Google CEO Sundar Pichai's testimony to Congress exposed the abject failings and futility of Washington's version of tech policy (GOOG)

sundar pichai google ceo

Google CEO Sundar Pichai testified before the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday morning.
It was a total waste of time.
Republican lawmakers fixated on the unproven idea that Google and big tech is censoring conservatives.
Meanwhile, important questions about data privacy, oversight of artificial intelligence, and military contracts were never asked.

Sundar Pichai's 3 1/2 hour testimony before the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday was noticeably lacking in enlightening answers.

The Google CEO was there as a witness to talk about transparency and accountability at the Californian technology giant, and it was a rare opportunity for serious scrutiny of Google's — and the broader tech industry's — data-collection policies and social impact.

Instead, Republican lawmakers fixated on the notion that tech companies like Google are deliberately biased against conservatives, trying to censor them from social networks and search results. They cited random anecdotes and disputed studies.

Republican Rep. Steve Chabot of Iowa complained about the negative news stories that appeared when he searched for the Republican attempts to repeal Obamacare. Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas ranted about Wikipedia undoing one of his staffer's edits, without ever actually asking a question. Republican Rep. Steve King of Iowa, a congressman repeatedly accused of racism, nonsensically asked why an unflattering message about him flashed up on an iPhone being used by one of his grandchildren. Pichai carefully responded, "Congressman, iPhone is made by a different company."

(Democratic Rep. Ted Lieu quipped, "To some of my colleagues across the aisle, if you're getting bad press articles and bad search results, don't blame Google or Facebook or Twitter — consider blaming yourself.")

5 minutes just isn't enough

Ted Poe google congress hearing On the relatively few occasions Pichai was pushed more substantially on issues, his reticence and obtuseness was telling.

Asked repeatedly about "Dragonfly," Google's efforts to build a censored search engine for China, Pichai clearly avoided answering questions, giving only the mealy-mouthed answer that Google wasn't planning to launch it "right now." When pushed, he said more than 100 employees were working on the project at one point — far less than the 300 reported by The Intercept, which initially broke the news of Dragonfly's existence.

In another exchange, asked about whether Google was tracking a congressman's cellphone, Pichai said he'd need to check the settings, which may have been technically correct but sidestepped the obvious point that Google is tracking (at least) hundreds of millions of people's devices, and not necessarily with their informed consent.

But other key subjects, from Google's involvement in military contracts to how the executive team approved huge payouts for employees accused of sexual misconduct, were never mentioned at all.

One big problem was the format itself, something that has caused issues in previous hearings featuring technology executives like Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg. Congresspeople only have five minutes each to ask their questions, which is barely enough time to even get into specifics, especially when Pichai (or any other witness, for that matter) spends half of that time giving boiler-plate answers and filibustering.

Fewer and better-informed questioners, with more time each, could produce vastly more illuminating answers from the Committee's witnesses. If Pichai's hearing taught us anything, it's that this model for hearings is broken.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Why NASA blasts half a million gallons of water during rocket launches