you know who stamford analytica is? i do. >> you think palantir top cambridge analytica i do. -- taught how to do these tactics? mark: i don't know. >> do think palantir has great data from facebook? mark: i don't know that. -- do you think during the 2016 campaign as cambridge analytica was providing support to the child alamo, areder object there any facebook people involved in that sharing of technique and information? mark: we provided support to the trump campaign similar to what we provide to any advertiser or campaign asks for it. >> so that was a yes? mark: can you repeat the specific question? on to make sure i get what you are specifically asking. >> cambridge analytica worked with the trump campaign to refine tactics where facebook employees involved in that? any of our't know if employees were involved with cambridge analytica, although i know we help the trump campaign overall, this and we do with all campaigns. >> they were involved in that time perio maybe that is some -- maybe that is something your inve

john bolton, with the bolton project at cambridge analytica and bolton data at cambridge analytica and his link with the nra and russian politicians, john bolton is right in the middle of this stuff, too. and maybe that's what he's talking with the white house lawyers about, ahead of his start date on monday. but this is starting to get weird. h.r. mcmaster is going out with a bang. john bolton does appear to be on his way in, but i think that is becoming a more complicated prospect than might be broadly appreciated. all right, got lots more to get to tonight, including, i'm very happy to tell you, we have an exclusive interview with someone who has made no public comments since leaving government service months ago. he's going to give his first exclusive tv interview to us tonight. it's a surprise. that's next. stay with us. -if you told me a year ago where i'd be right now... aah! ...i would have said you were crazy. but so began the year of me. i discovered the true meaning of paperless discounts... and the indescribable rush of saving drivers an average of $620. why does fear feel

john bolton, with the bolton project at cambridge analytica and bolton data at cambridged analytica and his link with the russian nra and politicians, john bolton is right in the middle of this stuff, too. and maybe that's what he's talking with the white house lawyers about, ahead of his start date on monday. but this is starting to get wired. -- weird. h.r. mcmaster is going out with a bang. john bolton does appear to be on his way in, but i think that is becoming a more complicated prospect than might be broadly appreciated. all right, got lots more to get to tonight, including, i'm very happy to tell you, we have an exclusive interview with someone who has made no public comments since leaving government service months ago. he's going to give his first exclusive tv interview to us tonight. it's a surprise. that's next. stay with us. just switched to geico and got more. more? they've been saving folks money for over 75 years. a company you can trust. geico even helped us with homeowners insurance. more sounds great. gotta love more... right, honey? yeah! geico. expect great savings a

facebook ban cambridge analytica in 2015? why did you wait? >> senator, that's a great question. cambridge analytica wasn't using our services in 2015, as we can tell. so this is clearly one of the questions that i asked our team as soon as we learned about this, why did we wait until we found out the reports last month to ban them? it's because as of the time that we learned about their activity in 2015, they weren't advertiser, they weren't running pages, so we actually had nothing to ban. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator feinstein. now senator hatch. >> well, in my opinion this is the most intense public scrutiny i've seen for tech related hearing since the microsoft hearing that i chaired back in the late 1990s. the recent stories about cambridge analytica and data mining on social media has raised serious concerns about consumer privacy. naturally you know that 2e same time these story ss touch on the internet economy. and the way the websites that drive our internet economy make money. some h

first, we're getting to the bottom of exactly what cambridge analytica did. and telling everyone affected. what we know now is that cambridge analytica improperly accessed some information about millions of facebook members by buying it from an app developer. that information -- this was information that people generally share publicly on their facebook pages like names, and profile picture and the pages they follow. when we first contacted cambridge analytica, they told us that they had deleted the data. about a month ago, we heard new reports that suggested that wasn't true. and now we're working with governments in the u.s., the u.k. and around the world to do a full audit and to get rid of any data they may have. and second, to make sure no app developers are misusing data, we're investigating every single app with a large amount of information in the past. and if we find that someone improperly used data, we're going to ban them from facebook and tell everyone affected. third, to prevent this from ever happening again going forward, we're making sure tha

and the cambridge analytica gets to the score of it. the model is, the most personalized system of surveillance ever constructed in human history, being -- that eegsz the core of the business, that's why it's the profitable business it is. my question is how deeply do the senators go and how deeply does mark zuckerberg go in defending that specific core model of the company. >> you read an article today talking about how it's a little bit ridiculous to assume that mark zuckerberg is not going to be ready for this. so i'll ask you, is he ready for this panel? for this hearing? >> he has to be, i mean my issue in the article i wrote was that we treat these boy geniuses of silicon valleys are boys when they're adults running major companies and they have to be held responsible for what they're doing. every time we give these people an out and rejuvenilize them, we lethem off the hook. i know i sound like a mean mom, but this is kind of ridiculous, these are billionaires that run major companies, they better be responsible for it and if not

-- analytica, correct? mr. blumen thaul: i want to show ou the terms of service that facebook.cogan gai to facebook was on notice that he could sell that information. have you seen the terms of service before? mr. zuckerberg: i have not. mr. blumenthal: who in facebook was responsible for seeing those terms of servais vist that put you on notice that that information could be sold? mr. zuckerberg: our app review team would be responsible for mr. blumen thaul: has anyone been fired on that app review team? mr. zuckerberg: not because of this. mr. blumenthal: doesn't that term of service conflict with e f.t.c. order that facebook was under at the time this terms of service was provided to facebook and you'll note that the f.t.c. order requires facebook to protect privacy, isn't there a conflict there? mr. zuckerberg: senator, it certainly appear we should have been aware that this app developer submitted a term that was in conflict with the rules of the platform. mr. blumenthal: what happened here was in effect w

cambridge analytica wasn't using our services in 2015 as far as we can tell. this is clearly one of the question, i asked our team as soon as we learned about this is why did we wait until we found out about the reports last month to ban them? it's because as of the time that we learned about their activity in 2015, they weren't an advertiser, they weren't running pages so we actually had nothing to ban. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> now senator hatch. >> this is the most intense public scrutiny i've seen for a tech-related hearing since the microsoft hearing that i chaired back in the late 1990s. the recent stories about cambridge analytica and data mining on social media have raised serious concerns about consumer privacy, and naturally i know you understand that. at the same time these stories touch on the very foundation of the internet economy and the way the web sites that drive our internet economy make money. some profess themselves shocked -- shocked that companies like facebook and google share user data with advertisers. did any of these

it also has been reported that he sold this data to cambridge analytica for $800,000. cambridge analytica then took this data and created a psychological welfare tool to influence the united states elections. in fact the ceo of alexander nix, that came bridge analyst can ran all the digital campaign, the television campaign and its data, informed all the strategy for the trump campaign. the reporting has also speculated that cambridge analytica works with the internet research agency to help russia identify which american voters to target with its propaganda. i'm concerned that press reports indicate facebook learned about this breach in 2015 but appears to have taken significant steps to address it until this year. this hearing is important. i appreciate the conversation we had yesterday and i believe that facebook through your presence hear today, and words you are about to tell us will indicate how strongly your industry will regulate and or reform the platforms that they control. i believe this is extraordinarily important. you lead a big company with 27,000 employ

kenyan democracy. >>> have you heard of cambridge analytica? >> yes, i have. [ laughter ] >> those are the guys who manipulated, in a way manipulated the elections. >> reporter: you think they gave him an unfair advantage? >> i don't know. but if it is, then it's unfortunate. >> it pulls into question the whole electoral infrastructure in relation to the elections which were held last year, must be fully audited. i think we'll see the footprints of cambridge analytica. >> reporter: images of kenya's president appear on cambridge analytica's website as well as on that of parent company scl where these images have since been removed. >> let's not absolve kenyan politicians of their role in this because cambridge analytica didn't pay themselves. a foreign company came. >> reporter: this video appeared on social media. it made astounding claims about the opposition leader. >> whenever you try to google kenya, the first greeting was all that trash about me. >> reporter: and do you think is contributed to ethnic tensions in this country? >> certainly

they talked about telling, you know, cambridge analytica to delete their data. but what if they already replicated it? what if they have it stored somewhere. but that may be a fact. but it never came up, i would like to know, you know, that probably is a possibility. and there is probably nothing we can do with it, if that's a fact, but no one asked about this fact. so i really appreciated being able to watch them, the hearings for the two days. i don't often have this block of time. and i thank you for letting people call in. because i've learned a lot from the hearings and from what the callers have said before me. so thank you very much. >> well, patricia north carolina and a newspaper of other callers have expressed their disappointment in the level of questioning, i guess you would say, from both yesterday from senators and today from members of the house energy and commerce committee. similar reflection here on facebook. leah posted this. maybe these congress people really should have done some reslesh befor research before this hearing. like read up faceb

former cambridge analytica employee has said that the data that cambridge analytica could be stored in russia. do you agree that's a possibility? >> are you asking if cambridge analytica's data could be stored in russia? >> that's what he said on the sunday show. >> i don't have any specific knowledge that would suggest that. one of the steps we need to take now is do a full audit of all of cambridge analytica systems and make sure they remove all the data. if they don't, we're going to take legal action against them to do so. that audit, we have temporarily ceded that while the u.k. government does their investigation. we're committed to get to the bottom of this so we can have more answers to this. >> you said you would support some privacy rules so everyone's playing by the same rules here. you also said here that you should have notified customers earlier. would you support a rule that would require you to notify your users of a breach within 72 hours? >> senator, that makes sense to me and i think we should have our team follow up with yours to discuss the details around that more

i think we need to fully examine what cambridge analytica did. they either broke a code of conduct or if they broke any other rules or agreements with you, i hope they suffer the consequences. i think that timeline needs to be updated. i read a series of art cals published in the m.i.t. technology review in 2012. it talks about how proud the obama campaign was of exploiting data on facebook. someone asked you if it made you mad what cambridge analytica did and you answered yes. but you should be equally mad when a former campaigning manager of obama tweeted facebook was surprised. we were able to suck out the holt social grasp. and they didn't stop us when they realized that's what we were doing. >> i'm sure we can get the tweet back, and the history grabber machine. when you do your research it's important to get your whole view. i worked in date analytics for my entire career. anybody who claims cambridge analytica was the first to exploit date pa hasn't worked in analytics. i would appreciate it if you start with the first high-profile nationa

anyone other than cambridge analytica? >> he sold it to a couple other firms. >> can you identify the? unoya.re is one called there may be a couple others. know or haveo you you tried to find out how cambridge analytica used the data when they had it before you believe they deleted it? heard that they do not delete it about a month ago, we have kicked off an internal investigation to see if they used that data in any of their ads. that investigation is still underway. resultsome back to the once we have that. >> i want to switch to my home state of wisconsin. reports, to press wisconsin was a major target of ads bought on facebook and the 2016 election. are touching on a number of polarizing issues. they were designed to interfere with the election. we also learned that russian actors using another platform, targetedsimilarly wisconsin with divisive content. dissentg division and including in the wake of a police involved shooting in milwaukee. in thesome encouragement steps you have outlined today to provide greater trans

facebook ban cambridge analytica in 2015? why did you wait? >> senator, that's a great question. cambridge analytica wasn't using our services in 2015, as we can tell. so this is clearly one of the questions that i asked our team as soon as we learned about this, why did we wait until we found out the reports last month to ban them? it's because as of the time that we learned about their activity in 2015, they weren't advertiser, they weren't running pages, so we actually had nothing to ban. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator feinstein. now senator hatch. >> well, in my opinion this is the most intense public scrutiny i've seen for tech related hearing since the microsoft hearing that i chaired back in the late 1990s. the recent stories about cambridge analytica and data mining on social media has raised serious concerns about consumer privacy. naturally you know that 2e same time these story ss touch on the internet economy. and the way the websites that drive our internet economy make money. some h

other cambridge analytica's dare still out there. shutting down access to third parties isn't enough in my opinion. facebook and other companies are doing the same thing. they are using people's personal information in targeted product and political advertising. facebook is the latest in a never ending string of companies that vacuum up our data but failed to keep it safe. this instance demonstrates yet again that our laws are not working. republicans in congress continue to block or repeal the few privacy protections we have. in this era of nonstop data breaches, republicans eliminated existing data security protections at the spc and their justification that those protections were not needed because the federal trade commission has everything under control. this latest disaster shows how wrong the republicans are. every tool republicans have been willing to give it and those tools weren't enough. that's why facebook acted like so many companies and reacted only when it got bad press. we know the cycle by now. data is stolen, the co

cambridge analytica has denied any wrongdoing. >> why didn't facebook ban cambridge in 2015? why did you wait? >> senator, this is clearly one of the questions that i asked our team as soon as i learned about this, why did we wait until we found out about the reports last month to ban them? >> reporter: but for those whose data has already been compromised, the breach may have far-reaching consequences. right before zuckerberg appeared on capitol hill, facebook and cambridge analytica were hit with a class action lawsuit accusing the company of misusing personal information. >> it's unlikely people will stop using facebook. the social network has become a utility. it not only owns facebook, it owns instagram, what's up, and a number of other companies. >> reporter: the social media site says it's doubling down on security, increasing the number of employees working on security from 10,000 to 20,000. zuckerberg's calm, careful, and contrite demeanor played well. facebook stock increased 4.5%. >> i think mark zuckerberg is comfortable being mark zuckerberg. i believe facebook i

cambridge analytica wasn't using our services in 2015 as far as we can tell. so this is clearly one of the questions that i asked our team as soon as i learned about this, why did we wait until we found out about the reports last month to ban them? it's because as of the time that we learned about their activity in 2015, they weren't an advertiser, they weren't running pages, so we actually had nothing to ban. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator feinstein. now senator hatch. >> well, in my opinion, this is the most, this is the most intense public scrutiny i've seen for a tech-related hearing since the microsoft hearing that i chaired back in the late 1990s. the recent stories about cambridge analytica and data mining on social media have raised serious concerns about consumer privacy. and naturally, i know you understand that. at the same time, these stories touch on the very foundation of the internet economy and the way the web sites that drive our internet economy make money. some have professed themselves shocked -- shocked -- [la

that was essentially what was stolen by cambridge analytica. the fact is, most people i think are pretty happy with the product they're getting from social media and from facebook. if they were more concerned about their privacy, we would have had a problem long before this. i'm more concerned by what we also eluded to, which is the hacking of things like equifax or personnel management. that was 21 million very confidential files. the question is, has anything ever come of those hacks? they've got your social security number. but i have never seen any evidence that something bad has happened as a result. >> dana: panel, stay with me here. mark zuckerberg has entered the hearing room. the chairman of the senate judiciary committee, senator chuck grassley of iowa is there. we anticipate this will be one of those hearings that actually starts on time. i was trying to remember the last time such a big hearing took place. dan and i were talking. possibly the ben ghazi hearing when hillary clinton testified. right now mark zuckerberg, his first time

my did not think cambridge analytica. my team let me know that cambridge analytica did start as an advertiser in 2050, so we could have a theory bandied them then. we made a mistake in not doing so, but i wanted to make sure i corrected that because i made a mistake, got that wrong earlier. thank you, chairman. welcome back. on the subject of bands, iwant welcome back. on the subject of bands, i want to explore a little bit what these mean. facebook has done disreputable damage with its association with alexander cook and cambridge analytica, which is one of the reasons you're having this wonderful afternoon with us. he testified that the app has been banned. as he also been banned? yes, my understanding is he has. so if you were my understanding is he has. so if you were to open up another account undera name and you were to open up another account under a name and you were able to find a document that would be taken, closed down? senator, i believe we are preventing him from doing any more apps. does he have a facebook

how many cambridge analytica are still out there. shutting down data to third parties isn't enough in my opinion. facebook and many other companies are doing the same thing, using people's personal information to do highly targeted product and political advertising. and facebook is just the latest in a never ending string of companies that vacuum up our data but fail to keep it safe and this incident demonstrates yet again that our laws are not working. making matters worse, republicans here in congress continue to block or even repeal the few privacy protections we have in this era of non-stop data breaches last year republicans eliminated existing privacy and data security protections at the fcc. their justification that those protections were not needed because the federal trade commission has everything under control. this latest disaster shows just how wrong the republicans are. the ftc used every tool the republicans have been willing to give it and those tools weren't enough and that's why facebook acted like so many other com

now, we still don't know what cambridge analytica has done with the data. you heard chairman thune say as we have discussed, we want to haul cambridge analytica in to answer these questions in a separate hearing i thank chairman thune for working with all of us in scheduling a hearing there was obviously a great deal of interest in this subject. i hope we can get to the bottom of this. if facebook and other online companies will not or cannot fix the privacy invasions, then we are going to have to we, the congress how can american consumers trust folks like your company to be caretakers of their most personal and identifiable information? that's the question. thank you. >> thank you, my colleagues and senator nelson our witness today is mark zuckerberg, founder, chairman, chief executive officer of facebook mr. zuckerberg launched facebook february 4th, 2004 at the age of 19 at that time, he was a student at harvard university. as i mentioned previously, his company now has over 40 billion of annual revenue and over 2 billion monthly active users mr. zucker

do you think they taught cambridge analytica -- press reports say how to do these tactics? >> senator, i don't know >> do you think that they have scraped data from facebook >> senator, i'm not aware of that >> okay. do you think that during the 2016 campaign as cambridge analytica provided support to the trump campaign under project alamo, were there any facebook people involved in that in that sharing of technique and information? >> senator, we provided support to the trump campaign similar to what we provide to any advertiser or campaign who asks for it >> so that was a yes is that a yes? >> senator, can you repeat the specific question. i want to make sure i get specifically what you are asking >> in the 2016 campaign, cambridge analytica worked with the trump campaign to refine tactics. were facebook employees involved in that? >> senator, i don't know that our employees were involved with cambridge analytica, although i know we did help out the trump campaign overall in sales support in the same way we do with other campaigns >> so they may have been involved all wor

how many cambridge analytica are still out there. shutting down data to third parties isn't enough in my opinion. facebook and many other companies are doing the same thing, using people's personal information to do highly targeted product and political advertising. and facebook is just the latest in a never ending string of companies that vacuum up our data but fail to keep it safe and this incident demonstrates yet again that our laws are not working. making matters worse, republicans here in congress continue to block or even repeal the few privacy protections we have in this era of non-stop data breaches last year republicans eliminated existing privacy and data security protections at the fcc. their justification that those protections were not needed because the federal trade commission has everything under control. this latest disaster shows just how wrong the republicans are. the ftc used every tool the republicans have been willing to give it and those tools weren't enough and that's why facebook acted like so many other com

the question is the cambridge analytica having impact. so far mark zuckerberg has said we haven't seen a material impact. remember that you guys talked to sheryl sandberg last week and she said that some advertisers are hitting deposit button on spending. was it enough for there to be an impact on sales? everything that cheryl and mark and in one on the call tomorrow says is one be scrutinized if there is any meaningful pullback. there's a couple of other things that happen at the beginning of the year and the make changes to the newsfeed. deborah to make the results more relevant, and that meant fewer advertisements. that is another thing people are going to look at. how much of an impact are those changes good having. member for the first time ever we have a decline in north american users and that continue into the first quarter? is it a function of can which allen -- cambridge analytica? all of these things are in focus tomorrow? emily: will that hang on twitter? or did twitter benefit from it? we hear their video strategy is paying o

-- and cambridge analytica. the ability of technology to be used in disinformation to desmet -- of this information campaigns. the manipulation of the credit institutions is a deeply harmful thing. at the -- >> does that strengthen, weaken, >> i dohe argument? hope it strengthens it. they are complying across their platform globally. it seems to me a lot of the opposition to the burden to allowing u.s. consumers to codify that -- i think it could have an effect of making it easier for congress to think about rightsizing consumer protection for the digital age. >> we appreciate you taking the time to come and chat today. we are going to invite the rest of the panel up right now. hey, gang. i'm going to let everybody introduced themselves. and then briefly answer the same question i posted. >> i think it's is going to have legs for a little while, subject to new massive breaking issues that may come up. there have been privacy questions. i think this will make a difference. the investigation will be ongoing. also

now on the subject of cambridge analytica. were these people 87 million people, users, concentrated in certain states? are you able to figure out where they are from? >> i do not have that information with me. but we can follow up with your office. >> okay. because as we know the election was close and it was only thousands of votes in certain states. you have also estimated that roughly 126 people, million people may have been shown content from a facebook page associated with the internet research agency. have you determined whether any of those people were the same facebook users whose data was shared with cambridge analytica? are you able to make that determination? >> senator, we're investigating that now. we believe that it is entirely possible that there will be a connection there. >> okay. that seems like a big deal as we look back at that last election. former cambridge analytica employee christopher wiley has said that the data that it improperly obtained that cambridge analytica improperly obtained from facebook use

the question is that cambridge analytica have an impact? so far mark zuckerberg has said we haven't seen in vitro the impact -- we haven't seen a material impact. sheryl sandberg said some advertisers are hitting the positive in on spending. was it enough for there to be an impact on sales? everything that anyone on the call says is going to be scrutinized if whether there was any kind of meaningful pullback. there's a couple of other things that happen at the beginning of the year. to make changes to the newsfeed and will make results more relevant and that might mean you see fewer advertisements. that is another thing people will look at. how much of an impact are those changes having? in the fourth quarter we had the inst time ever a decline north american users. did that continue into the first quarter and is it a function of cambridge analytica or newsfeed changes are a function of everybody is facebooked out? emily: will that hang over twitter? >> or did twitter benefit from it? great questions. we have seen and heard the reader strat

then cambridge analytica happened. i was like, oh, shoot, i need to step back and think about what is the concept behind apis. is it more responsible use of apis? and how do these feed into the digital ecosystem. so one of the warnings i want to put out there and something i think we should all be looking for and i think the ftc is well tooled to do this because they have the office of technology, the competition bureau, is to make sure that facebook as it starts to review its apis, review its api policies, and again i want to be careful to say i think there are a lot of things they should do to prerott privacy, to protect security, to make sure people willy nilly can't get access to all our consumer data, but at the same time make sure there isn't an overcorrection, but data that helps developers come up with exciting new programs and apps that people want to use on facebook, that could ultimately compete with facebook. and facebook could have the incentive and the ability using its apis to say, you know, let's not le

>> yeah. >> you gave that to cambridge analytica? >> what did you think they were going to use it for? >> i knew it was going to be for elections i had an understanding that it was going to be for the republican side. >> as political consult anlts, cambridge analytica is hired by campaigns to analyze voters and ta target them with ad. in the 2016 presidential election, cambridge analytica worked first for ted cruz campaign then later for donald trump, though his campaign says they didn't use the cogan data. the republican ben factors robert and rebecca mercer were cambridge analytica's backers. steve bannon on the board. >> did you ever meet or hear about steve bannon at cambridge analytica? the mercers? jared kushner? >> no, those names would not have rung a bell to be honest. >> tell me what you did? >> create an app people sign up to do a study. sign up to do the study. give them a survey. in the survey. just a facein log in button. click the button. authorize us. >> to do what? >> collect data. the location. gender, birth date. p

we don't know if cambridge analytica had permission from the other side. i definitely don't remember giving them permission to use my data, but perhaps it was buried somewhere in one of the many privacy agreements on one of the different agreements, opt-in or opt-out. that is why he's in the situation right now. they violated our trust, and that's not right. >> michael, when i heard zuri zuckerberg say you control the information you use on facebook, i found that to be a hard sell. you know the inside how the social network sites work. is that a tough sell? is it true what he said? >> i think he's right that users opt-in into the service. they decide what they put on the platform, and by uploading those things they opt into facebook's terms of agreement. i think what most of the public is lost on is what happens to the information once they submit it and the hotel that you're staying in or whether you prefer a certain type of food or a certain baseball team or very innocuous details about your life can be used to trianglate ideologies that you might prescr

they go to cambridge analytica outside their terms and cambridge analytica represents to this day that they deleted the data. why is there such a controversy about that. a former employee appears and it has the data, i took the data. cambridge analytica suited that gentleman. he had taken aspects of their company. demanding he delete the data. occurred.mistake that you can have all the laws in place in those types of mistakes would still occur. i think the cambridge analytica --ries people thought we had donald snag in yet another think people are learning the facts that donald trump does not use cambridge analytica data. people learned, the obama campaign four years ago got similar access to friends data and send political messages to the people who signed up to their friends. so, where does that leave us? i think cambridge analytica is a red herring. i don't think we should understand all these issues through the prism of this one mistake. nuala: i agree with that last point. while it is highly politicized and highly charged, these tools and data sets can be used for or against any p

now cambridge analytica and the academic himself said it was 30 million people. so -- >> who do you believe these days? >> that is right. >> anna schechter. and facebook announced they are taking steps to better protect user data. here is a look at the way they work. if you don't know the inner workings of facebook it will be tricky but i'll take you through it. apps were given permission to access guest lists and posts of events that you created. facebook now said apps are no longer going to have that permission. some will regain that access in the future. but with, quote, strict requirements. now apps could see information about people and conversations in closed groups. if the administrator of those groups granted access. now apps will need to get approval from group administrators and from facebook itself. it will be interesting to see what the implications are because what happens on facebook is within closed groups. facebook also said apps had access to more data than necessary. apparently that is becoming a obvious statement. as of today, the company will

, which is what cambridge analytica disputes but christopher wylie , is saying that cambridge analytica's related entities were mixed up in the brexit vote and in fact were paid significant amounts and could have helped swing that. he also says that 50 million people could have been affected by the cambridge analytica data overall. notably, he talked about palantir. this is the company peter teal is on the board of, and is on the board of facebook himself. pelletier could've been wrapped up in all of this emily. , emily: as the fallout continues in the wake of the exploitation of data on million of facebook users, we catch up with former twitter ceo dick costolo and asked him to weigh in on this controversy. dick costolo one of the : questions i have is the impact it will have on the way people think about api's and access to data in the future. obviously, facebook had built out this platform approach that enabled third parties to access this data and used them to interact with and engage with people on facebook. then they turned that off some years ago and are now sort of seeing the cons

as 50 million people who facebook profiles had been acquired via cambridge analytica. they did it to a quiz which 270,000 people took pa rt a quiz which 270,000 people took part in, all of their friends‘s data also got grabbed improperly. tonight, facebook has come out with its figure and has buried it right at the bottom, ijust its figure and has buried it right at the bottom, i just showing its figure and has buried it right at the bottom, ijust showing you this press release, it is five pages the press release. by the way, we believe that facebook information and 87 million people, mostly in the us, may have been improperly shared with cambridge analytica. i've just learned another interesting fact, they say that they had just told me that 1 they say that they had just told me that1 million of these people were in the uk, so 1 that1 million of these people were in the uk, so1 million uk british citizens affected by having their data handed over to cambridge analytica. either because they had downloaded the apple because they we re downloaded the apple because they

of a jumptart with 2007 and you to the cambridge analytica issue. a code of conduct if they broke any other rules or hope ents with you all, i they suffer the consequences. that timeline needs to be updated. needs to go back, i read a series of three articles published back in 2012. it talks about how proud the of exploiting was data on facebook in the 2012 campaign, in fact, somebody earlier if it made you mad about what cambridge nalytica did, and you rightfully answered yes. you should be equally mad when a ormer campaign director of the obama campaign proudly tweeted, facebook was surprised. to suck out the whole social graph, but they idn't stop us once they realized that was what we were doing. so you clearly had some people employ that apparently knew it, at least that's what this person said on twitter and back and ness for way some of the other history grabber machines, i'm sure we an get this tweet back and get it in the right context. i think when you do your research, it's important to get view.hole i worked in data analytics practice fo

last month, former cambridge analytica employee christopher wylie revealed the data was obtained after hundreds of thousands of people did a quiz on facebook in 2014. but the quiz didn'tjust collect information from those who did it, to go ahead with the quiz, but also their facebook friends. —— he claims the details were sold to cambridge analytica, which used them to profile voters ahead of the us presidential election. it's opened a huge debate about privacy and the ownership of personal data. our north america technology correspondent dave lee has more. made no mistake, this is an event mark zuckerberg had really wanted to avoid adding to his calendar, a trip to washington to face tough questions about how he runs the most powerful social network in the world. politicians had wanted to speak to mark zuckerberg before but until now, he has sent lawyers and other members of facebook‘s team to do thejob. other members of facebook‘s team to do the job. we have redoubled our security and engineering efforts to increase security. he has agreed to appear in person. in two days of

what cambridge analytica did was wrong. what we have to remember, when zuckerberg talked about how they use data they match it with an ad.gorithm to an ad then gets placed, they say, you ride your bike to work i am going to give you a bike , ad. that does not violate my privacy. emily: there's an argument that -- we will leave it there. robert atkinson, thank you. released16 data breach names, phone numbers and email addresses of its users, this according to the ftc. the acting ftc chair says the agency expanded the settlement with of the company and said the new agreement was designed to ensure that uber does not engage in similar misconduct in the future. coming up, betterment is offering wealth management with its robo-advisors. this is bloomberg. ♪ emily: tesla is taking the unusual step of withdrawing from a federal investigation of a fatal crash involving one of its vehicles. company says it did -- the safety board will not allow it to release information on the driver since program autopilot that was used in the cr

cambridge analytica may have it. so what happens when i say facebook, take my data off your platform? >> if you delete your account, we immediately make it so that your account is no longer available, once you're done deleting it. so no one can find you on the service. we wouldn't be able to re-create your account from that. we do have data centers and systems that are redundant, and we have back-ups in case something bad happens. over a number of days we'll go through and make sure that we flush all the content out of the system. as soon as you delete your account, effectively that content is dismantled, and we wouldn't be able to put your account back together if we want to. >> recognize the gentleman from maryland for four minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. good morning, mr. zuckerberg. i want to get something on the record quickly before i move to some questions. you had suggested in your testimony over the last couple days that facebook notified the trump and clinton campaigns of russian attempts to hack in to

out,s soon as they found if it had gone to cambridge analytica outside their terms, and cambridge analytica represents to this date that they deleted the data. why is there controversy? a former employee of cambridge analytica appears and says, i took the data. cambridge analytica sued that went into because he competition with his former employer and took assets of the company. they had to settle into an agreement with him, demanding he delete the data. has was a mistake that occurred, mark zuckerberg has said, and yet you can have all of the laws in place and yet those types of mistakes would still occur. i think the cambridge analytical story has taken on a life of its own because it is politically charged. we havepeople thought donald trump on yet another snag. i think now people are learning the facts, the donald trump did not use cambridge analytica data. not use the did facebook did at that mr. cogan took from facebook. now a lot of the air has come out of this controversy. then people learned, guess what. the obama campaign, four years ago, got similar access to data and sent politi

cambridge analytica may have it. so what happens when i say facebook, take my data off your platform? >> if you delete your account, we immediately make it so that your account is no longer available, once you're done deleting it. so no one can find you on the service. we wouldn't be able to re-create your account from that. we do have data centers and systems that are redundant, and we have back-ups in case something bad happens. over a number of days we'll go through and make sure that we flush all the content out of the system. as soon as you delete your account, effectively that content is dismantled, and we wouldn't be able to put your account back together if we want to. >> recognize the gentleman from maryland for four minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. good morning, mr. zuckerberg. i want to get something on the record quickly before i move to some questions. you had suggested in your testimony over the last couple days that facebook notified the trump and clinton campaigns of russian attempts to hack in to

cambridge analytica, however, disputes those numbers. this all comes as ceo mark zuckerberg gets ready to testify before several house and senate committees next tuesday. >>> president trump signed a proclamation to send the national guard to the u.s./mexico border. troops will not have contact with immigrants but be work with border patrol agents in support roles. there's no word yet how many in the national guard will be deployed or how much the mission will cost. >>> let's turn to oklahoma where thousands of teachers demanding funds for education may be closer to victory. the state senate is set to take up a $20 million online sales tax bill, collecting taxes from third-party internet retailers like amazon, and use the money for the schools. the bill has already passed the oklahoma house. >> this morning, schools across the state remain closed, as teachers enter their fourth day of protests outside the state's capitol. msnbc is live in oklahoma city. mar mariana, where does this bill stand now? >> reporter: that bill, which was seen a

to deny cambridge analytica. they told us they did this. in retrospect, it was a mistake to believe them. we should have followed up and done an audit done. that is not a mistake we will make. yes, you did that and apologised for it. but you didn't notify them. do you think that you have an ethical obligation to notify 87 million facebook users? when we heard back from cambridge analytica and us they weren't using the data and us they weren't using the data and deleted it, we considered it a close case. in retrospect, that is clearly a mistake. we shouldn't have taken their word for it and we adopted our policies and how we are going to operate the company to make sure we are not going to make that mistake again. did anybody notify notify the ftc? know, for the same reason. we considered it a closed case. would you do that differently today, in retrospect to the senator's question? yes. this may be your first appearance before progress, but it's not the first time facebook has faced questions about its policy. a magazine noted you have a 14

tom tillis, who's on the judiciary committee, ran ads that cam britabridge analytica underwrote. they're conflicted. they're confused. the issue goes -- what you write about, malcolm, couldn't be more essential to democracy. yet the threat of facebook goes way, way beyond that. it's rewiring how we think. this is why i've called zuckerberg -- >> well, yesterday, i did a piece, i spent some time out in silicon valley with a guy who was one of the authors of a study at m.i.t. and what it showed is that false news is retweeted, is liked, is -- far, far more, as much as 70% more, than true stuff. >> yes, and that makes sense. >> and in addition to that, it's coming -- it's not just coming -- this isn't just bots. bots are a problem, you have these mechanized statements coming out. but it's people. because they get more likes on their facebook page. they get more retweets. because fake news is more sensational. we have a human problem. in addition to a technical problem. having said that, do you see any circumstances under which if mark zuckerberg does not do well today, he doesn't ke

this isn't just about facebook, and not just about cambridge analytica, is it? this data collection and analysis has been going on for a long time and has been done by lots of people. right, so in two ways it is notjust about those companies. facebook enables a lot more companies than just cambridge analytica to suck out data in similar ways. that's the first thing. and then facebook is just one player in a big ecosystem of online advertising, online profiling. some of the companies you have heard of, but some of them you just have no relationship with. even if you fully understand the terms and conditions that you're agreeing to about what data you're sharing, i don't think anyone really understood what could be inferred from the data, so not the list of your friends, not your likes and dislikes, but the things that you've never talked about that now they can tell from your digital footprint. yeah, it is really hard to understand the inference power of this data, what can be deduced from it, that's true, how people make decisions higher they think about the iss

>> kogan: yup. >> stahl: and you gave that to cambridge analytica? >> kogan: correct. >> stahl: what did you think they were going to use it for? >> kogan: i knew it was going to be for elections, and i had an understanding or a feeling that it was going to be for the republican side. >> stahl: as political consultants, cambridge analytica is hired by campaigns to analyze voters and target them with ads. in the 2016 presidential election, cambridge analytica worked first for the ted cruz campaign, then later for donald trump, though his campaign says they didn't use the kogan data. the republican benefactors, robert and rebekah mercer, were cambridge analytica's financial backers; steve bannon was on the board. so did you ever meet or hear about steve bannon at cambridge analytica? the mercers? >> kogan: nope. >> stahl: jared kushner? nothing? >> kogan: and those names would not ever have rung a bell for me, to be honest. >> stahl: tell us what you did. >> kogan: yeah, so, i create this app where people sign up to do a study, and when they sign up to