Congressional hearings featuring Big Tech executives have often been criticized as mere “kabuki theater” or chaotic spectacles. Despite their reputation for generating viral moments and little else, these hearings wield a unique form of soft power. While immediate legislative consequences are rare, the pressure exerted during these sessions leads tech leaders to make voluntary commitments, resulting in incremental progress and overdue changes.
In the recent Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on online child sexual exploitation, CEOs from major platforms preemptively announced measures to address committee concerns. Meta imposed new restrictions on teens’ Instagram accounts, Snap endorsed the Kids Online Safety Act, and X committed to building a “trust and safety center of excellence.” These announcements, strategically timed before the hearing, demonstrate the impact of these sessions in pushing companies toward self-initiated improvements.
Chairman Dick Durbin highlighted the companies’ coincidental timing of child safety improvements, characterizing them as responses to the imminent hearing. Yet, this pattern is not new. Previous Big Tech hearings prompted actions like Facebook introducing parental supervision tools for Instagram and Mark Zuckerberg committing to hire 20,000 content moderators after the Russian election interference and Cambridge Analytica scandals.
While critics view these responses as “housewarming gifts” aimed at appeasing lawmakers without legislation, the resulting improvements, even if politically motivated, contribute positively to online safety. Meta’s enhanced protections for teens and X’s commitment to rebuild trust and safety teams are steps, albeit small, in the right direction. Despite the theatrical nature of these hearings, the track record reveals a history of product and policy changes, some more meaningful than others, surpassing the impact of legislative measures during the ongoing techlash.
In the realm of tech reform, these incremental changes may fall short of the ideal, but they represent tangible progress within the existing framework. For now, they stand as the primary outcomes of Big Tech hearings, shaping the industry’s trajectory amid calls for more comprehensive legislative actions.