that falls under free speech. >> or earned speech as jack dorsey put it. >> or earned speech. now is where we get into the other tricky situation f. we're going to tell social media networks, fast becoming the most powerful microphones in the world that they shouldn't engage in political advertising then the only campaigns that are going to get access to any political advertising are major ad spends more expensive. >> do you buy that argument? that is facebook's argument here. this isn't going to hurt president trump. it will hurt smaller, lesser candidates that don't have the mega funding that he does. do you buy that? >> there's a corollary with facebook's fight that oftentimes by trying to penalize people or put limits on what they do you end up benefiting the entrenched powers. that may be a conversation for another day. >> regulatory capture is a real thing. it's what helped all the mega banks after the financial crisis and killed the community banks. >> absolutely. for me the bigger question is for the last three years since the 2016 campaign we've talked about how we do

with ceo twitter jack dorsey saying no more political ads on his site. starting very soon. >>> in an unexpected announcement twitter ceo jack dorsey at suite threat about social platform will no longer be running political ads. saying in part we believe political message should be earned not bought. spent seeing twitter take the lead especially right now really does two important things. it defines democracy in a nonpartisan way by saying they are not going to take the money for these types of political ad.>> reporter: henderson believes it is related to the facebook founder took on capitol hill last week. on the topic of paid political ads. >>> you plan on doing no fact checking on political ads.>> chairwoman our policy is that we do not factcheck politicians speech. the reason for that is that we believe in a democracy it is important that people can see for themselves what politicians are saying. pope >> reporter: zuckerberg fired back saying the reality is we believe deeply that political speech is important and should be heard. that is what is drivi

twitter ceo jack dorsey announcing that his company will no longer take political ads. a shot across the bow at fellow bay area social network facebook and the ceo mark zuckerberg. >> i believe that -- that it is important for people to be able to hear and see what politicians are saying. the speech will be heavily scrutinized by journalists and other people. >> what does it mean for twitter users? >> i think jack dorsey realizeds it's easier to ban it than fact check. >> social media professor matt cab on the says with more political troefrps loom on whatever network you use it's more important than ever to be skeptical. >> i think there has to be a buyer beware thing. be slow to believe, thoughtful about it, check multiple sources. find sources that have an editorial process. >> we can also tell that you twitter's ad ban will take place starting november 22nd. by the way, during the facebook conference call, zuckerberg said that political adz count for less than 1 o of one% of the fv ref snu. >> home security cameras cau thieves red handed but now milpitas police need

funnily enough, jack dorsey in his twitter thread today seemed to be of a similar mindset. he isn't of the belief that tech companies have the ability or responsibility to regulate speech. as far as doing eight well is concerned. —— it well. their reactions are quite different. facebook isn't going to fact check political ads. even in their earnings call today, zuckerberg said they would be no change to their political ads policy. even following the backlash and the grilling before the backlash and the grilling before the senate, it isn't going to fact check political ads. jack dorsey on the other hand doesn't want to have political ads on its platform at all. amrita, we are going to have to alleviate their. apologies for interrupting you. amrita khalid, technology reporter with courts talking about our top story today. we will look at your comments later as well. —— courts. ghana has declared 2019 the year of return and is encouraging the african diaspora to visit the country. according to the country's tourism board, from january tojune this year, there was a 20%

plus, twitter ceo jack dorsey is doing what she -- what mark zuckerberg would not. twitter is banning political ads of all types. we have details. google's former head of design ethics talks to bloomberg from the event in new york. his thoughts on to knology, apple has beati across the board, topping estimates from both last quarter and next quarter. this is a significant accomplishment for apple despite some sputtering iphone sales. to break down the report, i am joined by our analysts. let me start with lee. broad-based beat, what is your take away with this? thatit is not a surprise the stock had performed pretty well coming into the report. especially on the services side of of this was a pretty large beat. that and the gross services number was pretty unexpected. that and the guidance for the holiday quarter was pretty good. look at the expected revenue numbers, the midpoint for the holiday quarter is about $5 million below the all-time high, which was last year. in terms of apple's business, they will be a smaller business. the financialization has led to high

the timing of this was pretty canny on jack dorsey's part. . he announced it on twitter an hour before facebook earnings dropped, so it was quite a neat way of sticking the knife into facebook a little bit, trying to own the conversation at a time when facebook had some very good earnings numbers to announce. it is an easy decision for twitter to make. they have very little revenue, i think about $3 million, from political ads. they are trying to be seen as being more of a responsible citizen, given that they are such a huge mouthpiece for, not others,nald trump and to speak directly to their base. but twitter makes money off of the fact that people are engaging in its platform to read those posts, to see them, and it is pushing ads in those peoples directions, so it is slightly hypocritical because ultimately, they are still looking money from what could be damaging political content. guy: we talked to sheryl sandberg last night. let's take a listen. yl: we are not doing this because of revenue. it is less than 1% of our thenue, and it is not

it's not what jack dorsey is necessarily right or mark zuckerberg is necessarily right, it's a nuanced and important conversation. the question is, and we come back to this every time i'm on your show, at a certain point we have to turn to washington and regulators to say what are we going to do here? >> self-regulation is not necessarily the answer. always good to see you. dylan byers. we'll continue with special coverage after this. you are watching msnbc. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. i wish i could shake your hand. granted. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

we are hearing on the call from mark zuckerberg, he is taking on a jack dorsey -- taking on jack dorsey of twitter. he says he is opening up the cause. he wants to talk about principles. while it does not impact his business, all of this controversy is creating a lot of these headline risks so to speak. even the political ads still make up a big portion of facebook's business, i wonder how much of these headlines are really starting to distract the debbie: that is one of the things i was feeling very .trongly about this is taking a lot of attention away from running the core business. timeis taking a lot of share away from the major executives to defend their practices. even though it doesn't account for a lot of facebook's ad revenue, it is accounting for a lot of mind share across the company. that is concerning to me. taylor: before we dig into the network, your take on political ads and outside influences on the company, lee? especially from the regulator standpoint. kurt: political ads were 8.9% of the revenue. political ads were 8.9% of the revenue. i think it would make sense for

let's look at this story about jack dorsey's decision. you already touched on it, twitter saying we won't have any political advertising on our platform from tomorrow, thursday of november, ahead of the uk election but also significantly the us election next year. what do you think it will make is a difference? lots of viewers have said it won't make much difference because there's so much political bias on twitter anyway. i would like to look at it from a business perspective, forget the emotional side and also the decency side, which is incredibly important, and bringing influence to bear. twitter had bad figures the week before last, and the share price drop 16%. they need advertising. and for want of a better... i salute jack dorsey being holier than thou, it's going to affect his bottom—line because trust me, all the others... but it might not much because their political ad revenue in the past hasn't been that great, unlike facebook and others. you have some in the united states, for example, those running trump's campaign, saying

today we want to know where you stand on mark zuckerberg versus jack dorsey? do you think political ads should be banned from platforms such as facebook and twitter? let us know — just use the hashtag #bbcworklife. good to have you with us. we begin with the rejection by facebook founder mark zuckerberg of calls to follow twitter and introduce a worldwide ban on paid for political advertising. he said it wasn't right for private companies to "censor politicians or the news". the move came as the social media giant delivered its latest results. facebook made revenues of more than $17.5 billion betweenjuly and september — up 28% on the same period last year. $6 billion of that was profit. the company says more than 2.8 billion people use at least one of its services — facebook, instagram, whatsapp, or messenger — every month. well over 2 billion use one every day. those figures are just extraordinary. with us now is raoul lumb, a solicitor expert in technology at legalfirm simons muirhead & burton. over1.5 over 1.5 billion people logging on to facebook e

i think for, you know, it's fine for jack dorsey to say this now. how they will implement it and it might cut into their bottom lined when you, expand this beyond politicians. >> the trump campaign said this is a way for jack dorsey and twitter to silence conservative voices. is that true? >> i mean, donald trump is the biggest and most prominent user of twitter. twitter has rules for world leaders, where they are allowed to break their -- break policy on the platform and say things that regular users can't and still stay on the platform. also, the trump campaign, compared to what they're spending on facebook, has been spending little on twitter. >> all right. donie o'sullivan, thank you, my friend. >> there is no problem. >> quite the megaphone there. >>> coming up, teachers in chicago have a tentative deal to go back to work. so, why is the strike now entering day 11? >>> the pentagon releasing newly declassified video and images of the raid that killed abu bakr al baghdadi. the cent-com commander said that the raid was prestaged in syria, after p

jack dorsey shutting down political ads on twitter why and how that puts him at odds with facebook's mark zuckerberg that's coming up next. medicare is great, but it doesn't cover everything - only about 80% of your part b medicare costs, which means you may have to pay for the rest. that's where medicare supplement insurance comes in: to help pay for some of what medicare doesn't. learn how an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by united healthcare insurance company might be the right choice for you. a free decision guide is a great place to start. call today to request yours. so what makes an aarp medicare supplement plan unique? well, these are the only medicare supplement plans endorsed by aarp and that's because they meet aarp's high standards of quality and service. you're also getting the great features that any medicare supplement plan provides. for example, with any medicare supplement plan you may choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. you can even visit a specialist. with this type of plan, there are no networks or referrals needed. als

maria: where is jack dorsey on capitol hill? has jack dorsey testified? mark zuckerberg has gone to capitol hill. he's trying to sit with lawmakers, trying to sit with the president. you haven't seen jack dorsey on capitol hill. i'm sure they're calling him. >> he has been on capitol hill. it hasn't been as recent as zuckerberg. yeah, they're both there. they're both trying to defend the hot seats they find themselves in for this very issue that you and i are talking about. dagen: number one, twitter is a mosquito and facebook is a rhinoceros. it's just -- in terms of the scale and the size of. there's clearly some jealousy there, number one. maria: that's a good point. >> like a bulldozer is more like it. dagen: jack dorsey ought to get on the same page as mark zuckerberg and i'm not saying they should collude with one another. nevertheless -- because congress could turn against both of these companies and basically eliminate that liability waiver that they have under the communications decency act where they can't be sued for user posts. again, they're

twitter‘s ceo jack dorsey announced the ban, unsurprisingly, on twitter. in a thread of tweets he said: "a political message earns reach when people decide to follow an account or retweet. paying for reach removes that decision, forcing highly optimized and targeted political messages on people. we believe this decision should not be compromised by money." in an apparent veiled attack on facebook‘s decision, he tweeted: it‘s not credible for us to say: "we‘re working hard to stop people from gaming our systems to spread misleading info, buuut if someone pays us to target and force people to see their political ad, well they can say whatever they want!" and he addressed possible free—speech critics by saying: "this isn‘t about free expression. this is about paying for reach. and paying to increase the reach of political speech has significant ramifications that today‘s democratic infrastructure may not be prepared to handle. it‘s worth stepping back in order to address." the ban will be enforced from 22 november, with full details released by

ceo jack dorsey shocking everybody saying from now on, twitter will not run political ads. saying, quote, political message reach should be earned, not bought more on this big story >> jack dorsey setting up a clash with facebook ceo that twitter will ban all political advertising. quote, paying to increase political speech that today's infrastructure may not be prepared to handle zuckerberg fired back defending his decision to allow political ads on the basis of free speech. >> we estimate that these ads will be less than 0.5% of our revenue. that's not why we are doing this to put this in perspective, the fine that these critics wouldn't be enough was more than 10 x bigger than this we believe deeply that political speech is important and that's what is driving us >> lawmakers critical of facebook's position praised twitter's policy which will go into effect november 22. trump's campaign responded blasting twitter saying, this is yet another attempt to silence conservatives. twitter shares did trade lower but ultimately this decision seeming to be less about ad revenues m

jack dorsey, appropriate enough goes on a bit of a twitter rant to make news. deirdre bolton in the newsroom. that was interesting timing. no more political ads. >> here is what jack dorsey tweeted out, ceo of twitter, essentially saying long store short, they are not going to accept, pull the tweet up on the screen, to follow along as well, no longer accepting political ads. we made the decision to stop all political advertising on twitter globally. we believe political messages should be earned, not bought. why? he goes into a few reasons you see on subsequent tweet. this really does stand out to your point, connell, especially for what we reported yesterday from facebook with this open letter to facebook from 250 employees. of course we'll keep in mind that facebook has about 35,000 employees. that said, they did make their voices heard saying that listen, we screen and third party check ads from brands. thinking for example, proctor & gamble, from individuals, why not political figures? facebook did respond saying, okay we understand the point. we welcome f

certainly what jack dorsey and twitter did on wednesday, it takes away one of mark zuckerberg's arguments, right? that his peers at twitter ban google are all doing the same thing -- and google are all doing the same thing when it comes to political ads. taylor: one half of 1% of revenue, which is the political ad contribution on facebook. why even get in this controversy to begin with? >> i think that is a great question. certainly, that is a point any people have made. that facebook would not be giving up really that much revenue if it decided we will just stop taking political ads and take ourselves out of this part of a conversation. i think the argument mark zuckerberg is making -- that is the argument mark zuckerberg is making. it does feel like he really believes it, is that facebook does not want to be in a position where they are asked to censor political speech, right? he really sees it as a free speech argument. there are politicians who agree with him. he does feel like a principal stand rather than a stand that is motivated entirely by money. taylor: facebook has one half of

dorsey and twitter to differentiate it self or do you think there's a real stand that jack dorsey is taking? >> i think it's right. i think they have such a minuscule amount of ad spent coming from politics that it's easy for him to throw this away. we may be talking about 3 to 5 million in the next election cycle. >> what about claims of fake advertising on facebook in is this something that mark zuckerberg says we can trust people to kind of fitter this information. if we shut this down, we'll shut down smaller voices who want to get in front of people in favor of the incumbents or is social media more nefarious in presenting fake ads because they can't be vetted and might confuse people in. >> the real issue is all the bad information whether paid or unpaid that people take to be truth. these companies have a problem with that and are being criticized for their roles in this there's only so much they feel like they can do to feel like it's reasonable. there's a little bit of a social license to operation what really do they need to be demonstrating how much they are trying to give

laura: on another topic, the ceo of twitter, jack dorsey, has is going to ban politicalinr advertfrom global platforms. is that going to put pressure oe ok to do the same? reid: i think it will. facebook has been at the center of the storm of whether or not they are capable of banning advertising that includes false information. senator elizabeth warren made a big point of putting a false advertisement on facebook to eghlight the fact that th are no guard rails here. that is a worrying concern forid caes across the spectrum at a time when we know that russia and other actors are going to try to influence elections laura: does it show that political pressure of the hearings in washington is beginning to take effect on the social-media companies? reid: it certainly is, and this is a glimpse into the y between jackorsey, the ceo of the ceo of facebook, who are, rivals at best, if you will. this is sort of designed, it seems, to put pressure on facebook. jack dorsey made veiled references to facebook, and i won't hesitate to note that today is facebook's shareholder phone call. we will se

ceo jack dorsey arguing it isn't about free expression and in an apparent shot of facebook he blasts other platforms were not doing the same. the trump campaign calling out twitter saying, twitter bands political ads and yet another attempt by the left is to silence trump and conservatives. i wouldn't be surprised twitter lifted the ban after 2020. okay. let's take around the table. we were talking about halloween candy during the break and, i got off track. >> you are trying to bring up some kind of concern for the story. that's the standpoint of, do you think it's good for public debate, or to have a debate about freedom of expression? because basically you have two of the biggest tech companies taking very different opinions on this. >> i think it's excellent. i think it's interesting that jack dorsey has taken such an i am the anti-facebook stance and i am the antidote, we do it so much better here and there are lots of fundamental flaws with his reasoning. for example the fact that they have now banned issue ads also and that will likely -- >> how do you decide to. >> watch your

twitter ceo jack dorsey often maligned for his policies on hate speech harassment and neo- nazis made a surprise move and banned political advertisements on the social platform. we believe political message should be earned and not bought. the announcement comes days after facebook founder mark zuckerberg found himself facing tough questions about paid political ads on capitol hill. >>> facebook does not factcheck. what we do is we have feedback the people in our community don't want to see viral hoaxes or. >>> you do know fact checking on any ads is that correct? >> reporter: today zuckerberg fired back saying the reality is that we believe deeply that political speech is important and should be able to be heard. that is what is driving us. political analyst paul henderson said this move is twitter regulating itself. before the government does. >>> it takes twitter outside of the growing conversation demanding higher accountability and social media platforms. so we have pure speech. pure ideas. impure conversations about politics and voting that isn't influenced by money and politica

incumbent's rights or jack dorsey has already said this the trump campaign has said that it's dumb and then we've had mostly positive reactions from the democratic side so i'm curious break that down for us to how how will this affect campaigns leading up to the 2020 election well campaigns to spend money on these political ads he's paid political ads to influence people and oftentimes that the as if they pay for are meant to meant to cast their opponents in an unfavorable light so these are very very important very important tool for campaigns they want to define their opponents before the opponents have a chance to define themselves and they want to defy the poets in a negative way and so that's how people in campaigns use paid political advertising in this case. the drum kit pay would probably think this is obviously trying to slow them down slow down the people who would on their behalf pay for these ads and twitter and so that's why the trump campaign would like it but on the other hand it's not going to slow the president down from being able to get his message out on twitter to

jack dorsey from twitter and facebook founder mark zuckerberg. twitter said it would no longer allow people to place political ads on its service. to be clear can you post about politics all you want. but candidates and political action committees cannot buy ads. this raises lots of questions, of course, about what a political ad is. donald trump for president an ad. we'll find out where this turns into a fight is when jack dorsey attacked for not doing the right thing. he is rudderless when it comes to policy on political ads telling congress one thing and candidates another. jack dorsey went for the jugular in a long string of tweets explaining the new policy and attacking zuckerberg if not by name. it is not credible for us to say we're working hard to stop people from gaming our systems to spread misleading info, but if someone pays us to target and force people to see their political ads, well, they can say twhafr they want. and adibi winky face. the reason i am making a big deal out of this today and will in the future is it is a big deal.

on twitter, ceo jack dorsey said that political message which should be armed and not bought. he said this is because it can be used to influence votes and affect the lives of millions. some regard this move asa of millions. some regard this move as a swipe at facebook, which recently ruled out a ban on political advertising. it is not to impact twitter massively. as we have seen, the amount of money spent on advertising on twitter is tiny, but this is a symbolic gesture because we are all now focusing on the influence and power of paid advertising on social media. facebook founder mark zuckerberg said he did not think it was right for private companies to censor politicians or the news. mps, including former home secretary amber rudd, and liver‘s david lammy, have welcomed the ban. but donald trump us election campaign team so it is yet another attempt by the left to silence the president. sam jeffers is the co—founder of the who targets me campaign, which monitors the use of political adverts on social media. he told my colleague annita twitter has a mixture of motivatio

jack dorsey said that political ads force targeted political messages on to people and because of social media's vast reach political ads can then be used to spread lies and misinformation twitter saying it will not be part of a situation in which politicians have the right to lie to the public simply because they pay for the advertising. i'm joined now by a man who is not shy about sharing his opinions about the news media and social media jeff jarvis is a journalism professor and author of several books including what would google do he joins me tonight from new york good to see you again you posted earlier today your thoughts about twitter banning political ads and you wrote that you're not going to please anyone with what you think why is that. well you just the popular opinion these days which we see on twitter itself that people should these services should ban political ads because there are some bad apples out there i think that's a mistake i think the intent that jack dorsey has is very good i think he's very thoughtful about this is trying to figure it out but i think that in a

jack dorsey said that political ads quote force highly optimized and targeted political messages on people. this he said significant risk to politics where it can be used to influence votes to affect the lives of millions. are joining me now to talk about this is my colleague ollie also girths good to see all that it sounds like that dorsey is saying basically that social media has become a platform where political misinformation can be spread easily is that what this is about yeah i mean we all remember the example from 2016 the u.s. presidential election which really showed that targeted political ads on social media can spread misinformation and can sway votes i mean anyone can buy an ad which targets if it's this if a demographic or location or an interest and there are thousands of these dot up points that you can single out and this is really how of course this could have a targeting online defense from traditional political advertising the social media companies know everything about as they know what we love what we hate what we fear and when you when you take that knowledge and us

jack dorsey has now come out against and he talents as he challenged up in his announcements he said that it's not credible for them to say we're working hard to stop people from gaming our systems to spread misleading info by someone pays us to targets and force people to see their political ad well then we can say whatever they want so this is obviously a swipe at facebook how he's. trolling marc sucker bergeson here right there so all eyes now on facebook yeah. there are a lot of pressure but not just from competitors also from their own employees recently joined 50 facebook employees signed a letter to monks like a bug saying free speech and paid speech and not the same thing misinformation affects us or our current policies on fact checking people in political office or those running for political office are threats to watch facebook stands for we strongly object to this policy as it stands and of course one of those politicians running for office is elizabeth warren she is one of the democratic. contenders for the presidency she recently challenge facebook facebook's policy by

henry, you've got this comparison to facebook with jack dorsey making a move on twitter. i argue it is apples and oranges. how much can you target on twitter. there's even less certainty around who is real on twitter. and facebook, talking 2 billion plus people. twitter, nowhere near that yes, you can argue that jack dorsey is doing the right thing, but can you compare it >> i think you're right. facebook is bigger and more powerful what they do here will ultimately matter more cudos to twitter stepped up, did it now facebook, if they do anything, look like they're following. and it is a very complicated issue. you had people come out yesterday and cheer, others said whoa, what about emerging politicians that want to use it legitimately, honestly, how do they reach people now. what is a lie and what is misleading, who is going to draw those lines. twitter did take an interesting approach by banning all ads. my question is how do you determine what's a political ad? especially when everybody can do it anonymously. >> does it have to do with who is paying for it does it end

if jack dorsey can pick a fight with mark zuckerberg, jack dorsey wins because he is the minnow compared to the whale in this fight, twitter versus facebook. neither company by the way has much to lose or gain from the actual political ads. so dorsey is not giving up ton in the same way mark zuckerberg is not gaining much so they're each taking what look like principled stands but pretty easy to knock holes in those principles. i'm happy to do so. connell: big deal for facebook, that's why they're doing it. what if facebook gave them up? doesn't seem, what if if they did, wouldn't be a huge deal? >> i think anything the companies do is a slippery slope. for example, twitter, dorsey is saying we won't take political ads. but they're specifically allowing politicians, sanctioned politicians to say whatever they like. we'll not do anything about that. well they can run ads against all normal twitter traffic. so no one is pure as the driven snow here. connell: no, i guess not. that argument on the merits you think is just flawed? the idea that on social media you have to earn your attention,

jack dorsey taking a shot at facebook's ceo, mark zuckerberg, moments of before facebook released its latest earnings report. twitter now banning all political advertisements on its plaplatforel. platform. lauren: the fight on capitol hill, in just hours, the house will vote on an impeachment resolution. we're live in washington with what happens next. cheryl: 2020 hopeful elizabeth warren making a big admission on medicare for all, plus how her war with wall street may be smoke and mirrors. lauren: history made in houston, washington is the district of champions this morning after the nationals beat the astros in game seven. we're going live to houston for the world series series epic v. it is thursday, october 31st. happy halloween, everybody. "fbn: a.m." starts right now. ♪ ♪ we are the champions, my friends. ♪ and we'll keep on fighting till the end. ♪ we are th the champions. lauren: they are the champions, celebrating in the nation's capital this morning. welcome to the show, "fbn: a.m.." i'm lauren simonetti. cheryl: what a world series. we're going to tal talk about it

we've also got some very big news just out from twitter from the ceo jack dorsey. we will tell you what you need to know about that before the markets open tomorrow. i'm david asman. joining me on the panel today carol roth, steve forbes, and zachary karabell. let's head to susan lee who is at apple headquarters in california. a big beat by apple. you have more specifics from your own personal time there with tim cook. >> that's right. so i think the main take away is that it was a strong quarter and also a very strong quarter heading into the holiday season. tim cook says he's very bullish heading into the holiday season. the iphone 11 has been received very well. in fact, he sees the u.s. economy as being very strong. i asked him about the u.s. consumer given that we just got an interest rate cut from the federal reserve and in his view he says he feels very good about the u.s. right now. as for china, which has been the achilles heel so far this year, he says things have improved and trade tensions have gone down. to him, he saw the bottom probably in december a

jack dorsey is very attractive guy. he is smart, good-looking. zuckerberg is kind of halting when he goes before congress. neil: has inhurt your career. you're rocketing. >> look at me. zuckerberg doesn't have the cool beard that dorsey has. i met dorsey -- neil: goatee is. >> dorsey is smooth guy. nice guy. neil: nice manner about him. >> he is really nice guy but, you have to side with zuckerberg on this. think of it this way. do people really -- liberals think this because they're so hooked on that the russians through ads somehow skewed the election to trump. really facebook, changed that much, that many votes? think of it this way. information is so dispersed now, in the old days it was three major networks and three big papers controlled a lot of bandwidth in terms of political discourse. now it is so dispersed. it is not just facebook. it is everything. you're bombarded with information. because zuckerberg takes some ads does that mean people's minds are warped? i just don't think so. this is the case, why should i be the final arbiter? le

direction. >> which >> in twitter, with jack dorsey. i think this is right. the nature, the nature of these type of ads, they are so hyper targeted they are able to gin up support quickly. i don't think this is going to make a big difference on twitter's bottom line. i think be it's a tremendous p.r. move. >> what do you make of the other side of this which is to say it just makes it harder for anybody going up against an incumbent? >> it's hard to see that -- alexandria ocasio-cortez didn't take out joe crowal i becauy beh had a bunch of political tweets. no one is promoting twitter to get in there and win an election >> take twitter out of it. let's talk about facebook, insta, all the other social media out there approaching this similarly with facebook. >> i don't know how you sustain an argument that you allow politicians and political candidates to state outright lies on your platform, pay to serve them to highly targeted mobilized groups of voters, and say that it's okay and just say that's free speech i don't know how you sustain

we will get more details, but , jack dorsey ,ncapsulated by saying it political reach should be earned, not bought. joe: this comes after facebook, and require -- came under fire about whether politicians can lie in their ads and the stress they are under about being put her in the -- about being put in the position to regulate that, so they are just getting out of that entirely. let's go back to hyundai's capital, -- honius shawn matthews. the consumers the driving force want toconomy, people spend. talkingou're still about low unemployment. the gm negotiation was a key --ght, because labor because labor won, the deal they got was better than expected, which means there is inflationary wage pressure out there that will work its way through. -- at lowure comes interest rates, we are talking about zero interest rates in some parts of the world, to percent or less in other parts, it doesn't change much for inflation expectations to change the curve significantly. that could be painful for fixed income investors. nice bouncetting a after earnings. the 2019sible that in ipo class people go

jack dorsey tweeted a political message reach should be at north port. boeing c.e.o. dennis miller in burke faced another grueling day in front of washington lawmakers tonight offering to resign in the wake of the grabbing of the 737 max jets which followed crashes in indonesia ethiopia that killed 346 people boeing's profits have collapsed since its key model was banned from flying. the world health organization. for animal health is warning that no country is immune to the risk of african swine fever asia has struggled to contain the deadly virus which was 1st detected in the world's largest producer china last year it has since spread to vietnam cambodia and the philippines. now you might not have heard of it but today is world savings day it's been marked since 1924 and it's meant to encourage the virtues of saving and thrift for households and governments but is putting your money in the bank such a safe bet anymore for years risk averse germans have led the way as one of the countries where private citizens and companies have put the biggest share of their incom

in a thread on twitter, the company founder and ceo jack dorsey said that the reach of a political message should be ‘earned', rather than ‘bought‘. the us has released video of the raid that killed the is leader abu bakr al—baghdadi. us central command says these are pictures of the compound in north—west syria where baghdadi was hiding. firefighters in california are continuing to battle the blazes that are being fanned by strong winds and low humidity. one fire is threatening the ronald reagan presidential library. unprecedented ‘extreme‘ red flag warnings have been issued for much of the state. more on our website — bbc.co.uk/news and the news app. now on bbc news, live to singapore for asia business report. markets for asia business report. cheer as the fed cuts agi wall markets cheer as the fed cuts again. wall street closes higher after the us central bank lowers rates for the third time this year. the sun shines on silicon valley. us technology giants apple and facebook give investors plenty of reasons to celebrate. welcome to asia business report live from singapor

jack dorsey tweeted political message rich should be earned not bores social media companies including to put its rival facebook on the growing pressure to stop selling our ads that's bret's inaccurate information or a paid for by foreign governments trying to influence u.s. elections. india's government will formally break up the state of jump. into 2 federal territories on thursday it's fought a sweeping move to tighten its grip over the region that is at the heart of more than 70 years of hostility with neighboring pakistan india puts job one kashmir on the direct control in august and closed it off to visit us the government said it wanted to help customers economy to flourish but the 2 has been paralyzed the region's most important industry for 2 months. srinagar in kashmir is known for its beautiful lakes. in the summer thousands of tourists spend their holidays here but this season the boat owners don't have any customers since india put the state of jammu and kashmir under its direct control then they closed the region to tourism glamorous school has a little floating hotel his

the time is 20 minutes until the top of the hour and political -- jack dorsey breaking from facebook and google to been political ads from his platform. was it the right move? democrats and donald trump are divided. imagine that. abca15 breaks down all sides. ♪ ain't no mountain high enough ♪ >> a judicial nominee brought to tears over a letter claiming he cannot be impartial. lawrence van dyck was picked for the ninth circuit court of appeal and currently a deputy assistant ag for the doj. the bar association called him, quote, not qualified because he won't be fair to the lgbt community, he broke down when senators asked him about that letter. watch. >> i did not say that. i apologize. >> van dyck eventually went on to say everyone should be treated with dignity and respect. megan mccain accusing cory booker of dodging her questions on gun-control. watch this. >> this is a really important issue. what we say about other people says more about us -- >> what about the gun buyback? gun buyback's? >> which is related to gun buybacks. >> just tell me how you will get my brother's gu

jillian: an interesting move by jack dorsey, getting reviews from donald trump in his contenders. pressure is mounting for facebook. >> it is not about freedom of speech but paying for reach. the political message earned, and account for retweet. they removed the decision, targeted political messages or not. donald trump's campaign calling this a dumb decision asking will twitter be stopping ads for biased liberal media outlets that run unchecked as they by obvious political content to attack republicans. this is an attempt to silence conservatives. 2020 opponents, putting on a statement for the move, saying we appreciate twitter recognizes they should not permit smears like those from the trump campaign to appear in advertisements on the platform. dorsey seems to associate at mark zuckerberg who last week was on capitol hill where he was defending his decision to allow political ads, even one that makes false claims. zuckerberg saying i don't think it is right for private companies to censor politicians or the news. instead the better approach is to work to increase transparency.

takes aceo jack dorsey shot at mark zuckerberg's stance on political ads. our stock of the hour is up next. this is balance of power on bloomberg television and radio. ♪ david: this is balance of power on bloomberg television and radio, i am david westin. facebook shares are higher after beating estimates on the earnings with stronger user growth. the cloud hanging over facebook includes regulatory issues and the company's decision not to block political ads. >> we are not doing it because of money, this is less than 1% of our revenue and the revenue is not about the controversy. mark said we believe in free expression, clinical speech and ads can be a part of that. we are leading on transparency. we put out an ad library. we announced the presidential at track or. you can see any ad that anyone is running anywhere in the u.s. or in the world, if it is not targeted at you. , we kind of transparency think, is important. we also talked about investing in protection. we talked about on earnings call the size of the investments we are making, working with ele

jack dorsey says the social media platform is going to be in political ads. that takes effect in november,, one year before the 2020 election. it is a contrast to facebook and mark zuckerberg, who defends his choice to run paid political ads on the site, even false ones, in the name of free speech. one year into his tenure, imran khan is facing his biggest challenge. his political rival is leading a march of thousands on its way to islamabad. inflation down over and a stagnant economy. our reporter is covering the story live. there was a massive rally planned for today. it has been postponed into the tragic fire that happened in pakistan, leavining 70 people dead. tell us about ththat. >> the o opposition party y in pakistan, has beeeen marching towards islamabad for t the past fiveve days. outskirtsreach the today. the plan was to come to islamabad and do a demonstration. arly in the day, there was train accident, in which 73 were killed. they have postponed their march for tomorrow. protesters are planning to and doslamabad tonight the demonstration tomorro

. >> wilf, twitter will stop accepting political ads on the platform jack dorsey has just tweeted it out. he says while internet advertising is an incredibly powerful and very effective tool for commercial advertisers, the power brings significant risk to politics where it can be used to influence votes that affect the lives of millions. this comes on the heels, of course, of facebook's controversial decision to continue to allow political ads and not fact check those ads jack dorsey says in what may be a not so veiled dig at facebook that it's not credible for us to say we're working hard to stop people from gaming our systems to spread misleading information, but if someone pays us to target and force people to see their political ad, well, they can say whatever they want. this will apply to both campaign ads for candidates and for issue ads as well. as you can see, twitter dropping by 3.5% in extended trading. >> contessa, thank you. >>> so, josh, twitter, do you think this is an overreaction? >> it might not be to how much money people felt twitter would make between now and the

jack dorsey looked to reassure investors. >> unfortunately we had some missteps in our map ads in july and august despite that, saw strong september results and good advertiser momentum. >> he stressed the commitment to clean up the platform and eliminate abuse. >> 2020 elections and integrity of the conversations around them is our first priority within how we think of health we are paying a lot of attention to all of the dynamics at play, specifically looking at misinformation and misleading information. >> analysts are starting to weigh in as we see stock selloff. mkm saying we view twitter's issues as internal, self inflicted, probably fixable over the near term, however, amplified impact on revenue due to a technical bug wonders whether one can have confident have a view on twitter's long term potential. >> moving the opposite direction, tesla, posting a surprise profit, sending shares surging. phil lebeau has more on that quarter from chicago phil >> morgan, this is what happens when you post a far better result than many were expecting. tesla earning 1.86 a share in third quarte

david: twitter ceo jack dorsey throwing down the gauntlet announcing a ban we reported on last night on all political ads on his platform, a direct dig at facebook whose ceo mark zuckerberg went on defense during his earnings call last night saying quote although i have considered whether we should not carry political ads in the past, and i will continue to do so, on balance, so far, i thought we should continue. zuckerberg is also having to contend with hundreds of his own employees who are now calling for the company to stop running these ads unchecked. but with twitter out of the game, does it make good business sense for facebook to continue? gary? >> i'd stay in. you know, here's what they keep telling us, we don't want to do these ads because the political ads are not correct, and they're lying. i got news for you, we've been watching ads for the last couple of decades about grandma being thrown off the cliff or we're going to take money or food off the table of children or all of the city is going to be in the water soon because of climate change. we're getting these political

this is a change for jack dorsey of twitter. why make the change now? wa>> a lot of ways jac reacting to pressure provided by a different company facebook. a lot of controversy ov facebook's policy of not pulling down misleading posts politicians pulled up. jack was saying we're taking a different ad than mark zuckerberg and facebook decided to go down. >> schifri dorsey made this announcement before an earnings call for facebookand zuckerberg was asked about it on the call and said in a democracy i don't thk it's right for private companies to censor private policy or the news. do they feel pressure because of what twitter has done? >> they don't. there's a great deal more attention on them, they are aware they say wede the decision, our problem is we haven't articulated it as wll but we'll stick to it. >> schifrin: their decision is what? >> that if politicians put up posts that are misleading they will count on voters to look at the ads and say that's not true, allow the public to make the decisions about truthfulness and not do the fact checking on

ceo jack dorsey announcing the social media platform will no longer run any political ads. facebook ceo mark zuckerberg had this response. the reality is that we believe deeply that political speech is important and should be able to be heard. that is what is driving us the social network has been under fire for refusing to fact check >>> tonighesidential hopeful kamala harris is rebooting cu forrton iowa. >>> a new memo said she is running low on cash. there are the polls. the latest from usa today suffolk university shows harris with less than 3% support among likely democratic voters. katie nelson explains what this could mean for the campaign long-term.>> reporter: is definitely not a good sign for the campaign. that is because harris comes from right here in california which typically is a democratic high dollar donors state. but some political analysts say don't count her out just yet. >>> i'm surrounded by great people.>> reporter: kamala harris is tightening the belt and going all in on iowa. critical state for any hopefuls to win. the changes during a campaign stop

jack dorsey said the move is about stopping campaigns paying for reach, not limiting their speech. twitter banned ads for specific candidates as well as issues. there will be exceptions, including voter registration. facebook's sheryl sandberg said it would not be doing the same. >> we are not doing it because of the money. this is less than 1% of our revenue and the revenue is not worth the controversy. but we believe in free expression. we believe in political speech and advocacy is an important part of that. we are focused on transparency. d tracker which means you can see any add anyone is running for a political candidate anywhere in the u.s.. if it is not targeted at you. that transparency is really important. you also talked about investing in protection. one of the things we talked about just now is the size of the investments we are making, working with election commissions all over the world, hiring engineers, using human reviewers. really doing what we can to make sure people are kept safe. >> so when twitter decides to go the opposite direction, does that make you quest