Jury signals tech titans on hook for social media addiction
By AFP
March 20, 2026
Parents adamant that social media has harmed their children are among those awaiting a verdict in the social media addiction trial taking place in Los Angeles - Copyright AFP Patrick T. Fallon
Romain FONSEGRIVES
A question by jurors in a landmark social media addiction trial on Friday signaled Meta or YouTube may have to pay for letting a girl get hooked onto their platforms.
The jury’s first full week of deliberations ended with the panel sending the judge a query related to calculating damages in the case, which is expected to set a precedent for thousands of similar suits in the nation.
“We don’t start dancing in the streets over what seems to be a good question,” said plaintiff’s attorney Mark Lanier.
“But we’re appreciative of the fact that they’re on the issues of damages.”
To turn their attention to damages, enough jurors had to essentially agree that one or both accused tech platforms was negligently or harmfully designed and users should have been warned, according to verdict forms.
Jurors will return to the Los Angeles courthouse on Monday to resume deliberations.
Since jury deliberations began on March 13, the jury has sent questions to the judge related to the plaintiff’s family troubles as well as how much she actually used Meta-owned Instagram as a child.
– Negligent in design? –
The verdict could turn on the question of whether familial strife and other real-world trauma, or YouTube and Meta apps such as Instagram, were to blame for mental woes of the woman who filed the suit.
A 20-year-old California woman identified as Kaley G.M. testified at trial that YouTube and Instagram fueled her depression and suicidal thoughts as a child, telling jurors that she became obsessed with social media, starting with YouTube videos, when she was six.
Under cross examination, however, Kaley also talked about feeling neglected, berated and picked on by family members.
A jury form given to jurors asks the panel to decide whether Meta or YouTube should have known their services posed a danger to children or if they were negligent in design.
If so, jurors are to decide if Meta or YouTube were “substantial factors” in causing Kaley’s woes and how much they should pay in damages.
Whatever the verdict, the trial highlights “an important tension” between social media platforms and vulnerable young internet users, reasoned University of Pittsburgh marketing professor Vanitha Swaminathan.
“The platforms have to address the concerns of this important segment,” Swaminathan told AFP.
The lawsuit is one of hundreds accusing social media firms of luring young users into becoming addicted to their content and potentially suffer from depression, eating disorders, psychiatric hospitalization and even suicide.
Internet titans have long shielded themselves with Section 230 of the US Communications Decency Act, which frees them of responsibility for what social media users post.
However, this case argues that the firms are responsible for defective products, with business models designed to hold people’s attention and to promote content that can harm their mental health.
The outcome of the trial is expected to establish a precedent for resolving other lawsuits that blame social media for fueling an epidemic of mental and emotional trauma.
By AFP
March 20, 2026
Parents adamant that social media has harmed their children are among those awaiting a verdict in the social media addiction trial taking place in Los Angeles - Copyright AFP Patrick T. Fallon
Romain FONSEGRIVES
A question by jurors in a landmark social media addiction trial on Friday signaled Meta or YouTube may have to pay for letting a girl get hooked onto their platforms.
The jury’s first full week of deliberations ended with the panel sending the judge a query related to calculating damages in the case, which is expected to set a precedent for thousands of similar suits in the nation.
“We don’t start dancing in the streets over what seems to be a good question,” said plaintiff’s attorney Mark Lanier.
“But we’re appreciative of the fact that they’re on the issues of damages.”
To turn their attention to damages, enough jurors had to essentially agree that one or both accused tech platforms was negligently or harmfully designed and users should have been warned, according to verdict forms.
Jurors will return to the Los Angeles courthouse on Monday to resume deliberations.
Since jury deliberations began on March 13, the jury has sent questions to the judge related to the plaintiff’s family troubles as well as how much she actually used Meta-owned Instagram as a child.
– Negligent in design? –
The verdict could turn on the question of whether familial strife and other real-world trauma, or YouTube and Meta apps such as Instagram, were to blame for mental woes of the woman who filed the suit.
A 20-year-old California woman identified as Kaley G.M. testified at trial that YouTube and Instagram fueled her depression and suicidal thoughts as a child, telling jurors that she became obsessed with social media, starting with YouTube videos, when she was six.
Under cross examination, however, Kaley also talked about feeling neglected, berated and picked on by family members.
A jury form given to jurors asks the panel to decide whether Meta or YouTube should have known their services posed a danger to children or if they were negligent in design.
If so, jurors are to decide if Meta or YouTube were “substantial factors” in causing Kaley’s woes and how much they should pay in damages.
Whatever the verdict, the trial highlights “an important tension” between social media platforms and vulnerable young internet users, reasoned University of Pittsburgh marketing professor Vanitha Swaminathan.
“The platforms have to address the concerns of this important segment,” Swaminathan told AFP.
The lawsuit is one of hundreds accusing social media firms of luring young users into becoming addicted to their content and potentially suffer from depression, eating disorders, psychiatric hospitalization and even suicide.
Internet titans have long shielded themselves with Section 230 of the US Communications Decency Act, which frees them of responsibility for what social media users post.
However, this case argues that the firms are responsible for defective products, with business models designed to hold people’s attention and to promote content that can harm their mental health.
The outcome of the trial is expected to establish a precedent for resolving other lawsuits that blame social media for fueling an epidemic of mental and emotional trauma.
By AFP
March 18, 2026
The EU move comes after an outcry over sexualised deepfake images of women and minors created by AI chatbot Grok - Copyright AFP/File Pablo VERA
EU lawmakers on Wednesday approved a ban on AI systems generating sexualised deepfakes, after a global outcry over non-consensual nudes created by Elon Musk’s chatbot Grok.
Backed by EU member states last week, the ban targeting so-called “nudification” apps is being introduced as part of proposals to amend the bloc’s rules on AI.
“This is a huge win, especially for women and children in Europe,” said Kim van Sparrentak, a lawmaker with the Greens group.
“Too many people have already woken up one day in despair after finding deepnudes of themselves, feeling violated, intimidated and hunted.”
Lawmakers in the EU parliament’s civil liberties committee gave it their green light Wednesday, paving the way for approval by the full assembly on March 26.
Michael McNamara, the Irish EU lawmaker leading work on the AI file, said the ban aimed to stamp out “nudification apps without consent, which have caused much pain for the profit of some.”
X, the platform on which Grok is available, in January said it had “zero tolerance” for sexualised deepfakes of children and women, and implemented measures it said would stop the practice after the global outrage.
The European Commission, the bloc’s digital watchdog, in January kickstarted an investigation into Grok under the EU’s online content rules.
The ban will become law after negotiations on a final text including the changes to the AI rulebook between the EU parliament and member states.
Fraudsters are using AI to create ‘pixel-perfect’ fake shopping sites
By Dr. Tim Sandle
SCIENCE EDITOR
Fake Website Scams
You search for a product, click what looks like a legitimate retailer’s website, and everything appears normal. The logo is correct, the layout is professional, even the customer reviews seem genuine. But look closer at the URL, is it really the right address?
Fraudsters are creating pixel-perfect copies of legitimate retailer websites, often paying for advertising to ensure their fake sites appear at the top of search results. These cloned sites collect your payment information and personal details, but the goods you’ve ordered never arrive. By the time you realise something’s wrong, the website has vanished.
If there is any doubt on the legitimacy of the website, call the company themselves to check, just be sure to get the phone number for an official source.
The Delivery Text That Isn’t
Your phone buzzes. “Your parcel is being held, additional customs fees required.” The message looks official, includes tracking numbers, and creates urgency. But it’s a trap.
Fake delivery notifications are one of the most common scams to hit UK shoppers. These messages contain links to fraudulent payment portals designed to harvest your banking details. Some even mimic the exact formatting and sender names used by legitimate courier companies.
Social Media Storefronts That Disappear
Scrolling through Facebook Marketplace or Instagram Shopping, you spot the perfect gift at an unbeatable price. The seller has hundreds of positive reviews, professional product photos, and responds quickly to messages. What could go wrong?
Scammers are increasingly sophisticated in their use of social media platforms, creating temporary storefronts that look entirely legitimate. They use stolen images, fabricated reviews, and professional communication to build trust, then vanish the moment you’ve transferred payment.
Many scammers are part of “fakebook” networks, where thousands or fake or hacked accounts help to convince you a page, item or opinion is legitimate.
Charity Scams Exploiting Goodwill
The time following the festive period often brings out the best in people, and scammers know it. Fake charity shops and fundraising campaigns have multiplied, particularly around popular causes, collecting donations that never reach the intended beneficiaries.
These scams are particularly cunning because they exploit our desire to help others during the season of giving.
Hijacked Seller Accounts
Sometimes the seller account is real, it’s just not being controlled by its legitimate owner anymore. Criminals are hijacking established seller accounts on major marketplaces, leveraging their positive reputation and transaction history to process fraudulent sales before the real owner even realises their account has been compromised.
By Dr. Tim Sandle
SCIENCE EDITOR
DIGITAL JOURNAL
March 17, 2026
Photo by freestocks on Unsplash
Fraudsters are stealing money from shoppers using increasingly sophisticated tactics powered by AI.
Online shopping and auction fraud now accounts for 20% of all online fraud incidents reported to Action Fraud, making it one of the most prevalent threats facing UK consumers. With broader fraud losses hitting £1.17 billion in 2024, driven partly by a 14% spike in unauthorised card fraud, the scale of the problem is increasing.
“The problem is now we have so many AI options, it is easier than ever for scammers to create fake sites, fake images, or fake offers,” warns Lior Pozin, founder of Build Your Store in a message sent to Digital Journal.
Pozin adds: “What used to take technical expertise can now be generated in minutes using artificial intelligence. This means that more criminals than ever have access to the tools to make their jobs easier, and your life harder.”
Five scams you need to watch out for
According to Pozin:
March 17, 2026
Photo by freestocks on Unsplash
Fraudsters are stealing money from shoppers using increasingly sophisticated tactics powered by AI.
Online shopping and auction fraud now accounts for 20% of all online fraud incidents reported to Action Fraud, making it one of the most prevalent threats facing UK consumers. With broader fraud losses hitting £1.17 billion in 2024, driven partly by a 14% spike in unauthorised card fraud, the scale of the problem is increasing.
“The problem is now we have so many AI options, it is easier than ever for scammers to create fake sites, fake images, or fake offers,” warns Lior Pozin, founder of Build Your Store in a message sent to Digital Journal.
Pozin adds: “What used to take technical expertise can now be generated in minutes using artificial intelligence. This means that more criminals than ever have access to the tools to make their jobs easier, and your life harder.”
Five scams you need to watch out for
According to Pozin:
Fake Website Scams
You search for a product, click what looks like a legitimate retailer’s website, and everything appears normal. The logo is correct, the layout is professional, even the customer reviews seem genuine. But look closer at the URL, is it really the right address?
Fraudsters are creating pixel-perfect copies of legitimate retailer websites, often paying for advertising to ensure their fake sites appear at the top of search results. These cloned sites collect your payment information and personal details, but the goods you’ve ordered never arrive. By the time you realise something’s wrong, the website has vanished.
If there is any doubt on the legitimacy of the website, call the company themselves to check, just be sure to get the phone number for an official source.
The Delivery Text That Isn’t
Your phone buzzes. “Your parcel is being held, additional customs fees required.” The message looks official, includes tracking numbers, and creates urgency. But it’s a trap.
Fake delivery notifications are one of the most common scams to hit UK shoppers. These messages contain links to fraudulent payment portals designed to harvest your banking details. Some even mimic the exact formatting and sender names used by legitimate courier companies.
Social Media Storefronts That Disappear
Scrolling through Facebook Marketplace or Instagram Shopping, you spot the perfect gift at an unbeatable price. The seller has hundreds of positive reviews, professional product photos, and responds quickly to messages. What could go wrong?
Scammers are increasingly sophisticated in their use of social media platforms, creating temporary storefronts that look entirely legitimate. They use stolen images, fabricated reviews, and professional communication to build trust, then vanish the moment you’ve transferred payment.
Many scammers are part of “fakebook” networks, where thousands or fake or hacked accounts help to convince you a page, item or opinion is legitimate.
Charity Scams Exploiting Goodwill
The time following the festive period often brings out the best in people, and scammers know it. Fake charity shops and fundraising campaigns have multiplied, particularly around popular causes, collecting donations that never reach the intended beneficiaries.
These scams are particularly cunning because they exploit our desire to help others during the season of giving.
Hijacked Seller Accounts
Sometimes the seller account is real, it’s just not being controlled by its legitimate owner anymore. Criminals are hijacking established seller accounts on major marketplaces, leveraging their positive reputation and transaction history to process fraudulent sales before the real owner even realises their account has been compromised.
No comments:
Post a Comment