The Daily - Facebook vs. the White House

Episode Date: July 20, 2021

Is misinformation on Facebook an impediment to ending the pandemic?President Biden even said that platforms like Facebook, by harboring skepticism about the shots, were killing people.Facebook immediately rejected the criticism, but who is right?Guest: Cecilia Kang, a correspondent covering technology and regulatory policy for The New York Times. Sign up here to get The Daily in your inbox each morning. And for an exclusive look at how the biggest stories on our show come together, subscribe to our newsletter. Background reading: Mr. Biden’s blunt statement about Facebook capped weeks of frustration in the White House over the spread of vaccine disinformation on social media.In response, Facebook called on the administration to stop “finger-pointing.”For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday. 

From New York Times, I'm Michael Barbaro. This is The Daily. Today, the nasty battle between the Biden administration and Facebook over who is responsible for misinformation about the COVID-19 vaccine. I spoke with my colleague, Cecilia Kong, about who's right and what's at stake. It's Tuesday, July 20th.

Cecilia, can you describe how this fight between the White House and Facebook has played out over the past few days. Over the last few days, there's been a remarkable set of comments by the Biden administration and the White House that really place blame at social media companies like Facebook for being the biggest impediment to solving the pandemic. Hello, everyone. How are you? It started with the Surgeon General on Thursday making a statement at the White House. Today, I issued a Surgeon General's advisory on the dangers of health misinformation. For the first time, issuing a public warning

that misinformation related to COVID-19 vaccines was really preventing people from getting the vaccine and really one of the biggest obstacles to the White House's efforts. The truth is that misinformation takes away our freedom to make informed decisions about our health and the health of our loved ones. He said that the threats often come from what we eat, drink and smoke. Today, we live in a world where misinformation poses an imminent and insidious threat to our nation's health. We must confront misinformation as a nation. Every one of us has the power and the responsibility to make a difference in this fight. Lives are depending on it.

So he's saying that online misinformation about the COVID-19 vaccine is literally a public health crisis. He is for the first time saying that speech and comments that are made on the Internet have hopped over into real life and have caused real world harm. Thanks so much for your time. And I'll turn it to Jen. And then right after the Surgeon General, Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, doubles down on his message. There are also proposed changes that we have made to social media platforms, including Facebook. And she really homes in on Facebook. She said that Facebook has been a leading cause of this misinformation. Facebook should provide publicly and transparently data on the reach of COVID-19, COVID vaccine misinformation.

And she said that the company owes it to the public to be transparent about how much misinformation is on the site, how it's spreading, and how much it's being engaged with. Second, that we have recommended, proposed that they create a robust enforcement strategy that bridges their... She pointed to the fact that the White House has had to repeatedly flag misinformation around the coronavirus vaccines to Facebook and that the company

takes too long to respond to this misinformation that's spreading so rapidly. Finally, we have proposed they promote quality information sources in their feed algorithm. She really also focused, Michael, on the algorithms that allow the company to spread misinformation so rapidly compared to any other media platforms. In this case, that's certainly an area that would have an impact. So she made a public call for Facebook to do better. Thanks, everyone.

Thanks, everyone. And then the next day, President Biden, just before he got on Marine One to Camp David, was asked by a reporter. On COVID misinformation. About what his message to social media companies would be like Facebook. They're killing people. And the president said, they're killing people. The only pandemic we have is among the unvaccinated. And they're killing people.

It was really a stunning statement. And the first time that I have heard and the public has heard such a direct line that the administration was drawing between these social media platforms and their problems and their challenges when it comes to solving the pandemic. coordinated effort by the White House, seems to be saying that companies like Facebook, in a sense, have blood on their hands when it comes to Americans being unwilling to take the COVID-19 vaccine because of the misinformation that they host. It was an extraordinary statement, and Facebook immediately pushed back. In a blog post, Facebook slammed the administration's position. It's perhaps not surprising that Facebook is not happy about having that message come out of the White House. They said, no, we are absolutely not killing people. And that's unfair. They said, in fact, we've tried to use our platform to help save lives.

We put a ton of effort into putting out authentic and correct information about coronavirus vaccines. And you, the Biden administration, Facebook was saying, are scapegoating us because it looks like you're not going to meet your vaccine goals. And that's not our fault at Facebook. So stop finger pointing. And that's true, right? The administration has missed its vaccination targets. That's right. The administration wanted to get 70% of all adults vaccinated by July 4th, and they did not meet that target. So, Cecilia, who is right here, Facebook or the White House? I mean, it's hard to say, Michael,

because there's evidence that both sides are right and a little bit wrong. Hmm. Well, let's walk through this and start with this White House claim and what in that claim feels legitimate when it comes to Facebook allowing content that has created vaccine hesitancy. What is the evidence behind that claim? Well, first, they're seeing it on the ground. The White House is saying that when they go out and ask Americans why they're hesitant about getting the vaccine, they hear stories like the vaccine will cause autism or will harm pregnant women and their unborn babies, that the vaccine could even lead to Bill Gates implanting a microchip into individuals. These are all false stories.

And the White House asks, where are you hearing these things? And they almost always point to Facebook. And thus led the White House to look at a study by the Center for Countering Digital Hate that looked at 12 people known as a disinformation dozen that are producing 65% of anti-vaccination misinformation across social media. 12 people producing 65% of all the misinformation on social media around COVID-19.

That's an extraordinary impact of a small group of people. They're super spreaders is how they're being viewed. And what should we know about these misinformation super spreaders that the White House has zeroed in on? What's an example of one of these people? One example is Robert Kennedy Jr., who is actually part of the Kennedy family. Hey, everybody, it's Robert F. Kennedy Jr. here. He is well known for his positions against taking vaccines. He has a huge following on Facebook with 4.7 million users. I cannot tell you how happy I am to be able to have this opportunity to talk to thousands of citizens

in 15 countries. In one post in February, he really warned that the vaccine could be detrimental to pregnant women. And he said that there wasn't enough evidence that the vaccines were safe for women and could possibly lead to miscarriages. Now, what he was claiming is not backed by any medical or scientific research. That particular post was eventually flagged as false by Facebook and Instagram, but it was also viewed tens of thousands of times. Doesn't it seem like you're waking me up out of a dream or more accurately, like a nightmare?

Another example is Joseph Mercola, an osteopathic physician who has about 2 million followers on Facebook and Instagram. This is some type of dystopian or willian nightmare. It's absolutely surreal. He has posted on Facebook and other social media platforms that hydrogen peroxide could be a successful treatment for coronavirus. And he has cast a lot of doubt on vaccines. His posts have also been viewed many thousands of times. Hey, guys. It's so crazy. I'm in Miami in the airport. And in another example, there is this couple, Ty and Charlene Bollinger. They have a Facebook page

called Truth About Cancer, which has about one million followers. Humanity is crumbling over under tyranny. And I've just had it. So I just want to reach out and say, stand up, rise up, say no. They have been big proponents of that Bill Gates theory about microchips. And this is exactly the kind of misinformation the White House says they're hearing from Americans as they survey the field on misinformation. So that would seem to reinforce the White House's claim that Facebook has become a place where anti-vaccine sentiment, much of it false and misleading, is finding a home and finding a big audience. Absolutely.

But also there's evidence that Facebook is putting more effort into fighting misinformation around the virus. They're absolutely prioritizing it. And they are trying to put more good information out there to conquer the bad. We'll be right back. So, Cecilia, talk us through Facebook's arguments and the evidence behind them that it has done a lot to counter vaccine misinformation. What have they done? Well, what Facebook is really focused on is what I describe as offense. They have done a lot to promote authentic information and to try to get people to go out and get vaccinated.

I mean, for example, I'm looking right now at my Facebook app and I see the COVID-19 Information Center. It tells me, looking for COVID-19 Information Center. It tells me looking for COVID-19 vaccine information, find answers to common questions. So I get a Q&A. It also tells me go to this place in my neighborhood, in my vicinity, where I can find vaccines available. This information appears as like a pop-up box. So it's right there when you open your app and the website. And that's the kind of proactive, offensive measure that they're doing.

So this is Facebook literally taking people by the hand and showing them how to get a vaccine, which they would argue is the most powerful way to counter bad information, even on Facebook, that raises doubts about the vaccine. Exactly. They're saying, we are actually taking the extra measures to try to help with this pandemic.

But I would also note that this is so core to Facebook's philosophy on content and speech, which is that good information can drown out bad information. And that's the strategy they're taking here. Another thing they do is they put labels related to the vaccine that gives people a little bit more information promoting the vaccine. So if you put in your status update, I just got the vaccine and my arm is sore, automatically the company's machine learning will see that language that you've mentioned the vaccine and they'll attach a label to that particular status update.

And that label will read something like, COVID-19 vaccines go through many tests for safety and effectiveness before they're approved. See the World Health Organization and get vaccine information. Oh, interesting. So basically, Facebook is spotting what might be interpreted as skepticism

or critique of the vaccine, and it's producing a message that would encourage somebody to take the vaccine by saying, hey, this has been tested, this is safe. That's right. And they go a step further in other cases in that they say they've taken down straight out misinformation. They say that they've taken down 18 million pieces of content that promote false conspiracy theories and news related to the vaccine and COVID-19. That sounds like a lot to have taken down 18 million, but relative to the viewership of misinformation, is that actually meaningful? This is really key, Michael.

We don't know what the whole pool of misinformation is. We don't know what that denominator is. So 18 million takedowns of how many. And that's actually one of the things that's really frustrating the White House right now. They wanna know what that denominator is. They wanna know how big is the reservoir of misinformation on Facebook related to the vaccine. Right. So that they can measure what it means when Facebook says, we've taken down 18 million out of...

How many. And further, how many people have viewed that content? How many people have liked it? How many people have shared it? That's really key to understanding engagement and reach. Is it fair to say, Cecilia, that Facebook has taken down some of the individual posts of the disinformation dozen, but still let them continue to post? Is that how this works? That's absolutely right. They've taken down not only posts,

but they've taken down some pages and some groups associated with the disinformation dozen. But those individuals are able to run other groups, other pages, and their accounts remain active. So this would seem to be Facebook acknowledging in a way that there is a problem, right? I mean, if they're taking down 18 million individual posts, that would seem to be a form of conceding that vaccine misinformation is very present on the platform. They are absolutely aware that this is a huge problem. They are really struggling, however, with how they can actually police misinformation and to also protect different point of views.

At the heart of this is something that Facebook has struggled with for years, which is what kind of speech they will allow on the platform and what kind of speech could eventually be so harmful that it should be taken down. Right, and they have to negotiate that every time they look at a post that's skeptical of the vaccine. Absolutely, and there's a skeptical of the vaccine. Absolutely.

And there's a lot of gray area. There's sometimes satire. There's sometimes just commentary. And conservative figures in Washington, lawmakers as well as media figures, really are watching this very closely. And they're criticizing Facebook for being too strict on their takedown policies. They say that people should be able to express different points of views as related to the vaccine. There are many Republicans who are not vaccinated right

now. And there are many media figures on TV who say that these companies should not be in the business of censorship. So in Facebook's telling, there is a problem of vaccine misinformation on the platform, but they have taken concrete steps to remove a lot of it and to try to drown it out or overshadow it with good information and accurate information that leads Facebook users to go get vaccinated. Yes, and Facebook points to its own data showing that less and less people on the platform are vaccine hesitant, and they are taking credit for that because of these efforts. But the White House is still frustrated because they say that

even though they're taking these proactive offensive measures, the White House is still frustrated that they're not taking down enough measures, the White House is still frustrated that they're not taking down enough misinformation and that the public is still seeing way too much misinformation about the vaccine. Right. It sounds like the White House is frustrated that on any given day, you might see the juxtaposition on Facebook of a COVID toolbox saying, here's where to get your vaccine. And then a few moments later, you might scroll down to a post on Facebook full of misinformation or even lies about that very vaccine. That's right, Michael.

It's almost like Facebook is rowing upstream with all of these offensive efforts, but they're also creating the surge of the downcurrent with all this disinformation. Cecilia, at the end of the day, back to your original analysis that both sides are kind of right and both sides are kind of wrong here, the White House and Facebook, who seems to be more right when we think about the question of Facebook, social media, and vaccine hesitancy? Well, I think the evidence is clear to anyone who has social media that misinformation exists. It's so ubiquitous. Definitely there have been efforts to take it down. I also think, Michael, it's really important to understand that this is not

just social media, that so much misinformation about coronavirus vaccines are also being spouted across cable television and other media platforms. So there's a whole ecosystem to contend with, but there's plenty of blame to go around among the social media platforms. And I think for Facebook, which has by far the biggest scale, much bigger than Twitter, it is a place that rightfully should be a focus because if anybody has the resources to fight this, it's a company like Facebook with a $1 trillion valuation and $85 billion in revenue and that have been fighting this and have experts on staff for years. There's a very familiar ring to everything

you just said, which is Facebook and its scale means that it has a responsibility to deal with misinformation. It felt like we had that same conversation when it came to Russia's disinformation campaign in 2016 using Facebook, or President Trump spreading misinformation on Facebook around the 2020 election, and then of course, around the 2020 election, and then, of course, Facebook's role in the January 6th riot at the Capitol. And I wonder if it's right to see vaccine misinformation as of a piece with those previous episodes, or if based on the fact that Facebook has changed since 2016 and is being more proactive in all the ways you just described, that it's possible that that history makes Facebook an easy target for the White House when it comes to vaccines in a way that may not be quite fair.

I mean, this is absolutely part of a pattern that has existed at Facebook for years. But what's different here, Michael, is that COVID-19 and efforts to end the pandemic through these vaccines have been an absolute priority, not just for the government, but also from within Facebook. Mark Zuckerberg has said that this is absolutely one of his top priorities. And they have stricter rules on COVID misinformation than any other pieces of content. And the stakes are so high. When we've seen Facebook struggle with misinformation related to election interference, false news around politics, it's been upsetting for users. It's been frustrating. It's certainly caught the attention of Washington and lawmakers that are, who are very angry at Facebook.

But this is about life and death. I think the consequences here are so high when it comes to false information that is making people potentially not want to get the vaccine, that it feels like this deserves more attention than other episodes. false information that is making people potentially not want to get the vaccine, that it feels like this deserves more attention than other episodes. Well, Cecilia, thank you very much. We appreciate it. Thanks so much for having me, Michael. On Monday, The Times reported that at the start of the pandemic, a group of data scientists at Facebook asked executives for their resources to help measure misinformation about COVID-19 on the platform. That request was never approved.

Meanwhile. You said last week that companies and platforms like Facebook are killing people by letting... That may be precisely what I said. I'm glad you asked me that question. Asked about his remark that companies like Facebook were killing people, President Biden clarified his statement, saying that the biggest blame

lay with the dozen Facebook users who spread the most misinformation. Facebook isn't killing people. These 12 people are out there giving misinformation. Anyone listening to it is getting hurt by it. It's killing people. It's bad information. But Biden continued to demand that Facebook take action.

My hope is that Facebook, instead of taking it personally, that somehow I'm saying Facebook is killing people, that they would do something about the misinformation, the outrageous misinformation about the vaccine. That's what I meant. Have they done enough in your opinion to stop? I haven't. We'll be right back. Here's what else you need to know today.

In the first ruling of its kind, a federal judge found that Indiana University can require that its students be vaccinated against COVID-19. The case involved eight students who argued that the requirement violated their rights, in part because vaccines against COVID-19 have only been granted emergency authorization, rather than full federal approval. But the judge ruled that the students' individual interests must be weighed against the larger goal of ensuring the health of the university's entire student body.

And with the backing of the international community, Haiti has announced a new prime minister in an attempt to resolve a battle over who should lead the country since the assassination of its president, Jovenel Moïse. The new leader, Ariel Henry, had been named prime minister by Moïse, but had not yet been sworn in when Moïse was killed. He will replace Claude Joseph, who took control of Haiti's government immediately after Moise's murder, in what some Haitian lawmakers likened to a coup. Today's episode was produced by Jessica Chung, Rachel Quester, and Rob Zipko.

It was edited by Dave Shaw, contains original scoring by Dan Powell, and was engineered by Chris Wood. That's it for The Daily. I'm Michael Barbaro. See you tomorrow.