fb exec on cooper
fb exec on cooper
Now playing
02:27
Cooper grills Facebook VP for keeping Pelosi video up
WASHINGTON, DC - JUNE 22: Facebook
WASHINGTON, DC - JUNE 22: Facebook's Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg speaks with AEI president Arthur C. Brooks during a public conversation on Facebook's work on 'breakthrough innovations that seek to open up the world' at The American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research on June 22, 2016 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Allison Shelley/Getty Images)
PHOTO: Allison Shelley/Getty Images North America/Getty Images
Now playing
01:23
Hear Sandberg downplay Facebook's role in the Capitol riots
screengrab US social media
screengrab US social media
PHOTO: Getty Images
Now playing
04:35
Tech companies ban Trump, but not other problematic leaders
PHOTO: Samsung
Now playing
01:53
See Samsung's new Galaxy S21 lineup
PHOTO: CNN
Now playing
02:47
Extremists and conspiracy theorists search for new platforms online
This illustration picture shows the social media website from Parler displayed on a computer screen in Arlington, Virginia on July 2, 2020. - Amid rising turmoil in social media, recently formed social network Parler is gaining with prominent political conservatives who claim their voices are being silenced by Silicon Valley giants. Parler, founded in Nevada in 2018, bills itself as an alternative to "ideological suppression" at other social networks. (Photo by Olivier Douliery/AFP/Getty Images)
This illustration picture shows the social media website from Parler displayed on a computer screen in Arlington, Virginia on July 2, 2020. - Amid rising turmoil in social media, recently formed social network Parler is gaining with prominent political conservatives who claim their voices are being silenced by Silicon Valley giants. Parler, founded in Nevada in 2018, bills itself as an alternative to "ideological suppression" at other social networks. (Photo by Olivier Douliery/AFP/Getty Images)
PHOTO: Olivier Douliery/AFP/Getty Images
Now playing
03:49
Parler sues Amazon in response to being deplatformed
PHOTO: Twitter
Now playing
02:39
Twitter permanently suspends Donald Trump from platform
Panasonic
Panasonic's Augmented Reality Heads-up Display
PHOTO: Panasonic USA
Now playing
01:06
This tech gives drivers directions on the road in front of them
PHOTO: LG Display
Now playing
01:10
See LG's transparent TV
PHOTO: Twitter/@gregdoesthings
Now playing
02:06
Internet gets creative with empty iPhone boxes
NEW YORK, NY - JUNE 3: The Google logo adorns the outside of their NYC office Google Building 8510 at 85 10th Ave on June 3, 2019 in New York City. Shares of Google parent company Alphabet were down over six percent on Monday, following news reports that the U.S. Department of Justice is preparing to launch an anti-trust investigation aimed at Google. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
NEW YORK, NY - JUNE 3: The Google logo adorns the outside of their NYC office Google Building 8510 at 85 10th Ave on June 3, 2019 in New York City. Shares of Google parent company Alphabet were down over six percent on Monday, following news reports that the U.S. Department of Justice is preparing to launch an anti-trust investigation aimed at Google. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
PHOTO: Drew Angerer/Getty Images North America/Getty Images
Now playing
03:25
Google employee on unionizing: Google can't fire us all
Now playing
02:01
Watch 'deepfake' Queen deliver alternative Christmas speech
Now playing
01:42
Watch father leave daughter dozens of surprise Ring messages
PHOTO: Photo Illustration: Kena Betancur/Getty Images
Now playing
04:50
Zoom's founder says he 'let down' customers. Here's why
Now playing
00:48
See Walmart's self-driving delivery trucks in action
Now playing
01:25
This robotaxi from Amazon's Zoox has no reverse function
(CNN Business) —  

The debate over Facebook’s decision to allow President Trump’s reelection campaign to pay to run false ads on its platform encapsulates the awkward moral, social and civil questions that have dogged the company since 2016.

Facebook’s argument is this: As a private company, it shouldn’t have the power to censor the leader of the free world, even if he lies. Those lies, Facebook says, will be tested and exposed by the media and through political discourse.

But not so, says former vice president Joe Biden’s campaign. They complained to Facebook last week after the Trump campaign began running false ads about the Bidens and Ukraine – an issue which is now central to the impeachment inquiry. Facebook, the Biden team says, should shut down the ads.

“Our approach is grounded in Facebook’s fundamental belief in free expression,” Katie Harbath, Facebook’s public policy director, responded to the Biden campaign. “Political speech is already arguably the most scrutinized speech there is. Thus, when a politician speaks or makes an ad, we do not send it to third party fact checkers.”

Facebook’s argument might be more convincing in a world without the platform. The company has helped create and enhance ideological echo chambers. Some Facebook users only follow and engage with content with which they agree. Hundreds of Facebook groups exist with thousands of members devoted to various presidential candidates. There, campaign talking points are repeated ad-nauseum.

Given how the Facebook News Feed is determined by an algorithm and the highly-targeted nature of Facebook ads, it’s entirely possible that a Facebook user could see a false ad from a campaign and not encounter a post that challenges or corrects it. On the other hand, the company perhaps has a point. Although a for-profit corporation, Facebook is an important part of America’s public square, allowing users from all sides of the political spectrum to converse and providing a platform for politicians to reach voters directly.

Democrats, many of whom lament the concentration of power in Silicon Valley, are calling on Facebook to exercise even more control by making decisions about political speech.

“Lawmakers often tell me we have too much power over speech, and frankly I agree,” Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg wrote earlier this year in a Washington Post op-ed. He called on Congress to write laws that would help companies like Facebook better police speech.

Zuckerberg is right. The law has not kept up with the digital revolution and these businesses are left to make up their own rules.

YouTube and Twitter let the Trump campaign run the false anti-Biden ad, too. But the fact they are only mentioned one time and halfway into this article – along with the Biden campaign’s decision to single out Facebook in their first letter – might reflect the media’s and Washington’s obsession with Facebook. The company — perhaps due to its perceived ubiquity — is often used as a conduit to scrutinize issues that in fact go far beyond Facebook, whether that be online political discourse or corporate social responsibility.

Nick Clegg, the former deputy prime minister of the United Kingdom and now a Facebook employee, recently waxed poetic about the company’s policy of not fact-checking politicians. Although Facebook said the policy has been in place for a year, Clegg made it part of a speech he delivered in Washington DC last month.

But there are some factors at play. What makes Facebook so profitable is its ability to build scalable products and services. Technologies such as automation and artificial intelligence help facilitate Facebook’s hands-off approach. The efforts neatly fit with Zuckerberg’s original vision for the company: a platform where people can connect openly in a way that involves relatively little oversight.

But since 2016, the company has been forced to be more proactive and responsive, reluctantly making overt editorial decisions. Facebook has cracked down on anti-vaccination misinformation, banned white nationalism and hired fact-checkers that de-prioritize posts containing misinformation. But politicians’ posts, for the most part, are exempt.

All these new rules require more people, despite the great promises of moderation by artificial intelligence extolled by Zuckerberg and others. In moments that matter, such as during the live streaming of the massacre in Christchurch, New Zealand, earlier this year, we have seen that dependence on AI backfire spectacularly.

Since May 2018, the Trump campaign has spent more than $20 million on Facebook ads. Fact-checking those ads would slow down Facebook’s approval process, potentially resulting in a lower ad-spend.

Facebook posted profits just shy of $7 billion last year. Fact-checking Trump and other 2020 candidates’ ads would not significantly impact the company’s bottom line. But it would represent another chisel cutting into the automated utopia that has made Facebook rich. Then, once fact checks happen on US politicians’ posts, other countries might call for the same.

Then there’s the political calculation. Under intense scrutiny since 2016 in Washington, Facebook has hired a mostly deft team to help it navigate the nation’s capital.

Facebook may be happier to take a letter of complaint or two from the Biden campaign about a Trump ad rather than fact check and possibly refuse ads from Trump. This would further embolden Republicans who claim Silicon Valley has an anti-conservative bias.

For now, Facebook is remaining steadfast in its position to allow politicians to post and pay to target lies at Americans. But the company has been known to change its policies around politics and speech before, no matter how much it once defended them.

While in the UK government, Clegg was slammed for not honoring a pledge not to raise the cost of college tuition. Now as Facebook’s front man on the fact-checking debate, he could again one day find himself walking back another argument made in good faith.