European lawmakers barraged Facebook’s chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, on Tuesday with a litany of questions about his company’s global power, its role in elections and its misuse of user data. One even raised the prospect of breaking up the social media giant.
But the meeting in Brussels ended with members of the European Parliament complaining that Mr. Zuckerberg had used the session’s odd format to evade specific questions and just repeat statements he had made in the past. Several shouted follow-up questions out of turn, one complained that he had asked six yes-or-no questions to which he received no clear reply, and another argued that Mr. Zuckerberg had used the event’s structure to deliberately sidestep details.
Zuckerberg's European Parliament testimony criticised
Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg has apologised to EU lawmakers for the company's role in the Cambridge Analytica scandal and for allowing fake news to proliferate on its platform.
Mr Zuckerberg apologised for Facebook's tools being used “for harm”.
But his testimony did not please all MEPs at the meeting, some of whom felt he had dodged their questions.
EU Lawmakers Fume at Zuckerberg Over Answers to Their Questions
Facebook Inc. founder Mark Zuckerberg left European Union lawmakers fuming over unanswered questions at the end of a hearing that began with a mea culpa for the company’s recent privacy woes.
At a meeting at the EU Parliament, Zuckerberg repeated what he’s been telling every audience recently: that his company didn’t take a broad enough view of its responsibility for user data, fake news and foreign interference in elections and that he is sorry for that.
Zuckerberg Won Only Half the Battle in Brussels
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg had two priorities heading into a hearing at the European Parliament on Tuesday.
First, he had to avoid a serious gaffe that could be replayed again and again as a soundbite on the evening news. Second, he had to convince lawmakers that Facebook Inc. is doing enough to counter fake news, foreign interventions into elections and hate speech to prevent the need for further regulation.