ReportWire

Tag: Facebook

  • Anyone who used Facebook in the last 16 years can now get settlement money. Here’s how.

    Anyone who used Facebook in the last 16 years can now get settlement money. Here’s how.

    [ad_1]

    Anyone in the U.S. who used Facebook in the last 16 years can now collect a piece of a $725 million settlement by parent company Meta tied to privacy violations — as long as they fill out a claim on a website set up to pay out money to the social network’s users. 

    The settlement stems from multiple lawsuits that were brought against Facebook by users who claimed that the company improperly shared their data with third-party sources such as advertisers and data brokers. The litigation began after Facebook was embroiled in a privacy scandal in 2018 with Cambridge Analytica, which scraped user data from the site as part of an effort to profile voters.

    Meta denied any liability or wrongdoing under the settlement, according to the recently created class-action website. However, the agreement means that U.S. residents who used Facebook between May 24, 2007, and December 22, 2022, can file a monetary claim as long as they do so before August 25, 2023. 

    How do I claim money under the Facebook settlement?

    Go to the claim website to fill out your claim, or else print out the claim and mail it to this address: Facebook Consumer Privacy User Profile Litigation, c/o Settlement Administrator, 1650 Arch Street, Suite 2210, Philadelphia, PA 19103. 

    What information do I need to provide?

    The claim asks for basic information:

    • Your name
    • Your address
    • Your email
    • Your phone
    • If you resided in the U.S. between May 24, 2007, and December 22, 2022
    • If you were a Facebook user between May 24, 2007, and December 22, 2022
    • If you deleted your account in that period, the date range when you were a Facebook user
    • Your Facebook user name
    • The payment service you prefer, such as PayPal, Venmo or a prepaid Mastercard

    How long does it take to fill out the form?

    It should take only a few minutes. 

    Can I file for more than one Facebook account?

    The claim administrator says that if you created but deleted one or more Facebook accounts, and then later created a new Facebook account, you can claim for the full amount of time you had an activated Facebook account during that time.

    However, if you had multiple accounts at the same time, you can’t get a claim for those extra accounts. In other words, no double-counting, according to the claim administrator.

    Can I file for a deceased person?

    Yes, but it takes a few extra steps.

    First, file the claim under the name of the deceased person and fill out their details in the “Your Facebook Account” section of the claim form. 

    Next, you’ll have to provide the claim settlement administrator with a request to change the name to the beneficiary or the estate of the claimant. To do that, you’ll have to provide documentation showing the reason for the name change, such as a copy of the death certificate. Send an email to the administrator through its secure portal with the explanation and the documents that demonstrate the need for the change.

    The secure portal will allow you to send an email to administrative@angeiongroup.com. Use the subject line: “Name Change – Facebook User Privacy Settlement” and include the claim ID from the claim confirmation, as well as the full name of the deceased person. The site will also ask you to register with your email and password. 

    You can also mail the documentation to:

    Facebook User Privacy Settlement
    Attn: Name Change
    1650 Arch Street, Suite 2210
    Philadelphia, PA 19103

    Is the Facebook settlement legit?

    Yes, according to Meta. 

    “We pursued a settlement as it’s in the best interest of our community and shareholders,” a Meta spokesperson told CBS MoneyWatch. “We are notifying people through their Facebook notifications about this settlement so they can decide whether to participate.”

    How much money will I get?

    That’s unclear, because the settlement amount per user will depend on how many people fill out a claim, according to the settlement website.

    However, the lawyers involved in the case are likely to take a portion of the settlement as part of their fees. The claim website notes that they could be awarded up to 25% of the settlement — or $181.3 million. If they receive that much, the settlement will be reduced to $543.7 million for the Facebook users who ask for part of the claim.

    Each claimant will get one point for each month when they had an “activated” Facebook account between May 24, 2007, and December 22, 2022. The settlement administrator will add up all the points assigned to all claimants and then divide the net settlement amount by that number. 

    Each claimant will receive that per point amount multiplied by the number of points they were assigned, meaning that people who have been on Facebook for shorter periods of time would likely get a lower settlement amount.

    When will I get the money?

    Not until later this year at the earliest.

    The claims site notes that there is a final approval hearing for the settlement on September 7, when the court will decide whether to approve the deal and award attorneys’ fees and other costs. If the settlement is approved, the case could still face appeals, which would take an unknown amount of time to be resolved, the website notes.

    “Settlement payments will be distributed as soon as possible if the court grants final approval of the settlement and after any appeals are resolved,” it notes.

    Can I opt out of the settlement — and if so, why should I?

    Yes, Facebook users can opt out of the settlement. One possible reason to do so is if you want to keep your right to separately sue the company about the issues and allegations in the case, according to the settlement website. 

    To opt out, you’ll have to send a request online or via mail before July 26, the site notes. To send the request in writing, you’ll have to include the information below:

    • The case name — In re: Facebook, Inc. Consumer Privacy User Profile Litigation, Case No. 3:18-md-02843-VC (N.D. Cal.)
    • Your name and current address
    • Your signature
    • A statement “clearly indicating your intent to be excluded from the settlement”
    • Your Facebook account URL
    • A statement that you were a Facebook user between May 24, 2007, and December 22, 2022

    What if I don’t do anything?

    If you neither file a claim nor opt out of the settlement, you give up your right to file a lawsuit, continue a suit or be part of any other litigation against Facebook about the legal issues involved in the case. You also won’t get to collect any of the settlement money, according to the site.

    Are there people who are excluded from the settlement?

    Aside from those who opt out of the settlement, people who work for Meta, affiliated companies or subsidiaries as well as the attorneys for the plaintiff and their employees can’t join the settlement. The special master, mediators and judges involved in the case can’t participate either. 

    The settlement also doesn’t cover users outside the U.S. or people who weren’t Facebook users at any time between May 24, 2007, and December 22, 2022.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Bipartisan bill would ban kids under age 13 from using social media

    Bipartisan bill would ban kids under age 13 from using social media

    [ad_1]

    Washington — Seventeen-year-old Julienne Pagulayan started using social media when she was in the fifth grade.

    “It was getting on and it was, like, seeing what other people are doing,” Pagulayan told CBS News.

    However, under a bipartisan bill introduced this week, children under the age of 13 would be barred from using social media, while those between the ages of 13 and 17 would need parental consent to create an account. Social media companies would also be prohibited from recommending content using algorithms to users under 18. 

    The Protecting Kids on Social Media Act is co-sponsored by Republican Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas and Democratic Sen. Brian Schatz of Hawaii, both of whom are parents.

    “My kids are young enough that it’s not a concern yet, but I do worry very much about it,” Cotton told CBS News.  

    Both Cotton and Schatz believe such a bill could be successfully enforced.  

    “There are lots of mechanisms for a more robust age verification system,” Cotton said. “The age verification that they’re doing now is essentially asking a 12-year-old to say, ‘Are you 18?’ And they click, ‘I’m 18,’ and now they’re online.”

    Schatz argues that the bill would give the Federal Trade Commission and individual states attorney generals the authority to enforce the age limit.

    “We’ve made a decision, as a society, that you should have to wait to a certain age to say, buy alcohol or buy tobacco,” Schatz said. “We’re not so naive that we don’t think teenagers have never smoked a cigarette or never drank a beer. But that doesn’t mean you should just throw up your hands, that there’s no solution at all.”

    The two senators point to several studies that suggest a potential link between social media and mental health, including a survey released in February by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention which found that 57% of high school girls, and 29% of high school boys, feel persistently sad. The survey also found that 22% of all high schoolers reporting they had seriously considered suicide.

    Pagulayan believes kids her age should be able to make their own decision about social media usage.

    “It’s so relevant now,” Pagulayan said. “And if a parent doesn’t see that, I feel like them not permitting their child kind of becomes a block in that opportunity for them.”
     
    Some social media platforms told CBS News they are reviewing the legislation, and note they already have safeguards in place. 

    Antigone Davis, global head of safety for Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, told CBS News in a statement that the company has “developed more than 30 tools to support teens and families.”

    When teens create an Instagram account, according to Davis, it is automatically set to private, and teens receive “notifications encouraging them to take regular breaks.”

    “We don’t allow content that promotes suicide, self-harm or eating disorders, and of the content we remove or take action on, we identify over 99% of it before it’s reported to us,” Davis said. We’ll continue to work closely with experts, policymakers and parents on these important issues.” 

    A spokesperson for Snap, the parent company of Snapchat, told CBS news in a statement that it has “built safety and privacy into the architecture of our platform and have extra protections for 13-17-year-olds.”

    “We are already working with industry peers, regulators, and third-party technology providers on possible solutions and look forward to continuing these productive conversations with the cosponsors of this legislation,” the spokesperson said.

    TikTok pointed to its privacy and parental controls, including restrictions to features such as direct messaging for younger teens, and restricting accounts for those under 18 from sending or receiving virtual gifts or livestreams. 

    Nikole Killion


    Nikole Killion

    Nikole Killion is a congressional correspondent for CBS News based in Washington D.C.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Bride had her wedding dress held ‘hostage’ in a billing dispute between Bed Bath & Beyond and preservation company | CNN Business

    Bride had her wedding dress held ‘hostage’ in a billing dispute between Bed Bath & Beyond and preservation company | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    It’s what every bride has nightmares about: A wedding dress disappeared, stained, or — in New Hampshire resident Jesse Moltenbrey’s case — held “hostage.”

    A billing dispute between now-bankrupt Bed Bath & Beyond and Houston-based Memories Gown Preservation led the preservation company to hold customers’ gowns until it received payment from the troubled retailer.

    Last week, Bed Bath & Beyond

    (BBBY)     announced it was planning to liquidate its inventory and go out of business. Founded in 1971, it will now close its remaining 360 stores and 120 buybuy BABY locations. The company is looking for a buyer and will halt its closings if one appears.

    But as the mammoth retailer ties up its loose ends, one group has been caught in the middle: the customers themselves.

    “This is a bride’s worst nightmare,” Moltenbrey initially said in a Facebook post. Her floor length gown — black with white floral design — was trapped somewhere in an unknown facility.

    In early March, Moltenbrey said she decided to send her wedding gown to be preserved. After reading good reviews about Houston-based Memories Gown Preservation, she decided to order the $120 kit through Bed Bath & Beyond.

    Moltenbrey received the kit on March 16, and said she was charged an additional $25 for insurance once MemoriesGP received the gown on April 3.

    “Why, then, on April 24th do I receive this email stating they are holding my dress ransom because of a company that is going BANKRUPT,” Moltenbrey wrote on Facebook.

    In the email that Moltenbrey shared on Facebook, MemoriesGP said it began holding all wedding gowns received from Bed Bath & Beyond purchased kits as of March 11, before Moltenbrey said she shipped her dress to them.

    “I felt sick to my stomach because of the helplessness,” Moltenbrey said in an interview with CNN.

    Her black dress was so unique that the local store didn’t even have a sample, she said, and she’ll never forget the look on her guests’ faces when she walked down the aisle in 2018.

    “I knew I wouldn’t look good in a white wedding dress,” she said.

    The small business claimed in the email sent to Moltenbrey that Bed Bath & Beyond owed them $42,563.73 and that it hasn’t been paid for kits ordered in the entire past year. MemoriesGP told Moltenbrey that it contacted the houseware giant five separate times over the past year but hasn’t received its payment yet.

    MemoriesGP asked Moltenbrey to call Bed Bath & Beyond’s customer service to request release of payment to the company.

    “Once payment has been received to MemoriesGP we will promptly clean, preserve & ship your gown out to you,” the email said. That left Moltenbrey to contact the retail giant for the overdue payment.

    “I’m just one person and this is a whole company going bankrupt,” Moltenbrey said.

    On Wednesday, Moltenbrey posted MemoriesGP is returning her unpreserved dress after she sent an email to its vice president.

    The company asked Moltenbrey pay for the shipping back to her. The $25 she paid for insurance will go toward the cost of shipping.

    CNN has not received comment after multiple requests sent to Memories Gown Preservation.

    However, in an email to Moltenbrey — which she posted to Facebook — Kyle Nesbit, who is listed on LinkedIn as the company’s former vice president, told her that the company “receives 100+ gowns per day.”

    “We have no way of knowing which package has a Bed Bath gown in it before the package is opened in our facility,” he told her.

    “The intent of our generic email was to get brides over to Bed Bath as that is who their financial transaction was with (we just provide the service),” Nesbit wrote to Moltenbrey.

    In a statement, Bed Bath & Beyond said it’s become a legal matter. The preservation kit is currently unavailable on the website. The MemoriesGP website still advertises Bed Bath & Beyond as an authorized dealer and as a registry option.

    “We take concerns raised by our customers very seriously,” Bed Bath & Beyond said. “This is a legal matter that we are working to resolve with a third party. As is our practice, we do not comment on legal matters.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Here’s what we know about First Republic Bank | CNN Business

    Here’s what we know about First Republic Bank | CNN Business

    [ad_1]

    A version of this story first appeared in CNN Business’ Before the Bell newsletter. Not a subscriber? You can sign up right here. You can listen to an audio version of the newsletter by clicking the same link.


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    First Republic Bank has been teetering on the edge for weeks. It may be finally falling.

    The San Francisco-based lender could be next in the line to collapse, following in the footsteps of former competitors Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank.

    It certainly fits the bill: First Republic

    (FRC)    , like SVB, is a mid-sized regional bank with a highly concentrated customer base, outsized amounts of uninsured deposits and loads of unrealized losses on the bonds and treasuries it holds.

    Rumors swirled on Wednesday as publications rushed out reports from unnamed sources saying that the bank was looking to cut a deal to sell assets, that the White House wasn’t interested in facilitating a bailout (there were also reports that it is) and that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation is considering downgrading the bank’s debt, which would limit its access to essential Federal Reserve loans.

    The FDIC, Federal Reserve, White House and First Republic did not respond to requests for comment about those reports. But the damage has been done.

    Shares of the stock fell by nearly 30% on Wednesday, after plunging by 49% on Tuesday. The stock’s trading was halted numerous times both days as its rapid decline triggered volatility-triggered timeouts by the New York Stock Exchange.

    But what’s actually happening here?

    The reality of the situation: What we do know for certain is that First Republic reported on Monday that its total deposits fell 41% in the first quarter of 2023 to $104.5 billion, even after a consortium of banks stepped in with $30 billion to prevent the lender from failing. Without that cash infusion, deposits would have fallen by over 50%.

    But, importantly, the bank said that while it saw a sharp drop in deposit activity after the collapse of SVB and Signature Bank last month, activity began to stabilize at the end of March and has since remained steady.

    We also know that First Republic’s net interest income, which shows how much money the bank earned from lending and borrowing, was down 19.4% year-over-year at the end of the first quarter.

    On top of all that, the bank is vulnerable to liquidity problems.

    When the banking crisis erupted in mid-March, about two-thirds of First Republic’s deposits were uninsured with the FDIC. That’s lower than the 94% at Silicon Valley Bank — but at the end of last year, First Republic had an exceptionally high ratio of 111% for loans and long-term investments to deposits, according to S&P Global — meaning it has loaned and invested more money than it has in deposits.

    In short: The outlook for the bank is not good.

    “It’s becoming clearer each day” that First Republic is “toast,” said Don Bilson at Gordon Haskett, in a note Wednesday. “The only question that really needs to be answered is whether the [Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation] moves in before the weekend or during the weekend, which is when it usually does its thing.”

    Possible solutions: We also know that it’s not over until it’s over, and that the bank is still operating. There are still some narrow paths forward.

    There’s a small chance that First Republic stays the course and “muddles along as a standalone company,” said David Chiaverini, managing director of equity research at Wedbush Securities.

    What’s more likely is that the company will try to sell some of its loans and securities at the same cost they bought them for. In exchange, the buyer would receive a preferred equity interest in the company.

    That will be a tough sell since those assets would probably sell for well above market rate. First Republic’s bonds maturing in 2046 are currently trading at just 43 cents on the dollar. But the bank has been lucky before. First Republic has stayed afloat since March largely thanks to a $30 billion bailout from a conglomerate of large US banks and a $70 billion line of credit from JPMorgan.

    The third option is the worst for shareholders: the bank could go into receivership. When a struggling bank goes into receivership it means that a regulatory authority or government agency takes control of the bank and its assets, usually with the goal of liquidating those assets to repay the bank’s creditors.

    Investors in First Republic would most likely see their money wiped out in that scenario.

    Coming next: First Republic is in a very tricky situation. Investors will be crossing their fingers and holding their breath until Friday at 4 p.m. ET. That’s when newly-collapsed banks have admitted defeat in the past.

    Facebook-parent Meta on Wednesday reported that it grew sales by 3% during the first three months of the year, reversing a trend of three consecutive quarters of revenue declines and far exceeding Wall Street analysts’ expectations, reports my colleague Clare Duffy.

    Meta shares jumped as much as 12% in after-hours trading following the report, continuing the company’s strong trajectory since CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced that 2023 would be a “year of efficiency.”

    Another bright spot: user growth was relatively strong compared to recent quarters. The number of monthly active people on Meta’s family of apps grew 5% from the prior year to more than 3.8 billion and Facebook daily active users increased 4% to more than 2 billion.

    Still, Meta has a big hill ahead of it. The company also reported that profits declined by nearly a quarter to $5.7 billion compared to the same period in the prior year. Price per advertisement — an indicator of the health of the company’s core digital ad business — also decreased by 17% from the year prior.

    Meta has been in the midst of a massive restructuring, as it attempts to recover from a perfect storm of heightened competition, lingering recession fears resulting in fewer ad dollars and a multibillion dollar effort to build a future version of the internet it calls the metaverse.

    Meta said in November it would eliminate 11,000 jobs, the single largest round of cuts in its history. And in March, Zuckerberg announced Meta would lay off another 10,000 employees. All told, the cuts will shrink Meta’s workforce by a quarter.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Anyone who used Facebook in the last 16 years can now get settlement money. Here’s how.

    Anyone who used Facebook in the last 16 years can now get settlement money. Here’s how.

    [ad_1]

    Anyone in the U.S. who used Facebook in the last 16 years can now collect a piece of a $725 million settlement by parent company Meta tied to privacy violations — as long as they fill out a claim on a website set up to pay out money to the social network’s users. 

    The settlement stems from multiple lawsuits that were brought against Facebook by users who claimed that the company improperly shared their data with third-party sources such as advertisers and data brokers. The litigation began after Facebook was embroiled in a privacy scandal in 2018 with Cambridge Analytica, which scraped user data from the site as part of an effort to profile voters.

    Meta denied any liability or wrongdoing under the settlement, according to the recently created class-action website. However, the agreement means that U.S. residents who used Facebook between May 24, 2007, and December 22, 2022, can file a monetary claim as long as they do so before August 25, 2023. 

    How do I claim money under the Facebook settlement?

    Go to the claim website to fill out your claim, or else print out the claim and mail it to this address: Facebook Consumer Privacy User Profile Litigation, c/o Settlement Administrator, 1650 Arch Street, Suite 2210, Philadelphia, PA 19103. 

    What information do I need to provide?

    The claim asks for basic information:

    • Your name
    • Your address
    • Your email
    • Your phone
    • If you resided in the U.S. between May 24, 2007, and December 22, 2022
    • If you were a Facebook user between May 24, 2007, and December 22, 2022
    • If you deleted your account in that period, the date range when you were a Facebook user
    • Your Facebook user name
    • The payment service you prefer, such as PayPal, Venmo or a prepaid Mastercard

    How long does it take to fill out the form?

    It should take only a few minutes. 

    Is the Facebook settlement legit?

    Yes, according to Meta. 

    “We pursued a settlement as it’s in the best interest of our community and shareholders,” a Meta spokesperson told CBS MoneyWatch. “We are notifying people through their Facebook notifications about this settlement so they can decide whether to participate.”

    How much money will I get?

    That’s unclear, because the settlement amount per user will depend on how many people fill out a claim, according to the settlement website.

    However, the lawyers involved in the case are likely to take a portion of the settlement as part of their fees. The claim website notes that they could be awarded up to 25% of the settlement — or $181.3 million. If they receive that much, the settlement will be reduced to $543.7 million for the Facebook users who ask for part of the claim.

    When will I get the money?

    Not until later this year at the earliest.

    The claims site notes that there is a final approval hearing for the settlement on September 7, when the court will decide whether to approve the deal and award attorneys’ fees and other costs. If the settlement is approved, the case could still face appeals, which would take an unknown amount of time to be resolved, the website notes.

    “Settlement payments will be distributed as soon as possible if the court grants final approval of the settlement and after any appeals are resolved,” it notes.

    Can I opt out of the settlement — and if so, why should I?

    Yes, Facebook users can opt out of the settlement. One possible reason to do so is if you want to keep your right to separately sue the company about the issues and allegations in the case, according to the settlement website. 

    To opt out, you’ll have to send a request online or via mail before July 26, the site notes. To send the request in writing, you’ll have to include the information below:

    • The case name — In re: Facebook, Inc. Consumer Privacy User Profile Litigation, Case No. 3:18-md-02843-VC (N.D. Cal.)
    • Your name and current address
    • Your signature
    • A statement “clearly indicating your intent to be excluded from the settlement”
    • Your Facebook account URL
    • A statement that you were a Facebook user between May 24, 2007, and December 22, 2022

    What if I don’t do anything?

    If you neither file a claim nor opt out of the settlement, you give up your right to file a lawsuit, continue a suit or be part of any other litigation against Facebook about the legal issues involved in the case. You also won’t get to collect any of the settlement money, according to the site.

    Are there people who are excluded from the settlement?

    Aside from those who opt out of the settlement, people who work for Meta, affiliated companies or subsidiaries as well as the attorneys for the plaintiff and their employees can’t join the settlement. The special master, mediators and judges involved in the case can’t participate either. 

    The settlement also doesn’t cover users outside the U.S. or people who weren’t Facebook users at any time between May 24, 2007, and December 22, 2022.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Facebook settlement: How to apply for some of Meta’s $725 million payout

    Facebook settlement: How to apply for some of Meta’s $725 million payout

    [ad_1]

    If you used Facebook between May 2007 and December 2022, the social-media giant may owe you some money.

    A California judge preliminarily approved a $725 million settlement between Facebook parent Meta Platforms
    META,
    -1.01%
    and users who say the company allowed their data to be viewed or shared by third parties, notably Cambridge Analytica, without their consent.

    The judge’s approval was a precursor to the final approval hearing, which will take place in September, but people can begin submitting claims now to potentially get a cash payment.

    Who does the Facebook settlement apply to?

    The $725 million settlement applies to anybody who was a Facebook user in the U.S. between May 24, 2007 and Dec. 22, 2022. The class-action form simply states that people who were Facebook users during that period are eligible. It does not mention any required level of activity on the account.

    It’s unclear if someone with multiple Facebook accounts would be entitled to more money than a person with a single account. To find out if you are included in the settlement group, you can email info@FacebookUserPrivacySettlement.com 

    When is the deadline to submit a claim?

    The claim form must be submitted no later than Aug. 25, 2023.

    The form can be completed online or downloaded and mailed to the settlement administrator at the following address: Facebook Consumer Privacy User Profile Litigation, c/o Settlement Administrator, 1650 Arch St., Suite 2210, Philadelphia, PA 19103.

    How much money will you get?

    As is typical with class-action lawsuits, the amount an individual will receive is dependent on a variety of factors.

    The settlement form says the payment will vary based on how many people submit claims. Additionally, administrative costs and attorneys’ fees will be deducted from the settlement fund prior to its release.

    See also: Mark Zuckerberg’s total 2022 pay rose because of the increased use of private aircraft

    “Settlement payments will be distributed as soon as possible if the Court grants Final Approval of the Settlement and after any appeals are resolved,” the claim website notes.

    How many people does this affect?

    Because Facebook has so many users and because of the 16-year time frame for this settlement, there are millions of people who could submit a claim.

    According to data compiled by Statista, total Facebook users in the U.S. numbered roughly 240 million in 2022.

    What has Meta said about the lawsuit?

    In December 2022, Meta agreed in principle to pay the settlement. At the time, a Meta spokesman said settling the class-action suit was “in the best interest of our community and shareholders.” The company added that it had revamped its privacy approach and “implemented a comprehensive privacy program.”

    Despite agreeing to pay the settlement, “Meta expressly denies any liability or wrongdoing,” according to the lawsuit website.

    Representatives for Meta didn’t immediately respond to MarketWatch’s request for comment on this story.

    See also: NPR’s CEO sayd ‘I have lost my faith in the decision-making’ at Twitter under Elon Musk

    The settlement comes as Meta is set to announce another round of layoffs this week.

    Meta shares were down 0.95% in the early afternoon on Wednesday and have gained nearly 80% year to date, compared with the S&P 500’s
    SPX,
    -0.01%
     8.11% gain in 2023.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Anyone who used Facebook in the last 16 years can now get settlement money. Here’s how.

    Anyone who used Facebook in the last 16 years can now get settlement money. Here’s how.

    [ad_1]

    Anyone in the U.S. who used Facebook in the last 16 years can now collect a piece of a $725 million settlement by parent company Meta tied to privacy violations — as long as they fill out a claim on a website set up to pay out money to the social network’s users. 

    The settlement stems from multiple lawsuits that were brought against Facebook by users who claimed that the company improperly shared their data with third-party sources such as advertisers and data brokers. The litigation began after Facebook was embroiled in a privacy scandal in 2018 with Cambridge Analytica, which scraped user data from the site as part of an effort to profile voters.

    Meta denied any liability or wrongdoing under the settlement, according to the recently created class-action website. However, the agreement means that U.S. residents who used Facebook between May 24, 2007, and December 22, 2022, can file a monetary claim as long as they do so before August 25, 2023. 

    How do I claim money under the Facebook settlement?

    Go to the claim website to fill out your claim, or else print out the claim and mail it to this address: Facebook Consumer Privacy User Profile Litigation, c/o Settlement Administrator, 1650 Arch Street, Suite 2210, Philadelphia, PA 19103. 

    What information do I need to provide?

    The claim asks for basic information:

    • Your name
    • Your address
    • Your email
    • Your phone
    • If you resided in the U.S. between May 24, 2007, and December 22, 2022
    • If you were a Facebook user between May 24, 2007, and December 22, 2022
    • If you deleted your account in that period, the date range when you were a Facebook user
    • Your Facebook user name
    • The payment service you prefer, such as PayPal, Venmo or a prepaid Mastercard

    How long does it take to fill out the form?

    It should take only a few minutes. 

    How much money will I get?

    That’s unclear, because the settlement amount per user will depend on how many people fill out a claim, according to the settlement website.

    When will I get the money?

    Not until later this year at the earliest.

    The claims site notes that there is a final approval hearing for the settlement on September 7, when the court will decide whether to approve the deal and award attorneys’ fees and other costs. If the settlement is approved, the case could still face appeals, which would take an unknown amount of time to be resolved, the website notes.

    “Settlement payments will be distributed as soon as possible if the court grants final approval of the settlement and after any appeals are resolved,” it notes.


    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Opinion: Washington needs to get over its TikTok fixation | CNN

    Opinion: Washington needs to get over its TikTok fixation | CNN

    [ad_1]

    Editor’s Note: Evan Greer is an activist, writer and musician based in Boston. She’s the director of the digital rights group Fight for the Future, and a regular commentator on issues related to technology policy, LGBTQ communities and human rights. Follow her on Twitter @evan_greer or Mastodon @evangreer@mastodon.online. Read more opinion on CNN.



    CNN
     — 

    The US government is racing ahead with proposals aimed at banning TikTok, the viral video platform used by more than 150 million Americans. Officials say it’s a matter of national security, gesturing urgently toward TikTok’s parent company ByteDance and its ties to China.

    While some might be motivated by thinly-veiled xenophobia, lawmakers also rightly point to concerns about TikTok’s surveillance and capitalist business model, which vacuums up as much personal information about users as possible and then uses it to serve content that keeps us clicking, scrolling, and generating ad revenue. TikTok “spies” on us for profit. That’s not in question.

    The problem is that – while they might not be owned by a Chinese company – Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, Snapchat and Twitter all do it too, as privacy advocates have been warning for more than a decade. Banning TikTok won’t make us safer from China’s surveillance operations. Nor will it protect children, or anyone else, from getting addicted to Big Tech’s manipulative products. It’s just an ineffective solution that sounds good on TV.

    While many governments engage in internet censorship and surveillance, China certainly has one of the most sophisticated and draconian systems. A core characteristic of China’s censorship regime is the “Great Firewall,” which blocks foreign social media apps, news sites and even educational resources like Wikipedia, under the guise of protecting national security.

    As they hyperventilate about TikTok, US politicians are so eager to appear “tough on China” that they’re suggesting we build our very own Great Firewall here at home. There is a small but growing number of countries in the world so authoritarian that they block popular apps and websites entirely. It’s regrettable that so many US lawmakers want to add us to that list.

    Several of the proposals wending their way through Congress would grant the federal government unprecedented new powers to control what technology we can use and how we can express ourselves – authority that goes far beyond TikTok. The bipartisan RESTRICT Act (S. 686), for example, would enable the Commerce Department to engage in extraordinary acts of policing, criminalizing a wide range of activities with companies from “hostile” countries and potentially even banning entire apps simply by declaring them a threat to national security.

    The law is vague enough that some experts have raised concerns that it could threaten individual internet users with lengthy prison sentences for taking steps to “evade” a ban, like side-loading an app (i.e., bypassing approved app distribution channels such as the Apple store) or using a virtual private network (VPN).

    But banning TikTok isn’t just foolish and dangerous, it’s also unconstitutional. The strong free speech protections enshrined in the First Amendment bar the government from extreme actions like criminalizing an app that millions of people use to express their opinions and ideas. The US government can’t ban you from posting or watching TikTok videos any more than they can stop you from reading a foreign newspaper like the Times of India or writing an opinion piece for The Guardian.

    The Washington Post, the New York Times and CNN all have their own official TikTok accounts, as do numerous candidates for office, elected officials, academics, journalists, religious leaders and political figures. Any proposal that results in TikTok’s effective ban in the US would almost certainly fall apart under a legal challenge, as the American Civil Liberties Union and other experts have asserted. Even conservative Republican Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky agrees that banning the app would violate Americans’ right to free speech.

    A ban on TikTok wouldn’t even be effective: The Chinese government could purchase much of the same information from data brokers, which are largely unregulated in the US.

    The rush to ban TikTok – or force its sale to a US company – is a convenient distraction from what our elected officials should be doing to protect us from government manipulation and commercial surveillance: passing some basic data privacy legislation. It’s a matter of common knowledge that Instagram, YouTube, Venmo, Snapchat and most of the other apps on your phone engage in similar data harvesting business practices to TikTok. Some are even worse.

    So it’s not just TikTok. Much of what you do in the digital space on all of your devices is tracked. Companies that engage in the practice claim that they track users’ activities online in order to deliver more targeted advertising and content.

    Many companies sell the data they harvest to third parties, who sell it to fourth and fifth and sixth parties. While companies collect this data for the purpose of extracting profit and getting users hooked on their products, governments have long taken an interest.

    The only way to stop governments from weaponizing data that private companies like TikTok collect and store about us is to stop those companies from collecting and storing so much information in the first place. You can’t do that with censorship. You do that by passing a strong national data privacy law that bans companies from collecting more data about us than they need to provide us with the service we’ve requested.

    Instead of helping Big Tech get bigger by banning a major competitor, Congress should also pass antitrust legislation to crack down on anti-competitive practices. That would give concerned parents and internet users who want to ditch TikTok and Instagram better options to choose from, and reduce the power of the largest platforms, making them harder for governments to exploit and manipulate. It’s much harder for bad actors, whether they’re corporate trolls or government agents, to control information across a constellation of smaller platforms, each with their own rules and algorithms, than it is for them to poison the well when there are a tiny handful of companies controlling access to information.

    A separate concern that lawmakers and US officials have raised is the idea that the Chinese government could pressure TikTok to amplify propaganda, or otherwise change its algorithm to advance the government’s interests. It’s an argument that’s not entirely without merit.

    We know the Russian government was effective in manipulating information on Facebook during the 2016 elections. The US has historically engaged in similar conduct overseas. Consider, for example, the US history in influencing the outcomes of elections in Latin America or disinformation campaigns by US allies after the Arab Spring. State-backed disinformation campaigns are happening at a mass scale and on every major platform. We fight that by demanding more transparency and accountability, not more censorship.

    It’s a national embarrassment that we have no basic data privacy law in the United States. And it’s a travesty that we continue to allow unregulated tech monopolies to trample our rights. Every day that our elected officials spend wringing their hands and spreading moral panic about what the kids are doing on TikTok is another day we’re left vulnerable and unprotected.

    With any luck, Washington’s TikTok hysteria will fade quickly. Let’s hope the next hot new trend in the nation’s capital is passing actual laws that protect people, starting with strong privacy and antitrust legislation.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Facebook parent company urged keep minors out of metaverse

    Facebook parent company urged keep minors out of metaverse

    [ad_1]

    The metaverse is no place for kids, according to a group of more than 70 advocates for children’s rights and online privacy. Those concerned are asking Facebook’s parent company, Meta, to abandon its plans to attract young teens onto its Horizon Worlds metaverse platform because, they say, doing so will likely expose minors to sexually explicit and homophobic content.

    Top executives at the Center for Digital Democracy, the Center for Countering Digital Hate, Fairplay and other organizations sent a letter to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg on Friday arguing that allowing minors onto Horizon would also expose them to bullying.

    The letter comes one month after a Wall Street Journal article revealed that Meta aims to draw kids ages 13-17 onto the platform where users interact with each other. Currently the app only allows players 18 and older.

    “Meta is demonstrating once again that it doesn’t consider the best interest of young people when it develops plans to expand its business operations,” Katharina Kopp, deputy director for the Center for Digital Democracy, said in a statement. “Before it considers opening its Horizon Worlds metaverse operation to teens, it should first commit to fully exploring the potential consequences.” 


    Clinical psychologist on how to talk to teens about cyberbullying

    04:15

    Meta vowed Friday to make sure minors aren’t exposed to explicit material while on Horizon Worlds.

    “Before we make Horizon Worlds available to teens, we will have additional protections and tools in place to help provide age-appropriate experiences for them,” a company spokesperson told CBS News. “Quest headsets are for people 13+ and we encourage parents and caretakers to use our parental supervision tools, including managing access to apps, to help ensure safe experiences.” 

    Some users as young as 15 are already on Horizon Worlds and they have been exposed to racist insults and misogynistic language, advocates wrote, while pointing to a CCDH study published last month. Researchers from the study recorded interactions from 100 of Horizon Worlds’ most populated spaces and found that minors occupy 66 of those VR worlds. In one interaction inside a virtual courtroom, a user noticed a minor with a Black avatar was told “you’re Black, you’re sentenced to death, get out of here.”

    Horizon Worlds is Meta’s free social app where users don an Oculus headset, dive into a virtual reality environment, explore different spaces and interact with other users in real time. Meta launched it in December 2021, sparking a race with other tech companies to assert dominance in the metaverse market. So far, Meta has spent — and lost — billions of dollars in its effort to rule virtual spaces.

    “Potential life-long users”

    “Getting teens to use the platform is essential to Meta’s bottom line because they are potential life-long users, and their presence and support can make the platform seem trendy,” advocates wrote in their letter to Zuckerberg. “But what may be good for your bottom line may be incredibly harmful to young people.”

    Meta, which also owns Instagram, has been called out in the past for how teenagers use its platforms. Company documents show that Meta is aware of negative effects Instagram has on the self-image of many young users, particularly for teenage girls, but still gives them access, the Journal reported in 2021. 

    “Meta is making the same mistake with Horizon Worlds that it made with Facebook and Instagram,” Imran Ahmed, CEO of the Center for Countering Digital Hate, said in a statement. “They have prioritized profit over safety in their design of the product, failed to provide meaningful transparency, and refused to take responsibility for ensuring worlds are safe, especially for children.”

    Meta officials are now focused on opening Horizon Worlds specifically to 13 to 17-year-olds in an effort to improve user retention on the platform, the Journal reported, citing an internal memo from the tech giant. Meta hopes to increase the retention rate to 20%, up from the 11% the platform saw in January, according to the memo. 

    Khristopher J. Brooks

    Khristopher J. Brooks is a reporter for CBS MoneyWatch covering business, consumer and financial stories that range from economic inequality and housing issues to bankruptcies and the business of sports.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • 2 tigers recaptured after escaping Georgia safari park during tornado warning | CNN

    2 tigers recaptured after escaping Georgia safari park during tornado warning | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Two tigers have been recaptured after escaping a Georgia safari park during a tornado warning Sunday morning, according to the park.

    In a Facebook post, the Wild Animal Safari park in Pine Mountain wrote that it sustained “extensive tornado damage.”

    No staff or animals were injured but “several animal enclosures” were breached and “two tigers briefly escaped,” said the park.

    Since then, both big cats have been “found, tranquilized, and safely returned to a safe enclosure.”

    Wild Animal Safari, a drive-through park, is home to over 75 species of animals housed on 250 acres of land, its website says. Tigers are included in the park’s “walkabout” section, where guests can observe animals in a more zoo-like environment, the website says.

    In a Sunday morning Facebook post, the Troup County Sheriff’s Office said it received a report of a tiger “unaccounted” for inside the park in Pine Mountain, Georgia.

    The park announced that it was closed for Sunday on Facebook. “We have sustained damage at the park and will not be open today,” the post said. “We are working diligently to keep our team and animals safe and will update with more news as it is available.”

    The storm came after a tornado warning was issued for parts of Georgia, including southeastern Troup County.

    Troup County authorities received reports of trees and power lines down after severe weather hit the area, the sheriff’s office said in a Facebook post Sunday morning.

    “We are receiving MULTIPLE reports of trees down, damage on houses and power lines down,” the agency wrote. “If you do not have to get on the roads this morning please do not travel.”

    The county is located about 70 miles southwest of Atlanta.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Utah governor signs bill requiring teens to get parental approval to join social media sites | CNN Business

    Utah governor signs bill requiring teens to get parental approval to join social media sites | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    The governor of Utah signed a controversial bill on Thursday that will require minors to obtain the consent of a guardian before joining social media platforms, marking the most aggressive step yet by state or federal lawmakers to protect kids online.

    As part of the bill, called the Utah Social Media Regulation Act, social media platforms will have to conduct age verification for all Utah residents, ban all ads for minors and impose a curfew, making their sites off limits between the hours of 10:30 p.m. – 6:30 a.m. for anyone under the age of 18. The bill will also require social platforms to give parents access to their teens’ accounts.

    The legislation, which was introduced by Republican Sen. Michael McKell and passed by Republican Governor Spencer Cox, will go into effect on March 1, 2024.

    “When it comes down to it, [the bill] is about protecting our children,” McKell said in a statement to CNN, citing how depression, anxiety and suicidal ideation has “drastically increased” among teens in Utah and across the United states Slongside the growth of social media sites. “As a lawmaker and parent, I believe this bill is the best path forward to prevent our children from succumbing to the negative and sometimes life-threatening effects of social media.”

    The legislation comes after years of US lawmakers calling for new safeguards to protect teens online, amid concerns about social platforms leading younger users down harmful rabbit holes, enabling new forms of bullying and harassment and adding to what’s been described as a teen mental health crisis in the country. To date, however, no federal legislation has passed.

    Utah is the first of a broader list of states introducing similar proposals. In Connecticut and Ohio, for example, lawmakers are working to pass legislation that would require social media companies to get parent permission before users under age 16 can join.

    “We can assume more methods like the Utah bill could find their way into other states’ plans, especially if actions are not taken at the federal level,” said Michael Inouye, an analyst at ABI Research. “Eventually, if enough states implement similar or related legislation, we could see a more concerted effort at the federal level to codify these (likely) disparate state laws under a US-wide policy.”

    Industry experts and Big Tech companies have long urged the US government to introduce regulations that could help keep young social media users safe. But even before the bill’s passage, some had raised concerns about the impact of the legislation. The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights group, said Utah’s specific set of rules are “dangerous” when it comes to user privacy and added that the bill will make user data less secure, internet access less private and infringe upon younger users’ basic rights.

    “Social media provides a lifeline for many young people, in addition to community, education, and conversation,” said Jason Kelley, director of activism at the EFF. “They use it in part because it can be private … The law, which would limit social media access and require parental consent and monitoring for minors, will incalculably harm the ability of young people to protect their privacy and deter them from exercising their rights.”

    Lucy Ivey, an 18-year-old TikTok influencer who attends Utah Valley University, agreed, saying some of her friends in the LGBTQ community may face challenges with the change.

    “My worry with this bill is that it will take away privacy from teenagers, and a lot of kids don’t have good relationships with their parents or don’t have a reliable guardian that would be needed to get access to social media,” she told CNN. “I think about my LGBTQ friends; some who have had a hard time with their parents because of their sexuality or identity, and they could be losing an important place where they can be themselves, and be seen and heard.”

    Ivey, who launched a publication called Our Era at age 15 and amplified its content on TikTok, said she’s also concerned about how the bill will impact content creators like herself. (If a legal guardian disapproves of a teens’ online activity or digital presence, those individuals may have to put their accounts on hold until they are 18 years old.)

    “With a new law like this, they may now be intimidated and discouraged by the legal hoops required to use social media out of fear of authority or their parents, or fear of losing their privacy at a time when teens are figuring out who they are,” Ivey said.

    Facebook-parent Meta told CNN it has the same goals as parents and policymakers, but the company said it also wants young people to have safe, positive experiences online and keep its platforms accessible. Antigone Davis, the global head of safety for Meta, said the company will “continue to work closely with experts, policymakers and parents on these important issues.”

    Representatives for TikTok and Snap did not respond to a request for comment.

    Given that the bill is unprecedented, it’s unclear how exactly the social media companies will adapt. For example, the legislation calls for platforms to turn off algorithms for “suggested content.” This particular guideline may help keep teens from falling down rabbit holes toward potentially harmful content, but it could present new issues, too. It might mean the company would no longer have the oversight and control over downranking problematic content that may show up in a user’s feed.

    Some of the bill’s guidelines may also be difficult to enforce. Inouye said minors could “steal” identities – such as from family members who don’t use social media – to create accounts that they can access and use without oversight. VPNs could also complicate matching IP addresses to the states of the users, he said.

    But even if legislative steps from Utah and other states prove to be flawed, Inouye says “these early efforts are at minimum bringing attention to these issues.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Transparency Is the Smartest Strategy When Business Is Bad | Entrepreneur

    Transparency Is the Smartest Strategy When Business Is Bad | Entrepreneur

    [ad_1]

    Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

    Due to a broad array of economic conditions, many businesses have experienced financial challenges in recent times. Even if your company has been spared from the worst of these economic effects, you will inevitably encounter serious obstacles at some point during your career.

    As a leader, there are different ways to handle these challenges in terms of how you keep your employees informed. Some may think it’s best to hold unfavorable information close to their chest, either to keep morale high or to protect their employees from stress. These types of leaders may feel it is their responsibility to protect their team or believe that presenting challenges could ding their reputation.

    Mark Zuckerberg recently made headlines when announcing 10,000 more layoffs at Meta, writing “I recognize that sharing plans for restructuring and layoffs months in advance creates a challenging period. But last fall, we heard feedback that you wanted more transparency sooner into any restructuring plans, so that’s what I’m trying to provide here.”

    Related: This Is the Single Most Important Job of a Leader

    A growing consensus — Zuckerberg apparently now included — believes that transparency during challenging financial times is the best leadership strategy. When you are transparent with your employees about the hardships your company faces, you could see benefits in unexpected ways. Here are five reasons why transparency is the best route when your company is facing challenging times:

    Transparency builds trust

    Trust is a fundamental building block in any relationship, and it is difficult to overstate the importance of trust in the workplace. Companies with high levels of trust have more productive employees, less turnover and increased morale.

    However, a relationship built on trust requires honesty, vulnerability and most importantly, transparency. Challenging or stressful times can be one of the best opportunities to display transparency as a leader and can improve levels of trust among your employees for years to come.

    A recent study of hundreds of employees across the United States found that employees working for companies that prioritized transparent communication during times of organizational change were more likely to trust their employer and were more open to organizational changes.

    When employers meet regularly with their employees to transparently communicate about financial challenges, the organization as a whole will likely experience a higher degree of trust. Take any financial challenges you may be experiencing as an opportunity to build trust and it will pay off in the long run.

    Related: 5 Obstacles Keeping You from Being an Effective Leader

    It builds empathy for you as a leader

    Times of stress and crisis remind us of our shared humanity and can lead to increased displays of kindness and empathy. Empathy in the workplace is important because it boosts employee engagement and loyalty.

    As a leader, you should not shy away from vulnerability during challenging financial times, as sharing your fears and emotions with your team can promote feelings of empathy within your company. When you communicate the company’s immediate needs with your employees and honestly relay what is at stake, your employees will be able to understand where you are coming from and be more willing to work hard to overcome these obstacles.

    Building an empathetic workplace environment goes both ways, so be sure to provide your employees with a platform to express their emotions regularly. When all parties feel listened to and understood, your company will see concrete benefits.

    Related: A 3-Step Plan for Handling Any PR Crisis

    Everyone can learn from the mistakes made along the way

    Knowledge is power. When a leader holds challenges close to their chest, nobody can learn from their mistakes.

    Instead, make a habit of regularly reviewing your company’s progress, and open up a dialogue with your employees about what was done well and what could be improved in the future. Giving your team members the platform to express themselves helps you and the rest of your workforce identify where mistakes might have been made along the way.

    More importantly, it provides everyone with the opportunity to learn from these mistakes. When employees are in a situation where they understand the financial troubles a business is going through, everyone will be on the same page about the challenges ahead and will work on what matters most. Additionally, your employees might bring in good ideas about where to save money that you as the business owner may not have thought of.

    Related: This Simple But Effective ‘Positivity Challenge’ Will Completely Change Your Mindset

    Don’t be afraid to own up to mistakes that you or leadership has made, as accountability and responsibility are some of the hallmark traits of a good leader.

    Being vulnerable about where you have made mistakes and taking responsibility for your role in the current situation will not only earn you respect, but it will also promote feelings of trust and empathy among your employees.

    It brings the team closer together

    Research shows that major events or times of stress bring people together. Case studies on natural disasters like Hurricane Katrina or the Mexico City earthquakes show increased social bonding and cohesion during tragic events. It is human nature to crave social connection during extreme events, so use this to your advantage when dealing with dire situations at your company.

    When you are open and transparent about the challenges your company is up against, you are doing more than just providing your team with the opportunity to come together. Challenging times often bring out the best in people and the organizations that they belong to.

    People are more likely to act altruistically and tirelessly when they feel they are contributing to a shared common cause. If you are not transparent about the challenges your company is up against, you are denying your employees the chance to come together and find meaning in their work.

    Major financial challenges have the potential to build trust, empathy, learning and connection at your company. However, transparency during challenging times is essential if you hope to see these positive benefits. The next time you are up against monumental financial challenges, lean in, and see what transparency during times of crisis can help you achieve.

    Related: 7 Ways to Tweak Your Marketing & Sales Strategies for the New Economy

    [ad_2]

    John Boitnott

    Source link

  • Why Bucks County, Pennsylvania, is suing social media companies | CNN Business

    Why Bucks County, Pennsylvania, is suing social media companies | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    One mother in Bucks County, Pennsylvania, said her 18-year-old daughter is so obsessed with TikTok, she’ll spend hours making elaborate videos for the Likes, and will post retouched photos of herself online to look skinnier.

    Another mother in the same county told CNN her 16-year-old daughter’s ex-boyfriend shared partially nude images of the teen with another Instagram user abroad via direct messages. After a failed attempt at blackmailing the family, the user posted the pictures on Instagram, according to the mother, with some partial blurring of her daughter’s body to bypass Instagram’s algorithms that ban nudity.

    “I worked so hard to get the photos taken down and had people I knew from all over the world reporting it to Instagram,” the mother said.

    The two mothers, who spoke with CNN on condition of anonymity, highlight the struggles parents face with the unique risks posed by social media, including the potential for online platforms to lead teens down harmful rabbit holes, compound mental health issues and enable new forms of digital harassment and bullying. But on Friday, their hometown of Bucks County became what’s believed to be the first county in the United States to file a lawsuit against social media companies, alleging TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, Snapchat and Facebook have worsened anxiety and depression in young people, and that the platforms are designed to “exploit for profit” their vulnerabilities.

    “Like virtually everywhere in the United States now … Bucks County’s youth suffer from a high degree of distraction, depression, suicidality, and other mental disorders, caused or worsened by the overconsumption of social media on a daily basis, which substantially interferes with the rights of health and safety common to the general public,” the lawsuit alleged.

    The lawsuit, which was filed in California federal court, said “the need is great” to continue to fund mental health outpatient programs, mobile crisis units, family-based mental health services, and in-school mental health programming and training to address the mental health of young people. Bucks County is seeking unspecified monetary damages to help fund these initiatives.

    Bucks County is joining a small but growing number of of school districts and families who have filed lawsuits against social media companies for their alleged impact on teen mental health. The unusual legal strategy comes amid broader concerns about a mental health crisis among teens and hints at the urgency parents and educators feel to force changes in how online platforms operate at a time when legislative remedies have been slow in coming.

    Seattle’s public school system, which is the largest in the state of Washington with nearly 50,000 students, and San Mateo County in California have each filed lawsuits against several Big Tech companies, claiming the platforms are harming their students’ mental health. Some families have also filed wrongful death lawsuits against tech platforms, alleging their children’s social media addiction contributed to their suicides.

    “I want to hold these companies accountable,” Bucks County district attorney Matthew Weintraub told CNN. “It is no different than opioid manufacturers and distributors causing havoc among young people in our communities.”

    He believes he has an actionable cause to file a lawsuit “because the companies have misrepresented the value of their products.”

    “They said their platforms are not addictive, and they are; they said they are helpful and not harmful, but they are harmful,” he said. “My hope is that there will be strength in numbers and other people from around the country will join me so there will be a tipping point. I just can’t sit around and let it happen.”

    In response to the lawsuit, Antigone Davis, the global head of safety for Instagram and Facebook-parent Meta, said the company continues to pour resources into ensuring its young users are safe online. She added that the platforms have more than 30 tools to support teens and families, including supervision tools that let parents limit the amount of time their teens spend on Instagram, and age-verification technology that helps teens have age-appropriate experiences.

    “We’ll continue to work closely with experts, policymakers and parents on these important issues,” she said.

    Google spokesperson José Castañeda said it has also “invested heavily in creating safe experiences for children across our platforms and have introduced strong protections and dedicated features to prioritize their well being.” He pointed to products such as Family Link, which provides parents with the ability to set reminders, limit screen time and block specific types of content on supervised devices.

    A Snap spokesperson said it is “constantly evaluating how we continue to make our platform safer, including through new education, features and protections.”

    TikTok did not respond to a request for comment.

    The latest lawsuit comes nearly a year and a half after executives from several social media platforms faced tough questions from lawmakers during a series of congressional hearings over how their platforms may direct younger users — particularly teenage girls — to harmful content, damaging their mental health and body image. Since then, some lawmakers have called for legislation to protect kids online, but nothing has passed at the federal level.

    Carl Tobias, a professor at the University of Richmond School of Law, believes it will be “difficult” for counties and school districts to win lawsuits against social media companies.

    “There will be the issues of showing that the social media content was the cause of the harm that befell the children,” he said. “But that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t file these lawsuits.”

    Tobias added that increased support for government regulation that would impose more restrictions on companies could impact the outcome of these lawsuits in their favor.

    “For now, there will be different judges or juries with diverse views of this around the country,” he said. “They aren’t going to win all of the cases but they might win some of them, and that might help.”

    Whatever the outcome, the mother of the 16-year-old whose intimate photos were shared on Instagram is applauding the district attorney’s office for sending a strong message to social media companies.

    “Before the incident with my daughter, I would not have given a lawsuit filed by the county much thought,” she said. “But now that I know how hard it was to take content down and there’s only so much people can do; corporations need to do so much more to protect its users.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Donald Trump Writes First Facebook Post Since Jan. 6 Capitol Attack

    Donald Trump Writes First Facebook Post Since Jan. 6 Capitol Attack

    [ad_1]

    Former President Donald Trump posted to Facebook and to YouTube on Friday for the first time since Jan. 6, 2021, and just hours before declaring that he expected to be arrested next week on charges stemming from a Manhattan district attorney investigation into his 2016 campaign.

    His message was brief: “I’M BACK!”

    It came with a short video taken from CNN the night he was elected president more than six years ago.

    “Sorry to keep you waiting,” Trump says in the clip. “Complicated business. Complicated.”

    Trump was booted from major social media platforms after the deadly Capitol riot in 2021, when he refused to stop saying the most recent presidential election had been “stolen” from him. Trump’s access to his Twitter, Facebook and Instagram pages has been reinstated in recent months; his YouTube page was just restored this week as he continues his campaign to take back the White House in 2024.

    On Saturday morning, Trump posted a lengthy, all-caps message to Truth Social, the Twitter knockoff he launched last year, suggesting that will be arrested Tuesday.

    He included an alarming call to action, writing, “PROTEST, TAKE OUR NATION BACK!”

    The timing on any possible indictment is unknown, and it is not fully clear why Trump believes he will be taken into custody next week, hinting only at “ILLEGAL LEAKS” from the New York County district attorney.

    Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg’s office reportedly signaled earlier this month that his investigation into the former president — one of multiple in various jurisdictions around the country — was nearing a conclusion. And officials told NBC News on Friday that local, state and federal law enforcement agencies were preparing logistically for Trump’s indictment.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Meta Makes Verification Available For US Users | Entrepreneur

    Meta Makes Verification Available For US Users | Entrepreneur

    [ad_1]

    Meta has begun testing a paid verification option for Facebook and Instagram users in the US. This follows a successful trial in Australia and New Zealand, with plans for a gradual rollout to more American users in the coming weeks.

    Starting at $11.99 per month for web users and $14.99 monthly for mobile users, the goal of Meta Verified is to increase authenticity and security on both platforms. CNN notes users must provide a government ID matching their profile name and picture and be at least 18 to get a blue badge.

    The subscription bundle offers account protection, support, and increased visibility on Instagram and Facebook. With this move, Meta joins the ranks of other platforms with subscription models, such as Discord, Reddit, YouTube, and Twitter Blue. The social media giant seeks to diversify its revenue streams amid challenges facing its core ad sales business.

    Meta’s long-term goal for the subscription service is to provide value to creators, businesses, and the community. The subscription service also offers proactive monitoring for impersonation accounts and continuous monitoring for reported violations.

    Per Meta’s post about the program, Users can visit Mark Zuckerberg‘s Meta Channel on Instagram for more information about Meta Verified.

    [ad_2]

    Steve Huff

    Source link

  • Meta launches paid verification subscription service in U.S.

    Meta launches paid verification subscription service in U.S.

    [ad_1]

    Meta to launch paid verification service


    Meta to launch paid verification service on Facebook and Instagram, following Twitter’s lead

    04:42

    Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, launched a paid subscription service in the U.S. on Friday — allowing users on both platforms to pay for verification.

    CEO Mark Zuckerberg made the announcement on his “Meta Channel,” which is one of the latest features the company has rolled out for creators to “directly reach their audience and form deeper connections with their communities,” the company said. 

    Meta Verified is only available to personal accounts and will cost $14.99 per month if purchased on an iOS or Android device, and $11.99 per month if purchased on the web.   

    “Meta Verified is rolling out in the U.S. today,” Zuckerberg said on his Meta Channel. “You can get a badge, proactive impersonation protection, and direct access to customer support.”

    Zuckerberg’s decision to launch a subscription service for the social media platform comes after the Elon Musk-owned Twitter  relaunched its own subscription service, Twitter Blue, last December, after a previous launch attempt failed. 

    As of now, the company is currently making the service available to users in the U.S., Australia and New Zealand. However, people can join a waitlist to receive a notification when it will be available in their region.

    Users that currently have verified badges can also apply for the Meta Verified subscription, but the company said it does not plan to make any changes to those that have already been verified based on prior requirements.

    The launch of the service comes as Meta seeks to cut costs and improve financial performance following two rounds of layoffs, the latest of which occurred this week and saw the company lay off about 10,000 workers. Last November, about 11,000 Meta workers were also laid off. 

    Tre’Vaughn Howard


    trevaughn-howard.jpg

    Tre’Vaughn Howard is a social media producer and trending content writer for CBS News.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Meta rolls out paid verification option for Facebook and Instagram users in US | CNN Business

    Meta rolls out paid verification option for Facebook and Instagram users in US | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Facebook and Instagram users in the United States will soon be able to pay to get a coveted blue check on their account.

    Meta on Friday began testing a paid verification option for US users of the two social networks, CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced on Instagram. The company plans to gradually roll out the paid option to more US users over the next few weeks.

    First tested in February in Australia and New Zealand, Meta Verified starts at $11.99 a month on the web or $14.99 a month on mobile. In addition to verification, the option offers perks such as extra protection from impersonation accounts and direct access to customer support.

    To avoid fake accounts, customers who want to get the blue badge would need to provide a government ID which matches their profile name and picture. Users must also be above 18 to be eligible for the new service.

    “This new feature is about increasing authenticity and security across our services,” Zuckerberg wrote in February in an Instagram broadcast channel.

    Meta joins other platforms, like Discord, Reddit and YouTube, which have their own subscription-based models. Twitter relaunched its own verification subscription service, Twitter Blue, in December, after an onset of fake “verified” accounts forced it to pull the feature. Twitter Blue costs $11 a month for iOS and Android subscribers, part of owner Elon Musk’s attempt to raise its subscriptions business after buying the platform for $44 billion.

    For Meta, the move offers the promise of another revenue stream beyond advertising, at a time when its core ad sales business is under pressure from a number of factors, including privacy changes on Apple and tightening budgets amid recession fears.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • YouTube reinstates Trump’s account ahead of 2024 campaign

    YouTube reinstates Trump’s account ahead of 2024 campaign

    [ad_1]

    CBS News’ exclusive talk with Trump


    Trump speaks one-on-one with CBS News political director on Iowa campaign visit

    04:31

    Washington — YouTube on Friday lifted restrictions on former President Donald Trump’s account that have been in place since the  weeks after the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. 

    Trump could begin uploading new content for his 2.65 million subscribers on the platform as of Friday, the company said. For the last two years, Trump had been prevented from uploading new videos for violating the platform’s policies on inciting violence. 

    “We carefully evaluated the continued risk of real-world violence, while balancing the chance for voters to hear equally from major national candidates in the run up to an election,” YouTube said in a statement. “This channel will continue to be subject to our policies, just like any other channel on YouTube.”

    The decision means the former president’s accounts on three major social media platforms have been restored ahead of the 2024 election. Twitter and Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, both suspended Trump’s accounts after Jan. 6 and have restored them in recent months.

    Trump, who has tens of millions of followers on YouTube, Twitter, Facebook and Instagram, has not posted on the platforms since being reinstated, instead preferring to post on his own social network, Truth Social. 

    Caitlin Yilek

    Caitlin Yilek is a politics reporter for CBS News Digital. Reach her at caitlin.yilek@cbsinteractive.com. Follow her on Twitter: https://twitter.com/hausofcait

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Twitter could have a new rival — a platform created by Meta | CNN Business

    Twitter could have a new rival — a platform created by Meta | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Facebook-parent Meta is exploring building a new, standalone platform for sharing text updates, the company confirmed to CNN on Friday, in what could mark the most high-profile new contender to take on Twitter as it falters under Elon Musk.

    “We believe there’s an opportunity for a separate space where creators and public figures can share timely updates about their interests,” a Meta spokesperson said in a statement to CNN, which essentially described Twitter’s mission statement without naming the platform.

    The platform, plans for which were earlier reported by Platformer and MoneyControl, would be decentralized, meaning users could ostensibly create different servers or communities, each with their own rules rather than one central platform controlled by Meta. The concept is similar to Reddit or Discord, but a departure from how Meta’s other platforms function.

    If Meta’s new platform were decentralized, it could allow third parties to build apps and features into the platform, potentially giving users experiences beyond what Meta itself might build.

    The effort, codenamed P92, is in its early stages and is being led by Instagram head Adam Mosseri, according to Platformer.

    Meta declined to comment beyond its statement, including in response to questions about the new platform’s potential features or a timeline for launch.

    A number of upstart platforms have in recent months attempted to capitalize as Twitter struggles with frequent outages, the return of controversial users and a drop-off in advertisers. Many of them had an early jump in users following Musk’s takeover at Twitter, but have since struggled to gain widespread adoption.

    Mastodon, a decentralized social network that was launched in 2016, grew its user base from 300,000 users to more than 2.5 million in the weeks after Musk completed his acquisition of Twitter in late October. But its growth has slowed in recent months, in part as users struggle with the somewhat less straightforward and user-friendly nature of a decentralized platform.

    A new service from Meta, however, could benefit from the existing, large user base of the company’s other platforms, including the two billion people who use Facebook daily.

    Plans for a new platform come as Meta is also shifting the strategy for its older platforms, emphasizing video and recommended content in an effort to better compete with TikTok. Earlier this week, Facebook head Tom Alison told CNN that the app is testing reincorporating messaging so that users don’t have to go to a separate app to share content they find on Facebook.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • What metaverse? Meta says its single largest investment is now in ‘advancing AI’ | CNN Business

    What metaverse? Meta says its single largest investment is now in ‘advancing AI’ | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Roughly a year-and-a-half after Facebook renamed itself “Meta” and said it would go all-in on building a future version of the internet dubbed the metaverse, the tech giant now says its top investment priority will be advancing artificial intelligence.

    In a letter to staff Tuesday, CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced plans to lay off another 10,000 employees in the coming months, and doubled down on his new focus of “efficiency” for the company. The pivot to efficiency, first announced last month in Meta’s quarterly earnings call, comes after years of investing heavily in growth, including in areas with unproven potential like virtual reality.

    Now, Zuckerberg says the company will focus mostly on cutting costs and streamlining projects. Building the metaverse “remains central to defining the future of social connection,” Zuckerberg wrote, but that isn’t where Meta will be putting most of its capital.

    “Our single largest investment is in advancing AI and building it into every one of our products,” Zuckerberg said Tuesday. He nodded to how AI tools can help users of its apps express themselves and “discover new content,” but also said that new AI tools can be used to increase efficiencies internally by helping “engineers write better code faster.”

    The comments come after what the CEO described as a “humbling wake-up call” last year, as the “world economy changed, competitive pressures grew, and our growth slowed considerably.”

    Meta and its predecessor Facebook have been involved in AI research for years, but the remarks come amid a heightened AI frenzy in the tech world, kicked off in late November when Microsoft-backed OpenAI publicly released ChatGPT. The technology quickly went viral for its ability to generate compelling, human-sounding responses to user prompts and then kicked off an apparent AI arms race among tech companies. Microsoft announced in early February that it was incorporating the tech behind ChatGPT into its search engine, Bing. A day before Microsoft’s announcement, Google unveiled its own AI-powered tool called Bard. And not to be left behind, Meta announced late last month that it was forming a “top-level product group” to “turbocharge” the company’s work on AI tools.

    “I do think it is a good thing to focus on AI,” Ali Mogharabi, a senior equity analyst at Morningstar, told CNN of Zuckerberg’s comments. Mogharabi said Meta’s investments in AI “has benefits on both ends” because it can improve efficiency for engineers creating products, and because incorporating AI features into Meta’s lineup of apps will potentially create more engagement time for users, which can then drive advertising revenue.

    And in the long run, Mogharabi said, “A lot of the investments in AI, and a lot of enhancements that come from those investments in AI, could actually be applicable to the entire metaverse project.”

    But Zuckerberg’s emphasis on investing in AI, and using the buzzy technology’s tools to make the company more efficient and boost its bottom line, is also “what the shareholders and the market want to hear,” Mogharabi said. Many investors had previously griped at the company’s metaverse ambitions and spending. In 2022, Meta lost more than $13.7 billion in its “Reality Labs” unit, which houses its metaverse efforts.

    And investors appear to welcome Zuckerberg’s shift in focus from the metaverse to efficiency. After taking a beating in 2022, shares for Meta have surged more than 50% since the start of the year.

    Angelo Zino, a senior equity analyst at CFRA Research, said on Tuesday that the second round of layoffs at Meta “officially make us convinced that Mark Zuckerberg has completely switched gears, altering the narrative of the company to one focused on efficiencies rather than looking to grow the metaverse at any cost.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link