Legislation Would Force Google and Rivals to Disclose Search Algorithms
Legislation
Would Force Google and Rivals to Disclose Search Algorithms
Senate bill aims to give users of search engines more control over personal data
WASHINGTON—Senate lawmakers proposed bipartisan legislation that
would require search engines to disclose the algorithms they use in ranking
internet searches and give consumers an option for unfiltered searches.
Search engines such as Alphabet Inc. ’s
Google unit use a variety of measures to filter results for individual
searches, such as the user’s browsing activity, search history and geographical
location.
Critics have increasingly complained about algorithms enabling
online-search and social-media companies to determine the content users see,
with some on the right claiming the result is a form of censorship because
certain views may be excluded. The big internet firms generally have denied
such claims and contend that using profile information gives users
better-tailored results.
The proposed Filter Bubble Transparency Act would require big
online search engines and platforms to disclose that they are using algorithms
to sort the information that users are requesting or are being encouraged to
view.
The bill would also require the online search engines or
platforms to offer a relatively unfiltered version of the same information if
users ask for it.
The bill was filed by Sen. John Thune (R., S.D.) and is being co-sponsored
by a bipartisan group of lawmakers.
“People are increasingly impatient with the lack of
transparency,” Mr. Thune said in an interview. He added that the legislation
would give consumers more choice, while avoiding heavy-handed and legally dicey
regulation of algorithms.
“It’s a way of giving consumers more control, consistent with
the light touch approach I believe in,” he said.
Google, the largest search company, didn’t respond to requests
for comment. Social-media giant Facebook Inc. also
didn’t respond to a request for comment.
The legislation is potentially significant as a way to address
growing public concern about algorithms and their impact on public discourse as
well as individual users’ behavior and emotions. Mr. Thune said he is concerned
about the potential for search algorithms to be used to prey on users’
emotions, seeking to stir anger and prolonging their use of a service, for
example.
The plain-vanilla alternative wouldn’t consider user-specific
profile data—such as the user’s geographic location and search and browsing
history—in formulating search results unless the user expressly provides such
data to the platform for purposes of the search, according to a draft of the
bill. It also couldn’t make “inferences about the user or the user’s connected
device.”
The legislation wouldn’t apply to platforms with fewer than 500
employees or $50 million in revenue, or those that collect or process the
personal data of fewer than one million people.
The bill represents the most serious legislative effort to date
to put limits on the use of online algorithms, which are complex programs that
detail the specific filters that a computer should use to carry out and rank
results from a search.
The bill could become an element of a broader Senate privacy
bill that lawmakers are hoping to weave together in coming weeks, said Sen.
Marsha Blackburn (R., Tenn.), a co-sponsor. Lawmakers are aiming to hold a
hearing in mid-November to try to hammer out agreements on what will go in a
Senate privacy package.
Sen. Mark Warner (D., Va.) said consumers have “limited
understanding of how their data is being used and how platforms operate. This
bill helps reduce the power of opaque algorithms on our discourse and put
greater control in the hands of consumers.”
The bill would place the Federal Trade Commission in charge of
enforcement.
Comments
Post a Comment