Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Meta sued by states over harmful youth marketing

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 483 posts

Re: Meta sued by states over harmful youth marketing

#241

Post by ryanklee »

pixl97 wrote: post #206
ryanklee wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What people think and feel in private is often not what they admit in public. For many of these individuals, there is massive incentive not to admit such things. Doesn't make it right, but we shouldn't assume the people responsible don't feel responsible simply because we aren't hearing about it.

I mean the same holds true for what people feel about what happens to them versus what happens to others. You are measured by your external actions not the internal "well maybe I shouldn't have murdered the world" voice the rest of us don't hear.

I don't really see how this is relevant

If we don't like how something works, we should understand the factors that shape it. If someone's internal preferences are contrary to their actions, that's worth knowing, as it says something about the strength of the incentive structures. This is true for any person of any status, not least the rich, who, ideally, should not be destructive forces in society.

Private preferences and feelings are relevant to the analysis.

Re: Meta sued by states over harmful youth marketing

#242

Post by PH95VuimJjqBqy »

yodsanklai wrote: post #155
glimshe wrote: post #129

Irrespective of the incidental value "Meta" provides, let's keep in mind that no business has a right to exist independently from its standing in the system of laws and the health of its users - especially children. Social media companies argue that they can't monitor every post and do appropriate age verification online because it would be "impossible to scale". Well, tough luck. Not being able to scale is YOUR prob…

> Not being able to scale is YOUR problem, not MINE. Following your reasoning, anything that could possibly harm children should be banned. Cars sometimes kill children, shall we ban them too? Now, suppose we do ban Meta. Where should we stop? should we ban open decentralized social media too? You may not like social media, but a lot of people use them without any particular issues.

The poster didn't say ban, this is a huge strawman.

The poster said laying down requirements and them being unable to scale whilst adhering to those requirements is not an argument for removing said requirements.

Our priority is the safety and health of society, if the only way they can scale is to put people at risk then maybe as a society we don't WANT them to scale.

Re: Meta sued by states over harmful youth marketing

#243

Post by avgcorrection »

glimshe wrote: post #129

Irrespective of the incidental value "Meta" provides, let's keep in mind that no business has a right to exist independently from its standing in the system of laws and the health of its users - especially children. Social media companies argue that they can't monitor every post and do appropriate age verification online because it would be "impossible to scale". Well, tough luck. Not being able to scale is YOUR prob…

Glad to see this take here.

So often I've seen the opinion that effectively expresses that some company or business plan has a God-given right to be viable. Not directly of course but through about-face when someone points out that the company's business proposition conflicts with something—but how will the business make a profit if it has to [submit to government regulation] because of [concerns about marketing to children]?

Some people could probably steadfastly support a new business that was selling something dangerous but that was new and “innovative”. “Oh well people just have take responsibility for their own well-being—regulating crystal dust fumes™ would be way too onerous and impractical.”

Re: Meta sued by states over harmful youth marketing

#244

Post by dragonwriter »

charonn0 wrote: post #216
thrill wrote: post #90

AKA: Dozens of states' attorney generals could petition legislatures to pass laws saying under-18's are not allowed to use Facebook in their state, knowing it'd probably fail because of freedom of speech trespasses, but instead would rather sue the deep-pocket corporation for profit and reelection-time bennies.

The lawsuit asks for injunctive, not monetary, relief.

False. It asks for both injunctive and monetary relief.

On monetary relief:

On the joint COPPA claim, it asks the court to “Award the Filing States damages, restitution, and other compensation”

On the state law claims, each and every state asks for monetary relief under its own law in the form of civil penalties, damages, disgorgement, and/or restitution.

Re: Meta sued by states over harmful youth marketing

#245

Post by yodsanklai »

I'm impressed by the strong negative reactions on this thread. Maybe because this is a US-centric forum, or because I don't have kids, but I fail to see the big deal with Meta. Facebook is mostly groups with little engagements. Nowadays, people really fight on Twitter which has less moderation. Then Instagram, I thought kids were on Tik Tok?

Well, I can see how some people might be negatively impacted by this sites but it has to be marginal considering we're taking about billions of users. And what's new? the same could be said by tons of other businesses (how many people are obese with reduced life expectancy because of agressive marketing from Mac Donald's and Coca Cola for instance?). I mean, is Meta that bad?

Re: Meta sued by states over harmful youth marketing

#246

Post by gaucheries »

smcin wrote: post #166
gaucheries wrote: post #120

What’s stopping parents from allowing their kids to use Meta’s products?

The role of parental responsibility is a valid but separate matter. Kids can sign up to social media from a friend's phone/ computer/ tablet, from a library computer etc., and self-certify their claimed age. They can get phones (without cellphone contract) from other people without their parents' knowledge.

It seems to me like Meta’s marketing harms everybody who uses their products… it’s not specifically kids.

Re: Meta sued by states over harmful youth marketing

#247

Post by tsunamifury »

manuelabeledo wrote: post #238
HDThoreaun wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean no, they're specifically optimizing for engagement. It just turns out that toxicity fuels engagement.

Isn't that a bit like tobacco companies "optimizing for engagement", but knowing that the same ingredients cause cancer?

In all seriousness, no, and for obvious reasons. The toxicity is created by the participants, freely and of their own volition. Is it Facebooks responsibility to police that, shut it down, censor it? Honestly... And where who and when? According to what laws in what regions. Also how do we know Facebook created it, or if it is simply making visible the toxicity that everyone knows is middle school and highschool.

I honestly don't know, but I don't like so disingenuously simple shoot the messenger answers. That being said, if Facebook amplified it willfully knowing the damage already -- then it's a different issue. And I think there is some evidence of that.

Either way its different than tobacco which was created by the company itself.

Re: Meta sued by states over harmful youth marketing

#249

Post by spookie »

thomastjeffery wrote: post #148
glimshe wrote: post #129

Irrespective of the incidental value "Meta" provides, let's keep in mind that no business has a right to exist independently from its standing in the system of laws and the health of its users - especially children. Social media companies argue that they can't monitor every post and do appropriate age verification online because it would be "impossible to scale". Well, tough luck. Not being able to scale is YOUR prob…

The mistake we are making here is to draw the problem along the boundary of age. The problem is not exclusive to children! Even if you could successfully bar all children from participating on Facebook, the problem would still exist, and Facebook would continue to harm people.

Very much true. Marketing content should be carefully vetted, filtered. Whom you wish to project that content for may want to take back control from addictions they suffer from (i.e. food).

Re: Meta sued by states over harmful youth marketing

#250

Post by jrflowers »

paulddraper wrote: post #240
glimshe wrote: post #129

Irrespective of the incidental value "Meta" provides, let's keep in mind that no business has a right to exist independently from its standing in the system of laws and the health of its users - especially children. Social media companies argue that they can't monitor every post and do appropriate age verification online because it would be "impossible to scale". Well, tough luck. Not being able to scale is YOUR prob…

> no business has a right to exist independently from its standing in the system of laws and the health of its users I don't understand what that means, and how I can know if my business in inside or outside the law.

> I don't understand what that means, and how I can know if my business in inside or outside the law.

Simply put this sentiment on the landing page of your website, labeling on your product or, if you have a mailing list, in the subject field of your next newsletter. “I do not understand if my business is inside or outside the law” is bound to generate useful feedback

Post reply on HN