Social Network (10)
A Facenote hearing was held at the Capitol on Capitol Hill in Washington D.C.
Democratic and Republican senators took their seats.
Because it was a public hearing, reporters and spectators packed the room, and the proceedings were broadcast live around the world through television and online media.
It was here that the whistleblower finally stepped into the light for the first time.
The white woman in her mid-forties had already sworn, before the hearing began, to tell nothing but the truth.
Senator Bane, who was overseeing the hearing, asked, “Please state your name and identity.”
She answered in a calm voice. “My name is Emily Heisen. I worked as a product manager for misinformation for three years and eight months, and I resigned two months ago.”
“What was your job at Facenote?”
“Data management. I was responsible for filtering misinformation and deleting problematic posts.”
“Why did you decide to come forward as a whistleblower?”
“Facenote is harming teenagers, deepening division, fueling anger and hatred, and weakening democracy. I believed someone had to let the world know what was happening.”
Then the senators began their real questioning.
“Could you explain the bias in the algorithm?”
“It was designed to give greater weight to posts that shared similar thoughts and emotions. The more actively a user engaged through likes, comments, and shares, the more attention their posts would receive.”
“Why is that a problem?”
“In an algorithm that prioritizes reactions, fake news, misinformation, and extreme content are the things that get amplified. The algorithm doesn’t show the truth; it shows what it wants to show.”
In the past, people on the internet fought over the same things because they all saw the same things.
But on Facenote, the algorithm delivered personalized information to each user, while content with opposing views was blocked outright. By feeding only on information that confirmed one’s own beliefs, people came to believe that their own views were always right and that the opposing side must be wrong.
It was the Filter Bubble—people trapped inside soap bubbles of filtered information, unable to break free.
It also bundled together people who thought alike, until what I said and what the other person said began to sound exactly the same.
Like an echo bouncing endlessly off the walls.
That was the Echo Chamber Effect, which bred collective confirmation bias and drove out objective, rational opinion, leaving only the extremes to rise as the new mainstream.
“According to public documents, Linstagram hid its own internal findings that it was harmful to mental health and increased teen suicide rates. Is that true?”
“Yes. The findings showed that among teenagers using Linstagram, 7 percent of Americans and 12 percent of Britons experienced suicidal thoughts. Social media is addictive, much like cigarettes or drugs, but teenagers don’t have that much self-control.”
The questions kept coming.
“Is it true that Facenote knew how serious fake news was and looked the other way?”
“Yes. Facenote monitored fake news during the last presidential election. But the moment the election was over, that monitoring was rolled back.”
“Why?”
“Monitoring costs money. And measures like that reduce users’ time on the platform and their attention, which hurts growth.”
“So you stopped monitoring because it wasn’t good for corporate growth?”
“That’s right. Facenote has always chosen corporate interests over social interests. As a result, there was more division, more harm, and more lies, and that led to more violence and war.”
What came next was even more shocking.
“Even that minimal level of monitoring is concentrated mainly in developed countries with large populations and heavy penalties. Sixty-five percent of the staff responsible for misinformation are focused on posts in English-speaking countries, while proper management is barely carried out in other nations. The smaller the population and the lower the revenue, the fewer people were assigned to misinformation, and as a result fake news and manipulated videos spread while fake accounts multiplying like weeds received no real response.”
“Are you saying that’s connected to the massacres in Myanmar and Ethiopia?”
“Yes. Posts that justified military coups and massacres based on political leanings were recommended, and posts stirring up fake news and racial hatred shot up the rankings very quickly. As long as Facenote continues ranking content based on reactions, these problems will keep happening.”
Emily Heisen had one final thing to say.
“Facenote has to change. It needs to become a better social media platform—one that is safe and values personal freedom and freedom of expression. But Facenote will never change on its own. That is why laws that can regulate it must be created. That is why I’m here.”
The aftershocks of the hearing were no small thing.
Facenote’s stock fell 11 percent, dropping to $830 billion. It was the biggest decline of the year and the lowest level in 52 weeks.
Analysts turned increasingly negative on Facenote and scrambled to slash their price targets.
The hearing lasted two days.
On the first day, the whistleblower appeared; on the second, CEO Mike Goldenberg took the stand.
In most countries, hearings rarely attract much public attention.
But this was such a massive event, and the news that CEO Goldenberg would be appearing drew the attention not just of the United States, but of the entire world.
When Mike Goldenberg appeared before a hearing for the first time, he too swore to tell nothing but the truth.
From the very beginning, the senators’ questions were sharp.
“Do you admit that the algorithm was deliberately designed to provoke hatred and anger?”
CEO Goldenberg denied it flatly. “It’s absurd to claim that we deliberately drove people into rage for the sake of profitability. That never happened.”
The questions kept coming.
“Did you stand by and do nothing even though you knew Linstagram was triggering depression and suicidal thoughts in teenagers?”
“There may be some cases like that, but that isn’t the whole story. On the other hand, there are plenty of teenagers who use Linstagram to build better relationships and communicate with the people around them. The internal documents are, at the end of the day, just survey questions. What’s needed here is a detailed and careful investigation by medical institutions and experts. We’re taking these issues—teen safety, physical health, mental health—very seriously, and with far more depth and caution.”
“Everyone has the right not to have their privacy violated. And yet Facenote watches everything users do and makes money from it. Are you willing to fundamentally change that business model?”
“That requires deep consideration. Facenote is a free service. It would be impossible to sustain it without engaging in any kind of commercial activity.”
“So you’re saying you’ll keep selling user data to advertisers the way you do now?”
“We don’t sell data. Advertisers have no access to the data. We only analyze it and show ads to the customers advertisers need.”
But not every senator was asking the right kind of questions.
The eighty-year-old Senator Vernon suddenly asked, “Is Facenote free, or is it paid?”
“It’s free.”
“Then how do you make money?”
“Through advertising.”
“So Facenote is an ad site?”
“No. We’re social media.”
“What is social media?”
There was a burst of laughter from the gallery at the absurd question.
“Did Facenote deliberately leave fake news and false information alone?”
“No, it didn’t. Tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands of posts are uploaded to Facenote every single day. Along with AI, thousands of employees work every day to delete fake news and hate content, but there are clear limits. We’re trying to find ways to improve the situation.”
“The whistleblower says regulation is necessary. What do you think about that?”
“My view on regulation isn’t that I’m simply against it. I think there are many reasons to believe regulation is necessary, and we need deep discussion about what should be regulated and how. Such regulation wouldn’t be a problem for giant companies like Facenote, but it could become a serious issue for startups.”
While other senators were pointing out that Facenote had failed to filter fake news and misinformation properly, Senator Brown of Texas instead asked questions opposing censorship.
“Mr. Goldenberg, do you consider yourself a public figure who should remain politically neutral? Or do you believe you’re free to express political opinions?”
“I think a platform CEO should not express political opinions.”
“Many Americans oppose political censorship by Facenote and other big tech companies. But companies like Facenote are based in Silicon Valley, and the people there tend to be progressive. Don’t you think those employees’ leanings infringe on freedom of expression?”
“Our position is that politically biased opinions should be excluded as much as possible.”
“Facenote deleted ads and posts from groups opposing abortion and homosexuality, while leaving ads from organizations that support abortion and homosexuality untouched. Abortion is not a political issue—it is a matter of life and human rights. So tell me: is opposing abortion hate content? And if so, are you saying that supporting abortion, which means murdering a child in the womb, is not hate?”
“That’s—”
Before CEO Goldenberg could answer, Senator Cameron shouted, “What are you talking about? Murder?”
Other Democratic senators rose in unison as well.
“Are you saying it’s wrong for women, who make up fifty percent of the population, to exercise their rights over their own bodies?”
“Apologize to the public!”
Senator Brown raised his voice and shouted back. “Roe v. Wade was an unjust ruling. We have a duty to protect life, whether the child has been born or not!”
“So anti-homosexuality ads aren’t hate?”
“That isn’t hate; it’s freedom of expression. America is a liberal country. Anyone can freely express what they believe, and they bear responsibility for it themselves.”
“Resign now!”
In the middle of the hearing, the Democrats and Republicans suddenly went at each other in a furious brawl over abortion and homosexuality.
The hearing was temporarily suspended.
Mike Goldenberg took a short break in the prepared lounge and checked both public reaction and the stock price.
What the market feared most was a complete collapse in public opinion and the creation of harsh new regulations. But compared with Mike Goldenberg, who had come in thoroughly prepared, the senators’ questions were disappointing.
The media pointed that out as well.
The internet was in an uproar.
The hearing risk had already been priced in the day before.
What the market hates most is uncertainty.
Once the hearing actually began, the uncertainty seemed to clear, and the falling stock had already climbed 5 percent.
Public opinion was also turning in Facenote’s favor.
Watching that, Mike Goldenberg let out a cold smile.
Looks like it was time to hit back.