> Of course not. They're on the platform using it, viewing ads, aren't they?
> I mean, it's a shame that some people die, because they won't be able to view ads, and the negative press might impact other people's opinion of the platform leading to potentially reduced ad view, but, heeeeeyyyyyy it's easy enough to prevent certain platform-hostile opinions from being surfaced too much on the platform, you know? "Vagueries of the Algorithm" and all!
(insert a large rolleyes here)
I'm sure we'll get the Standard Tech Appopollylolly: "We are so, so sorry that you caught us enabling this bad behavior, and we will try to do the work to ensure you don't catch us doing it next time."
> The lawsuit, filed in South Carolina state court last week, accuses Meta’s social media platforms of causing a range of problems in children, including depression, low self-esteem, anxiety and eating disorders. It alleges that Meta uses algorithms to aggressively target adolescents and does not do enough to keep them safe from harm.
Of course it doesn't. Depressed, low self esteem, and anxious? That's their dream user - likely to be online a lot, and easily influenced by Meta's actual customers, those paying to influence the thinking of others. The more people like that Meta can produce out of formerly well adjusted individuals, the more money they make. Their incentives are entirely opposite that of larger society. Healthy, well adjusted, offline individuals are mostly worthless to Meta, because they're likely to be on the platform far less often. You just need enough that the platform looks like it's well adjusted people on it.
I hope the lawsuit succeeds. It's long past time for the social media companies to face the consequences of what they've created for their own short sighted profit numbers.