[Narrator] Today, Mark
Zuckerberg finally appeared before the European Parliament to testify about Facebook's
impact on society, from data privacy to elections. But the format was different from what most American viewers
are probably used to. Instead of a back and
forth between Zuckerberg and the politicians, all the members of the Parliament asked
their questions first. Zuckerberg took notes, and
at the end of the meeting, he picked out the questions
he wanted to respond to, then he promised he'd get back
to the group with the rest. The entire thing was a little frustrating, even to the legislators, and eventually dissolved into a mess. - I asked you six yes or no questions. I got not a single answer. - So, thank you again for
inviting me, for having me - Mr. Zuckerberg, I think
there was one question raised by Guy Verhofstadt that's linked to my question. - The problem is the timing. - I'll make sure we follow up
and get you answers to those. - [Narrator] Despite that,
the European legislators asked some pretty good questions and weren't afraid to
be a little aggressive. - You have to ask yourself
how you will be remembered as one of the three big internet giants together with Steve Jobs, I should say, and Bill Gates, who
have enriched our world and our societies or, on the other hand, the fact that the genius
will create a digital monster that is destroying our democracies and our societies for the moment? - I'm asking you today,
very, very clearly, would you accept that
today Facebook is not a platform for all ideas
that is operated impartially? - [Narrator] The most pressing
question Zuckerberg faced was whether Facebook was a monopoly. During last month's
Congressional hearings, Senator Lindsey Graham,
asked whether Zuckerberg could name a competitor to Facebook and a couple of European
legislators brought that issue up again but with a more
pointed threat attached. - Would you consider your
company as a monopoly? I think it is time to
discuss breaking Facebook monopoly because it's
already too much power in only one hand. Can you
convince me not to do so? - You cannot convince him
because it's nonsense, naturally. You have given
the example of Twitter, you have given the example,
I think, also of Google as some of your competitors, but it's like somebody has a monopoly in making cars and saying, 'Look, I have
a monopoly making cars but there is no problem,
you can take a plane. You can take a train.' - [Narrator] When it came time to answer, Zuckerberg said that he didn't
think that was true at all and generally dismissed the concern. - We exist in a very
competitive space where people use a lot of different
tools for communication. Where the average person uses
about eight different tools for communication
ranging from all sorts of private messaging up to
more broadcast mediums, to things where they're
communicating with groups of people and all their friends at once. So, from where I sit, it
feels like there are new competitors coming up everyday. There are competitors that
reach tens and hundreds of millions of people and
we're constantly needing to evolve our service in
order to stay relevant and serve people well.
So, that feels like it's a competitive environment where there are many choices that people have. - [Narrator] A number
of politicians suggested that even if it isn't time
to break up a monopoly, Facebook needs to be
aggressively regulated. - Are you ready to
completely comply with the new regulation in Europe
within the next three days? - When you said that
the regulation would be implemented in spirit, what
does that mean exactly? - [Narrator] In response, Zuckerberg offered what's become a canned reply. - I don't think the question
here is whether or not there should be regulation.
I think the question is, what is the right regulation? - [Narrator] But so far,
these right regulations remain illusive and, as
one legislator pointed out early in the hearing, self-regulation has not worked well in the past. - It's a little bit like with the banks in the 2006, 2007, 2008. They said, 'Oh, we are
going to do self-regulation. Don't bother, we are
going to do it ourself.' Reality is, that they
didn't do them themselves and it was needed to
have tough regulation. - [Narrator] Then, there was
the question of how Facebook stores data, especially
of people who aren't even on Facebook otherwise known
as their shadow profiles. - How can non-users
stop Facebook collecting their data and what do you do with the non-Facebook's data?
Do you commercialize it and, if you do that, is
it morally acceptable do you think, in your opinion, to collect non-Facebook users' data without them knowing what you do with it? - [Narrator] And
Zuckerberg nearly concluded without even mentioning these. - Is there anything else here that- - Shadow profiles. -Shadow profiles. - [Narrator] He didn't seem
to want to talk about shadow profiles at all and changed
the subject pretty quickly. - If you're not a Facebook user, how do you stop that
data being transferred? - On a security side,
we think it's important to keep it to protect
people in our community. Were there any other themes that we want to get through? I mean, there's what's- - [Narrator] These hearings are happening largely because people are worried about election meddling on
Facebook, whether through fake news propaganda or through Cambridge Analytica's data siphoning. This wasn't lost on legislators. - Will Facebook commit to 1) eradicate all remaining fake accounts
by the end of the quarter, and b) systematically prevent the creation of new ones moving forward? - [Narrator] Zuckerberg continued to say there's no quick fix to this problem. - We'll never be perfect
on this, our adversaries, especially on the election
side, people who are trying to interfere,
will have access to some of the same AI tools that we will. - [Narrator] But that's a
pretty obvious statement. The details are what matter
and Facebook is still just talking up its two favorite
weapons, moderators and AI. - The game plan is a
combination of building more AI tools to identify fake
accounts that are trying to interfere and take
them down, like we did in the French presidential election, but our vision for how we
should manage the system is going to move from one
of reactive management, as people in our community flag things, to one where we're more
proactively having systems look at the content, flag things for tens of thousands of people to review and we're already making
significant progress in doing that. - [Narrator] And there were
a lot of other questions which were never answered.
These included broad questions about whether
Facebook can really keep people's data safe after
Cambridge Analytica. - Is Cambridge Analytica an isolated case or would you say it's
the top of the iceberg? - [Narrator] But also
extremely specific ones about how quickly
Facebook scrubs data that the user asks to be deleted. - If people want to come off Facebook, how quickly and under what conditions will their data be fully removed? - [Narrator] Or whether
Facebook would work with antitrust regulators to
prove it's not a monopoly. - Could you or would you cooperate with the European Antitrust
authorities to examine it and to open your books so that we can see, if yes or no, there is a monopoly. - [Narrator] Zuckerberg promised to give written answers to all these questions, but that's the same
line he used during the US Congressional hearings.
We don't know when the answers will come,
how thorough they'll be, or if Zuckerberg will give a straight answer to the toughest demands. - Can you guarantee that to
the Europeans that another scandal will not happen in
three, six, or nine months time? - Is the only way of
preventing Facebook collecting my data to avoid the
internet all together? - [Narrator] And after
watching legislators ask good, difficult questions about Facebook, that feels like a huge,
wasted opportunity. Is Facebook really taking
its responsibilities more seriously? Will
lawmakers start trying to regulate it? Or will we just keep hearing the same speech over and over? - So the fact that maybe
you have less control or no control about your own company, for the moment, because you have to apologize now, I think
in total, you apologized now 15 or 16 times the last decade. In 2003 you started,
every year you have one or other wrongdoing or
problem with Facebook and you have to face
the reality, and to say sorry, and to say your going to fix it. Are you capable to fix it?
