Democrats Slam Facebook Ad Policy; Kennedy Defends Decision
Facebook’s unwillingness to ban or fact-check political commercials (see 2001090029) is grossly irresponsible and undermines democracy, said Sens. Mark Warner, D-Va., and Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, in interviews earlier this month. Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., argued the company is right. He trusts Americas to “do their own fact-checking.”
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
It’s “grossly irresponsible" for Facebook not to recognize the potential for candidates’ lies to be amplified by foreign entities, said Warner, the Senate Intelligence Committee’s top Democrat. “I continue to be disappointed when we still don’t have a handle on the volume of foreign influence.”
Schatz said he has directly communicated to CEO Mark Zuckerberg that the platform’s stance is “preposterous.” The company underestimates “the extent to which they’re undermining democracy itself,” he said. The company didn't comment Tuesday.
“Facebook’s current policy is the correct policy,” Kennedy said. Many in Washington think American people “are stupid,” he continued. “They don’t read Aristotle every day because they’re busy earning a living.” Americans see negative ads and decide for themselves all the time, he argued: The policy is better than letting the government decide what people can and can’t see.
Political speech should be handled the same as broadcast campaign ads, in terms of codes of conduct, said Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., in an interview. “The nature of the platforms don’t really make any difference for the speech. I don’t know why on the digital side, we wouldn’t use the same rules.”
The policy isn’t a position that “distinguishes Facebook,” Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., told us: “They should want our democracy to work very well and to allow lies next to the moniker F.B. If it were my company, that would not be a source of pride for me.”
“Assuming that they really care about this topic, I wish they could do more in the practical and real sense to” prevent disinformation and propaganda on the platform, said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn.
Schatz and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., told us their proposals on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act are on hold, citing other pressing matters. Graham and Blumenthal initially wanted to unveil draft legislation early in the new year (see 1912190079). The delay is because of impeachment and Iran, Graham said. “Blumenthal and I are close, and we’ve just got to get the time to sit down and iron it out. It’s probably going to be a little bit later now.”
Schatz said he and Senate Majority Whip John Thune, R-S.D., didn’t discuss their proposal (see 1912180052) over the winter break. Everything privacy-related gets punted until after the impeachment trial, Schatz said.
Senate Commerce Committee ranking member Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., expects privacy meetings with Chairman Roger Wicker, R-Miss., in January. She told us they will look at the two separate drafts (see 1912040045) and identify common ground.
Schatz faulted Facebook for initially announcing it wouldn’t ban manipulated media from political candidates before issuing a correction (see 2001070012). Allowing campaigns to lie was always an “untenable” position, he said. “To say I’m unimpressed is an understatement. I’m deeply frustrated with this company that can’t seem to use common sense to get to the point where they do the right thing.”