Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Facebook Businesses EU Social Networks The Internet News

Mark Zuckerberg 'Not Able' To Attend International Disinformation Hearing (cnet.com) 80

Mark Zuckerberg is "not able" to attend a joint disinformation hearing in London, Facebook says. "In a letter to the UK's Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee, the company declined to say why Zuckerberg couldn't attend, but said it remains 'happy to cooperate' with the inquiry," reports CNET. "The letter also laid out some of the efforts Facebook has made over the last year in areas like fighting fake news and striving for transparency in political ads." From the report: Damian Collins, chair of the committee, is leading the charge and noted that the social network's response is "hugely disappointing." "The fact that he has continually declined to give evidence, not just to my committee, but now to an unprecedented international grand committee, makes him look like he's got something to hide," he said in an emailed statement."

Facebook declined the initial invitation from the British and Canadian politicians in October, prompting them to send another with additional signatures from their Argentinian, Australian and Irish counterparts. This came after Zuckerberg turned down a spring invitation to give evidence to the UK Parliament about Facebook's role in the Cambridge Analytica data scandal, since he'd already answered questions from the European Union's Parliament and the U.S. Congress.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Mark Zuckerberg 'Not Able' To Attend International Disinformation Hearing

Comments Filter:
  • He's too busy (Score:5, Informative)

    by DaveM753 ( 844913 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2018 @06:42PM (#57645622)

    ...spreading disinformation.

    • "Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups" - George Carlin

      And now those groups are bigger and better connected. Just look at the persistence of this whole anti-vaccination nonsense that stirs up every year or two.

  • Really? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by zippo01 ( 688802 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2018 @06:46PM (#57645640)
    Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook are disinformation. The more I read and hear about "social media" the more I agree with other that it's been more of a hindrance to society then anything. All it's done is make a handful of people rich off of other peoples suffering and privacy.
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by alvinrod ( 889928 )
      That's a fair assessment, but no one forced anyone to sign up for a Facebook or Twitter account. It might sound well and good to ban them or something like that, but then I'd have to ask why you're not doing the same about other "hindrances to society" which might even include a few things that one or both of us enjoy. As much as you might wish to, you can't really legislate good decision making.
    • While I agree. it is off topic.

      The media talking as if it is normal for US business owners to travel overseas to meet with haters is itself disinformation.

      Of course "social media" is a hindrance to society, and of course Whathisface isn't going to show up at Foreignplace.

    • Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook are disinformation. The more I read and hear about "social media" the more I agree with other that it's been more of a hindrance to society then anything.

      Exactly, we need to shutdown platforms that are used by people to speak. That will fix the problem.

      I'm no fan of Facebook but to attack Facebook specifically for the spread of disinformation is utterly ludicrous given that they do not create any content themselves. The solution to this problem is not censorship by closing down avenues of wide spread speech.

      • Exactly, we need to shutdown platforms that are used by people to speak.

        We need to regulate platforms that decide which people speak, and which words are allowed to be spoken. "Safe Harbors" don't alter the messages they transport, or rearrange them, or change the recipients. Facebook appears to be doing those things, rather than simply being "used by people to speak". Thus the investigation.

        • Facebook appears to be doing those things, rather than simply being "used by people to speak". Thus the investigation.

          Causality fail. Facebook started doing those things in response to investigations of the use of their platform for anyone to speak.

          Remember ultimately what Facebook is: A social network. Social networks are built in a similar way on such a site as they are in real life causing group think between people of common interests. It's not Facebook spreading those messages, it's people who already believe those messages, and people who would spread them in real life as well.

  • New euphemism? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2018 @06:54PM (#57645688)

    Is "not able to attend" the new phrase for "doesn't want to attend"?

    [ Asking for various Secret Service agents in Paris. :-) ]

  • Would you go? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by BringsApples ( 3418089 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2018 @07:01PM (#57645752)
    Why would anyone go sit around being grilled, if they didn't HAVE to? Seems totally unreasonable to me. I wouldn't go either - sitting around, looking like a dick.
    • And to the U.K., of all places. It's not like they have a huge amount of international sway these days. I'm no fan of Zuckerberg, but it's honestly not entirely unreasonable of him to decline this. Particularly when the U.K. has not been, shall we say, a particularly adroit negotiator with other power structures.
      • Yeah, if they wanted me to sit through that nonsense they'd have to grant me a fancy title first.

        I'll bet if they named Zucky Lord Protector he'd show up right away.

    • Agreed. He gets no benefit to attending. Even if he has an ideal performance on camera and everything works in his favor, his statements will still be misquoted, pulled out of context, twisted by many groups to fit their own agendas. More likely and typical, there will be small slips and gaffes which will appear on camera, and each one will be replayed in detail by anyone who dislikes him or the company.

      He has nothing to gain, and potentially quite a lot to lose. If he is compelled to attend and give test

      • ...deflect/minimize questions as being advised not to answer them.

        I don't know what protections against self-incrimination British Law provides or how broad they are. However, here in the USofA, they are only absolute in a court of law, or when being questioned during an investigation by law enforcement. That's why suspects must be read their rights before being formally questioned so that they don't incriminate themselves because they don't know enough about the law to know that they don't have to. (
        • The British counterpart to the American right to remain silent is weaker. It includes this clause encouraging a defendant to reveal his hand earlier: "But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court." Those under arrest have the right to free legal advice, but unlike the American Miranda warning, the British police caution appears to lack standard phrasing for this (source [www.gov.uk]).

    • I wouldn't go either - sitting around, looking like a dick.

      It's Zuckerberg: he looks like a dick whatever he does. So I guess it's the sitting around he objects to?

      • I wouldn't go either - sitting around, looking like a dick.

        It's Zuckerberg: he looks like a dick whatever he does. So I guess it's the sitting around he objects to?

        Now, now, he may be the anti-Christ, and an evil fuckhead besides, but lets not resort to body-shaming.

      • It's Zuckerberg: he looks like a dick whatever he does.

        True as that may be it doesn't mean he should flaunt it in front of the camera having every word and action carefully analysed.

        If I were a dick I wouldn't go to a public hearing where everyone is against me either, I'd put on a hoddie and go be a dick in the local bar while claiming I am someone else.

    • That's what I was thinking... Why bother when it's beyond obvious that it's really nothing beyond an opportunity for politicians to do some grandstanding? Because that's what happens whenever the executives of a company in the midst of a scandal is asked to come testify before a panel of politicians.
    • EU governments are generally circling around US internet companies that don't pay much tax in the EU. They're going to be all the more motivated to make FBs life difficult if FB doesn't co-operate with them.

      That said, I probably wouldn't go either, but it'll turn into a PR problem for FB if they keep ducking these sorts of things.

    • sitting around, looking like Data from Star Trek.

      Fixed that for you

      You're missing the point of being a CEO. He is also the face and spokesman for his company - it is up to him to come to its defense and uphold its reputation. If there is a risk of legal action or damage to the business, you get your ass on that plane, answer questions and spread the word about the great things you're doing.

      Apples stock would take nose-dives when news of Jobs' health was declining - whether it was true or not.

      Ballmer's hot-headedness and throwing of chairs is the stuff of

  • he will certainly attend. Oh, wait as second...
  • UK, he talked to your bosses in the federal government of the EU. Why should he go talk to the UK government (a state in the federated EU) any more than he should go talk to New Jersey or Maryland?

    • by tsa ( 15680 )

      To get the public's interest away from Brexit for a while.

    • Why should he go talk to the UK government (a state in the federated EU) any more than he should go talk to New Jersey or Maryland?

      Two reasons:

      1. The EU is currently organized more like the United States under the Articles of Confederation than like the US under its present Constitution. The central EU government doesn't have nearly as much power over member states' relationships with non-member states as the US has over the several states.
      2. British secession from the European Union is underway.

  • ...that in the town square where people talk and post notices, you can mostly avoid the trolls. Local governments have no shortage of laws dictating what you can say, where and when. You also typically don't have people from foreign countries and lobbyists from X company standing on soap boxes shouting at you every time you turn around in your local town.

    Mark Z. Should be talking to anyone he can. For the sake of people that use this stuff, I would like to see Facebook stick to just ads for products a

    • ...that in the town square where people talk and post notices, you can mostly avoid the trolls. Local governments have no shortage of laws dictating what you can say, where and when.

      Another good reason not to visit Foreignplace to meet the haters; they don't even understand Freezepeach!

You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred. -- Superchicken

Working...