Return to Transcripts main page

CNN NEWSROOM

Facebook CEO's Apology and Explanation; Users Abandon Facebook After Cambridge Analytica Findings; Mourinho Under Scrutiny At Man United; Mourinho Managed Bolt In Match Of Friendship; England: Russia Has Duty To Protect Its Fans. Aired 2-3a ET

Aired March 22, 2018 - 02:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


[02:00:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

JOHN VAUSE, CNN INTERNATIONAL NEWSROOM ANCHOR: This is "CNN Newsroom" live from Los Angeles. Ahead this hour, Facebook does damage control.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARK ZUCKERBERG, CEO, FACEBOOK: We have a basic responsibility to protect people's data. And if we can't do that, then we don't deserve to have the opportunity to serve people.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VAUSE: CEO Mark Zuckerberg's apology and explanation after a data company access the personal information from millions of Facebook users without their knowledge.

Also this hour, more than 100 school girls kidnapped in Nigeria have been set free but at what price? What price did the government pay for their freedom?

And for anyone traveling to France today, pack your patience. A nationwide strike could affect trains, planes, and a whole lot more.

Great to have you with us. I'm John Vause and this is the third hour. Yes, the third hour of "Newsroom L.A."

Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg is speaking out for the first time and giving a rare public apology over the Cambridge Analytica scanda. Fifty million Facebook users had their personal information breached and used without their knowledge, supposedly so the data firm could build voter profiles to help Donald Trump's presidential campaign.

The full exclusive interview with Zuckerberg in a moment. First, CNN's Drew Griffin sets the stage.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DREW GRIFFIN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice over): The reason Facebook is under fire is the ease with which a researcher was able to use Facebook to harvest the personal information of tens of millions of Americans, then transfer all that personal information to a data analytics company that would eventually work for Donald Trump's campaign.

That firm, Cambridge Analytica, denies any of its work on the 2016 election, used the Facebook data to target voters. But Christopher Wylie, the former U.K.-based Cambridge Analytica employee turned whistle blower, says at the core of the company's activities was the access Facebook provided.

CHRISTOPHER WYLIE, FORMER EMPLOYEE, CAMBRIDGE ANALYTICA: So -- we went from no data to harvesting all of this data off of Facebook and then combing it with all this, you know, the consumer data sets and voter data sets.

So, you know, we had sort of a -- you know, Steve Bannon and a billionaire breathing down our necks trying to, you know, where is the data, where is the algorithm, where is our information weapon. And -- and that's where Kogan came along, Aleksandr Kogan, the professor at Cambridge.

GRIFFIN (voice over): Aleksandr Kogan is the Cambridge University researcher, who in 2014 developed an app, a Facebook personality test called "This Is Your Digital Life." Two hundred seventy thousand people voluntarily took the personality test.

But what no one who took the test knew is that Kogan's app opened the door to all their personal information and to all of those voluntary Facebook responders' friends and their friends and so on. Tens of millions of people. Facebook says Kogan misled, that he was supposed to only use the data for research. Instead, he collected it and sold it. But Kogan doesn't believe he did anything wrong.

ALEKSANDR KOGAN, RESEARCHER, CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY: Because the reality is that our app wasn't special. It was completely commonplace. There are thousands if not tens of thousands of apps doing the exact same thing.

GRIFFIN (voice over): Now the attorneys general of at least three states are demanding answers. Congress demanding Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg testify. Even government officials in the U.K. want executives from Facebook and Cambridge Analytica to explain how a research app led to the exploitation of the personal data of millions.

Drew Griffin, CNN, Atlanta.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

VAUSE: CNN's Laurie Segall sat down with Mark Zuckerberg for this exclusive interview. In this first excerpt, he breaks his silence on the scandal with an apology.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

LAURIE SEGALL, CNN SENIOR TECHNOLOGY CORRESPONDENT: Let me start with just a basic question. Mark, what happened? What went wrong?

ZUCKERBERG: So, this was a major breach of trust. And I'm really sorry that this happened. You know we have a basic responsibility to protect people's data and if we can't do that then we deserve to have the opportunity to serve people. So our responsibility now is to make that this doesn't happen again.

And there are a few basic things that I think we need to do to ensure that. One is making sure that developers like Aleksandr Kogan, who got access to a lot of information and then improperly used it, just don't get access to as much information going forward.

[02:04:56] So we are doing a set of things to restrict the amount of access that -- that developers can get going forward. But the other is we need to make sure there aren't any other Cambridge Analyticas out there. Right, or folks who have improperly accessed data.

So, we're going to go now and investigate every app that has access to a large amount of information from before we locked down our platform. And if we detect any suspicious activity we're going to do a full forensic audit.

SEGALL: Facebook has asked to us share our data, to share our lives on this platform, and wanted us to be transparent. And people don't feel like they've received that same amount of transparency. They are wondering what is happening to their data. Can they trust Facebook?

ZUCKERBERG: Yes. So, one of the most important things that I think we need to do here is make sure that we tell everyone whose data was affected by one of these rogue apps. We're going that. We're going to build a tool where anyone can go and see if their data was a part of this.

SEGALL: The 50 million people that were impacted, they will be able to tell if they were impacted by this?

ZUCKERBERG: Yes. We're going to be even conservative on that. So, you know, we may not have all the data in our system today. So, anyone whose data might have been affected by this, we're going to make sure that we tell. And going forward when we -- when we identify apps that are doing similarly doing sketchy things, I'm going to make sure that we tell people then too.

That's definitely something that looking back on this, you know, I regret that we didn't do at the time, and I think we got that wrong and we're committed to getting that right going forward.

SEGALL: I want to ask about that because when it came to light, you guys knew this a long time ago, that this data was out there. Why didn't you tell users? Don't you think users have the right to know that their data is being used for different purposes?

ZUCKERBERG: So, yes, and let me tell you what actions we took. So in 2015, some journalists from The Guardian told us that they had seen or had some evidence that data that this app developer, Aleksandr Kogan, who built this personality quiz app and a bunch of people used it and shared data with it, had sold that data to Cambridge Analytica and a few other firms.

When we heard that -- that's against the policy. You can't share data in a way that people don't know or don't consent to. We immediately banned Kogan's app. And further, we made it so that Kogan and Cambridge Analytica and the other folks with whom he shared the data, we asked for a formal certification that they had none of the data from anyone in the Faceok community, that they deleted it if they had it, and that they were not using it. And they all provided that certification. So as far as we understood around the time and that episode, there was no data out there.

SEGALL: So why didn't Facebook follow up? You know, you say you certified it. I think -- why wasn't there more of a follow up? Why wasn't there an audit then? Why does it take a big media report to get that proactive approach?

ZUCKERBERG: Well, I don't know about you, but I'm used to when people legally certify that they're going to something, that they do it. But I think of this as clearly a mistake in retrospect.

SEGALL: Was it putting too much trust in developers?

ZUCKERBERG: I think it did. And that's why -- you know, we need to make sure that we don't make that mistake ever again, which is why one of the things that I announced today is that we are going to do a full investigation into every app that had access to a large amount of data from around this time before we lock down the platform.

And we're now not just going to take people's word for it and want to give us a legal certification, but if we see anything suspicious, which I think that there probably were signs in this case that we could have looked into, we are going to do a full forensic audit.

SEGALL: How do you know there aren't hundreds more companies like Cambridge Analytica that are also keeping data that violates Facebook's policies?

ZUCKERBERG: I think the question here is, are app developers who -- who people given access to their data, are they doing something that people don't want? Are they selling the data in a way that people don't want? Or they are giving it to someone that they don't have authorization to do? And this is something that I think we now need to go figure out, right? So, for all these apps --

SEGALL: That's got to be a -- I got to say that's going to be a really challenging ordeal. How do you actually go do that? Because you talk about it being years ago and then you guys have made it a bit stricter for that kind of information to be shared. But backtracking on it, it's got to be really difficult to find out where that data has gone and what other companies have shady access.

ZUCKERBERG: Yes, I mean, as you say. The good news here is that we already changed the platform policies in 2014. Before that, we know what the apps were that had access to data. We know how much -- how many people were using those services. And we can look at the patterns of the data requests.

[02:09:57] And based on that, we think we'll have a pretty clear sense of whether anyone was doing anything abnormal. And we'll be able to do a full audit of anyone who is questionable.

SEGALL: Do you expect -- do you have any scale or any scope of what you expect to find? Anything in the scope of what happened with Cambridge Analytica where you had 50 million users?

ZUCKERBERG: Well, it's hard to know what we'll find, but we're going to review thousands of apps. So, this is going to be an intensive process, but this is important. I mean this is something that in retrospect we clearly should have done, upfront, with Cambridge Analytica. We shouldn't have trusted the certification that they gave us. And we're not going to make that mistake again.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

VAUSE: OK, the rest of that interview in just a moment. But right now, let's go to CNN's Anna Stewart in London. So, Anna, Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg have announced a whole lot of steps the company plans to take to try and fix this mess. What are we talking about?

ANNA STEWART, CNN PRODUCER: Well, as you heard there from Mark, a big audit of apps. This will number into thousands of different apps that use Facebook which sounds really costly. It will be interesting to see what (INAUDIBLE). Now these will be apps that pre 2014 when Facebook made some policy changes had access to vast amounts of data.

And also apps that had been more recently that may be showing some sort of suspicious activity. Any app that says they will not submit to a star audit will just be deleted from Facebook. They will also going to limit how much data apps currently have for users. As he said, he will be testifying to Congress or would be happy to do that. So, he has made some good steps, but is it too little too late?

VAUSE: Yes, I guess that's the question. I mean, will this be enough for not just the investors but for the users, the regulators? He has a lot of audiences to please.

STEWART: He really does. You know, Facebook was already facing like an existential crisis. It's users in the U.S. are on the decline. Plenty of people will have hit delete on Facebook over this crisis. And perhaps a lot of investors have hit the delete button on Facebook in the portfolio. (INAUDIBLE) yesterday but it's still down eight percent on the week. It will be interesting to see how it opens today given that some of these steps will be very costly. It will take a very, very long time.

In terms of regulators, they may be pleased that he wants to now get out in front, although it has taken five days. I'm not sure whether you can really call that getting out in front. And (INAUDIBLE) of course from the U.K. parliament and the E.U. parliament who also want to speak to him about all these privacy issues surrounding Facebook. So we'll have to see whether he submits to those two.

VAUSE: Also, it seems that Zuckerberg wanted to sort of portray Facebook as a victim here as well, a victim of this evil Cambridge Analytica doing evil things. But Facebook was told about what they were doing back in 2015. Kept it quiet and just tried to sort come up the data and move on.

STEWART: I know. And I think this is -- I mean, he says this is one of his biggest regrets, is not doing more when he was told that there was this problem in 2015. And he says, you know, Facebook was too trusting, and users have been too trusting of Facebook frankly. This is a big problem.

And I think the biggest question (ph), why they didn't do more, as Laurie said in that interview, why they didn't do more then? Why did it take this kind of huge scandal to come out, all these news reports, and five days for Facebook to think about it before they can come up with a party line?

VAUSE: It's always been deny, deny, deny. Yes, we did it, sorry. You will stick around because we have part two of our exclusive interview with Mark Zuckerberg. That's up next. Find out what Mark Zuckerberg thinks about Facebook's impact on the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

[02:15:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VAUSE: Facebook's CEO Mark Zuckerberg has apologized for not doing enough to prevent a massive operation that collected data on tens of millions of users without their knowledge. He says the company is now trying to take action to make sure it never happens again. Here is part two of his exclusive interview with CNN's Laurie Segall.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ZUCKERBERG: If you told me in 2004, when I was getting started with Facebook, that a big part of my responsibility today would be to help protect the integrity of elections against interference by other governments, you know, I wouldn't have really believed that that was going to be something that I will have to work on 14 years later.

SEGALL: I'm going to challenge you.

ZUCKERBERG: We're going to make sure that we do a good job.

SEGALL: Have you done a good enough job yet?

ZUCKERBERG: Well, I think we will see. But, I think what's clear is that in 2016, we were not as on top of a number of issues as we should have, whether it was Russian interference or fake news.

But what we have seen since then is, a number of months later there was a major French election, and there we deployed some AI tools that did a much better job of identifying Russian bots and basically Russian potential interference and weeding that out of the platform ahead of the election. And we were much happier with how that went.

In 2017, last year, during the special election, the senate seat in Alabama, we deployed some new AI tools that we built to detect fake accounts that were trying to spread false news and we found a lot of different accounts coming from Macedonia.

So, I think the reality here is that this isn't rocket science. Right? And there's a lot of hard work that we need to do to make it harder for nation-states like Russia to do election interference, to make it so that trolls and other folks can't spread fake news, but we can get in front of this.

And we have a responsibility to do this, not only for the 2018 midterms in the U.S., which are going to be a huge deal this year and that's just a huge focus for us but there's a big election in India this year, there's a big election in Brazil, there are big elections around the world, and you can bet that we are really committed to doing everything that we need to to make sure that the integrity of those elections on Facebook is secured.

SEGALL: I can hear the commitment but since I got you here, do you think that bad actors are using Facebook at this moment to meddle with the U.S. midterm elections?

ZUCKERBERG: I'm sure someone is trying. Right? I'm sure that there is V2, version two of whatever the Russian effort was in 2016, I'm sure they are working on that and there are going to be some new tactics that we need to make sure that we observe and get in front of --

SEGALL: Do you know what the -- speaking of getting in front of them, do you know what they are? Do you have any idea?

ZUCKERBERG: Yes, and I think we have some sense of the different things that we need to get in front of.

SEGALL: Are you specifically saying bad actors try to meddle with the U.S. election now?

ZUCKERBERG: I'm not a hundred percent sure what that means. It's not -- I think that the candidates are going to find that.

SEGALL: Are you seeing anything new or interesting?

ZUCKERBERG: What we see are a lot of folks trying to sew division. Right? So that was a major tactic that we saw Russia try to use in the 2016 election. Actually most of what they did was not directly, as far as we can tell from the data that we've seen, was not directly about the election, but was more about just dividing people.

You know, so they'd run a group for pro-immigration reform and they'd run another group against immigration reform to just try to pit people against each other. And a lot of this was done with fake accounts that we could do a better job of tracing and using AI tools to be able to scan and observe a lot of what is going on and I'm confident that we're going to do a much better job.

SEGALL: Lawmakers in the United States and the U.K. are asking you to testify. Everybody wants you to show up. Will you testify before Congress?

ZUCKERBERG: So the short answer is I'm happy to, if it's the right thing to do. Facebook testifies in Congress regularly on a number of topics, some high profile and some not. And our objective is always to provide Congress, who does an extremely important job, to have the most information that they can.

[02:20:04] We see a small slice of activity on Facebook, but Congress gets to have access to the information across Facebook and all other companies and the intelligence community and everything. So what we try to do is send the person at Facebook who will have the most knowledge about what Congress is trying to learn.

So if that's me, then I am happy to go. What I thin we've found so far is the typically there are people whose whole job is focused on an area, but I would imagine at some point that there will be a topic where I am the sole authority on and that would make sense for me to do and I'll be happy to do it at that point.

SEGALL: You are the brand of Facebook. You are the name of Facebook. People want to hear from you.

ZUCKERBERG: That's why I'm doing this interview. But, you know, I think that there is -- the question in a question of congressional testimony is what is the goal, right? And that's not a media opportunity or at least it is not supposed to be. The goal there I think is to get Congress all the information that they need to do their extremely important job.

And we just want to make sure that we send whoever is best informed at doing that. I agree separately that there is an element of accountability where I should be out there doing more interviews. And you know -- as uncomfortable as it is for me to do a T.V. interview, I think this is an important thing that as a discipline for what we are doing I should be out there and being asked hard questions by journalists.

SEGALL: Knowing what you know now, do you believe Facebook impacted the results of the 2016 election?

ZUCKERBERG: That's -- that is hard. You know, I think that it is -- it's really hard for me to have a full assessment of that. You know, it's -- the -- the reality is -- well, there were so many different forces at play. The organic posting that people did, the get out to vote campaigns that we ran, the pages that both candidates run, the advertising that they did, I'm sure that all of that activity had some impact.

It's hard for me to assess how much that stacked up compared to all the campaign events and advertising that was done off of Facebook and all of the other efforts. And I think it's also hard to fully assess the impact of that. That organic activity which we are actually quite proud of --

SEGALL: And also the bad actors.

ZUCKERBERG: And the bad stuff. That's something. I think it is hard to fully assess.

SEGALL: Given the stakes here, why shouldn't Facebook be regulated?

ZUCKERBERG: I actually am not sure we shouldn't be regulated. You know, I think in general technology is an increasing -- increasingly important trend in the world and I actually think the question is more, what is the right regulation rather than "yes or no, should it be regulated?"

SEGALL: What's the right regulation?

ZUCKERBERG: Well there's some basic things, then I think there are some big intellectual debates. On the basic side, I think there are things like ads transparency regulation that I would love to see. If you look at how much regulation there is around advertising on TV and print, it's just not clear why there should be less on the internet.

We should have the same level of transparency required. And I don't know if a bill is going to pass. I know a couple of senators are working really hard on this, but we are committed and we've actually already started rolling out ad transparency tools that accomplish most of the things that are in all the bills that people are talking about today because this is an important thing.

People should know who is buying the ads that they see on Facebook, and you should be able to go on any page and see all the ads that people are running to different audiences.

SEGALL: How has being a father changed your commitment to users, changed your commitment to their future and what a kinder Facebook looks like?

ZUCKERBERG: Well, I think, having kids changes a lot. And --

SEGALL: Like what?

ZUCKERBERG: Well, you know I used to think that the most important thing to me by far was, you know my having the greatest positive impact across the world that I can and, now I really just care about building something that my girls are going to grow up and be proud of me for. And that's what is kind of my guiding philosophy at this point is and you know I come and work on a lot of hard things during the day and I go home and just ask will my girls be proud of what I did today?

(END VIDEOTAPE)

VAUSE: Laurie Segall joins us now from San Francisco. Laurie, congratulations. A good exclusive to get. And I guess the big headline out of this, Zuckerberg sort of all but admitting that Facebook may have influenced the outcome of the U.S. election. And then adding that maybe now is the time that regulations are needed.

SEGALL: Yes, it's interesting to hear a tech leader say that. You know he said the right kind of regulation is important, but you know normally you don't hear them come out and say that. You have lawmakers calling for Facebook to be regulated, calling for the big tech companies to be regulated. You usually feel a lot more push back.

[02:25:01] I think Zuckerberg said we need a more thoughtful approach, John.

VAUSE: Yes. I wonder how will this go down with the other big tech companies like Google and Twitter. How will they react to this?

SEGALL: Look, I think it's a big moment. And I will say, you know, I think all tech companies are under a lot of pressure at this moment. We have had a year of unintended consequences. We've seen the weaponization of all these platforms.

I think we focus a lot on Facebook because Facebook is very personal to us and we have seen the Russian influence on Facebook. It has been a year for Facebook where we saw a lot of bad actors take advantage of the platform.

So I think the pressure is on. I'll tell you this, John. You know Mark doesn't like doing on camera interview because he is very nervous. He would rather be kind of behind the scenes with the engineers working on the product. But I think we kind of reach this pivotal point where we also need our tech leaders to step up and talk about some of these unintended consequences, some of the nuance behind the challenges that they are facing that come along with this really powerful technology.

VAUSE: It's only a guess, but I'm guessing he also does not like testifying before Congress, but he said he would. But then he added, if it's the right thing to do. It's hard to imagine how it would be the wrong thing to do.

SEGALL: Yes, you know he said it for various -- all -- very specific and he said maybe, you know, for the right thing. I wonder what that right thing is and what I said to him is, you know, you are the brand, you are the face of Facebook, in a way that's bigger than other tech founders. You know, you don't think -- when you think of Microsoft, sure some folks may know the CEO is Satya Nadella.

But when you think of Facebook, most people around the world know Mark Zuckerberg as the CEO. That's why when you see a tough year like Facebook have, when you see a tough last couple of days that Facebook has had when it comes to knowing that the data was used for nefarious purposes, I really do think that people want to see Mark. I think it's interesting and newsy that he said he could potentially will be -- for the the right reasons be willing to testify.

VAUSE: Laurie, a good exclusive, a good get, and thank you for being with us. We appreciate it.

SEGALL: Yes.

VAUSE: Next here on "Newsroom L.A.," the U.S. is about to fire the next shot in what could become a trade war with China. The question now is how will Beijing respond?

And back home at last. The emotional return of more than 100 school girls who were kidnapped last month in Nigeria.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VAUSE: Thanks for staying with us. You're watching "CNN Newsroom" live from Los Angeles. I'm John Vause. We will check the headlines this hour. In an exclusive interview with CNN, Facebook's CEO has apologized for the reported misuse of users' data, calling it a massive breach of trust.

[02:30:05] Mark Zuckerberg said he is open to the idea of social media regulation and will testify before Congress, adding if it is the right thing to do.

Police in Austin, Texas say a serial bomber recorded a 25-minute video describing the devices he made before blowing himself up. The time bombs killed two people and wounded five others over the past three weeks. Police say security in front of FedEx or is crucial in tracking him down.

For the coming hours, U.S. President Donald Trump is expected to announced new tariffs on Chinese imports. It's not known what products will be targeted but their total value is expected to be around $60 billion representing more than 10 percent of Chinese imports to the U.S. last year. All this on top of duties and steel and aluminum or aluminum depending where you live. That goes into effect on Friday.

Andrew Stevens is live in Hong Kong, aluminum, aluminum, you know, OK. If past is prolonged that it's a fair bet, Beijing will not be too happy about these new tariffs.

ANDREW STEVENS, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: I think it's fair to say that, John, what Beijing does, we all wait to see. They are more than likely I suspect to launch some sort of retaliatory action even as the senior leadership said this a couple of days ago that they don't want a trade war. It is in the interests of no one and they wanted to fight to any trade issues through multilateral organization like the World Trade Organization. But as you say, this is -- this is potentially $50 or $60 billion worth of tariffs and from the U.S. side, from Donald Trump's side particularly what it does is, A, tackle that yawning trade deficit the U.S. has $325 billion deficit with China. But it also punishes China about what the U.S. sees and what a lot of U.S. industry sees as theft of intellectual property, U.S. intellectual property. When you're a U.S. company going into China, you're a high-tech company, any company, you invariably have to form a joint venture with a local partner and then there is a technology transfer.

So the technology you have goes to China. On top of that, there are real concerns they have there for many, many years that cyber theft by the Chinese all the U.S. trade secrets and also a more recent phenomenon, John, is the move by Chinese companies to acquire sort of sensitive industry companies in the U.S., you know, in high-tech chipmakers for example. But that acquisition is being funded by the state. Beijing is bankrolling some of these acquisitions and that is also a clearly worrying the U.S. So we shouldn't be surprised the U.S. is going after this -- after this breach of intellectual property. And in fact, it's probably getting quite a warm reception in industry in the U.S.

VAUSE: Yes. Although, the criticism is it's a sledge hammer to fix a problem when we need a pair of fine pliers or something. I don't know much about tools. Andrew, thank you. Good to see you.

STEVENS: Thanks, john.

VAUSE: OK. Well, most of the 110 school girls' kidnapped in Nigeria last month are back home with their families. They were released by the terror group Boko Haram on Wednesday. Five girls reportedly died while they were held hostage. The Nigerian government says no ransom was paid and denies reports the military and police received warnings in the hours before the kidnapping but failed to act. Bukky Shonibare joins us now from Abuja, Nigeria. She's a member of the Bring Back Our Girls Movement and is the founder of the group focus of running girls access to quality education. Bukky, thank you for taking the time to be with us. The Nigerian government says there was no ransom was paid, nothing was given in exchange for the girls. So why were they released by Boko Haram? What's in it for them? Why would they do this?

BUKKY SHONIBARE, MEMBER OF BRING BACK OUR GIRLS MOVEMENT: For Boko Haram to have abducted our girls in the first place means that there was an objective. There was a motive. There was something that they need to get out of it. So when the federal government of Nigeria comes out to say that no ransom was paid, none of the soldiers were released, it puts to question what exactly was actually put on the table for Boko Haram to release our girls? They wouldn't just come to that take the girls and then take them, and then after one month they think it's the best thing to do to girls bring them back. And when you look at the issue of the Chibok girls, the federal government also at some point denied that they gave ransom. But "The Wall Street Journal" reports came out just late last year showing the amount of millions of U.S. dollars paid. Again, it's only a matter of time the truth will still come out. But I don't think it is proper for the government of Nigeria to keep those lies on because when the truth is going to be found out, it will boost the confident and trust that we the people need to have in our government.

VAUSE: Yes. The truth always comes out. And you know, wouldn't it be better for them to actually release the truth rather than, you know, coming out Iips and drabs. You mention the families of the Chibok girls, that was four years ago and many of those girls are still being held today. This must be a really difficult day for the parents of those girls who are still being held. What have they been saying?

[02:35:12] SHONIBARE: You know, the coincidental events that happened was Tuesday night about 30 of the parents actually arrived in Dapchi to, you know, pay condolence. I'm sorry. To pay solidarity visit to the parents of the Dapchi girls. And then on Wednesday morning, the girls -- that was yesterday morning and then the Dapchi girls will go back. So imagine them having to experience that after life where Boko Haram returned the Dapchi girls while they are still waiting for four years. So I think it brings back the pain and the agony of their girls being missing for that long.

VAUSE: Gosh. It's hard to imagine what those parents must have been going through for such a long time.

SHONIBARE: It is. VAUSE: Just generally, though, you know, there are these reports

which the government denies that there was apparently, you know, an attempt to tip off the military and the police in the hours before these latest kidnapping took place. They deny that there's no any such tipoffs. But in a general sense, how safe do girls feel when they are at school especially when they're in these areas where these abductions have occurred?

SHONIBARE: When Chibok girls' abduction happened, one of the things we expected and we as a group called for was that there must be an extra fortification and security of schools. And you see then that untouchable girls are best for were shut down for a certain number of months before they were reopened. And now we have the Dapchi girls abduction happening. So it means that the proper security that should be provided for girls has not been provided in that region. The question then now is, now that the Dapchi girls were abducted and going back school, we're also shut down. What is the Government of Nigeria now doing? So again, if I'm not sure that another abduction will happen just maybe the Dapchi girls are put. It means the central government is not securing schools. This is a region that costs about $10.5 million out of school children and the higher percentage of those are actually girls.

One Boko Haram returned those girls yesterday, they keep telling the parents of the girls don't go back to western education, don't go back to school. It further endanger education and if the government does not break this cycle of watching the insurgents come to take our girls, they evoke people's emotions and then get some of their men release and then come back to launch the same attack. If we don't put a stop to that cycle, it means our girls education particularly will continue to be in danger. So the responsibilities on the Government to Nigeria to protect schools enough, so that we can promote girls child education and education generally in that region which is not the case now.

VAUSE: It's just a very much basic of government responsibilities and services. Kids can go to school and they can go to school in safety everywhere. It should be everywhere but clearly it's not but it should be. Bukky, thank you so much. We appreciate your time.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you very much.

VAUSE: OK. Next strikes are expected in France on Thursday. Why traveling in the country may not be the only challenge many will be facing? We'll explain in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[02:40:35] VAUSE: So apparently traveling in France will be a challenge on Thursday I supposed to every other time of the week -- any other day of the week. Seven labor unions are vowing to walk out in a nationwide strike to protest plan to economic reform. Among them rail works, air traffic controllers, even school, and hospital workers. Here's Jim Bittermann reporting from Paris.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) JIM BITTERMANN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: For decades,

French leaders have tried to reform the nation's economy and while they've had some successes, there have been some spectacular failures, as unions, especially in the public sector have pushed back against attempts to change workplace rules.

In this case, the protest against Jacques Chirac's plans in 1995 went on for weeks, brought the country to a halt and contributed to the downfall of Prime Minister Alain Juppe. There's been one attempt after another since and now French President Emmanuel Macron who was elected on a promise to enact reforms and would began the process shortly after Election Day is taking on the most difficult one yet, modifying the work rules in the public transportation sector. For economists like Pascal Perri, it's long overdue. If for no other reason, then France is facing a deadline at the end of the year when European Railway Systems must open up the competition, meaning that there could soon be German and Italian trains running on French tracks.

PASCAL PERRI, ECONOMIST: It's a question of competitiveness, of, you know, profitability. So today, the government has decided to play its role.

BITTERMANN: Perri points out that the French Rail System runs at a loss each year and it's currently 50 billion Euros in debt. But French railway workers, some of whom, are unemployed under work rules that go back to World War II in the days of coal-fired locomotives are resisting any attempt to tamper with their pay, pension, or benefits. Once more, they fear the government as is done in other sector is heading towards privatizing the rail system, a system some union leaders think should be entirely free.

BRUNO PONCET, GOVERNING COUNCIL, SUD RAIL (through translator): We want to explain everyone that like medical costs, healthcare costs, and education, transportation should be free in order to have true social equality in France.

BITTERMANN: Even among the other unions involved, not everyone would agree with that. But the union leader says that he believes that public service employees and other sectors like the ones he mentioned will join the railway workers on Thursday for strikes that could continue well beyond this week.

In fact, the leadership of one rail union is calling for a labor action from April through June at a pace of two strike days for every three days' work, an innovative protest that could infuriate rail users and bedevil the government. Whatever the outcome, barring a last minute compromise, the government and passengers could be in for some trying times ahead. Jim Bittermann, CNN Paris.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

VAUSE: Thank you for watching CNN NEWSROOM live from Los Angeles. I'm John Vause. World Sport is up next. You're watching CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [02:45:12] KATE RILEY, CNN INTERNATIONAL SPORTS ANCHOR: Hello and welcome along to WORLD SPORT. I'm Kate Riley at CNN Center. Well, in recent weeks, the spotlight has well and truly fallen on the Manchester United manager Jose Mourinho, for all the wrong reasons.

Just last week, United went crashing out of the Champions League at the hands of Sevilla. And their performance at Old Trafford left much to be desired. But afterwards, the Special One's post-game comments drew plenty of scrutiny. He claimed United losing at home in the Champion's League was nothing new.

And then, went on to the Sevilla dressing room to congratulate them on their win, a gesture which is actually earned a round of applause from the visiting team. But the next day, Mourinho, then went on a 12- minute rant questioning his club's recent history and heritage, and pointing to the fact rivals Manchester City have finished above United in every season since 2013.

On Saturday, United be brightened, 2-0 to book a place in the FA Cup semi-finals. But to Mourinho, there was a very little to celebrate, he accused his side of "A lack of personality, lack of class and lack of desire." The FA Cup could be the only chance to serve well the season, as they sit 16 points behind City in English Premier League title race.

Well earlier, CNN's Amanda Davies has to speak to Jose Mourinho. He's in Basel, Switzerland right now managing one of the teams for the Hublot Match of Friendship. Coaching against Argentina's iconic Diego Maradona. Both team speech of past legends of the game. Plus one, their special guest, Olympic sprint champion Usain Bolt, no less. And Amanda started by asking Mourinho, about that lightning quick member of his team.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

AMANDA DAVIES, CNN INTERNATIONAL SPORTS CORRESPONDENT: Thank you so much for your time. Have you got any plans to make Usain Bolt, a permanent member of your team?

JOSE MOURINHO, MANAGER, PREMIER LEAGUE CLUB MANCHESTER UNITED: No, I don't have these plans. But was amazing to meet him and was amazing to share football celebration with so many legends, with so many players that we, we love them when they were playing, and we respect them even now because of what they did for our game. That has a meaning as a double -- a double meaning for me is the meaning of a -- for what he represents in the history of sports and also what he represents in the history of humanity. But has a double -- a double meaning for me is that is --- a

Manchester United supporter and my feeling towards Manchester United supporters is always that feeling of gift of everything I can, everything I have to try to make them happy.

DAVIES: You mentioned the Manchester United fans. I, myself, I'm one who's to spend 30 ordeals going to Old Trafford supporting Manchester United. Do you think the United fans have a realistic expectation of success at Old Trafford this days? MOURINHO: I think, there have the passion, and everyone with passion has the biggest and the best expectations about their football clubs. And in daystar in football all around the world not just in England, you had the biggest clubs with moments of transition. You'll have the biggest clubs with moments of continues and permanent victories. And this are faces in the club. And I think really in this moment looking to us in the Premier League, we have one team clearly, one club clearly better prepared than us in the past few years to be first.

And we have 18 clubs behind us. One in front of us, 18 behind us. Of course, in the future, we want to have 19 behind us, but this is the reality. And the reality is for people with brain, with sense, with common sense, with knowledge of what's sports is. We are in the moment of transition, and being in the moment of transition, hence, to manage to do what we did last season and win trophies. And to do what we are trying to do this season which is still trying to win a trophy and try to be second. Because in this moment is the only opposition that is possible for us to bear it as if we are in the good position -- in a good position.

DAVIES: Do you want the team to be playing exciting football?

[02:50:00] MOURINHO: What do you mean by that?

DAVIES: Football that gets the Old Trafford crowd on the edge of their seat that is attacking that season going forward there and taking their opportunities.

MOURINHO: Like we did against Chelsea and against Liverpool, do you mean that?

DAVIES: But perhaps, not against Sevilla.

MOURINHO: OK. Yes, yes. It's like then, you are right.

DAVIES: But do you understand the criticism that you have been getting from some quarters as to why the fans have been frustrated?

MOURINHO: No, I don't. I understand the frustration, I understand the sadness of being knocked out in the -- in the Champions League, but I don't understand anything more than that.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

RILEY: All right, thanks to Jose for his time there. And the fastest man on the planet, Usain Bolt is also a Manchester United fan. Went all out to impress the gaffer on the up to many. Known for being light on his feet, and on the day he certainly was a spot actually went on to score a goal in the game which ended 11 goals to 11. Speaking after that not so surprising draw, the Jamaican said he has no regret after leaving the track.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

USAIN BOLT, EIGHT-TIME OLYMPIC GOLD MEDALIST, SPRINTS: I think, I've done everything that I want to do in sport. Just so I just kind of trying to move on to football because it would be a new challenge, and I need something difficult for me to do, and to be challenge me. And just what I want on track and field that where I started out. It was very challenging, I had to work to get a great. So, for me, I want to do something else that would challenge --

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RILEY: Good for him. While elsewhere in the U.K. and the Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, has asked for reassurances over fan's safety in Russia this summer. He is seeking promises from the authorities in Russia that found traveling to the World Cup will be safe. The comments come amid an escalating war of words between Russia and Britain. Amid the poisoning of a former Russian double agent on British soil. Earlier this month, he told members of parliament on Wednesday that 24,000 fans from the U.K. had applied for tickets for the global tournament.

Coming up, the show must go on despite heightened security. The newly revamped world Match Play golf tournament is now on the way on Austin. See how native Texan Jordan Spieth is pairing, coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RILEY: Well, that with tennis news now. Well, the most famous woman in the sport, Serena Williams, took to the court against Japan's Naomi Osaka, in the opening round at the Miami Open earlier. Osaka, of course, straight back on the court after making headlines at the weekend. Serena was one -- was once the world No. 1 when she stopped playing to have her first child.

However, she now has ranked 491st in the world as he returns to action this week. That means that Serena isn't unseeded a player here. And therefore, could be matched up with anyone and thus was matched with the Indian world winner from the week, and the often coming, Osaka.

The WTA seeding rule has been criticize by many including the Miami tournament director himself, James Blake. And it was the 20 year old Japanese star, he cruise part the 8-time champion here in straight sets. Osaka really made Serena worked hard leaving her around the court and that was a big key to this victory.

Osaka wins the first ever meeting between the two. And will now face 4th seed, and Ukrainian world No. 4, Elina Svitolina in round two. While Osaka's response may be what you'd expect from a 20 year old. Yes, you can see on Twitter there, OMG and a great picture of the two. The young sister off was that she was so nervous to play Serena because she is her all-time favorite player. But she had extra motivation as she wanted to impress her, no doubt that she did.

Well, as you been seeing in our new shows, tensions have heightened in on a roundly often Texas area after a string of package bombings left two people dead. And on through the man believed to be behind that all is dead, PGA Tour officials increased security measures as the Word Golf Championship in Austin, got underway on Wednesday. Most of the players who with expect to be in contention with the exception of Tiger Woods are an action this week. Preparing for The Masters, which begins in two weeks' time.

And it tweet the format of it's one in recent years rather than a series of one on one lookout matches. This one start of 16 groups of four players, only one of him can progress from the first round. And Texas native, Jordan Spieth is off to a sizzling start. He defeated the South African Charl Schwartzel, thanks in large part to a brilliant approach shot here on the 14th (INAUDIBLE) birdie. Spieth beat Schwartzel, two and one, to take the opening round robin.

Match his friend and rival, Justin Thomas got a 2-up victory over Luke List. But credit to list were hanging on in there after breaking his par through on the 60, and having to par with this (INAUDIBLE) more than half the round. (INAUDIBLE).

All right. That's it from us, thanks for watching. Stay with CNN, the news is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MARK ZUCKERBERG, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, FACEBOOK: This was a major breach of trust and I'm really sorry that this happened.