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

Meta removes ads for social media addiction litigation

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 276 posts

Re: Meta removes ads for social media addiction litigation

#91

Post by boringg »

bilekas wrote: post #28
boringg wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean those class action lawsuits enrich trial lawyers and maybe force companies to behave better (though i bet empirical evidence would show that its more a cost of business). The 20$ dollars people get is nothing but a guise that the trial lawyers are helping people.

I'm not sure if the lower price means that class actions shouldn't still be taken. It's to allow companies to not have to deal with individual claims for each person. I see that the ranges can be substantial though, several thousands, but seems to be criteria. > Nearly nine months later, Mark received a notification that his claim had been approved. Two weeks after that, $186 was deposited into his bank account. Whil…

I can agree with that -- however the amount of money the trial lawyers make comparatively is wildly disproportionate. I think that 186$ figure is an example on the high side of payouts to individuals.

Re: Meta removes ads for social media addiction litigation

#93

Post by epistasis »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #41
mrwh wrote: post #21

Meta wants to be an impartial platform only and exactly when it suits them to be.

[flagged]

A few years ago this seemed a bit too extreme for me. Now, with the web mostly burned down anyway, I see little to lose and lots to gain in a section 230 repeal. My, how the Overton Window changes on some ideas. And when it's changing on some things it tends to accelerate on others too, like a social momentum on reconsidering past norms.

Re: Meta removes ads for social media addiction litigation

#94

Post by ed312 »

rokkamokka wrote: post #77
Xeoncross wrote: post #75

As an aside, class-action lawsuits seem less than ideal for the public. The awards benefit the lawyers and perhaps a small handful, but the actual plaintiffs only get $0.05. In addition, successful class-action suits prevent further litigation from being allowed for the same issue. Individuals bringing their own lawsuits seems like it would affect better change as 1) the award money would be better distributed instea…

A hundred million identical court cases might not be too good for the legal system

1. Why should harming a million people identically reduce their right to a fair legal evaluation and possibly compensation for damages? <-- maybe it makes sense for large corporations to carry insurance to pay for the potentially massive legal costs they could impose on governments? 2. Shouldn't we be able to quickly resolve these cases assuming there are no substantially different pieces of evidence?

Re: Meta removes ads for social media addiction litigation

#95

Post by lazarus01 »

thimabi wrote: post #63
zeroonetwothree wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there’s a clear difference in restricting advertising vs organic posts.

Meta does both. It has long been said that businesses have little organic reach in Meta’s platforms, as an incentive for them to use ads.

I’m not a big poster at all, but ran into this precise issue.

They analyze the video posts on instagram. If they detect the video has even a small amount of commercial value, they classify it as branded content and you need to pay for it to get promoted.

Re: Meta removes ads for social media addiction litigation

#96

Post by SecretDreams »

rokkamokka wrote: post #77
Xeoncross wrote: post #75

As an aside, class-action lawsuits seem less than ideal for the public. The awards benefit the lawyers and perhaps a small handful, but the actual plaintiffs only get $0.05. In addition, successful class-action suits prevent further litigation from being allowed for the same issue. Individuals bringing their own lawsuits seems like it would affect better change as 1) the award money would be better distributed instea…

A hundred million identical court cases might not be too good for the legal system

Agreed. Naturally, the solution is to get meta to compensate for the actual and cumulative damage they've done to mankind. Then plaintiffs might actually benefit.

This is humanity vs Mark Zuckerberg.

Re: Meta removes ads for social media addiction litigation

#97

Post by boelboel »

fdeage wrote: post #90

"Anxiety. Depression. Withdrawal. Self-harm. These aren't just teenage phases — they're symptoms linked to social media addiction in children." Seems like they couldn't write even three lines without a LLM.

Maybe being unable to write us another symptom

Re: Meta removes ads for social media addiction litigation

#98

Post by miki123211 »

shimman wrote: post #74
HumblyTossed wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The judge should have ordered Meta to place a banner on FB so that everyone can see it and join if they're a victim.

Wow this is a really good idea. I wonder if the various state trials happening as well should use this for remediation too. It's not a hard thing to implement on their end and should be mandated by a judge as you said. Filing this away for later use.

Europe (Poland) loves this kind of stuff.

It often comes up in (anti) free-speech trials, where the government compels the perpetrator to issue a public apology to the victim. Forcing them to buy an ad in a newspaper for example is not unheard of.

As far as I understand, Americans consider this to be "compelled speech" and hence prohibited, but I might be wrong on this.

Post reply on HN