Illustration: Aïda Amer/Axios

Facebook is doubling down on its big pitch to lawmakers across the globe: regulate us.

Yes, but: Key regulators aren't buying it. Hours after Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg met with lawmakers in Europe to discuss the company's new proposals for regulation, a French commissioner overseeing the EU's data strategy rejected the plan, saying "It’s not enough. It’s too slow, it’s too low in terms of responsibility and regulation."

Why it matters: Facebook hopes that by embracing the push for regulation, it can build more trust with policymakers and better influence future regulation in its favor. But so far policymakers are wary of Facebook's attempts to help write its own rules.

Driving the news: In an op-ed in the Financial Times Monday, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg called for more regulation around four key areas: transparency around content moderation, political ads, openness around data sharing, and oversight and accountability.

"I believe good regulation may hurt Facebook’s business in the near term but it will be better for everyone, including us, over the long term."
— Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg in an op-ed in the Financial Times

Zuckerberg's op-ed teased Facebook's second white paper out Monday which lays out questions regulators may want to consider when thinking about ways to craft regulation. He noted that the company is currently working with governments, including in France and New Zealand, on what regulation could look like.

  • Flashback: Facebook's first white paper of this kind last year laid out questions for regulators around privacy and data portability, specifically.

Details: The paper lays out 4 key questions that Facebook thinks policymakers should ask while crafting regulation for tech companies. The questions address topics that Facebook grapples with itself when trying to create its own policies.

  • How can content regulation best achieve the goal of reducing harmful speech while preserving free expression?
  • How can regulations enhance the accountability of internet platforms?
  • Should regulation require internet companies to meet certain performance targets?
  • Should regulation define which “harmful content” should be prohibited on the internet?

The paper also lays out "principles" that it thinks future regulators should address, like "incentives" for tech companies to balance their own corporate priorities with societal values.

Yes, but: The white paper, as well as previous comments from the tech giant, make it clear that Facebook is making suggestions for regulation that support its current policies and practices, because that's what it thinks works best.

  • For example, in speaking about "incentives," Facebook says that companies "could be incentivized to meet specific targets such as keeping the prevalence of violating content below some agreed threshold."
  • This type of proposal favors policies Facebook is already putting in place. The company says that improvements to its machine learning and technology have dramatically reduced the amount of bad content on its platform.

Our thought bubble: Facebook's bigger problem today lies in addressing the problematic content that its rules permit. If it can get its current policies baked into international regulations, critics will find it harder to fault Facebook's choices for where to set boundaries for acceptable content.

Be smart: Asking for regulation also serves as a helpful reminder to consumers that U.S. lawmakers have done little themselves to address the complicated issues that are much bigger than Facebook, things like privacy, data sharing and political ads.

The big picture: The press blitz comes just days ahead of the U.S. Justice Department's workshop on a critical law that protects Facebook business model, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.

Bottom line: Facebook has spent the past three years on defense, apologizing to regulators for policies that left its platform vulnerable to election abuse, fraud and privacy violations and defending its policies for empowering free speech. Now, it's going on the offense, asking repeatedly for more regulations but aiming to shape those rules to its wishes.

What's next: Facebook says it plans to publish similar white papers on elections and privacy in the coming months.

Go deeper

1 hour ago - Podcasts

Facebook boycott organizers share details on their Zuckerberg meeting

Facebook is in the midst of the largest ad boycott in its history, with nearly 1,000 brands having stopped paid advertising in July because they feel Facebook hasn't done enough to remove hate speech from its namesake app and Instagram.

Axios Re:Cap spoke with the boycott's four main organizers, who met on Tuesday with CEO Mark Zuckerberg and other top Facebook executives, to learn why they organized the boycott, what they took from the meeting, and what comes next.

Boycott organizers slam Facebook following tense virtual meeting

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios

Civil rights leaders blasted Facebook's top executives shortly after speaking with them on Tuesday, saying that the tech giant's leaders "failed to meet the moment" and were "more interested in having a dialogue than producing outcomes."

Why it matters: The likely fallout from the meeting is that the growing boycott of Facebook's advertising platform, which has reached nearly 1000 companies in less than a month, will extend longer than previously anticipated, deepening Facebook's public relations nightmare.

Steve Scalise PAC invites donors to fundraiser at Disney World

Photo: Kevin Lamarque-Pool/Getty Images

House Minority Whip Steve Scalise’s PAC is inviting lobbyists to attend a four-day “Summer Meeting” at Disney World's Polynesian Village in Florida, all but daring donors to swallow their concern about coronavirus and contribute $10,000 to his leadership PAC.

Why it matters: Scalise appears to be the first House lawmakers to host an in-person destination fundraiser since the severity of pandemic became clear. The invite for the “Summer Meeting” for the Scalise Leadership Fund, obtained by Axios, makes no mention of COVID-19.