Thursday, April 21, 2011
Facebook and Free Speech
President Barack Obama will travel to Facebook Inc.'s Silicon Valley headquarters Wednesday to hold a "town hall" meeting on the economy with users of the social-networking site.
But Facebook is still trying to find a path to Washington, where the company has only a fledgling lobbying operation, even though it finds its privacy policies under increasing scrutiny and is trying to navigate a politically sensitive expansion into China.
In seven years, Facebook has risen from a tiny start-up to an Internet power with a potential market value estimated at more than $50 billion. Now an online forum with more than 600 million users, Facebook faces growing pressure from lawmakers and regulators concerned about the way it uses personal information shared by its users.
At the same time, the company is confronting questions about how it will handle its role as a global public square for dissidents if it enters China and other countries with little tolerance for dissent. In an interview with The Wall Street Journal about its approach abroad, Facebook officials in Washington suggested the company might be willing to play by China's rules—a stance that could raise hackles in Congress.
Until lately, Facebook has spent very little money in Washington, even by Silicon Valley's frugal standards. The company's outlays on lobbying totaled $351,000 last year, federal records show. That's a fraction of the amount spent by other technology giants, including Google Inc.'s $5.2 million and Microsoft Corp.'s $6.9 million.
Facebook's new Washington office, designed to look like a hacker's lair, with walls of faux construction rubble, is a work in progress.
People familiar with the company's plans said talks to hire former Obama press secretary Robert Gibbs to guide the company's communications strategy, including with Washington, have fallen apart in the wake of a leak to the media that made a deal for him to join the company sound imminent. Facebook declined to comment.
Meanwhile, Facebook is talking with potential Chinese partners about entering the huge China market, where the government has been cracking down on dissidents. That crackdown has come in response to the uprisings shaking authoritarian Middle Eastern regimes, movements that have used U.S.-based social-media sites like Facebook and Twitter as organizing tools.
"Maybe we will block content in some countries, but not others," Adam Conner, a Facebook lobbyist, told the Journal. "We are occasionally held in uncomfortable positions because now we're allowing too much, maybe, free speech in countries that haven't experienced it before," he said.
"Right now we're studying and learning about China but have made no decisions about if, or how, we will approach it," said Debbie Frost, Facebook's director of international communications.
Facebook's plans may not sit well with congressional leaders already incensed with the company for sidestepping congressional inquiries on its China plans. Last spring, Sen. Dick Durbin, the Illinois Democrat who heads the Senate Judiciary Committee's panel on human rights, rebuked Facebook for refusing to appear at a Capitol Hill hearing on "global Internet freedom."
The company hasn't joined the Global Network Initiative, a group that includes information-technology companies like Google and Microsoft and human-rights groups that have agreed to common principles of conduct in nations such as China, which restrict speech and expression.
Neither Facebook nor its founder, Mark Zuckerberg, have said much publicly about Facebook's role as a tool for pro-democracy activists in Tunisia or Egypt. In Tunisia, where Facebook took technical steps to counter government efforts to steal users' Facebook passwords, the company said its efforts were driven by a safety and security breach—not politics.
"We've witnessed brave people of all ages coming together to effect a profound change in their country. Certainly, technology was a vital tool in their efforts but we believe their bravery and determination mattered most," Ms. Frost said.
Steering clear of association with human-rights issues could help Facebook woo officials in China, where the government is sensitive to the Internet's potential for fomenting dissent. But it would also attract criticism. "Blocking content in some countries—but not others—would deeply damage Facebook's brand and raise troubling questions about its commitment to human rights and Internet freedom," said Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, the top-ranking Republican on the Senate's human- rights panel.
Online privacy is an equally pressing policy issue for Facebook's Washington office. Sen. John McCain, an Arizona Republican, and Sen. John Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat, recently co-sponsored legislation that would establish a consumer privacy bill of rights. House lawmakers, meanwhile, have introduced privacy legislation that would require more disclosure to consumers but rely on industry self-regulation.
In mid-January, Facebook came under fire after it opened up a new feature allowing external websites and applications to gain access to users' addresses and phone numbers, with their permission.
Two weeks later, the company received a pointed letter from Rep. Joe Barton, a Texas Republican, and Rep. Edward Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat, demanding an explanation of how the plan fit into the company's privacy policies.
White House spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki said the president will answer online questions from Facebook users Wednesday. He won't deliver prepared remarks addressing China or privacy issues with Facebook's leadership. "Facebook, with more than a half a billion users, is a great opportunity for the president to speak directly to the American people," she said.
In the past six months, Facebook has hired two outside lobbying firms and four new Washington staff members, bringing its staff head count to 10 at its D.C. office. Only two of those staffers are registered lobbyists, and they lack ties to the congressional committees that will lead the privacy debate.
People familiar with Facebook's Washington plans said it is looking to hire more people with deeper congressional experience and bring on more seasoned communications and public-relations hands.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I find it a little scary that Facebook is moving into Washington. I still haven't quite gotten used to the openness of FB and the fact that it's expanding so quickly does not help my paranoia. I definitely see the issue of expanding into countries like China; the battle between free speech and foreign policy is a huge issue for the human rights movement, and has become incredibly more complicated with the growing use of the internet. But I think that FB will eventually make its way in (after all, America's not really known for staying out of people's business) either by persuading the government or finding more illicit ways to do so.
What a success... Facebook being the gateway to uprisings in the middle east was not something totally left field... It made sense- you can only imagine what the market of china would do with something like facebook
I'm not too sure about my views concerning Facebook in China. I'm all for promoting living in a free country where you can speak what you want, but there has to be intense caution when introducing that to countries that aren't used to it. This should definitely be looked into numerous times. We don't want to be responsible for chaos in other countries.
I find it interesting that members of the US government are trying to dictate the policies that a private company should follow in a foreign nation. To the best of my knowledge, the scope of US government and it laws only hold power and weight within the boarders of the United States. I may not agree with what Facebook proposes to do in foreign country but it is not my place to order a company to follow my polices in a foreign nation. Yet another great example of how the United States government is trying to increase its sphere of control. We should know by now that such conduct will diminish the standing of the US in the international community. Although, I must say that I am shocked to find out that Facebook does not have a huge staff of lobbyists in Washington already like the majority of technology companies. But the increase in their Washington staff leads to some important questions: What does Facebook plan to do in the future and how are they going to try to shape US privacy policy?
There are already several "facebooks" popping up around China. If Facebook decides to enter China then the company should do so without intertwining themselves with human liberties and leave it to the several other social networking sites around China. Facebook is a social network, not a noble stance for human rights.
Post a Comment