Original subtitles

♪ ♪

♪ ♪

[CHEERS AND APPLAUSE]

John: WELCOME, WELCOME,

WELCOME TO "LAST WEEK TONIGHT"!

I'M JOHN OLIVER, THANK YOU SO

MUCH FOR JOINING US.

IT HAS BEEN A BUSY WEEK.

IN BRAZIL, JAIR BOLSONARO WAS

CHARGED IN AN ALLEGED COUP

SCHEME, AND IN THE U.S., TRUMP

TOLD UKRAINE THEY SHOULD NEVER

HAVE STARTED THEIR WAR WITH

RUSSIA, AND ALSO MADE TIME TO

SPEAK TO THE PRESS ON AIR FORCE

ONE TO DELIVER AN IMPORTANT

MESSAGE.

WE'RE GONNA GO INTO FORT KNOX

TO MAKE SURE THE GOLD IS THERE.

ARE THEY--

YOU KNOW THAT, WE'RE GONNA GO

INTO FORT KNOX, YOU KNOW ABOUT

THAT?

THAT WAS A BAD BUMP!

WE'RE GONNA GO TO FORT KNOX, THE

FABLED FORT KNOX, AND MAKE SURE

THE GOLD IS THERE.

WHERE WOULD THE GOLD HAVE

GONE?

IF THE GOLD ISN'T THERE,

WE'RE GONNA BE VERY UPSET.

John: OKAY, SET ASIDE HIM

SAYING "THAT WAS A BAD BUMP!"

IN THE VOICE OF THE AFLAC DUCK

-- HE'S ALLUDING TO A BONKERS

RIGHT-WING THEORY THAT THE GOLD

IN FORT KNOX IS MISSING.

THOUGH, FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, IN

TRUMP'S FIRST TERM, HIS TREASURY

SECRETARY STEVE MNUCHIN ACTUALLY

DID VISIT THERE, AND

FREEDOM-OF-INFORMATION REQUESTS

YIELDED THIS PHOTO TAKEN INSIDE,

WHERE YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE THE

GOLD BARS.

I KNOW THEY'RE EASY TO MISS,

GIVEN THE CERTIFIED SMOKESHOW

STANDING IN FRONT OF THEM, BUT I

PROMISE, THEY ARE THERE.

THE WEEK ALSO SAW ELON MUSK'S

DOGE CONTINUING TO FIRE

GOVERNMENT WORKERS.

SOMETHING HE CELEBRATED BY

WIELDING A CHAINSAW AT CPAC.

[YELLING]

THIS IS THE CHAINSAW FOR

BUREAUCRACY!

CHAINSAW!

John: OKAY, FIRST, IS IT

POSSIBLE THAT ELON MUSK-- THE

WORLD'S RICHEST MAN-- THINKS

THE SOUND A CHAINSAW MAKES...

IS "CHAINSAW?"

AND SECOND, I'M NOT LEGALLY

ALLOWED TO SAY WHAT I WANT TO

HAPPEN THERE, BUT I CAN, AND AM,

THINKING IT REALLY HARD RIGHT

NOW.

BUT A CHAINSAW MIGHT BE A PRETTY

APT METAPHOR FOR DOGE, GIVEN

MUSK'S CUTTING HASTILY AND

WITHOUT A LOT OF PRECISION.

THE GOVERNMENT'S REPEATEDLY HAD

TO SCRAMBLE TO REHIRE EMPLOYEES

THEY SUDDENLY REALIZED WERE

ESSENTIAL.

ON MONDAY, WE LEARNED THEY WERE

TRYING TO REHIRE MORE THAN 300

EMPLOYEES TASKED WITH MANAGING

AMERICA'S NUCLEAR WEAPONS.

THEN ON TUESDAY, THE USDA SAID

IT ACCIDENTALLY FIRED EMPLOYEES

WHO ARE WORKING ON THE FEDERAL

GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE TO THE

AVIAN FLU OUTBREAK.

THERE WERE ALSO CUTS TO WORKERS

AT THE NATIONAL PARKS AND FOREST

SERVICES.

AND AT ONE PROTEST, A FIRED

WORKER GAVE A WARNING ABOUT WHAT

THESE LAYOFFS COULD MEAN.

WHEN YOU GO ON VACATION THIS

SUMMER, I HOPE THERE ARE NO

FOREST FIRES BECAUSE I, AND

THOUSANDS OF MY COWORKERS, OTHER

NATIONAL PARK RANGERS AND

NATIONAL FOREST SERVICE MEMBERS,

WON'T BE THERE TO HELP PUT OUT

THE FIRES.

SO, GOOD LUCK WITH THAT.

John: YEAH, IT TURNS OUT PARK

RANGERS DO A LOT MORE THAN JUST

PICK UP LITTER, GIVE TOURS, AND

-- JUDGING BY THIS RANGER--

SERVE LOOKS.

THE EARRINGS, THE BRAIDS, THE

CAT-EYED SUNNIES.

SHE LOOKS LIKE THE MAN IN THE

YELLOW HAT IF HE SLAYED.

AND TARGETING PARK SERVICE

WORKERS WASN'T JUST SHORTSIGHTED

YOU'RE BULLYING AMERICA'S BEST

DORKS.

THEY'RE INDOOR KIDS WHO LOVE THE

OUTDOORS.

JUST WATCH THIS VIDEO FROM THE

RANGERS AT BADLANDS NATIONAL

PARK ABOUT WHAT VISITORS ARE NOT

ALLOWED TO TOUCH.

♪ ♪

♪ ♪

John: THAT'S PERFECT.

PROTECT THOSE DWEEBS AT ALL

COSTS.

CAN YOU IMAGINE THEIR CHRISTMAS

PARTIES?

JUST A BUNCH OF NATURE LOVERS

GIFTING EACH OTHER "LEAF OF THE

MONTH" CALENDARS BEFORE GETTING

ABSOLUTELY ZOOTED ON SPIKED

SHIRLEY TEMPLES?

AND THEY'RE COMMITTED TO THAT

MESSAGE OF "DON'T TOUCH THE

WILDLIFE," EVEN POSTING TWEETS

LIKE "DON'T PET THE FLUFFY

COWS," WITH THE FOLLOWUP, "IN

NATIONAL PARKS, YOU DON'T PET

BISON.

BISON PET YOU.

IF YOU GET TOO CLOSE."

AND LET ME JUST SAY, DON'T

THREATEN ME WITH A GOOD TIME.

I'D LET THAT BROAD-BACKED COW

WITH PATRICK DEMPSEY HAIR GIVE

ME THE RIDE OF MY LIFE.

THERE'S NOT A PERSON AMONG US

WHO WOULDN'T HAPPILY GET BUCKED

AND FUCKED BY GOD'S BIGGEST

CHONK.

NOW, AFTER MASSIVE PUBLIC

OUTCRY, THEY DID REINSTATE SOME

OF THE PARKS SERVICE WORKERS,

SHOWING TWO THINGS: THIS

ADMINISTRATION CAN BE SWAYED BY

PUBLIC PRESSURE, AND THEY HAVE

NO IDEA WHAT THEY'RE DOING.

AND NOTHING'S DRIVEN THAT POINT

HOME MORE THAN THE "DOGE"

WEBSITE POSTING "RECEIPTS" FOR

THEIR CUTS AND CLAIMING THEIR

"TOTAL ESTIMATED SAVINGS ARE $55

BILLION"-- A CLAIM THAT

IMMEDIATELY FELL APART.

AS REPORTERS QUICKLY FOUND THE

WEBSITE ONLY ACCOUNTED FOR

$16.6 BILLION OF SAVINGS.

BUT EVEN THAT FIGURE TURNED OUT

TO BE AN OVERCOUNT, AS THEY'D

MISLABELED A CANCELED CONTRACT

AS BEING WORTH $8 BILLION,

INSTEAD OF $8 MILLION.

AND WHEN NPR ELIMINATED OTHER

ERRORS-- LIKE CONTRACTS THAT

HADN'T ACTUALLY BEEN TERMINATED

OR CLOSED OUT-- THEY FOUND THE

ESTIMATED SAVINGS, BASED ON THE

RECEIPTS DOGE POSTED, WERE

CLOSER TO $2 BILLION.

WHICH IS A LOT OF NUMBERS AWAY

FROM $55 BILLION!

IN FACT, THERE HASN'T BEEN SUCH

A STARK DISCONNECT BETWEEN

MARKETING AND REALITY SINCE IT

TURNED OUT THE GLASGOW WONKA

EXPERIENCE WAS ACTUALLY THIS.

RIGHT NOW, WE ARE ALL HER.

AND THAT WASN'T THE ONLY BIG

CLAIM THAT QUICKLY FELL APART.

A WEEK AGO, MUSK TWEETED OUT

THIS TABLE SHOWING MILLIONS OF

PEOPLE IN SOCIAL SECURITY'S

DATABASE OVER THE AGE OF 100,

CLAIMING, "MAYBE TWILIGHT IS

REAL AND THERE ARE A LOT OF

VAMPIRES COLLECTING SOCIAL

SECURITY, LAUGHING EMOJIS."

BECAUSE HE'S GOT AN INCREDIBLE

SENSE OF HUMOR.

TRUMP THEN AMPLIFIED THOSE

CLAIMS AT A PRESS CONFERENCE.

WHEN I SAW THE SOCIAL

SECURITY NUMBERS, I SAID, "WOW,

THAT'S REALLY SOMETHING."

SO, WE HAVE-- LET'S JUST GO

ABOVE 100 YEARS OLD.

WE HAVE MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF

PEOPLE OVER 100 YEARS OLD.

EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT'S NOT SO.

PEOPLE FROM 150 YEARS OLD TO 159

YEARS OLD, 1,345,000.

THESE ARE IN THE-- BY THE WAY,

THESE ARE IN THE COMPUTER FILES.

THESE ARE-- THIS IS WHAT THEY

DO WELL.

THEY'RE SUPER-- I ASKED ELON,

"WHO ARE THESE DOGE PEOPLE?"

HE SAID, "THEY'RE SUPER

BRILLIANT COMPUTER PEOPLE AND

THEY LOVE THE COUNTRY."

John: OKAY, HE'S CLEARLY

READING THAT FOR THE FIRST TIME,

BECAUSE NO ONE SAYS "WOW, THAT'S

REALLY SOMETHING" WHEN THEY KNOW

WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT.

YOU SAY "WOW, THAT'S REALLY

SOMETHING" WHEN YOUR KID HANDS

YOU A DRAWING OF YOUR FAMILY AND

YOU CAN'T DECIPHER WHERE YOU END

AND YOUR DOG BEGINS.

AS FOR THOSE "BRILLIANT COMPUTER

PEOPLE," TURNS OUT, NOT THAT

BRILLIANT.

BECAUSE IT EMERGED THAT TABLE

CAME FROM A SOCIAL SECURITY

DATABASE WHICH CONTAINS BASIC

INFORMATION ON EVERY SOCIAL

SECURITY NUMBER EVER ISSUED.

A 2023 AUDIT DID FIND IT

CONTAINED NEARLY 19 MILLION

PEOPLE OVER 100 WITHOUT A

RECORDED DEATH.

BUT CRUCIALLY, THE SSA ITSELF

HAD FOUND "ALMOST NONE" OF THEM

WERE RECEIVING PAYMENTS FROM THE

AGENCY, AND THAT IT'D COST

BETWEEN $5.5 AND NEARLY $10

MILLION TO CORRECT THOSE ERRORS,

LIKELY FAR MORE THAN YOU'D GET

BACK IN ANY SAVINGS.

AND THAT'S THE THING HERE-- FOR

ALL MUSK AND TRUMP'S BRAGGING,

MANY OF THE CUTS THEY'RE MAKING

ARE RANDOM, DISORGANIZED, AND

JUST PLAIN STUPID.

AND AS THE REAL AND SUBSTANTIAL

DAMAGES BECOME MORE AND MORE

CLEAR, I'M GUESSING IMAGES LIKE

ELON WIELDING A CHAINSAW WHILE

DRESSED LIKE THE GRIM REAPER ON

A VEGAS BENDER, ARE GOING TO

SPARK A TON OF PUBLIC ANGER.

AND WHEN WHEN THEY FIND THAT

ANGER DIRECTED RIGHT AT THEM, IF

I MAY BORROW THE WORDS OF A

JUSTIFIABLY FURIOUS PARK RANGER.

GOOD LUCK WITH THAT.

John: EXACTLY.

AND NOW, THIS.

Announcer: AND NOW,

CBS 50 AIDS FRANKIE JUPITER HAS

A WAY WITH SMALL TALK.

MS. WHERE SPEECH IS?

DON'T WORRY, SHE'S AT HOME

CUDDLING WITH HER FATHER.

YOU KNOW WHEN YOU'RE THE DOG'S

PERSON.

I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU KNOW BUT

YOU DEVON I JUST KNOW.

I BOUGHT HER TWO HALLOWEEN

OUTFITS AND SHE LOVES HER NEW

OUTFITS.

ARE YOU SURE THOUGH?

HOW ARE YOU?

I'M GOOD.

WONDERFUL, NO COMPLAINTS.

I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT.

I WISH WE HAD A BLACK CAT.

AND A MIRROR TO SMASH.

FRANKIE HAS A MIRROR.

IF YOU BROUGHT THE APPLE

STOCK, WOULD YOU BE HERE TODAY?

IT'S TRUE.

YOU'D BE RUNNING YOUR OWN

PERSONAL 500 COMPANY.

DOESN'T IT FEEL LIKE FRIDAY

THOUGH?

NO.

DID YOU EVER WANT TO BE AN

ASTRONAUT?

NO.

ARE YOU GOING TO BUY YOURSELF

SOMETHING NICE?

WHAT WOULD YOU DO IF WE WERE IN

THE BEATLES?

WOULD I BE RINGO?

WHO DO YOU WANT TO BE?

I DON'T CARE.

WHO DO YOU WANT TO BE COME UP

ALL?

WHOEVER IS LEFT.

WHO DO YOU WANT TO BE?

I'M JUST HERE BECAUSE SO I DON'T GET

FIRED.

John: MOVING ON.

OUR MAIN STORY TONIGHT CONCERNS

TECHNOLOGY.

THE THING THAT'S BROUGHT US

STONE TOOLS, THE CATAPULT, THE

TAMAGOTCHI, AND ONE DAY, GOD

WILLING, A FOURTH THING WORTH

HAVING.

ONE OF THE BIGGEST STORIES FROM

THE LAST ELECTION IS JUST HOW

MUCH THE TECH INDUSTRY SEEMED TO

SWING TOWARD TRUMP.

ELON MUSK, OF COURSE, CAMPAIGNED

AND JUMPED FOR HIM, AND

JEFF BEZOS REPORTEDLY KILLED

"THE WASHINGTON POST'S"

ENDORSEMENT OF KAMALA HARRIS,

AND GOT A PRIME SEAT AT THE

INAUGURATION, ALONGSIDE THE

CEO'S OF BOTH GOOGLE AND APPLE.

BUT ONE OF THE MOST VISIBLE

SWINGS CAME FROM

MARK ZUCKERBERG.

HE FAMOUSLY BANNED TRUMP FROM

FACEBOOK AFTER JANUARY 6.

BUT LAST MONTH, HE WAS

CO-HOSTING A PARTY AT HIS

INAUGURATION.

AND JUST TWO WEEKS BEFORE, HE

MADE THIS STRIKING ANNOUNCEMENT.

HEY, EVERYONE.

I WANT TO TALK ABOUT SOMETHING

IMPORTANT TODAY, BECAUSE IT'S

TIME TO GET BACK TO OUR ROOTS

AROUND FREE EXPRESSION ON

FACEBOOK AND INSTAGRAM.

John: OH, IS THAT WHAT YOU

WANT TO TALK ABOUT, IS IT?

BECAUSE I'D RATHER DISCUSS WHY

YOU SUDDENLY LOOK LIKE

EDDIE REDMAYNE WAS CAST TO PLAY

ICE CUBE.

YOU LOOK LIKE WHITE MACKLEMORE.

YOU LOOK LIKE A HIGH SCHOOLER

GOING UNDERCOVER AS A DIFFERENT

HIGH SCHOOLER WITH FEWER

FRIENDS.

BUT I'M SORRY-- YOU WERE

TALKING ABOUT GETTING BACK TO

YOUR ROOTS?

FIRST, WE'RE GOING TO GET RID

OF FACT-CHECKERS AND REPLACE

THEM WITH COMMUNITY NOTES,

SIMILAR TO X, STARTING IN THE

U.S.

SECOND, WE'RE GOING TO SIMPLIFY

OUR CONTENT POLICIES AND GET RID

OF A BUNCH OF RESTRICTIONS ON

TOPICS LIKE IMMIGRATION AND

GENDER THAT ARE JUST OUT OF

TOUCH WITH MAINSTREAM DISCOURSE.

THIRD, WE'RE CHANGING HOW WE

ENFORCE OUR POLICIES TO REDUCE

THE MISTAKES THAT ACCOUNT FOR

THE VAST MAJORITY OF CENSORSHIP

ON OUR PLATFORMS.

WE USED TO HAVE FILTERS THAT

SCANNED FOR ANY POLICY

VIOLATION.

NOW, WE'RE GOING TO FOCUS THOSE

FILTERS ON TACKLING ILLEGAL AND

HIGH-SEVERITY VIOLATIONS.

AND FOR LOWER SEVERITY

VIOLATIONS, WE'RE GOING TO RELY

ON SOMEONE REPORTING AN ISSUE

BEFORE WE TAKE ACTION.

John: THAT'S THE CEO OF META

ANNOUNCING HE'S GETTING RID OF

FACT-CHECKERS AND CALLING

SAYING HE DOESN'T WANT TO BE OUT

OF TOUCH WITH DISCOURSE AND

BEING OUT OF TOUCH

WHILE WEARING A $900,000 WATCH.

AND THERE'S NO WAY ANY WATCH IS

WORTH THAT MUCH, UNLESS, WHEN

YOU LOOK AT IT, IT READS "IT'S

TIME TO DONATE THE REST OF YOUR

MONEY, YOU OFFICIALLY SEEM TO

HAVE TOO MUCH."

THE CHANGES ZUCKERBERG'S MAKING

ARE STRIKING.

A LEAKED TRAINING DOCUMENT FOUND

IT'S NOW ACCEPTABLE TO SAY

"IMMIGRANTS ARE GRUBBY, FILTHY

PIECES OF SHIT," AND ALSO

SPECIFIES THAT THIS SLUR FOR

TRANS PEOPLE IS NO LONGER A

DESIGNATED SLUR, AND IS

THEREFORE ALLOWED.

AS FOR REPLACING FACT-CHECKERS

WITH COMMUNITY NOTES, LIKE ON X

-- IT'S WORTH NOTING, THAT

HASN'T BEEN A RAGING SUCCESS

OVER THERE, WITH ONE STUDY

FINDING NEARLY THREE-QUARTERS OF

ACCURATE COMMUNITY NOTES ON

ELECTION MISINFORMATION NEVER

GOT SHOWN TO USERS.

REMEMBER THAT TWEET FALSELY

CLAIMING HAITIANS WERE EATING

PETS IN SPRINGFIELD, OHIO?

THAT CLAIM WAS RATED

POLITIFACT'S "LIE OF THE YEAR,"

BUT THERE'S STILL NO COMMUNITY

NOTES ON THE TWEET, DESPITE

MULTIPLE ATTEMPTS TO ADD ONE.

AND ALL OF THIS IS A PRETTY

NOTABLE SHIFT FOR ZUCKERBERG.

BECAUSE SEVEN YEARS AGO-- AMID

WIDESPREAD PUBLIC OUTCRY AROUND

FACEBOOK STOKING MISINFORMATION

AND HATRED-- HE WENT BEFORE

CONGRESS TO APOLOGIZE.

FOR MOST OF OUR EXISTENCE, WE

FOCUSED ON ALL OF THE GOOD THAT

CONNECTING PEOPLE CAN DO.

BUT IT'S CLEAR NOW THAT WE

DIDN'T DO ENOUGH TO PREVENT

THESE TOOLS FROM BEING USED FOR

HARM, AS WELL.

AND THAT GOES FOR FAKE NEWS, FOR

FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN

ELECTIONS, AND HATE SPEECH, AS

WELL AS DEVELOPERS AND DATA

PRIVACY.

WE DIDN'T TAKE A BROAD ENOUGH

VIEW OF OUR RESPONSIBILITY, AND

THAT WAS A BIG MISTAKE.

AND IT WAS MY MISTAKE.

AND I'M SORRY.

John: YEAH, IT SEEMS THAT

VICTORIAN GHOST HAS MADE A

PRETTY BIG TURNAROUND, BOTH IN

TERMS OF WHAT HE'S SAYING, AND

HOW HE LOOKS.

AND I'LL ADMIT, NEW ZUCK DOES

LOOK LIKE HE'S HAVING MORE FUN.

HE'S TAN, HE LOOKS LIKE HE'S

SHOPPING AT STORES THAT ONLY

TAKE CRYPTO, AND HE'S NOT

SITTING IN FRONT OF CONGRESS

LOOKING LIKE A DEPRESSED VERSION

OF THE GUY FROM THE STONKS MEME.

ZUCKERBERG'S FRAMING ALL THIS AS

MERELY RESPONDING A BROADER

CULTURAL SHIFT-- SOMETHING HE

OUTLINED, NATURALLY, ON

JOE ROGAN.

WHAT WE DO IS, WE TRY TO

BUILD A PLATFORM THAT GIVES

PEOPLE A VOICE.

BUT I THINK THAT THERE'S THIS

WHOLESALE GENERATIONAL SHIFT IN

WHO ARE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE BEING

LISTENED TO.

I THINK IT'S JUST LIKE, A

WHOLESALE SHIFT IN SAYING, "WE

JUST WANT DIFFERENT PEOPLE WHO

WE ACTUALLY TRUST."

RIGHT.

WHO ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO

LIKE, TELL US THE TRUTH, AND

LIKE, AND NOT GIVE US LIKE THE

BULLSHIT OPINIONS THAT YOU'RE

SUPPOSED TO SAY, BUT LIKE, THE

TYPE OF STUFF THAT I WOULD

ACTUALLY-- LIKE WHEN I'M

SITTING WITH-- IN MY LIVING

ROOM WITH MY FRIENDS, LIKE THE

STUFF THAT WE KNOW IS TRUE.

John: IS THERE ANYTHING MORE

OFF PUTTING THAN A GUY WORTH

HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS, TRYING TO

BE A RELATABLE EVERYMAN?

"YOU KNOW HOW IT IS-- CHILLING

IN THE LIVING ROOM WITH THE

BROS, CRACKING A SIX PACK OF ACE

OF SPADES MAGNUMS, KICKING BACK

ON YOUR DIAMOND ENCRUSTED SOFA

AND TURNING ON THE BIG SCREEN

TV, WHICH IN MY HOUSE, IS A

HOLLOW BOX WHERE I PAY THE CAST

OF THE OFFICE TO REENACT MY

FAVORITE SCENES.

Y'KNOW, JUST RELATABLE, EVERYDAY

STUFF, GUYS."

AND LOOK, I'M NOT SAYING

FACEBOOK WAS DOING A PERFECT JOB

OF MODERATING CONTENT UNTIL NOW

WE'VE CRITICIZED THEM MULTIPLE

TIMES BEFORE.

I'M ALSO NOT SAYING THEY EVEN

COULD'VE DONE IT PERFECTLY.

IT'S BEEN SAID THAT "CONTENT

MODERATION AT SCALE IS

IMPOSSIBLE TO DO WELL."

BUT THE DECISION TO BOTH ABANDON

FACT-CHECKERS, AND TURN OFF

SYSTEMS THEY'D PREVIOUSLY

CLAIMED MADE THE PLATFORM SAFER,

DOES FEEL LIKE IT'S ABOUT TO

MAKE THAT SITE A WHOLE LOT

WORSE.

AND THE SELF-DEPICTION OF

ZUCKERBERG-- RAP NAME LIL

BROCCOLI-- AS SOMEONE SIMPLY

EMBRACING HIS COMPANY'S "ROOTS

AROUND FREE EXPRESSION" IS

SELF-SERVING BULLSHIT.

SO GIVEN ALL OF THAT, TONIGHT,

LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT THE

CHALLENGES OF CONTENT

MODERATION, HOW FACEBOOK'S FACED

THEM IN THE PAST, AND WHAT

MIGHT'VE LED TO ITS NEW

APPROACH.

AND LET'S START WITH THE

CHALLENGES.

BECAUSE FROM THE VERY BEGINNING

OF THE MODERN INTERNET, THERE

WERE CONCERNS ABOUT WHAT WAS ON

IT.

IN 1995, SENATOR JAMES EXON

BROUGHT A BLUE BINDER TO THE

FLOOR OF THE SENATE.

IT WAS FULL OF, WELL--

THE MOST HARDCORE, PERVERSE

TYPES OF PORNOGRAPHY.

THE IMAGES CAME FROM THE

INTERNET.

EXON WANTED HIS FELLOW SENATORS

TO REALIZE WHAT KIDS COULD SEE.

COME BY MY DESK AND TAKE A

LOOK AT THIS DISGUSTING

MATERIAL.

John: OKAY.

THERE'S A LOT TO LOVE THERE,

FROM THE BINDER THAT SAYS

"WARNING" IN BIG LETTERS, TO THE

INVITATION TO COME BY HIS DESK

ANYTIME FOR SOME "DISGUSTING

MATERIAL."

BUT MY FAVORITE PART HAS TO BE

THE CLIP OF A PLAYBOY JPEG

LOADING ONE CENTIMETER AT A

TIME.

THAT'S AN EXTREMELY ACCURATE

PORTRAYAL OF WHAT ONLINE PORN

WAS LIKE IN THE '90s.

HOW DO I KNOW?

NO REASON AT ALL.

BACK THEN, THERE WERE BATTLES IN

BOTH CONGRESS AND THE COURTS

ABOUT HOW THE LAW SHOULD TREAT

WEBSITES' HOSTING OF THINGS LIKE

PORNOGRAPHY AND DEFAMATORY

COMMENTS.

FOR A BRIEF TIME, THERE WERE

QUESTIONS ABOUT WHETHER A SITE'S

DECISION TO MODERATE CONTENT IN

ANY WAY MADE IT A "PUBLISHER,"

AND THEREFORE LIABLE FOR

ANYTHING IT DIDN'T REMOVE.

THAT ULTIMATELY LED TO THE

PASSAGE OF WHAT'S KNOWN AS

SECTION 230-- OFTEN DESCRIBED

AS THE 26 WORDS THAT CREATED THE

INTERNET.

IT STATED THAT COMPANIES COULD

BE SHIELDED FROM LIABILITY FOR

WHAT ITS USERS POST, BECAUSE

UNLIKE, SAY, A PRINT

PUBLICATION, WEBSITES ARE

DEALING WITH SO MUCH MATERIAL,

THEY COULDN'T POSSIBLY VET ALL

OF IT.

IT DOES HAVE SOME CARVEOUTS--

IT DOESN'T GIVE SITES A PASS FOR

CERTAIN TYPES OF ILLEGAL

CONTENT, LIKE CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE

AND TERRORISM MATERIALS-- BUT

MOSTLY, IT ALLOWS THEM TO

MODERATE WITHOUT FEAR.

WHICH IS GOOD.

BECAUSE-- AS SCHOLARS WILL TELL

YOU-- CONTENT MODERATION IS

ABSOLUTELY KEY TO MAKING THE

INTERNET BEARABLE.

YOU CAN'T HAVE A USABLE

PLATFORM IF YOU DON'T DO SOME

SORT OF CONTENT MODERATION.

OTHERWISE, EVERY PLATFORM WILL

JUST BE PORN AND DIET PILLS.

John: RIGHT, THAT WOULD BE A

PROBLEM!

ESPECIALLY ON A WEBSITE LIKE,

SAY, LINKEDIN.

ALTHOUGH, TO BE HONEST IT MIGHT

ALREADY BE JUST PORN AND DIET

PILLS-- I HAVEN'T BEEN ON IT IN

YEARS, I'VE HAD THIS JOB SINCE

2014, AND FRANKLY, HAVE NO

INTEREST IN LEARNING HOW OTHER

PEOPLE "RISE AND GRIND."

THE POINT IS, IF YOU WANT PEOPLE

TO USE YOUR SITE, AND--

CRUCIALLY-- HAVE COMPANIES WANT

TO PAY TO ADVERTISE ON IT,

YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE

CHOICES ABOUT WHAT TO REMOVE.

AND HOW YOU MAKE THOSE CHOICES

IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE

CONTENTIOUS.

FACEBOOK, OVER THE YEARS, HAS

LEARNED A LOT OF THESE LESSONS

THE HARD WAY.

IN ITS EARLY DAYS, IT TOOK AN

ALMOST TOUCHINGLY NAIVE

APPROACH, AS THIS FORMER

EMPLOYEE EXPLAINS.

WE HAD TO SET UP SOME GROUND

RULES.

BASIC DECENCY, NO NUDITY AND NO

VIOLENT OR HATEFUL SPEECH.

AND AFTER THAT, WE FELT SOME

RELUCTANCE TO INTERPOSE OUR

VALUE SYSTEM ON THIS WORLDWIDE

COMMUNITY THAT WAS GROWING.

WAS THERE NOT A CONCERN,

THEN, THAT IT COULD COME, BECOME

SORT OF A PLACE OF JUST UTTER

CONFUSION, THAT YOU HAVE LIES

THAT ARE GIVEN THE SAME WEIGHT

AS TRUTHS, AND THAT IT KIND OF

JUST BECOMES A PLACE WHERE TRUTH

BECOMES COMPLETELY OBFUSCATED?

NO.

WE RELIED ON WHAT WE THOUGHT

WERE THE PUBLIC'S COMMON SENSE

AND COMMON DECENCY TO POLICE THE

SITE.

John: OH, YOU DID, DID YOU?

I'D SAY THAT WAS ADORABLE, BUT

FRANKLY, I'D BE EMBARRASSED TO

GO ON FRONTLINE AND CONFESS THAT

EVERYONE WORKING AT FACEBOOK

SHARED A LEVEL OF WIDE-EYED

NAIVETE THAT CAN ONLY BE

DESCRIBED AS "FULL-BLOWN

AMELIA BEDELIA."

OBVIOUSLY, THAT INITIAL OPTIMISM

DIDN'T LAST.

AND OVER THE YEARS, FACEBOOK

STARTED IMPLEMENTING MORE AND

MORE RULES, AND EMPLOYING MORE

AND MORE PEOPLE TO ENFORCE THEM.

AND THAT COULD BE A GRIM JOB.

HERE'S ONE MODERATOR DESCRIBING

WHAT IT WAS LIKE TO SCREEN

THOUSANDS OF DISTURBING IMAGES A

DAY, WITH-- I'M GOING TO WARN

YOU-- A VERY DISTRACTING

DISGUISE.

I THINK IT WOULD BE EASIER TO

DEAL WITH THE IMAGES IF YOU

WEREN'T HAVING TO THINK ABOUT

THEM SO DEEPLY.

I WORKED THE EVENING SHIFT, SO I

WOULD START 6 P.M., FINISH AT

TWO-- TWO O'CLOCK IN THE

MORNING.

BUT THEN YOU WOULD OFTEN WAKE UP

THREE, FOUR HOURS LATER.

YOU'D SUDDENLY SIT UP IN BED,

REMEMBERING A DECISION THAT

YOU'VE MADE AND REALIZING THAT

YOU'VE MADE A MISTAKE.

LIKE, I'VE MISSED A NIPPLE.

YOU-- YOU REMEMBER SOME IMAGE

THAT YOU'D SEEN AND YOU SUDDENLY

REALIZE THAT THERE WAS A NAKED

GIRL ON ONE SIDE OR-- OR AN

ISIS FLAG IN THE BACKGROUND, SO

NOW IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DELETED

UNDER THE TERRORISM POLICY.

John: NOW, SETTING ASIDE THAT

IT'S COMING FROM A GROWN MAN

WITH A BABY HEAD TALKING LIKE

DARTH VADER WHILE DRESSED FOR

VACATION, THAT'S A DEPRESSING

GLIMPSE INTO WHAT FACEBOOK WAS

DEALING WITH.

AND IT'S A LONG WAY FROM RELYING

ON THE INHERENT GOOD OF HUMANITY

TO HIRING PEOPLE TO MAINLINE

ISIS PORN.

AND WHILE SOME DECISIONS AROUND

BLOCKING CONTENT WERE EASY,

OTHERS TURNED OUT TO BE MORE

DIFFICULT.

BECAUSE THINK ABOUT IT-- SAY

YOU BAN NUDITY.

WHAT ABOUT STATUES?

WHAT ABOUT BREASTFEEDING?

WHAT ABOUT A BREASTFEEDING

STATUE?

AND BEFORE YOU ANSWER, WHAT IF I

TOLD YOU I MEANT THIS ONE?

SEE?

IT GETS TRICKY QUICK.

THE COMPANY ALSO HAD TO DEVELOP

POLICIES AROUND HATE SPEECH AND

MISINFORMATION, WHERE THE

BOUNDARIES COULD BE EVEN

TRICKIER TO DEFINE.

FOR INSTANCE: THEIR RULES

PROHIBITED ATTACKS ON PEOPLE

BECAUSE THEY BELONG TO

"PROTECTED CATEGORIES" BASED ON

THINGS LIKE RACE, SEX, GENDER

IDENTITY, OR RELIGIOUS

AFFILIATION, BUT ALLOWED USERS

BROADER LATITUDE WHEN THEY WROTE

ABOUT NARROWER SUBSETS OF THOSE

CATEGORIES.

AND WATCHING MODERATORS TRY TO

APPLY RULES LIKE THAT IN

PRACTICE CAN BE BIZARRE-- AS

THIS HIDDEN-CAMERA VIDEO FROM A

CONTENT MODERATION CENTER IN

IRELAND SHOWS.

THAT TICKET THERE: "FUCK OFF

BACK TO YOUR OWN COUNTRY," AND

IT SAYS "MUSLIM."

OH, IMMIGRANTS.

MUSLIM IMMIGRANTS.

IF IT JUST SAID "MUSLIMS,"

THEN, YEAH.

YOU'D TAKE THIS ACTION.

BUT IT DOESN'T, IT'S ACTUALLY AN

IGNORE.

HE LOOKS AFTER STINKING

MUSLIM IMMIGRANTS.

I THINK THAT'S FINE.

IS THAT RIGHT?

YEAH, BECAUSE SAYING THAT

THEY'RE STINKING MIGHT BE

PHYSICAL INFERIORITY.

OKAY.

IF IT SAID LIKE "MUSLIM

IMMIGRANT SCUM" FOR EXAMPLE,

THAT WOULD BE A DELETE.

John: YEAH, THAT'S A WEIRD

PLACE TO DRAW THE LINE.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME, ANYWHERE

YOU DRAW A LINE CAN BE WEIRD.

DECIDING WHERE SPEECH BECOMES

HARMFUL IS LIKE TRYING TO FIGURE

OUT WHICH OF THE HORRIFYING

NIGHTMARES ON AN ANIMORPHS COVER

YOU WOULDN'T RUN OVER WITH YOUR

CAR.

THESE FREAKS?

NO QUESTION.

IT'S ON SIGHT.

I'LL BOUNCE THEM OFF THE FRONT

BUMPER OF MY SUBARU GOING EIGHTY

AND FEEL NOTHING.

ON THE OTHER END, WHOA!

WHOA!

THAT'S A NORMAL KID.

SLOW DOWN, I'M NOT TRYIN' TO DO

TIME.

BUT IN THE MIDDLE?

YEAH, THAT'S A QUESTION ISN'T

IT?

THAT'S A QUESTION.

AND THE THING IS, THE SAME GOES

WITH FACT-CHECKING-- OBVIOUS

LIES ARE ONE THING, BUT THERE

ARE PLENTY OF STATEMENTS THAT

ARE FACTUALLY TRUE BUT STILL

TECHNICALLY MISLEADING.

AND AT ONE TIME, FACEBOOK PUT A

LOT OF THOUGHT INTO THIS-- EVEN

PRODUCING THIS VIDEO IN 2018,

FEATURING A BUNCH OF EMPLOYEES

WRESTLING WITH THE NUANCES OF

MODERATION, AND ONE EVEN

DIAGRAMMING OUT THE PROBLEM AS

HE SAW IT.

IMAGINE ON THE X AXIS THAT

YOU HAVE THE AMOUNT OF TRUTH IN

A PIECE OF CONTENT.

NOW ON THE Y AXIS YOU HAVE THE

INTENT TO MISLEAD.

YOU CAN TAKE THIS CHART AND YOU

CAN SPLIT IT INTO FOUR

QUADRANTS, RIGHT?

IN THE BOTTOM LEFT, YOU HAVE THE

SET OF THINGS THAT ARE LOW

TRUTH, BUT NOBODY WAS INTENDING

TO MISLEAD ANYTHING.

THAT'S JUST CALLED BEING WRONG

ON THE INTERNET AND IT HAPPENS.

AND IN THE BOTTOM RIGHT, YOU

KNOW, IT'S THE SET OF THINGS

THAT HAVE HIGH TRUTH BUT AGAIN

NOBODY WAS TRYING TO MISLEAD

ANYONE, THAT'S JUST CALLED BEING

RIGHT ON THE INTERNET AND I'M

SURE IT WILL HAPPEN SOMEDAY.

THE TOP RIGHT, THIS IS THINGS

THAT ARE HIGH TRUTH, HIGH INTENT

TO MISLEAD SO THIS IS STUFF LIKE

PROPAGANDA.

SO, THIS IS STUFF LIKE

CHERRY-PICKING OF STATISTICS.

NOW, MIND YOU, WE HAVE TO BE

REALLY CAREFUL HERE, RIGHT?

BECAUSE OF OUR COMMITMENT TO

FREE SPEECH, EVERYTHING WE DO

HERE HAS TO BE INCREDIBLY,

INCREDIBLY CAREFUL.

BUT THEN WE MOVE TO THIS

QUADRANT, THIS IS LIKE THE

REALLY DANGEROUS QUADRANT,

RIGHT?

LOW AMOUNT OF TRUTH, HIGH INTENT

TO MISLEAD.

THESE ARE THINGS THAT WERE

EXPLICITLY DESIGNED AND

ARCHITECTED TO BE VIRAL.

THESE ARE THE HOAXES OF THE

WORLD.

THESE ARE THINGS LIKE PIZZAGATE.

THIS IS JUST FALSE NEWS.

WE HAVE TO GET THIS RIGHT IF

WE'RE GOING TO REGAIN PEOPLE'S

TRUST.

John: YOU KNOW, IT'S AMAZING

THAT ALL THIS STARTED WHEN A

YOUNG MAN HAD A SIMPLE DREAM OF

RANKING HIS CLASSMATES BY

FUCKABILITY, AND 15 YEARS LATER,

A COMPANY'S STRUGGLING TO STOP

PEOPLE FROM ACCUSING RANDOM

PIZZERIAS OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING.

A BUTTERFLY MASTURBATES IN ITS

DORM ROOM, AND IT CAUSES A

HURRICANE FOR THE REST OF US.

AND TO GIVE THAT MAN CREDIT:

HE'S GENUINELY WRESTLING WITH

THE ISSUE THERE.

BUT THE COMPANY WASN'T DOING

THAT OUT OF THE GOODNESS OF ITS

HEART.

FACEBOOK HAD COME UNDER HEAVY

FIRE FOR ALLOWING FAKE NEWS AND

HATE SPEECH TO PROLIFERATE--

NOT JUST IN THE U.S., BUT ALSO

ABROAD.

WE'VE TALKED BEFORE ABOUT HOW

MISINFORMATION ON FACEBOOK

HELPED FUEL ETHNIC HATRED,

LEADING TO HEADLINES LIKE

"FACEBOOK ADMITS IT WAS USED TO

INCITE VIOLENCE IN MYANMAR."

IT WAS AROUND THIS TIME THAT

ZUCKERBERG APOLOGIZED TO

CONGRESS, AND THE COMPANY BEGAN

DEPLOYING AN ARRAY OF OPTIONS TO

HANDLE MISINFORMATION-- FROM

PARTNERING WITH OUTSIDE

FACT-CHECKERS, TO APPENDING

NOTES TO POSTS.

IT'D ALSO DELETE SOME POSTS, OR

LIMIT THE REACH OF-- OR

OTHERS.

AND IN DOING SO, IT FOUND ITSELF

CONSTANTLY MAKING VERY HARD

DECISIONS, UNDER PRESSURE FROM

SOME VERY POWERFUL PEOPLE.

HERE'S ONE SUCH CASE, AND A

FORMER FACEBOOK EMPLOYEE

EXPLAINING THE DECISION THEY

ENDED UP MAKING.

WE WANT TO GIVE THIS

PRESIDENT THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO

SOMETHING HISTORIC.

THIS WAS THE VIDEO OF

THEN-HOUSE SPEAKER PELOSI POSTED

TO FACEBOOK IN 2019, SLOWED DOWN

TO MAKE IT SEEM THAT SHE WAS

SLURRING HER WORDS.

DID IT COME DOWN?

IT DID NOT.

WHY?

BECAUSE IT DIDN'T VIOLATE THE

POLICIES THAT THEY HAD.

SO DID SHE PUT PRESSURE ON

THE COMPANY TO TAKE IT DOWN?

SHE WAS DEFINITELY NOT

PLEASED.

SHE DEFINITELY--

IS THAT A YES?

YES.

AND IT REALLY DAMAGED THE

RELATIONSHIP THAT THE COMPANY

HAD WITH HER.

John: OKAY, SET ASIDE THE

FACT I DON'T SEE WHY YOU'D NEED

TO SLOW DOWN FOOTAGE TO

EMBARRASS NANCY PELOSI, A PERSON

WHO SAYS PLENTY OF EMBARRASSING

THINGS AT NORMAL SPEED-- I KIND

OF AGREE WITH FACEBOOK THAT

"DOES THIS PISS OFF NANCY

PELOSI" ISN'T A VALID METRIC FOR

TAKING THAT PARTICULAR VIDEO

DOWN.

AND LOOK, I'M NOT SAYING

FACEBOOK MADE THE RIGHT DECISION

100% OF THE TIME.

AGAIN, NO COMPANY AT THIS SCALE

COULD.

BUT IT DID DEVELOP SYSTEMS THAT

IT "CLAIMED" WORKED PRETTY WELL.

AT ONE POINT, THEY BRAGGED THAT

WHEN PEOPLE SAW FACT-CHECKERS

HAD LABELED CONTENT FALSE, OR

PARTIALLY FALSE, THEY WOULD NOT

CLICK ON IT NEARLY 95% PERCENT

OF THE TIME.

IN THIS REPORT, THEY NOTED THAT,

WHEN IT COMES TO HATE SPEECH

THEY'D TAKEN ACTION AGAINST,

THEIR SYSTEMS AUTOMATICALLY

DEALT WITH 95.3% OF IT, MEANING

USERS ONLY HAD TO REPORT THE

REST.

NOW, OF COURSE, SOME OF THOSE

TOOLS ARE BEING WATERED DOWN,

AND OTHERS TURNED OFF

COMPLETELY.

AND THAT BRINGS US TO THE

QUESTION OF "WHY?"

WHY ARE THEY SUDDENLY DOING

THIS?

WELL, THERE ARE A FEW THINGS

HAPPENED DURING THE PAST FIVE

YEARS THAT HELPED BRING US TO

THIS POINT.

ONE HAS BEEN CONSERVATIVES

REPEATEDLY PAINTING NORMAL

CONTENT MODERATION AS POLITICAL

PERSECUTION.

BIG TECH'S OUT TO GET

CONSERVATIVES.

THAT'S NOT A SUSPICION.

THAT'S NOT A HUNCH.

THAT'S A FACT.

WE'VE SEEN THESE BIG TECH

HAVE BEEN CENSORING US.

THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE BEING

CENSORED.

CONSERVATIVES ARE BEING

CENSORED.

THE INFORMATION THAT'S FLOWING

TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE IS BEING

CENSORED.

IT'S JUST THE BOTTOM LINE.

John: OKAY, THAT'S OBVIOUSLY

ALL BULLSHIT, BUT TO BE FAIR--

DEVIN NUNES KNOWS A THING OR TWO

ABOUT CENSORSHIP, GIVEN HE ONCE

FILED A $250 MILLION LAWSUIT

AGAINST TWITTER ACCOUNTS THAT

MADE FUN OF HIM, INCLUDING ONE

THAT PRETENDED TO BE NUNES' COW.

HE SUED A FAKE TWITTER COW

BECAUSE IT SAID MEAN THINGS

ABOUT HIM, PROMPTING THE ACLU TO

ISSUE THIS ACTUAL STATEMENT

HEADLINED, "DEVIN NUNES' COW HAS

A FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO CALL

REP.

NUNES A 'TREASONOUS COWPOKE'."

WE TRULY LIVE IN THE STUPIDEST

TIMELINE.

THE POINT IS, CONSERVATIVES HAVE

BEEN CRYING CENSORSHIP FOR

YEARS.

BUT THE EVIDENCE FOR THAT IS

VERY WEAK.

FIRST: TO THE EXTENT THEIR POSTS

DO GET FLAGGED MORE, THAT'S

PROBABLY BECAUSE CONSERVATIVES

TEND TO BE MORE LIKELY TO SPREAD

POLITICAL MISINFORMATION,

ACCORDING TO NUMEROUS EMPIRICAL

STUDIES."

BUT EVEN IF YOU THINK PLATFORMS

ARE TRYING TO SUPPRESS

CONSERVATIVES, THEY'RE DOING A

TERRIBLE JOB, GIVEN MANY OF

FACEBOOK'S TOP PERFORMERS LEAN

RIGHT, AND THERE ARE THREE TIMES

AS MANY EXPLICITLY CONSERVATIVE

NEWS INFLUENCERS AS LIBERAL ONES

ON THE SITE.

NEVERTHELESS, REPUBLICANS

CONDUCTED AN ALL-OUT ASSAULT ON

THE IDEA OF CONTENT MODERATION,

OFTEN CITING ONE GO-TO EXAMPLE,

OUTLINED HERE BY JEANINE PIRRO.

WHO SUPPRESSED FREE SPEECH IN

THE 2020 ELECTION?

FACEBOOK.

WHEN THEY WOULDN'T ALLOW PEOPLE

TO COMMUNICATE AND THE PRESS TO

COMMUNICATE ON HUNTER BIDEN'S

LAPTOP.

John: RIGHT.

HUNTER BIDEN'S FUCKING LAPTOP, A

STORY THAT BIG TECH SUCCESSFULLY

CENSORED, WHICH IS WHY YOU'VE

NEVER HEARD ABOUT IT.

AND I'M AFRAID IT'S WORTH TAKING

A SECOND TO REMIND YOU OF THE

DETAILS IN THIS STORY.

BECAUSE WHILE PEOPLE'S MINDS MAY

IMMEDIATELY SWING TO "RUSSIAN

HOAX" OR "DAMNING EVIDENCE OF

BIDEN CORRUPTION," THE TRUTH IS,

IT WAS NEITHER.

VERY BRIEFLY: BACK IN 2020--

WHILE TRUMP WAS PRESIDENT--

SOCIAL MEDIA SITES GOT A WARNING

FROM THE FBI TO LOOK OUT FOR

HACK-AND-LEAK OPERATIONS BEFORE

THE ELECTION.

THEN, IN OCTOBER, THE NEW YORK

POST RAN A STORY BASED ON FILES

FROM A LAPTOP THEY CLAIMED

BELONGED TO HUNTER BIDEN-- AND

WHICH HAD BEEN GIVEN TO THEM BY

STEVE BANNON AND RUDY GIULIANI.

FACEBOOK AND TWITTER WERE WARY

OF THE STORY.

TWITTER BRIEFLY DIDN'T ALLOW

PEOPLE TO POST LINKS TO IT.

AND FACEBOOK ALLOWED THE STORY

TO BE SEEN AND SHARED BUT

LIMITED THE ARTICLE'S REACH,

ONLY TO REMOVE THAT RESTRICTION

SOON AFTER.

NOW, IT EVENTUALLY CAME OUT THAT

FILES FROM THE LAPTOP WERE

LEGIT, BUT ALSO, THAT NOTHING ON

IT REVEALED ILLEGAL OR UNETHICAL

BEHAVIOR BY JOE BIDEN.

SO, WAS INITIALLY SUPPRESSING

THE LAPTOP STORY A FUCKUP BY

THESE COMPANIES?

IN HINDSIGHT, YES.

WAS THE STORY ITSELF

PARTICULARLY REVELATORY OR

IMPORTANT?

NOT REALLY.

DID FACEBOOK'S ACTIONS PREVENT

PEOPLE FROM FINDING OUT ABOUT IT

BEFORE THE ELECTION?

AGAIN, NOT REALLY-- EVEN DURING

THE PERIOD FACEBOOK WAS LIMITING

ITS SPREAD, THE STORY GOT THE

54 MILLION VIEWS.

IT GOT THE SAME VIEWERSHIP OF

PEOPLE WHO WATCHED THE

"THE FRIENDS" FINALE.

BUT THAT INITIAL DECISION MEANT

MARK ZUCKERBERG GOT YELLED AT A

LOT BY THE RIGHT.

AND AROUND THAT SAME TIME, HE

WAS ALSO BEING YELLED AT BY

BIDEN'S WHITE HOUSE.

BECAUSE AS THE COVID VACCINE WAS

ROLLING OUT, A LOT OF

MISINFORMATION WAS CIRCULATING

ON FACEBOOK.

BIDEN HIMSELF SAID AT ONE POINT,

OF FACEBOOK, THAT "THEY'RE

KILLING PEOPLE."

AND WHILE HE QUICKLY WALKED THAT

BACK, TO HEAR ZUCKERBERG TELL

IT, THE PRESSURE FROM THE WHITE

HOUSE TO SUPPRESS ANYTHING

CRITICAL OF VACCINES BACK THEN

WAS OVERWHELMING.

I MEAN, BASICALLY, THESE

PEOPLE FROM THE BIDEN

ADMINISTRATION WOULD CALL UP OUR

TEAM AND, LIKE, SCREAM AT THEM

AND CURSE.

I MEAN, BIDEN, WHEN HE WAS--

HE GAVE SOME STATEMENT AT SOME

POINT.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS A PRESS

CONFERENCE OR TO SOME JOURNALIST

WHERE HE BASICALLY WAS LIKE,

"THESE GUYS ARE KILLING PEOPLE."

AND-- AND I DON'T KNOW.

THEN, LIKE, ALL THESE DIFFERENT

AGENCIES AND BRANCHES OF

GOVERNMENT BASICALLY JUST LIKE,

STARTED INVESTIGATING, COMING

AFTER OUR COMPANY.

IT WAS BRUTAL.

John: OKAY.

HE IS CLEARLY PANDERING TO

JOE ROGAN AND HIS AUDIENCE THERE

ALTHOUGH MANY SEEMED TOO

DISTRACTED BY HIS OUTFIT FOR

THAT TO WORK WELL, GIVEN

COMMENTS UNDER THAT VIDEO

INCLUDE, "BRO DRESSED LIKE

UNDERCOVER COP," I THOUGHT THIS

WAS LIL DICKY, AND WHY IS A

40-YEAR-OLD BILLIONAIRE DRESSED

LIKE MY 25-YEAR-OLD SHROOMS GUY"

BUT LET'S DEAL WITH HIS IMPLICIT

CLAIM THAT THE GOVERNMENT

LAUNCHED INVESTIGATIONS TO

PUNISH FACEBOOK FOR HOSTING

ANTI-VACCINE CONTENT.

IT'S TRUE THAT THE GOVERNMENT'S

INVESTIGATED FACEBOOK A LOT IN

RECENT YEARS, BUT NONE OF THOSE

INVESTIGATIONS FIT ZUCKERBERG'S

NARRATIVE.

SOME, LIKE AN FTC ANTITRUST

LAWSUIT, WERE LAUNCHED DURING

THE FIRST TRUMP ADMINISTRATION.

OTHERS, LIKE THE CFPB'S

INVESTIGATION OF PAYMENT

PROCESSES, INVOLVE MULTIPLE

OTHER COMPANIES.

AND MUCH OF THE SCRUTINY THE

COMPANY'S RECEIVED IN RECENT

YEARS WAS ACTUALLY THE RESULT OF

A WHISTLEBLOWER RELEASING A

CACHE OF DOCUMENTS KNOWN AS "THE

FACEBOOK FILES."

AS FOR HIS COMPLAINT THE

GOVERNMENT WAS CURSING AND

SCREAMING AT FACEBOOK-- THEY

ARE ALLOWED TO DO THAT.

WHEN WE CALL UP GOVERNMENT

AGENCIES TO CHECK A FACT, THEY

CAN TELL US TO EAT SHIT.

BECAUSE CURSING DOESN'T VIOLATE

YOUR RIGHTS.

FOR MORE ON THAT, CHECK OUT "THE

CONSTITUTION FOR TOTAL FUCKING

DUMBASSES."

WHAT THEY CAN'T DO IS FORCE YOU

TO DO SOMETHING.

AND IN THAT INTERVIEW,

ZUCKERBERG DESCRIBES HIS

RESPONSE TO GOVERNMENT DEMANDS

BACK THEN AS, I WAS JUST LIKE,

WELL, WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO

THAT.

AND, EXACTLY.

YOU SAID NO.

AS WAS YOUR RIGHT.

AND DON'T TAKE MY WORD FOR THIS.

ALLEGATIONS LIKE THESE HAVE BEEN

ADJUDICATED IN COURT.

WHEN TWO REPUBLICAN STATE AG'S

TRIED SUING THE GOVERNMENT,

CLAIMING IT HAD PRESSURED

PLATFORMS-- INCLUDING FACEBOOK

-- TO CENSOR THEIR SPEECH, THEY

LOST, IN A 6-3 SUPREME COURT

DECISION WRITTEN BY

AMY CONEY BARRETT, WHO ARGUED

"THE PLAINTIFFS COULD NOT

DEMONSTRATE THAT THEIR CONTENT

WAS RESTRICTED DUE TO GOVERNMENT

PRESSURE."

AND LOOK, I CAN UNDERSTAND

ZUCKERBERG'S FEELINGS BEING HURT

BY THE PRESIDENT SAYING HIS

COMPANY'S KILLING PEOPLE.

AND I CAN UNDERSTAND HIM BEING

SICK OF BEING YELLED AT BY

REPUBLICANS FOR DOING TOO MUCH,

AND BY DEMOCRATS FOR DOING TOO

LITTLE.

ON SOME LEVEL I CAN EVEN

UNDERSTAND A BUSINESS WANTING TO

COZY UP TO WHOEVER'S IN THE

WHITE HOUSE.

BUT THERE'S ONE OTHER FACTOR

HERE THAT SEEMS RELEVANT TO THIS

DISCUSSION, AND FEELS IMPORTANT

TO MENTION.

IT'S A POLITICAL EVOLUTION

FOR META.

FOUR YEARS AFTER FACEBOOK

SUSPENDED MR. TRUMP'S ACCOUNTS

IN THE WAKE OF JANUARY 6TH, AND

JUST MONTHS AFTER THE

PRESIDENT-ELECT ACCUSED

ZUCKERBERG OF PLOTTING AGAINST

HIM IN 2020, CALLING FOR

"LIFE IN PRISON" IF ZUCKERBERG

DID IT AGAIN.

BUT AFTER MR. TRUMP'S WIN,

ZUCKERBERG TRAVELED TO

MAR-A-LAGO, HIS COMPANY DONATED

A MILLION DOLLARS TO THE TRUMP

INAUGURAL FUND, AND NOW CLOSE

TRUMP ALLY AND UFC HEAD DANA

WHITE IS JOINING META'S BOARD.

META, FACEBOOK.

I THINK THEY'VE COME A LONG WAY.

DO YOU THINK HE'S DIRECTLY

RESPONDING TO THE THREATS THAT

YOU HAVE MADE TO HIM IN THE

PAST?

PROBABLY.

John: YEAH!

YEAH, PROBABLY!

TRUMP THREATENED MARK ZUCKERBERG

WITH LIFE IN PRISON, THEN

ZUCKERBERG TURNED AROUND, GAVE

HIM MONEY, HIRED ONE OF HIS

BUDDIES AND CHANGED THE

DIRECTION HIS COMPANY WAS GOING.

IT DOESN'T TAKE A GENIUS TO DRAW

A CONCLUSION THERE AND, IN

IT DIDN'T TAKE ONE.

AND IT DIDN'T STOP THERE.

META ALSO RECENTLY PAID $25

MILLION TO SETTLE A BULLSHIT

LAWSUIT TRUMP FILED OVER BEING

KICKED OFF FACEBOOK, DESPITE

MANY EXPERTS AGREEING, THAT WAS

WELL WITHIN THE COMPANY'S

RIGHTS.

AND AT THIS POINT, IT BEGINS TO

FEEL LIKE TRUMP'S DOING EXACTLY

WHAT ZUCKERBERG ACCUSED THE

BIDEN ADMINISTRATION OF:

LEVERAGING THE POWER OF HIS

OFFICE TO PRESSURE SOCIAL MEDIA

COMPANIES TO BEND TO HIS WILL.

AND ZUCKERBERG IS COMPLYING.

AND HE'LL INSIST THESE CHANGES

AREN'T A RESULT OF BEING UNDER

POLITICAL PRESSURE, BUT EITHER

WAY, FACEBOOK IS NOW SET TO

BECOME AN ABSOLUTE SEWER OF

HATRED AND MISINFORMATION.

WHICH I KNOW SOUNDS LIKE A

PRETTY GOOD DESCRIPTION OF

FACEBOOK ALREADY, BUT WE'RE

ABOUT TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS WHEN

THEY "REALLY" STOP TRYING.

SO WHAT CAN WE DO?

WELL, THERE ARE SOME BAD IDEAS

OUT THERE.

BOTH DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS

HAVE IN RECENT YEARS SUGGESTED

WAYS TO AMEND SECTION 230 SO

COMPANIES ARE MORE LIABLE FOR

WHAT APPEARS ON WEBSITES.

BUT I AM YET TO SEE A PROPOSAL

THAT COULDN'T BE EASILY

WEAPONIZED TO ENABLE POLITICAL

CENSORSHIP.

THERE ARE DEFINITELY OPTIONS

AVAILABLE TO COMPANIES THAT

ADVERTISE ON FACEBOOK-- AND I'D

ARGUE THEY MIGHT WANT TO

SERIOUSLY CONSIDER WHETHER THEY

WANT THEIR ADS NEXT TO THESE

ACTUAL SAMPLE SENTENCES FACEBOOK

SAYS ARE NOW ACCEPTABLE.

HEY, DISNEY, YOU WANT OLAF

PROMOTING "FROZEN 3" NEXT TO

THAT SHIT?

I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE YOU DO!

BUT FOR INDIVIDUALS, THE OPTIONS

ARE MORE LIMITED.

YOU COULD DELETE YOUR META

ACCOUNTS.

AND YOU WOULDN'T BE ALONE IN

THAT.

IN JANUARY, GOOGLE SEARCHES FOR

HOW TO CANCEL AND DELETE

FACEBOOK, INSTAGRAM, AND THREADS

ACCOUNTS INCREASED BY OVER

5000%.

AND THERE ARE ALTERNATIVES OUT

THERE THAT DON'T SEEM AS

DESPERATE TO FALL IN LINE WITH

TRUMP.

BUT, I DO GET THAT IF FACEBOOK

AND INSTAGRAM ARE WHERE YOUR

FAMILY AND FRIENDS ARE, YOU MAY

NOT BE READY TO TAKE THAT STEP.

JUST REMEMBER TO TAKE WHATEVER

YOU READ ON THOSE PLATFORMS WITH

EVEN MORE OF A GRAIN OF SALT

THAN YOU DID BEFORE.

BUT THERE IS ONE SMALL WAY YOU

CAN ACTUALLY FUCK WITH META, AND

THAT'S BY MAKING YOURSELF A BIT

LESS VALUABLE TO THEM.

REMEMBER, ADVERTISING MAKES UP

98% OF META'S REVENUE.

AND A KEY COMPONENT IS THEM

BEING ABLE TO OFFER COMPANIES

THE ABILITY TO MICRO-TARGET YOU.

META CAN DO THAT BECAUSE THEY

TRACK MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF DATA

ABOUT NOT JUST WHAT YOU DO ON

THEIR SITES, BUT ALL ACROSS THE

INTERNET.

WHICH IS WHY IT'S SO

WHICH IS WHY THEY PROBABLY

WOULDN'T WANT ME TO TELL YOU SO

YOU CAN CHANGE YOUR SETTINGS SO

FACEBOOK AND META CANNOT PROFIT

FROM YOUR DATA ANYMORE.

IF YOU'D BE INTERESTED IN A

STEP-BY-STEP GUIDE ON HOW TO DO

THAT, SIMPLY VISIT

JohnWantsYourRatErotica.com.

AND IN THE MEANTIME, IF FACEBOOK

IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO SUBJECT

US TO A STEADILY RISING TIDE OF

SLURS, HOAXES, AND

MISINFORMATION, THE LEAST IT CAN

DO IS TELL US THE ACTUAL TRUTH

IN ITS MESSAGING.

OVER THE YEARS WE'VE TRIED

OUR BEST.

IT FELT LIKE OUR

RESPONSIBILITY BECAUSE WE MADE

THAT TOILET.

AND GOT SUPER RICH FROM IT.

BUT MODERATING BILLIONS OF

USERS IS REALLY HARD.

THEY SAY WITHOUT IT, THE

INTERNET WOULD BE PORN AND DIET

PILLS.

GOD, I WISH THAT WAS THE THING

WE ONLY HAD TO LOOK OUT FOR.

GAMBLING, CRYPTO SCAMS, THE

PICTURES OF A WEIRDLY JACKED

GRANDPA THAT SAYS ONE TRICK TO

GET TURBO SHREDDED AFTER 50.

IT'S A LOT THEY ARE >> WHICH IS

WHY WE ARE SO HAPPY TO ANNOUNCE

OUR 20 OF 25 POLICY ON CONTENT

MODERATION.

FUCK IT.

TO BE CLEAR, ALL HER PREVIOUS

ISSUES REMAIN BUT BY

STRATEGICALLY PIVOTING TO FUCK

IT, WE FOUND ITS MORE OF A YOU

PROBLEM.

KEEP ALL THE NUANCES GREAT

LIKE WHY IMMIGRANTS ARE SHITTY

IS ACCEPTABLE AND IMMIGRANTS ARE

SHIT ISN'T.

MAY BE THE OPPOSITE.

YOU KNOW HOW YOUR OLDER

RELATIVES WOULD SAY I GOT AN

EMAIL FROM A PRINCE IN AFRICA

WHO WILL SEND ME $1 MILLION OF I

GIVE HIM MY SOCIAL SECURITY

NUMBER AND YOU HAD TO BE LIKE

NO, GRANDMA, THAT'S FAKE.

NOW YOU HAVE TO DO THAT FOR ALL

YOUR RELATIVES FOR ALL NEWS

FOREVER.

FUCK IT.

TO SPEAK BESIDES, WHAT'S THE

WORST THAT COULD HAPPEN?

THAT YOU COULD CONTRIBUTE TO A.

IN MADDEN ARE.

THEY FIRED THE TEAM THAT

WOULD NO.

HE CAN USE THE SLURS OF HIS

CHOICE.

OR HER CHOICE.

OR THEIR-- O COME OUT, IT'S

TWO, FACEBOOK DECIDED TO JUST

THE TWO NOW.

HERE THAT?

FUCK IT.

TO THOSE WHO SAY WE'RE JUST

ROLLING OVER TO PRESIDENT TRUMP

IN HOPES HE WON'T THROW US IN

PRISON, LET ME FORCEFULLY SAY,

NUH-UH.

JUST KNOW WHATEVER'S

HAPPENING OUT THERE, WE HERE AT

FACEBOOK ARE RECOMMITTED TO OUR

CORE VALUES.

THE SAME ONES WE DEFINITELY

ALWAYS HAD.

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION.

AVOIDANCE OF RESPONSIBILITY.

AND RANKING COLLEGE GIRLS BY

HOTNESS.

NO, THAT'S TOO FAR BACK?

OKAY.

FACEBOOK, LIKE A TOWN SQUARE.

AND NOW YOU'RE THE MAYOR AND

POLICE OF YOUR TOWN SQUARE.

[CHEERS AND APPLAUSE]

John: THAT'S OUR SHOW.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR WATCHING.

WE'LL SEE YOU NEXT WEEK.

GOOD NIGHT!

FUCK IT.

♪ ♪