WEBVTT - Zuckerberg Agrees to Congressional Testimony

0:00:03.480 --> 0:00:07.560
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. I'm June Grosso. Every

0:00:07.640 --> 0:00:10.440
<v Speaker 1>day we bring you insight and analysis into the most

0:00:10.480 --> 0:00:13.399
<v Speaker 1>important legal news of the day. You can find more

0:00:13.480 --> 0:00:18.040
<v Speaker 1>episodes of the Bloomberg Law Podcast on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud

0:00:18.320 --> 0:00:22.640
<v Speaker 1>and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcasts. Turning Out of Facebook,

0:00:23.040 --> 0:00:26.840
<v Speaker 1>Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook CEO has been the subject of withering

0:00:26.840 --> 0:00:31.560
<v Speaker 1>criticism from Democratic and Republican members of Congress, from privacy advocates,

0:00:31.600 --> 0:00:35.720
<v Speaker 1>and from the public over yet another privacy crisis, revelations

0:00:35.720 --> 0:00:40.160
<v Speaker 1>that political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica harvested data from about

0:00:40.200 --> 0:00:44.279
<v Speaker 1>fifty million Facebook users without their knowledge. The FTC took

0:00:44.320 --> 0:00:48.360
<v Speaker 1>the unusual step this week of confirming it's investigating Facebook

0:00:48.560 --> 0:00:51.519
<v Speaker 1>over whether the social media company violated the terms of

0:00:52.320 --> 0:00:55.840
<v Speaker 1>consent decree. The pressure on Facebook has led Zuckerberg to

0:00:55.840 --> 0:00:59.279
<v Speaker 1>agree to testify before Congress, according to an official familiar

0:00:59.280 --> 0:01:02.680
<v Speaker 1>with the plan. My guest is Woodrow Heart, sog, professor

0:01:02.720 --> 0:01:06.240
<v Speaker 1>at Northeastern University Law School. Would you let's start with

0:01:06.280 --> 0:01:10.640
<v Speaker 1>the consent decree? What did Facebook agree to in that decree?

0:01:10.760 --> 0:01:15.160
<v Speaker 1>And did its deal with Cambridge Analytic Analytica violate that decree.

0:01:16.680 --> 0:01:21.640
<v Speaker 1>So the consent decree was pretty standard, and that's the

0:01:22.000 --> 0:01:25.440
<v Speaker 1>Facebook promise not to do things like make privacy misstatements,

0:01:25.959 --> 0:01:29.320
<v Speaker 1>to get consent for certain kinds of non public uses,

0:01:29.680 --> 0:01:33.840
<v Speaker 1>and to engage in a comprehensive privacy program. To create

0:01:34.200 --> 0:01:39.400
<v Speaker 1>comprehensive privacy program. Um, it's not clear actually whether Cambridge

0:01:39.440 --> 0:01:45.080
<v Speaker 1>and the Cambridge Analytica incident violated any of the actual

0:01:45.160 --> 0:01:50.000
<v Speaker 1>terms of the consent order. So let's talk about Zuckerberg.

0:01:50.080 --> 0:01:53.320
<v Speaker 1>He announced steps the company would take to better protect

0:01:53.520 --> 0:01:57.960
<v Speaker 1>users data and on Wednesday announced a new privacy shortcut

0:01:58.000 --> 0:02:02.760
<v Speaker 1>menu on mobile devices. Do those address the real privacy

0:02:02.800 --> 0:02:08.600
<v Speaker 1>concerns of the public. Uh, My fear is that it doesn't.

0:02:09.000 --> 0:02:12.000
<v Speaker 1>So we've seen this story play out a few times

0:02:12.040 --> 0:02:17.720
<v Speaker 1>before where there's a privacy incidents, there's a sincere apology

0:02:17.760 --> 0:02:20.680
<v Speaker 1>and then followed by some sort of rollout of new

0:02:20.720 --> 0:02:25.520
<v Speaker 1>privacy tools. But the privacy tools still don't solve the

0:02:25.680 --> 0:02:29.720
<v Speaker 1>root problem, which is the incentive for companies to extract

0:02:29.720 --> 0:02:33.640
<v Speaker 1>as much data as possible out of people. And really,

0:02:33.680 --> 0:02:36.920
<v Speaker 1>what the privacy tools do is they placed the burden

0:02:36.960 --> 0:02:39.200
<v Speaker 1>of protection onto the user, and that even if the

0:02:39.240 --> 0:02:42.320
<v Speaker 1>privacy tools are better it still doesn't solve some of

0:02:42.360 --> 0:02:46.520
<v Speaker 1>the deeper questions we have about the risk in using

0:02:46.639 --> 0:02:49.840
<v Speaker 1>these these platforms that that take away so much data

0:02:50.440 --> 0:02:53.400
<v Speaker 1>um and so it seems to me that this is

0:02:53.720 --> 0:02:55.080
<v Speaker 1>my fear, is that this is going to be a

0:02:55.120 --> 0:02:59.480
<v Speaker 1>cosmetic fix rather than a real meaningful, subsidi fix. They've

0:02:59.520 --> 0:03:04.240
<v Speaker 1>all been cosmetic fixes. Is it that privacy just doesn't

0:03:04.240 --> 0:03:08.960
<v Speaker 1>fit in with the business model of Facebook. Facebook's handling

0:03:09.000 --> 0:03:12.960
<v Speaker 1>of users personal information is part of how it gains revenue.

0:03:13.080 --> 0:03:18.239
<v Speaker 1>So can we really ever expect fundamental changes to that? Sure?

0:03:18.600 --> 0:03:21.640
<v Speaker 1>I don't think we can expect fundamental changes without some

0:03:21.720 --> 0:03:25.680
<v Speaker 1>sort of significant policy change, because you're exactly right that

0:03:25.800 --> 0:03:30.480
<v Speaker 1>that Facebook's business incentive is to have us keep sharing early,

0:03:30.600 --> 0:03:32.919
<v Speaker 1>have us keep sharing often, and to have us try

0:03:32.960 --> 0:03:35.080
<v Speaker 1>and feel as good about it as possible, which is

0:03:35.080 --> 0:03:37.760
<v Speaker 1>what I think the privacy settings are meant to help

0:03:37.840 --> 0:03:40.640
<v Speaker 1>us do. What we need is actually a much more

0:03:40.800 --> 0:03:45.840
<v Speaker 1>substantive discussion about how to limit not just the collection

0:03:45.880 --> 0:03:49.560
<v Speaker 1>of data, the the misuse of data on these platforms.

0:03:49.600 --> 0:03:51.640
<v Speaker 1>And to do that, we're going to have to have

0:03:51.680 --> 0:03:55.520
<v Speaker 1>a serious conversation about changing the data protection and privacy

0:03:55.600 --> 0:03:58.800
<v Speaker 1>laws in the United States. Because right now, um, they're

0:03:58.840 --> 0:04:03.240
<v Speaker 1>they're actually relatively limited compared to other sorts of regimes.

0:04:04.560 --> 0:04:07.560
<v Speaker 1>What can the FTC do? It seems as if that

0:04:07.680 --> 0:04:12.000
<v Speaker 1>twenty year consent decree really hasn't been very effective. Can

0:04:12.040 --> 0:04:16.960
<v Speaker 1>the FTC do something or enforce something against Facebook before

0:04:17.000 --> 0:04:19.960
<v Speaker 1>we actually get privacy laws which may be a long

0:04:20.000 --> 0:04:24.400
<v Speaker 1>time coming. Sure, so the FTC is limited its ability

0:04:24.440 --> 0:04:29.279
<v Speaker 1>to regulate here. The consent order was meant to address

0:04:29.320 --> 0:04:31.880
<v Speaker 1>a very specific kind of problem that that had to

0:04:31.920 --> 0:04:36.000
<v Speaker 1>do with deceptive trade practices. Um. But to ask it

0:04:36.120 --> 0:04:40.080
<v Speaker 1>to sort of police the entire data ecosystem and Facebook

0:04:40.080 --> 0:04:43.120
<v Speaker 1>as a platform is just a really tall order for

0:04:43.240 --> 0:04:47.560
<v Speaker 1>something is as uh as constrained as a consent order.

0:04:47.920 --> 0:04:52.840
<v Speaker 1>And so, uh, the the FTC actually needs better powers

0:04:52.920 --> 0:04:56.000
<v Speaker 1>because the only reason that it's even regulating privacy and

0:04:56.080 --> 0:04:58.279
<v Speaker 1>data security in the first place is because it stepped

0:04:58.320 --> 0:05:01.599
<v Speaker 1>in to fill the void um that really should have

0:05:01.640 --> 0:05:06.159
<v Speaker 1>been filled probably by a data protection authority, dedicated data

0:05:06.200 --> 0:05:09.760
<v Speaker 1>protection authority. Now the FTC with increased powers might be

0:05:09.800 --> 0:05:14.440
<v Speaker 1>able to serve in that role, but right now it's

0:05:14.240 --> 0:05:17.719
<v Speaker 1>it's simply sort of doing the thing, uh that serving

0:05:17.720 --> 0:05:20.080
<v Speaker 1>as a privacy regulator in the United States, because no

0:05:20.160 --> 0:05:22.960
<v Speaker 1>other agency had the powers to do it, and so

0:05:23.040 --> 0:05:28.279
<v Speaker 1>it's not exactly an ideal fit for regulating these massive

0:05:28.360 --> 0:05:31.160
<v Speaker 1>data platforms. We need some sort of legislation to pass

0:05:31.200 --> 0:05:35.720
<v Speaker 1>to either embold in the FTC or some sort of national,

0:05:36.360 --> 0:05:40.560
<v Speaker 1>uh broad privacy law that applied throughout, rather than the

0:05:40.600 --> 0:05:44.000
<v Speaker 1>sort of splotchy areas of privacy law that we have

0:05:44.200 --> 0:05:49.039
<v Speaker 1>right now. Zuckerberg has never testified before Congress. He's usually

0:05:49.120 --> 0:05:53.240
<v Speaker 1>in complete control of his public appearances. How important will

0:05:53.320 --> 0:05:57.680
<v Speaker 1>his testimony be to the company. Oh, I think it's

0:05:57.960 --> 0:06:01.760
<v Speaker 1>I think it's incredibly important. I think that should not

0:06:01.880 --> 0:06:04.800
<v Speaker 1>just watch what the testimony is like. But the really

0:06:04.839 --> 0:06:08.360
<v Speaker 1>important thing to watch is what happened after the testimony,

0:06:08.400 --> 0:06:11.360
<v Speaker 1>because right now we're seeing a ground fell of support

0:06:11.760 --> 0:06:17.520
<v Speaker 1>for some sort of movement on national privacy policy, and

0:06:18.120 --> 0:06:21.640
<v Speaker 1>it will be interesting to see whether the testimony moves

0:06:21.680 --> 0:06:26.200
<v Speaker 1>that needle more towards finding a more national privacy law,

0:06:26.320 --> 0:06:30.480
<v Speaker 1>or whether it's sort of mitigates some of the rhetoric

0:06:30.560 --> 0:06:33.080
<v Speaker 1>and passion that we've seen around this topic right now

0:06:33.160 --> 0:06:36.160
<v Speaker 1>and so uh and so this could be a real

0:06:36.200 --> 0:06:41.559
<v Speaker 1>inflection points in a larger debate that's already more heated

0:06:41.600 --> 0:06:43.440
<v Speaker 1>than we've seen in the past couple of years around

0:06:43.480 --> 0:06:47.080
<v Speaker 1>data protection and privacy. So we've seen now the hashtag

0:06:47.120 --> 0:06:51.719
<v Speaker 1>delete Facebook, and as you say, a more heated discussion.

0:06:52.080 --> 0:06:55.560
<v Speaker 1>But in the end, is Facebook the only game in town,

0:06:55.839 --> 0:06:59.039
<v Speaker 1>and so people are going to go back to it

0:06:59.080 --> 0:07:02.040
<v Speaker 1>if they want to have communications with you know, their

0:07:02.120 --> 0:07:06.839
<v Speaker 1>friends and family, etcetera. We have about forty five seconds here, sure,

0:07:06.960 --> 0:07:09.040
<v Speaker 1>So I've seen a lot of discussion about, oh, well,

0:07:09.080 --> 0:07:11.320
<v Speaker 1>if you don't like it, just to lead your Facebook account.

0:07:11.320 --> 0:07:13.679
<v Speaker 1>But I don't think that's the answer because it views

0:07:14.400 --> 0:07:17.560
<v Speaker 1>privacy and individual choice as though we're the ones in

0:07:17.600 --> 0:07:20.920
<v Speaker 1>power here. But we're not. Right, a lot of these things,

0:07:20.960 --> 0:07:24.440
<v Speaker 1>these software programs, we depend upon, and so we need

0:07:24.440 --> 0:07:26.480
<v Speaker 1>a we need a more holistic push and a greater

0:07:26.560 --> 0:07:30.840
<v Speaker 1>movement rather than just exercising individual choice. That we still

0:07:30.840 --> 0:07:34.720
<v Speaker 1>have about twenty seconds. So how many how many years

0:07:34.880 --> 0:07:37.280
<v Speaker 1>do you think that it will take before we get

0:07:37.360 --> 0:07:41.080
<v Speaker 1>to that point where we have laws. Well, it all

0:07:41.120 --> 0:07:44.559
<v Speaker 1>depends on what will happen within I think the next

0:07:44.840 --> 0:07:48.240
<v Speaker 1>five is in uh month to see whether we're get

0:07:48.280 --> 0:07:50.400
<v Speaker 1>any sort of moving on the policy. Flint, Thank you

0:07:50.440 --> 0:07:53.680
<v Speaker 1>so much. That's Woodrow Heart Suck, Professor at Northeastern University

0:07:53.760 --> 0:07:57.080
<v Speaker 1>Law School. Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg Law Podcast.

0:07:57.440 --> 0:08:01.480
<v Speaker 1>You can subscribe and listen to the show on Apple podcast, SoundCloud,

0:08:01.560 --> 0:08:05.480
<v Speaker 1>and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcast. I'm June Grosso.

0:08:05.960 --> 0:08:12.720
<v Speaker 1>This is Bloomberg m