Judge rules Meta caused "public nuisance" and must fund mental health treatment (arstechnica.com)

submitted 2 days ago by ooo_shiny@lemmy.nz to c/newzealand@lemmy.nz

3 comments fedilink hide all child comments

This is an interesting legal development overseas that has potential repercussions for NZ, particularly in light of the proposed social media ban for teenagers.

As a teacher I can’t stress enough how harmful I think this ‘engagement bait’ social media is for our kids. It’s addictive for adults too, but theoretically they’re better equipped to understand what they’re getting into.

Over the past decade I’ve seen steadily declining literacy rates and I attribute this directly to the increase in screen time, particularly of short-form content like Instagram and TikTok and the algorithmic feed that Facebook provides, and the corresponding reduction in book-reading that our children engage in. It’s scary.

I’m interested to see whether this kind of finding sticks and is replicated elsewhere, and if it turns into the kind of fight that tobacco companies engaged in back in the day, where they were gradually forced to rein themselves in bit by bit with their similarly addictive product.

top 3 comments

sorted by: hot top new old

[-] Dave@lemmy.nz 6 points 1 day ago

I once read an article that argued social media algorithms should be regulated like medicines. As in, the company that wants to use it needs to run studies to prove their safety, and convince a panel of experts (not politicians) of that safety. Once they prove that it's a safe algorithm, they can use it (presumably with some sort of patent system for exclusive use for a period of time like drug companies).

More and more I think of that article and how it would be a much better approach than this ambulance at the bottom of the cliff approach where we let them fuck everyone up then give them fines.