
Meta
CEO
Mark
Zuckerberg
recently
told
House
Judiciary
Chair
Jim
Jordan
(R-OH)
he
regretted
not
being
more
“outspoken”
about
“government
pressure”
around
covid
content,
though
he
acknowledged
that
taking
down
content
is
ultimately
the
company’s
decision.
The
Elon
Musk-owned
X
was
invited
to
today’s
hearing
but
didn’t
bother
sending
anyone
—
Warner
said
the
company
failed
to
provide
an
adequate
replacement
after
the
one
they
offered
left
the
company
a
couple
of
weeks
before
the
hearing.
(Warner
said
TikTok
had
been
another
potential
participant,
but
there’d
been
concerns
about
timing
due
to
recent
oral
arguments
in
its
case
against
the
government’s
divest-or-ban
efforts.)
Warner
said
he
agreed
with
Rubio
that
Americans
can
say
whatever
they
want
“no
matter
how
crazy.”
But,
he
said,
“there’s
a
difference
when
foreign
intelligence
services
cherry-pick
and
amplify
it.”
The
line
between
unconstitutional
government
coercion
and
permissible
pressure
was
at
issue
in
a
recent
Supreme
Court
case,
Murthy
v.
Missouri.
Republican
attorneys
general
had
accused
the
Biden
administration
of
coercing
tech
platforms
to
remove
or
demote
speech
like
covid-19
disinformation,
leading
to
temporary
restrictions
on
the
White
House’s
communication
with
tech
platforms.
The
Supreme
Court
decided
the
AGs
didn’t
have
standing
and
questioned
whether
companies
were
really
responding
to
government
pressure,
and
its
decision
cleared
the
path
for
the
government
to
communicate
with
tech
companies
about
misinformation
and
other
election
threats.
Warner
told
reporters
after
the
hearing
that
communication
between
the
government
and
tech
companies
is
already
“much
better.”
But
he
lamented
during
the
hearing
that
“we
are
less
safe
today
because
many
of
those
independent
academic
reviewers
have
been
litigated,
bullied
or
chased
out
of
the
marketplace,”
referring
to
institutions
like
the
Stanford
Internet
Observatory.
In
their
responses
to
lawmakers,
the
tech
executives
were
mindful
of
the
political
minefield
they
faced.
Microsoft
president
Brad
Smith,
for
example,
said
that
two
key
principles
in
the
approach
to
election
threats
should
be
preserving
the
right
to
free
expression
and
defending
the
public
from
the
deceptive
tactics
of
foreign
nation-states.
Meta
president
of
global
affairs
Nick
Clegg
told
Rubio
that
when
it
came
to
their
handling
of
covid
content,
“I
think
we
learned
our
lesson”
that
when
governments
exert
pressure,
they
need
to
act
“independently.”
Google
president
of
global
affairs
Kent
Walker
told
Sen.
Tom
Cotton
(R-AR)
that
the
company
kept
the
controversial
New
York
Post
story
about
Hunter
Biden’s
laptop
up
after
an
independent
investigation.
Meanwhile,
the
executives
feared
the
true
challenges
of
this
election
cycle
are
still
to
come.
Several
executives
and
lawmakers
acknowledged
there
hasn’t
yet
been
the
major
AI
bombshell
many
anticipated,
but
they
predicted
the
days
right
before
and
after
the
election
will
prove
to
be
the
biggest
test
of
foreign
influence
protections.
Speaking
to
reporters
after
the
hearing,
Warner
said
he
doubts
the
“visibility”
the
public
has
into
the
robustness
of
corporate
trust
and
safety
teams,
amid
earlier
reports
about
waves
of
layoffs
that
impacted
them.
And
looking
to
the
days
and
hours
right
after
polls
close,
Warner
said,
“presuming
it’s
a
close
election,
what
a
vulnerable
time.”
(Originally posted by Lauren Feiner)
Comments