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

Meta Designed Products to Capitalize on Teen Vulnerabilities, States Allege

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 170 posts

Re: Meta Designed Products to Capitalize on Teen Vulnerabilities, States Allege

#31

Post by ff317 »

quacked wrote: post #7
avalys wrote: post #4

Do grocery stores “capitalize on vulnerability” when they place name-brand products at eye level? Do carmakers “capitalize on vulnerability” when they advertise pickup trucks as big tough vehicles for tough, outdoorsy men? Do providers of health insurance for pets “capitalize on vulnerability” when they say you need to buy their product if you love your pet? At some point people need to be responsible for their own d…

Yes, yes, and yes. However, the three situations you named are targeting adults. Children and teenagers are worth insulating from the full might of advertisers, propagandists, and always-on virtual social circles.

Arguably, adults are worth protecting as well. A lot of marketing and even design intent for adult products is also extremely misleading and intentionally designed to prey on our collective fallibility. In that sense, it's at the very least unethical, and maybe should be illegal. We have some laws about truth-in-advertising, but they're very weak in a lot of scenarios.

Re: Meta Designed Products to Capitalize on Teen Vulnerabilities, States Allege

#32

Post by blackhaz »

zooq_ai wrote: post #14

I for one hope this case reach the supreme court and it's struck down on egregious Government overreach. This case has no proof about net harm to teenagers by social media. This case is basically projecting everyone's misplaced hate of social media without doing a proper controlled experiment of it's benefits/harm to the society. You can't do controlled experiments on humans and hence the states have no case except o…

I don't know about you, but my Facebook is littered with every day pedophilia, mostly generated and edited photo/video shorts with literally children doing erotic dancing in prostitute clothing. I don't know, did I click on something wrong? Some ads lead to obviously adult pay-per-view accounts on third party sites - you're a click away from porn. Many posts, appearing for some reason clustered - I guess when their advertiser's budget allows - are Russian propaganda with armies of bots liking posts about "how great Motherland Russia is". And no, blocking, disabling and going out of my way to tell Facebook I don't like this content and that I'm here only for astronomical communities doesn't help at all. Being a Ukrainian father living abroad, this not only irritates the hell out of me, but makes me deeply sad about teenagers encountering all this crap. This is capitalizing on children vulnerabilities. This is making money on the propaganda of terrorism. I think Facebook should burn in hell, and I wish good communities, whatever is left, would move out of there and find a new home ASAP.

Re: Meta Designed Products to Capitalize on Teen Vulnerabilities, States Allege

#33

Post by awejralwej »

zooq_ai wrote: post #14

I for one hope this case reach the supreme court and it's struck down on egregious Government overreach. This case has no proof about net harm to teenagers by social media. This case is basically projecting everyone's misplaced hate of social media without doing a proper controlled experiment of it's benefits/harm to the society. You can't do controlled experiments on humans and hence the states have no case except o…

Age requirements for cigarettes and alcohol and driving are also insane government overreach. No one has ever done consistent and conclusive research that I have read and approve of that clearly and undoubtably demonstrates that cigarettes and alcohol are bad! Or that vaccines are safe! And guns! Don't forget about guns! Children should be allowed to protect themselves! (And if any of you try to give me "evidence" then I'll know you're a liberal groomer woke.)

Re: Meta Designed Products to Capitalize on Teen Vulnerabilities, States Allege

#34

Post by ff317 »

switchbak wrote: post #13
avalys wrote: post #4

Do grocery stores “capitalize on vulnerability” when they place name-brand products at eye level? Do carmakers “capitalize on vulnerability” when they advertise pickup trucks as big tough vehicles for tough, outdoorsy men? Do providers of health insurance for pets “capitalize on vulnerability” when they say you need to buy their product if you love your pet? At some point people need to be responsible for their own d…

Do grocery stores “capitalize on vulnerability” when they ... place junk food at the checkout line to capitalize on your impulsiveness when you're least able to defend against it? Yes. You can be expected to make responsible decisions as an adult. That doesn't mean that there aren't bad actors trying to take advantage of you, and that this behaviour isn't borderline unethical.

I should make responsible decisions as an adult, but it's still fair to call that grocery store's actions unethical, and that maybe they should be regulated if they can't be ethical on their own.

Re: Meta Designed Products to Capitalize on Teen Vulnerabilities, States Allege

#35

Post by lokar »

megaman821 wrote: post #24
quacked wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, yes, and yes. However, the three situations you named are targeting adults. Children and teenagers are worth insulating from the full might of advertisers, propagandists, and always-on virtual social circles.

Are you saying the cereal boxes on display at grocery stores are mostly targeting adults?

At least it’s in the real world where you have to be physically present, and exposure is limited.

If you want to talk about kids cereal the real issue are TV ads pretending to be cartoons. A subject that has generated considerable concern, debate and state action over the years.

Re: Meta Designed Products to Capitalize on Teen Vulnerabilities, States Allege

#36

Post by skeaker »

avalys wrote: post #4

Do grocery stores “capitalize on vulnerability” when they place name-brand products at eye level? Do carmakers “capitalize on vulnerability” when they advertise pickup trucks as big tough vehicles for tough, outdoorsy men? Do providers of health insurance for pets “capitalize on vulnerability” when they say you need to buy their product if you love your pet? At some point people need to be responsible for their own d…

Yes, yes, and yes. Advertising is almost always malicious. The days of it being primarily small businesses getting the word out about themselves are long over. Advertising firms now have actual psychologists that study ways to best exploit the brain of the common man, and that is wrong.

Re: Meta Designed Products to Capitalize on Teen Vulnerabilities, States Allege

#37

Post by blackhaz »

NickC25 wrote: post #3

Should come as no surprise, honestly. Above all else since turning public, Meta is in the business of making money. It's not illegal to target user's vulnerabilities in order to get the user to spend more time or money on their platform. It's unethical as hell, but it's business 101 - the shareholders would revolt if Zuck came out and said "here's this opportunity to make you all a ton of money, but we're placing our…

This is like saying - hey, let everyone buy their guns without background checks, because the shop has to make money!

Re: Meta Designed Products to Capitalize on Teen Vulnerabilities, States Allege

#38

Post by lotsofpulp »

ff317 wrote: post #34
switchbak wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do grocery stores “capitalize on vulnerability” when they ... place junk food at the checkout line to capitalize on your impulsiveness when you're least able to defend against it? Yes. You can be expected to make responsible decisions as an adult. That doesn't mean that there aren't bad actors trying to take advantage of you, and that this behaviour isn't borderline unethical.

I should make responsible decisions as an adult, but it's still fair to call that grocery store's actions unethical, and that maybe they should be regulated if they can't be ethical on their own.

Can you define exactly what is unethical about displaying candy in the checkout line?

Should nothing be there? Only healthy vegetables? Is it unethical to sell things with added sugar in the first place? Or a certain amount of sugar per volume period?

Re: Meta Designed Products to Capitalize on Teen Vulnerabilities, States Allege

#39

Post by Kapura »

avalys wrote: post #4

Do grocery stores “capitalize on vulnerability” when they place name-brand products at eye level? Do carmakers “capitalize on vulnerability” when they advertise pickup trucks as big tough vehicles for tough, outdoorsy men? Do providers of health insurance for pets “capitalize on vulnerability” when they say you need to buy their product if you love your pet? At some point people need to be responsible for their own d…

>At some point people need to be responsible for their own decisions.

That point should come when they are no longer children. Targeting children to produce perfect little ecosystem consumers is... kinda evil.

Re: Meta Designed Products to Capitalize on Teen Vulnerabilities, States Allege

#40

Post by Levitz »

avalys wrote: post #4

Do grocery stores “capitalize on vulnerability” when they place name-brand products at eye level? Do carmakers “capitalize on vulnerability” when they advertise pickup trucks as big tough vehicles for tough, outdoorsy men? Do providers of health insurance for pets “capitalize on vulnerability” when they say you need to buy their product if you love your pet? At some point people need to be responsible for their own d…

>And I can’t get that worked up about Meta’s free product.

There is no "Free" product. You are paying with freedom, you are paying with attention, you are paying with privacy. It's not "free", it's extracting value from you.

It doesn't cost money, yes, but neither does working, yet we assume that transfer of value is such that it ought to be paid for. It's not Meta offering a "free" product. It's their users. Their users give Meta their data for "free", which then Meta uses for profit.

Post reply on HN