WEBVTT
1
00:00:00.260 --> 00:00:11.860
Geek Out! with Matt Navarra is sponsored by Pinterest. Inspire your audience and grow your company on Pinterest with a free business account. Learn more at business.pinterest.com. It's time to Geek Out!
2
00:00:11.950 --> 00:00:27.660
[upbeat music] Hello, and welcome to Geek Out! with Matt Navarra, sponsored by Pinterest. I am Matt Navarra. And I'm Martin SFP Bryant.
3
00:00:27.740 --> 00:00:37.360
Now, regulation of social media is a topic we'll no doubt keep coming back to in this podcast. So we thought it'd be worth speaking to one of the heavyweights in that particular game. Yes.
4
00:00:37.440 --> 00:00:44.230
This week we'll be talking to Damian Collins, the British MP who chairs the UK Parliament's Digital Culture, Media and Sports Committee.
5
00:00:44.660 --> 00:00:49.519
He's the man Z- Mark Zuckerberg will be hauled in front of if he ever touches down on British soil again.
6
00:00:49.580 --> 00:00:58.520
And it's fair to say Damian's committee has managed to ask the probing questions politicians in other countries haven't. So it's going to be a really interesting chat. He'll be joining us shortly.
7
00:00:58.800 --> 00:01:09.180
And if you wanna get in touch with us on Twitter, use the hashtag #GeekOutQuestions, and you can find us, um, there, and me particularly, as MattNavarra on Twitter. And I'm MartinSFP.
8
00:01:09.280 --> 00:01:10.960
So Matt, what have you been up to this week?
9
00:01:11.480 --> 00:01:25.140
Well, I just got an email actually saying I've been nominated for an award by Social Media Day, Social Media Marketing Awards 2019, as Freelance Social Media Marketer of the Year, which is quite cool, so thank you to them for the shortlisting of, for that award.
10
00:01:25.480 --> 00:01:28.460
Find out, uh, later on next month, uh, whether I get anywhere with that one.
11
00:01:29.140 --> 00:01:41.540
Um, I've been looking at more podcast guests, 'cause we're already getting quite interested in thinking about season two, and there's quite a queue of people that I'd like to try and get onto the podcast, so I've been working through a, uh, a nice-to-have and must-have list.
12
00:01:41.620 --> 00:01:46.400
And I've also been playing with a new tool for TikTok called Pentos, which is a analytics tool.
13
00:01:46.500 --> 00:01:56.580
It's quite basic at the moment, but, uh, it seems to be quite new, so I've been playing around with that to see how effective it is, and still trying to decide on whether I am gonna upgrade to the iPhone 11.
14
00:01:56.740 --> 00:02:04.000
It's a decision that's, you know, critical of course, but, uh, has yet to be decided. I think probably to the Pro, but, um, that's 'cause I'm a geek, so there we go.
15
00:02:04.100 --> 00:02:27.160
In fact, I was listening to one of the longest-running Apple podcasts out there, uh, MacBreak Weekly, uh, the other day, and, uh, they were talking about the, uh, iPhone 11 and, uh, how, uh, normally, uh, the, uh, the top of the range one is the one that Apple tries to sell you, and then there's like the, the slightly not so good, cheaper one, um, that they say, "Oh, oh, you could have this one," which has, you know, plastic rather than glass or whatever, you know.
16
00:02:27.200 --> 00:02:30.000
It's not quite as good materials, but it's pretty good and it's a lower price.
17
00:02:30.260 --> 00:02:37.180
They've s- they swapped it round this year and, like, the one that they want you to buy is the slightly cheaper one, and then the Pro one is the one for the geeks.
18
00:02:37.260 --> 00:02:44.400
Uh, unashamedly so with all the, uh, the high-spec features and stuff, and they know that's more of a luxury item, so it's been interesting to see that switch this time.
19
00:02:44.460 --> 00:02:49.940
So, uh, so I don't think there's anything at all, uh, to be, uh, surprised about that geeks would buy the Pro.
20
00:02:50.040 --> 00:03:04.860
But, uh, yeah, um, uh, personally, I've just been, uh, working on, uh, projects, a lot of projects that I've, I've been working on for weeks and months even have finally come to fruition, so, uh, I've been, uh, basically head down on that doing very little geeky stuff unfortunately.
21
00:03:04.940 --> 00:03:12.520
But, uh, this, this is a, this, this show is a good release for that. Exactly. Exactly. Well, I'm, I'm really looking forward to, uh, getting on and chatting to our guest today.
22
00:03:12.690 --> 00:03:25.600
So welcome, Damian Collins, uh, somebody that I have met luckily once before, and we had a fascinating conversation about regulation and Cambridge Analytica and everything that's going on in the social media world and, and how, um, the government's role and Parliament's role is in that.
23
00:03:26.040 --> 00:03:30.640
Uh, and I thought that would be something that'd be worth having a similar conversation a bit more publicly. So welcome, Damian.
24
00:03:30.720 --> 00:03:37.130
Um, can you just tell everyone a little bit about you and what you do and, and how it all works? Uh, yes. It was great to be with you again. Um,
25
00:03:38.500 --> 00:03:51.760
I am a member of Parliament, uh, for Folkestone and Hythe in southeast Kent, and as well as that, I was elected in 2016 to be chairman of the House of Commons Select Committee for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport.
26
00:03:52.180 --> 00:04:09.600
And just to explain a little bit about the committee and the, the way the committee system works in Parliament, uh, we are one of the departmental select committees, so we scrutinize the work of the government department of the same name, and that department is the lead department for digital policy and media policy in the UK.
27
00:04:10.040 --> 00:04:19.240
And our job is to scrutinize their work and the work of bodies that they fund, but also to initiate our own investigations and inquiries into any related issues as well.
28
00:04:19.340 --> 00:04:28.580
So that can mean rather than just scrutinizing what the government's doing or what the regulators are doing already in this space, but actually to ask questions about things they're not doing yet, but maybe they should.
29
00:04:28.900 --> 00:04:29.280
Awesome.
30
00:04:29.360 --> 00:04:46.469
Well, we're gonna talk in a lot more detail with Damian in, in a short while, um, and, and see what's going on in terms of the regulation space, 'cause it's been, even this week, lots going on in the US with, uh, antitrust stuff and, and other Senate hearings involving Mark Zuckerberg and other senior members of the, uh, board of Facebook and Twitter and, and everyone else.
31
00:04:46.840 --> 00:04:55.360
But for now, let's, um, chat a quick bit about the news from the last seven days to do with social media. So Martin, what's been going on this week? Yeah, so first up, uh, some Facebook news.
32
00:04:55.420 --> 00:05:06.860
In fact, a lot of our news today is about Facebook. They really do dominate the conversation. Google Glass is back, baby. Well, kind of. Facebook is working on smart glasses with Ray-Ban, according to CNBC.
33
00:05:07.200 --> 00:05:18.050
Uh, they're codenamed Orion. Uh, don't expect them to come anytime soon. They're expected, uh, between 2023 and 2025, so, uh, up to, uh, seven years from now.
34
00:05:18.430 --> 00:05:31.440
Uh, and, uh, a- according to the report, uh, they'd be able to take calls, show information to users in a small display, live stream their vantage point to social media friends and followers, uh, and essentially replace smartphones.
35
00:05:31.640 --> 00:05:39.620
So it's Google Glass, but, uh, from Facebook with, but with a longer time span for it to, for, for it to come to us. Um, Matt, what did you make of this?
36
00:05:39.820 --> 00:05:59.520
Uh, to me, it just sounds like another one of those things that, uh, a lot of these tech companies do and, and Facebook's renowned for doing, which is throwing out a lot of things, um, to see what sticks, to see what they can make work, to see what drives appetite from consumers and things, and it sounds a little bit like a futuristic kind of product that may never make it to market, as they've kind of suggested it may or may not, may not anyway.
37
00:05:59.940 --> 00:06:12.780
Uh, I think that the fact that it's more geared around AR rather than the VR side of things is, is good because I still think V- uh, VR to me seems far off being a mainstream, uh, product for, for most people, so the AR element of this is, is interesting.
38
00:06:13.100 --> 00:06:18.380
But, uh, Damian, uh, these sorts of things excite you, or is this something that it, it says Facebook, you know Mr.
39
00:06:18.580 --> 00:06:25.020
Zuckerberg's involved, and you already got your heckles up and you're not quite sure about ever thinking about using such a thing? Well, I mean, it is very interesting.
40
00:06:25.060 --> 00:06:28.660
I mean, the idea that, um, glasses would replace smartphones.
41
00:06:29.380 --> 00:06:40.556
Um, but the, I think the question you gotta have in your mind about that is well, um- If the companies are making money from advertising y- on the current mobile format, how will they make it with Glass?
42
00:06:40.616 --> 00:06:43.576
You know, w- presumably you would see pop-up ads as you were walking around.
43
00:06:43.616 --> 00:06:59.036
You know, the AR experience could be creating f- you know, virtual billboards and, and other mechanisms for advertising content to people, and would also, uh, users pay a premium not to see the ads, but other people who don't wanna pay that premium would, and what would you see?
44
00:06:59.176 --> 00:07:10.436
So I still think at the end of the day, whatever Facebook does, it's gotta make money out of, from advertising, and how would it make money in this new AR Glass-wearing world? Yeah.
45
00:07:10.456 --> 00:07:18.236
It's an interesting one to, to think about. Uh, I, I'm curious to see how many people will, will adopt anything, um, that involves Facebook in terms of products at the moment.
46
00:07:18.296 --> 00:07:20.616
We've seen this with Portal, which we'll probably talk about a bit later.
47
00:07:20.676 --> 00:07:26.396
But, um, but yes, um, I'm, I'm hopeful that it does come out 'cause I think it'll be quite a cool thing to play around with as, as a geek that I am.
48
00:07:26.436 --> 00:07:33.416
But, um, but in terms of other things, there's been a, um, slightly more significant, uh, development this week with Facebook. What, what was that all about, Martin? Uh, yeah.
49
00:07:33.516 --> 00:07:41.216
So they have announced more details of their independent oversight board. So this has been billed as a Supreme Court of Facebook.
50
00:07:41.256 --> 00:07:53.316
Basically, they'd have a bunch of, uh, great and good individuals from around the world who would work part-time, uh, for Facebook, deciding on things like-- being, being the ultimate decider on content moderation.
51
00:07:53.386 --> 00:08:02.556
So if there's a really particularly, uh, controversial decision that has been made around content moderation, it would eventually make its way to this oversight board who would make a decision on that.
52
00:08:02.776 --> 00:08:12.576
And they could also make, uh, advice, uh, you know, advisory policy decisions on other things that Facebook does. Uh, you know, it could be related to privacy or, uh, other things.
53
00:08:12.876 --> 00:08:24.046
And, uh, Facebook would be bound apparently by the content moderation decisions, uh, and could take other recommendations into consideration. So it's an interesting model of governance.
54
00:08:24.626 --> 00:08:34.996
Uh, and, uh, I would say it's perhaps overdue, but it's definitely a job I'd like. [laughs] I, I saw this and I thought, "I want this job." Uh, you know, I would love that as a part-time job.
55
00:08:35.156 --> 00:08:41.316
Uh, Matt, w- I, I assume you too? Yeah. I, I'd definitely like to be involved in some of these things. Uh, they do, they do fascinate me.
56
00:08:41.516 --> 00:08:48.796
Um, I had a look and saw that I think it's 40 part-time positions, um, which, uh, I think 11 of them involve from selection from Facebook itself.
57
00:08:49.256 --> 00:09:16.536
Um, and they're saying that the content decisions that they'll pass through would be-- for them to look at and take decisions from are based on ones that they class as significant and difficult decisions, and they've listed in their blog post about this significance being, you know, how severe it is and then the scale of the, of the, of the decision, um, and the public discourse that's being made around this particular decision and difficulty around how it, how much it's been disputed, how much uncertainty around the correct decision, uh, and other such tensions.
58
00:09:16.896 --> 00:09:23.016
Um, but they do say they're a bit more vague about whether they would take a steer on policy decisions or changes to policy from this committee.
59
00:09:23.556 --> 00:09:29.536
Um, I- I'd be interested to see how many decisions they pass through, um, and what the turnover rate would be of the board.
60
00:09:29.996 --> 00:09:39.196
Um, but overall, clearly it's a good, it's a good thing, uh, and it's a step in the right direction and all those other cliches. But it, it-- for, for Facebook with me, I take everything with a pinch of salt.
61
00:09:39.256 --> 00:09:48.156
I wanna see it and wanna see how it works, um, what the reality of it is, um, and I suspect, Damian, you're one of the same sort of opinions. What, what do you think about all this? Yes.
62
00:09:48.216 --> 00:09:52.676
I mean, you've gotta think what's the credibility of this body, particularly?
63
00:09:52.956 --> 00:10:04.016
You know, if, imagine this particularly controversial issue, um, where, um, you know-- L- Well, let's take the n- issue that was, has been in the media this year, the, the Nancy Pelosi, um, fake film.
64
00:10:04.716 --> 00:10:18.436
Um, you know, if, if you, if the, uh, you know, the Supreme Court of Facebook said, "No, we uphold the decision of Facebook not to remove the film, and we think Facebook did the right thing," are people ever gonna believe that's a kind of rigorous, fair, and independent analysis of what went on?
65
00:10:18.716 --> 00:10:27.366
You know, because ultimately this is a body created by Facebook, paid for by Facebook, recruited by Facebook to sit in judgment on Facebook. And do...
66
00:10:27.396 --> 00:10:35.076
Will, you know, will it, will this body ever have that, the sort of credibility, uh, to be taken seriously? I think it's not... I'm not surprised they're vague on policy initiation.
67
00:10:35.176 --> 00:10:42.836
I bet this body won't be asked to initiate policy, but just to arbitrate on the existing platform policies. And I think it'll be interesting to see what sort of people they pick.
68
00:10:42.896 --> 00:10:57.196
I mean, will they pick people who've been previously very critical of Facebook and its decision-making process, or will they pick people, you know, from the academic or media community who largely hold to Facebook's values, um, and are likely to think the way Facebook would think about these problems?
69
00:10:57.396 --> 00:10:59.056
Yeah. I think there's some, some valid points there.
70
00:10:59.336 --> 00:11:09.236
I, I'm, I'm not sure, um, how effective it will be, which is why I'm hesitant to say it's a wholehearted, great decision, and it's gonna be brilliant and everything else. Um, but, um, I guess we will soon find out.
71
00:11:09.276 --> 00:11:17.446
I think in the beginning of next year is when we'll start seeing some of the, uh, outcomes of, of this committee. Um, it- I, I just, um, I, I...
72
00:11:17.446 --> 00:11:30.356
If Facebook think that creating these self-regulatory structures will meet, will head off the calls for more effective regulation of tech companies, I think they've quite badly misjudged that, you know?
73
00:11:30.436 --> 00:11:38.136
So I think it will be interesting to see what, not of what relevance, but what real role, uh, this body has in the future. Yeah. Interesting stuff.
74
00:11:38.176 --> 00:11:40.816
It's certainly one that's gonna keep on rolling and rolling, that's for sure.
75
00:11:41.316 --> 00:11:51.636
Um, but in certainly in a slightly different, uh, tone and tact, uh, for Nextdoor, which is a, um, social media network based around your neighborhood, um, there's some news there, Martin. What's been going on with them?
76
00:11:51.696 --> 00:12:02.496
Yeah. So they've taken a leaf out of Instagram's book. Uh, they are going to be advising you when you're about to post something that is potentially abusive.
77
00:12:02.576 --> 00:12:11.316
So let's say you're about to type, "You're an idiot," then it will pop up with a kindness reminder, uh, to try and stop neighbors being so mean to each other.
78
00:12:11.416 --> 00:12:23.216
Uh, and, uh, this is something that, uh, Instagram has, uh, floated before, uh, as, uh, you know, using AI to learn what people say and language patterns and then say, "You know, maybe you shouldn't be doing that."
79
00:12:23.406 --> 00:12:32.256
And it's a nice idea, and it's, it's, it's a positive idea, but I do wonder if it might actually make you more angry. If you're really angry about something your neighbor's done, "I can't believe you, idiot.
80
00:12:32.316 --> 00:12:43.420
You've po- You've, you won't-- Cut your hedge, and it's spoiling my view," and then this message comes up saying- Maybe be nicer to your neighbor. You're like, "No, I won't be. I'll be even more nasty."
81
00:12:43.520 --> 00:12:50.520
Uh, so it'll be interesting to see how it works, but, uh, but yeah, um, uh, just trying to make n- uh, neighbors nicer to each other. Do you think it'll work, Matt?
82
00:12:50.660 --> 00:13:08.520
Um, [sighs] to me, this just seems like a, a tick box thing for a lot of these social platforms, particularly with the discussions we're gonna have about regulation, where they're almost throwing out lots of examples they can give back as this is what we've done to kind of, you know, protect people, our users, and this is another thing that we're working on and developing to solve a problem.
83
00:13:08.880 --> 00:13:17.200
And, and I don't know whether it does solve a problem. I think it's clever use of tech, and I think it's, uh, it's, uh, it's certainly a-- You can't argue it's, it's a positive step in some ways.
84
00:13:17.280 --> 00:13:21.100
But in terms of real word-- world usage and effectiveness, I'm, I'm dubious.
85
00:13:21.420 --> 00:13:30.470
And I saw actually yesterday one, one-- I say that, then BBC have launched an app yesterday, which is, um, enables, um, children and younger people to have an app which has a keyboard.
86
00:13:30.770 --> 00:13:42.610
And if they're type-- using this app as their main keyboard, and they start typing abusive or, uh, derogatory messages, or they start sharing their personal details in a message, the keyboard detects that and gives them a nudge to suggest, "Do you want to be sending that?
87
00:13:42.660 --> 00:13:46.820
Is that a good idea?" And I think for younger people, there's certainly an element of education.
88
00:13:46.840 --> 00:13:55.360
And I do think a lot of the, um, some of the solutions to, uh, the problems we have with social media comes from better education and support to, uh, young and vulnerable people using it.
89
00:13:55.780 --> 00:14:02.840
Um, so I think that's a positive thing. But for this, uh, I think it's, it's an interesting bit of PR, but I'm, I'm not as excited as maybe others are.
90
00:14:03.160 --> 00:14:07.700
Damian, does this, this excite you, or do you think this is a bit kind of meh? [laughs] I think it's good.
91
00:14:07.720 --> 00:14:13.960
And I, I saw the, uh, BBC demonstration of this a year ago actually by the, the, the Blue Room team in, uh, Salford.
92
00:14:14.120 --> 00:14:24.760
And I certainly think for younger people, um, a-as a tool to try and combat cyberbullying and challenge young people about, uh, the language they're using when they're talking to each other, I think it w- I think it could be effective.
93
00:14:24.800 --> 00:14:34.940
I don't think it'll solve all of these problems. There'll be some people who are sort of determined to use bad language or offensive comments. But I think if it, it helps moderate it, then that can't be a bad thing.
94
00:14:34.980 --> 00:14:41.620
But it's not-- I don't think it'll solve the problem by itself. Yeah. No, I think that, that, that's again, sort of aligns with how I'm seeing it.
95
00:14:41.680 --> 00:14:48.320
I think, um, parents will be pleased with some of these, um, features, particularly in the more, um, mainstream, big, big social networks.
96
00:14:48.540 --> 00:14:58.780
Um, and, uh, and I'm sure Facebook and, and Instagram and others that are doing similar things will, will use that and pump it out in, in many of their Senate hearings and everything else to sort of give a list of things that they've tried to do.
97
00:14:59.140 --> 00:15:05.560
And so it'd be hard to criticize them for, for doing these things. So I think it's, uh, applaud them for, for doing something or trying something.
98
00:15:05.620 --> 00:15:14.980
As to its effectiveness for the average user who's, you know, you know, maybe not a teenager or a vulnerable person, I'm a little bit skeptical. Um, I think that's it for this week's news for now. Is that right, Martin?
99
00:15:15.020 --> 00:15:24.249
What, anything else we need to chat about or? Oh, we just, we just needed to have a, a quick note of another piece of, uh, Facebook hardware news. Oh, yes, yesterday's breaking news. [laughs] Yes. Yes.
100
00:15:24.320 --> 00:15:32.200
Uh, so, uh, Facebook, uh, has announced a few new Portal devices. They are really keen to have a, a camera in your living room.
101
00:15:32.460 --> 00:15:47.320
Uh, the most notable one is the Portal TV, which will connect up to your TV and, uh, will allow you to, uh, have video chats on your, you know, your big, your big TV in your house, uh, and also watch, uh, Facebook video content together with somebody on the other side of the world.
102
00:15:47.540 --> 00:15:55.320
Now, to me, this sounds-- it's, on one level, oh, well, that sounds like a nice experience, but I really don't think anyone is crying out for this.
103
00:15:55.360 --> 00:16:01.720
It's very easy to say, "Oh, it's creepy Facebook," and that's one angle of it, you know? Oh, they, they want to watch us and all of that. Yes, fair enough.
104
00:16:01.860 --> 00:16:10.900
But just from a pure product design point of view, I don't think anyone is really calling out for this. Uh, you can create a product that nobody knew they wanted and make a success of it.
105
00:16:11.280 --> 00:16:17.420
Uh, you know, you think of, uh, the, uh, Amazon Echo, for example. Nobody knew they wanted a smart speaker, and they're, you know, the biggest gadget around now.
106
00:16:17.800 --> 00:16:28.040
Uh, but for this, I, I, I don't think anyone really saw last year's initial Portal devices and thought, "I really want one of those." Uh, there, there didn't seem to be much demand for them.
107
00:16:28.140 --> 00:16:33.920
So, uh, it feels like this isn't going to go anywhere. Um, uh, don't know what you think, Matt.
108
00:16:33.960 --> 00:16:39.660
Well, it's, it's finally u-um, launching in Europe now, so this has been something that's been only available in the US, uh, up until recently.
109
00:16:39.760 --> 00:16:48.510
Um, so that's a good thing for those that do want the product, so that's great. Um, in terms of the numbers, I think it says a lot that Facebook really doesn't wanna give us any numbers on sales.
110
00:16:48.650 --> 00:16:57.339
Um, I think the estimates I've read in the last twenty-four hours are between fifty thousand and three hundred thousand units, which only accounts for about 1% of the market that they're playing for.
111
00:16:57.940 --> 00:17:08.780
Um, I think that in general, again, yeah, I'm not sure it does anything enough that s- sort of sets it apart from its rivals who are doing it better and bigger w- and more elaborately.
112
00:17:08.820 --> 00:17:17.740
I think it, it's one thing that is quite cool is the main piece of tech that's, you know, tracks you as you're moving around, so you can have much more natural group conversations when you're busy doing something at home.
113
00:17:17.900 --> 00:17:19.680
That, that technology in there is really good.
114
00:17:20.200 --> 00:17:27.870
Um, I think we were discussing before, um, earlier today about the fact that they've got a, a little red light as part of their privacy features for this, and where if the camera- Mm-hmm...
115
00:17:27.880 --> 00:17:36.670
is not on, the red light is on. To me and to others on Twitter yesterday, that seemed a very peculiar piece of, uh, sort of product setup. Yeah.
116
00:17:36.700 --> 00:17:48.500
It's, it's the opposite of what you'd expect, and it kind of feels like they're trying to get you used to the idea that the camera is always on, the microphone is always on, and being off is an exception.
117
00:17:49.080 --> 00:17:57.080
Um, that, that, that's what having the light the opposite way round to what you'd expect seems to be saying what they seem to be conditioning you to. It is. And Damian, are you gonna have one of these in your house?
118
00:17:57.540 --> 00:18:00.380
No, I don't think so. [laughs] Surprise, surprise.
119
00:18:00.479 --> 00:18:25.420
[laughs] Well, I have got an E- we have got, um, uh, Alexa, but, um, the, I do, the, the, the suspicion here is gonna be, I think you're gonna wanna read the terms and conditions pretty carefully before letting Facebook onto your TV, um, because, you know, there, there will be, because of stuff that's happened in the last couple of years, suspicions that this thing is sort of gathering data about other things you're watching, things that are going on in your house, uh, um, what's being done with that data.
120
00:18:25.540 --> 00:18:28.120
Now, then maybe Facebook could come in and assure us no, that's not the case.
121
00:18:28.200 --> 00:18:36.840
But there will be these suspicions, and I think I'm not sure, I'm, I'm not sure many people will, will trust Facebook to have them on their, their TV in their homes.
122
00:18:37.280 --> 00:18:45.355
We'll speak more with Damian shortly, but first- Geek Out with Matt Navarra is sponsored by Pinterest. And each week, we share tips to help you make the most of the platform.
123
00:18:45.636 --> 00:18:52.196
Inspiring, useful ideas are at the heart of Pinterest. Yes, relevant and compelling content matters more than anything else.
124
00:18:52.536 --> 00:19:00.816
Focus your energy on creating quality content that's visual and tailored to your audience's interests, so it stands out in people's feeds and shows up when people search.
125
00:19:01.116 --> 00:19:08.796
A major factor that makes Pinterest different to social media platforms is that content lives for an average of 105 days on Pinterest as opposed to a few hours.
126
00:19:09.316 --> 00:19:12.896
People discover your content as soon as you create it and also months after.
127
00:19:13.396 --> 00:19:22.936
If you're a content creator or a business, you can take advantage of this by making content work harder for you at different rates to other platforms. Follow these tips to make your existing content work harder for you.
128
00:19:23.316 --> 00:19:34.256
First of all, get ahead of seasonal trends. People come to Pinterest to plan. When it comes to celebrations or seasonal moments, people use Pinterest to plan long before they turn to other platforms.
129
00:19:34.276 --> 00:19:43.116
Make the most of this by factoring this earlier timing into your content strategy. Pick eye-catching images. Use high-quality vertical images that will stand out in people's feeds.
130
00:19:43.396 --> 00:19:51.075
Pinterest recommends a 2-to-3 aspect ratio. Make your brand the focal point. Don't be afraid to put your product or service front and center.
131
00:19:51.096 --> 00:20:00.296
Avoid using abstract images or lifestyle imagery that doesn't showcase your brand. A text overlay tells a better story. Text overlay is the copy that goes on your pin image.
132
00:20:00.636 --> 00:20:11.476
It makes your content stand out, and it adds context and enhances your message. Pinterest recommends keeping text concise, so it's easy for people to read on their phones because 80% of Pinterest users are on mobile.
133
00:20:11.516 --> 00:20:16.796
And get pinning. Publishing content consistently is better than a once-a-week flurry of pinning.
134
00:20:16.876 --> 00:20:25.536
Having a pinning spree once a week might be okay if you're a regular user, but for creators and businesses, switch to the mindset of little and often, where you'll see better results.
135
00:20:26.016 --> 00:20:36.936
You can use Pinterest scheduling tools to help spread out the content. Learn more about the creative best practices and Pinterest content strategy at business.pinterest.com. So Damian, what's Mark Zuckerberg's deal?
136
00:20:37.096 --> 00:20:47.296
Is, is he intentionally breaking rules and, and using underhand tactics to benefit Facebook, or has he created something he can't control? Which is it? Well, I don't-- I think it's, it's a bit of both. Um,
137
00:20:48.596 --> 00:20:56.076
I think what they can see is that you can create these tools to connect the world, but you can't necessarily control the way people will use them, um, or the way people will behave on it.
138
00:20:56.636 --> 00:21:03.316
And I think what they've-- I think what we've, we've tried to challenge them on to make them recognize is, is that they have a responsibility.
139
00:21:03.676 --> 00:21:17.516
Um, because if people are using tools they've created and systems they've created to do bad things, um, then they have a responsibility to act on that basis, particularly if they're the only ones that can really see what people are doing or what they're using, using the tools for.
140
00:21:17.576 --> 00:21:24.356
So I think they've been slow to recognize the responsibility they have towards the way people use the systems that they've created.
141
00:21:24.785 --> 00:21:31.276
And I think that's also gone alongside a ambivalence towards issues like data protection and data privacy.
142
00:21:31.316 --> 00:21:44.676
And I, I would question whether Mark Zuckerberg really believes that data privacy should exist and that actually it's a good thing that Facebook can gather as, you know, as much data about you as it possibly can to design services for you and sell you stuff.
143
00:21:45.056 --> 00:21:56.176
Um, and I think that people have pushed back against that idea now because, uh, they do believe in pr- data rights. Um, they do believe in the right to, you know, to withhold information from a company like Facebook.
144
00:21:56.646 --> 00:22:02.755
And actually, the desire to have ever more perfect advertising targeting them is not something they feel as strongly about as, as he does.
145
00:22:02.876 --> 00:22:24.756
And I think looking at the work we've done, um, looking at some of the documents that we've published as well about, about Facebook, you can see these internal debates they're having about how to maximize data gathering from other partners and developers, how to monetize, uh, more effectively the data that they hold, um, how to make it un-- less clear to users just how much da-data they are gathering and where they're getting it from.
146
00:22:25.256 --> 00:22:35.976
So to me, these, this would suggest that Facebook as a company doesn't really have, um, much morals when it comes to thinking about how to, you know, monetize their user base.
147
00:22:36.565 --> 00:22:44.016
So h-how many times now have you actually requested f-- uh, Mark Zuckerberg to answer questions? And do you think you'll give up on that? You know, is he running scared?
148
00:22:44.156 --> 00:22:50.616
And what would happen if he even entered the country? Because it's curious to the, the average person as to how that situation is, is developing really.
149
00:22:51.756 --> 00:23:01.066
Well, we, we said, um, that we would issue a sort of summons to him if he entered the UK. Uh, so we can't issue a summons to someone who's outside of the UK.
150
00:23:01.556 --> 00:23:07.736
But if he comes to Britain, then we will issue a summons for him to appear. But he's not just, you know, declined to come to my committee.
151
00:23:07.896 --> 00:23:17.736
And, and the reason, the reason we've constantly pushed for him to come is that, you know, they-- Facebook have sent other people over the last couple of years, including Mike Schroepfer, the chief tech-technology officer.
152
00:23:18.316 --> 00:23:27.556
Uh, every time they come, uh, and Monica Bickert, who's the global policy lead on disinformation. But every time these people come, there's always stuff they say they don't know. They also have to write back to us.
153
00:23:28.656 --> 00:23:36.536
Um, new information comes out that questions some of the things we've been told, and we get told, "Well, the person that gave evidence wasn't sighted on that information when they gave evidence to you."
154
00:23:36.976 --> 00:23:47.776
So we think, well, ultimately, there's only one person that ha-- doesn't have that excuse, the one person who, by his own admission to the US, uh, Congress, i-is responsible for what happens at Facebook and knows what goes on at Facebook, and that's Mark Zuckerberg.
155
00:23:48.596 --> 00:23:58.276
And we've asked him to come to the UK Parliament. He's declined to do that. Uh, I initiated the establishment of an international grand committee involving, uh, people from nine different countries.
156
00:23:58.796 --> 00:24:01.416
Uh, I think it's twenty-seven different parliamentarians who came.
157
00:24:01.456 --> 00:24:11.916
So we thought, well, if Mark Zuckerberg can't visit every parliament in the world, maybe we'll gather together people from the same relevant committees in other parliaments who are investigating the same issues and ask if Mark Zuckerberg will come and give evidence to that.
158
00:24:12.416 --> 00:24:20.716
Again, he declined. At the second of these meetings, which was held in Canada in May, he declined to appear there. There'll be a third of these international meetings in Dublin in November.
159
00:24:21.016 --> 00:24:28.796
Again, he's declined to appear there as well. So this is, to me, the pattern, a pattern of behavior. It's not about snubbing one parliament in particular.
160
00:24:28.856 --> 00:24:41.236
It's about rejecting the idea of public scrutiny by, you know, parliamentarians that have built up a degree of knowledge on these issues because of the investigations that they've been running, and it's now a, a pattern of behavior of evasion.
161
00:24:41.336 --> 00:24:50.076
And, um, you know, yes, he's appeared, appearing in front of Congress, but I think, you know, he's outside of America, he clearly doesn't want, uh, to be scrutinized in this way.
162
00:24:50.096 --> 00:24:56.956
And I, and I was just gonna come onto that to say, you know, what do you make of the news overnight that, uh, Mark Zuckerberg's attending this, the new Senate hearings in Washington, DC this week?
163
00:24:57.156 --> 00:25:03.576
Is, is that a, a surprise to you? Do you think that's, uh, a, an interesting development, or do you think it's just, you know, part and parcel of the process we're going through or?
164
00:25:04.532 --> 00:25:15.052
Um, they-- No, I'm not sur-I'm not surprised that he's, he's appearing. Um, and but I-- What, what I found interesting having... I spoke, I spoke last year to Senator Warner, uh, about this.
165
00:25:15.312 --> 00:25:24.512
Um, and I found that they-- What he sort of said to me was that in Congress, they find it just as difficult to engage with Facebook, just as difficult to get answers and information out of them.
166
00:25:24.642 --> 00:25:35.712
So if we'd thought that, well, they're only interested in talking to politicians in Washington because Congress has jurisdiction over them, I think everyone finds it a frustrating process trying to get answers out of Facebook.
167
00:25:35.992 --> 00:25:47.292
And I think Facebook are probably, you know, concerned as well about, um, the, the, the, the, the questions about, um, regulate, you know, competition regulation investigations into them.
168
00:25:47.352 --> 00:25:56.492
You know, call, calls for them within America for, for, for them to be broken up. They'll be mindful, of course, of antitrust rulings agai-in the past against companies like, uh, Microsoft.
169
00:25:56.592 --> 00:26:01.512
So I would imagine that's why Facebook are concerned to make sure they try and keep the congressmen on side.
170
00:26:01.712 --> 00:26:07.792
Now, I just wanted to pick up on the, uh, the, the point about, uh, the summons to Mark Zuckerberg when he enters the country. What happens then?
171
00:26:07.852 --> 00:26:16.692
Does, uh, d-- Will the police turn up at the airport or his hotel and, and, and haul him into parliament, or is it a, a more polite invitation?
172
00:26:17.012 --> 00:26:26.172
Um, well, the, a summons is issued by the Serjeant at Arms of the House of Commons or someone the Serjeant appoints and is usually delivered in the form of a letter.
173
00:26:26.512 --> 00:26:31.752
Um, so, uh, and that happened to, um, Ru-Rupert Murdoch. I was a member-- I wasn't chair of the committee.
174
00:26:31.782 --> 00:26:41.692
I was a member of the committee in two thousand and eleven when Rupert Murdoch, who's an American citizen, um, was in London, and he was summoned to appear in front of the committee to talk about the phone hacking scandal at the News of the World.
175
00:26:42.172 --> 00:26:44.212
Uh, and he did appear. He chose to appear.
176
00:26:44.252 --> 00:26:56.752
And I think, again, it will be the action of someone who takes their responsibility seriously and wants to run a company that's seen to comply with the laws of the countries in which it, which it trades to respect a request from his parliament to come and give evidence.
177
00:26:56.832 --> 00:27:03.512
So there are precedents for other international business people doing that, and that's the position Mark Zuckerberg will be put in when, when he's summoned.
178
00:27:03.532 --> 00:27:11.832
He'd have to, you know, decide whether he would-- wanted to not appear and risk being held in contempt of parliament, uh, or whether he would be prepared to come and answer our questions. Right.
179
00:27:11.852 --> 00:27:17.812
And, and your, your select committee has been running this inquiry into, uh, social media companies, uh, for quite some time now.
180
00:27:17.952 --> 00:27:26.772
Um, could you give us a summary of where it's at and, uh, where we can expect it to go in the future? Yeah. So the, the main, um, inquiry was launched in two thousand and seventeen.
181
00:27:27.372 --> 00:27:34.392
We issued, uh, two reports, an interim report, uh, in the summer of twenty eighteen, the final report in March this year.
182
00:27:34.922 --> 00:27:39.572
And on the back of that, we've set up a permanent subcommittee of the committee because these are ongoing issues.
183
00:27:39.772 --> 00:27:49.092
Um, and particularly looking at the issues we raised around the, making social media companies responsible, uh, for the content that's run through their platforms, uh, giving them
184
00:27:50.132 --> 00:27:55.952
a, a, a, a legal duty of care liability towards-- to protect the interests of their users, uh, and to act against harmful content.
185
00:27:56.492 --> 00:28:10.632
Um, on the back of our committee inquiries and our reports and recommendations, the government, um, has produced its own white paper on online harms, and I think the next stage there will be to look at a legislation coming out of that white paper.
186
00:28:10.672 --> 00:28:24.532
And there was discussion earlier in the year that the government might look to bring forward, uh, legislation, you know, probably next year, uh, to create a regulate-- content regulator for social media platforms and create these legal liabilities for them to act against harmful content.
187
00:28:24.681 --> 00:28:26.711
And so that, that's just been the progression.
188
00:28:26.752 --> 00:28:39.292
You know, we're, we're continuing to look at these issues and take evidence on them, and we'll scrutinize the, the legislations that goes through, and we're continuing to work with and discuss these issues with people at other parliaments around the world, and in crit-- I think particularly across Europe.
189
00:28:40.242 --> 00:28:47.412
Um, you know, other governments are now considering how they could create similar sorts of regimes, similar legal responsibilities for social media companies.
190
00:28:47.452 --> 00:28:51.852
So I see this as a, a not just important, but a live and an ongoing process.
191
00:28:51.892 --> 00:29:12.732
You know, so on, on these investigations and, uh, committee hearings, some-something that I, I think a lot of people picked up on that, uh, in other countries, particularly the example of the, uh, early, um, Senate hearings with, um, Mark Zuckerberg, um, people were quite mocking of, of some of these senators and, and the members, uh, over there in terms of the questions and the softball questions and the peculiar questions that they were asking.
192
00:29:13.112 --> 00:29:22.162
You know, I think there was one example that's famous where someone said, you know, "Mr. Zuckerberg, when I'm emailing on WhatsApp," which was a big sign that this person couldn't quite understand the technology.
193
00:29:22.232 --> 00:29:28.532
Uh, that kind of, um, problem, um, hasn't been made or hasn't been, uh, accused of, of your committee, which is a good thing.
194
00:29:28.672 --> 00:29:38.832
I think the views have tended to be that the, the UK Select Committee has been done right, and the questions that have been asked are pertinent, and they're direct, and they're technical, and they are exactly what should be.
195
00:29:38.932 --> 00:29:47.472
Um, do you-- Was that something that you set out with from the start to do, and would you say that you've scared tech companies like Facebook by your level of kind of preparedness for these sorts of sessions?
196
00:29:48.272 --> 00:29:51.712
So the-- There are a couple of, a couple of book-- important things there.
197
00:29:51.832 --> 00:30:03.192
You know, we-- I think there's definitely a benefit to having a dedicated committee that, that, that in launching an investigation works on that issue in together over a sustained period of time.
198
00:30:03.272 --> 00:30:15.292
Um, and, and if you look at the Senate hearings, in particular the early ones, was the-- What you saw then was, you know, you had a, you had a s-a session where you had fifty senators asking questions of Mark Zuckerberg with a time limit of four minutes each.
199
00:30:15.872 --> 00:30:18.612
Now, you-- Now, if you're the witness, it's qui-- that's quite, you know...
200
00:30:18.812 --> 00:30:27.872
It might be grueling 'cause you're doing it for a long time, but it's an easy format because you know that even if the, the member is asking you questions, he's asking you good technical questions or pertinent questions.
201
00:30:28.142 --> 00:30:33.792
I mean, Kamala Harris, you know, pushed him quite hard on what, you know, what he knew about Cambridge Analytica and when. You know they've only got four minutes.
202
00:30:34.112 --> 00:30:42.112
You can play for time, you can pad out your answers, uh, and then it moves on to the next questioner. So being held to sustained questioning is very difficult in that situation.
203
00:30:42.442 --> 00:30:49.212
And when you've got so many people doing it, a lot of those people will not be specialists at all or really ne-- have really spent very much time working on that issue.
204
00:30:49.612 --> 00:31:02.912
But if you've got a dedicated committee of ele-of eleven members who've been working on these issues for a year, um, you know, been through multiple hearings talking to other technology companies, um, and have got a clear idea of what the issues are they wanna ask, that's a much more challenging environment.
205
00:31:03.552 --> 00:31:17.432
And the second, second thing I would say is that, um, what we recognized early on in the process was that, you know- Companies like Facebook will avoid giving you relevant information that unless you specifically ask for it.
206
00:31:17.732 --> 00:31:18.252
Um, they will, you know...
207
00:31:18.272 --> 00:31:28.592
So, so you've got to make sure you're asking for the right things, uh, and asking them the right questions because they will avoid answering things that if you've not asked it in the, expressed in the right way, and they can avoid answering the question, they will.
208
00:31:29.192 --> 00:31:37.792
And also, when they're discussing their tools or the way their tools work in the sessions, you've got to understand that too, so you can push them further on that.
209
00:31:37.982 --> 00:31:40.452
Uh, otherwise, you won't get them to disclose information that's relevant.
210
00:31:40.552 --> 00:31:53.012
So, you know, from quite early on, we sought to engage with academics, people from the tech community that could help prepare us for the questions that we should be asking, and also to make sure that after the sessions, we vigorously followed up as well.
211
00:31:53.072 --> 00:32:02.532
So we were always writing back if w- we felt the answers were unclear or information had, that had been promised hadn't been given. Um, so the, the process didn't end when the, when the session ended.
212
00:32:03.132 --> 00:32:08.512
So do you think we need international rules to deal with, uh, global companies like Facebook and Google?
213
00:32:08.592 --> 00:32:26.711
Because, uh, it- it's fair enough having the, you know, different investigations in different countries, but, uh, as we've seen with tax as well, the idea of Amazon paying very little tax, it's very hard to control these companies, uh, when, uh, they know how to operate in a way that is above the law of individual countries.
214
00:32:26.772 --> 00:32:42.772
Um, so yes and no, I think, because, um, on one level, yes, I think if you've got global standards, um, uh, then the, the companies have to adhere to, and those, those are good standards, then you're, you're s- you know, you're setting a, a decent bar for big companies and other competitors coming in.
215
00:32:42.812 --> 00:32:52.952
They're-- things they know they've got to do, uh, around the world. And GDPR in Europe on data protection rights I think has been a good example of that. It's created a robust system in, in the European Union.
216
00:32:53.512 --> 00:33:03.092
Um, the UK said it'll, it'll stay within GDPR, uh, after Brexit. Other American states now have started to in- introduce their own, uh, legislation based on GDPR as well.
217
00:33:03.592 --> 00:33:09.592
And the, there what you can see is that, you know, people can say, "Well, what-- If people in Europe have these rights, why don't I have them too?"
218
00:33:09.852 --> 00:33:17.352
Uh, and so I think you can see a leveling up around the world, and that can be a good thing. And I think in content moderation in Europe, we're starting to see that as well.
219
00:33:17.742 --> 00:33:23.032
Um, I think it will happen in a different way in America, uh, but I think Ame- you know, those same debates we have in America too.
220
00:33:23.812 --> 00:33:33.912
But what we shouldn't do is say, "Well, what we c- because these are global companies, and having global standards is a good thing, until we've got a global consensus on what those standards should be, we can't do anything at all."
221
00:33:34.332 --> 00:33:43.212
Uh, and I sometimes think when the tech companies in particular say, "Well, we need a global, global response to this," you know, well, they know full well, you know, Europe and China and the United States are never gonna agree.
222
00:33:43.592 --> 00:33:53.412
And therefore, my, my suspicion is that they use that as a, as an excuse for doing nothing at all. At the end of the day, international companies have to comply with the laws of the countries in which they trade.
223
00:33:53.632 --> 00:34:00.192
So, you know, whilst it might be nice to have global standards, we don't need them. We can just do what we think is right for our own people in our own countries.
224
00:34:00.232 --> 00:34:10.212
And, you know, you see, you see this being enforced already around licensing content. You know, when you-- what you watch on Netflix in one country is different from another because of the different licensing agreements.
225
00:34:10.252 --> 00:34:18.182
So people are used to making that in the commercial, uh, world about licensing, uh, the use of content. Uh, so there's no way it can't work in the regulatory one as well.
226
00:34:18.592 --> 00:34:28.332
You were featured in The Great Hack, the Netflix documentary, which, uh, was, uh, a, a, a big talking point over the summer. Um, although the reception to it was mixed.
227
00:34:28.372 --> 00:34:37.012
We had people who loved it and then people who absolutely, uh, couldn't stand it. There was a, there was a, um, a, a scathing Economist review of that documentary.
228
00:34:37.052 --> 00:34:45.832
Uh, do you think it did a good job of, uh, of, of discussing the Cambridge Analytica scandal? Yeah, I think it, I think it did. I think it, it did a good job of, um...
229
00:34:46.752 --> 00:35:00.192
I think it-- for people that had, had followed the story in the news, were, were sort of aware in general terms of what had been going on, I think it did a good job of trying to explain some of the issues that, that underpinned it and to tell the stories of some of the people that had been involved in that process.
230
00:35:00.712 --> 00:35:06.572
I think you could, you could make a whole other documentary diving into the questions about does psychological profiling work.
231
00:35:06.852 --> 00:35:20.212
Um, uh, you know, I, I would say certainly Cambridge Analytica did-- believed it did, and the academics who worked on, worked for them, um, believed that it did and wrote a, wrote papers discussing how they thought that it worked, uh, and why it was important and significant.
232
00:35:20.232 --> 00:35:27.312
And there are, of course, many other issues as well that come from it, and I think some of the people who may have criticized the program, you know, may have felt that it, it glossed over some of those issues.
233
00:35:27.372 --> 00:35:35.752
But, you know, there, there's a huge amount of detail in The Great Hack. I think some of these issues are so complex that you could make whole documentaries about them on their own. Yeah.
234
00:35:35.772 --> 00:35:37.052
And I, I just wanted to follow up on that.
235
00:35:37.072 --> 00:35:51.612
And talking about all the stuff to do with Cambridge Analytica and all of these scandals that hit social media companies, particularly Facebook, one of the things that stands out to me above all of this is, is that the usage of these platforms and the revenue these companies are making seems n- not to have been impacted.
236
00:35:51.632 --> 00:36:00.612
A bit like Teflon, just keeps, you know, chucking things at them, and it slides back off of them, and their main business lines don't seem massively impacted. Is that... Again, is that a surprise to you?
237
00:36:00.652 --> 00:36:02.812
And, and do you, and can you explain why that is the case?
238
00:36:03.472 --> 00:36:12.882
So I think the, the reason the, the sort of share value, if you like, of some of the companies has, has recovered is ultimately not enough consumers are turning them off. You know, their, their...
239
00:36:12.892 --> 00:36:18.772
Ultimately, if their audience numbers are, remain robust, then the commercial value of the companies will be sustainable.
240
00:36:18.832 --> 00:36:28.052
Although, I think, I think clearly even though they've, they may have recovered their value against where they were at the start of that crisis, I mean, they're probably a, a long way behind where they would have expected to have been.
241
00:36:28.172 --> 00:36:32.832
I think they've, there's probably a lot of lost value that'll take time to, to recover, if they ever do.
242
00:36:32.872 --> 00:36:39.192
And there was some evidence last year that certainly in Europe that, that Facebook usage was cooling off, uh, and cooling down.
243
00:36:39.212 --> 00:36:48.892
But I think what hasn't changed is the, um, attitude within, I think, you know, I think the questioning of them as a, as companies, the declining public trust, uh, in them.
244
00:36:49.392 --> 00:36:55.092
Uh, I mean, maybe some people haven't given up using them because they don't feel they can, that effectively these companies have become like public utilities.
245
00:36:55.152 --> 00:37:03.792
And if, even if they might not like Facebook, they can't get away without using it, its systems and its tools b- to engage with the people they want to engage with.
246
00:37:04.232 --> 00:37:08.532
I think the attitude amongst policymakers and regulators, you know, hasn't changed at all.
247
00:37:08.612 --> 00:37:21.448
And, uh, it's, I think you see Growing appetite now, growing calls for more oversight, more regulation, competition investigations as well. Um, and I don't see that change. That's a permanent shift, I think.
248
00:37:21.468 --> 00:37:34.288
And I think the, the, the permanent shift of, I think, people in public policy, lawmakers and so on, uh, actually saying we need to understand better what these companies do, uh, the harm that could come about with the systems that they've created.
249
00:37:34.888 --> 00:37:43.028
Uh, there's far more, I think, daily scrutiny on that than there was two years ago. And I think that that is a permanent change that's come about, uh, since the Cambridge Analytica scandal.
250
00:37:43.208 --> 00:37:48.728
Do, do you think we should be concerned about social media platforms or tech hardware owned and operated by Chinese businesses?
251
00:37:49.018 --> 00:37:54.808
A bit like what the Americans, uh, and lots of people in America and commentators are suggesting that we should be scared or fearful of.
252
00:37:55.088 --> 00:38:04.328
Well, the-- so the concern you raised in the UK particularly about Huawei and its links to the, uh, Chinese state, and, uh, I looked at the report.
253
00:38:04.368 --> 00:38:13.488
There's a report that, um, an oversight board prepares, um, on Huawei every year. It's published by the Cabinet Office, so it's a public document. Anyone can, can read it.
254
00:38:13.608 --> 00:38:26.847
And what concerned me when I read that was that the, that that board, uh, which is largely comprised of for-- you know, people that worked in the security services in the UK, um, and g-got, you know, detailed knowledge on security and infrastructure.
255
00:38:27.388 --> 00:38:41.168
They said looking at Huawei's existing infrastructure that there were, uh, concerns about it, uh, that, that there was sort of potential for, for security breaches, uh, and for the network to be compromised, that those issues have been raised with Huawei in the past.
256
00:38:41.518 --> 00:38:47.268
And not only had Huawei not corrected, uh, those issues, they had no credible plan in place yet to do so.
257
00:38:47.328 --> 00:39:01.908
And so for me, if those concerns are there, I would question why we'd want to give more work and more contracts in developing things like the 5G network to companies like that if those security concerns exist and until they've convinced us that, uh, those things have been put right.
258
00:39:02.928 --> 00:39:03.808
Hmm, yes.
259
00:39:03.948 --> 00:39:15.288
Well, and this is stuff that is gonna go round again and again because, you know, every week I've seen stories about people's, uh, somewhat-- some of it fear-mongering it seems, but another bits of it seem, you know, genuine reasons to, to be looking into them.
260
00:39:15.368 --> 00:39:26.888
But, um- Yeah. There, there was an interesting, um, uh, story, uh, from, uh, one of the US newspapers, uh, over the weekend about TikTok and about how it, uh, uh, was...
261
00:39:26.948 --> 00:39:38.188
Uh, obviously, TikTok is a, a big hit social app at the moment, uh, across the, the Western world, but it's owned, uh, by a Chinese company. And, uh, there's no content on there pretty much about the Hong Kong protests.
262
00:39:38.608 --> 00:39:49.088
And so it's kind of raising the issue that this is a Chinese company presenting a Chinese worldview, uh, to, uh, Western young people.
263
00:39:49.488 --> 00:39:58.428
Uh, and, uh, that, uh, you know, you can say that's harmless or you can say that's a problem, but, uh, either way, it's something to think about that we don't necessarily have to think about.
264
00:39:58.488 --> 00:40:09.568
You know, Facebook, there may be issues with them, but, uh, they're a Western company, and, uh, they have a certain worldview that maybe chimes in a lot of ways with, uh, uh, with, with other Western countries.
265
00:40:09.588 --> 00:40:18.288
But, uh, if you then have China, which is incredibly different in its worldview, uh, that could create more friction. Yeah. I, I, I think that's, I think that's absolutely right.
266
00:40:18.388 --> 00:40:27.208
But I think, I think what we're, we're trying to work through here is a kind of, is a sort of middle way because, you know, pe-pe-people have said there are sort of two forms of, um, there are two forms of internet.
267
00:40:27.248 --> 00:40:35.408
There is the kind of surveillance capitalism model personified by companies like Facebook, where everything that goes on it is monitored and monetized by companies.
268
00:40:36.188 --> 00:40:46.008
Um, there is the surveillance state model where the Chi-- where the state, the Chinese government, you know, uses media to gather information about citizens and, and shape policy around people based on the information that it gathers.
269
00:40:46.468 --> 00:40:56.068
And I think what we, what we wanna see is a sort of third way where people have got rights, where people can protect their data, they can be empowered, uh, by it and not just be, uh, the victim of surveillance.
270
00:40:56.648 --> 00:41:07.868
Let's look at UK politics for a second. Uh, it's, it's an interesting situation, UK politics at the moment, uh, and it does seem like there's gonna be a general election sometime in, uh, the next couple of months or so.
271
00:41:07.928 --> 00:41:18.868
Uh, now, you have called for new laws to protect against another Cambridge Analytica scandal. So what do you think is needed in terms of protecting elections from interference? Sure.
272
00:41:18.948 --> 00:41:29.907
I think there are, there are some very specific things I think that we need to see. One is to make sure that, um, the, that the electoral law that applies in the offline world applies online as well.
273
00:41:30.368 --> 00:41:40.108
So that means if you see an advert, there should be a legal requirement for you to be-- to know who's paid for that advert and, uh, who that advert is there to promote.
274
00:41:40.678 --> 00:41:46.228
And that's a legal requirement on leaflets and posters and things and newspaper adverts in the UK, but it's not a legal requirement on Facebook.
275
00:41:46.608 --> 00:42:08.168
So for there to be real transparency over the messages that you're seeing, uh, 'cause one of the concerns we've, we've raised in our work has been these shadowy, shady campaign networks, the campaign groups that exist on, uh, on Facebook that are running adverts, and no one knows really who's funding them or where the money's coming from, uh, and they're, they're promoting issues that may help, you know, one candidate or another.
276
00:42:08.208 --> 00:42:13.808
So to make sure we've got that, that real transparency so people can see-- when they see a message, they know who's doing it.
277
00:42:14.308 --> 00:42:20.428
I think the other thing that should give us concern is, um, is pa-- is, is money raising, fundraising online as well.
278
00:42:20.778 --> 00:42:30.288
Um, you can effectively bypass all of the campaign finance laws by, um, and by, you know, really laundering money into political campaigns through online payment systems.
279
00:42:30.368 --> 00:42:35.788
And, you know, through that, there's-- you can effectively get round the rules on receiving money from overseas.
280
00:42:36.208 --> 00:42:44.508
You can process one large donation as a series of micro donations to try and get around the declaration rules. And I think, you know, we should be concerned about this.
281
00:42:44.608 --> 00:42:52.828
We discussed this with the chair of the, um, Federal Election Commission in America when we, um, had a international grand committee meeting in Canada earlier in the year.
282
00:42:53.228 --> 00:43:06.128
You know, she thought there was, over the last ten years, there was a billion dollars' worth of dark money that had got into American politics that was virtually impossible to trace and that, you know, uh, blockchain technologies, Bitcoin, all those things will make this much easier in the future.
283
00:43:06.248 --> 00:43:16.568
So, you know, I think we, we should recognize that, that technology has b-- uh, allows people to bypass all the rules we've put in place to try and safeguard democracy and the way it works and the way elections are run.
284
00:43:17.008 --> 00:43:25.452
And unless we change those rules to make them relevant for the future- Then, um, this interference, the role of companies like Cambridge Analytica, you know, will, will only grow.
285
00:43:26.172 --> 00:43:34.322
What do you think about the use of social media by world leaders such as Donald Trump and Boris Johnson, particularly on Twitter? Um, I think it shows that,
286
00:43:35.312 --> 00:43:50.391
um, that leaders can now reach people, big audiences of people directly, and that the days when, you know, if a politician wanted to get heard, they needed to get the TV networks and the newspapers on side, uh, to give them a fair hearing.
287
00:43:50.972 --> 00:43:58.012
Um, those days haven't tot- ha- those, those aren't totally gone because mainstream media is still important, but you don't-- there are other routes.
288
00:43:58.052 --> 00:44:02.272
There are direct routes to talk to people now, and you're seeing politicians use those more and more.
289
00:44:02.692 --> 00:44:14.472
Now, I don't have a problem with that if it helps people, you know, to engage with politics, uh, and, and where we're actually using the channels that the public are using to find information out, and you'd want that information to be there.
290
00:44:14.792 --> 00:44:22.772
But at the same time, you need challenge and scrutiny as well, so the, the sort of free press plays a, and the media plays a very important role in holding politicians to account.
291
00:44:22.792 --> 00:44:30.932
And we wouldn't wanna move into a world where actually politicians could largely just bypass that scrutiny altogether and just talk directly to the voters without challenge.
292
00:44:30.972 --> 00:44:39.142
And I was, and I was just gonna say, you know, I, I can't criticize too much at this stage. It's early days for, for Boris Johnson in his role as Prime Minister on, on his use of Twitter.
293
00:44:39.192 --> 00:44:50.092
But certainly we can see from Donald Trump that he has a very particular style, uh, very, um, polarizing, at times controversial, and, you know, very argumentative and inflammatory, I would say.
294
00:44:50.192 --> 00:44:53.912
And do you see that as, um, as a, a, a dangerous thing?
295
00:44:54.012 --> 00:45:01.272
Something that, um, that you think is a, is a useful thing, and you understand it, or how do you, how do you view those sorts of tweets from someone like Donald Trump?
296
00:45:02.052 --> 00:45:09.892
I think you've gotta be very careful here because a, a leader, you know, may say something that is borderline offensive, you know, some people might find offensive.
297
00:45:10.552 --> 00:45:19.112
Um, they're still, they're still held to account for what they say. So they've gotta be, still gotta be slightly careful, although Trump really just pushed that about as far as is probably humanly possible to go.
298
00:45:19.712 --> 00:45:33.292
Um, but you're also sending a signal and creating a license for other people to pile in as well, and that-- and often that's, that's where the, I think the real harm can be caused, is, uh, inciting people on social media to say even more outrageous things, uh, for followers to do that as well.
299
00:45:33.772 --> 00:45:43.532
And that's, that, that would be my concern, is that what's, I think, starting to happen in politics is there is a, there are greater schisms opening up between different voices in politics.
300
00:45:44.182 --> 00:45:53.572
Uh, politics is becoming more extreme, and I think, um, the design of social media is, is helping that as well because when people say things, it feeds the echo chambers of support they've got.
301
00:45:53.872 --> 00:46:01.392
I think it encourages people in those chambers to adopt and say yet more extreme things in their own right, and it's pulling people apart.
302
00:46:01.432 --> 00:46:05.241
And at a time when I think, you know, we desperately try and need to bring people back together. Yeah.
303
00:46:05.252 --> 00:46:11.152
And I think on that point, Martin, we've-- we're looking at something this morning before we started recording, it was quite interesting from Barack Obama. Yeah.
304
00:46:11.182 --> 00:46:21.892
I mean, he was just talking about the, um, uh, this kind of polarization and how social media had accelerated it, and, uh, it reinforces biased viewpoints and things. You know, not an original viewpoint.
305
00:46:21.952 --> 00:46:27.872
It's something that has been, uh, said many times before, but, uh, you do see politicians taking advantage of it.
306
00:46:28.292 --> 00:46:34.512
Um, uh, and, uh, it, it-- I mean, it's fair to say that in the UK you've seen the, the Labour Party take advantage of it in some of their campaigning.
307
00:46:34.552 --> 00:46:45.792
You've seen, you've seen the Conservative Party take advantage of it as well in terms of this kind of really, uh, the, the polarizing messaging that you can use on social media to really fire up your, uh, your supporters.
308
00:46:46.192 --> 00:46:57.322
Um, so it works, though. That's the problem, doesn't it? So can you really fight that? Can you really fight that when you've got a, a, a campaign director who's like, "We really need to win this, this election"?
309
00:46:57.632 --> 00:47:02.832
You're going to use that, aren't you, if it, if it's going to win? I, I think that
310
00:47:03.952 --> 00:47:11.922
campaigning done by, you know, registered political parties, official parties, is always gonna be held to account for what it says 'cause it's, it's, it's got the party's logo on.
311
00:47:12.392 --> 00:47:19.002
If people could challenge or question the information being put out there, the facts being put out there, then ultimately there are people that can be held to account for that.
312
00:47:19.052 --> 00:47:25.332
I don't think politicians should not use social media or social-- or advertising through social media to, to reach voters in that way.
313
00:47:25.752 --> 00:47:29.012
I, I think that's, that, that's where people are, and I think they should, they should do that.
314
00:47:29.352 --> 00:47:45.052
If people didn't do that or say we just banned political advertising from social media, then the upper hand will be gained by the people that operate sort of networks of inauthentic accounts, you know, that people dominate, uh, social media through, you know, through these sort of, you know, um, people sort of
315
00:47:46.632 --> 00:47:48.832
imitating the behavior of, of bot accounts as well.
316
00:47:49.452 --> 00:47:56.812
And, uh, it would be a herd, and it would be people managing these herds of people that would gain the biggest share of voice, and there'd be very little way of actually challenging that.
317
00:47:56.892 --> 00:48:02.032
So I think, I think political a-advertising should play a role, uh, messaging, and I think parties should do that.
318
00:48:02.472 --> 00:48:12.272
But I, what I think is important is transparency so that, you know, it, it's clearly labeled, it's clearly come from them. You can see archives of what these ads are. Um, it's-- and people are held to account for it.
319
00:48:12.732 --> 00:48:20.832
And what I would-- you know, my concern is that, um, too much of this political communication is not coming from the, the registered legitimate organizations.
320
00:48:20.852 --> 00:48:29.012
It's coming from these shady campaign groups pushing messages, and we don't really know who they are or who's behind it. I just wanted to put into that, um, we had a piece of information this week.
321
00:48:29.092 --> 00:48:35.172
Um, it was a piece of research commissioned by, um, I think you pronounce it Wellio. Um, but they, they did this, um, survey of politicians.
322
00:48:35.232 --> 00:48:41.612
A hundred and thirty-seven MPs were surveyed towards their public attitudes, um, towards politicians and their use of social media.
323
00:48:41.732 --> 00:48:48.712
Uh, and it's four in five MPs believe that public attitudes towards politicians have been changed for the worse by social media.
324
00:48:49.082 --> 00:48:58.932
Um, and they say that, uh, yeah, eighty-one percent of the a hundred and thirty-seven MPs surveyed, um, believe that, that, you know, it's had a negative impact, uh, on politics in general. So interesting numbers.
325
00:48:59.592 --> 00:49:07.452
It's also not-- I mean, and it's not just politicians as well. I mean, we, um, you know, we've had this debate around racist abuse, uh, directed at Premier League footballers like Paul Pogba.
326
00:49:08.012 --> 00:49:22.436
Uh, we had a, an evidence session in front of the select committee on reality TV recently where we had, uh, people from Love Island, and they would say that, you know, for, um, some people, you know, some celebrities, you know, racist abuse is just part of- Part of what they expect to receive.
327
00:49:22.476 --> 00:49:27.896
It's just pr- you know, it's, it's just the way the world is and what they expect. And, you know, should we be, should we be satisfied with that?
328
00:49:27.996 --> 00:49:40.616
Should we say that actually the fact that social media has created this pipe of abuse that can be directed at anyone and is often directed at people from minority communities and women in particular, is something we should just, you know, shrug our shoulders against and say there's nothing we can do.
329
00:49:40.716 --> 00:49:50.256
And I think, you know, this is part of the debate we're trying to have with the social media companies that, um, whilst, you know, individuals are choosing to post this content, you know, are the systems coarsening public debate?
330
00:49:50.296 --> 00:49:56.976
Are they encouraging people to take more extreme positions, say more, uh, appalling things, and how do we stop it? Got you.
331
00:49:57.056 --> 00:50:02.996
And, uh, we're just coming into, um, the end of our interview, so we've got a couple of quick questions to wrap up, which are a bit more broad really.
332
00:50:03.056 --> 00:50:10.876
Um, you've obviously got some strong opinions, uh, and, and b- beliefs around social media companies, tech companies, w- you know, what they should be doing, maybe what they shouldn't be doing.
333
00:50:11.376 --> 00:50:22.296
Uh, you know, five years from now, I can see social media looking somewhat different in terms of the way it's set up, how people use it, how the companies are, are regulated or not. Um, w- I guess it's two-part question.
334
00:50:22.436 --> 00:50:27.366
What would you like to see, uh, in terms of social media companies, um, five years from now?
335
00:50:27.436 --> 00:50:35.126
And w- and what do you think a, a fair reality is to expect in terms of, you know, how they will operate and how we will use social media? Do you have, do you have any thoughts about that? Yeah.
336
00:50:35.556 --> 00:50:53.356
I, I think we'll, we'll move to a system where, um, social media companies will be required by law to take action against the most harmful forms, uh, of content, and that this will no longer be just about their platform policies and the way they administer them, but standards that we expect.
337
00:50:53.476 --> 00:51:15.336
And I think they will then come under the, the, the-- some form of regulation, uh, the regulatory bodies with powers similar to those the information commissioner has now over data privacy investigations, will play a role in holding these companies to account and also having the right to go in and question those companies and have the right to look at data and information about the decisions those companies have made.
338
00:51:15.416 --> 00:51:24.066
I think we will move into a world where that sort of oversight is there. And alongside that, a requirement that these companies are more proactive in identifying these problems for themselves.
339
00:51:24.576 --> 00:51:36.536
Now, that, that in some ways would be a system not unlike the system of regulation that exists in financial services where, you know, banks are supposed to monitor, uh, and look out for suspicious activity or criminal activity and to report that to the relevant authorities.
340
00:51:36.816 --> 00:51:45.566
I think that's the sort of world I think we will, we will move to. I think we will see different countries in Europe, in particular UK, Germany and France, pushing the, the boundaries.
341
00:51:45.636 --> 00:51:48.036
I think the European Commission will do as well, I think.
342
00:51:48.056 --> 00:51:58.156
But I think w- where we will move away from-- I think, I think in five years' time, we'll no longer s- I think be-- see the public policy debate around, you know, are they neutral platforms?
343
00:51:58.256 --> 00:52:06.335
Do they have any responsibilities? I think it will move to saying they do have responsibilities. There is oversight over how they exercise it. The question will be, well, what's in scope?
344
00:52:06.496 --> 00:52:11.916
You know, what should we be regulating? And I just wanted to, to put into that, uh, as well, um, a couple of quick bits of information.
345
00:52:11.996 --> 00:52:29.416
Um, yeah, and this week even in, during some, uh, sessions in the US with these hearings, I think Facebook's head of global policy, um, Monika Bickert said that, um, they've reduced the average time it takes for our AI to find a violation on Facebook Live to twelve seconds, a ninety percent reduction in our average detection time from a few months ago.
346
00:52:29.456 --> 00:52:33.836
So on the face of it, that sounds like a lovely big number, but as we all know, there's a lot more to it than just Facebook Live.
347
00:52:34.316 --> 00:52:51.756
Um, but the other thing I just wanted to get in there, 'cause one of the criticisms that I get or people say to me when we talk about regulation, uh, and the government having a role in, in regulating anything, but particularly something that involves freedom of speech and platforms that they can access and engage with information and, and chat to people on, is that this is just censorship.
348
00:52:51.796 --> 00:53:00.675
This is censorship, controlling, um, uh, government monitoring. Uh, it's a constant thing you get thrown up, and I'd just be interested to hear your-- what your view on people who say that.
349
00:53:00.716 --> 00:53:09.216
And, and also the fact that people say that the government isn't the best p- um, group of people who know enough to, to be able to do a good job of it. Um, what would be your response to people's complaints there?
350
00:53:09.696 --> 00:53:17.016
Well, I mean, firstly would say i- if what they think is that we should leave things as they are and that the companies are good at doing this, then I think they're, they're very much mistaken.
351
00:53:17.276 --> 00:53:25.736
We've got involved in this because we feel the companies are not good at making these decisions. Um, w- uh, we have, you know, we have a regulated media i- in the UK.
352
00:53:26.085 --> 00:53:40.275
You know, radio stations, uh, television stations are licensed by Ofcom, which is a body with legal powers created by Parliament, uh, but is independent of government and i- uh, and enforces its code of conduct against the people it issues licenses to.
353
00:53:40.335 --> 00:53:47.876
They have to make, um, decisions all the time based on their judgment on taste, decency, uh, partiality, and so on.
354
00:53:48.396 --> 00:54:01.836
So w- we do already have, in a country which is free media and freedom of expression, we do have rules and standards that are applied, uh, based on laws that have been passed by Parliament and independent regulators and bodies that enforce those rules.
355
00:54:01.876 --> 00:54:09.116
And there's no reason why, uh, social media shouldn't form part of that environment as well. And I think that, that is what will happen.
356
00:54:09.196 --> 00:54:15.316
That's not about, that's not about, um, trying to crack down on, uh, and censor people.
357
00:54:15.376 --> 00:54:23.876
It's about saying that there are standards in, in public-- in the public world, in the public space that we expect people to adhere to. Well, thank you so much, uh, Damian, for coming in and chatting to us.
358
00:54:23.976 --> 00:54:26.916
Um, I certainly could spend another few hours talking about these things.
359
00:54:27.056 --> 00:54:39.916
Uh, and I think in the current climate of, of politics and tech and regulation and things, uh, having someone who's, you know, at the forefront of making those changes in our own country and, and potentially impact how it works in other countries is, has been very, uh, useful.
360
00:54:39.976 --> 00:54:47.616
So thank you very much for coming in today. Um, where can people find more information about, um, you and what you're doing and what you're up to and all this sort of stuff online? Is there anywhere they should go?
361
00:54:47.876 --> 00:54:53.896
Uh, yes. People can go to my website, which is damiancollins.com. Uh, also people look up the DCMS Select Committee.
362
00:54:54.416 --> 00:55:05.096
Uh, the committee has a website as part of the Parliament website, and you can see all of our reports and documents, all of the evidence we've taken is all, all there, um, to be viewed for free. Brilliant stuff.
363
00:55:05.176 --> 00:55:13.796
And, um, if those who, uh, want more debate and discussion about this sort of stuff, uh, and everything else related to social media, uh, join my Facebook group, um, the Social Media Geek Out.
364
00:55:13.876 --> 00:55:20.636
It's, uh, facebook.com/groups/socialgeekout. Time now for quick hits.
365
00:55:20.736 --> 00:55:30.028
Here's Matt with tweaks, tests, and totally titillating treats he's spotted from social media companies this week How long did it take you to write that one? Okay, let's go for it.
366
00:55:30.077 --> 00:55:35.788
[laughs] Um, so there's a couple of things this week from a, a smattering of social networks. Uh, let's kick off with something from LinkedIn.
367
00:55:36.268 --> 00:55:47.268
Uh, LinkedIn have launched a, a new feature that's, uh, enables you to search for freelancers or sort of experts in their field, and also you can make recommendations to, um, your network about these people as well.
368
00:55:47.638 --> 00:55:59.568
So you'll be able to s- um, find it much easier to find somebody that's really good at graphic design, or you'd be able to spot friends that could recommend to you, uh, a really good, uh, web designer that you've never heard of before from their network.
369
00:55:59.628 --> 00:56:07.648
So that's a feature that, uh, LinkedIn's starting to roll out globally. Facebook is also up to some more tests this week. So this one's actually courtesy of Jane Wong.
370
00:56:07.868 --> 00:56:27.008
Um, she has spotted that Facebook have got a chat post option where you're, um, able to put out a post on Facebook in the normal way you would, like a, an image or a video or, or just a status update, but you could actually choose a chat post, which will enable people to click on the, the item in the post and take them to a private group chat that you've already got set up and running.
371
00:56:27.088 --> 00:56:34.308
Um, so this is something that we've seen in, in other, um, social networks as well, but now they've extended a test of a similar f- feature for Facebook as well.
372
00:56:34.368 --> 00:56:42.828
Facebook Groups, uh, there's a filter that I've never seen before, but it doesn't mean it's new 'cause these things tend to roll out slowly or are tested in different places at different times.
373
00:56:43.208 --> 00:56:49.488
But there's a filter now for you to be able to sort people requesting to join your group, um, who are previously removed members.
374
00:56:49.848 --> 00:57:01.988
So this is great if you've got a very big group and you've had to, uh, remove several people, or you've had issues in the group with certain members, and you wanna quickly search in the new member request to see if there's anyone in there that, uh, has already been in and removed once before.
375
00:57:02.368 --> 00:57:12.258
So that's quite a handy little feature for groups that I noticed on my group this week. TikTok, so, um, they've got an analytics tool which is a third-party tool. It's not actually a, a, a native tool.
376
00:57:12.408 --> 00:57:23.208
Um, as I mentioned at the beginning of the show today, it's called Pentos, and it really is very basic, and it really allows you to track, you know, the growth in the person's following and, uh, the amount of engagement on some of their public posts and things.
377
00:57:23.268 --> 00:57:27.848
So it's quite, uh, limited, but it's worth having a little, uh, look at. So that's Pentos.
378
00:57:28.558 --> 00:57:37.188
Snapchat have also launched a 3D selfies feature, which is only for iOS at this time, but it will extend to other platforms as well, Android of course.
379
00:57:37.207 --> 00:57:48.578
But it's, effectively is a bit like what we've seen on Facebook's 3D photos where you can take a, an image using the, uh, front-facing depth sensing camera, and then it gives you that 3D effect which you can put into a Snapchat story now.
380
00:57:48.668 --> 00:57:52.228
So that's, uh, a new feature this week coming up on Snapchat for iOS.
381
00:57:53.228 --> 00:58:08.828
LinkedIn, they have launched a skills assessment feature which has been around on my, uh, account for quite a while, but it's, uh, only really limited to very technical subjects to do with Excel and, uh, programming languages and some other kind of, uh, much more techie kinda things really.
382
00:58:09.228 --> 00:58:13.028
Um, and you're able to take a skills assessment to test, and then it will give you a score.
383
00:58:13.048 --> 00:58:22.088
And if you re- reach a certain threshold, I think it's 70%, you can place that as a kind of an achievement, if you like, for, for your skill and prowess in that area on your profile.
384
00:58:22.128 --> 00:58:29.628
And they say that they're gonna roll it out globally, and they say that also there's gonna be a lot more courses, uh, and assessments that will come soon enough as well.
385
00:58:29.658 --> 00:58:36.378
And finally, Google have launched, um, for Photos, Photo Stories, so yet another platform with stories, but this time it's a little bit different.
386
00:58:36.768 --> 00:58:46.948
Rather than looking at the here and now, um, situation, telling people your life in a story for today, this is more focusing on stories of things to do with your photos and videos from times gone by.
387
00:58:46.968 --> 00:58:57.968
So it's a bit like a memories ra- ra- recounting what's gone on in the past kinda feature in a stories format. So Google Photos has got that coming soon. So that's all of this week's quick hits.
388
00:58:58.048 --> 00:59:05.698
The, uh, skills assessment thing for LinkedIn is a good idea, even if it's just for a limited number of skills, because asking people to endorse you is, uh, a, a little bit awkward.
389
00:59:05.768 --> 00:59:12.488
And so the idea of having a, uh, a test where you can prove categorically you're good at something is, uh, perhaps a better idea.
390
00:59:12.668 --> 00:59:19.228
I think so too, and I, and I also think that LinkedIn's site, um, new feature for making recommendations is, is smart, and I'm surprised they haven't done it sooner.
391
00:59:19.258 --> 00:59:28.928
'Cause one of the things that I'm always kind of considering as a freelancer is, you know, I need someone who's really good at video editing or really good at, uh, I don't know, sound, sound production or whatever it is for a project.
392
00:59:29.328 --> 00:59:37.128
Uh, and LinkedIn is kind of often left untapped because I don't know enough about people or, or trust enough in somebody that might be good based on their profile.
393
00:59:37.168 --> 00:59:48.608
So to have someone, um, uh, I can ask to people to make recommendations, or I can search for people that are experts in a certain field which have got some credibility and, uh, achievements in that area is, uh, is quite good.
394
00:59:48.708 --> 01:00:01.448
It means I'll be u- using LinkedIn more than I am right now, so that's great as well. So good stuff. Next week, we will be speaking to Andrew Boz Bosworth, who is Facebook's VP for AR and VR.
395
01:00:01.828 --> 01:00:07.448
Yes, this interview ties in with Oculus Connect, which is taking place very shortly in San Jose, uh, next week I believe.
396
01:00:07.548 --> 01:00:17.888
And so he will have a lot of interesting news to talk about with what Facebook's going on, um, with VR and AR obviously. Um, and hopefully we'll sneak in a few other questions around some other pertinent topics.
397
01:00:18.048 --> 01:00:28.788
So, uh, tune in for that one next week. Uh, so Geek Out with Matt Navara is a Big Revolution production. Find out more at bigrevolution.net. You can find me on Twitter as martinsfp.
398
01:00:28.988 --> 01:00:37.608
And you can find me as @mattnavara on Twitter as well. So don't forget to tell, um, people about the podcast, and we'd love to have more people listening and see what they think, and, uh, maybe leave us a voice message.
399
01:00:37.668 --> 01:00:44.448
We keep reminding you. We've, we've had a few, and maybe we'll compile them all in the final episode. But if you head to- Someone sang us a song last week, didn't they? Someone did sing us a song.
400
01:00:44.488 --> 01:00:46.838
That might be the ending to one of our final shows. But, uh- [laughs]...
401
01:00:46.868 --> 01:00:57.588
if you head to anchor.fm/geekoutmattnavara, you'll find an option to record a message, and we'll play some of the best ones in a future show hopefully. So, uh, I think that's about it for us then, Martin. Yeah.
402
01:00:57.648 --> 01:01:09.868
Thanks for joining us, Damien. My pleasure. It's been great to talk to you. Uh, well, we'll see everybody back here next week to geek out, so goodbye, geeks. [upbeat music]
1
00:00:00.260 --> 00:00:11.860
Geek Out! with Matt Navarra is sponsored by Pinterest. Inspire your audience and grow your company on Pinterest with a free business account. Learn more at business.pinterest.com. It's time to Geek Out!
2
00:00:11.950 --> 00:00:27.660
[upbeat music] Hello, and welcome to Geek Out! with Matt Navarra, sponsored by Pinterest. I am Matt Navarra. And I'm Martin SFP Bryant.
3
00:00:27.740 --> 00:00:37.360
Now, regulation of social media is a topic we'll no doubt keep coming back to in this podcast. So we thought it'd be worth speaking to one of the heavyweights in that particular game. Yes.
4
00:00:37.440 --> 00:00:44.230
This week we'll be talking to Damian Collins, the British MP who chairs the UK Parliament's Digital Culture, Media and Sports Committee.
5
00:00:44.660 --> 00:00:49.519
He's the man Z- Mark Zuckerberg will be hauled in front of if he ever touches down on British soil again.
6
00:00:49.580 --> 00:00:58.520
And it's fair to say Damian's committee has managed to ask the probing questions politicians in other countries haven't. So it's going to be a really interesting chat. He'll be joining us shortly.
7
00:00:58.800 --> 00:01:09.180
And if you wanna get in touch with us on Twitter, use the hashtag #GeekOutQuestions, and you can find us, um, there, and me particularly, as MattNavarra on Twitter. And I'm MartinSFP.
8
00:01:09.280 --> 00:01:10.960
So Matt, what have you been up to this week?
9
00:01:11.480 --> 00:01:25.140
Well, I just got an email actually saying I've been nominated for an award by Social Media Day, Social Media Marketing Awards 2019, as Freelance Social Media Marketer of the Year, which is quite cool, so thank you to them for the shortlisting of, for that award.
10
00:01:25.480 --> 00:01:28.460
Find out, uh, later on next month, uh, whether I get anywhere with that one.
11
00:01:29.140 --> 00:01:41.540
Um, I've been looking at more podcast guests, 'cause we're already getting quite interested in thinking about season two, and there's quite a queue of people that I'd like to try and get onto the podcast, so I've been working through a, uh, a nice-to-have and must-have list.
12
00:01:41.620 --> 00:01:46.400
And I've also been playing with a new tool for TikTok called Pentos, which is a analytics tool.
13
00:01:46.500 --> 00:01:56.580
It's quite basic at the moment, but, uh, it seems to be quite new, so I've been playing around with that to see how effective it is, and still trying to decide on whether I am gonna upgrade to the iPhone 11.
14
00:01:56.740 --> 00:02:04.000
It's a decision that's, you know, critical of course, but, uh, has yet to be decided. I think probably to the Pro, but, um, that's 'cause I'm a geek, so there we go.
15
00:02:04.100 --> 00:02:27.160
In fact, I was listening to one of the longest-running Apple podcasts out there, uh, MacBreak Weekly, uh, the other day, and, uh, they were talking about the, uh, iPhone 11 and, uh, how, uh, normally, uh, the, uh, the top of the range one is the one that Apple tries to sell you, and then there's like the, the slightly not so good, cheaper one, um, that they say, "Oh, oh, you could have this one," which has, you know, plastic rather than glass or whatever, you know.
16
00:02:27.200 --> 00:02:30.000
It's not quite as good materials, but it's pretty good and it's a lower price.
17
00:02:30.260 --> 00:02:37.180
They've s- they swapped it round this year and, like, the one that they want you to buy is the slightly cheaper one, and then the Pro one is the one for the geeks.
18
00:02:37.260 --> 00:02:44.400
Uh, unashamedly so with all the, uh, the high-spec features and stuff, and they know that's more of a luxury item, so it's been interesting to see that switch this time.
19
00:02:44.460 --> 00:02:49.940
So, uh, so I don't think there's anything at all, uh, to be, uh, surprised about that geeks would buy the Pro.
20
00:02:50.040 --> 00:03:04.860
But, uh, yeah, um, uh, personally, I've just been, uh, working on, uh, projects, a lot of projects that I've, I've been working on for weeks and months even have finally come to fruition, so, uh, I've been, uh, basically head down on that doing very little geeky stuff unfortunately.
21
00:03:04.940 --> 00:03:12.520
But, uh, this, this is a, this, this show is a good release for that. Exactly. Exactly. Well, I'm, I'm really looking forward to, uh, getting on and chatting to our guest today.
22
00:03:12.690 --> 00:03:25.600
So welcome, Damian Collins, uh, somebody that I have met luckily once before, and we had a fascinating conversation about regulation and Cambridge Analytica and everything that's going on in the social media world and, and how, um, the government's role and Parliament's role is in that.
23
00:03:26.040 --> 00:03:30.640
Uh, and I thought that would be something that'd be worth having a similar conversation a bit more publicly. So welcome, Damian.
24
00:03:30.720 --> 00:03:37.130
Um, can you just tell everyone a little bit about you and what you do and, and how it all works? Uh, yes. It was great to be with you again. Um,
25
00:03:38.500 --> 00:03:51.760
I am a member of Parliament, uh, for Folkestone and Hythe in southeast Kent, and as well as that, I was elected in 2016 to be chairman of the House of Commons Select Committee for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport.
26
00:03:52.180 --> 00:04:09.600
And just to explain a little bit about the committee and the, the way the committee system works in Parliament, uh, we are one of the departmental select committees, so we scrutinize the work of the government department of the same name, and that department is the lead department for digital policy and media policy in the UK.
27
00:04:10.040 --> 00:04:19.240
And our job is to scrutinize their work and the work of bodies that they fund, but also to initiate our own investigations and inquiries into any related issues as well.
28
00:04:19.340 --> 00:04:28.580
So that can mean rather than just scrutinizing what the government's doing or what the regulators are doing already in this space, but actually to ask questions about things they're not doing yet, but maybe they should.
29
00:04:28.900 --> 00:04:29.280
Awesome.
30
00:04:29.360 --> 00:04:46.469
Well, we're gonna talk in a lot more detail with Damian in, in a short while, um, and, and see what's going on in terms of the regulation space, 'cause it's been, even this week, lots going on in the US with, uh, antitrust stuff and, and other Senate hearings involving Mark Zuckerberg and other senior members of the, uh, board of Facebook and Twitter and, and everyone else.
31
00:04:46.840 --> 00:04:55.360
But for now, let's, um, chat a quick bit about the news from the last seven days to do with social media. So Martin, what's been going on this week? Yeah, so first up, uh, some Facebook news.
32
00:04:55.420 --> 00:05:06.860
In fact, a lot of our news today is about Facebook. They really do dominate the conversation. Google Glass is back, baby. Well, kind of. Facebook is working on smart glasses with Ray-Ban, according to CNBC.
33
00:05:07.200 --> 00:05:18.050
Uh, they're codenamed Orion. Uh, don't expect them to come anytime soon. They're expected, uh, between 2023 and 2025, so, uh, up to, uh, seven years from now.
34
00:05:18.430 --> 00:05:31.440
Uh, and, uh, a- according to the report, uh, they'd be able to take calls, show information to users in a small display, live stream their vantage point to social media friends and followers, uh, and essentially replace smartphones.
35
00:05:31.640 --> 00:05:39.620
So it's Google Glass, but, uh, from Facebook with, but with a longer time span for it to, for, for it to come to us. Um, Matt, what did you make of this?
36
00:05:39.820 --> 00:05:59.520
Uh, to me, it just sounds like another one of those things that, uh, a lot of these tech companies do and, and Facebook's renowned for doing, which is throwing out a lot of things, um, to see what sticks, to see what they can make work, to see what drives appetite from consumers and things, and it sounds a little bit like a futuristic kind of product that may never make it to market, as they've kind of suggested it may or may not, may not anyway.
37
00:05:59.940 --> 00:06:12.780
Uh, I think that the fact that it's more geared around AR rather than the VR side of things is, is good because I still think V- uh, VR to me seems far off being a mainstream, uh, product for, for most people, so the AR element of this is, is interesting.
38
00:06:13.100 --> 00:06:18.380
But, uh, Damian, uh, these sorts of things excite you, or is this something that it, it says Facebook, you know Mr.
39
00:06:18.580 --> 00:06:25.020
Zuckerberg's involved, and you already got your heckles up and you're not quite sure about ever thinking about using such a thing? Well, I mean, it is very interesting.
40
00:06:25.060 --> 00:06:28.660
I mean, the idea that, um, glasses would replace smartphones.
41
00:06:29.380 --> 00:06:40.556
Um, but the, I think the question you gotta have in your mind about that is well, um- If the companies are making money from advertising y- on the current mobile format, how will they make it with Glass?
42
00:06:40.616 --> 00:06:43.576
You know, w- presumably you would see pop-up ads as you were walking around.
43
00:06:43.616 --> 00:06:59.036
You know, the AR experience could be creating f- you know, virtual billboards and, and other mechanisms for advertising content to people, and would also, uh, users pay a premium not to see the ads, but other people who don't wanna pay that premium would, and what would you see?
44
00:06:59.176 --> 00:07:10.436
So I still think at the end of the day, whatever Facebook does, it's gotta make money out of, from advertising, and how would it make money in this new AR Glass-wearing world? Yeah.
45
00:07:10.456 --> 00:07:18.236
It's an interesting one to, to think about. Uh, I, I'm curious to see how many people will, will adopt anything, um, that involves Facebook in terms of products at the moment.
46
00:07:18.296 --> 00:07:20.616
We've seen this with Portal, which we'll probably talk about a bit later.
47
00:07:20.676 --> 00:07:26.396
But, um, but yes, um, I'm, I'm hopeful that it does come out 'cause I think it'll be quite a cool thing to play around with as, as a geek that I am.
48
00:07:26.436 --> 00:07:33.416
But, um, but in terms of other things, there's been a, um, slightly more significant, uh, development this week with Facebook. What, what was that all about, Martin? Uh, yeah.
49
00:07:33.516 --> 00:07:41.216
So they have announced more details of their independent oversight board. So this has been billed as a Supreme Court of Facebook.
50
00:07:41.256 --> 00:07:53.316
Basically, they'd have a bunch of, uh, great and good individuals from around the world who would work part-time, uh, for Facebook, deciding on things like-- being, being the ultimate decider on content moderation.
51
00:07:53.386 --> 00:08:02.556
So if there's a really particularly, uh, controversial decision that has been made around content moderation, it would eventually make its way to this oversight board who would make a decision on that.
52
00:08:02.776 --> 00:08:12.576
And they could also make, uh, advice, uh, you know, advisory policy decisions on other things that Facebook does. Uh, you know, it could be related to privacy or, uh, other things.
53
00:08:12.876 --> 00:08:24.046
And, uh, Facebook would be bound apparently by the content moderation decisions, uh, and could take other recommendations into consideration. So it's an interesting model of governance.
54
00:08:24.626 --> 00:08:34.996
Uh, and, uh, I would say it's perhaps overdue, but it's definitely a job I'd like. [laughs] I, I saw this and I thought, "I want this job." Uh, you know, I would love that as a part-time job.
55
00:08:35.156 --> 00:08:41.316
Uh, Matt, w- I, I assume you too? Yeah. I, I'd definitely like to be involved in some of these things. Uh, they do, they do fascinate me.
56
00:08:41.516 --> 00:08:48.796
Um, I had a look and saw that I think it's 40 part-time positions, um, which, uh, I think 11 of them involve from selection from Facebook itself.
57
00:08:49.256 --> 00:09:16.536
Um, and they're saying that the content decisions that they'll pass through would be-- for them to look at and take decisions from are based on ones that they class as significant and difficult decisions, and they've listed in their blog post about this significance being, you know, how severe it is and then the scale of the, of the, of the decision, um, and the public discourse that's being made around this particular decision and difficulty around how it, how much it's been disputed, how much uncertainty around the correct decision, uh, and other such tensions.
58
00:09:16.896 --> 00:09:23.016
Um, but they do say they're a bit more vague about whether they would take a steer on policy decisions or changes to policy from this committee.
59
00:09:23.556 --> 00:09:29.536
Um, I- I'd be interested to see how many decisions they pass through, um, and what the turnover rate would be of the board.
60
00:09:29.996 --> 00:09:39.196
Um, but overall, clearly it's a good, it's a good thing, uh, and it's a step in the right direction and all those other cliches. But it, it-- for, for Facebook with me, I take everything with a pinch of salt.
61
00:09:39.256 --> 00:09:48.156
I wanna see it and wanna see how it works, um, what the reality of it is, um, and I suspect, Damian, you're one of the same sort of opinions. What, what do you think about all this? Yes.
62
00:09:48.216 --> 00:09:52.676
I mean, you've gotta think what's the credibility of this body, particularly?
63
00:09:52.956 --> 00:10:04.016
You know, if, imagine this particularly controversial issue, um, where, um, you know-- L- Well, let's take the n- issue that was, has been in the media this year, the, the Nancy Pelosi, um, fake film.
64
00:10:04.716 --> 00:10:18.436
Um, you know, if, if you, if the, uh, you know, the Supreme Court of Facebook said, "No, we uphold the decision of Facebook not to remove the film, and we think Facebook did the right thing," are people ever gonna believe that's a kind of rigorous, fair, and independent analysis of what went on?
65
00:10:18.716 --> 00:10:27.366
You know, because ultimately this is a body created by Facebook, paid for by Facebook, recruited by Facebook to sit in judgment on Facebook. And do...
66
00:10:27.396 --> 00:10:35.076
Will, you know, will it, will this body ever have that, the sort of credibility, uh, to be taken seriously? I think it's not... I'm not surprised they're vague on policy initiation.
67
00:10:35.176 --> 00:10:42.836
I bet this body won't be asked to initiate policy, but just to arbitrate on the existing platform policies. And I think it'll be interesting to see what sort of people they pick.
68
00:10:42.896 --> 00:10:57.196
I mean, will they pick people who've been previously very critical of Facebook and its decision-making process, or will they pick people, you know, from the academic or media community who largely hold to Facebook's values, um, and are likely to think the way Facebook would think about these problems?
69
00:10:57.396 --> 00:10:59.056
Yeah. I think there's some, some valid points there.
70
00:10:59.336 --> 00:11:09.236
I, I'm, I'm not sure, um, how effective it will be, which is why I'm hesitant to say it's a wholehearted, great decision, and it's gonna be brilliant and everything else. Um, but, um, I guess we will soon find out.
71
00:11:09.276 --> 00:11:17.446
I think in the beginning of next year is when we'll start seeing some of the, uh, outcomes of, of this committee. Um, it- I, I just, um, I, I...
72
00:11:17.446 --> 00:11:30.356
If Facebook think that creating these self-regulatory structures will meet, will head off the calls for more effective regulation of tech companies, I think they've quite badly misjudged that, you know?
73
00:11:30.436 --> 00:11:38.136
So I think it will be interesting to see what, not of what relevance, but what real role, uh, this body has in the future. Yeah. Interesting stuff.
74
00:11:38.176 --> 00:11:40.816
It's certainly one that's gonna keep on rolling and rolling, that's for sure.
75
00:11:41.316 --> 00:11:51.636
Um, but in certainly in a slightly different, uh, tone and tact, uh, for Nextdoor, which is a, um, social media network based around your neighborhood, um, there's some news there, Martin. What's been going on with them?
76
00:11:51.696 --> 00:12:02.496
Yeah. So they've taken a leaf out of Instagram's book. Uh, they are going to be advising you when you're about to post something that is potentially abusive.
77
00:12:02.576 --> 00:12:11.316
So let's say you're about to type, "You're an idiot," then it will pop up with a kindness reminder, uh, to try and stop neighbors being so mean to each other.
78
00:12:11.416 --> 00:12:23.216
Uh, and, uh, this is something that, uh, Instagram has, uh, floated before, uh, as, uh, you know, using AI to learn what people say and language patterns and then say, "You know, maybe you shouldn't be doing that."
79
00:12:23.406 --> 00:12:32.256
And it's a nice idea, and it's, it's, it's a positive idea, but I do wonder if it might actually make you more angry. If you're really angry about something your neighbor's done, "I can't believe you, idiot.
80
00:12:32.316 --> 00:12:43.420
You've po- You've, you won't-- Cut your hedge, and it's spoiling my view," and then this message comes up saying- Maybe be nicer to your neighbor. You're like, "No, I won't be. I'll be even more nasty."
81
00:12:43.520 --> 00:12:50.520
Uh, so it'll be interesting to see how it works, but, uh, but yeah, um, uh, just trying to make n- uh, neighbors nicer to each other. Do you think it'll work, Matt?
82
00:12:50.660 --> 00:13:08.520
Um, [sighs] to me, this just seems like a, a tick box thing for a lot of these social platforms, particularly with the discussions we're gonna have about regulation, where they're almost throwing out lots of examples they can give back as this is what we've done to kind of, you know, protect people, our users, and this is another thing that we're working on and developing to solve a problem.
83
00:13:08.880 --> 00:13:17.200
And, and I don't know whether it does solve a problem. I think it's clever use of tech, and I think it's, uh, it's, uh, it's certainly a-- You can't argue it's, it's a positive step in some ways.
84
00:13:17.280 --> 00:13:21.100
But in terms of real word-- world usage and effectiveness, I'm, I'm dubious.
85
00:13:21.420 --> 00:13:30.470
And I saw actually yesterday one, one-- I say that, then BBC have launched an app yesterday, which is, um, enables, um, children and younger people to have an app which has a keyboard.
86
00:13:30.770 --> 00:13:42.610
And if they're type-- using this app as their main keyboard, and they start typing abusive or, uh, derogatory messages, or they start sharing their personal details in a message, the keyboard detects that and gives them a nudge to suggest, "Do you want to be sending that?
87
00:13:42.660 --> 00:13:46.820
Is that a good idea?" And I think for younger people, there's certainly an element of education.
88
00:13:46.840 --> 00:13:55.360
And I do think a lot of the, um, some of the solutions to, uh, the problems we have with social media comes from better education and support to, uh, young and vulnerable people using it.
89
00:13:55.780 --> 00:14:02.840
Um, so I think that's a positive thing. But for this, uh, I think it's, it's an interesting bit of PR, but I'm, I'm not as excited as maybe others are.
90
00:14:03.160 --> 00:14:07.700
Damian, does this, this excite you, or do you think this is a bit kind of meh? [laughs] I think it's good.
91
00:14:07.720 --> 00:14:13.960
And I, I saw the, uh, BBC demonstration of this a year ago actually by the, the, the Blue Room team in, uh, Salford.
92
00:14:14.120 --> 00:14:24.760
And I certainly think for younger people, um, a-as a tool to try and combat cyberbullying and challenge young people about, uh, the language they're using when they're talking to each other, I think it w- I think it could be effective.
93
00:14:24.800 --> 00:14:34.940
I don't think it'll solve all of these problems. There'll be some people who are sort of determined to use bad language or offensive comments. But I think if it, it helps moderate it, then that can't be a bad thing.
94
00:14:34.980 --> 00:14:41.620
But it's not-- I don't think it'll solve the problem by itself. Yeah. No, I think that, that, that's again, sort of aligns with how I'm seeing it.
95
00:14:41.680 --> 00:14:48.320
I think, um, parents will be pleased with some of these, um, features, particularly in the more, um, mainstream, big, big social networks.
96
00:14:48.540 --> 00:14:58.780
Um, and, uh, and I'm sure Facebook and, and Instagram and others that are doing similar things will, will use that and pump it out in, in many of their Senate hearings and everything else to sort of give a list of things that they've tried to do.
97
00:14:59.140 --> 00:15:05.560
And so it'd be hard to criticize them for, for doing these things. So I think it's, uh, applaud them for, for doing something or trying something.
98
00:15:05.620 --> 00:15:14.980
As to its effectiveness for the average user who's, you know, you know, maybe not a teenager or a vulnerable person, I'm a little bit skeptical. Um, I think that's it for this week's news for now. Is that right, Martin?
99
00:15:15.020 --> 00:15:24.249
What, anything else we need to chat about or? Oh, we just, we just needed to have a, a quick note of another piece of, uh, Facebook hardware news. Oh, yes, yesterday's breaking news. [laughs] Yes. Yes.
100
00:15:24.320 --> 00:15:32.200
Uh, so, uh, Facebook, uh, has announced a few new Portal devices. They are really keen to have a, a camera in your living room.
101
00:15:32.460 --> 00:15:47.320
Uh, the most notable one is the Portal TV, which will connect up to your TV and, uh, will allow you to, uh, have video chats on your, you know, your big, your big TV in your house, uh, and also watch, uh, Facebook video content together with somebody on the other side of the world.
102
00:15:47.540 --> 00:15:55.320
Now, to me, this sounds-- it's, on one level, oh, well, that sounds like a nice experience, but I really don't think anyone is crying out for this.
103
00:15:55.360 --> 00:16:01.720
It's very easy to say, "Oh, it's creepy Facebook," and that's one angle of it, you know? Oh, they, they want to watch us and all of that. Yes, fair enough.
104
00:16:01.860 --> 00:16:10.900
But just from a pure product design point of view, I don't think anyone is really calling out for this. Uh, you can create a product that nobody knew they wanted and make a success of it.
105
00:16:11.280 --> 00:16:17.420
Uh, you know, you think of, uh, the, uh, Amazon Echo, for example. Nobody knew they wanted a smart speaker, and they're, you know, the biggest gadget around now.
106
00:16:17.800 --> 00:16:28.040
Uh, but for this, I, I, I don't think anyone really saw last year's initial Portal devices and thought, "I really want one of those." Uh, there, there didn't seem to be much demand for them.
107
00:16:28.140 --> 00:16:33.920
So, uh, it feels like this isn't going to go anywhere. Um, uh, don't know what you think, Matt.
108
00:16:33.960 --> 00:16:39.660
Well, it's, it's finally u-um, launching in Europe now, so this has been something that's been only available in the US, uh, up until recently.
109
00:16:39.760 --> 00:16:48.510
Um, so that's a good thing for those that do want the product, so that's great. Um, in terms of the numbers, I think it says a lot that Facebook really doesn't wanna give us any numbers on sales.
110
00:16:48.650 --> 00:16:57.339
Um, I think the estimates I've read in the last twenty-four hours are between fifty thousand and three hundred thousand units, which only accounts for about 1% of the market that they're playing for.
111
00:16:57.940 --> 00:17:08.780
Um, I think that in general, again, yeah, I'm not sure it does anything enough that s- sort of sets it apart from its rivals who are doing it better and bigger w- and more elaborately.
112
00:17:08.820 --> 00:17:17.740
I think it, it's one thing that is quite cool is the main piece of tech that's, you know, tracks you as you're moving around, so you can have much more natural group conversations when you're busy doing something at home.
113
00:17:17.900 --> 00:17:19.680
That, that technology in there is really good.
114
00:17:20.200 --> 00:17:27.870
Um, I think we were discussing before, um, earlier today about the fact that they've got a, a little red light as part of their privacy features for this, and where if the camera- Mm-hmm...
115
00:17:27.880 --> 00:17:36.670
is not on, the red light is on. To me and to others on Twitter yesterday, that seemed a very peculiar piece of, uh, sort of product setup. Yeah.
116
00:17:36.700 --> 00:17:48.500
It's, it's the opposite of what you'd expect, and it kind of feels like they're trying to get you used to the idea that the camera is always on, the microphone is always on, and being off is an exception.
117
00:17:49.080 --> 00:17:57.080
Um, that, that, that's what having the light the opposite way round to what you'd expect seems to be saying what they seem to be conditioning you to. It is. And Damian, are you gonna have one of these in your house?
118
00:17:57.540 --> 00:18:00.380
No, I don't think so. [laughs] Surprise, surprise.
119
00:18:00.479 --> 00:18:25.420
[laughs] Well, I have got an E- we have got, um, uh, Alexa, but, um, the, I do, the, the, the suspicion here is gonna be, I think you're gonna wanna read the terms and conditions pretty carefully before letting Facebook onto your TV, um, because, you know, there, there will be, because of stuff that's happened in the last couple of years, suspicions that this thing is sort of gathering data about other things you're watching, things that are going on in your house, uh, um, what's being done with that data.
120
00:18:25.540 --> 00:18:28.120
Now, then maybe Facebook could come in and assure us no, that's not the case.
121
00:18:28.200 --> 00:18:36.840
But there will be these suspicions, and I think I'm not sure, I'm, I'm not sure many people will, will trust Facebook to have them on their, their TV in their homes.
122
00:18:37.280 --> 00:18:45.355
We'll speak more with Damian shortly, but first- Geek Out with Matt Navarra is sponsored by Pinterest. And each week, we share tips to help you make the most of the platform.
123
00:18:45.636 --> 00:18:52.196
Inspiring, useful ideas are at the heart of Pinterest. Yes, relevant and compelling content matters more than anything else.
124
00:18:52.536 --> 00:19:00.816
Focus your energy on creating quality content that's visual and tailored to your audience's interests, so it stands out in people's feeds and shows up when people search.
125
00:19:01.116 --> 00:19:08.796
A major factor that makes Pinterest different to social media platforms is that content lives for an average of 105 days on Pinterest as opposed to a few hours.
126
00:19:09.316 --> 00:19:12.896
People discover your content as soon as you create it and also months after.
127
00:19:13.396 --> 00:19:22.936
If you're a content creator or a business, you can take advantage of this by making content work harder for you at different rates to other platforms. Follow these tips to make your existing content work harder for you.
128
00:19:23.316 --> 00:19:34.256
First of all, get ahead of seasonal trends. People come to Pinterest to plan. When it comes to celebrations or seasonal moments, people use Pinterest to plan long before they turn to other platforms.
129
00:19:34.276 --> 00:19:43.116
Make the most of this by factoring this earlier timing into your content strategy. Pick eye-catching images. Use high-quality vertical images that will stand out in people's feeds.
130
00:19:43.396 --> 00:19:51.075
Pinterest recommends a 2-to-3 aspect ratio. Make your brand the focal point. Don't be afraid to put your product or service front and center.
131
00:19:51.096 --> 00:20:00.296
Avoid using abstract images or lifestyle imagery that doesn't showcase your brand. A text overlay tells a better story. Text overlay is the copy that goes on your pin image.
132
00:20:00.636 --> 00:20:11.476
It makes your content stand out, and it adds context and enhances your message. Pinterest recommends keeping text concise, so it's easy for people to read on their phones because 80% of Pinterest users are on mobile.
133
00:20:11.516 --> 00:20:16.796
And get pinning. Publishing content consistently is better than a once-a-week flurry of pinning.
134
00:20:16.876 --> 00:20:25.536
Having a pinning spree once a week might be okay if you're a regular user, but for creators and businesses, switch to the mindset of little and often, where you'll see better results.
135
00:20:26.016 --> 00:20:36.936
You can use Pinterest scheduling tools to help spread out the content. Learn more about the creative best practices and Pinterest content strategy at business.pinterest.com. So Damian, what's Mark Zuckerberg's deal?
136
00:20:37.096 --> 00:20:47.296
Is, is he intentionally breaking rules and, and using underhand tactics to benefit Facebook, or has he created something he can't control? Which is it? Well, I don't-- I think it's, it's a bit of both. Um,
137
00:20:48.596 --> 00:20:56.076
I think what they can see is that you can create these tools to connect the world, but you can't necessarily control the way people will use them, um, or the way people will behave on it.
138
00:20:56.636 --> 00:21:03.316
And I think what they've-- I think what we've, we've tried to challenge them on to make them recognize is, is that they have a responsibility.
139
00:21:03.676 --> 00:21:17.516
Um, because if people are using tools they've created and systems they've created to do bad things, um, then they have a responsibility to act on that basis, particularly if they're the only ones that can really see what people are doing or what they're using, using the tools for.
140
00:21:17.576 --> 00:21:24.356
So I think they've been slow to recognize the responsibility they have towards the way people use the systems that they've created.
141
00:21:24.785 --> 00:21:31.276
And I think that's also gone alongside a ambivalence towards issues like data protection and data privacy.
142
00:21:31.316 --> 00:21:44.676
And I, I would question whether Mark Zuckerberg really believes that data privacy should exist and that actually it's a good thing that Facebook can gather as, you know, as much data about you as it possibly can to design services for you and sell you stuff.
143
00:21:45.056 --> 00:21:56.176
Um, and I think that people have pushed back against that idea now because, uh, they do believe in pr- data rights. Um, they do believe in the right to, you know, to withhold information from a company like Facebook.
144
00:21:56.646 --> 00:22:02.755
And actually, the desire to have ever more perfect advertising targeting them is not something they feel as strongly about as, as he does.
145
00:22:02.876 --> 00:22:24.756
And I think looking at the work we've done, um, looking at some of the documents that we've published as well about, about Facebook, you can see these internal debates they're having about how to maximize data gathering from other partners and developers, how to monetize, uh, more effectively the data that they hold, um, how to make it un-- less clear to users just how much da-data they are gathering and where they're getting it from.
146
00:22:25.256 --> 00:22:35.976
So to me, these, this would suggest that Facebook as a company doesn't really have, um, much morals when it comes to thinking about how to, you know, monetize their user base.
147
00:22:36.565 --> 00:22:44.016
So h-how many times now have you actually requested f-- uh, Mark Zuckerberg to answer questions? And do you think you'll give up on that? You know, is he running scared?
148
00:22:44.156 --> 00:22:50.616
And what would happen if he even entered the country? Because it's curious to the, the average person as to how that situation is, is developing really.
149
00:22:51.756 --> 00:23:01.066
Well, we, we said, um, that we would issue a sort of summons to him if he entered the UK. Uh, so we can't issue a summons to someone who's outside of the UK.
150
00:23:01.556 --> 00:23:07.736
But if he comes to Britain, then we will issue a summons for him to appear. But he's not just, you know, declined to come to my committee.
151
00:23:07.896 --> 00:23:17.736
And, and the reason, the reason we've constantly pushed for him to come is that, you know, they-- Facebook have sent other people over the last couple of years, including Mike Schroepfer, the chief tech-technology officer.
152
00:23:18.316 --> 00:23:27.556
Uh, every time they come, uh, and Monica Bickert, who's the global policy lead on disinformation. But every time these people come, there's always stuff they say they don't know. They also have to write back to us.
153
00:23:28.656 --> 00:23:36.536
Um, new information comes out that questions some of the things we've been told, and we get told, "Well, the person that gave evidence wasn't sighted on that information when they gave evidence to you."
154
00:23:36.976 --> 00:23:47.776
So we think, well, ultimately, there's only one person that ha-- doesn't have that excuse, the one person who, by his own admission to the US, uh, Congress, i-is responsible for what happens at Facebook and knows what goes on at Facebook, and that's Mark Zuckerberg.
155
00:23:48.596 --> 00:23:58.276
And we've asked him to come to the UK Parliament. He's declined to do that. Uh, I initiated the establishment of an international grand committee involving, uh, people from nine different countries.
156
00:23:58.796 --> 00:24:01.416
Uh, I think it's twenty-seven different parliamentarians who came.
157
00:24:01.456 --> 00:24:11.916
So we thought, well, if Mark Zuckerberg can't visit every parliament in the world, maybe we'll gather together people from the same relevant committees in other parliaments who are investigating the same issues and ask if Mark Zuckerberg will come and give evidence to that.
158
00:24:12.416 --> 00:24:20.716
Again, he declined. At the second of these meetings, which was held in Canada in May, he declined to appear there. There'll be a third of these international meetings in Dublin in November.
159
00:24:21.016 --> 00:24:28.796
Again, he's declined to appear there as well. So this is, to me, the pattern, a pattern of behavior. It's not about snubbing one parliament in particular.
160
00:24:28.856 --> 00:24:41.236
It's about rejecting the idea of public scrutiny by, you know, parliamentarians that have built up a degree of knowledge on these issues because of the investigations that they've been running, and it's now a, a pattern of behavior of evasion.
161
00:24:41.336 --> 00:24:50.076
And, um, you know, yes, he's appeared, appearing in front of Congress, but I think, you know, he's outside of America, he clearly doesn't want, uh, to be scrutinized in this way.
162
00:24:50.096 --> 00:24:56.956
And I, and I was just gonna come onto that to say, you know, what do you make of the news overnight that, uh, Mark Zuckerberg's attending this, the new Senate hearings in Washington, DC this week?
163
00:24:57.156 --> 00:25:03.576
Is, is that a, a surprise to you? Do you think that's, uh, a, an interesting development, or do you think it's just, you know, part and parcel of the process we're going through or?
164
00:25:04.532 --> 00:25:15.052
Um, they-- No, I'm not sur-I'm not surprised that he's, he's appearing. Um, and but I-- What, what I found interesting having... I spoke, I spoke last year to Senator Warner, uh, about this.
165
00:25:15.312 --> 00:25:24.512
Um, and I found that they-- What he sort of said to me was that in Congress, they find it just as difficult to engage with Facebook, just as difficult to get answers and information out of them.
166
00:25:24.642 --> 00:25:35.712
So if we'd thought that, well, they're only interested in talking to politicians in Washington because Congress has jurisdiction over them, I think everyone finds it a frustrating process trying to get answers out of Facebook.
167
00:25:35.992 --> 00:25:47.292
And I think Facebook are probably, you know, concerned as well about, um, the, the, the, the, the questions about, um, regulate, you know, competition regulation investigations into them.
168
00:25:47.352 --> 00:25:56.492
You know, call, calls for them within America for, for, for them to be broken up. They'll be mindful, of course, of antitrust rulings agai-in the past against companies like, uh, Microsoft.
169
00:25:56.592 --> 00:26:01.512
So I would imagine that's why Facebook are concerned to make sure they try and keep the congressmen on side.
170
00:26:01.712 --> 00:26:07.792
Now, I just wanted to pick up on the, uh, the, the point about, uh, the summons to Mark Zuckerberg when he enters the country. What happens then?
171
00:26:07.852 --> 00:26:16.692
Does, uh, d-- Will the police turn up at the airport or his hotel and, and, and haul him into parliament, or is it a, a more polite invitation?
172
00:26:17.012 --> 00:26:26.172
Um, well, the, a summons is issued by the Serjeant at Arms of the House of Commons or someone the Serjeant appoints and is usually delivered in the form of a letter.
173
00:26:26.512 --> 00:26:31.752
Um, so, uh, and that happened to, um, Ru-Rupert Murdoch. I was a member-- I wasn't chair of the committee.
174
00:26:31.782 --> 00:26:41.692
I was a member of the committee in two thousand and eleven when Rupert Murdoch, who's an American citizen, um, was in London, and he was summoned to appear in front of the committee to talk about the phone hacking scandal at the News of the World.
175
00:26:42.172 --> 00:26:44.212
Uh, and he did appear. He chose to appear.
176
00:26:44.252 --> 00:26:56.752
And I think, again, it will be the action of someone who takes their responsibility seriously and wants to run a company that's seen to comply with the laws of the countries in which it, which it trades to respect a request from his parliament to come and give evidence.
177
00:26:56.832 --> 00:27:03.512
So there are precedents for other international business people doing that, and that's the position Mark Zuckerberg will be put in when, when he's summoned.
178
00:27:03.532 --> 00:27:11.832
He'd have to, you know, decide whether he would-- wanted to not appear and risk being held in contempt of parliament, uh, or whether he would be prepared to come and answer our questions. Right.
179
00:27:11.852 --> 00:27:17.812
And, and your, your select committee has been running this inquiry into, uh, social media companies, uh, for quite some time now.
180
00:27:17.952 --> 00:27:26.772
Um, could you give us a summary of where it's at and, uh, where we can expect it to go in the future? Yeah. So the, the main, um, inquiry was launched in two thousand and seventeen.
181
00:27:27.372 --> 00:27:34.392
We issued, uh, two reports, an interim report, uh, in the summer of twenty eighteen, the final report in March this year.
182
00:27:34.922 --> 00:27:39.572
And on the back of that, we've set up a permanent subcommittee of the committee because these are ongoing issues.
183
00:27:39.772 --> 00:27:49.092
Um, and particularly looking at the issues we raised around the, making social media companies responsible, uh, for the content that's run through their platforms, uh, giving them
184
00:27:50.132 --> 00:27:55.952
a, a, a, a legal duty of care liability towards-- to protect the interests of their users, uh, and to act against harmful content.
185
00:27:56.492 --> 00:28:10.632
Um, on the back of our committee inquiries and our reports and recommendations, the government, um, has produced its own white paper on online harms, and I think the next stage there will be to look at a legislation coming out of that white paper.
186
00:28:10.672 --> 00:28:24.532
And there was discussion earlier in the year that the government might look to bring forward, uh, legislation, you know, probably next year, uh, to create a regulate-- content regulator for social media platforms and create these legal liabilities for them to act against harmful content.
187
00:28:24.681 --> 00:28:26.711
And so that, that's just been the progression.
188
00:28:26.752 --> 00:28:39.292
You know, we're, we're continuing to look at these issues and take evidence on them, and we'll scrutinize the, the legislations that goes through, and we're continuing to work with and discuss these issues with people at other parliaments around the world, and in crit-- I think particularly across Europe.
189
00:28:40.242 --> 00:28:47.412
Um, you know, other governments are now considering how they could create similar sorts of regimes, similar legal responsibilities for social media companies.
190
00:28:47.452 --> 00:28:51.852
So I see this as a, a not just important, but a live and an ongoing process.
191
00:28:51.892 --> 00:29:12.732
You know, so on, on these investigations and, uh, committee hearings, some-something that I, I think a lot of people picked up on that, uh, in other countries, particularly the example of the, uh, early, um, Senate hearings with, um, Mark Zuckerberg, um, people were quite mocking of, of some of these senators and, and the members, uh, over there in terms of the questions and the softball questions and the peculiar questions that they were asking.
192
00:29:13.112 --> 00:29:22.162
You know, I think there was one example that's famous where someone said, you know, "Mr. Zuckerberg, when I'm emailing on WhatsApp," which was a big sign that this person couldn't quite understand the technology.
193
00:29:22.232 --> 00:29:28.532
Uh, that kind of, um, problem, um, hasn't been made or hasn't been, uh, accused of, of your committee, which is a good thing.
194
00:29:28.672 --> 00:29:38.832
I think the views have tended to be that the, the UK Select Committee has been done right, and the questions that have been asked are pertinent, and they're direct, and they're technical, and they are exactly what should be.
195
00:29:38.932 --> 00:29:47.472
Um, do you-- Was that something that you set out with from the start to do, and would you say that you've scared tech companies like Facebook by your level of kind of preparedness for these sorts of sessions?
196
00:29:48.272 --> 00:29:51.712
So the-- There are a couple of, a couple of book-- important things there.
197
00:29:51.832 --> 00:30:03.192
You know, we-- I think there's definitely a benefit to having a dedicated committee that, that, that in launching an investigation works on that issue in together over a sustained period of time.
198
00:30:03.272 --> 00:30:15.292
Um, and, and if you look at the Senate hearings, in particular the early ones, was the-- What you saw then was, you know, you had a, you had a s-a session where you had fifty senators asking questions of Mark Zuckerberg with a time limit of four minutes each.
199
00:30:15.872 --> 00:30:18.612
Now, you-- Now, if you're the witness, it's qui-- that's quite, you know...
200
00:30:18.812 --> 00:30:27.872
It might be grueling 'cause you're doing it for a long time, but it's an easy format because you know that even if the, the member is asking you questions, he's asking you good technical questions or pertinent questions.
201
00:30:28.142 --> 00:30:33.792
I mean, Kamala Harris, you know, pushed him quite hard on what, you know, what he knew about Cambridge Analytica and when. You know they've only got four minutes.
202
00:30:34.112 --> 00:30:42.112
You can play for time, you can pad out your answers, uh, and then it moves on to the next questioner. So being held to sustained questioning is very difficult in that situation.
203
00:30:42.442 --> 00:30:49.212
And when you've got so many people doing it, a lot of those people will not be specialists at all or really ne-- have really spent very much time working on that issue.
204
00:30:49.612 --> 00:31:02.912
But if you've got a dedicated committee of ele-of eleven members who've been working on these issues for a year, um, you know, been through multiple hearings talking to other technology companies, um, and have got a clear idea of what the issues are they wanna ask, that's a much more challenging environment.
205
00:31:03.552 --> 00:31:17.432
And the second, second thing I would say is that, um, what we recognized early on in the process was that, you know- Companies like Facebook will avoid giving you relevant information that unless you specifically ask for it.
206
00:31:17.732 --> 00:31:18.252
Um, they will, you know...
207
00:31:18.272 --> 00:31:28.592
So, so you've got to make sure you're asking for the right things, uh, and asking them the right questions because they will avoid answering things that if you've not asked it in the, expressed in the right way, and they can avoid answering the question, they will.
208
00:31:29.192 --> 00:31:37.792
And also, when they're discussing their tools or the way their tools work in the sessions, you've got to understand that too, so you can push them further on that.
209
00:31:37.982 --> 00:31:40.452
Uh, otherwise, you won't get them to disclose information that's relevant.
210
00:31:40.552 --> 00:31:53.012
So, you know, from quite early on, we sought to engage with academics, people from the tech community that could help prepare us for the questions that we should be asking, and also to make sure that after the sessions, we vigorously followed up as well.
211
00:31:53.072 --> 00:32:02.532
So we were always writing back if w- we felt the answers were unclear or information had, that had been promised hadn't been given. Um, so the, the process didn't end when the, when the session ended.
212
00:32:03.132 --> 00:32:08.512
So do you think we need international rules to deal with, uh, global companies like Facebook and Google?
213
00:32:08.592 --> 00:32:26.711
Because, uh, it- it's fair enough having the, you know, different investigations in different countries, but, uh, as we've seen with tax as well, the idea of Amazon paying very little tax, it's very hard to control these companies, uh, when, uh, they know how to operate in a way that is above the law of individual countries.
214
00:32:26.772 --> 00:32:42.772
Um, so yes and no, I think, because, um, on one level, yes, I think if you've got global standards, um, uh, then the, the companies have to adhere to, and those, those are good standards, then you're, you're s- you know, you're setting a, a decent bar for big companies and other competitors coming in.
215
00:32:42.812 --> 00:32:52.952
They're-- things they know they've got to do, uh, around the world. And GDPR in Europe on data protection rights I think has been a good example of that. It's created a robust system in, in the European Union.
216
00:32:53.512 --> 00:33:03.092
Um, the UK said it'll, it'll stay within GDPR, uh, after Brexit. Other American states now have started to in- introduce their own, uh, legislation based on GDPR as well.
217
00:33:03.592 --> 00:33:09.592
And the, there what you can see is that, you know, people can say, "Well, what-- If people in Europe have these rights, why don't I have them too?"
218
00:33:09.852 --> 00:33:17.352
Uh, and so I think you can see a leveling up around the world, and that can be a good thing. And I think in content moderation in Europe, we're starting to see that as well.
219
00:33:17.742 --> 00:33:23.032
Um, I think it will happen in a different way in America, uh, but I think Ame- you know, those same debates we have in America too.
220
00:33:23.812 --> 00:33:33.912
But what we shouldn't do is say, "Well, what we c- because these are global companies, and having global standards is a good thing, until we've got a global consensus on what those standards should be, we can't do anything at all."
221
00:33:34.332 --> 00:33:43.212
Uh, and I sometimes think when the tech companies in particular say, "Well, we need a global, global response to this," you know, well, they know full well, you know, Europe and China and the United States are never gonna agree.
222
00:33:43.592 --> 00:33:53.412
And therefore, my, my suspicion is that they use that as a, as an excuse for doing nothing at all. At the end of the day, international companies have to comply with the laws of the countries in which they trade.
223
00:33:53.632 --> 00:34:00.192
So, you know, whilst it might be nice to have global standards, we don't need them. We can just do what we think is right for our own people in our own countries.
224
00:34:00.232 --> 00:34:10.212
And, you know, you see, you see this being enforced already around licensing content. You know, when you-- what you watch on Netflix in one country is different from another because of the different licensing agreements.
225
00:34:10.252 --> 00:34:18.182
So people are used to making that in the commercial, uh, world about licensing, uh, the use of content. Uh, so there's no way it can't work in the regulatory one as well.
226
00:34:18.592 --> 00:34:28.332
You were featured in The Great Hack, the Netflix documentary, which, uh, was, uh, a, a, a big talking point over the summer. Um, although the reception to it was mixed.
227
00:34:28.372 --> 00:34:37.012
We had people who loved it and then people who absolutely, uh, couldn't stand it. There was a, there was a, um, a, a scathing Economist review of that documentary.
228
00:34:37.052 --> 00:34:45.832
Uh, do you think it did a good job of, uh, of, of discussing the Cambridge Analytica scandal? Yeah, I think it, I think it did. I think it, it did a good job of, um...
229
00:34:46.752 --> 00:35:00.192
I think it-- for people that had, had followed the story in the news, were, were sort of aware in general terms of what had been going on, I think it did a good job of trying to explain some of the issues that, that underpinned it and to tell the stories of some of the people that had been involved in that process.
230
00:35:00.712 --> 00:35:06.572
I think you could, you could make a whole other documentary diving into the questions about does psychological profiling work.
231
00:35:06.852 --> 00:35:20.212
Um, uh, you know, I, I would say certainly Cambridge Analytica did-- believed it did, and the academics who worked on, worked for them, um, believed that it did and wrote a, wrote papers discussing how they thought that it worked, uh, and why it was important and significant.
232
00:35:20.232 --> 00:35:27.312
And there are, of course, many other issues as well that come from it, and I think some of the people who may have criticized the program, you know, may have felt that it, it glossed over some of those issues.
233
00:35:27.372 --> 00:35:35.752
But, you know, there, there's a huge amount of detail in The Great Hack. I think some of these issues are so complex that you could make whole documentaries about them on their own. Yeah.
234
00:35:35.772 --> 00:35:37.052
And I, I just wanted to follow up on that.
235
00:35:37.072 --> 00:35:51.612
And talking about all the stuff to do with Cambridge Analytica and all of these scandals that hit social media companies, particularly Facebook, one of the things that stands out to me above all of this is, is that the usage of these platforms and the revenue these companies are making seems n- not to have been impacted.
236
00:35:51.632 --> 00:36:00.612
A bit like Teflon, just keeps, you know, chucking things at them, and it slides back off of them, and their main business lines don't seem massively impacted. Is that... Again, is that a surprise to you?
237
00:36:00.652 --> 00:36:02.812
And, and do you, and can you explain why that is the case?
238
00:36:03.472 --> 00:36:12.882
So I think the, the reason the, the sort of share value, if you like, of some of the companies has, has recovered is ultimately not enough consumers are turning them off. You know, their, their...
239
00:36:12.892 --> 00:36:18.772
Ultimately, if their audience numbers are, remain robust, then the commercial value of the companies will be sustainable.
240
00:36:18.832 --> 00:36:28.052
Although, I think, I think clearly even though they've, they may have recovered their value against where they were at the start of that crisis, I mean, they're probably a, a long way behind where they would have expected to have been.
241
00:36:28.172 --> 00:36:32.832
I think they've, there's probably a lot of lost value that'll take time to, to recover, if they ever do.
242
00:36:32.872 --> 00:36:39.192
And there was some evidence last year that certainly in Europe that, that Facebook usage was cooling off, uh, and cooling down.
243
00:36:39.212 --> 00:36:48.892
But I think what hasn't changed is the, um, attitude within, I think, you know, I think the questioning of them as a, as companies, the declining public trust, uh, in them.
244
00:36:49.392 --> 00:36:55.092
Uh, I mean, maybe some people haven't given up using them because they don't feel they can, that effectively these companies have become like public utilities.
245
00:36:55.152 --> 00:37:03.792
And if, even if they might not like Facebook, they can't get away without using it, its systems and its tools b- to engage with the people they want to engage with.
246
00:37:04.232 --> 00:37:08.532
I think the attitude amongst policymakers and regulators, you know, hasn't changed at all.
247
00:37:08.612 --> 00:37:21.448
And, uh, it's, I think you see Growing appetite now, growing calls for more oversight, more regulation, competition investigations as well. Um, and I don't see that change. That's a permanent shift, I think.
248
00:37:21.468 --> 00:37:34.288
And I think the, the, the permanent shift of, I think, people in public policy, lawmakers and so on, uh, actually saying we need to understand better what these companies do, uh, the harm that could come about with the systems that they've created.
249
00:37:34.888 --> 00:37:43.028
Uh, there's far more, I think, daily scrutiny on that than there was two years ago. And I think that that is a permanent change that's come about, uh, since the Cambridge Analytica scandal.
250
00:37:43.208 --> 00:37:48.728
Do, do you think we should be concerned about social media platforms or tech hardware owned and operated by Chinese businesses?
251
00:37:49.018 --> 00:37:54.808
A bit like what the Americans, uh, and lots of people in America and commentators are suggesting that we should be scared or fearful of.
252
00:37:55.088 --> 00:38:04.328
Well, the-- so the concern you raised in the UK particularly about Huawei and its links to the, uh, Chinese state, and, uh, I looked at the report.
253
00:38:04.368 --> 00:38:13.488
There's a report that, um, an oversight board prepares, um, on Huawei every year. It's published by the Cabinet Office, so it's a public document. Anyone can, can read it.
254
00:38:13.608 --> 00:38:26.847
And what concerned me when I read that was that the, that that board, uh, which is largely comprised of for-- you know, people that worked in the security services in the UK, um, and g-got, you know, detailed knowledge on security and infrastructure.
255
00:38:27.388 --> 00:38:41.168
They said looking at Huawei's existing infrastructure that there were, uh, concerns about it, uh, that, that there was sort of potential for, for security breaches, uh, and for the network to be compromised, that those issues have been raised with Huawei in the past.
256
00:38:41.518 --> 00:38:47.268
And not only had Huawei not corrected, uh, those issues, they had no credible plan in place yet to do so.
257
00:38:47.328 --> 00:39:01.908
And so for me, if those concerns are there, I would question why we'd want to give more work and more contracts in developing things like the 5G network to companies like that if those security concerns exist and until they've convinced us that, uh, those things have been put right.
258
00:39:02.928 --> 00:39:03.808
Hmm, yes.
259
00:39:03.948 --> 00:39:15.288
Well, and this is stuff that is gonna go round again and again because, you know, every week I've seen stories about people's, uh, somewhat-- some of it fear-mongering it seems, but another bits of it seem, you know, genuine reasons to, to be looking into them.
260
00:39:15.368 --> 00:39:26.888
But, um- Yeah. There, there was an interesting, um, uh, story, uh, from, uh, one of the US newspapers, uh, over the weekend about TikTok and about how it, uh, uh, was...
261
00:39:26.948 --> 00:39:38.188
Uh, obviously, TikTok is a, a big hit social app at the moment, uh, across the, the Western world, but it's owned, uh, by a Chinese company. And, uh, there's no content on there pretty much about the Hong Kong protests.
262
00:39:38.608 --> 00:39:49.088
And so it's kind of raising the issue that this is a Chinese company presenting a Chinese worldview, uh, to, uh, Western young people.
263
00:39:49.488 --> 00:39:58.428
Uh, and, uh, that, uh, you know, you can say that's harmless or you can say that's a problem, but, uh, either way, it's something to think about that we don't necessarily have to think about.
264
00:39:58.488 --> 00:40:09.568
You know, Facebook, there may be issues with them, but, uh, they're a Western company, and, uh, they have a certain worldview that maybe chimes in a lot of ways with, uh, uh, with, with other Western countries.
265
00:40:09.588 --> 00:40:18.288
But, uh, if you then have China, which is incredibly different in its worldview, uh, that could create more friction. Yeah. I, I, I think that's, I think that's absolutely right.
266
00:40:18.388 --> 00:40:27.208
But I think, I think what we're, we're trying to work through here is a kind of, is a sort of middle way because, you know, pe-pe-people have said there are sort of two forms of, um, there are two forms of internet.
267
00:40:27.248 --> 00:40:35.408
There is the kind of surveillance capitalism model personified by companies like Facebook, where everything that goes on it is monitored and monetized by companies.
268
00:40:36.188 --> 00:40:46.008
Um, there is the surveillance state model where the Chi-- where the state, the Chinese government, you know, uses media to gather information about citizens and, and shape policy around people based on the information that it gathers.
269
00:40:46.468 --> 00:40:56.068
And I think what we, what we wanna see is a sort of third way where people have got rights, where people can protect their data, they can be empowered, uh, by it and not just be, uh, the victim of surveillance.
270
00:40:56.648 --> 00:41:07.868
Let's look at UK politics for a second. Uh, it's, it's an interesting situation, UK politics at the moment, uh, and it does seem like there's gonna be a general election sometime in, uh, the next couple of months or so.
271
00:41:07.928 --> 00:41:18.868
Uh, now, you have called for new laws to protect against another Cambridge Analytica scandal. So what do you think is needed in terms of protecting elections from interference? Sure.
272
00:41:18.948 --> 00:41:29.907
I think there are, there are some very specific things I think that we need to see. One is to make sure that, um, the, that the electoral law that applies in the offline world applies online as well.
273
00:41:30.368 --> 00:41:40.108
So that means if you see an advert, there should be a legal requirement for you to be-- to know who's paid for that advert and, uh, who that advert is there to promote.
274
00:41:40.678 --> 00:41:46.228
And that's a legal requirement on leaflets and posters and things and newspaper adverts in the UK, but it's not a legal requirement on Facebook.
275
00:41:46.608 --> 00:42:08.168
So for there to be real transparency over the messages that you're seeing, uh, 'cause one of the concerns we've, we've raised in our work has been these shadowy, shady campaign networks, the campaign groups that exist on, uh, on Facebook that are running adverts, and no one knows really who's funding them or where the money's coming from, uh, and they're, they're promoting issues that may help, you know, one candidate or another.
276
00:42:08.208 --> 00:42:13.808
So to make sure we've got that, that real transparency so people can see-- when they see a message, they know who's doing it.
277
00:42:14.308 --> 00:42:20.428
I think the other thing that should give us concern is, um, is pa-- is, is money raising, fundraising online as well.
278
00:42:20.778 --> 00:42:30.288
Um, you can effectively bypass all of the campaign finance laws by, um, and by, you know, really laundering money into political campaigns through online payment systems.
279
00:42:30.368 --> 00:42:35.788
And, you know, through that, there's-- you can effectively get round the rules on receiving money from overseas.
280
00:42:36.208 --> 00:42:44.508
You can process one large donation as a series of micro donations to try and get around the declaration rules. And I think, you know, we should be concerned about this.
281
00:42:44.608 --> 00:42:52.828
We discussed this with the chair of the, um, Federal Election Commission in America when we, um, had a international grand committee meeting in Canada earlier in the year.
282
00:42:53.228 --> 00:43:06.128
You know, she thought there was, over the last ten years, there was a billion dollars' worth of dark money that had got into American politics that was virtually impossible to trace and that, you know, uh, blockchain technologies, Bitcoin, all those things will make this much easier in the future.
283
00:43:06.248 --> 00:43:16.568
So, you know, I think we, we should recognize that, that technology has b-- uh, allows people to bypass all the rules we've put in place to try and safeguard democracy and the way it works and the way elections are run.
284
00:43:17.008 --> 00:43:25.452
And unless we change those rules to make them relevant for the future- Then, um, this interference, the role of companies like Cambridge Analytica, you know, will, will only grow.
285
00:43:26.172 --> 00:43:34.322
What do you think about the use of social media by world leaders such as Donald Trump and Boris Johnson, particularly on Twitter? Um, I think it shows that,
286
00:43:35.312 --> 00:43:50.391
um, that leaders can now reach people, big audiences of people directly, and that the days when, you know, if a politician wanted to get heard, they needed to get the TV networks and the newspapers on side, uh, to give them a fair hearing.
287
00:43:50.972 --> 00:43:58.012
Um, those days haven't tot- ha- those, those aren't totally gone because mainstream media is still important, but you don't-- there are other routes.
288
00:43:58.052 --> 00:44:02.272
There are direct routes to talk to people now, and you're seeing politicians use those more and more.
289
00:44:02.692 --> 00:44:14.472
Now, I don't have a problem with that if it helps people, you know, to engage with politics, uh, and, and where we're actually using the channels that the public are using to find information out, and you'd want that information to be there.
290
00:44:14.792 --> 00:44:22.772
But at the same time, you need challenge and scrutiny as well, so the, the sort of free press plays a, and the media plays a very important role in holding politicians to account.
291
00:44:22.792 --> 00:44:30.932
And we wouldn't wanna move into a world where actually politicians could largely just bypass that scrutiny altogether and just talk directly to the voters without challenge.
292
00:44:30.972 --> 00:44:39.142
And I was, and I was just gonna say, you know, I, I can't criticize too much at this stage. It's early days for, for Boris Johnson in his role as Prime Minister on, on his use of Twitter.
293
00:44:39.192 --> 00:44:50.092
But certainly we can see from Donald Trump that he has a very particular style, uh, very, um, polarizing, at times controversial, and, you know, very argumentative and inflammatory, I would say.
294
00:44:50.192 --> 00:44:53.912
And do you see that as, um, as a, a, a dangerous thing?
295
00:44:54.012 --> 00:45:01.272
Something that, um, that you think is a, is a useful thing, and you understand it, or how do you, how do you view those sorts of tweets from someone like Donald Trump?
296
00:45:02.052 --> 00:45:09.892
I think you've gotta be very careful here because a, a leader, you know, may say something that is borderline offensive, you know, some people might find offensive.
297
00:45:10.552 --> 00:45:19.112
Um, they're still, they're still held to account for what they say. So they've gotta be, still gotta be slightly careful, although Trump really just pushed that about as far as is probably humanly possible to go.
298
00:45:19.712 --> 00:45:33.292
Um, but you're also sending a signal and creating a license for other people to pile in as well, and that-- and often that's, that's where the, I think the real harm can be caused, is, uh, inciting people on social media to say even more outrageous things, uh, for followers to do that as well.
299
00:45:33.772 --> 00:45:43.532
And that's, that, that would be my concern, is that what's, I think, starting to happen in politics is there is a, there are greater schisms opening up between different voices in politics.
300
00:45:44.182 --> 00:45:53.572
Uh, politics is becoming more extreme, and I think, um, the design of social media is, is helping that as well because when people say things, it feeds the echo chambers of support they've got.
301
00:45:53.872 --> 00:46:01.392
I think it encourages people in those chambers to adopt and say yet more extreme things in their own right, and it's pulling people apart.
302
00:46:01.432 --> 00:46:05.241
And at a time when I think, you know, we desperately try and need to bring people back together. Yeah.
303
00:46:05.252 --> 00:46:11.152
And I think on that point, Martin, we've-- we're looking at something this morning before we started recording, it was quite interesting from Barack Obama. Yeah.
304
00:46:11.182 --> 00:46:21.892
I mean, he was just talking about the, um, uh, this kind of polarization and how social media had accelerated it, and, uh, it reinforces biased viewpoints and things. You know, not an original viewpoint.
305
00:46:21.952 --> 00:46:27.872
It's something that has been, uh, said many times before, but, uh, you do see politicians taking advantage of it.
306
00:46:28.292 --> 00:46:34.512
Um, uh, and, uh, it, it-- I mean, it's fair to say that in the UK you've seen the, the Labour Party take advantage of it in some of their campaigning.
307
00:46:34.552 --> 00:46:45.792
You've seen, you've seen the Conservative Party take advantage of it as well in terms of this kind of really, uh, the, the polarizing messaging that you can use on social media to really fire up your, uh, your supporters.
308
00:46:46.192 --> 00:46:57.322
Um, so it works, though. That's the problem, doesn't it? So can you really fight that? Can you really fight that when you've got a, a, a campaign director who's like, "We really need to win this, this election"?
309
00:46:57.632 --> 00:47:02.832
You're going to use that, aren't you, if it, if it's going to win? I, I think that
310
00:47:03.952 --> 00:47:11.922
campaigning done by, you know, registered political parties, official parties, is always gonna be held to account for what it says 'cause it's, it's, it's got the party's logo on.
311
00:47:12.392 --> 00:47:19.002
If people could challenge or question the information being put out there, the facts being put out there, then ultimately there are people that can be held to account for that.
312
00:47:19.052 --> 00:47:25.332
I don't think politicians should not use social media or social-- or advertising through social media to, to reach voters in that way.
313
00:47:25.752 --> 00:47:29.012
I, I think that's, that, that's where people are, and I think they should, they should do that.
314
00:47:29.352 --> 00:47:45.052
If people didn't do that or say we just banned political advertising from social media, then the upper hand will be gained by the people that operate sort of networks of inauthentic accounts, you know, that people dominate, uh, social media through, you know, through these sort of, you know, um, people sort of
315
00:47:46.632 --> 00:47:48.832
imitating the behavior of, of bot accounts as well.
316
00:47:49.452 --> 00:47:56.812
And, uh, it would be a herd, and it would be people managing these herds of people that would gain the biggest share of voice, and there'd be very little way of actually challenging that.
317
00:47:56.892 --> 00:48:02.032
So I think, I think political a-advertising should play a role, uh, messaging, and I think parties should do that.
318
00:48:02.472 --> 00:48:12.272
But I, what I think is important is transparency so that, you know, it, it's clearly labeled, it's clearly come from them. You can see archives of what these ads are. Um, it's-- and people are held to account for it.
319
00:48:12.732 --> 00:48:20.832
And what I would-- you know, my concern is that, um, too much of this political communication is not coming from the, the registered legitimate organizations.
320
00:48:20.852 --> 00:48:29.012
It's coming from these shady campaign groups pushing messages, and we don't really know who they are or who's behind it. I just wanted to put into that, um, we had a piece of information this week.
321
00:48:29.092 --> 00:48:35.172
Um, it was a piece of research commissioned by, um, I think you pronounce it Wellio. Um, but they, they did this, um, survey of politicians.
322
00:48:35.232 --> 00:48:41.612
A hundred and thirty-seven MPs were surveyed towards their public attitudes, um, towards politicians and their use of social media.
323
00:48:41.732 --> 00:48:48.712
Uh, and it's four in five MPs believe that public attitudes towards politicians have been changed for the worse by social media.
324
00:48:49.082 --> 00:48:58.932
Um, and they say that, uh, yeah, eighty-one percent of the a hundred and thirty-seven MPs surveyed, um, believe that, that, you know, it's had a negative impact, uh, on politics in general. So interesting numbers.
325
00:48:59.592 --> 00:49:07.452
It's also not-- I mean, and it's not just politicians as well. I mean, we, um, you know, we've had this debate around racist abuse, uh, directed at Premier League footballers like Paul Pogba.
326
00:49:08.012 --> 00:49:22.436
Uh, we had a, an evidence session in front of the select committee on reality TV recently where we had, uh, people from Love Island, and they would say that, you know, for, um, some people, you know, some celebrities, you know, racist abuse is just part of- Part of what they expect to receive.
327
00:49:22.476 --> 00:49:27.896
It's just pr- you know, it's, it's just the way the world is and what they expect. And, you know, should we be, should we be satisfied with that?
328
00:49:27.996 --> 00:49:40.616
Should we say that actually the fact that social media has created this pipe of abuse that can be directed at anyone and is often directed at people from minority communities and women in particular, is something we should just, you know, shrug our shoulders against and say there's nothing we can do.
329
00:49:40.716 --> 00:49:50.256
And I think, you know, this is part of the debate we're trying to have with the social media companies that, um, whilst, you know, individuals are choosing to post this content, you know, are the systems coarsening public debate?
330
00:49:50.296 --> 00:49:56.976
Are they encouraging people to take more extreme positions, say more, uh, appalling things, and how do we stop it? Got you.
331
00:49:57.056 --> 00:50:02.996
And, uh, we're just coming into, um, the end of our interview, so we've got a couple of quick questions to wrap up, which are a bit more broad really.
332
00:50:03.056 --> 00:50:10.876
Um, you've obviously got some strong opinions, uh, and, and b- beliefs around social media companies, tech companies, w- you know, what they should be doing, maybe what they shouldn't be doing.
333
00:50:11.376 --> 00:50:22.296
Uh, you know, five years from now, I can see social media looking somewhat different in terms of the way it's set up, how people use it, how the companies are, are regulated or not. Um, w- I guess it's two-part question.
334
00:50:22.436 --> 00:50:27.366
What would you like to see, uh, in terms of social media companies, um, five years from now?
335
00:50:27.436 --> 00:50:35.126
And w- and what do you think a, a fair reality is to expect in terms of, you know, how they will operate and how we will use social media? Do you have, do you have any thoughts about that? Yeah.
336
00:50:35.556 --> 00:50:53.356
I, I think we'll, we'll move to a system where, um, social media companies will be required by law to take action against the most harmful forms, uh, of content, and that this will no longer be just about their platform policies and the way they administer them, but standards that we expect.
337
00:50:53.476 --> 00:51:15.336
And I think they will then come under the, the, the-- some form of regulation, uh, the regulatory bodies with powers similar to those the information commissioner has now over data privacy investigations, will play a role in holding these companies to account and also having the right to go in and question those companies and have the right to look at data and information about the decisions those companies have made.
338
00:51:15.416 --> 00:51:24.066
I think we will move into a world where that sort of oversight is there. And alongside that, a requirement that these companies are more proactive in identifying these problems for themselves.
339
00:51:24.576 --> 00:51:36.536
Now, that, that in some ways would be a system not unlike the system of regulation that exists in financial services where, you know, banks are supposed to monitor, uh, and look out for suspicious activity or criminal activity and to report that to the relevant authorities.
340
00:51:36.816 --> 00:51:45.566
I think that's the sort of world I think we will, we will move to. I think we will see different countries in Europe, in particular UK, Germany and France, pushing the, the boundaries.
341
00:51:45.636 --> 00:51:48.036
I think the European Commission will do as well, I think.
342
00:51:48.056 --> 00:51:58.156
But I think w- where we will move away from-- I think, I think in five years' time, we'll no longer s- I think be-- see the public policy debate around, you know, are they neutral platforms?
343
00:51:58.256 --> 00:52:06.335
Do they have any responsibilities? I think it will move to saying they do have responsibilities. There is oversight over how they exercise it. The question will be, well, what's in scope?
344
00:52:06.496 --> 00:52:11.916
You know, what should we be regulating? And I just wanted to, to put into that, uh, as well, um, a couple of quick bits of information.
345
00:52:11.996 --> 00:52:29.416
Um, yeah, and this week even in, during some, uh, sessions in the US with these hearings, I think Facebook's head of global policy, um, Monika Bickert said that, um, they've reduced the average time it takes for our AI to find a violation on Facebook Live to twelve seconds, a ninety percent reduction in our average detection time from a few months ago.
346
00:52:29.456 --> 00:52:33.836
So on the face of it, that sounds like a lovely big number, but as we all know, there's a lot more to it than just Facebook Live.
347
00:52:34.316 --> 00:52:51.756
Um, but the other thing I just wanted to get in there, 'cause one of the criticisms that I get or people say to me when we talk about regulation, uh, and the government having a role in, in regulating anything, but particularly something that involves freedom of speech and platforms that they can access and engage with information and, and chat to people on, is that this is just censorship.
348
00:52:51.796 --> 00:53:00.675
This is censorship, controlling, um, uh, government monitoring. Uh, it's a constant thing you get thrown up, and I'd just be interested to hear your-- what your view on people who say that.
349
00:53:00.716 --> 00:53:09.216
And, and also the fact that people say that the government isn't the best p- um, group of people who know enough to, to be able to do a good job of it. Um, what would be your response to people's complaints there?
350
00:53:09.696 --> 00:53:17.016
Well, I mean, firstly would say i- if what they think is that we should leave things as they are and that the companies are good at doing this, then I think they're, they're very much mistaken.
351
00:53:17.276 --> 00:53:25.736
We've got involved in this because we feel the companies are not good at making these decisions. Um, w- uh, we have, you know, we have a regulated media i- in the UK.
352
00:53:26.085 --> 00:53:40.275
You know, radio stations, uh, television stations are licensed by Ofcom, which is a body with legal powers created by Parliament, uh, but is independent of government and i- uh, and enforces its code of conduct against the people it issues licenses to.
353
00:53:40.335 --> 00:53:47.876
They have to make, um, decisions all the time based on their judgment on taste, decency, uh, partiality, and so on.
354
00:53:48.396 --> 00:54:01.836
So w- we do already have, in a country which is free media and freedom of expression, we do have rules and standards that are applied, uh, based on laws that have been passed by Parliament and independent regulators and bodies that enforce those rules.
355
00:54:01.876 --> 00:54:09.116
And there's no reason why, uh, social media shouldn't form part of that environment as well. And I think that, that is what will happen.
356
00:54:09.196 --> 00:54:15.316
That's not about, that's not about, um, trying to crack down on, uh, and censor people.
357
00:54:15.376 --> 00:54:23.876
It's about saying that there are standards in, in public-- in the public world, in the public space that we expect people to adhere to. Well, thank you so much, uh, Damian, for coming in and chatting to us.
358
00:54:23.976 --> 00:54:26.916
Um, I certainly could spend another few hours talking about these things.
359
00:54:27.056 --> 00:54:39.916
Uh, and I think in the current climate of, of politics and tech and regulation and things, uh, having someone who's, you know, at the forefront of making those changes in our own country and, and potentially impact how it works in other countries is, has been very, uh, useful.
360
00:54:39.976 --> 00:54:47.616
So thank you very much for coming in today. Um, where can people find more information about, um, you and what you're doing and what you're up to and all this sort of stuff online? Is there anywhere they should go?
361
00:54:47.876 --> 00:54:53.896
Uh, yes. People can go to my website, which is damiancollins.com. Uh, also people look up the DCMS Select Committee.
362
00:54:54.416 --> 00:55:05.096
Uh, the committee has a website as part of the Parliament website, and you can see all of our reports and documents, all of the evidence we've taken is all, all there, um, to be viewed for free. Brilliant stuff.
363
00:55:05.176 --> 00:55:13.796
And, um, if those who, uh, want more debate and discussion about this sort of stuff, uh, and everything else related to social media, uh, join my Facebook group, um, the Social Media Geek Out.
364
00:55:13.876 --> 00:55:20.636
It's, uh, facebook.com/groups/socialgeekout. Time now for quick hits.
365
00:55:20.736 --> 00:55:30.028
Here's Matt with tweaks, tests, and totally titillating treats he's spotted from social media companies this week How long did it take you to write that one? Okay, let's go for it.
366
00:55:30.077 --> 00:55:35.788
[laughs] Um, so there's a couple of things this week from a, a smattering of social networks. Uh, let's kick off with something from LinkedIn.
367
00:55:36.268 --> 00:55:47.268
Uh, LinkedIn have launched a, a new feature that's, uh, enables you to search for freelancers or sort of experts in their field, and also you can make recommendations to, um, your network about these people as well.
368
00:55:47.638 --> 00:55:59.568
So you'll be able to s- um, find it much easier to find somebody that's really good at graphic design, or you'd be able to spot friends that could recommend to you, uh, a really good, uh, web designer that you've never heard of before from their network.
369
00:55:59.628 --> 00:56:07.648
So that's a feature that, uh, LinkedIn's starting to roll out globally. Facebook is also up to some more tests this week. So this one's actually courtesy of Jane Wong.
370
00:56:07.868 --> 00:56:27.008
Um, she has spotted that Facebook have got a chat post option where you're, um, able to put out a post on Facebook in the normal way you would, like a, an image or a video or, or just a status update, but you could actually choose a chat post, which will enable people to click on the, the item in the post and take them to a private group chat that you've already got set up and running.
371
00:56:27.088 --> 00:56:34.308
Um, so this is something that we've seen in, in other, um, social networks as well, but now they've extended a test of a similar f- feature for Facebook as well.
372
00:56:34.368 --> 00:56:42.828
Facebook Groups, uh, there's a filter that I've never seen before, but it doesn't mean it's new 'cause these things tend to roll out slowly or are tested in different places at different times.
373
00:56:43.208 --> 00:56:49.488
But there's a filter now for you to be able to sort people requesting to join your group, um, who are previously removed members.
374
00:56:49.848 --> 00:57:01.988
So this is great if you've got a very big group and you've had to, uh, remove several people, or you've had issues in the group with certain members, and you wanna quickly search in the new member request to see if there's anyone in there that, uh, has already been in and removed once before.
375
00:57:02.368 --> 00:57:12.258
So that's quite a handy little feature for groups that I noticed on my group this week. TikTok, so, um, they've got an analytics tool which is a third-party tool. It's not actually a, a, a native tool.
376
00:57:12.408 --> 00:57:23.208
Um, as I mentioned at the beginning of the show today, it's called Pentos, and it really is very basic, and it really allows you to track, you know, the growth in the person's following and, uh, the amount of engagement on some of their public posts and things.
377
00:57:23.268 --> 00:57:27.848
So it's quite, uh, limited, but it's worth having a little, uh, look at. So that's Pentos.
378
00:57:28.558 --> 00:57:37.188
Snapchat have also launched a 3D selfies feature, which is only for iOS at this time, but it will extend to other platforms as well, Android of course.
379
00:57:37.207 --> 00:57:48.578
But it's, effectively is a bit like what we've seen on Facebook's 3D photos where you can take a, an image using the, uh, front-facing depth sensing camera, and then it gives you that 3D effect which you can put into a Snapchat story now.
380
00:57:48.668 --> 00:57:52.228
So that's, uh, a new feature this week coming up on Snapchat for iOS.
381
00:57:53.228 --> 00:58:08.828
LinkedIn, they have launched a skills assessment feature which has been around on my, uh, account for quite a while, but it's, uh, only really limited to very technical subjects to do with Excel and, uh, programming languages and some other kind of, uh, much more techie kinda things really.
382
00:58:09.228 --> 00:58:13.028
Um, and you're able to take a skills assessment to test, and then it will give you a score.
383
00:58:13.048 --> 00:58:22.088
And if you re- reach a certain threshold, I think it's 70%, you can place that as a kind of an achievement, if you like, for, for your skill and prowess in that area on your profile.
384
00:58:22.128 --> 00:58:29.628
And they say that they're gonna roll it out globally, and they say that also there's gonna be a lot more courses, uh, and assessments that will come soon enough as well.
385
00:58:29.658 --> 00:58:36.378
And finally, Google have launched, um, for Photos, Photo Stories, so yet another platform with stories, but this time it's a little bit different.
386
00:58:36.768 --> 00:58:46.948
Rather than looking at the here and now, um, situation, telling people your life in a story for today, this is more focusing on stories of things to do with your photos and videos from times gone by.
387
00:58:46.968 --> 00:58:57.968
So it's a bit like a memories ra- ra- recounting what's gone on in the past kinda feature in a stories format. So Google Photos has got that coming soon. So that's all of this week's quick hits.
388
00:58:58.048 --> 00:59:05.698
The, uh, skills assessment thing for LinkedIn is a good idea, even if it's just for a limited number of skills, because asking people to endorse you is, uh, a, a little bit awkward.
389
00:59:05.768 --> 00:59:12.488
And so the idea of having a, uh, a test where you can prove categorically you're good at something is, uh, perhaps a better idea.
390
00:59:12.668 --> 00:59:19.228
I think so too, and I, and I also think that LinkedIn's site, um, new feature for making recommendations is, is smart, and I'm surprised they haven't done it sooner.
391
00:59:19.258 --> 00:59:28.928
'Cause one of the things that I'm always kind of considering as a freelancer is, you know, I need someone who's really good at video editing or really good at, uh, I don't know, sound, sound production or whatever it is for a project.
392
00:59:29.328 --> 00:59:37.128
Uh, and LinkedIn is kind of often left untapped because I don't know enough about people or, or trust enough in somebody that might be good based on their profile.
393
00:59:37.168 --> 00:59:48.608
So to have someone, um, uh, I can ask to people to make recommendations, or I can search for people that are experts in a certain field which have got some credibility and, uh, achievements in that area is, uh, is quite good.
394
00:59:48.708 --> 01:00:01.448
It means I'll be u- using LinkedIn more than I am right now, so that's great as well. So good stuff. Next week, we will be speaking to Andrew Boz Bosworth, who is Facebook's VP for AR and VR.
395
01:00:01.828 --> 01:00:07.448
Yes, this interview ties in with Oculus Connect, which is taking place very shortly in San Jose, uh, next week I believe.
396
01:00:07.548 --> 01:00:17.888
And so he will have a lot of interesting news to talk about with what Facebook's going on, um, with VR and AR obviously. Um, and hopefully we'll sneak in a few other questions around some other pertinent topics.
397
01:00:18.048 --> 01:00:28.788
So, uh, tune in for that one next week. Uh, so Geek Out with Matt Navara is a Big Revolution production. Find out more at bigrevolution.net. You can find me on Twitter as martinsfp.
398
01:00:28.988 --> 01:00:37.608
And you can find me as @mattnavara on Twitter as well. So don't forget to tell, um, people about the podcast, and we'd love to have more people listening and see what they think, and, uh, maybe leave us a voice message.
399
01:00:37.668 --> 01:00:44.448
We keep reminding you. We've, we've had a few, and maybe we'll compile them all in the final episode. But if you head to- Someone sang us a song last week, didn't they? Someone did sing us a song.
400
01:00:44.488 --> 01:00:46.838
That might be the ending to one of our final shows. But, uh- [laughs]...
401
01:00:46.868 --> 01:00:57.588
if you head to anchor.fm/geekoutmattnavara, you'll find an option to record a message, and we'll play some of the best ones in a future show hopefully. So, uh, I think that's about it for us then, Martin. Yeah.
402
01:00:57.648 --> 01:01:09.868
Thanks for joining us, Damien. My pleasure. It's been great to talk to you. Uh, well, we'll see everybody back here next week to geek out, so goodbye, geeks. [upbeat music]
