More

Senator To Facebook CTO: Your Company Is 'Indefensible'

Facebook Senate Hearing Privacy

First Posted: 05/19/11 04:58 PM ET Updated: 07/19/11 06:12 AM ET

Facebook's chief technology officer, Bret Taylor, was grilled by senators Thursday on the adequacy of the social network's policy barring users under 13 years old after a recent report found that millions of children had Facebook accounts.

"I want you defend your company here because I don't know how you can," Sen. Jay Rockefeller told Taylor during a Senate commerce subcommitee hearing on mobile privacy.

Though Facebook's terms of service prohibit children from using their site, the West Virginia Democrat questioned its efforts to verify users' ages, citing a recent Consumer Reports study that estimated 7.5 million children had profiles on the social network.

Rockefeller also expressed concerned about Facebook's app, which Apple's App Store describes as appropriate for all users over four years of age.

"That's actually news to me," Taylor said of the app's rating. "We don't allow people to have accounts under the age of 13... Certainly your iPhone app has the same rules and conditions governing it as our website, which means that no one under the age of 13 can create an account."

"I appreciate that, but it doesn't appear to be the truth," Rockefeller responded. "You can't just dismiss that seven-and-a-half million users are younger than 13 and say you have a policy that doesn't allow that to happen," he added later.

Rockefeller recounted a conversation he had had with Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg in which she told him that the company had 100 people in place to supervise content posted by the site's 600 million users. The West Virginia senator expressed strong doubts that such a small team could effectively prevent bullying and other abuses on the social network.

"My reaction is, that is indefensible," he said. "It's unbelievable that you'd say that."

In an aside, the 73-year-old senator suggested that problems with Facebook's privacy protections could in part be traced to the young age of its founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg.

"It's my general feeling that people who are 20, 21, 22 years old really don't have any social values at this point," said Rockefeller, noting that Zuckerberg started working on Facebook while a college student at Harvard University. "I think he was focused on how his business model would work and he wanted to make it bigger and do it faster than anyone else ever had, and nothing I know suggests otherwise."

Taylor noted that Facebook has instituted features, such as its Social Reporting tool, to allow users to flag content that violates the site's policies and, when relevant, alert parents and teachers to the posts.

"We work hard to protect individuals' privacy by giving them control over the information they share and the connections they make. For Facebook -- like other providers of social technologies -- getting this balance right is not only the right thing to do, but a matter of survival," Taylor said in his prepared testimony.

That didn't alleviate the concerns of Amy Guggenheim Shenkan, chief operating officer of Common Sense Media and another witness at the hearing.

"Our view is there's not enough being done," she said, referring to the site's measures to prevent underage users. "If we took a small amount of the time that any of these companies spend innovating products and start to think about how to protect kids and -- frankly -- adults, it would go a long way."

"These are organizations that have created a platform that 600 million people use across the globe... and instead of spending money to try to hire PR firms to try and take down the other company, let's take that money and spend it on figuring out technological ways to protect our kids," Shenkan explained, referencing the revelation that Facebook had paid a company to plant negative stories about Google in the press.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST TECH

Facebook's chief technology officer, Bret Taylor, was grilled by senators Thursday on the adequacy of the social network's policy barring users under 13 years old after a recent report found that mill...
Facebook's chief technology officer, Bret Taylor, was grilled by senators Thursday on the adequacy of the social network's policy barring users under 13 years old after a recent report found that mill...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 502
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (15 total)
04:30 PM on 06/21/2011
jesus, leave mark alone. he created a revolutionary site that we choose to use. If a kid makes an account on fb, it's not fb's fault, it's the parents'.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Squigibo
Blocked by RWNJ's Everywhere
02:17 PM on 05/22/2011
Facebook - Bad!
Big oil - Good!
RTIII
Poster of over 0.0135% of all HufPost comments
12:52 PM on 05/22/2011
All well and good, but what's the purpose of these grillings? The reporter failed to tell us that.

I'm just guessing here: Because maybe there'll be some regulation proposed?
10:55 AM on 05/22/2011
Maybe the question should be asked why is it so attractive to the American people and people world wide to have a site that guarantees privacy. The other question that should be asked is what are U.S. Senators doing to protect the privacy of the citizens from predatory invasion by businesses and the people government. But once again the issue of "little children" seems to be the ultimate defense for any ruthless government intervention and the entry point for our politicians to make points with the voters.

This way the politicians do not feel they have to have any relationship with their oath to preserve, protect and defend the constitution of the U.S. They can claim they are doing every single craven act they take at considerable risk of self enrichment for the "little children".

Don't these "little children" have parents? Or do their mothers and fathers just abdicate all responsibility for their children except for paying their internet bills?

So where is the problem? Is it just made up? Does some middle aged person decide that "protecting kids - and frankly some adults -" is something they should be doing to further their non profit although very well paying concern!
04:06 PM on 05/21/2011
The only good thing about facebook is that it allows normal no pedophile or stalkers to have a place to know where these social wierdos can be found. really anyone on facebook pretty much has a mental issue and as proven through research tend to be unable to live within reality in the real world of face to face. That said if your a parent and you allow your kid on facebook your a horrible parent who should loose your kids for child endangerment as facebook is such an unsafe slimmy world or weirdos you really couldn't do much worse unless you dropped your kids off at the rapists house. Hmm I better go tweet this or past it on my wall...not..like I would be so stupid to have accounts at either. Come on now Im 34 and have the common sense to know better when did 600 million idiots get online?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dan Jighter
04:39 PM on 05/21/2011
"really anyone on facebook pretty much has a mental issue and as proven through research tend to be unable to live within reality in the real world of face to face."

For someone who accused my of the "stupidest comment", let's consider the intellectual veracity of this cute claim. Facebook has 600 million users. That includes people like my parents, my extended family, my friends, etc whom I can tell you know how to interact with people face to face and do so on a regular basis. Do you really think there are 600 million people out there with such serious mental issues? Dude, this is just bogus. Most people on Facebook do not have "mental issues".

"That said if your a parent and you allow your kid on facebook your a horrible parent who should loose your kids for child endangerme­nt as facebook is such an unsafe slimmy world or weirdos you really couldn't do much worse unless you dropped your kids off at the rapists house."

Okay, it should be readily apparent how offensive and incorrect this statement is. Seriously, drop kids off at a rapist's house? In response to your one comment to me, I'm neither 13 or very old. I use the internet everyday. On an occasion I even see a scammer, they are too easy to spot. The internet and Facebook is hardly crawling with creeps. It's actually surprisingly safe in my experience.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dan Jighter
04:45 PM on 05/21/2011
And honestly, your comment is so extreme that I want to leave it so that people see the sort of absurdity behind your view. You know, my position is to tell these concerned parents that there isn't much they can do to keep their kids from Facebook and to accept it, which is not what parents want to hear. For someone to tell parents they might as well drop their kids off with a rapist helps my position. The extremism of your post is just amusing.

But Huffington Post does have rules again saying things like "you dropped your kids off at the rapists house". You just do not talk about rape around here and having known people who were raped that's not cool dude. And HP has rules against conspiracy theories and you have a wild theory here. You violated the rules and I have to report abuse. And I also have to comment, publicly or directly to the moderators who delete this, that I can't believe the moderators let this get posted but delete some of my much more mild comments. Really, talking about rape of kids is okay but disagreeing with people isn't? Seriously moderators, what are you doing regarding the moderating of comments? You seem to be doing a horrible job of deleting for rules violations and only for rules violations. I honestly want to speak to the person managing the moderators to find out what's going on here.
01:07 PM on 05/21/2011
A recent AP story about a murder at a Philadelphia area party of teens had a tidbit about how a couple of 13 year olds were questioned as they lived 30 or more miles away. When asked about how they knew of this party, they said it was through Facebook. As a concerned guardian of a 13 year old, I can assure you there is an entire sub-culture of teens that communicate through Facebook and other similar "social networking sites". Much of what they are saying is pure filth. My wife and I have already raised a sucessful MIT graduate/nuclear engineer; we are fairly computer savvy. When I say that the current crop of teens have found ways around parental controls and are sharing it, I know whereof I speak. We're not even going to go into "smart phones" here either. This hearing was a very important first step to recognizing on a national level an increasingly serious problem that parents, teachers, and school administrators are looking at right now and the ramifications are just barely beginning to be seen.
11:46 AM on 05/21/2011
What is going on here? Senators are wasting their time grilling a CTO of an inconsequential Internet company (FACEBOOK = FAD) when we have really problems. If I had been an independent observer allowed to speak during that occasion, I would have sad some harsh things about the current process, questioned the morals of those self-righteous fools we call Senators and then just walked out. I do not care if they arrested me for contempt.
04:08 PM on 05/21/2011
Actually he is doing a good thing as facebook has no concern about saftey and todays parents are of a very lazy and stupid generation who appearently have no clue. When you also have a president as stupid as Obama who endorses facebook and twitter for our national terror advisory system you have to keep an eye out on these idiots who use these sites.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Pembrokelib
06:38 PM on 05/20/2011
I see nothing wrong with young kids being on Facebook as long as their parents check their sites. My grandchildren have been using tbe Internet for fun and schoolwork since about third grade. Kids can learn a great deal if they do something other than play games. Even if you try, you can't shut them off from the good and tbe bad in this world. Facebook is fun. I'm 80 and I enjoy it very much.
01:14 PM on 05/21/2011
You're family is lucky so far. Believe me, the Internet is not a "Leave It to Beaver" type of place and many kids are using it entirely differently than what you describe. Just wondering - why can't Facebook at least put language filters on kids and teens pages? Is that asking too much? Because right now there are NO filters on at all while Facebook owners/employees just rake it in. I'm a 56 year old liberal who sees the Facebook phenomena as a very bad harbinger for the future of our society.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Pembrokelib
01:56 PM on 05/21/2011
I agree with you about some of the language on my grandkid's friends. They should know better as should a number of adults who got in trouble for posting insults about their students or bosses. I am new to the computer world ( at 80 !) and not sure if filters would work. My daughter just emailed me a photo of my granddaughter graduating an hour ago! Seems like magic.
04:10 PM on 05/21/2011
If you see nothing wrong you either have no intyernet knowledge or are just well stupid. The accounts are not save and facebook is very very hackable with no security. If you sign on to facebook you are endangering your computer your id and your own saftey its a free tracker of your daily routine and who your with. A parent unless a good hacker can not watch or control the facebook content or who is secretly following your every move. Please get educated on the internet and saftey as your one of many who have no idea.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dan Jighter
04:50 PM on 05/21/2011
"its a free tracker of your daily routine and who your with"

Yea, if you constantly use the status item. Otherwise Facebook is as much a tracker as Gmail and is as hackable. You have the same pool of brilliant minds working on Gmail and Facebook security in Silicon Valley. If you fear Facebook that much, honestly you should stop using email. And you should stop commenting on Huffington Post too, as they are hooked up to Facebook and email and can be as easily used to track you too.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PCPrincess
I'm probably gaming.
05:14 PM on 05/20/2011
Another hearing and day wasted by a Senator from an institution plagued with corruption having grossly impractical expectations of a company.
On a second note: Is it really that bad for a teenager to have a Facebook profile? Paranoid much?
04:13 PM on 05/21/2011
Hmmm you say watsted time that the government who is the watchdog of child saftey did their job for once? Grossly impractical? No pretty simple have a age check via credit card verification which in turn may make idiots who use it think twice one credit card info gets stolen daily from the porous unsafe technology implimented in the facebook source code and servers. I am actually glad a senator did his job in relation to protecting kids since parents who allow kids on facebook dont seem to care about their own kids.
01:39 PM on 05/22/2011
Bravo, Fletch55! My sentiments exactly. No hearing that involves the safety of children is wasted. Wasted hearings are rampant in Congress but this is not one of them.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dan Jighter
04:59 PM on 05/20/2011
If there is all this concern about kids under 13 using Facebook, why not ban kids under 13 from the internet. Or better yet, shelter them and keep them from life, as there are dangers, smut, and creeps in reality too.
03:50 PM on 05/20/2011
How can persons under 22 possibly have any intelligence???(sarcasm) The government keeps cutting educational funding by billions... This is utterly pathetic! I'd say it is the parents job to monitor their kid's internet use, and the government's job to fund important things like education. Who is the one actually lacking morals here? Zuckerberg who donated $100 million to schools, or the Senators that support cutting education by the billions???? Perhaps the fact that Senators can afford to send their children to the best and most expensive private schools plays a part..
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tmboy
Reading comments messes with my ZEN, but I'm addic
02:41 PM on 05/20/2011
20-23 year olds dont have social values? what kind of asinine bull is that? Is there a law that says 13 year olds can be on FB? its not an adult site. Why does FB have to be the baby sitter/ parent and control cyber bullying when teachers and parents refuse to do anything aboue non-cyber bullying? How exactly do you want FB to stop these kids from signing up? If the report found 7.5 million 13 and under kids on FB, why dont you inform FB of who these kids are so they can take action?
09:11 AM on 05/21/2011
That's easy for you to say. Ever try going to Facebook and finding a "contact us" link? You wo't find one because there isn't one. This topic is very timely in my life as my wife and I have found our 13 year old girl abusing this site in a manner that can only be compared to addiction. sk any school administrator and they will tell you that Facebook and other similar sites are their #1 problem amongst students in this new Internet driven age in education. You, like many others here, are very naive on this issue.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tmboy
Reading comments messes with my ZEN, but I'm addic
07:15 PM on 05/21/2011
No not Naive, I just think it is your problem as the parent and not facebooks. Your daughter is 13, FB allows 13 yr olds. If she is not 13 go to her page, on the left side of the screen, last under her friends list it should say "report/block" this person. Thats how you bring attention to her page for removal if she is under aged. But if she is 13 or older exactly what do you want FB to do about your kid spending too much time on their site?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Murphdogg
This micro-bio is literally a nano-bio on steroids
12:48 PM on 05/20/2011
"It's my general feeling that people who are 20, 21, 22 years old really don't have any social values at this point," said Rockefeller.

Two points.
#1. I'll put my 13 year old son's social values and moral compass up against ANY U.S. Senator.
#2. If the senate doesn't believe 22 and under don't have any social values then persons of that age should not be in the military.
12:35 PM on 05/20/2011
I think those senators are just mad because they didn't get in on any of that facebook money when it was just starting out.
10:43 AM on 05/20/2011
It is called "PARENTING" - Who would let their underage CHILD get a FB account? Stupid idiots!! Anything posted today could be an embarrassment to them when they get older - you can not "erase" cyber space.
09:18 AM on 05/21/2011
You make it sound so easy. It's not. Many schools are becoming more and more Internet based and even require online school work. Even with Microsft's "parental controls" in place, we have had direct experience that these technologically savvy kids have found ways around them and that there is a thriving teen/"tween" community of Facebook (and similar sites) users and abusers. Facebook has very little in the way of contact capability to allow parents to contact them with concerns (their biggest one is "as a parent you should have a Facebook account too"). School administrators are already seeing the impact and it will become increasingly clear that social networking needs to be limited to those under 18 as it is impacting both these youths' social and scholastic lives.