In response to the Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton (Tom Cotton) proposed a series of sharp questions when Twitter's deputy general counsel Sean Agate (Sean Edgett) in just a few minutes gives two contradictory answers. Cotton questioned Agate's problem is that why twitter decided to suspend the CIA (CIA) enter the twitter data analysis and early warning system?
The Twitter data analytics service was provided by a company owned by Twitter, part of a company called Dataminr, and it has been reported that Dataminr sometimes allows the Russian media giant RT (today's Russia) to use the service.
"Do you think the CIA and Russia's intelligence agencies equally?" Cotton asked.
"We did not provide our services to any government for surveillance purposes," Eggett replied.
"So is your policy on the U.S. intelligence agencies the same one that is imposed on the intelligence agencies of our adversary?" Cotton continued, asks.
"As a global company, we have to implement our policies on an equal footing," Eggette replied.
"We are trying to be fair and just around the world."
Cotton then turned to WikiLeaks, which WikiLeaks has now been seen by the U.S. intelligence service as an anarchy for hostile intelligence. Cotton asked why WikiLeaks was able to operate "with no constraints" on Twitter.
Is it a prejudice to favor America more than to defend our opponents? "Cotton questioned.
"We are trying to be fair and just around the world," Eggette said. "We are, of course, a U.S. company and are very concerned about the issues we talk about today, but if the issue involves WikiLeaks and other Twitter accounts like WikiLeaks, we'll treat each of them as a Twitter account and make sure they Follow our policy. "
Here, Egge's answer back and forth shows a paradoxical position that Twitter considers himself both a global company and a U.S. company, and its solution to this paradox is to claim that it is only compliant In their own policy.
In Snowden after the incident, the United States many social media users have been realized, such as Google, Facebook and twitter technology companies to achieve accurate advertising to build data collection mechanisms, can also be easily used for accurate monitoring. As Virginia, Senator Mark Werner (Mark Warner) and other senators mentioned so, these giants of American science and technology has established a perfect monitoring system, "they understand the Americans than the American government"
Under such circumstances, many U.S. technology giants, especially Twitter, have to bear the "throes" of protecting user data. On many occasions, they have fiercely struggled with the U.S. government in court and reap the rewards Many cheers from privacy advocates.
But these sound-sounding explanations, a few years ago, are quite different in the face of Russia's alleged involvement in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
"Facebook already has 5 million advertisers, Facebook has the ability to track down all these advertisers behind'Investor'? "
For example, California Senator Diane Feinstein (Dianne Feinstein) in the relationship between Google and RT, Google has been severely questioned
On behalf of Kent Walker Google's (Kent Walker) said, Google in the view over RT uploaded content, found the content and all those other in Google and YouTube to the search content, without any special difference.
"To investigate whether RT follows our rules regarding hate speech, incitement or even violence, we've done a very cautious review of RT's uploaded content," Walker said. "Up to now, we have not found any irregularities, but we will still keep the review."
Senator Forstein stared at Walker with suspicious eyes. He said: "We are living in a brand new era. This may be a cyberwar. As a policy issue, all of you should take a serious look at this issue. And to figure out what role you play in this. "
Throughout the hearing, several technology companies were boycotting what many senators wanted them to say: behavior from national actors that should be differentiated from other behaviors that incorrectly used their social networks and advertising systems Come on.
Although none of the technology companies here wants to set any new regulations, let alone set any new rules on them, these arguments seem to make it clear that whether they stand on the side of support or on the other side, Senators oppose more than just the relationship between these technology companies and Russia. What they care more about is that these tech companies' responses reveal an inherent problem in the Internet industry: They gather data from Americans, and anyone who These data can be used to sell to the Americans, this method is very efficient and highly automated, very much in line with the intentions of many countries.
In Monday's hearing, Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana (John Kennedy) was general counsel of Facebook Colin Strice (Colin Stretch) were questioned. Kennedy bluntly asked whether the company Facebook geological Colin, know that there are government agencies in other countries to buy the election advertisements?
"As far as I can tell," Strelach replied.
"How do you know that there is not?" Kennedy pursued. "There are already 5 million advertisers on Facebook, are you trying to tell me that Facebook has the ability to trace the gold owners behind all these advertisers?"
The transfer of power is already around the world"numerous"Government agencies and technology giants"the company"Staged
Of course, unlike conventional advertising sales, Internet technology companies like Facebook, Google and Twitter do not need formal or informal human censorship to handle the business of buying and selling ads through software, which is part of their business model .
The United States Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr (Richard Burr) at the end of his statement also expressed similar views. In the past, if a media agency to finalize an advertising purchase order, but the other vaguely that money will be paid to the ruble form, so the media may take an experienced person judge, ensure that the other party will not violate the federal election law.
"If a media company for some reason has asked if the payment was made in foreign currency, then the company may not accept the advertising order," said Burr. "I hope none of your platforms will start a business without first identifying the source of the money."
Although Senator Vastings also claimed that it is a new era now, it remains an open question how the United States and other legislatures will deal with what is now their immediate concern about the way the Internet operates.
Throughout the hearing, the only law that could be directly invoked was the Honest Advertising Act, a U.S. law that would teach technology companies how to treat political advertising correctly. It has been reported that many senators had forced the technology companies at the hearing to say they would support the bill. However, the responses they received were often "not fully agreed."
We do not know yet - it's not yet clear - whether there will be a larger U.S. legislature coming out to change the way these technology companies operate or to bring them under the new regulatory regime in the United States.
Many U.S. senators have realized that the transfer of power has been staged between many government and tech giant companies around the world. However, one thing we can foresee is that those legislatures in the United States may eventually seek greater change by enacting new laws.
As a result, the problem will evolve into whether these tech companies will believe that their governments will force them to change those policies the company has set itself. Are these technology companies free from other areas beyond the traditional government jurisdiction? At present, the development of this matter is just like ordering a network of science fiction novels with just a few Senate hearings.