US court finds Meta, Google, failed to warn users of the dangers of their platforms

Showing all posts about social media

US court finds Meta, Google, failed to warn users of the dangers of their platforms

27 March 2026

Jurors ultimately ruled in favor of the plaintiff, who claimed that Meta and YouTube’s negligence played a “substantial factor” in causing mental health-related harms. Compensatory damages were assessed at $3 million, with Meta on the hook for 70% and YouTube the remaining 30%. Punitive damages amount to an additional $3 million, with $2.1 million to be paid by Meta and $900,000 by YouTube.

Meta — who all up have been fined just over five million dollars (American) — plans to appeal the judgement. Not on account of the speeding ticket size of the fine (for a company with Meta’s capitalisation that is), but because they “respectfully disagree” with the verdict.

A separate Wall Street Journal article (pay wall) suggested the Los Angeles court decision may trigger numerous legal claims against social media companies, potentially presenting them with an existential dilemma.

An existential dilemma? Can anyone else see these organisations going through some of self reckoning, and changing their ways? No, neither can I.

Twitter, the upstart social media platform that stunted the growth, and more, of the web

24 March 2026

Dave Winer:

A bit of history. Read this post from 20 years ago by Phil Jones. That’s what I was trying to do back then, just as Twitter came online. I didn’t know it then but was the moment when the web stopped growing.

I don’t think, in 2006, anyone realised, nor could have realised, the profound impact Twitter, as one of the earliest social media platforms, was going to have, specifically on blogs and websites, and more generally, and later, the web.

Twitter launched smack bang in the middle of a period often referred to as the golden age of blogging, a time when websites and blogs seemed invincible and invulnerable. Believe it or not, they were the only game in town.

If anything was going to change the status quo, it wasn’t going to be some upstart microblogging platform where people said too much about their private lives, and what they had for lunch.

How wrong we were. But who was to know, back then, how influential and powerful the social media platforms would become, and potential threat they posed to the free flow of news and information.

It is possible to escape this quagmire by creating, collaboratively, a social media platform, impervious to the grips of monopoly control, and tech-billionaires? I thought we already had, in the form of Mastodon and Bluesky, but no one can agree which is the right model.

Is there a third way of some sort? And if so, will this option gain sufficient traction, nullify the platforms we want nullified, or remain a niche offering, like the alternatives presently available?

When it comes to social media platforms twenty years after Twitter arrived, it seems like we only go in circles. Ever decreasing circles.

AI spam, the latter day internet, force digg.com offline for now

19 March 2026

digg.com, social news aggregator, and once the front page of the internet, has closed its doors for the duration, and let a number of staff go, just months after officially relaunching.

digg* says an onslaught of AI agents, and automated accounts, are behind the decision, together with an internet, that in 2026, is different. That’s sure something a few of us can attest to.

And after a long time out of circulation, they’ve found making a comeback a little trickier than anticipated, according to a post presently on the site’s frontpage:

We underestimated the gravitational pull of existing platforms. Network effects aren’t just a moat, they’re a wall. The loyalty users have to the communities they’ve already built elsewhere is profound. Getting people to move is a hard enough problem. Getting them to move and bring their people with them is something else entirely.

The good news for those who had looked forward to digg’s return is the shutdown is meant to be short lived. In addition, original co-founder Kevin Rose, who helped revive the site, will shortly commence working at digg in a full time capacity. digg adherents can only hope his presence will help steady the ship in the waters that are today’s internet.

* according to digg’s Wikipedia page, the site’s name is stylised in lowercase. Just about all the references I could see featured an uppercase letter d. I’ve gone lowercase here, in the same way disassociated is stylised with a lower case d.

There is nothing irksome than styling disassociated with an uppercase d, and the same goes for digg.

Problematic Instagram use: redefining the nature of addiction

19 February 2026

Kali Hays, Regan Morris, and Peter Bowes, writing for the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC):

The head of Instagram has defended his platform against claims it caused mental health damage to minors, arguing in a California court that even seemingly excessive use of social media does not equal an addiction.

Adam Mosseri, Head of Instagram (IG), made the remark during a court hearing in Los Angeles, in the United States. Plaintiffs allege IG, along with other social networks, including YouTube, are little more than “addition machines”.

One young woman, who was a minor at the time, claimed she once spent sixteen hours in a day, looking at IG.

I’m not sure how anyone can brush that sort of usage off as “problematic”. Four to five hours maybe, but not sixteen. How can that be anything other than an addiction?

In regards to IG, the problem has become worse in recent years with the proliferation of usually low quality (content wise) video clips, and numerous posts making dubious, though intriguing claims.

It’s easy to get carried sometimes, and waste more time than intended scrolling through some of the stuff (I hesitate to say content) on the explore tab.

Last year I signed up to Foto, a simple photo-sharing app, that IG used to be like, sans the filters, many years ago now. I check in on Foto once a day, and am unlikely to spend no more than a few minutes there. I have a quick look at the latest posts, and that’s it.

There’s no doomscrolling the app for hours on end.

I suspect though that sort of usage is precisely what the large social networks consider to be problematic. Of course then there is no such thing as social media addiction, when visits of several hours, not minutes, are the norm on some platforms.

Substack reportedly asking Australian users to verify their age

2 February 2026

According to a Reddit thread, that was re-posted at Marginal Revolution, the online publishing platform is requesting users in Australia submit to an age verification process.

Substack, as of the time I type, is not on the list of websites, or services, that Australians under the age of sixteen cannot access, so I’m not sure why Substack would be doing this. If indeed they are.

On a visit to Substack, again, as of the time I write this, I was able to access, and move around the site without hindrance. I was not logged in, but was using an Australian ISP.

Evidently some people are having difficulty though. Possibly age verification only applies to people in Australia who are logging in to gain access. I might try doing this another time.

But Substack is a platform, and who knows, may one day be added to the banned list. This is precisely why online writers should be publishing from their own, independent website, and not a platform.

And this is before addressing the concerns many people have with Substack in the first place.

Coming soon to Instagram, Facebook, WhatsApp: subscription content

31 January 2026

Aisha Malik, writing for TechCrunch:

The launch of additional subscriptions will allow Meta to generate more revenue; however, many users may be deterred by subscription fatigue. With so many paid services competing for monthly spending, Meta will have to offer a compelling product to get users to sign up for yet another subscription.

Meta plans to trial subscriptions on Facebook (FB), Instagram (IG), and WhatsApp. I’m pleased I’ve managed to so far avoid signing up to WhatsApp, and only make minimal use of Facebook.

I check in a little on IG though, so am expecting to see sign up prompts for a subscription service of some sort, should they be rolled out. I can’t see myself taking up the offer though.

No matter how compelling the product might be. But what would it take to make a subscription product available through FB, IG, or WhatsApp, compelling enough to pay for in the first place?

Considering such content may already be accessible through another channel, either for free, or that someone is already paying to see. Does Meta not earn enough advertising revenue as it is?

In the meantime, I nominate “subscription-fatigue” as word of the year for 2026.

RELATED CONTENT

social media, technology, trends

Influencers, content creators, taking centre court at Australian Open

27 January 2026

Marnie Vinell, writing for the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC):

Emily Wade, 28, says she is a genuine fan who is finding it personally frustrating to see the influx of influencers take up seats at marquee matches when others who would genuinely appreciate being there for the tennis are finding it increasingly inaccessible through overcrowding and higher ticket prices.

Ticket buying fans report waiting hours, in the heat, to watch the tennis matches, and claim social media influencers are being given priority access.

The Australian Open (AO) sells itself. As long as tennis fans know the world’s top players are going to be in Melbourne in January, they’ll show up and buy tickets.

No advertising required, let alone influencers.

But the show no longer seems to be about the fans, it’s about putting social media content creators with large followings, centre court. You no longer go to see games, you go for an experience. One which may not include a whole lot of actual tennis.

But it’s not all beer and skittles for the influencers however. They have to sing for their supper, or, presumably, risk not being invited back:

But one popular TikTok influencer, who talked to the ABC on the condition of anonymity, said they were surprised at the level of pressure placed on influencers to be creating content by organisers.

“I think it was 20 posts [across the tournament] to even be allowed into the AO creator lounge,” they said. The creator lounge is a designated section within Tennis HQ, where creators can film, edit and work.

Influencers under pressure? I’d have thought they’d be the ones calling the shots, especially those with millions of followers. “If you want to me to show up to some tournament I have no real interest in, and promote it, we’re doing things my way.”

It sounds like influencers, even the established ones, don’t have a great deal of leverage after all.

RELATED CONTENT

Australia, social media, sport, trends

Threads surges ahead of X/Twitter among mobile device users

24 January 2026

Sarah Perez writing for TechCrunch:

A report from market intelligence firm Similarweb suggests that Meta’s Threads is now seeing more daily usage than Elon Musk’s X on mobile devices. While X still dominates Threads on the web, the Threads mobile app for iOS and Android has continued to see an increase in daily active users over the past several months.

This seems like a case of I have good news, I have bad news.

My use of Threads is limited, with X next to non-existent at present. But if the quality of discourse on X is bad, Threads is hardly any better.

I can already see Thread’s users “celebrating” the news, with posts that read exactly like this: “I have great news”. That’s it. Nothing more. No additional information or context.

After all, why let information get in the way of a good Threads’ post?

Nearly five million Australian social media accounts deactivated after ban

19 January 2026

Clare Armstrong writing for the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC):

More than 4.7 million accounts on platforms like Instagram, TikTok and Snapchat were deactivated in the first two days of the ban that started on December 10, according to new data released by the federal government.

The social media ban, supposedly to stop Australians under the age of sixteen accessing numerous such platforms, has seen nearly five million accounts closed in the last five weeks.

Here’s hoping the lockout is having the desired impact, whatever exactly that was, though it may be a while before we know one way or the other.

digg.com two-point-zero officially relaunches

16 January 2026

The first version of digg, something many people called the front page of the internet, arrived in 2004, and was a little like what Hacker News is today.

A social bookmarking news aggregator, if you want to be technical. People could submit items of interest, and those favoured by the community would win a place on digg’s coveted front page, resulting in viral levels of traffic.

digg went through a number of iterations after co-founders Kevin Rose and Jay Adelson sold the website in 2012, before Rose, together with Reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian, bought digg (again) in March 2025.

I’m hardly a social media power user (not that digg is really a social media platform) so didn’t get much involved in the pre-(re)-launch buildup, but couldn’t resist signing up yesterday when I saw digg had officially returned.

RELATED CONTENT

social media, technology, trends

« older posts