Is Facebook Better Off Regulated?
Facebook in Washington
With every new revelation about how Facebook has failed to shepherd its users’ data, Americans’ feelings toward the company have become a bit more chilly. A poll conducted by HarrisX following Facebook’s Senate hearings suggests the chill could finally have a material impact. The poll found 88 percent of Americans think Facebook should be regulated, either heavily (49 percent) or lightly (39 percent). Such intensity should spur congressional action.
In anticipation of such sentiment and to gain the upper hand in hearings, Mark Zuckerberg made effective use of rhetorical judo, projecting openness to regulation in theory, but adding that the question is “what is the right regulation, not whether there should be or not.”
This revealed textbook hearing preparation. First, Zuckerberg countered Sen. Graham’s question, “you embrace regulation?” with a question. Second, he depressurized the situation by agreeing with his questioner. Third, his response provided a compelling headline for news organizations and Wall Street. Finally, Zuckerberg played to conventional wisdom that Congress will get regulation wrong.
He then enumerated how Facebook is self-regulating, implying regulation is unnecessary or at least that Facebook should be involved in its own regulation.
An Imperfect Choice
Zuckerberg’s calculation was half right. Despite Americans’ lopsided desire that Facebook be regulated, if the follow-up question were “how much confidence do you have that Congress will strike the right balance in regulating Facebook?” the majority of Americans likely would respond little or no confidence rather that a lot or some. At the same time, if the next question were “do you think that Facebook should be involved in designing and developing rules to regulate social media?” the majority of people likely would equate that with the fox designing the henhouse.
We’ve Seen This Movie Before
Facebook is taking a page from a well-worn script. Industry-leading companies often find themselves better off if they don’t fight regulation. They find ways to constructively engage in the process, reducing uncertainty, creating a better regulatory framework and reducing shock to their industry. Benefits can run both ways as policy makers turn to industry experts to get regulation right.
A good example of this is the U.S. lighting and bulb manufacturing industry, which worked closely with the Department of Energy and Congress to pass the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act to establish new lighting standards that were phased in from 2012–2014. The new standards were designed to reduce energy usage and save consumers money, but also have helped create demand for newer, more efficient lighting technologies such as LED.
Facebook Can No Longer Police Itself
Sometimes, however, there is either too much at stake or simply no proof that the industry has been responsible enough to partner in the process. That is the case with Facebook. Its sins of omission and commission illustrate that it hasn’t self-regulated well enough to be allowed that privilege.
First, the company failed to anticipate the negative outcomes and unintended consequences of how its technology could be weaponized to destabilize democracies around the world. Second, through its consulting services, it assisted a foreign power in attacking the United States. Third, after the fact, at best it failed to acknowledge what had happened, while at worst the company misrepresented the magnitude of what had happened and its responsibility for these outcomes.
This is not so much about social media or privacy protections as national security and national interest. Given sober introspection, Facebook’s leadership should acknowledge that it would be better off regulated — if only to safeguard the business. If we experience election interference again in the United States, the consequences for Facebook will be much more dire.