"But if only a fraction of one per cent of teenagers in the United States are impacted at this serious level, that ends up being a trillion dollars of damages, not even considering punitive damages."
Said Frances Haugen, quoted in "Facebook whistleblower: Meta now faces a Big Tobacco-style ‘reckoning’ exclusive/In 2021, Frances Haugen revealed her former employer was getting users hooked on damaging social media. Now she tells The Times: 'A thousand flowers will bloom from this'" (London Times).
"They say history doesn’t repeat, but often it rhymes,' she told the Times. 'The rhyming beats between this and tobacco are just too loud for nothing to happen now. All other industries that have had the level of societal impact that Meta has had have faced a reckoning much sooner.... I think Meta understands that if they have to stop serving under-16-year-olds — or maybe even under-18-year-olds depending on how over barrel they end up being — the future of their company is over.... I am not a prohibitionist when it comes to this.... But I believe in the power of negotiation. These platforms have basically felt like they were able to negotiate from a position of strength. Now, they have to sit down at the table and discuss how to provide their services more responsibly."
Posts
39 comments:
Addled Inducements (AI)
Congress passed strict manufacturer liability around the 70s, the idea being that manufacturers would make their stuff safe enough to minimize damages but not so safe as to cost a lot more. A market solution. Unfortunately juries added punitive damages and now everything just costs too much.
Instagram has some guy making fancy wood joining vids, another , magic tricks for kids, another , toddler advice. I'm hooked and could use some financial relief.
Ambiguous Incentives
Addictive Impressions
Anthropogenic Influencers
Welcome to the new millennium. Welcome to AI.
This is chum in the water for trial lawyers for ALL social media. Saying there will be a feeding frenzy is to minimize the impact.
A percentage of the population is prone to compulsive behaviors that mimic addiction. Does that mean that the government can punish speech that results in addiction-like compulsion? This claim is barred by the First Amendment. The plaintiff's parents are the negligent ones.
Other instances of speech causing addictive behaviors are The Bible, The Beatles, and Taylor Swift.
As soon as the lawfare crowd saw the tech bros on stage at the Trump 47 inauguration...heretics...new target. The CA billionaires moved out of state to avoid the wealth tax...the state needs a new way to cover the budget shortfall and pay all those teacher union pensions.
"FredSays said...
This is chum in the water for trial lawyers for ALL social media. Saying there will be a feeding frenzy is to minimize the impact."
Class action gonna be bigger and longer lasting than Round Up and Asbestos combined.
Rhymes? It’s similar, but never rhymes.
Facebook is for Oldsters. In ten-ish years all the Boomers will be dead and gone and no one will be Facebook to be affected by it.
I am addicted to the Althouse blog.
Anyone want to join me in a class action lawsuit?
Trying to remember all the people who were helped by the big tobacco settlements. Seems like mostly state governments and lawyers. I am sure this will be different.
I'm no fan of Zuck and his platform sucks. However, this whistleblower is bullshit. Gen Alpha (born 2013 – 2024) uses Facebook less than Gen Z (born 1997- 2012 and at the target age mentioned), which uses Facebook less than Millennials. <a href="https://targetinternet.com/resources/how-different-age-groups-are-using-social-media-2024>Source</a>
If Social Media is like "big tobacco", then Facebook's addiction isn't working on the younger generation. I know they already lost the case, and the statistics mentioned don't work out for YouTube. I just find the notion that Social Media is like tobacco to be ludicrous, or to be specific, any one brand of Social Media. Meta and Alphabet may wish they had products that addictive, but they don't. Should they be punished for trying to sale to minors? I don't think so, but that is a larger societal question.
Also +1 to WK...
Facebook chose to jump into politics and push a leftist wing agenda. So now when they are going to get screwed by the Left, I will sit back and laugh.
They chose the form of their destructor. I hope they get burned down to the ground
I am going to sue the publisher of the medical encyclopedia my parents owned, as it turned me into a hypochondriac.
Facebook worked and modified and played their "algorithm" to hook people.
This is not a 1s Amendment issue, this is a "how do they run their business" issue.
They ran it to addict people. They succeeded. So screw them, to the wall.
As soon as the lawfare crowd saw the tech bros on stage at the Trump 47
Now all lives matter? Not. Nothing but leverage with profits.
London bridge is falling down, falling down...
Social media's core attraction and main issue come from giving participants exactly what they desire in social interaction and by topic of interest.
The narrowness of a digital interface makes it a one-note experience akin to eating only sugar or dropping coins into a slot machine all day long. Any effective engagement algorithm must be a mirror of the passions and interests of the users. The content is often banal, but so are many people.
For those under 18, the blame lies primarily with parents and schools in allowing usage. Back in the day of land-line phones, teenage girls were limited to 1 or 2 hours per day of hogging the phone. Some indulgent parents did allow dedicated gossip phones for their daughters.
I guess the plaintiffs' bar has identified the next carcass to carve up for legal fees.
She knows you have to sell stock to Pay this money out right?
Lawsuits that should have failed.
For years, the plaintiffs bar tried to use the tobacco playbook against the oil companies but it didn't work. So now the shift is to social media. The end game is a giant class action suit and giant shakedown of Facebook, YouTube and the rest of them.
When you've got a fat hog, cut it.
I have an Estate where the PR is still getting asbestos money. Those asbestos cases are decades old. But a great annuity for the class action lawyers.
…reeks of those hundreds of professors signing statements. Judiciary seems to never miss an opportunity to undermine the credibility of the courts nowadays. Salty language the least of your problems…
The fault, dear Brutus, lies not in fate but in your own choices.
As I recall there was a damages problem in the tobacco litigation: medical costs were rising so quickly that even discounted to present value they outweighed the costs associated with premature deaths from tobacco related diseases — so damages would be negative. But the state legislature stepped in and passed a statute saying that the cost of future treatments couldn’t be used to offset damages. Problem solved (I love politicians). Afterwords they tried to stiff their lawyer (Joe Jamail?), but lost.
Is anyone suing their parents for allowing them too much screen time or not blocking websites through the router?
I'd be happy with a decent sized financial settlement and a requirement that Facebook goes back to its 2009 layout/approach.
"I am addicted to the Althouse blog."
She is rather irresponsibly interesting. But she doesn't actually get people to pay for her musings like ...... oh, say, Charles Blow. Now there is an irresponsible muser.
The big tobacco moment?
Consider this:
In 1998 the "Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement" was issued. Philip Morris share price was about $45.
Philip Morris today $166 -- even after a major splitting off of Altria in 2008, so the combined investment has been massive.Add in consistently high dividend returns compounded and your return since 1998, including the split off of Altria, would have beenbetween 1850% and
2100%.
Similar calculations can be made for British American Tobacco, Imperial Brands, Japan Tobacco etc.
I don't doubt Alphabet will offer a similar result. Buy some Alphabet, put it in your sock drawer and that of your children, and forget about it.
Stock was been down 15% in the last year 26% in the last six month
Ban advertisements on social media platforms.
Isn’t that what businesses are supposed to do - get their customers addicted? And since it’s a media business I bet SCOTUS will be on its side.
So, apparently, "Give the people what they want" is now a tort.
You know what I am addicted to?
Cars.
Music.
Amazon.
Various sports.
Maryland crab cakes.
All sorts of stuff that I really like and if someone provides at a reasonable price I'm in.
It's not the same thing as...heroin.
Now, the Althouse blog--that's another thing altogether.
We can quit any time
Curious as to how many preteens have been influenced to question their gender as a result of online influence?
Can we throw that into the mix?
Sounds like lawyer pre-negotiation talk using the power of media to sway public opinion. I don't see any shade thrown at the parents of these wayward children.
Just a ploy to suck billions out of a deep pocketed sucker. Sort of like the taxpayers of this country getting fleeced to provide daycare and learing centers in Minnesota.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.