Five takeaways from Zuckerberg’s testimony

Facebook CEO Mark ZuckerbergMark Elliot ZuckerbergGoogle parent posts high profit amid privacy concerns Overnight Cybersecurity: Senators eye path forward on election security bill | Facebook isn't winning over privacy advocates | New hacks target health care Can Silicon Valley expect European-style regulation here at home? MORE weathered pointed questions about data privacy and his company’s power during 10 hours of congressional testimony Tuesday and Wednesday.

While contrite, Zuckerberg offered a full-throated defense of Facebook and its policies. He insisted that it is doing enough to address concerns about user privacy after the Cambridge Analytica controversy, in which the data of tens of millions of users was used for political targeting without their permission.

ADVERTISEMENT

Here are five key takeaways.

Zuckerberg keeps his cool — but isn’t winning over everyone

Zuckerberg was widely viewed as holding his own through hours of questioning and flashing cameras.

His careful testimony had a positive impact on Wall Street, as Facebook’s stock rose Tuesday and Wednesday. His tech savvy also played to his advantage, as some lawmakers appeared ill-prepared to delve into complex technology issues.

Zuckerberg garnered praise from some lawmakers.

“You have been respectful of our questions and we appreciate your answers and your candor,” House Commerce Committee Chairman Greg WaldenGregory (Greg) Paul WaldenOvernight Energy: Pruitt heading before House | New EPA policy aimed at easing lawsuits against oil, gas | Trump hits OPEC for high prices Overnight Health Care: GOP in retreat on ObamaCare | Drug pricing fight heads to the states | PhRMA spends record amount on lobbying Overnight Health Care: Maternal deaths rising in US | Judge rules against Trump officials for ending teen pregnancy funds | Rep. Ann McLane Kuster on her sibling's struggle with opioids MORE (R-Ore.) said in conclusion Wednesday.

But there were also some critical notes.

Sen. John KennedyJohn Neely KennedyMORE (R-La.) told the Facebook CEO flatly that his user agreement “sucks.”

“I'm a little disappointed in this hearing today,” he said Tuesday. “I just don't feel like that we're connecting.”

Zuckerberg may want to cultivate relationships on Capitol Hill further to win a greater say in any regulation under consideration by Congress.

“You can go back home, spend $10 million on lobbyists and fight us,” Kennedy said Tuesday, “or you can go back home and help us solve this problem.”

Lawmakers might try to regulate Facebook

If the past two days are any indication, momentum for legislation that would curb how Facebook can use the data of its users is building.

Privacy advocates have been urging lawmakers to look to Europe for a roadmap. Next month, the EU will implement a sweeping new privacy law called the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) that will require internet companies to offer more privacy settings, including the ability to offer and revoke consent to websites for the use of personal data.

It’s unclear whether Congress is willing to go that far, but this week’s hearings suggest lawmakers are cool to letting companies police themselves.

Rep. Frank Pallone Jr.Frank Joseph PalloneOvernight Tech: EU investigates Apple's Shazam buy | FCC defends GOP commissioners CPAC visit | Groups sue FTC for Facebook privacy records | A big quarter for Google Keeping up with the cosmetics: Kourtney Kardashian to urge makeup reform on Capitol Hill FCC defends GOP commissioners' appearance at CPAC MORE (N.J.), the top Democrat on the House Commerce Committee, laid the blame for the data scandal on Wednesday not with Zuckerberg, but with GOP colleagues who didn’t move on data legislation after previous privacy breaches.

“We need comprehensive privacy and data security legislation,” Pallone said. “We need baseline protections that stretch from internet service providers to data brokers to app developers and to anyone else who makes a living off our data.”

Zuckerberg left himself some wiggle room

Zuckerberg was deliberately evasive with some of his answers, signaling an openness to concerns but stopping short of explicit support for specific privacy legislation.

“I think that it is inevitable that there will need to be some regulation,” Zuckerberg said Wednesday. “I also think that you have to be careful about what regulation you put in place.”

When asked to endorse specific proposals, Zuckerberg often resorted to telling lawmakers that his “team” would look into the details.

“The details matter and I look forward to having our team work with you on fleshing that out,” Zuckerberg told Sen. Ed MarkeyEdward (Ed) John MarkeyDem senators demand Trump explain ties to Koch brothers Overnight Cybersecurity: Senators want info on 'stingray' surveillance in DC | Bills to secure energy infrastructure advance | GOP lawmaker offers cyber deterrence bill Overnight Tech: Alleged robocall kingpin testifies before Congress | What lawmakers learned | Push for new robocall rules | Facebook changes privacy settings ahead of new data law | Time Warner CEO defends AT&T merger at trial MORE (D-Mass.) on Tuesday.

Some grew visibly frustrated with Zuckerberg’s noncommittal answers.

Rep. Marsha BlackburnMarsha BlackburnTrump backs Blackburn's Tennessee Senate bid Corker won’t campaign against Democrat running for Tennessee Senate seat GOP Senate hopefuls race to catch up with Dems MORE (R-Tenn.) accused him of “filibustering” on Wednesday, before quizzing Zuckerberg on whether he would support legislation placing restrictions on sharing browsing history.

Zuckerberg declined, telling her he was not “directly familiar” with the details of the bill.

“Let’s get familiar with the details,” Blackburn said. “This is only thirteen pages.”

Concerns are mounting over Facebook ‘monopoly’

Zuckerberg faced bipartisan pressure over Facebook’s market power, with some suggesting that the company is a monopoly.

Rep. Bill FloresWilliam (Bill) Hose FloresRepublicans express doubts that Ryan can stay on as Speaker McCarthy says early leadership election to replace Ryan unlikely Five takeaways from Zuckerberg’s testimony MORE (R-Texas) on Wednesday compared Facebook to Standard Oil and Ma Bell, companies that grew so large and dominant that regulators broke them up.

“What happened is policymakers had to step in and reestablish the balance between those folks and everyday Americans,” Flores told Zuckerberg.

On Tuesday, Zuckerberg prompted laughs during the Senate hearing after Sen. Lindsey GrahamLindsey Olin GrahamOvernight Cybersecurity: Senators eye path forward on election security bill | Facebook isn't winning over privacy advocates | New hacks target health care Paul backs Pompeo, clearing path for confirmation Can Silicon Valley expect European-style regulation here at home? MORE (R-S.C.) asked if Facebook is a monopoly.

“It certainly doesn’t feel like that to me,” Zuckerberg responded, saying that Facebook competes with a lot of social media companies.

Graham did not seem convinced, arguing that other social media companies don’t fill the same role as Facebook. Graham likened the lack of competition to car options: if he was unhappy with his Ford, he could switch to a Chevy, but he didn’t see a similar alternative for Facebook.

“Here’s the question that all of us got to answer: What do we tell our constituents, given what’s happened here, why we should let you self-regulate?” Graham asked.

FTC investigation could be bad for Facebook

Lawmakers of both parties repeatedly brought up Facebook’s 2011 consent decree with the Federal Trade Commission and the agency’s investigation into whether the Cambridge scandal breached the settlement.

“I think it may have violated the agreement with the Federal Trade Commission, and I’m sure that will be determined in the future,” Rep. Leonard LanceLeonard LanceImpeaching Rosenstein? Some Republicans are talking about it Some doubt McCarthy or Scalise will ever lead House GOP House Dems add five candidates to ‘Red to Blue’ program MORE (R-N.J.) told the Facebook CEO.

Facebook entered into the agreement with regulators to settle previous charges of privacy violations. Under the settlement’s terms, Facebook agreed to not misrepresent to users what their data was being used for. It also must submit to regular privacy audits for 20 years.

Zuckerberg told the Senate on Tuesday that Facebook had not disclosed the Cambridge Analytica incident to privacy auditors or the FTC.

“We considered it a closed case,” Zuckerberg told Sen. Bill NelsonClarence (Bill) William NelsonWinners and losers from Jim Bridenstine’s confirmation as NASA administrator Vulnerable Senate Dems have big cash advantages Overnight Energy: Senate confirms Bridenstine as NASA chief | Watchdog probes Pruitt’s use of security detail | Emails shine light on EPA science policy changes MORE (D-Fla.). “In retrospect, that was a mistake.”

However, Zuckerberg maintains that Facebook did not violate the agreement. If the FTC does find a violation it could theoretically impose a fine of more than $1 trillion. While it’s unlikely that Facebook would be hit with such a massive sum, it has plenty of reason to worry about the probe.