[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 115 (Wednesday, July 13, 2022)]
[Senate]
[Page S3250]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                              Social Media

  Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, I will be brief. But I do want to talk 
about a serious subject. You know, 30 years ago, we wouldn't have been 
talking about email or social media or other things that we now rely on 
to receive communications, to be informed on political choices, and to 
potentially even support candidates that we want to support. But the 
reality is, today, we all have two or three email accounts, probably 
most of them based on Gmail. We have got access to Twitter, Instagram, 
Facebook--a number of social media platforms. And I have a concern that 
maybe it is not a level playing field for political views.
  We have always had that argument, but recently NC State issued a 
report that seems to find that--particularly with Gmail--we have an 
imbalance between how information is disseminated, how candidates are 
able to reach out for support. What the study found is a potential 
political bias against Republicans in favor of Democratic candidates.
  Now, I am a technology person, and I think my staff called me a bit 
of a nerd. I have been in technology for almost 40 years. I am not 
willing to jump to the conclusion that Google has necessarily created a 
strategy for benefitting Democrats over Republicans, but a study seems 
to suggest that there are legitimate questions that need to be 
answered.
  I, for one, don't think any platform should favor either policy. I 
think more speech, more access is better; more informed voters, more 
people participating in elections. But the study seems to suggest that 
there is a bias in the way that we receive our information through 
Gmail.
  I joined a letter with Senator Daines to say: Take a look at that 
report, take a look at your operations, and give us your response to 
the assertions in the report.
  I know that this is very important for the future of elections, for 
the future of participation in elections. And, again, I don't want a 
platform that biases itself toward conservatives any more than I want 
one that biases itself towards liberals. But I did have an opportunity 
to talk with technologists at Google, who dismissed the report. But 
that is not enough. The report has findings. And I think--in this case 
Google, but there are other platforms we can ask the same question.
  Incidentally, Twitter 2 months ago informed me that I was not who I 
said I was, so they suspended my account. I tried to go through an 
appeal process and finally just decided I don't need that Twitter 
account. I am wondering if that was a result of an algorithm or the 
result of somebody in Twitter who didn't like what I had to say about 
my mother and my wife and my kids on my Twitter account because I 
happen to have an official account that, for some reason, it is OK.
  We have got to get this straightened up, and Google can help us start 
by taking a look at the findings in this report and providing us hard 
answers for it and identifying others who may actually be responsible 
for the outcomes that we are, at this point, assuming are the 
responsibility of Google.
  I think it is very important for us to go through the report, give us 
the information we need because we may find out that Google is, in 
fact, not responsible for what some of my colleagues believe is the 
vast majority of appeals from conservatives going into their spam 
filter and never being reached. There may be other reasons. We already 
know that Russia, China, other state actors influence public opinion in 
the United States through their views and exploitation of social 
platforms.
  So the reason I come to the floor today is to basically reassert what 
I did in the letter to Google. Do the homework. Prove to us that there 
are no operations or conscious decisions made by the management or 
individuals in the organization to actually bias towards one ideology 
or the other. I need that information so that we can figure out how we 
can have more speech and more engagement in the political process.
  But I will say this: If there is any social media platform that has 
an employee or an organization that is biased, those folks should no 
longer be working for those platforms. And if I find any evidence to 
that effect, I will be pursuing it aggressively. But I come to the 
floor to encourage Google to do the homework, know that I will be 
objective. And I would like to get a response soon.