Facebook, EFF Decline to Testify, Amid House Judiciary Concerns Over Bias
Facebook won't appear Thursday at the House Judiciary Committee’s hearing on social media filtering, despite an invitation from concerned committee lawmakers from both parties (see 1804200049). Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., told us he wants to better understand how Twitter decided to block a political video from House Communications Chairman Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., this fall. He voiced concern that other networks are censoring users over political differences: “Facebook is a leftist organization -- Twitter, Google. These are all [Democrat]-founded and Democrat-leaning, and it doesn’t mean that they’re absolutely unfair by any means, but they clearly have a preference.”
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
Rep. Gregory Meeks, D-N.Y., told us he's gathering information for the hearing, but he has concerns about content censorship in general, calling the practice one of the differences between the U.S. and China: “I don’t think this is a Democratic or Republican issue. I think it’s an issue that’s going to affect all of us, and as a result, I hope this is something we’ll be able to listen to and be able to come together on and not break down on party lines.”
A House Judiciary Committee aide said her office was still working with invitees Google, Facebook and Twitter to find the “appropriate personnel to testify.” A Facebook spokesman said the company won't send a representative: “We look forward to a continuing dialogue with members of the committee about Facebook’s strong commitment to being a platform for all voices and ideas.” Twitter and Google didn’t comment. The aide said witnesses “who decide to attend will have the opportunity to address these issues head-on and shape future policy.”
Another last-minute change was Electronic Frontier Foundation’s announcement Legal Director Corynne McSherry won't testify, despite the committee originally listing her as a witness. EFF was “initially interested in participating, but before we confirmed our participation, the hearing shifted in a different direction,” a spokeswoman said. EFF has been outspoken in arguing that policing content will “censor legal speech and silence voices on the internet. We are submitting our analysis on the topic to the committee for future discussions,” she said.
Blackburn is scheduled to testify, along with News Media Alliance CEO David Chavern and Lynette Hardaway and Rochelle Richardson, also known as Diamond and Silk, conservative social media personalities and ardent supporters of President Donald Trump. TechFreedom founder Berin Szoka, a late addition, told us Wednesday he will testify.
Blackburn entered the conversation this fall, when Twitter blocked a campaign video from her office, citing “inflammatory” comments about abortion. A day after the decision, Twitter allowed the submission from Blackburn, who's vying for the seat of Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn. Diamond and Silk clashed with Facebook over content filtering claims. Though he didn’t concede anything directly, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg told Congress any attempts to block the duo on the platform would have been an “enforcement error” (see 1804100054 and 1804110065).
Chavern said he heard mixed messages about whether Facebook, Twitter or Google will appear for the hearing, and EFF’s decision to drop out was “surprising.” Chavern hopes for better understanding of how platforms monitor and handle content, saying the secrecy of algorithms creates skepticism.
R Street Institute Technology Policy Manager Tom Struble described the atmosphere as a “circus,” given the uncertainty about appearances from platforms, the apparent reversal involving EFF and late addition of Szoka. EFF might have wanted to avoid what has turned into a “political sideshow in an election year” hosted by a committee that may have felt “slighted” for not having the opportunity to question Zuckerberg when he was on Capitol Hill, Struble said. He called it a “high-risk, high reward” event for the platforms, in which they had the opportunity to “call bullshit” on claims over bias. If they didn’t successfully make that case, it would confirm concerns about social media filtering, he said.
National Religious Broadcasters President Jerry Johnson said the “end game” should be a level playing field, “a truly open square for the world of ideas.” NRB has been a critic of social media platforms for perceived censorship of Christian and conservative content (see 1804120058). If the platforms don't appear at the hearing, it sends the message they are only interested in acting if Congress forces them, he said.
Struble said Thursday’s hearing could have implications for Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which provides platforms freedom from certain liabilities when policing content. Szoka noted in his prepared remarks that the section was created to “avoid having the government try to meddle with ‘vast democratic forums’ of the internet and remove disincentives against responsible self-policing.”