Legislators often say to me that we have too much power over speech, and frankly, I agree. I came to the conclusion that we should not make so many important decisions to address on our own. Thus, we create an independent body that people can appeal our decision. We also work with governments, including the French officials to ensure the effectiveness of the content review systems.
Internet companies should be responsible for ensuring compliance by the number of harmful standards. It is impossible to remove all the harmful content from the Internet, but if people use a variety of file sharing – all with their own policies and processes – we need a more standardized approach.
One of the ideas for the body of third parties to set standards governing the distribution of malicious content and measure the campaign against these standards. Regulation can set the baseline for what is prohibited, and requires companies to create a system for storing dangerous content to a minimum.
Facebook already publish transparency reports on how effectively we will remove the harmful content. I believe that each of the major Internet service providers have to do it on a quarterly basis, because it is just as important as the financial statements. Once we understand the prevalence of harmful content, we can see which companies are improving, and where we need to establish baselines.
Secondly, the legislation is essential to protect the elections. Facebook already introduced significant changes around political advertising: Advertisers in many countries need to verify your identity before you buy political advertising. We have built a searchable archive that shows who pays for advertising that others on the & # 39; shew they fled, and that the audience saw on the & # 39; waking. However, the solution to the & # 39 is on & # 39 political ads is not always easy. Our system would be more effective if the regulation established common standards for the inspection of political actors.
Online political advertising laws in the first place focus on the candidates and the election, and not divisive political issues, which we have seen more attempts to interfere. Some laws apply only during the elections, although information campaigns & # 39 are non-stop. And there are also important questions about how companies use political data and targeting. We believe that legislation should be updated to reflect the reality of the threats and to set standards for the entire industry.
Third, effective privacy and data protection needs of a globally agreed framework. People around the world call for comprehensive regulation particularly in accordance with the General Regulation of the European Union Data Protection (GDPR), and I agree. I believe that it would be good for the Internet, as more countries have adopted regulation such as GDPR as a common basis.
The new provision on confidentiality in the United States and around the world should be based on protection, GDPR gives. He must protect your right to choose how your information is used – at the time, allowing companies to use the information for security purposes and to provide services. It should not require to store data locally, which would make it more vulnerable to unwarranted access. And he must establish a way to keep companies like Facebook accountable through the imposition of sanctions, when we make mistakes.
I also believe, a common global framework – and not regulation, that is significantly different depending on the country and the state – will ensure that the Internet does not get broken, entrepreneurs can create products that provide all, and everyone gets the same protection.
Lawmakers adopt new rules particular, I hope that they can help to answer some questions GDPR leaves open. We need clear rules as to where the information can be used to serve the interests of society and how it should be applied to new technologies such as artificial intelligence.
Finally, the regulation must guarantee the principle of data portability. If communication with a service, you should be able to transfer it to another. It gives people a choice, and enables developers to innovate and compete.
This is important for the Internet – and people want to create services. That's why we created our development platform. True portability data should look like, how people are using our platform to enter into the application than existing methods, you can download an archive of your data. But this requires clear rules about who is responsible for the protection of information as it travels between the services.
It also requires common standards, so we support standard data format and transmission data of the project open source.
I believe that Facebook is responsible to help solve these problems, and I look forward to discuss with lawmakers around the world. We have built an advanced system to detect dangerous content by stopping the selective intervention and make advertising more transparent. But people should not rely on individual companies address these issues themselves. We need to have a wider debate about what we want as a society and how regulation can help. These four areas are important, but of course, there is still discussed.
The rules governing the Internet have allowed a generation of entrepreneurs to build services that have changed the world and created a lot of value to people's lives. It's time to update the rules to define clear responsibilities for people, companies and governments, who go forward.
Mark Zuckerberg is the founder and CEO of Facebook.
The Washington Post