Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. I'm June Grosso. Every
Speaker 1: day we bring you insight and analysis into the most
Speaker 1: important legal news of the day. You can find more
Speaker 1: episodes of the Bloomberg Law Podcast on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud
Speaker 1: and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcasts. Turning Out of Facebook,
Speaker 1: Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook CEO has been the subject of withering
Speaker 1: criticism from Democratic and Republican members of Congress, from privacy advocates,
Speaker 1: and from the public over yet another privacy crisis, revelations
Speaker 1: that political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica harvested data from about
Speaker 1: fifty million Facebook users without their knowledge. The FTC took
Speaker 1: the unusual step this week of confirming it's investigating Facebook
Speaker 1: over whether the social media company violated the terms of
Speaker 1: consent decree. The pressure on Facebook has led Zuckerberg to
Speaker 1: agree to testify before Congress, according to an official familiar
Speaker 1: with the plan. My guest is Woodrow Heart, sog, professor
Speaker 1: at Northeastern University Law School. Would you let's start with
Speaker 1: the consent decree? What did Facebook agree to in that decree?
Speaker 1: And did its deal with Cambridge Analytic Analytica violate that decree.
Speaker 1: So the consent decree was pretty standard, and that's the
Speaker 1: Facebook promise not to do things like make privacy misstatements,
Speaker 1: to get consent for certain kinds of non public uses,
Speaker 1: and to engage in a comprehensive privacy program. To create
Speaker 1: comprehensive privacy program. Um, it's not clear actually whether Cambridge
Speaker 1: and the Cambridge Analytica incident violated any of the actual
Speaker 1: terms of the consent order. So let's talk about Zuckerberg.
Speaker 1: He announced steps the company would take to better protect
Speaker 1: users data and on Wednesday announced a new privacy shortcut
Speaker 1: menu on mobile devices. Do those address the real privacy
Speaker 1: concerns of the public. Uh, My fear is that it doesn't.
Speaker 1: So we've seen this story play out a few times
Speaker 1: before where there's a privacy incidents, there's a sincere apology
Speaker 1: and then followed by some sort of rollout of new
Speaker 1: privacy tools. But the privacy tools still don't solve the
Speaker 1: root problem, which is the incentive for companies to extract
Speaker 1: as much data as possible out of people. And really,
Speaker 1: what the privacy tools do is they placed the burden
Speaker 1: of protection onto the user, and that even if the
Speaker 1: privacy tools are better it still doesn't solve some of
Speaker 1: the deeper questions we have about the risk in using
Speaker 1: these these platforms that that take away so much data
Speaker 1: um and so it seems to me that this is
Speaker 1: my fear, is that this is going to be a
Speaker 1: cosmetic fix rather than a real meaningful, subsidi fix. They've
Speaker 1: all been cosmetic fixes. Is it that privacy just doesn't
Speaker 1: fit in with the business model of Facebook. Facebook's handling
Speaker 1: of users personal information is part of how it gains revenue.
Speaker 1: So can we really ever expect fundamental changes to that? Sure?
Speaker 1: I don't think we can expect fundamental changes without some
Speaker 1: sort of significant policy change, because you're exactly right that
Speaker 1: that Facebook's business incentive is to have us keep sharing early,
Speaker 1: have us keep sharing often, and to have us try
Speaker 1: and feel as good about it as possible, which is
Speaker 1: what I think the privacy settings are meant to help
Speaker 1: us do. What we need is actually a much more
Speaker 1: substantive discussion about how to limit not just the collection
Speaker 1: of data, the the misuse of data on these platforms.
Speaker 1: And to do that, we're going to have to have
Speaker 1: a serious conversation about changing the data protection and privacy
Speaker 1: laws in the United States. Because right now, um, they're
Speaker 1: they're actually relatively limited compared to other sorts of regimes.
Speaker 1: What can the FTC do? It seems as if that
Speaker 1: twenty year consent decree really hasn't been very effective. Can
Speaker 1: the FTC do something or enforce something against Facebook before
Speaker 1: we actually get privacy laws which may be a long
Speaker 1: time coming. Sure, so the FTC is limited its ability
Speaker 1: to regulate here. The consent order was meant to address
Speaker 1: a very specific kind of problem that that had to
Speaker 1: do with deceptive trade practices. Um. But to ask it
Speaker 1: to sort of police the entire data ecosystem and Facebook
Speaker 1: as a platform is just a really tall order for
Speaker 1: something is as uh as constrained as a consent order.
Speaker 1: And so, uh, the the FTC actually needs better powers
Speaker 1: because the only reason that it's even regulating privacy and
Speaker 1: data security in the first place is because it stepped
Speaker 1: in to fill the void um that really should have
Speaker 1: been filled probably by a data protection authority, dedicated data
Speaker 1: protection authority. Now the FTC with increased powers might be
Speaker 1: able to serve in that role, but right now it's
Speaker 1: it's simply sort of doing the thing, uh that serving
Speaker 1: as a privacy regulator in the United States, because no
Speaker 1: other agency had the powers to do it, and so
Speaker 1: it's not exactly an ideal fit for regulating these massive
Speaker 1: data platforms. We need some sort of legislation to pass
Speaker 1: to either embold in the FTC or some sort of national,
Speaker 1: uh broad privacy law that applied throughout, rather than the
Speaker 1: sort of splotchy areas of privacy law that we have
Speaker 1: right now. Zuckerberg has never testified before Congress. He's usually
Speaker 1: in complete control of his public appearances. How important will
Speaker 1: his testimony be to the company. Oh, I think it's
Speaker 1: I think it's incredibly important. I think that should not
Speaker 1: just watch what the testimony is like. But the really
Speaker 1: important thing to watch is what happened after the testimony,
Speaker 1: because right now we're seeing a ground fell of support
Speaker 1: for some sort of movement on national privacy policy, and
Speaker 1: it will be interesting to see whether the testimony moves
Speaker 1: that needle more towards finding a more national privacy law,
Speaker 1: or whether it's sort of mitigates some of the rhetoric
Speaker 1: and passion that we've seen around this topic right now
Speaker 1: and so uh and so this could be a real
Speaker 1: inflection points in a larger debate that's already more heated
Speaker 1: than we've seen in the past couple of years around
Speaker 1: data protection and privacy. So we've seen now the hashtag
Speaker 1: delete Facebook, and as you say, a more heated discussion.
Speaker 1: But in the end, is Facebook the only game in town,
Speaker 1: and so people are going to go back to it
Speaker 1: if they want to have communications with you know, their
Speaker 1: friends and family, etcetera. We have about forty five seconds here, sure,
Speaker 1: So I've seen a lot of discussion about, oh, well,
Speaker 1: if you don't like it, just to lead your Facebook account.
Speaker 1: But I don't think that's the answer because it views
Speaker 1: privacy and individual choice as though we're the ones in
Speaker 1: power here. But we're not. Right, a lot of these things,
Speaker 1: these software programs, we depend upon, and so we need
Speaker 1: a we need a more holistic push and a greater
Speaker 1: movement rather than just exercising individual choice. That we still
Speaker 1: have about twenty seconds. So how many how many years
Speaker 1: do you think that it will take before we get
Speaker 1: to that point where we have laws. Well, it all
Speaker 1: depends on what will happen within I think the next
Speaker 1: five is in uh month to see whether we're get
Speaker 1: any sort of moving on the policy. Flint, Thank you
Speaker 1: so much. That's Woodrow Heart Suck, Professor at Northeastern University
Speaker 1: Law School. Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg Law Podcast.
Speaker 1: You can subscribe and listen to the show on Apple podcast, SoundCloud,
Speaker 1: and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcast. I'm June Grosso.
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg m