A24 eZ re the washington post.wednesday, march 11 , 2020
PowerPost
intelligence for leaders washingtonpost.com/powerpostPresident Trump had made
American “energy dominance” a
key part of his platform for
reelection. But a plunge in the
price of oil threatens to
undermine that 2020 message.
The price of crude took one of
its most dramatic drops in
history Monday after Saudi
Arabia opened the spigots on its
massive oil reserve amid a price
war with Russia. The result
wiped out of hundreds of billions
of dollars in market value for the
U.S. oil and gas industry — and
dragged down the rest of the U.S.
economy with it.
That’s bad news for Trump,
who is trying to reassure voters
in key swing states that produce
oil and gas — Colorado,
Pennsylvania and Te xas — that
he is the best person to shepherd
the U.S. economy for the next
four years. Trump has gone from
touting the economy as “the best
it’s ever been” to attempting to
minimize the effects as the
coronavirus spreads throughout
the United States and markets
tank on it.
A big part of the “energy
dominance” agenda Trump touts
on the campaign trail is making
sure U.S. oil and gas exports
grow. But the country’s role as an
energy exporter is jeopardized by
the glut of oil now on the market,
as well as depressed demand as
the coronavirus shock winds its
way through the world economy.
“If the Saudi-Russia oil price
war persists,” s aid Jason Bordoff,
founding director of Columbia
University’s Center on Global
Energy Policy, “it will cause
widespread bankruptcies
through the shale patch and
steep declines in U.S. oil output,
which would cause net oil
imports in the U.S. to start rising
again.”
It’s yet another remarkable
consequence of the rapidly
spreading coronavirus that the
Trump administration is
struggling to contain.
The whole thing kicked off
halfway around the world — and
mostly due to something beyond
the White House’s control.
lAn uneasy oil-production
alliance between the Saudis andSocial networks haven’t d one
enough t o prevent manipulation
of voters on their platforms in
2020, according to an
overwhelming majority o f tech
experts surveyed by The
Te chnology 202.
Companies including
Facebook, G oogle’s YouTube and
Twitter are under i mmense
political p ressure t o fight
disinformation after Russian
interference i n the last
presidential e lection. But a
whopping 89 percent o f experts
in The Te chnology 202 Network
say their responses so far do not
inspire confidence.
“Fighting misinformation a nd
online v oter manipulation is not a
one-time effort, it is a continuous
game of cat-and-mouse,” s aid
Hadi Partovi, chief executive o f
Code.org a nd an early i nvestor i n
Facebook, U ber and A irbnb. “ The
leaders o f all the major online
platforms would agree their job i s
far f rom ‘done.’ ”
The Te chnology 202 Network is
a panel o f more t han 100 experts
from across government,
industry and t he consumer
advocacy community i nvited to
vote in ongoing s urveys on t he
most pressing issues in the field.
The responsibility to tackle
disinformation and o ther threats
shouldn’t j ust be on tech
companies, some industry
experts said. “Social media
companies should be doing more,
but are w e comfortable with
[Facebook c hief executive] Mark
Zuckerberg or [Twitter’s] Jack
Dorsey as the arbiters of truth?”
said Glenn Kelman, t he chief
executive o f R edfin.
But Kelman says t hat
policymakers are not r eally
equipped to handle the p roblem,
either. “We elect governments,
not c orporations, to regulate
speech, run fair elections and
deter f oreign interference. B ut
most government f olks lack the
technical expertise t o regulate the
Internet, a nd many actually
prefer a wide-open field forpartisan warfare.”
Rep. Ro Khanna ( D-Calif.), w ho
represents Silicon Valley, i nsists
that “technology companies
should be investing i n
authentication tools, both for
users and f or content, to ensure
that the n ews Americans are
seeing online this y ear is honest
and r eal.” Y et K hanna also s ays it
is time for Congress to finally pass
legislation t o force companies to
take action: “Congress should
also provide a basic r egulatory
framework so that social media
companies remove b latant
disinformation and h ate speech
that goes viral from their
pl atforms.”
Many e xperts said tech
companies’ lack o f transparency
about interference a ttempts
makes it virtually impossible for
voters to know whether
adversaries are t rying to
influence t hem.
“The first step in preventing
manipulation for individuals is
knowing that i t may be afoot,”
said Danielle Keats Citron, a
Boston University law professor
and 2 019 MacArthur f ellow,
commonly known as a “genius
grant” r ecipient. “In short, s o
much is hidden from v oters t hat
we cannot t ell the e xtent of the
manipulation, l et a lone what
companies are doing a bout it.”
Te ch companies have p romised
big i nvestments to address
potential foreign interference on
their platforms, i ncluding rooting
out fake a ccounts a nd l abeling
posts t hat fact-checkers have
deemed f alse. But t he Network’s
experts say these changes are just
the tip o f the iceberg.
The approach to tackling
disinformation and o ther threats
has b een inconsistent across Big
Te ch, said Falon Fatemi, the c hief
executive o f start-up Node.io.
“While some companies have
invested heavily in this area and
taken a proactive a pproach t o this
challenge, it is evident that some
have not yet employed all that
artificial intelligence can do to
combat this problem,” s he w rote.
“A ll tech companies have a moral,
and f urthermore, b usiness
rationale to do b etter here, and t o
employ the l atest and greatest AIfor g ood in this uncertain time.”
Some respondents singled out
Facebook’s policies as being
particularly problematic: The
company h as said i t will p ermit
politicians to lie i n ads and a llow
campaigns to target narrow s lices
of voters with political messages
based o n highly p ersonalized d ata
amassed b y the company. ( Google
has p ut tougher r estrictions on
how political a ds c an be t argeted.)
If Facebook w ants to be serious
about election i ntegrity, i t should
follow Twitter’s l ead a nd d o away
with political ads altogether, s aid
Karla Monterroso, the h ead of
Code2040, a nonprofit group
advocating f or diversity in t he
industry. “ Ty ing money and
targeted ad d ata to freedom o f
speech is r idiculous,” Monterroso
said. “No one is entitled to that
amount o f data tied t o a
microphone in exchange f or
money. Especially i f they are
spreading lies.”
“Facebook w on’t e ven s top
running political a ds. It’s h ard to
fathom, and Z uckerberg’s
reasoning i s either based o n
extremely ulterior motives o r is
just hardheaded,” s aid B radley
Tusk, founder of Tusk Ventures.
Several Network participants
noted that the companies do not
have the right incentives to fix the
problems with disinformation
because of their b usiness m odels.
“Truly f ixing Facebook’s threat t o
free and f air elections would
require f undamental changes to
its business model, but Facebook
is not going t o risk its b illion
dollars a week in targeted d igital
advertising revenue unless it’s
forced t o do so,” s aid Sally
Hubbard, director of
enforcement strategy at O pen
Markets Institute.
“The actions of Facebook and
Google since 2016 r aise s erious
doubts about t he sincerity of t heir
commitment to protecting
democracy,” s aid R oger
McNamee, a Silicon Valley
investor and author of “Zucked:
Waking Up to the Facebook
Catastrophe.” “ Both c ompanies
employ business models and
algorithms that amplify hate
speech, disinformation, and
conspiracy theories because s uchcontent i s unusually p rofitable.
Rather t han compromise their
business models, both companies
have made o nly cosmetic c hanges
to appease p olicymakers.”
Rampant d isinformation
disproportionately affects
minority groups, warned Rashad
Robinson, the president o f the
civil rights group Color of
Change. “Make no m istake, these
platforms know they have a
problem — they acknowledged it
in 2016 and they are aware of i t
today,” h e said. “Yet t hese
companies are making a n active
choice n ot to do more to end
misinformation online, and that
choice w ill disproportionately
harm the c ommunities m ost in
need of the resources determined
by elections and t he upcoming
census count.”
Just 1 1 percent of the Network
— which includes executives from
most major social networks —
said companies are doing enough.
Kevin Martin, Facebook’s vice
president for p ublic policy a nd
FCC chairman during t he George
W. B ush administration, sought
to highlight the company’s
progress.
“We have made strides in
improving our s ecurity efforts
through m assive investments i n
people and t echnology to increase
transparency, c ombat abuse a nd
protect e lection integrity across
the w orld,” Martin said. “While
we know o ur work will never b e
complete, we are committed to
combating t hese t hreats.”
Jesse B lumenthal, vice
president of technology a nd
innovation p olicy f or the n etwork
backed by C harles Koch a nd like-
minded investors, said i t is up to
each individual to discern f act
from fiction. “ Social media
companies are in a ‘cat-and-
mouse’ game with all sorts of b ad
actors. I t is easy to focus only on
the c hallenges that exist and lose
sight o f the ways that social
media platforms can a nd do h elp
bring i mportant information t o
light,” he said. “Ultimately, it is u p
to each o f us to sort t rue
information f rom falsehoods.”
ca [email protected]tonya riley contributed to this report.Social networks need to ramp up disinformation fight
The Technology 202
Cat zakrzewskiBY DEVLIN BARRETTHouse Democrats and Repub-
licans proposed a surveillance bill
Tuesday that would extend provi-
sions used for counterterrorism
investigations while putting new
restrictions and safeguards on
the FBI to address criticism of
how agents investigated a Trump
campaign adviser in 2016.
The proposed legislation at-
tempts to strike a balance be-
tween conservatives angry over
the FBI’s handling of its investiga-
tion into the Trump campaign
and liberals seeking to get more
civil liberty protections in the
highly secretive work done
through the court established by
the Foreign Intelligence Surveil-
lance Act (FISA).
“We’re trying to put a limit on
power,” Rep. Jerrold Nadler
(D-N.Y.) told the House Rules
Committee. Nadler, the chairman
of the Judiciary Committee, of-
fered the bipartisan bill as part of
an 11th-hour push to get a bill
passed before lawmakers leave
Washington later this week.
The fight over FISA has been
contentious in recent months as
allies of President Trump have
demanded significant changes to
address problems discovered in
the surveillance of his former
campaign adviser Carter Page.
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), one
of the FBI’s biggest critics in
Congress, said the legislation
“does represent real reform.”
A Justice Department spokes-
woman said the department is
reviewing the legislation.
While Trump has long accused
the FBI of conducting an unfair
and politically motivated investi-
gation of his campaign, his ad-
ministration has supported a
“clean” reauthorization of the
current law, meaning renewing it
without modifications or new re-
strictions.
Attorney General William P.
Barr met privately Monday eve-
ning with House Minority Leader
Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and a
number of other Republicans to
discuss the possible FISA renew-
al.
Last year, Inspector General
Michael Horowitz released a re-
port detailing serious omissions
and errors in the FBI’s FISA appli-
cations for surveillance on Page,
whom they suspected of conspir-
ing with the Russians to interfere
in the 2016 election. Page was
never charged with a crime, and
Horowitz has been highly critical
of the FBI for emphasizing in-
criminating information to the
court while not sharing facts that
suggested Page’s innocence.
To address those concerns, the
new bill would require the attor-
ney general to sign off on any
FISA surveillance targeting a fed-
eral officeholder or a candidate
for federal office.
At a hearing Tuesday, Rep.
Norma J. Torres (D-Calif.) raised
concerns about that provision.
“I’m not sure why we think
we’re special,” s aid To rres. “We’re
not above the law.”
“Of course we’re not above the
law,” replied Nadler, who said the
purpose of the legislation was to
make it harder for government
officials to misuse the FISA pro-
cess.
The FISA court was created by
Congress in the 1970s as a safe-
guard against privacy abuses by
the government. The court over-
sees the most sensitive national
security cases involving espio-
nage and terrorism, but privacy
advocates have long complained
the extensive secrecy surround-
ing the FISA court makes it ripe
for abuse.
The legislation offered Tuesday
would step up internal reviews
and data reporting requirements
on FISA cases; increase the po-
tential prison sentence for unau-
thorized disclosures about FISA
surveillance; and require FISA
applicants to assure the court
they have provided information
that might call into question their
factual assertions.
The bill would also bring to an
official end a controversial phone
records collection program the
government has abandoned as
costly and ineffective. Privacy ad-
vocates have long sought to end
the phone metadata surveillance
program that saw phone compa-
nies collect data on the calls of
millions of Americans, which the
government could search after
obtaining a court order.
Lawmakers will not have much
time to debate the finer points of
the bill, because three current
surveillance provisions are due to
expire this weekend. The pro-
posed legislation would extend
those authorities until December
2023 if it passes in the House and
Senate.
Barr has appointed Connecti-
cut U.S. Attorney John Durham to
investigate how the FBI and CIA
pursued allegations of Russian
election interference. Durham is
considering whether to file a
criminal charge against a former
FBI lawyer who altered an email
during the Page investigation to
make it appear Page had not
provided information to the CIA
during a relevant time frame,
when he had, according to people
familiar with the investigation,
who spoke on the condition of
anonymity because they were not
authorized to discuss the case.
[email protected]Bipartisan bill proposes
new limits on use of
federal surveillance law
Russians broke down over the
weekend after Moscow refused
to cut its oil output. The
kingdom wanted to work with
the Russians to prop up the price
per barrel as energy demand
weakens because of the viral
outbreak. When Russia refused,
the Saudis decided to flood the
market with oil themselves.
lThe glut of oil sent the price
of West Texas Intermediate, the
U.S. benchmark, down by a
quarter to $31 a barrel by the end
of trading Monday. The stock
value of U.S. energy firms, which
can’t compete with such cheap
and plentiful Saudi crude, fell by
17 percent.
According to my colleagues
Steven Mufson and Will
Englund, the drop in the price of
oil “was the steepest since prices
plunged 35 percent on Jan. 17,
1991 ” — the start of Operation
Desert Storm in Iraq.
lThings may get worse for U.S.
producers before they get better.
Goldman Sachs warned that a
price of $20 per barrel on the
international market may be a
real possibility.
Trump tweeted through the
maelstrom by emphasizing just
how cheap gasoline may get in
the coming weeks. That’s a 360-degree turn from celebrating the
renaissance of energy producers
who he falsely says made a
remarkable comeback during his
administration.
“Good for the consumer,
gasoline prices coming down!”
he wrote on Twitter. He also
inexplicably tried to pin the oil
plunge on the news media.
Drivers indeed should see
some relief at the pump. The
national average price for
gasoline could drop by 20 to 30
cents in the next two to three
weeks, according to GasBuddy,
which tracks fuel prices
throughout the country. “It
doesn’t seem like anyone is
backing down, so if this
continues we can see the world
become floated with oil,”
GasBuddy’s Allison Mac said. “If
they can come to an agreement
then we can see prices level off.”
But low fuel prices aren’t good
for the overall U.S. economy,
according to Kevin Book, who
manages research at ClearView
Energy. That’s because of the
adverse effect the price drop will
have on oil and gas firms.
The U.S. oil and gas sector will
have a harder time selling its
product abroad — and, Book
said, may have “less of adominant market share going
forward.” That’s not great news
for the president trying to
correct the U.S. trade deficit.
“Coronavirus was bad enough
before this,” Book added.
And a drop in gasoline prices
would cut both ways for Trump
politically. According to
ClearView Energy, residents in
states that Trump won in 2016
tend to spend more on energy,
but they also collectively produce
most of the nation’s onshore oil,
gas and coal.
Sensing distress among
Trump voters in the oil patch, the
White House is considering
offering federal assistance —
likely in the form of low-interest
government loans — for oil and
natural gas producers.
The oil and gas lobby tried to
strike a confident tone in a
phone call with reporters
Monday. “ There is no doubt that
we are in a challenging time, but
we have weathered this
complicated period before as a
nation and as an industry,” said
Mike Sommers, president of the
American Petroleum Institute.
But he conceded: “I don’t think
anybody is making any money at
$30.”
[email protected]Plummeting oil prices may sink Trump’s message
The Energy 202
dino GrandoniChristopher pike/bloomberg News
An investor observes a stock price index board at the Dubai Financial Market on Tuesday.Keep The Heat! Being Cold Gets Old!INSULATION SALEInstalling Multilayer Foil Attic Insulation, Blown Insulation and
Air Sealing Can Have an Immediate Impact on Your Energy Bill!Cold House? High Heating Bills?
Winter is here!Monthly payments
as low as $59!
with approved credit.
Minimum purchases
of $4,000.
Offer expires
3-31-20202-996-3585 DC301-245-249 2 MD703-278-9016 VAVA #270 502945 6A | MHIC #4674 4 | DC # 67000878 | NC #7 7474***Attics Only - We Do Not Do Crawl Spaces***FREE
a $ 30 0 value
12-point Home Energy
Loss Analysis