tv Google CEO Testifies on Data Collection CSPAN December 16, 2018 11:11am-2:50pm EST
his administration, the learning curve was incredibly steep, just like it is for every single president of united states. there is no class on being president and there is a learning curve. watch book tv this weekend on c-span two. >> a look at china's belt and wrote initiative, a wide reaching program to establish -- intructure and other asia, africa and the middle east. c-span.org and on the free c-span radio app. james jeffrey joins in the discussion on u.s. policy toward the atlantic by council and our live coverage begins at noon on c-span and again on our website and radio app.
[no audio] >> good morning. the judiciary committee will come to order and without objection the chair is authorized to declare recesses of the committee at any time and we welcome everyone to this morning's hearing on transparency and accountability, examining google and its data collection use and filtering practices. before i recognize myself and the ranking member for opening statements, i would like to recognize our first witness, the majority leader, kevin mccarthy of california, for his statement. welcome. >> well, thank you, mr. goodlatte, for working with me to organize this hearing. i want to thank sundar pichai for testifying on capitol hill. we appreciate and note your willingness to travel here and answer our questions. first in a private setting in september and now a public
setting. google is one of the most valuable companies in america because of what it does. google's search engine organizes the internet, and by extension, almost all the information in the world. this is hardly an exaggeration. here is a statistic you will hear a lot today, but it bears repeating. according to the "wall street journal," 90% of all internet searches go through google. that is power. it comes with responsibility. mr. pichai, it was necessary to convene this hearing because of the widening gap of distrust between technology companies and the american people. for our country and economy to grow stronger, the american people must be able to have trust in the great companies of the 21st century. we can alleviate some of their concerns today with transparency and candor. i hope we can begin to restore trust in technology companies that shape our world, but we
need answers. we need to know first that google is committed to the free market ideals of competition and entrepreneurship that launched its revolutionary products to begin with. second, we need to be sure that any political bias within google's workforce does not creep into its search products. third, we these to know that google is living up to america's belief in free expression and human rights when it deals with foreign governments. a word on the last subject, right now google reportedly is developing a censored search engine with the chinese communist party and also developing next generation technology on chinese soil and in conjunction with chinese national champions. technology that the administration considers a national priority. this news raises a troubling possibility that google is being used to strengthen china's system of surveillance,
repression, and control. right this very second, china's authoritarian system detains more than a million religious minorities in reeducation camps. mr. pichai, i urge you to reflect on that fact and on the promise your company made when it pulled out of the china market in 2010 and i applauded you for that move in 2010. back then, google promised it would not censor its search results in china or compromise its commitment to a free and open internet. in light of the recent events, i think the american people deserve to know if something changed, and if so, what? all of these topics, competition, censorship, bias, and others, point to one fundamental question that demands the nation's attention. are america's technology
companies serving as instruments of freedom or instruments of control? are they fulfilling the promise of the digital age and advancing the cause of self-government, or serving of instruments of manipulation, used by powerful interests and foreign governments to rob the people of the power, agency, and dignity? i believe we need to grapple with these questions together as a nation, because a free world depends on a free internet. we need to know that google is on the side of the free world and that it will provide its services free of anti-competitive behavior, political bias, and censorship. i want to thank you again for being here and answering these questions. i look forward to listening to the answers with a very open mind and i yield back. chairman goodlatte: i would now like to invite mr. pichai to take his seat at the witness table.
without objection, the chair now recognizes the ranking member mr. nadler for a point of personal privilege to recognize a member of his staff, a very distinguished member of his staff. mr. nadler: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, i want to take a moment to recognize danielle brown, whose last working day for the committee is tomorrow. danielle has served on the judiciary committee democratic staff for more than a decade in a variety of roles, beginning as staff assistant and then going to counsel parliamentarian, chief legislative counsel and most recently deputy chief counsel. danielle has been essential to the operations of this committee and has been involved in nearly every important piece of
committee business over the last decade. her interests and expertise range from protecting vulnerable immigrants to ensuring reproductive freedom and vital consumer protections and leaving us now, unfortunately, to become general counsel and parliamentarian of the ways and means committee. our loss is surely their gain. i wish you well. i appreciate a wise counsel. i thank her for all of her years to the service of this committee and hope the committee will join me in thanking her for her years of service to the committee. chairman goodlatte: would the gentleman yield? [applause] i thank the gentleman for yielding and i would like to join him in thanking danielle for her service to this committee. she has worked with members on both sides of the aisle and has worked with the majority staff very productively and cooperatively on a great many issues that have made this
committee not only more productive but also operating in a fashion that has resulted in a number of bills getting from this committee all the way to the president's desk, whether that president be barack obama or donald trump. that's an accomplishment that this entire committee should be proud of and danielle should be proud she's played an important part in doing that and i thank you. [applause] i now recognize myself for an opening statement. in the united states, google operates the preeminent internet search engine, the leading email service provider, and the android operating system which runs most of its smart -- most of the smartphones in the united states. when a consumer performs an internet search, sends an e-mail or uses his or her smartphone, google collects information on that person.
in fact, almost every minute of every day the android operating system sends information about the exact location, temperature, barometric pressure, and speed of movement of every phone that runs on the android operating system. with americans carrying their smartphones all day, every day, google is able to collect an amount of information about its users that would even make the nsa blush. of course, when users click through the terms of service for these services, they do consent to such collection. but i think it is fair to say that most americans have no idea the sheer volume of detailed information that is collected. today i hope to get answers on the extent of data collection and use by google. in addition, decades ago, congress passed the communications decency act, including section 230 of that act, which allows service providers to remove lewd, lascivious, violent or otherwise
objectionable content from their platforms. this law allows providers to remove illegal material including child pornography and content that is illegal under our intellectual property laws. while meant to block obscene and harmful materials, there is some discretion that service providers, by necessity, must use to make decisions about what content is harmful or objectionable. given google's ubiquity in the search market, google is often consumer's first and last stop when searching for information on the internet. as such, this committee is very interested in how google makes decisions about what constitutes objectionable content that justifies filtering and who at google makes these decisions. given the revelation that top executives at google have discussed how the results of the 2016 elections do comply with google's values, these questions have become all more important.
while it's true google is not a government entity and does not have to comply with the first amendment, the american people deserve to know what types of information they are not getting when they perform searches on the internet. market works best when information about products and services is readily available and so today, on behalf of this committee and the american consumer, i hope to get answers from mr. pichai regarding who at google makes the judgment calls on whether to filter or block objectionable content and what metrics google uses. i want to thank google's ceo for his willness to testify today and answer these and other questions. with respect to search results, algorithmic screening is the primary means by which google sorts data and information. google's search algorithm, for example, calculates what is presented to a user based on the variables the user inputs into
the search bar. at its best, google's algorithm reaches the best answer in the least amount of time while providing choices to the user by ranking pages most relevant to the search inquiry. of course, by ranking pages, google's search favors one page over another. this kind of bias appears harmless. after all, the point of a search is to discriminate among multiple relevant sources to find the best answer. this process, however, turns much more sinister with allegations that google manipulates its algorithm to favor the political party it likes, the ideas that it likes or the products that it likes. there are numerous allegations in the news that google employees have thought about doing this, talked about doing this, and have done it. the dangerous implications to a fair, democratic process cannot be understated. one study performed by psychologist robert epstein has
revealed that internet search rankings have a significant impact on consumer choices, mainly because users trust and choose higher ranked results more than lower ranked results. after performing five relevant double blind randomized controlled experiments using a total of 4556 undecided voters, representing diverse demographic characteristics of the voting populations of the united states and india, the study revealed that biased search rankings can shift the voting preferences of undecided voters by 20% or more. the shift can be much higher in some demographic groups and search ranking bias can be masked so that people show no awareness of the manipulation. the potential for this kind of bias is clearly problematic and is further compounded by the fact that google every day collects mountains of information about its users while they are actively engaged
with a google product or even when they are not. according to a study conducted by vanderbilt university, a dormant, stationary android phone with chrome active in the background communicated location information to google 340 times during a 24-hour period or at an average of 14 data communications per hour. the collection of location data may be obvious to most users, but they are often unaware of the many censors that the android platform supports, including an accelerometer, a barometer and a photo meter. these censors, in addition to the cameras and microphone on a mobile device, can collate into a very accurate picture of where a user is, what they are doing, and who else is there. the shocking amount of information that google collects via its phones was recently featured on "good morning
america," which a reporter using an android phone with no sim card that wasn't connected to the internet discovered that the phone collected the device's movement, even identifying the mode of transportation such as the subway or even a bicycle and at times taking ten sensor readings per minute. moreover, google's practice of reinforcing its dominance in light of self-serving allegations of bias creates little choice for consumers across the spectrum of internet-based products or services. given that google's ads show up on nongoogle websites and google's search engine is being used as the default search tool on other products such as the apple phone, it is almost impossible to avoid google altogether. google in many things -- google is many things. it's one of the largest data collectors ever seen in human history. it's an advertiser that can get the right product to the right customer at precisely the right time.
google is also an internet giant, directing over 3.5 billion searches per day. with this massive authority, however, comes the potential for far-reaching abuse. the mere suspicion that google manipulates its products and features for self-serving or even political purposes raises serious concerns about its business practices, its impact on free speech and our democratic process, and american's trust that the information gathered about them in their day-to-day lives is done with their knowledge and is not being used against them. my hope is that through our inquiries today, we will ensure more transparency and accountability going forward. last, despite the nature and scope of today's hearing, google is still the story of the american dream. the company was started by two individuals in a garage and grew to be one of the most successful companies in the world. two decades ago we could not fathom instantaneous access to
more information than that which is contained in all the encyclopedias in the world. now we take that for granted because of services google provides. with that, i want to again thank our witness for his presence here today and look forward to your testimony. it's now my pleasure to recognize the ranking member of the committee, the gentleman from new york, mr. nadler, for his opening statement. mr. nadler: mr. chairman, our society has become reliant on social media and other on-line platforms to obtain, create, share, and sort information. this information helps us make decisions ranging in importance from where to make dinner reservations to which candidate to vote for in a presidential election. the public's increasing use of these platforms has generated many positive benefits for society, but it has also given rise to troubling trends. google is among the dominant firms in this field, and as such, given the public's widespread use and reliance on its products and services, there
are legitimate questions regarding the company's policies and practices, including with respect to content moderation and the protection of user privacy. before we delve into these questions, i must first dispense with an illegitimate issue, the fantasy, dreamed up by some conservatives that google and other online platforms have an anti-conservative bias. as i have said repeatedly, no credible evidence supports this right wing conspiracy theory. i have little doubt my republican colleagues will spent time presenting out of context statements made by google employees as supposed evidence of anti-conservative bias. none of that will make it true. this factory propaganda does help generate the mistrust that the majority leader referred to a few moments ago. even if google were to deliberately discriminate against conservative viewpoints, just as fox news and sinclair
broadcasting, conservative radio hosts like rush limbaugh discriminate against liberal points of view, that would be its right as a private company to do so, not to be questioned by government. during the reagan administration, 35 years ago, the federal communications commission appointed by ronald reagan abolished what we used to have called the fairness doctrine, which placed an obligation on broadcasters who use the airwaves to be fair to different points of view. this question might be relevant if the republican members wanted to bring back the fairness doctrine and expand its scope to social media companies. i doubt we will see any interest in doing so. we should not let the delusions of the far right extract us from from the real issues that should be the focus of today's hearing. for example, we should examine what google is doing to stop hostile foreign powers from using its platform to spread false information to harm our political discourse.
it has been more than two years since the 2016 election, yet this committee has not held a single hearing focused on russia's campaign to manipulate online platforms to undermine american democracy. despite the fact that it is the consensus view of our intelligence agencies that russia engaged in a massive disinformation campaign to influence the 2016 election. i hope that mr. pichai can tell us what actions google has taken to counter this unprecedented attack and why gaps remain in his defense without being specific to give a guidance to foreign powers. this may help congress determine what more can be done to further insulate our democratic processes from foreign interference. we should also examine how google enforces community standards that prohibit racist and bigoted threats and inappropriate conduct. while internet platforms have produced societal benefits they have provided a new tool for those seeking to stoke racial and ethnic hatred. the presence of hateful conduct
and content on these platforms has been made all the more alarming by the recent rise in hate motivated violence. according to statistics recently released by the fbi, reported incidents of hate crimes rose by 17% last year, compared to 2016 marking the third consecutive year that such reports have increased. the horrible massacre at the tree of life synagogue in pittsburgh, the recent murder of an african-american couple in a kentucky grocery store, the killing of an indian engineer last year in kansas are sadly not isolated outbursts of violence, but the most salient examples of a troubling trend. we should consider to what extent google and other online platforms may have been used to foment and disseminate such hatred and how these platforms can play a constructive role in combatting its spread. as the dominant player in its field, google possesses significant market power. it is also useful to examine its policies and practices to ensure that other companies are able to
compete in an open and fair marketplace. there are also concerns about the prevalence of pirated material available on google and other internet platforms at the expense of legitimate content. finally, it is important to know what google is doing to protect the users' data privacy and security. the "wall street journal" reported that google discovered last march that a bug in google plus had exposed the private profile data of up to 500,000 users to third-party developers. it opted not to disclose the issue publicly. not even to those who may have been affected at the time. just yesterday the company announced it had discovered another google plus bug that may have exposed the private profile data of millions of users. while google has found no evidence that developers have, in fact, abused these bugs, or that any user profile data has been misused in any way, incidents like this raise legitimate questions about what types of data exposures a company is obligated to disclose
publicly. it also raises questions about how much control users have over their own data and how much -- how such control should be regulated. i am disturbed by reports that google is developing a search engine for the chinese mainland market. according to reports, the search engine would not only accommodate chinese government censors, but allow them to track individuals by linking search terms to the user's mobile phone number. unfortunately, in this, our fourth hearing devoted to entirely fictitious allegations of anti-conservative bias by internet companies, we will waste more time and more taxpayer money on elevating well-worn right wing conspiracy theories instead of concentrating on the questions and issues that should be the focus of our hearings. our committee can and must and will do better. i yield back the balance of my time. chairman goodlatte: thank you, mr. nadler. we welcome our distinguished witness and if you would rise, i will begin by swearing you in.
please raise your right hand. do you swear that testimony you are about to give shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god? i do. do. chairman goodlatte: thank you. let the record show that witness answered in the affirmative. our only witness today is mr. sundar pichai. mr. pichai is the chief executive officer of google. your written statement will be entered into record in its entirety and ask you summarize your testimony in five minutes. to help you stay within that time, there's a timing light on your table. when the light switches from green to yellow you have one minute to conclude your testimony. when the light turns red it signals your five minutes have expired. mr. pichai, you are very welcome and may begin. >> chairman goodlatte, ranking member nadler, distinguished members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to be here today. i joined google 15 years ago and have been privileged to serve as
ceo for the past three years, but my love for information and technology began long before that. it's been 25 years since i made the u.s. my home. growing up in india, i have distinct memories of when my family got its first phone and its first television. each new technology made a profound difference in our lives. getting the phone meant i could call ahead to the hospital to check that the blood results were in instead of taking a two-hour trip there. and the television, while it only had one channel, but i couldn't have been more thrilled by its arrival. those experiences made me a technology optimist and i remain one today, not only because i believe in technology, but because i believe in people and their ability to use technology to improve their lives. i'm incredibly proud of what google does to empower people around the world, especially here in the u.s. i would like to take a moment to share a bit of background on that.
20 years ago two students, one from michigan and one from maryland, came together at stanford with a big idea -- to provide users with access to the world's information. that mission still drives everything we do, whether that's saving you a few minutes on your morning commute or helping doctors detect disease and save lives. today google is more than a search engine. we are a global company that is committed to building products for everyone. that means working with many be -- many industries from education and health care to manufacturing and entertainment. even as we expand into new markets, we never forget our american roots. it's no coincidence that a company dedicated to the free flow of information was founded right here in the u.s. as an american company, we cherish the values and freedoms that have allowed us to grow and serve so many users. i am proud to say we do and we will continue to work with the government to keep our country safe and secure.
over the years, our footprint has expanded far beyond california to states such as texas, virginia, oklahoma, and alabama. today in the u.s., we're growing faster outside of the bay area than within it. i've had that great opportunity to travel across the country and see all the places that are powering our digital economy. from clarksville to pittsburgh to san diego, where we recently launched a partnership with the uso to help veterans and military families. along the way, i met many people who depend on google to learn new skills, find jobs or new businesses. over the past year, we've supported more than 1.5 million american businesses and over the past three years, we have made direct contributions of $150 billion to the u.s. economy, added more than 24,000 employees, and paid over $43 billion to our u.s. partners across search, youtube and android. these investments strengthen our
communities and support thousands of american jobs. they also allow us to provide great services to our users to help them through the day. it's an honor to play this role in people's lives, and it's one we know comes with great responsibility. protecting the privacy and security of our users has long been an essential part of our mission. we have invested an enormous amount of work over the years to bring choice, transparency, and control to our users. these values are built into every product we make. we recognize the important role of governments, including this committee, in setting rules for the development and use of technology. to that end, we support federal privacy legislation and proposed legislative framework for privacy earlier this year. users look to us to provide accurate, trusted information. we work hard to ensure the integrative products. we have put checks and balances in place.
i lead this company without political bias and work to ensure that our products continue to operate that way. to do otherwise would be against our core principles and our business interests. we are a company that provides platforms for diverse perspectives and opinions, and there is no shortage of them amongst our employees. some googlers are former servicemen and women who have risked much in defense of their country. some are civil libertarians who fiercely defend freedom of expression. some are parents who worry about the role technology plays in our households. some like me are immigrants who are profoundly grateful for the freedoms and opportunities it offers. some of us many of these things. let me close by saying that leading google has been the greatest professional honor of my life. it's a challenging moment for our industry, but i'm privileged to be here. i greatly appreciate you letting me share the story of google and
our work to build products worthy of the trust users place in us. thank you for the opportunity and i look forward to answering your questions. chairman goodlatte: thank you. we'll proceed under the five-minute rule with questions and i'll begin by recognizing myself. mr. pichai, is it true that the android operating system sends google information every few minutes detailing the exact location of a smartphone within a few feet, the speed of movement of the phone to determine what floor of a building the phone is on, the temperature surrounding the phone and other readings and if so, with americans carrying their phones with them virtually at all times, doesn't the collection of this volume of detailed information really mean that google is compiling information about virtually every movement an individual with a smartphone is making every hour of every day? >> mr. chairman, thank you for that question. today, for any service we
provide our users, we go to great lengths to protect their privacy and we give them transparency, choice and control. android is a powerful platform and provides smartphones for over 2 billion people. as part of that, it depends on the applications users choose to use. if you're using a fitness application, which is detecting the steps you walk, it's a choice users make, we make it clear and it depends on the cases. chairman goodlatte: the answer to my question is yes? is that correct? that the information that i cited is gathered by google? >> if the -- for google services, you have a choice of what information is collected and we make it transparent. chairman goodlatte: i understand there are uses that consumers make use of. i use it to keep track of the number of steps i walk.
i understand that service that one of your competitors provides. i understand that purpose. do you think the average consumer understands that google will collect this volume of detailed information when they click through the terms of service agreements to use the android operating system? >> it's really important for us that, you know, that users are able to understand it. this is why we do something called privacy checkup. chairman goodlatte: do you think the average users read the terms of service and updates that are frequently sent to us? >> beyond the terms of service, we actually offer, remind users to do a privacy checkup and we make it very obvious every month. in fact in the last 28 days, 160 million users went to the my account settings where they can clearly see what information we have. we show it back to them. and we give clear toggles by category where they can decide whether that information is
collected, stored, or more importantly, if they decide to stop using it, we work hard to make it possible for users to take their data with them if they choose to use another service. chairman goodlatte: let me switch to the issue of section 230 of the communications decency act. you heard me say in my opening statement this provides broad liability protections for you and other technology companies for good faith restrictions that when google thinks something is obscene, lewd, filthy, excessively violent, harassing or otherwise objectionable, on the other hand objectble material by whatever standard applied, likely illicits the most engagement from users on your site, and for google, increased engagement means increased revenue. however, it is important for google to make clear where it draws the line and i don't believe google has done its best to make that clear. what i would ask is the following, would google or youtube be bewilling to make changes in support of a healthier civic dialog if doing
so meant a drop in user engagement metrics? >> absolutely, mr. chairman. we have a long track record, we have always to focus on long-term goals to user satisfaction. we focus on their knowledge, happiness, successes and that's what we work hard to create. it is important to us that platforms like youtube are viable and it's in our natural incentive to do so. youtube is a place where users, advertisers, and content createors who make their livelihood use the platform. we want to make this work in a sustainable way. chairman goodlatte: when it comes to political advertising, some of your competitors in other advertising media are required by law to offer the same rate, the lowest rate as a matter of fact, to all political candidates. for example, that's true in
television and radio. would google -- should competing political candidates be charged the same ad rates to reach prospective voters? >> our advertising products are built without any bias and the rates are set by a live auction process. depending on the keywords for which you're bidding for and the demand that is in the auction, the prices are automatically calculated. the system decides that. chairman goodlatte: i understand automatically calculated, but could two competing political candidates targeting the same audience see different ad rates, and if yes, could that disparity be substantial? >> there wouldn't be a difference based on, you know, any political reasons unless there are keywords which are of particular interest in the market. it's essentially a supply and demand equilibrium. it can lead to difference in rates, but it will vary from time to time.
chairman goodlatte: can those rates be very substantial in difference? >> there could be occasions where, yes, there could be difference in rates, yeah. i haven't looked at the specific of it. chairman goodlatte: the result is different than in other markets like television or radio where every candidate is entitled to the lowest rate that that television station or radio station offers to any political candidate for office? >> we -- there could be variations based on the time of the day, the keywords you're choosing to go for, you know, the geographies you're advertising in. it's decided by the system and it's a process we have done for over 20 years. let me assure you anything to do with our civic process we make sure we do so in a nonpartisan way and it's important for us. chairman goodlatte: thank you. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york, mr. nadler, for five minutes. mr. nadler: thank you, mr. pichai. according to media reports
google found evidence that -- well, let me go to the other one first. google found a bug in its google plus social media platform that could have potentially exposed the private data of half a million users without the consent to third-party developers and google did not disclose the bug until months later, after revealed by a report in the "wall street journal." yesterday as i mentioned before, they found -- you announced another bug. what legal obligations is the company under to disclose that exposure that do not involve sensitive financial information but still involve private, personal data like user's name, age, phone number? >> we take privacy seriously. the bugs you mentioned are bugs we found them by either doing an audit or, you know, using our automated testing systems. whenever we find any bugs, we follow, you know -- it gets escalated to our privacy and data protection office and we
comply with -- mr. nadler: i'm not criticizing what you do. i'm asking what legal obligation is the company under to disclose such data exposures that don't involve financial information, but still involve other personal information? >> it depends on the situation. we follow the requirements and in that case, in the first case, typically we look at our legal requirements, but we go above and beyond to make sure we do the right thing for our users. in the first case, there was no evidence data was is used. misused.dence data was mr. nadler: i understand all that. my question is what legal obligations are there? >> today, right now, if we found a bug and a certain -- once you've done the investigation and determined the users are for notification, you have 72 hours. we notify users and regulators in that time frame. mr. nadler: thank you. according to media reports, google found evidence that russian agents spent thousands
of dollars to purchase ads on its platforms that span multiple google products as part of the russian agent's campaign to interfere in the election two years ago. juniper downs, head of global policy for youtube, testified in july that youtube identified and shut down multiple channels containing thousands of videos associated with the russian misinformation campaign. does google now know the full extent to which its on-line platforms were exploited by russian actors in the election two years ago? >> we have -- we undertook a very thorough investigation and in 2016 we now know there were two main ad accounts linked to russia, which, you know, advertised on google for about $4700 in advertising. we also found other limited -- mr. nadler: total of $4700? >> that's right.
which was, you know, no amount is okay here, but we found limited activity and improper activity. we learned a lot from that and we have dramatically increased the productions we have around our election offerings, leading up to the current elections we again found limited activity both from the internet research agency in russia as well as accounts linked to iran. mr. nadler: what specific steps have you taken, including during the recent 2018 elections, to protect against further interference from russia or other hostile foreign powers? >> we have undertaken significant review of how ads are bought. we look for the origin of these accounts. we share and collaborate with law enforcement, other technology companies, and we essentially are investing a lot of effort and oversight in this area. mr. nadler: looking ahead to the next congress, i assume we can
have your assurances that google will work with this committee as we examine the issue of how to better secure our elections from future foreign interference? >> congressman, protecting our elections is foundational to our democracy and you have my full commitment we will do that. >> what is google doing to combat the spread of white supremacy and white -- right-wing extremism across youtube? >> youtube is an important platform. we have rules of the road. clear content policies. we have policies against hate speech. we clearly defined them.
if we find any violations, we take down content. >> can you flag future content from the same sources? >> we look at it on a video by video basis. we notify the content creator. we follow up, accordingly. >> i yield back. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas. >> google has revolutionized the world though not entirely in the way i expected. americans deserve the facts objectively reporting. using conservative voices has intensified, a specially during the presidency of donald trump. 90% of internet searches take place on google or youtube. they are curating what we see. google has faced criticism for manipulating search results to
censor conservatives. conservative individuals have had their pro-trump comments labeled hate speech. enforcement of immigration laws has been tagged as hate speech, as well. such actions pose a grave threat to our democratic way of life. 96% of search results for trump were from a liberal media outlets. not a single right-leaning site appeared on the first page of search results. this does not happen by accident. those who write the algorithms get the results they must want. apparently management allows it. dr. robert epstein of harvard trained psychologist showed googles biased likely swung 2.6 million votes to hillary clinton in the 2006
election. google could well elect the next president with dire implications for our democracy. this should be a real concern to all but the most politically partisan. those at the top set the tone. it will require a herculean effort by senior management to change the political bias now programmed into the company's culture. let me ask my first question about those examples of political bias. you will hear others. in your opening statement you mention your desired to provide information that was without political bias. clearly that is not working so what are you going to improve that situation? >> thanks for the question. if i may, some of the studies you mentioned, we have investigated those other studies which have look at it.
we have found issues. let me step back and say providing users with high quality information is sacrosanct to us. it is what our principles are. want to serve users everywhere and we need to earn their trust. >> what actions are you going to take to try to counter the political bias and some of those examples i gave? you have to take some responsibility for the bias. >> with respect, dr. epstein's , happy to follow up with your office and give our findings. we evaluate our studies to evaluate search results. we have been doing this for 20 years. --ing sure
> what does methodology had do with the fact that 96% of the references to trump are liberal media? >> there are always studies .hich can show one set of data we have looked at results on our top news category. we find a variety of sources including from the left and right. we are committed to making sure there is a diverse perspective. >> the study i referred to was done by a self-proclaimed democrat. he voted for hillary clinton and said he regretted to find what he found. no one has been able to disprove him. there may be a difference of opinion as to the degree or amount of political bias. would you agree to allow an independent entity to study your search results for political bias? you have individual studying
that now but you appointed them. would you allow a third-party independent outside organization to study your search results and cooperate to determine the degree if any political bias? >> there have been independent third-party studies looking at search results. >> you chose those third parties. i'm talking about someone truly independent. >> we did not choose them. they completed those studies. second is we are transparent as to how we are a value adding search. we publish our guidelines. we are trying hard to understand what users want. this is something important to us to get right. i'm happy to follow up and explain the methodologies and he studies done by independent third parties. >> to my knowledge, again, you have picked those third parties. i would like to have somebody truly independent. number two, you have never sanctioned any employee for any
type of manipulating search results whatsoever. is that the case? >> the time has expired but he will be allowed to answer the question. >> it is not possible for an individual employee or groups of employees to manipulate search results. we have a robust framework. many steps in the process. >> i disagree. i think humans can manipulate the process. it is a human process. thank you, mr. chairman. >> i will recognize the gentlewoman from california. >> thank you for being here. google is located in santa clara county, my home. i have got to say, in contrast to the recent amazon effort for headquarters they're proposing, google is proposing to establish
a facility in downtown san jose and they did not have for subsidies. in fact they are purchasing the land and paying the city money. in san jose people butexcited by the proposal there's anxiety on the impact of housing and whether google intends to be a partner to make sure we accommodate the housing met will be necessary for the 20,000 additional employees proposed in san jose. >> i missed the last part of your question. >> whether you would the apartment with the city to provide additional housing to accommodate these employees. >> we deeply care about the community where we work as part of this effort. we have done wide outrage. we have committed to making sure there is affordable housing as
the planned. we are in touch with city leaders. >> thank you so much. we will not be able to deal with all the questions. i'm hoping in the next congress we will be able to visit with you and other companies to go through issues of privacy, data localization and its relationship to human rights competition policies. the issue of takedown request by authoritarian regimes. encryption policy and what is going on in australia. filtering and confirmation bias and its impact on society. both culturally and politically. we cannot do that in the five minutes we have here. i would like to revisit some of the questions that have already been asked. the chairman asked about location policies in your android system. you pointed to apps that might provide information. let's say i got an android
phone. i do not have a single app on that phone. what information will be collected? mr. pichai: congresswoman there , is a device, location setting, which can turn on or off. >> if i turn it off. mr. pichai: there is no location information sent. this is a complex area. there are times where your ip address may include location information. we are committed to doing more to make it easier. >> manipulation of search results, i think it is important to talk about how search works. right now, if you google the word idiot, under images, a picture of donald trump comes up. i just did that. how would that happen?
how does search work so that that would occur? mr. pichai: we provide search anytime you type in a keyword. we have gone out and stored copies of billions of pages in our index and we take the keyword and match it against webpages and drag them based on 200 signals, things like relevance, freshness, popularity, how other people are using it. based on that, at any given time, we try to rank and find me -- and find the best results for the query. we evaluate to objective guidelines. that is how we make sure the process is working. >> it is not some little man sitting behind the curtain. figuring out what we're going to show the users, a compilation of what users are generating and
trying to sort through that information. mr. pichai: 3 trillion searches every single day. 15% of the searches, we have never seen them before. this is working at scale. we don't manually intervene on any particular search. >> from time to time, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle complained they hear an individual engineer appears to be a democrat. i would like to put this in context. in santa clara county, donald trump. 20% of the vote. in the 2016 election. it is not surprise that the engineers who live in santa clara county would reflect that general political outcome. that has nothing to do with that algorithms and the
automated process that is the search engine that serves us. if we didn't have google, we wouldn't be able to find any information in the efficient way we do. i look forward next year to working with you on some of the very serious questions we faced. it is pretty obvious bias against conservative voices is not one of them. you very much. my time has expired. -- thank you very much. my time has expired. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from ohio. >> let me start out with something quickly. we have heard the mention, 90% of the time a person does and internet search, it is through google. would you basically agree that is true? mr. pichai: more than ever there , are many ways users access information. if you are trying to buy something, more than 50% of product searches originate with amazon.
today in the u.s.. if you are looking for news from -- >> to you dispute the 90% number? mr. pichai: it is tough for us to give a number. there are external studies that have shown lower numbers than that. >> you heard the allegation this morning that there is a bias in favor of liberal or progressive points of view against more conservative points of view can . let me tell you about a firsthand experience. i do a weekly blog. i have been doing it for the better part of nine years. awhile back, republicans in the house passed legislation to repeal and replace obamacare. our bill was called the american health care act or the ahca. when i was writing about that, i
googled american health care act and virtually every article was an attack on our bill. article after article alleging that our bill would result in millions and millions of people losing the great care that they were supposedly getting under obamacare. i would argue that was completely false. but it wasn't until you got to the third or fourth page of search results that you found anything remotely positive about our bill. the republican tax cut bill was passed about a year ago. the tax cuts and jobs act, same story. article after article attacking republican tax cut plan alleging the tax cuts only went to the rich when in actuality 85% of taxpayers got their taxes cut, including millions and millions of middle class taxpayers. and once again to find any article that had anything
remotely good to say about our plan, you had to go deep into the search results. i know google's attitude, the algorithm made us do it. but i don't know i buy that. how do you explain this apparent bias on google's part against conservative points of view, against conservative policy? is it just the algorithm or more happening there? mr. pichai: congressman, i understand the frustration of seeing negative news and i see it on me. there are times you can search on google and page after page there's negative news, which we deflect. but what is important here is we use the robust methodology to reflect what is being said about any given topic at any particular time. and we try to do it objectively using a set of rules. it's in our interest to make sure we reflect what's happening out there in the best objective manner possible.
i can assure you we do it without regards to political ideology. >> i'm going to run out of time. i apologize for interrupting. i sincerely believe that you believe what you're saying here. but you have almost 90,000 employees. somebody out there is doing something that just isn't working if you're looking for unbiassed results. and i have seen this firsthand. time after time, i just mentioned two of the most obvious ones that people would remember those bills heard about those. so i have seen if what i have described and others, if it is happening, you see how conservatives believe that your company is kind of putting their thumb on this scale, so to speak, that you are picking winners and losers and political discourse out there in america today. therefore, affecting elections
and do you see why conservatives would be concerned about this and why we're asking these kinds of questions? there's a lot of people think what i'm saying here is happening. and i think it's happening. so i've only got about 20 seconds to go. mr. pichai: congressman, it's important to me that i understand these concerns. this is why i have been trying to reach out and meet people. we have done outreach. we want the to explain how these things work. we are happy to look at independent studies. it's important to demonstrate our products work without any bias. we built our products in a neutral way. i'm happy to follow up and look forward to getting a chance to explain it better. >> thank you very much. i appreciate your willingness to follow up because there's a lot of people that have a lot of questions. i'm already out of time. but let me thank google for one thing.
i happen to be the chair of the house small businesses and your company has worked with an awful lot of small businesses across the country to create a lot of jobs. i commend you for that. i yield back. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from texas, ms. jackson lee. >> good morning. it is a pleasure to have you here this morning. i am going to try to offer to you questions initially that require a yes or no answer, if you would. does google choose conservative voices over liberal voices? mr. pichai: we approach work without a political bias. >> answer is yes or no? mr. pichai: no. >> if hate speech provokes violence, is that the definition you would take it down? i know there are other aspects. particularly, encouraging violence? does that get taken down? mr. pichai: the primary purpose of inciting violence is what we
consider hate speech. yes, we would remove it. >> i want to take note of the fact that i look forward to best practices when we start the 116 congress in terms of having more hearings. my view is this committee has washed its hand of engaging in meaningful oversight of technology platform efforts to sift through content being sold by hostile foreign actors claiming to heighten social division at the peril of democracy. i will not ask a question, but i will make mention of the declaration of article xii, that says no one should be subjected to interference with privacy and it has been noted that google does engage in reviewing e-mails. would you commit to it hearing to article 12 of the declaration of human rights as it relates to protecting the privacy of individual e-mails? >> we think privacy is an important individual right. we are committed to a polling
that and happy to engage in any discussions with respect to that. >> i'd like to do so. we know that building the u.s. economy through innovation is very important. i'd like to know whether or not you would be open to google involving the economy to nontraditional areas of social economic groups. data shows the impact of not having that access. would you be welcome or would you welcome invitations to those communities to do more than what has been done? >> definitely, absolutely. >> you received a letter from the senate a few weeks ago regarding illegal drug sales. it's quite extensive. my question is, have you made any efforts to deal with the facilitating of sale of falsified medicines sold through illegal online pharmacies? mr. pichai: there's a national crisis. we have undertaken a lot of work in this area. we just recently rolled out
a national take back day. in google maps and showed drop off locations. we work with law enforcement here and just last week we received a corporate citizenship award. we are committed to doing more work in this area. >> we applauded you in 2010 when google took a powerful stand of democratic values over profits and came out of china. i'm am concerned you are going back into china and uphold the procedures that would help censor chinese persons seeking a lifeline of democracy and freedom. how can you do that? what are you doing to minimize
this or indicate it is not a best practice? >> we have no plans to launch in china. our core mission is to provide access to information. we are always trying to provide that information. right now, there is no plans to launch search in china. >> i would like to pursue that and i think that was an important point. my community is diverse. the congressional black caucus has been working with google and others to recognize there are not enough individuals of diversity, african-americans. my district has a huge number of creatives. i am wondering what you two is doing to promote diversity.
tube you -- there you is a population of diverse persons growing. >> diversity is something we are i committed to. be committed to. youtube is a platform where as we reach out to content creators, we want to make sure there are diverse perspectives. we encourage with minorities to make sure they have a voice on the platform. you as a company, we have been you will undertaking a lot of work. you we were one of the first to publish a transparency report. we publish representation you numbers externally. there is a lot more work to do. we have engaged with the congressional black caucus and we are encouraging more. >> let me invite you to texas and we would like to work with google as we move forward.
>> it would be a pleasure to do that. >> i would like to put into the record a letter. unanimous consent. let me thank the witness for his testimony. thank you all for your. >> i would like to follow up on some of the gentleman that came before me on this side who talked about the bias and i know that the gentle lady from texas and some of the others said there's no bias. but i'd like to pick up where sheila jackson lee just left off because i think it's important. she used numbers and outcome that she either has or believes exists to say that it you have to do better in the minority community.
do you agree with that? >> as a company, we are committed to making sure -- >> statistically, the outcome that she measures is how she asks you to do better because your outcome is insufficient relative to the size of the community. do you agree with that? mr. pichai: i interpret it as today we do not have enough representation. >> very good. you got her point. now here's the point that i think we're giving. if you measure the outcome such as some of those that were just listed by the gentleman from texas and ohio, what you find is that there is an appearance of bias including the outcome of search engines, even the question of if i pay for advertising and my democratic opponent pays for advertising, if the characteristic of what we happen to search for somehow is
more expensive if you're trying to get conservative and republican, those are outcome events. will you commit to look in the case of potential political bias in all aspects of your very large company to look at the outcome, measure the outcome and see if, in fact, there's evidence of bias using that and then work backwards to see if some of that can be evened to what would appropriately be the outcome. you see my point there. mr. pichai: congressman, i understand. while i am confident we do not approach our work with political bias, i think it is important we look at outcomes and make sure there is no evidence of bias. >> for most of my adult life, there have been laws on the book to stop the events that ms. jackson lee speaks of. we have had laws to protect minority communities. we have had laws to protect against segregation and bias.
and yet there are measurements that are still being used including we create districts that are dedicated to minorities in this country under federal orders because of a history or a measurement of outcome. i would ask you to commit to measure and when you find an outcome that's inconsistent with that which would be ordinaryily predictable, we are two parties relatively tied in the outcome of elections on a global -- on a national basis. if that outcome doesn't come out similar, then you have the evidence to work backwards and see if, in fact, policies can be found which are causing that artificially. which by the way, might include
an overzealous liberal crowd that spends more time trashing republicans than vice versa. that might be what you find, but unless you look at the outcome, you're always going to say we seem to be fair, but the jout come measured by my colleagues will not work out. >> i think is a valid point. >> you have talked about turning off location and other data location. there are two things i am talking about. can you commit as you go through generation 15, 16, 17 of your software, to improve the transparency in the tools to teach people how to protect their privacy? how to offload data? turn off things they might not want to have? in this area will do better. the company has grown a lot. there is complexity.
it is something we can do better. we do show clear dashboards for the data. we want to make it easy for average users to navigate the settings. that is something we are working on. >> each time i turn it on and off, there is no simple place to go to find out how to do it. i agree you have a dashboard and most don't. an article from the wall street 2018, placedber 8, in the record, in that article it talks about the user data breach. it also makes us aware there is a memorandum at google. that has been requested by multiple members of congress. would you commit to provide that memorandum to congress so that we can know more about internal workings related to the breach? mr. i'm committed to
following up with your office. >> chair recognizes the gentleman from tennessee for five minutes. >> thank you. i'd like to follow-up on what mr. issa was talking about. i use your apparatus often. i don't understand all the different ways you can turn off the locations. so many different things. have you considered having an online school people to go to with a google rep and you could log in a mask questions or have -- and not like comcast or you get put on hold and find somebody can understand. something easy to talk somebody? mr. pichai: we are constantly
looking for better ways to do it. one of the areas is giving online tutorials. specifically looked at that but i'm happy to take that feedback. we remind people of privacy checkups and what and through. around 20 million people come to us every day. >> but you don't have individuals i find it's easier to talk to somebody and go this is what i want. the other thing is frustrating if you can look into that i think would help. privacy is something many people are interested in but sometimes it is difficult to use the device to get that. you said you can turn off your location history but still your ip address will track your information. is that correct? mr. pichai: many internet companies do collect and sometimes store id information. for example we need to know the language -- there may be some .ocation information there
location turns out to be in the fabric of how people use internet today are you it is important there is legislation in the area. we want to simplify things but it is a complex area. >> in recent months authoritarian regimes, vladimir putin's regime in russia which seems to have first place near the heisman winner with that, have used bots to manipulate you --results >> the individual who has provide us with a poster will remove that immediately come the .oom can we have the doors closed? capitol police will explore the gentleman out of the building -- will escort the gentleman on the building.
seconds.20 more >> without objection. regimes, usedan bots to manipulate youtube algorithms by piling up tens of thousands of artificial dislikes to their videos. by authoritarian regimes but so far no systemic solution has been found. youtube is the main platform for democratic and human rights activists in countries where the mainstream media are controlled by the government. this results in youtube algorithms putting up barriers to the distribution of such content. what is youtube and google doing to address this problem? mr. pichai: youtube and google are committed to freedom of expression. we want to be a platform by which people can get their we were calledd
to do that. i'm not sure if all of the specifics in that case. in general we operate around the world. part of the reason we do it is so that we can be a platform by which people can get their messages out including human rights activists. >> there are way bots could influence the algorithm by going in and disliking or whatever? mr. pichai: we deal with spambots and bots of many kinds. we worked hard to make sure we can counter. we respond strongly. >> i heard on television this morning msnbc said you have almost 200 lobbyists and it's amazing that they all look like themould i talk to one of and ask them to get with you on this issue?
mr. pichai: we will have our office follow-upmr. pichai:. .> msnbc would be a news wouldn't that be in your news? i punch news, this weekend i was on msnbc four times and yet first thing that comes up is the daily caller. not exactly a well-known group. then breitbart news. the memphis business new -- it looks like you are overly using conservative news organizations on your news. i would like you to look into overuse of conservative news organizations -- let me know about that i would appreciate it. mr. pichai: i can assure you we do this in a neutral way and we do this based on the specific keywords. what we are able to assess the
most relevant -- >> it's hard to fathom being on msnbc four times and there's more content on breitbart news and msnbc. that might say something about -- i'm not going to say that. scary. thank you. >> the chair recognizes mr. jordan for five minutes. this company lead without political bias and work to ensure that our products operate that way. iliana merlot is google's head of multicultural marketing. does ms. merlot do good work? mr. pichai: i'm not very familiar with her work but she is an employee of global and we are proud of our employees. >> the day after the 2016 election in a four-page email she wrote about her work with the latino vote she said even
send our gave our efforts i shout out. mr. pichai: she was referring to my communication around nation -- around translation. said we pushed to get out the latino vote with our features. a few lines down she qualified that sentence and set we pushed to get out the latino vote with our features in key states. she cites the states florida and nevada. near the end in a similar sentence she says we supported partners like -- to pay for rides to the polls in key states. i want to analyze those sentences. we pushed it out the latino vote with our features in key states likeotoorted v partners
latino. is it fair to say that the we refers to google? mr. pichai: we are concerned withmr. pichai: allegations like that -- >> is it fair to say that we refers to the company, google? mr. pichai: as google we would not participate in partisan efforts. partners to pay for rides and polls -- rise the polls in key states. how were they getting that done? , accordingt done by to your head of multicultural marketing, by altering features were configuring features in such a way and for paying for rides for people to get to the polls. is that fair to say what those sentences are talking about? mr. pichai: we found no evidence that there were any activity
like that from google. >> so she's not telling the truth? mr. pichai: for sure we did not find supporting evidence of such activity. >> she said she paid for the ride to the polls and configure features -- water participation encouraging people to participate in election process. so far those sentences are just fine but then three words at the end of each sentence that cause me concern. we pushed to get out the latino vote with our features in key states. suddenly it gets political. we supported partners to pay for rides to the polls in key states . that makes everything different. why? why did google configure its
features and pay for rides to the polls to get out the latino vote only in key states? we found no evidence to substantiate those claims. >> so your head of multicultural marketing, you praised her work, gave her a shout out, was lying when she said you were trying to get a the latino vote? mr. pichai: this is what users look to us for where to find your nearest polling place, what the hours their open. >> what i'm asking is why did you only do it in key states? mr. pichai: we didn't do any such activity as google in any of these key states. >> did you push to get out the latino vote in all state?
mr. pichai: as google we do not have goals to get any particular segment. we don't participate in our tips -- inst in partisan partisan activities. we provide users with --ormation >> your head of multicultural marketing said you were pushing to get out the latino vote, paying for reince to the polls for the latino vote only in key states and you are saying that's not accurate. mr. pichai: that's right. up?o she just made it wrote this him out to your top executives and it's not true? mr. pichai: i'm happy to follow up. employees today do their own -- >> i want the real answers right here in this committee. mr. pichai: we've looked into it -- >> i would say the two most populous states for latinos with the california and texas. did you pay for people to go to the polls in california and texas?
mr. pichai: we as a company did not have any effort to push out votes for a particular demographic. that would be against principles. we participate in a nonpartisan way and we think it's important. >> i know i'm over time but i think it's interesting their head of multicultural marketing rights and email the day after talksection where she about 71% of the latino votes vote for hillary but that was not enough and she talks about paying for rides to the polls in and the head of the company says that's not accurate. >> time with the gentleman has expired. the witness may answer the question. mr. pichai: we are happy to follow up with the congressman. we have not found any evidence to substantiate those allegations. >> the she still work for the company?
mr. pichai: it's my understanding that she does. >> jarrett denies the gentleman from georgia. of thisyou ever heard email you were just asked about? mr. pichai: not at that time. later when there was concern expressed around it. >> is it true that she sent that email or could that be fake news? [laughter] mr. pichai: my understanding is emails were sent with the congressman referred to. your -- google did not configure its features to get out the latino vote in key states? mr. pichai: we don't build partisan features or features with any goals affecting
elections. we reach users across the united states signing time we do these efforts informing people where widely, these are used across entire countries. >> google's collection and use of consumer data and its record of protecting consumers and their data are appropriate areas of congressional oversight. sadly, this committee has neglected consumer protection as an area of oversight, choosing instead to squander their oversight responsibility and use its power so as to holy google and other technology companies into minimizing negative news and comments about republicans and the trump administration. disclosed thatle
private profile data of over 52 million users may have been exposed. i understand your phasing out the google plus platform but many americans trust your email platform and countless other products with their personal information and you admit that you collect private data for use in advertising. how can we be assured considering this new breach of consumers is safe with you? mr. pichai: an important question. this is why we undertake these efforts. we operate important products with gmail. billing software inevitably has bugs associated. we undertake a lot of efforts to find bugs.
we rooted out every fix it. that is how we make systems better. the biggest area of risk received for our users is around security. an account gets hacked or something. we work hard. gmail is an area -- we have advanced protection program. it allows a second layer of protection to your account. much harder to get your account misappropriated in anyway. >> yesterday the new york times published an in-depth investigation of your location tracking applications. google has said it does not sell data but as a corporation deeply involved in the business of consumer data used in
advertising your company benefits from applications that track consumer locations. how do you differentiate what google does with geo-locational data from companies with applications that track and so the data? mr. pichai: as a company we do not sell user data. that would be against our principles. >> how do you differentiate what datao with the geolocation from companies that do sell the data? how do you differentiate what you do with that data versus what these applications that do track and sell the data do? we would never sell user data. we do give consumers preferences about heather data is used for
advertising -- about how their data is used for advertising. type on the keywords you that is where we get most information. actually change the use of personal data for advertising as well. >> my time expires. do you believe google has done enough to be transparent in its data collecting policies? mr. pichai: we always think there is more to do. an area which will be an ongoing effort for us. transparentt very and encourage users to check it out. every day 20 million users check. around 170 million users to check it. we will continue in this area. >> thank you. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas for five minutes. >> thank you.
i have an iphone. if i move from here and go over there and sit with my democrat friends which would make them real nervous, does google track my movement? , does googlephone know that i have moved here and moved over to the left? it's either yes or no. mr. pichai: there may be a service which you opted in to use. >> so google knows that i'm you make $100 million a year. you ought to be able to answer .hat question does google know that i am moving over there and sitting next to mr. johnson which would make him really nervous. it's yes or no. mr. pichai: without knowing more details. >> if i walk over there and sit next to mr. johnson and carry my
phone does google know that i was sitting here and then i moved over there. no?or i am shocked you don't know. i think google obviously does. are you familiar with the general data protection by the european union?we work over 18 months on it. mr. pichai: >> the european union is protecting the right of -- we do not have such a law in the united states? are you familiar with resolution 1039 resolution i introduced that would basically adopt some of the european practices in america and give consumers in the united states the right of privacy. i familiar with that
legislation? it is ironic to me that the united states, supposed to be the country in the world that protects privacy and individuals more than anybody else, we are playing second fiddle to the .uropeans to be the seems current law. i think most americans don't know all things this phone can do. one thing you can do is disseminate information we are unaware of the all different people. united states should change the rules so that we as consumers opt in otherwise that
information is not disseminated. what does google view as objectionable? mr. pichai: if you're referring , we publisholicies fraudulentou to like activity, child safety -- >> what are extreme political views? you find those objectionable. what are those extreme views? mr. pichai: we think it is important. google and youtube are platforms -- >> what are those which train political views you find objectionable? we don't define any as mr. pichai: -- >> so you let all political views come on even objectionable liberal views? mr. pichai:mr. pichai: we have
areas defined as not allowed on our platforms. on youtube, their definitions around hate speech but it's defined as speech which have a primary goal of inciting hatred or violence towards groups of people. >> you would agree hate speech has many definitions depending on who is doing the defining. mr. pichai: we understand it's a subjective area. we define it and publish our definition of it. >> do you believe google has been brought out here -- is biased? mr. pichai: it is important to me we approach -- >> do you believe google is biased? mr. pichai: no. not another approach. >> it is a private company. it is not the government. google is not the government. you want the government to regulate google?
mr. pichai: we are subject to a lot of regulation across many different agencies. >> but you are not subject to the definition of what bias is by the government coming in and saying google cannot be bias and we the government are going to decide what is biased and what is not? you're not subject to that philosophy? i hope we don't get to that point where government tries to come in and regulate what bias is. this is an independent free company. google, to me it is a part of it doing business like any media outlet. it can say what it wants. i've gone over time, mr. chairman. i have other questions like to submit for the record. welcome toleman is join me on this side and switch parties at any time. >> getting a little late in his career.
>> that's right. >> i will just respond to the gentleman from texas and say we will be submitting questions in , including the ones from the gentleman from texas and we would ask you answer them promptly. the chernow recognizes the gentleman -- the chair now recognizes the gentleman from florida. >> i believe platform should do a better job of preventing said rhythms cook our lives canove magnify our worst human tendencies. mark zuckerberg said his company is responsible for the content on its platform. we have to stand for the content of our platforms. we cannot just say we are a platform.
will you come in front of our committee affirmed that google is accountable for the content on your platforms? mr. pichai: we have a commitment ,o provide trustworthy high-quality information. >> i will take that as a yes. i want to return to the privacy discussion. i went to do a privacy check. it is quite good. i want to talk about what it does and does not do. perhaps you can help me work through this. my settings now on google, my device information is paused, voice and audio activity is paused, my youtube search history is paused. that said, it does not mean you're not collecting data on me does it? mr. pichai: for those categories if you pause it --
>> overall it does not mean you've stopped collecting data. you are still collecting data on search, on ways that can help advertising and help provide the services you provide. , i wanted tos focus on the new york times article about what they refer to as the mobile location industry. that datand the way is collected when you talk on your website about searching google, getting directions for maps, you collected data to make services work letter. i understand that. data is also collected to use in advertising. according to the new york times estimated $21g an billion this year. it talks about your company and facebook dominating the mobile
ad market but also lead in location-based advertising and it says google receives precise information from apps that use its and services. can you explain that to me? ifthe new york times saying there is any company that uses your ad service is not given -- given the dominant place to play in advertising, if there's any company that uses your data that theyt collect would also be available to you? ultimately the data they collect on me is the question of asking. haveichai: we as a company commitments to you. we view data as belonging to users. we don't transmit personal data to advertisers. --i'm asking about the data
the new york times said google receives precise location information from apps that use it and service. information about the locations that i travel from companies who use your advertising service? mr. pichai: i want to make sure i understand the specifics. let's say it is for a restaurant we normally do it in location near you so it is relevant for you. you have an option to turn the setting off. we would be -- it is not coming from the company to us. >> that is what i want to understand. it a company uses your advertising of their location sharing continue? times talks about information is not tied to someone's phone number.
your personal information seems email,me, i -- name, billing information. that may be personal information and you treat that the way we would expect, there's a lot of information about where we are at any moment that can as the times points out allow someone with access to the raw data including employees or clients to identify a person without their consent by following someone, pinpointing a phone, can you use the locations that people go to identify the back into who a person is? could someone else do the same thing? mr. pichai: we would not do that without consent. to answer your question i'm happy to follow up. say high level i would location is turning out to be an important area.
important we give location protection for our users. we want to lead the way as a company. >> the time of the gentleman has expired. the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. marino. >> thank you for being here, all of you. , youe start out by saying and the office of your company, particularly you, as you are at the helm, have a tremendous ,esponsibility, to employees toward your stockholders, your company, providing jobs. a much you also have more awesome responsibility to the american people to make sure you educate accurately, to make
sure you stay in the middle-of-the-road. because, i've learned over the years as a prosecutor and more so as a member of there is a lot of people who believe everything that is put out by anyone. are a 10-second society now, and we can't hold conversations, we can only read 10 or 12 words and that is supposedly the gospel. you have a responsibility to see that the truth is out there. that's put out by anyone. society now.cond what a right and what is wrong, i, for one, the less government in my life, the better. on you and ng
companies like your company to those lines because if the federal government ever regulate you o aren't going to like it. i have a concern, concerning china. left the chinese marketplace due to concerns over censorship and how the chinese government was to data.gaining access i'm interested in what has hanged since 2010 and how working with the chinese government to censor results, a part of google's core values. question?erstand my >> congressman, right now, there a no plans for us to launch search product in china. e're in general always looking to see how best, as part of our try hard to to provide users with information.
we always have evidence based on we've operated, and us reaching out and giving more users more information has very important impact and we feel that calling but right now there are no plans to launch in china. to the extent that we ever, we that, ih a position like will be fully transparent policymakers here and engage in consulting widely. understand you have no lans to enter into any agreements with china concerning used in china?s >> we currently do not have a --rch product there so >> do you plan on having a isn't product there? >> right now, there are no plans a search product in china. way.et me ask it this to n the future you decide do that, what information would
share with the chinese users, other er countries? any time we look to operate in a country, we would, you know, we look at what the conditions are to operate. there are times in the past, we debated the conditions to wide e, and we employer a range of possibilities. currently there is an effort only internally. we're not doing this in china, ut i'm happy to come back and be transparent if we plan something there. >> i'm sure you are aware that thousands, here are maybe hundreds of thousands of that the chinese government has on computers trying to hack into the u.s. and any other countries. the same thing is taking place to a lesser degree in russia. simply because of the population.
what can google do to help that if not eliminate countries from hacking into countries? faced company, we've significant attacks before. at night.keeps me up it's something we invest a lot over the years. law enforcement because we rely on them, but effort and ehensive it something we take seriously. > i yield back, but remember the responsibility that i think you have. > recognize the gentleman from california, ms. bass for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chair and for coming today. >> i want to follow up on some uestions that you mentioned earlier, specifically the use of bots and troll farms by russia. wanted to know if you could be more specific in terms of how going to respond? in other words, will you expand
our staff or modify the algorithms in an effort to identify and eradicate the trolls, and then in terms of the flooding that takes place ith bots, what specifically will you do, to address it? >> this is something we actually face across a set of products that we do today. ad systems, be it our search products, and be it on.ube and so o in general, we've built systems over the years that had traffic patterns and mitigate that. collaborate with others, law enforcement has been very regard. to us in this >> so if you take the example of the bots, where you have, i saw where there was one day, 125 dislikes, and the next were 84,000. how do you respond in a ituation like that, where it's obviously, it done purposefully?
me see. anipulation -- either we get reports or we determine in our systems spikes which make it it's not humans doing it. > you have staff dedicated to looking at that? >> yeah. algorithms, a.i. staffing -- we have upped our staffing specifically over the past couple of years so we do it comprehensively. >> so anticipating what took lace in 2016, happening again, and this is specifically what russia did to ferment racial tensions in the you're tates and how responding to that, where they called for fake protests, either african-americans to turn out to protest something that or to have white
supremacists -- what is google respond to that? saw with respect to russia -- on our app platforms. n general we're not a social networking company across the products we do. we particularly aren't connecting groups of people and that's not how google mainly so we haven't seen that kind of activity on our vigilant and we're happy to share any findings which come through as we look into it more. i wanted to ask you a couple of questions about online raders of color, where mainstream media outlets often ail to cater to communities of color, or resolve lingering issues of under revelation or misrepresentation. soughtties of color have out digital mediums to tell their stories and in some cases his has been very successful and it's led to larger networks
recognizing the talent. it's given them a platform -- a platform to voice hat is otherwise would be silent. i wonder what policies google might be putting into place to that the voice of online expand?s can >> there is a lot of community outreach programs. other ner with organization who is do important work in this area, but today, at youtube, you do see a platform. diversified. it's part of the strength of the platform and the reach it provides. >> could i get the information about your outreach specifically who you do outreach to? that would be very helpful. >> i would be happy to do that. time to ack my representative deutsche. >> thank you. wanted to finish up. again, appreciate you being here, i wanted to follow up on that the chairman started our hearing with and
a question about information collected by google. report that he referred to talked about information collected android phones. -- even if those phones aren't on wifi or the on, is that isn't something that happens? > congressman, it's not clear to me when there is no connectivity how it would happen. --we haven't >> i'm sorry. able to en't been substantiate those specific findings. >> you're looking into the though?s, >> the scenario, our goal is to, we're trying to help users with want.formation they today there are many cases. users give us feedback. part of what we're trying to do, they want to be location aware. >> i understand. you're not aware of data
being collected while the phone not connected to either a cell service for a wifi? > there may be specific instances, for example, gps may be working. it depends -- the question is, if that information, if that's possible, if you learn that it love for to i would you share that with us. if you learn that's happening, the information then when the customer turns on his or her that ervice, if information is then sent back to your company, on their data obviously of people have limited data plans. when you look at this, if you whether, whenk at the information is sent back to the extent that it happening some people cause to go over their limits thereby costing them more on their monthly bill that. be helpful information as well. >> that's good feedback. you, mr. chairman. >> the gentleman from georgia. you.ank look, there is an understanding,
i think it's come across from that i here, saying sort of have lived by for most life.adult reality.on is time, there oint in are several perceptions going on about what's being stored and and the t being stored data and privacy issue and the effect or outcomes of how are made. one of the other issues, not ust google itself but also youtube there is another issue i will not touch but probably will do some questions on is the content and the issue of how that is stolen in many could be how that worked on. those issues we'll deal with. >> i want to go through several questions. it's been discussed a lot about what you collect and don't collect. will be few questions yes or no. it's simply what do you collect okay?ow do you collect it, in dealing with google, do you
or do you not collect, identify name, age, and address, yes or no? yes, inreate an account, using an account, yes. > specific search history when somebody types something into a search bar? >>? f you have search turned on, yes. >> identifiers turned on -- >> depending on the situation, it, yes.be collecting >> gps signals, wifi cardinals, beacons?h >> it would depend on the specifics, but there may be situations. gps, yes? >> yes. >> do you listen to conversations when using voice products? we give an option to turn on off. >> if a person didn't know -- --ce and conversation >> when they initiate with it okay google. contents of emails and google documents? >> we store the data but we read or look at your email. >> do you have access to them?
>> as a company we have access yes.hem, >> so you could? i'm not asking, do you or don't, 'm saying you could, though, there is a possibility? >> we have clear established policies on how we would do that data. >> and your policies, speaking of that, has changed 28 times including eight times since 2016.y so i think the policies, you know, and this is why i'm asking questions. is there any type orchies gin of data which google would refer to that it's not already like hippa?ylaws >> there are many categories of information today, we're about anything to do with health data. >> those are covered under those. anything that you would not of the two that i named which are generally ccepted as things you cannot collect? >> there are many things which we don't collect, for example, we don't collect, could you have google home, we wouldn't collect conversations unless you specifically asked us to. question, we
definitely are very careful and minimize the data that we need provide the service back to our users. >> we'll get to that in a second. how long do you keep the data that you've captured? >> we xwv you the choice whether you want to store the data or not. if you store it, from the time store it for we you. > all of this that's been discussed, how many would you say, you've made an interesting point. ow many people actually understand that they can off?ally cut this >> we remind people, 20 million people come and make changes of these settings. 95% of searches, you control this in a very large way, i would say the vast not the most sophisticated, some are not as amiliar with this as some who work in the industry or around the industry would. that be a fair statement? that?uld you repeat >> earlier it was said
identifiers such as age, name and address are treated differently. true, how are you treating them differently and is the same data collection process still done? how is it treated differently than maybe some of these others mr. oke about prosecution deutsche's discussions, such as locators and things like that? different controls for that. for example, for location we give specific controls for your activation. we give specific controls. e're trying to meet users' expectations so, for example, some people may want their be available to but they don't want -- we give users.ices to our >> one of the general dynamics in the tech ose industry is data -- the issue hat i had in march of this googlee downloaded quote takeout. 5.5 gigabyte. names, not just a few addresses. number one why, does google need
all of this information? that in the fact that 86% of your revenue comes rom advertising so we know you manipulate the data in some ways. can you explain what you do to data which is generally an accepted standard practice among those who collect data? is, but -- for example, if we're providing you g-mail which we have done for 15 years that data, we need to store it for expect us to.hey so we're trying hard to match users' expectations. need, our data for advertising, as i said earlier, a keyf it comes from just word that you type. we need minimal data. give you options to turn ad data off. we give users the experience they want. >> i'm going to go back to where i started. perception is reality. the amount of data being collected, how it's used, how ties basically the flow
of information that you have and the monday money-tization -- something we'll continue to process, but most people deal with this, i'm not sure in the broad scope clicking yes,es that's society in which some of these things and especially mobile, which was not dealt into further, will open up a much larger situation simply monday st ti data, but being used in legal proceedings, they on't understand exactly what's going on. with that my time has expired. gentlemen from cicilline.-
>> it's become increasingly seer cycle is fundamentally threatened by the dominance of a few power companies. tin venter of the world wide web made this point clear in an open letter earlier this year. we warned that the open internet has been compressed under the weight of a few dominant have the ability to harm competition and control deas and opinions that are shared online. i strongly support an open that is ized internet gatekeepers.ful with that in mind i'm deeply about google's discriminatory conduct for internet search. findings, google has harmed the competitive process by favoring its own services over rivals, by de listing competitors' content. first question, as a proponent of internet openness, ending the commit to
discrimination against rivals and other businesses through products? >> congressman, with respect to, you know, i disagree with characterization. we provide users with the best experience that they are look looking for. information.vant that's how we approach our product. >> but does that include the use of discriminatory practices? is that part of your business model? definitely not. and in the european commission, we're appealing that decision. they looked at shopping as amazon ry they excluded from the space so the specifics matter here. we're interested in providing sers with the best information they are looking for be it from competitor, any or that's what we're interested in doing. >> i strongly believe in tructural antitrust enforcement. i also plan to work with the federal trade commission to to direct islation this type of discriminatory conduct online l. google commit together with congress on legislative
roposals designed to ensure that online firms with significant market power are not ble to harm the competitive process due to discriminatory conduct? > we would be happy to engage construct actively on legislation in any of these areas. >> thank you. i would like to turn to the of china. mr. pichai, operating has onment in china deteriorated with respect to urveillance -- and ance and censorship. concerns about google planning to reenter the chinese market with an app that would have to comply with strict censorship by the ents imposed government. the environment has deteriorated. you're launching an app in that
environment which would seem to inconsistent with google's recently launched a.i. rinciples which say you will not design or employ technologies whose purpose contra convenience widely principles of international law and human rights. it's hard for me to imagine you in a chinese market under the current government framework and main a ommitment to universal values such as freedom of information and personal vie have acy. any employees are currently having product on this chinese project, and if not when did end?e >> we have undertaken an internal effort but right now plans to launch service in china as i said earlier. current ere any discussions with any member of the chinese government on launching this app? in discussions on launching a search product in china. >> are there any conversations chinese ers of the government about this? > this effort currently is an
internal effort. i'm happy to be transparent. launching ps towards a product in china. > who at google is leading dragonfly effort? >> our efforts are around search.g it's undertan by our search teams but these are distributed. it's limited to an internal effort currently. a will you rule out launching tool for salon and censorship in china while you're c.e.o. of google? >> congressman, i commit to engaging one of the things which is important to us as a company, stated mission of providing users with information, and so we always, think it's our duty to explore possibilities, to give information, and i have the commitment, but as i said earlier, we'll be very and we engage widely. > this goes beyond google and
beyond china. rising andritarianism the world, when governments are its ownppression toward people, we need to assert moral leadership because other that the will look leadership. i would ask you to submit for the record the letter of 15 sent to mr. d i pichai, his response, and a human from more than 50 and civil rights organizations opposing the launch of a engine google search for the chinese market and i would just note, mr. chairman, this for mission of unanimous consent, the ngo letter reports and i quote, government is actively promoting its modful of censorship and surveillance world.the many governments look to china as an example and major industry leaders, such demands will likely cause many other regimes to follow china's lead provoking race to the bottom in standards.
it would also undermine efforts by google and other companies to resist government surveillance requests in order to protect use,' privacy and security 'em boldning state and intelligence and security agencies to demand greater access to user data. the implications -- >> i would ask that they be may. objection, so ordered > the chair recognizes the florida, mr. -- >> thank you, mr. chair man. an you ever launched investigation into whether as impacts experience? we look into them. launched u expressly an investigation into political
bias of your employees? our employees, you said? >> yes. you know, we take any llegations across any issue seriously and we look into them. > you said to me yesterday, political bias, you haven't lost those investigations because there are so many redundancies so much peer review that that would not be possible. s that still your testimony today? >> congressman, the way our processes work, if you need to algorithms,e in the there are several steps testing. user >> your employees can get together and chat in groups, right? google groups? yes, they can. >> one of those groups is the group, right? >> we have employees taking part in conversations, yes. looked into the conversation into the resist group? no.congressman, >> is it -- does -- is that a
tries to you, that there is a group? >> i'm not aware whether such a not.p exists or >> if there were a group is that the type of thing would you want to look into? we have clear policies around how our products are built. >> if there is a resist, you movement is a movement built to resist the movement of president trump. if there is a resist movement company, where groups of employees, not one, are getting together to engage time course on company with company infrastructure, does that strike you as the type of thing would you want to investigate? of ongressman, i'm not wear any such group, nothing like that has been brought to my attention. happy to follow up. >> mr. chairman, i seek to enter into the record a document from a google rts to be employee which is part of the google group resist. ordered. >> i'm also reading now from the
discussion that occurred over and google ads and i'm quoting from one of your employees who reportedly posted, anybody want to hol their knows and look through breitbart.com for hate speech. would someone need to hol their nose to do that work. freedom of expression and we don't stand or condone these things. our very clear about policies as to how we build our and we serve our publishers that way. launched an en't investigation on any of your employees because it would take a group of employees to engage those er conduct and if groups of employees are engaging in discussion on your platform, and if one of those platform is resist, and if on that resist movement, on that site or any other sites in your you'reand
first of all i want to accept that so employees and this issue and the systeme and our product will be able to do that. how can i have confidence when employeesknow your are getting together on your company's infrastructure to talk about political activity. >> our systems are designed. be bad.ed there would because you know, for security externally and in turnly at any given moment we assume that somebody may be asking in bad faith. that is how we designed our systems with protection in place. we need to do that for security of the systems. and that hois you we designed our systems with protections en place. that for security of systems and the first aprop. is thatur assumption
people can act in bad faith, why not launched am investigation into the communitycations that seem to indicate a desire to suppress conservative voices. >> we would conduct am investigation. >> ok. that is good hear. the "wall street journal reported" the workers were tweaking search terms to frame the discussion over the travel ban. you perform an investigation into that alligation. >> we looked into it. at, yous no attempt know anything to influence the products. times during important news events important during even like hurricanes, et a set of tools, crisis response tools. during the department of security and looking to put out information because confusion around the event so discussion around things like that, too. >> well, i would strongly the cray sisf
response tools that you use is an investigation into the em degrees on resisting the trump presidency, the trump agenda and then the conservative outlets. i yield back, mr. chair. >> yes,. >> thank you, mr. chairman. welcome. i rep isn't the congressional be the san francisco bay area where a number work at was hoping we could dive into some concerns i hear i hearem and but also from constituents just have .oncerns about privacy privacyd a national law? off theessman, i am view given how important privacy is, we're better off with, you a single. of >> would you mind moving the microphone in front of your har you better? >> thank you.
>> thank you. the opinion we are more data with production framework, which for users and that would be good to do. >> you know in europe last year implemented the general data known as gdpr. were for conceals to know, to understand and consent, there wasyou agree framework in the united states to have a national rife sy law the critical framework to have no understand or consent? so i do see value in aligning
camp. >> mr. pichai, on your platform, on facebook's platform, on twit ear platform, money was provided from russia addresses where. what has google done to make again? doesn't happen just last week, secretary mattis confirmed that russia continued the attack on the democracy in most recent midterm elections? we invested a, lot. we did see limited proper , you know,d obviously, we learned from that. very transparent with the findings. leading up to the last couple of year, any time we have found know, weivity, you disclose it. we are constantly evolving the rack is as we do. but you know, i do say, our soorts have been successful, far. google has two election cycles. is never enough.
more. constantly doing >> mr. pichai that seeing an bewer on result pages could useful. you know, what is 25 times 15 google spitting out 375 that is useful. but today, you know, if my wife was to search for pediatrician in california, and instead of the most the most relevant information from across the web according to google or any mommy wife would see map that is powered by google's eco testimony of local reviews and in response to google put its own results ahead of competitors rank algorithm believes it should be ranked higher. certainas told international forces that local search rules come from which ised index distinct. i was hoping today you could clarify for me. possible tohnically
compare local business content that collects against that by third partyed services using a page rank like quality store. we employ a know, lib arif signals am we're treensed in providing users to to user feedback so as aures you could be on the mobile limited.h you could be a busy parent and checking for information and trying to fin a doctor because kid is sick and so we're looking to see how we can get to you asmation quickly as possible. that this is case which drives and ifduct development that information is available from other company we make it times we and there are are able to provide that information because we have better information and we dontly looking and that to the best of our ability. >> thank you. i yield back. the chairen, recognizes the gentlemen from louisiana. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. pichai, we want to thank you appearing today and taking
time to answer our our questions. isnk you and ai agree it important for the company and for the people to have this public hearing to get this the record so to speak. to so as we discussed in the office yesterday. colleagues and i have fierce advocates we're of freed guardians speech and the free marketplace. we do not want to impose burdensome government regulation on those industry. however we do believe we have thatmative duty to ensure the engine that processes as much as we said today, 90% of searches is never used to unfairly sensor conservative viewpoints or suppress political views. you are challenged today and in the days ahead is to convince members of this body that google and the industry peers will implement the own safeguards and solutions to this problem so the toernment doesn't have interren. here's the question. in previous hearings and discuss. the trustedibed
flagger program as source. released aoogle transparent report on content removal which revealed out of the 7.7 million automated flag and reprev as from the platform 7% of thatund content was removed before it received any views are the public. here is a question. how does google ensure that automatedmoved in the process is not merely because of fill low sof call or political differences? >> congressman, he is important question as you said. freedom a platform for of eggs pression. we go to great lengths to do that. handle immediatian the clear clears of clearly defined have.es we do have automated systems but we ist-check it to make sure it working as intend and we respond to feedback so you can appeal if removed eroan osly. it is really important toes that late form for a freedom of expression and
areas ande rules on transparent about the clear policies with which we do those things. have spoken a lot about objecttivity. he that is the goal. as you know, alphabets incubator jigsaw introduced. a tool that uses machine learning to filter on-line for toxicity unquote. this to me raises shores of how using's parent kips machine listenerring to filter speech that is use viewed as attacks or the like. when creating a tool like perspective. steps is google taking to consider toxic by subjective reviewers as the program progresses? perspectivean, provided one of the sister organizations jigsaw, it is a for publishers to use. so publishers get to define what they want and acceptable or not. then, that is what the two
provides for hem. the point is valid. i mean we don't want to be in this position of just editorializing publicker content and providing a tool for proved the content on the platforms. u mentioned the appeals process ir hase content proved the material flagged how quarterbacking does that appeals process work? review period? prioritizes areas which are sensitive. for example, areas like terrorism is something we have higher up in the cue but resource and the goal is to do that as soon as possible but sometimes it could be a matter of howevers. areas around the copyright, we have complicated. canave a system which we respond right away to copyright owners so it is a constant work in progress. the committee's last hearing with google miss juniper downs i raise the case of
greening freedom being removed reported bay trusted flagger on youtube. the flagging organization was poverty law center which has infamous reputation radicalg, i would say left organization and that opposes conservative viewpoints? criteria does google use when using trusted flagger such aso third parties the plc. wantnow, today, we first to clarify one thing. they can flag content for us to review and be reviewed flat content. it is mostly used by law enforcement and many nonprofits and in areas important areas child safety, terrorism and so on. so southern law center is a trusted flagger. people can register. last week we checked they never theged single video on platform and we have reached up to a wide varied of organization including organizations that be
happy to take them to add, you organizations. >> appreciate that. we need a little objecttivity i lead to. >> gentlemen, recognize the gentlemen from california. mr. chair. this is now the fourth hearing in a series of ridiculous hearings on a free speech of internet companies. a significant portion of this timeng was a waste of because the first amendment individuals and corporations, free speech rights. now, there are things that unrelated to speech that i disagree. when it comes to search algorithms your prior tiezation, what videos with you a don't show protects you. will ask you a series of questions. some of them are fairly bass ek. i apologize. i peel like i have to educate some of my colleagues in how it feel free answer yes or no and my first question is, we here on the committee or the and google is a
corporation, correct? no.or >> yes. >> the first amendment limits what government can do and content of speech. i it does not limit google. have to follow corporate laws and other laws. you andr those laws, your board have a few jubbary the shareholders, correct. yes. >> one of the ways that google whenates a profit is consumers use your search engine and watch videos and some of the click on ads, they use applications, isn't that one way you generate rov it? >> that is one of the business models. >> and if consumers were not getting the search results they the videosot getting they wanted to see they may start moving to your competitors isn't that right? >> um, every monday in the yes, usersmeetings, have a lot of choices. to interestsrd every week.
>> so let's help you figure out the number one thing they want and cad vitog videos. do you have the absolute right pronot dog and cat videos hp you have the right to do that if to.want isn't that correct? >> congressman, i am not expert. so thank you. when you have another within of the hearings. i did a search on google. for congressman steve scalise he is a republican. the news tab. the first four articles that pretty with generally positive. the first one is from town hall. generally conservative about his book back in the game. second article, also about the game, third ise talking about election rules. fourth is from fox. another positive article about his book back in the game. you don't have a group of people google there sitting there thinking we like steve scalise
so generate positive articles. happening, what is right? am glad to steve scalise record. we don't deal with individual in quireries and view point. programmingn the code does congressman steve scalise show up, set up that right? is right. that now i will do real-time google iarch for very similar term will change one word. steve king.h for will hit the news tab. the first natural pops up is from abc news. it says steve keng's racist immigration talk prompts call for congressional censure. that is negative article. of peoplehave a group sitting there think and trying to modify every time steve king negative up and article appears. that is not happening, right? for anyly operate
inquire where i same set of principles and trying to reflect nor is currently you know newsworthy, a is being discussed about that phrase. >> thank you. so let me just conclude here by stating the obvious. if you want positive search positive things. if you don't want negative search result, don't do negative things. if you are getting bad press result,, bad search don't blame google or facebook or twitter consider blaming yourself. i yield back. >> your time has expired. recognize the gre arizona. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for being here. i don't disagree one point made questioner. say.is easier to in the sense that i think you right torst amendment do what you want to do. you are a private company.
there is very few constraint on the first amendment. although, lots of constraints when we start looking at everything from liable, to to threatening, intimidating, to fire, you know, constraints on the first amendment speech. but you have seen, as we have here today, to say that google doesn't have bias. you personallyid don't have bias and you also implement policies prevent bias and unanimous as well, isn't that true? >> yeah. we work hard to build our products in a way. we are doing it that way. in some respects, we have not heard much discussion about thehuman intersection with creation or ma niplition or of algorithms but there is human interaction with the algorithms andhe you may have artificial do someence that may additional information as it
goes, but originally, it comes humans, right? >> that is right. that how can we be assured foreign adversaries will not use americansorms against or american national interests? >> well, you know, we always that as factor. we we make where sure, you know, the best way we do it when we're building the relay on, youn't know, one personal groups of people to be able to do it. we follow a set of process including test and validation userp we get feedbacks from users and use externally to evaluate. all the 50 states of the u.s. oh graphically distribute them so we get per spects of everyone around the country. >> that doesn't get to the answering my question of securityish assurance. i guess, if ma nape
flation of the information was effective.e or we would, we would not be seeing countries investigating in manipulationy of whether it is others that attempt to ma nip let a the system. be attempts to use our rod dugs and services advertisingrovide products whan we saw in the 2016 election was, you know, limited am proper two accounts related to russia and platforms. >> $4700 i think you said. >> yeah. that is example of the kind of threat we see. you know, something we are work hard to mitigate. i guess i would say looks like you have a policy of do no evil. right? is that fire? i it now it is it isal policy, but know, a statement that is looks like
communicated by us in turnly. have brought up the work that you may or may not be doing in china in a want a of that.tion are you looking to expand in china and coop brate the chinese on a platform release in china? >> to the question is about search. right now no plans to launch china and over the year explode how best we can continue to serve users kin china that is what we're doing. >> are you doing any winning the the data share with the chinese. today we don't operate our services which user data and like google search or gmail in china. so you are telling me nothing at all. >> well, we do provide for ex peal android which is operating system we work with partners world and there are manufacturers around the world including in china. manufacturers but beyond manufacturers any other platform ?se >> we don't have any special
agreements on user data. and. government.e >> that is right. >> ok. >> right. >> ok. >> do you share the data you on vill yips with the united states federal government? with valid law enforcement requests and you processd we we do have and comply. a what is the extent of that? publish aw, we transparency report end which we give in sight has the law we have gotrequests and you know, and our compliance there. question real quickly. may 2016 google barned all ads payday listeners which is effective abay day listener. it banned ads by competitors. that is a normal practice? undertook adn, we policies in a particular area because we saw evidence of we have got in a lot
of feedback and we reacted. app?d you ban your own eye done think google. think one of the sister companies is, you know, has it.stment in that is my understanding. follow up. i am not sure. i would be happy to follow-up. thank you. expired. has >> yes, you are recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairmap. welcome. thank for the testimony today. do you know what frazzle trip is? >> um, i a am not aware of the bits.cific i heard some references about it from my team over the past 24 hours. just learned bitten the washington post this morning and they said an wall a headline a platform for free speech that exploded. in it the article explains the recommendation engine for by googleich is owned correcting.
>> yes. the recommendation engine for recently suggested videos claiming that politician and celebrities and other abusing ore sexually consuming the remains of children often in satanic rite according to watchdog group transparency. site the discredited pizza gate which two years ago lead to a man firing shots into washington, d.c. pizza rereyain search of children he believed were being held as sex slaves by democratic leaders. one recent variation on the theory which is on youtube this claiming the longtime drank hera be a dean blood and conspiracy this ry. the article guess ton describe how this frazzle drip conspiracy some ofver youtube and the frazzle drip clips report to images of clinton
and be a dean committing crimes thespeaking of invoking death penalty one video viewed 77,000 time and remains on-line says has a voiceover that will the children become the dessert at the conclose to meal? , um, and this is one example that they use. extreme right and paranoid conspiracy groups using youtube to trade their videos and to promote prop did a. what is your company policy on that? you trying to deal with it? >> you know, we are. constantly undertaking it for it to deal well misinformation but you know, we stated policies and we have made lots of prague guess and many of the areas you know over the past years in many areas like ter rim, child safety and so on. look. we're looking to do more you know, and this was a recent but coming and following
up on it and making sure that we ourevaluating these against policies. >> yeah. in the area we acknowledge this is more work to be done. you know? definitely continuing that. videos disdidthe cussed including images offed a buy done this table before restrained children in a hillary with a blood dyed mouth and fangs claiming they drank the blood of their victim. was removed but then another consisting of exact cop video remainedhe on-line and remains on-line. is your basic position that want tosomething you try to do something about but basically there is just avalanche of such material and nothing that can be done and should be buyer be aware or aware when you go on youtube. you know, we do grape well difficult issues. we have to lack at it on media by media basis and clearly so we would need to evaluate whether the specific
medium violates any of the policies and we just have strive to do it for the content. we do get. >> yeah. >> 400 hours of video every minute but it is our responsibility, i think, to make sure you know, youtube is a platform for freedom of but it is responsible and conbutes positively to society. of my colleagues are sup yet about meck negative references to donald trump not clinton or barack obama. obviously one potential traj he try to heckle you into somehow playing favorites with donald trump and republicans that i would be silly and ridiculous takeaway from this. ishe of the other hand there material which is a true public danger you know? to have got a right whatever politics you have. i mean, we could subpoena fox here andbring them in beat them up about how 90% of the reference on fox news to barack obama or hillary clinton are neg if he but the right
under the first amendment and a right to have whatever political got. you have but i think the point a at which seriouses matter of public interests is when your communications vehicle is being 6:00 prop did a that leads to violent events like the guy showing up within the pizza gate consper racy case and so, i guess, my question is, taking that threat seriously? >> well, the time has expired. you can answer the question. >> we have clear policies against hate speech things could hatred orm or violence and clearly taking a lot of action and but i want to acknowledge that it is more wo work, more work to be done and you know, with our growth comes more responsibility and we are committed to doing better as we have more en this area. you, mr. chair. >> all right. now, reck high the young lady from georgia. >> thank you, thank you very for being here. for years the federal trade bipartisan basis
has affirmed that precise islocation information considered highly highly sensitive. consumers must opt in to that. do you agree that? >> yes, i agree with that. >> do you think there is other information prior sy information should bers that required to have opt in versus the. out in like a framework for privacy ofwhich users have a sense transparency, control, and choice, and have clear understanding of the tradeoffs need to make, i think it is very good for consumers and we would support that. ok. speaking of privacy and transparency, i am trying to understand the difference a paying customer for the google suites versus the free gmail so when it comes to data collection. criteria and the rules the same if you are on google versus gmail? a gmail is -- google sweet is
broader suite than g million alone. g have specific policies from male in general and we don't as company we don't read gmail have expressed consent you from. for example. abuse in account. we provide across many stainsance clear policies against that too. >> what i asking is are they different? distinguish between, for example. it to free. it.one use the data for ur collect it? store., we user documents. we document. we store it for the user so they it.access >> and no one in your company has ac sec to it? >> or they do have ac ses if. >> we have policies unless they from theific consent
user for specific situation. would be within of those reasons? >> for exam he'll. you may want to investigate related toactivity the account and we may ask for permission to do that. be a valid law enforcement compliment. we have to come wry. go back to google takeout which my colleague from georgia asked about earlier. i would say that the average person probably has never heard takeout until recently. when it dith become available? started this effort, you know, as early as over ten years ago. started building for many of our products. we started office in chicago with express goal of providing users with the takeout capabilities and quite unique in work on that as a company. but there is more effort we plan to do that. to it?has access >> this is for users. you decide to, if
stop your gmail account and you providernother e made being able to take the gmail data with you. user.t is for >> but no one from within gooingle are or any other place can come in to google take drought get your information? >> no. it is expressly designed for consumers to take data with them. i understand what it is designed for. practically can get access to it? >> we have very strict limitations on access to it. >> more than just friday going google takeout for karen i am not the only one who has ac nes. >> i am saying you asked about systems. we have policies. employees cannot look at user unless there are set of circumstances which will involve user or legal situations et cetera. >> all right. is it free? take out.
>> data. >> yes, it is free. >> when a person takes data out they want to go through and clean up privacy and they delete, is it really delet aleted or just hidden? >> depending on the service. terminating the account. you delete the data. wewill take some time and communicate that to our systems and get removed but we follow through on that. is deleted it is not hid. it dice letted. >> one last question. embarked on initiative to register people to vote. how did you do that? >> for example during registration windows am you peoplee give po information about where to register. we do these things across for u.s.he users across the all indications are that i a cross the user exercise we do this with of.ess goal how did you do it?
>> did you sen out links? voteru sen out registration forms to people? >> your time expired. you can and the question. >> thank you. >> for example on the google home place we say check the place. as a seusser you can click on it location of the location and the times available. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i yield. >> thank you, mr. chairman. you mr. pichai for coming. i am thrilled you as a company encourage people to vote. i
encourage people to vote. i think we all should do that. i to love selection day as holiday. i have been deeply concerned for some time about employers mandating employers mandating forced arbitration rather than allowing for people to pursue justice. employersople into mandating forced arbitration rather than allowing for people to pursue justice. forcing people into arbitration when theyence perienced a violation of the basic rights i think is a deep and justice and it subjects people who have been vick time i road to further victimization and we have seen research that shows it discouraging people from coming forward to report abuses to begin with. they are successful companies in your field including companies and that havece thrived while for going and and contractstion and clauses and can agree the that eliminating threatens innovation and should be dismissed out of hand. forced arbitration has been a shared priority by me colleagues on this committee as fact that oure ranking member as well as hank johnson, david and i have all legislation to end the practice. and i was very heart inned to ended forcedle arbitration but only in the context of sexual harassment. hope you agree me that upholding people's fundamental right to safety in the workplace and freedom from discrimination whether it is based on gender or orientation or race or relig or any other metric benefits all of us. so i wanted to point out that it is particularly critical for
companies like google to take the spacership in since there are limitations for pursued people to systemwide change through tools like class-action lawsuits. not exclusive is to google and that it extends to many others. but suns are here before the committee today. which has jurisdiction over this issue i want to ask you if you will voluntarily commit to expanding the policy of ending arbitration for any violation of a person's right not just around sexual all ofent but really for your moment years and contractors. for theman, thanks question. it is important area. one thing if i could clarify agreementsrbitration don't require any confidentiality that is in how we have done it. for sexualmentioned harassment. we agree it show be up to the jeep and we give them a choice. looking into this further
it is am area i have gotten so weck from our em heees are reviewing what we could do and you know, i am look, forward consulting and happy to think about more changes here. love to workould with you on. i am think this for people who are listening to this hearing that may not understand this. basically when you sign a contract as we saw with sexual harassment, where some employees don't know what they are signing away but signing away their ability to actually pursue claims in the justice system by going to irced arbitration and so think that this is very, very important. aboutk your point confidentialities important but not the issue here. transparency but about the basic right of somebody to seek access to justice courts. so stage are you at in advancing of ending forced ash trician on the sexual harassment side but in firms of the
process. how do we have a timeline? how do we engage with you to make sure that you endorse our legislation as we move forward the next congolese. >> well, we already -- we changes forac the forced arbitration for giving an option for home iees we're reviewing what area andan do in the definitely happy to have the office follow-up as they are thinking about it to give and committed to look into this more and making changes. >> thank you. issue i wanted to just raise in the last minutes moderating hate speech and this in a number of different ways and we appreciate the work that you have done with youtube and i know we had alex jones in the you arelier buy think know, promoting conspiracy theories that are patently false and result in real harm is a problem. agree the u.n. high come messing the that social media
played a role for example in per pating a genocide and what is google's responsibility to moderate hate speech on your platforms? >> we feel tremendous sense of moderate hate to speech. ifed hate speech as in citing violence or hatred toward groups of people and something which i think we need to take a strick line on and we clearlyted our policies and working hard to make our enforcement better and we got in lot better but not enough and so we are committed. forward to work on that and before which kneeled back take a point of personal privilege to say i was born in the same state as you in ind why leading ad to see you company and continuing to show that immigrants to this country great val in spied of the receipt reck we hear. thank you. i yield back.
>> the chair recognize the gre pennsylvania. you. >> thank you. >> thank you for being here. a appreciated the reference to the opening. greet have you as part of the community there. your company really should be held out as success story for mark's free enterprise system. google has very powerful products and services and there withsaying that goeses great power comes great responsibility. think you realize that. those google engineers believe they have the power influence on .lection do you think google's product and services are powerful enough sway publicn election ifilt an the company wanted to? seeongressman, today, we users getting information from a wide variety of sources and google is a big search.
search is one of the ways in which people get information. they get it. do you think your products are that powerful? >> that is to not the way think about it when we're building the products. we constantly worry about the areas that are doing well and looking to do better and we see a lot of innovation and not just from the around theobally world and we do realize we have a large company and that comes scrutiny and thinks it is important to engage on that. >> you testified about google algorithms work on a way.rtisan and you are confident google does not approach work with any hit call bias. often jaialai the vote and santa clara are a county. anything todo ensure the diversity? >> congressman, we have
communicated clearly to the company that we need to welcome viewpoints from across all sides. are right. you we're based in california and clearly, you know, there is a leaning there but the first year we grew faster wut. withinfornia and california and also have gleams globally and i do see a wide variety of he obedience. when you asked a question about this and the program. said for us to review. who is the us? who is doing view? >> well, we review things with automatedation of our systems and the viewers. these are people who are part. how many people is that? >> how many is it? is it a committee? you know? >> you know, we committed to the of 10,000-ohm people and we do that. there is thousands of people across 24-7 globally
looking at content based on policies. >> google described as with the sames, don't be evil, though right thing him? like to discuss the ideals to reports that google he and we have been talking about china ruleshinese government the people have concern around the gleb for generations and i days ofrecall the early square89 and tiananmen and recent reports about crackdown on muslims, christians, mass incarcerations against people in china should everyoner concern for around the world including your company. google design a row tow type or search end gain kobossed a in sensor content? >> condressman, we have undertaken the effort. >> did you create a prototype bere was a report in the sent that says row tow type for
the censored search engine was .esigned ?> what search could supply we explode. >> how many mop was that project ongoing. >> we had it away for awhile. whale a product taken for and never launched them, too. >> how many people? >> we are working on it? >> estimates in a treatment and project ande on the over time. >> again at one point we had 400 people working on it. eye want to echo what my had said. you are snowe i am glad you are herriment am glad you are here in our country. story. a success this was never even on your
radar. but you dime the country. because this country had that promise throughout. and i want to thank you for being here today. i enlarge you to continue collaborating. thanks. >> your time has expired. you so much, mr. chairman. i am here. thank you so much for being here and enduring all we have heard and seen today. certainlyw, google has significant influence over the des sem nation of to the american people. you have the ability to mold and shape how we think, decisions we but let mewe buy, remind you and others that will w all the greatness has enough problems and we have the approvalthat
is used the service that you provide is a responsible one in your own statement, you said that the american people have the ache to use technology to improve their lives so that tells me google helps to solve problems and not create problems. my concern specifically centers thend the protection of consumers. google season wry not be anything without the consumer's certification of the data and their information and the level andervice that you provide i know we talked a lot today about data collection and how it and if the settings are in place and not collected so understand really starting with the chairman's questions which i saw and opening for us and if a consumer
to collect their data then you do not collect the correct?that >> that is right. >> ok. -- doesdoes google google allow advertisers to sensitive based on factors like race, ethnicity, affiliation? >> currently, we don't have mentioned. >> ok. policy regarding advertisements? >> yeah, we have policies. there.ond we have undertaken significant changes on the platform. we are committed to doing better. represente do everybody, four communities as well as the affluent communities. make sure that the
information that is received in theisk communities protects consumer if you will. same inthey treated the terms of influence versus poor communities? make sure they are? teams do you know, our outreach and the content and you know, the use of product which affects, you know, thes and we do follow up and engage and take action. that again,u do please. >> for example. if there is a specific category know, weuct where you get feedback. maybe they implemented the somect and the effect on minority come fins. we do engage. understand and make changes in the products and the policies. >> so you get feedback. do you do any checking or is comeinformation have to back to you?
you are proactive in terms of looking for those type of vulnerabilities? >> we do both. is more we cane do in being proactive and happy to follow up and understand better and area we are committed to doing well. >> you talked about working with law enforcement i believe you that. maybe four five times. i would like to hear more about the things you do with law enforcement to protect as well and protect electoral process and other things that we should care about. >> if we do this across the library of areas. for example. laws an area we lack to enforcement for guidance. areas like safety, it is an area actively collaborate soh law enforcement agencies fraud, mall which are ash and depending on the area went gage the effort wes are
trying to do and the opioid crisis is a good example of the of work.re doing a lot >> what do you think he is the main areas where google could better help the consumer? eye always got protect. i always think, you know, privacy is an area where we it is a fact. we have done a lot for the users over this years and it is area where expectations are constantly evolving and we are and area we'reve committed to doing better and i want took knowledge there is is never done it and something we are committed. >> again thank you mr. chairman. i yield back. thehair now recognizes gentlemen from texas. minutes. >> thank you. appreciate being here. i agree on both sides. .e applaud great work for example.
steven spielberg despite provided my family a lot of enjoyment and entertainment. and your colleagues at google have created an vehicle fory searching out things and it is friend acrossas a the aisle was pointing out, you got government that is not supposed to interfere in people's civil rights then you company, a cooperation like google. my problem is when the gives its immunity to a private over corporation that the head of that cooperation doesn't even realize that there is political run amuck in the company. and that is the problem. see you overto regulate? i don't want to see you regulated. upant to see others come with brilliant ways as you did
something that makes life easier. a good example. thatave a trusted flagger you indicated all of the sudden poverty law center. the southern poverty law senor really has started out more started up more hate than about i know.r group they start up one ga to the the familyhe went to research council and i know those people. they are christians. is more based on love than any other religion. god so loved the wor, he gave his life and yet they stirred up hate against the family research center and a guy you havehooting and
this yearjune 18th of and the law center and announced a settlement with the organization and falsely labeling them and anti-muslim they were wrong. now, you consider them a trusted flagger yet they keep creating problems for people that are not haters. they had to pay out $3.375 million. onproblem is when you put them a trusted flagger why paying $3.375 to him. problem. you trust people that have stirred up a lot of hate. and another good example and you
surrounded byso liberal alley that i hates hates peopleand that really love our constitution and the freedoms it like you thatle you don't even recognize it. it is like a blind man not even knowing what life looks like because you are surrounded by darkness. if you look and let's see presidentxample after trump won the cofounder said, prettyople here are upset and pretty sad. now a lot of them have seen the video. the top people at google were and for to you come in here and say, there is no bias in google tells are beingher dishonest i don't want to think that or you don't have a clue bias google is. aw another example is we do search and what comes up is
right there is the knowledge weel on the right and hopefully will have a screen shot of that. wikipediament my chief of staff tell mess every might for proper honestput propertion in with annotations and the liberal editors around the world went knocking everything and instead put up a bunch of garbage. yet to you, they get a trusted wikipediaa liables someone and you are the one that trusted them above any other liable.ou got to be you ought to be liable when cplc beliable and you ought to liable when wikipedia uses the bias in a hope and
encourage you to look around and runoffyour conservatives. embrace liberals and it is time google was actually not immune so people can hold you and get a little better objectiontivity. my time has run out. he yield back. yield back. mr. chairman. your testimony here today. a number of the questions plo to me. i may be repeating some of this. i am till not clear on how nanny staff and who it is that establishes the perimeters by the algorithms are written. can you tell me how many staff that is? how that works? >> congressman, today. our team which works on the
and youthe search teams 1,000 people and i am happy to elaborate more. >> and when you hire them, the people hire coming the outside brought up from internally. what is a typical path the two roughly 1,000 person search team. >> it is a combination of both. but engineers on the search team typically dend to be in the time.y for a very long >> so most of the time you will know them having worked with , do you go you then to the social media to determine what they may be doing on social media? >> normally we don't. of people to ex res themselves but we make it clear that how we build our greatt is done with
thought and focused on getting users the information they are looking for. >> these are the team of 1,000. they are the people that write buy which they write the algorithms write the al go rhythms? that is correct. yeah. so there is not really any look arehat their private lives even though the public social media is not examined by the does anyone outside of google know who the 1,000 people are? >> yeah. we don't examine their personal activities and wish there some senior people do part of the outside and known the outside come nin and watching people whose social knocked them out of lifey high positions in almost every week one or more and social media this week and a 24-48 of them in the last hours. but will make this point. abelieve i have made it with
number of the internet companies that have been sitting here at the table in the past. there is a very strong conviction on this side of this thiel the algorithms are written with a bias against conhetives. people in on the other side because of that course it benefits them. what we don't know is who are the 1,000 people? what theirt know social media looks like. we do know the people that crom are about 80% supporter of hillary clinton if i listen to the lady from correctly and so that would be a built-in bias if i know people from california and know their politics from california in a think i do. least a built in bias here. examined. not being how would you folks get to objective result which you said we build in a neutral way but doesn't mean it comes out neutral. you folks get to
unbias media.ot examining the social how would you expect you can get to an objective result, when you have said we got our products in a neutral way, but that does not mean your product comes out neutral. so how would you expect to get to unbiased results with a built-in formula, that i have described that i do not think his objective. mr. pichai: i need -- >> i made the point if we don't know who the 1000 are and we cannot look at the social media and cannot look at the algorithms to observe the results they are doing behind closed doors, and yet the public believes there's an open forum, a balanced open access of information, and of course it is not. so i has said we either need to know who they are, look at their social media, and if that doesn't solve this problem, the next step, published the algorithms. if that doesn't happen, next step section 230, the amendments
of section 230, and beyond that is a teddy roosevelt step. mehrt, ih mr. go don't want to regulate anything, but i don't want to see a society so polarized that the will of the american people cannot be expressed at the ballot box. i would finish with this. i have a seven-year-old granddaughter who picked up her phone before the election and is playing a game, the kind of game a kid would play, and up there pops a picture of her grandfather. i will not say into the record what kind of language was used around that picture of her grandfather, but i would ask you, how does that show up on a seven-year-old's iphone playing a kid's game? mr. pichai: congressman, iphone is made by a different company. >> did might have been an android. it was a hand-me-down of some kind. mr. pichai: i am happy to follow up, if i understand the
specifics, there might be an application being used which had a notification, but happy to understand that better and clarify for you. >> thank you for your testimony. i yield back the balance of my time. >> mr. chairman? >> for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> to place three questions in the record. >> we already indicated we will take all question submitted in writing, and asked him to answer them. >> i appreciate if i can share these three. >> all right, gentlewoman, without objection. >> i thank the courtesy of the gentlelady from alabama. there have been several points made. obviously algorithms have been mentioned over and over again. three questions. one. explaining how the algorithm may play into someone's impression
it's very important for the american public. you mentioned the transparency in your policy. you're policy is 20 pages long, changes multiple times a year. i have to ask a couple questions about the policy, because i quite frankly don't understand all of it. that is, the policy states that google's data collection applies when "you use google services." and so, most consumers would think that means google search, google maps. my question is, does the policy apply when a consumer contacts a double-click cookie? are you then, are they then under that policy, or not? today the product is
policy says you collect voice and audio information, when you use audio features. however, does this mean google assistant is recording our voices and conversations? how about just using google voice? is that actually being recorded? mr. pichai: today, if you invoke google voice by either using the microphone or you say "ok command, weissue a treated it like a search query and record that activity. but we have a separate setting, in which as a user you can choose whether you want these stored or not, so we give users the choice and option. >> i, you know, when it gets to transparency, i think when you realize you have these active, you know, when i am clicking and giving that information, agreeing to it, i think people understand that information is going out, and they are giving that permission.
let me stop you there and ask, then. is it possible for google to of all therintout information they have collected on me within the last month, where i have been, where i have clicked, is all that information, you have all the information, it can fro be provided to make? mr. pichai: we make it available to you easily. we are concerned about security of the data, so we don't casually get it out, but -- >> so i would ask, i am running out of time, but instead of me as a consumer or anyone as a consumer giving you the privacy right up front, why don't you be more honest with me, tell me exactly what information is being collected, what information you want to share,
and allow me to decide how much of that information i would like to share is a consumer? mr. pichai: congressman, i agree with that sentiment. what we precisely do, we are very transparent, we make it very easy. you go to account settings, we clearly tell the categories, and you can see the information we have an turn it on or off, but we want to do better. >> there are areas where information is being collected, even if i have the particular there is stillf, information collected through these other passive systems that you have contracted with, correct? mr. pichai: we are pretty explicit about data we collect, and we give protections for you to turn them on or off. even when you use a product like chrome or gmail, google home, we are very clear about the data we collect, and we reflect back to the use of the data we have on them and try to be transparent. >> my time is out, but i would
today about the consumer and what the consumer knows, and i understand there is a personal responsibility as a consumer to do my part to try to understand, but it is also very competent staff. -- complicated stuff. so i want to point is having positive google is doing. in march, you have the online safety roadshow that came through alabama's second congressional district to a middle school. you are being a corporate citizen by trying to teach our young people to be smart and safe on the internet, and as the mother of a 13-year-old girl, i appreciate that very much. i think that is truly a good example of what it means to be a corporate citizen, that the young people can have the world in their hands and recognize all the positive things that can come from it, but there are dangers as well. i would just say, i think what we would all benefit from is understanding as a corporate citizen, what are you doing to
how the data will be used? mr. pichai: congresswoman, it is a good question. for example, we are sending email reminders for certain types of data being collected, asking you to go review your settings. an example of the kind of revolution we are doing. looking atementing, combining settings where we can so that it is easier for users. we want to minimize the number of controls, but want to match it. users have complex expectations. they want some devices to be private, but are ok with others being able to be used, location, etc. we are trying to match user expectations. users tell us, when they search for the weather or restaurants, they want restaurants near their location and not somewhere else, and as you can imagine, if someone from atlanta is searching, they want relevant information to them. that is what we are trying to meet, but i agree we need to simplify this even more and there's more work to do.
be used, is being used, without the consumer. again, there's personal responsibility there as well. i think you are doing some good things in educating folks about, particularly with the online safety roadshow. i think you could take some work you are doing there and hearing our concerns today look for ways to better educate the consumer moving forward. thank you. i yield back. >> thank you very much. mr. pichai, a couple quick follow ups. i don't think anyone asked, who makes the judgment calls regarding content moderation at google? mr. pichai: chairman, it depends on the area. if it is you to, we have -- youtube, we have very clear teams responsible for youtube content policies. >> are they identified? is it possible for a customer to write to them and say, hey, here
is a concern i have? mr. pichai: we give clear channels for content creators to raise concerns back, and we have clear avenues. we also have had people who are responsible for these platforms, including content moderation, ap pear here and i think they have consulted widely here, too. >> i have a question about preloaded apps. have agreements with the companies, amazon might have an app they put on your platform, do you have a data sharing agreement with them? do they get information and you get information generated? how does that work? mr. pichai: we don't have any special agreements with respect to user data as part of preloading any application. >> so if somebody puts that app on your platform, they do it with your permission? mr. pichai: not necessarily.
for example, our device manufacturer can reload applications on android, and it is up to them and the developer to do so. >> if they operate on your operating system, do you get the information as well as the app promoter? mr. pichai: information about what is happening within the application? >> right. mr. pichai: there might be specific cases where the user gave us diagnostic information so that would depend on the context, but in general, no, the relationship is between the user and app the voter. >> -- developer. gathers information on a specific thing, that is not also going to google? mr. pichai: in a general sense, no. >> finally, and this you can provide a written answer because it is a lengthy answer, i believe, but i'm interested in knowing, i know you had a lot of difficulties in europe of late,
and i am interested in knowing how your policy in europe differs from your policy in the united states. mr. pichai: i am happy to, i think is a pretty extensive topic, and i am happy to have a follow-up on that area back to your office. >> we would appreciate that. we will give you some written questions. that other members have provided. we will have more of our own, and we would ask that you respond to those promptly. mr. pichai: definitely will. >> thank you. well, you have gone for about three and a half hours, and it's about what we predicted yesterday when we talked. so we thank you very much for your participation today. this concludes today's hearing, and without objection all members will have five legislative days to submit written questions for the witness, or additional materials for the record, and with that this hearing is adjourned. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2018] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]
we can either choose to fight for america's working class or immigration. you can't do both. >> is their legal room on that -- i'm nota going to going to -- if the democrat party wants to go down the road of continuing to preserve a model that enriches smuggling organizations, that kills 300 americans a week through heroin overdoses alone. $230 billion every single year. >> you are talking about the intent of these migrants, which gets more to the diplomatic issues of why people are fleeing in the first place. are we going to have a shutdown
largestistmas? >> the increases in illegal immigration are incentivize by loopholes and our laws and loopholes created by activist left-wing judges including a district court judge in the categories that correspond with these loopholes and the interventions, reckless lawless interventions a district court judges. and this president has taken historic action to stem the tide of illegal immigration. this is what the american people want, both parties to come together for the sake of american children, for the sake of children all across this hemisphere. plea -- we just keep playing games with peoples lives. they are playing games with a shutdown. they are playing games with members