Zuckerberg acknowledges that Facebook hasn’t done enough to prevent its platform from being misused for harmful purposes, such as fake news, election interference, and misuse of personal data. He commits to increasing investments in safety and security measures, even if it impacts profitability. New steps are being taken to restrict app access to user information, audit apps, and give users more control over their data.

Addressing the Cambridge Analytica Scandal:
In response to the Cambridge Analytica scandal, Facebook is further restricting app access to user information and requiring apps to undergo a full review process. Apps will only have limited access to user information, such as name, profile photo, and email address, unless explicitly authorized by the user. Apps that haven’t been used in three months will lose access to user information until reauthorized. Facebook is investigating apps that had access to large amounts of user data before 2014 and will suspend or ban apps if misuse of personal data is found.

Enhancing User Control and Data Protection:
Zuckerberg emphasizes three principles of the GDPR: control, transparency, and accountability. Facebook is making the same controls and settings available to users worldwide, not just in Europe. A new “Clear History” feature is under development, allowing users to see and clear information collected from websites and apps, and to disable future storage of this data.

Conclusion:
Zuckerberg expresses a commitment to learning from past mistakes and making significant investments to improve user safety and security on Facebook. He acknowledges the importance of giving users more control over their data and complying with data protection regulations like the GDPR.

Mark Zuckerberg’s Key Points:
Enhanced privacy features allow users to control their data, including clearing browsing history. Combating election interference: Investments have been made to prevent election attacks through AI recognition and collaboration. Successful mitigation of misinformation attempts in elections like the French presidential election. Tackling fake news: Reduction of economic incentives for fake news publishers. Penalizing clickbait and sensationalism. Prioritizing stories verified as true by third-party fact-checkers. Improved advertising transparency: Introduction of tools to display all of a page’s advertisements. Increased accountability and responsibility for advertisers. Continuous security efforts: Persistent investment in security enhancements to stay ahead of evolving threats. Development of tools to facilitate democratic engagement. Facebook’s positive role in elections: Assisting leaders in connecting with voters. Encouraging voter registration through Get Out the Vote initiatives. Commitment to Europe: Substantial European presence, with offices and data centers. Ongoing investment, including digital skills training for small businesses. Zuckerberg’s goal: Connecting people and fostering communities. Bringing the world closer together. Acknowledging challenges: Viewing issues as opportunities to strengthen positive forces. Gratitude for the invitation to address the European Parliament.

Introduction:
Mark Zuckerberg appears before the European Parliament in response to the Cambridge Analytica scandal. Members of the European Parliament raise concerns about data protection, transparency, and the potential impact of Facebook on democracy.

Concerns about Data Protection and Transparency:
Manfred Weber, Chair of the Group of the European People’s Party, questions why Facebook did not suspend access for all business partners upon discovering the Cambridge Analytica incident. Weber also asks whether Cambridge Analytica is an isolated case or a sign of a larger issue. Udo Bullmann, Chair of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats, seeks assurance that Facebook will fully comply with the new General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and will not collect, use, or sell data without proper consent.

Addressing Fake Accounts and Election Interference:
Bullmann emphasizes the rise in fake accounts on Facebook and inquires about measures to combat them. He also asks about Facebook’s commitment to preventing manipulation and interference in the upcoming European elections, seeking guarantees that the platform will not be used for such purposes.

Discussion on Shadow Profiles:
Syed Kamall, Chair of the European Conservative Group, raises concerns about Facebook’s collection and storage of data on non-users through so-called shadow profiles. Kamall questions the ethical implications of this practice and asks if non-users have the ability to access and view the data Facebook has collected on them.

Conclusion:
Members of the European Parliament express their concerns about Facebook’s data practices, emphasizing the need for transparency, data protection, and accountability. Zuckerberg is expected to respond to these concerns and provide assurances about the company’s commitment to addressing these issues.

Zuckerberg’s Apologies and Problem-Fixing Ability:
Mr. Giverostad highlights Mark Zuckerberg’s numerous apologies over the past decade for various issues related to Facebook. He questions Zuckerberg’s ability to fix these problems effectively, given the repeated issues and apologies.

Need for Public Regulation:
Mr. Giverostad advocates for public regulation of Facebook, similar to the regulations imposed on banks after the 2008 financial crisis. He draws parallels between the lack of self-regulation in the banking industry and the need for regulation in the tech industry.

GDPR Concerns:
Mr. Giverostad raises concerns about Facebook’s compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and European privacy standards. He alleges that Facebook has transferred European data of non-European citizens out of Europe, violating GDPR and existing directives.

Compensation for European Facebook Users:
Mr. Giverostad refers to Article 82 of the GDPR, which provides for the possibility of compensation if Facebook users have been abused. He asks Zuckerberg if Facebook plans to compensate European Facebook users and inquires about the amount of compensation that might be offered.

Challenging Zuckerberg’s Monopoly Comparison:
Responding to Zuckerberg’s comparison of Facebook to other platforms like Twitter and Google, Mr. Giverostad dismisses the analogy. He argues that Facebook’s dominance in the social media market is akin to a monopoly in the car industry, where alternatives like planes, trains, and bikes do not eliminate the monopoly.

Questions from Udo Bullmann, Leader of the Socialist and Democrats Group:
Cooperation with European antitrust authorities to examine potential monopoly and possible split of Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp Personal reflection on being remembered as a digital monster vs. someone who enriched society

Questions from Bart Staes, Co-chair of the Group of the Greens:
Systematic and public release of data on politically relevant advertising Development of an opt-out mode for targeted advertising Eradication of remaining fake accounts and prevention of new ones Clarification of Facebook’s role as a media provider or neutral platform Voluntary commitment to publish financial data on a country-by-country basis Commitment to pay taxes where Facebook operates

Questions from Gabi Zimmer, Chair of the Confederal Group of the European United Left:
Explanation for the lack of an open public meeting and refusal of broader participation Concerns about the change in Facebook’s platform and the impact of fake news Effectiveness of Facebook’s commitment to the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Facebook’s lobbying efforts to postpone the GDPR and its implications Evolution of Facebook’s philosophy regarding discrimination against women

Statements from David Martin, President of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe Group:

Clarification on the web-streaming of the meeting with Zuckerberg

Questions from Nigel Farage, Chair of the European Freedom and Direct Democracy Group:
Concerns about the neutrality of Facebook as a political platform Allegations of reduced views and engagements for right-wing content Inquiry into the third-party fact-checkers employed by Facebook Consideration of a social media Bill of Rights to protect free speech

Impact on Freedoms:
Members of the European Parliament express concerns regarding the impact of Facebook’s dominance on freedom of expression and information. Facebook’s decisions to remove accounts and pages are viewed as having a significant impact on the plurality of opinions and access to information. Comparisons are drawn to censorship, with the removal of a Facebook page seen as similar to banning a newspaper.

Arbitrary Censorship:
The European Parliament members question the compatibility of Facebook’s arbitrary censorship with democratic values. They seek clarification on the legal criteria used by Facebook to justify the removal of pages expressing legitimate opinions.

Concerns over Fake News:
The hunt for fake news is acknowledged as a current trend. However, concerns are raised that it might serve as a pretext for further restrictions on freedom of opinion and expression.

Social Media Safety:
Ronan’s tragic suicide at age 17 after being blackmailed for a compromising photograph emphasizes the need to address false Facebook accounts targeting vulnerable youth. The company must clarify its actions to combat these fake accounts and protect users.

Internet Safety Education:
Concerns are raised about Facebook’s collaboration with third-party organizations to educate users, especially young people, about online safety and privacy. The company should elaborate on its efforts in this area.

User Safety Settings:
Assurance is sought regarding the effectiveness of Facebook’s default settings in safeguarding the children of families represented in the meeting. The company should address whether these settings are sufficient to protect users from harmful content and online threats.

Hateful and Offensive Content:
Given the rise of anti-Semitism and terrorism, Facebook’s recent removal of hateful and offensive comments is acknowledged. The company must define its criteria for acceptable comments on the platform and explain how it regulates such content effectively.

Facebook’s Responsibility for Platform Content:
Facebook acknowledged its responsibility for the content on its platform. Concerns were raised about Facebook’s follow-up process to ensure compliance when requesting other companies to delete users’ data. The speaker emphasized the importance of ensuring that Facebook takes all necessary steps to comply with EU data protection standards and GDPR.

GDPR Compliance and Expectations:
The speaker stressed the importance of Facebook complying with GDPR, which goes beyond its business model. E-privacy was highlighted as a crucial aspect that needs consideration. The regulatory gap between the United States and the European Union was noted, emphasizing the need for detailed compliance measures from Facebook.

Concerns Regarding Facebook Apps:
The Cambridge Analytica scandal and the subsequent blocking of 200 apps were discussed. The speaker questioned whether this indicated a failure by Facebook to protect user privacy, especially given the large number of EU users on the platform. Facebook was urged to provide detailed measures for ensuring a thorough analysis of apps allowed on the platform. The lack of user notification regarding these issues was also raised.

Transparency and Access to Data:
The speaker highlighted the need to understand the true scale of user data violations by third-party apps in Europe. The importance of providing users with full access to their marketing profiles, including data not explicitly disclosed but inferred from their behavior, was emphasized.

Commitment to EU Data Protection Law:
The speaker called on Facebook to make a legal and moral commitment to uphold EU data protection law and consider e-privacy. Facebook was reminded of the expectations placed on it as a company operating within the European Union, where GDPR was created.

GDPR Compliance:
Zuckerberg confirms that Facebook will apply the principles of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) globally, ensuring consistency in data processing practices. He expresses hope that Facebook is fully compliant with the GDPR worldwide and raises the question of whether U.S. consumers should receive equal treatment to EU users in terms of data protection.

Consent for Data Processing:
Zuckerberg acknowledges the concern that users often face a “take it or leave it” situation when it comes to consenting to data processing. He assures that Facebook will adhere to the GDPR’s principles, ensuring that users only provide consent for data processing necessary to use the service.

Data Collected for Security Purposes:
Zuckerberg clarifies that Facebook collects certain data for security purposes. He promises that this data will not be used for other purposes, such as targeted advertising.

Separation of User Data Between Facebook and WhatsApp:
Zuckerberg responds to European court rulings demanding the separation of user data between Facebook and WhatsApp, acquired by Facebook. He commits that from Friday onwards, there will be no exchange or use of user personal data between the two services.

Facebook’s Responsibility:
Zuckerberg acknowledges Facebook’s responsibility has grown due to its capabilities. AI tools are employed to proactively flag harmful content and thousands of reviewers are hired for faster response.

Prioritization of Sensitive Areas:
Facebook prioritizes sensitive areas like terror, bullying, election integrity, and self-harm. The goal is to develop AI systems and hire staff for proactive content review.

Challenges and Competition:
Zuckerberg recognizes that it’s an arms race against adversaries in the election interference space. Companies with similar AI tools will constantly compete to stay ahead.

Addressing Fake News:
Three main sources of problematic content: Spam: economically motivated, sensationalist content. Fake accounts: linked to false information and election interference. Well-intentioned sharing of provably false information.

Spam and Fake Accounts:
Facebook employs methods similar to email spam fighting to remove profit motives. Significant efforts are made to identify and remove fake accounts.

Fact-Checking:
Facebook collaborates with third-party fact-checkers. If multiple fact-checkers identify a story as false, related content is shown to users.

Elections and Interference:
Facebook actively works to prevent election interference. AI tools, cooperation with election commissions, and transparency measures are employed.

Regulation:
Zuckerberg believes some form of internet regulation is inevitable. The focus is on creating flexible frameworks that protect users, fosters innovation, and doesn’t hinder startups.

Competition in the Communication Space:
Facebook inhabits a dynamic space, facing growing competition from emerging platforms reaching millions of individuals, necessitating constant service evolution to remain relevant.

Advertising and Business Market:
The global advertising market includes Facebook as a player, having about 6% share. Advertiser choice is a significant factor, underscoring the need to consider both consumer and business perspectives.

Positive Impact on Small Businesses:
Facebook empowers 70 million small businesses globally and 18 million in Europe using its tools to reach customers. Half of these businesses reported increased hiring due to using Facebook tools, demonstrating the pro-competitive effect of accessible advertising and marketing tools.

Global Tax Compliance:
Facebook fulfills all tax obligations in countries it operates in, paying taxes as per the law.

European Investments:
Facebook’s commitment to Europe includes employing over 10,000 employees across 12 cities by year-end. Data center expansions with existing facilities in Sweden and Ireland, along with a new one in Denmark coming online in 2020, reflect the company’s investment in the region.

GDPR Compliance:
Facebook expects to be fully GDPR compliant by May 25th, 2018. The company has rolled out GDPR settings and flows gradually to European users, allowing them to review and dismiss them before they are required to do so starting on May 25th.

Political Bias:
Zuckerberg reaffirms Facebook’s commitment to being a platform for all ideas across the political spectrum. He emphasizes that the company does not make decisions about content or ranking based on political orientation.

Content Distribution:
Facebook has made changes to prioritize content from friends, family, and communities over public content. This has led to reductions in the distribution of public content, videos, and news across the board, regardless of political ideology.

Shadow Profiles:
Zuckerberg explains that Facebook allows users to clear basic browsing history data through the upcoming “clear history” feature. He highlights the need to prevent non-Facebook users from scraping publicly available data to protect the community.

Cambridge Analytica and Data Misuse:
Zuckerberg reiterates that the platform changes made in 2014 would prevent a new app like Cambridge Analytica from obtaining the same level of data. The company is investigating thousands of apps that had access to users’ personal data before the 2015 platform changes. Zuckerberg anticipates finding more apps to take down and emphasizes a proactive approach to investigating and auditing apps.

Targeted Advertising:
Zuckerberg does not directly address the question of allowing users to escape targeted advertising.

Separation of Services:
A question on the separation of services between Facebook and WhatsApp is raised but not answered during the meeting.

Written Answers to Questions:
MEPs request written answers to specific questions that Zuckerberg was unable to address during the meeting.

Continuation of Discussion:
MEPs express their desire to continue the discussion on Facebook’s practices in both the current format and in the LIBE (Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice, and Home Affairs) format.

Competition and Antitrust:
Zuckerberg agrees to provide written answers to questions related to competition and European antitrust, avoiding the need for further actions by the antitrust agency.