Barry Diller Says Google Needs Regulation, Won't Join Facebook Ad Boycott

The transcript discusses the need for regulating big tech companies like Google, Amazon, and Facebook, highlighting Google's monopoly status. It debates the effectiveness of breaking up these companies and emphasizes the necessity of regulation. The conversation shifts to the topic of boycotting Facebook due to its policies on hate speech, with a focus on the challenges of regulating political speech. The speaker supports Mark Zuckerberg's stance on not regulating political ads and argues against boycotts, suggesting that Facebook is addressing extreme speech. The discussion concludes with the inevitability of diverse opinions in any group, amplified by internet communication.

What is the speaker's stance on regulating big tech companies like Google?

• They think regulation is essential as companies grow larger.

• They support breaking up all big tech companies.

• They believe regulation is unnecessary.

• They believe only Amazon should be regulated.

Why does the speaker support Mark Zuckerberg's policy on political advertising?

• They disagree with Zuckerberg's policy.

• They want to promote more political advertising.

• They think regulating political speech is almost impossible.

• They believe it is easy to regulate political speech.

What is the speaker's opinion on boycotting Facebook over hate speech policies?

• They think boycotts are ill-advised and ill-considered.

• They are undecided about boycotts.

• They believe boycotts are effective.

• They support boycotts as a primary solution.

How does the speaker view the challenge of managing speech in large groups?

• They believe it is easy to control speech in large groups.

• They think differing opinions are inevitable in large groups.

• They think all speech should be censored.

• They believe only positive speech should be allowed.

What does the speaker suggest about addressing hate speech?

• They think hate speech is not a problem.

• They believe in promoting hate speech.

• They recommend addressing it without boycotts.

• They suggest ignoring hate speech.