social media Archives - IT Support

Facebook, Instagram, and other social media sites may soon face lawsuits alleging that the way their algorithms work may be a factor in causing mental illness in some users.

A Defective Product?

In the US, a reported consolidation of lawsuits across multiple districts that are rumoured to be filed next month in the Northern District of California will allege that these social media giants are causing eating disorders, anxiety and depression in their users through the use of algorithms that are “defective products”.

Why?

It is alleged that social media algorithms can encourage addictive behaviour by encouraging users to view certain posts, e.g. posts that could lead them into mental illness.

Evidence

It’s been reported that some of the evidence will relate to comments made by former Facebook Product Manager turned whistleblower Frances Haugen. In 2021, for example, she alleged that Facebook (now Meta) knew that Instagram users were suffering ill health effects and that Facebook had been putting profit over safety. Her reported (unproven) allegations about Facebook at the time included:

– There were conflicts of interest between what was good for the public and what was good for Facebook.

– Facebook knew that Instagram was worsening body image issues among teenagers and had a two-tier justice system.

– Facebook uses engagement-based ranking algorithms (in Instagram) knowing that these algorithms can’t adequately identify dangerous content and may even amplify negative content and help to fuel violent rhetoric and ethnic violence.

– Facebook hid most of its own data and when asked directly about how it impacts the health and safety of children, it chose to mislead and misdirect.

– Facebook failed to act on internal research showing that Instagram had a negative impact on the mental health of teenage girls.

Despite calls for regulation from some members of Congress and President Biden since Haugen’s initial allegations, the lawsuits may argue that nothing substantial has been done.

Known About For A Long Time

It has been reported (Portico) that Previn Warren, an attorney for Motley Rice (a leading firm involved in the case) has said that Frances Haugen’s allegations suggest that Meta may have known for some time about the negative effects of Instagram on children, and that “It’s similar to what we saw in the 1990s, when whistleblowers leaked evidence that tobacco companies knew nicotine was addictive.”

Product Liability

Since the focus may be on social media algorithms as possibly being defective products, the case will relate to product liability law. Although algorithms being treated as products is a relatively new area, an algorithm could be considered a product under U.S. product liability law. If, for example (as the lawsuits may allege) an algorithm is a defective product, it may fall under the category of “strict liability” which means that the manufacturer of the product can be held liable for damages caused by a defect, regardless of whether they were at fault or not. The defectiveness of the algorithm must have existed at the time it was sold or supplied to the user. The determination of whether the algorithm is defective is likely to be a complex part of the legal argument and could depend on factors like industry standards and the foreseeable uses of the algorithm.

Protected From Product Liability Claim?

It has, however, been noted by some tech commentators that the Section 230 provision of the 1996 Communications Act may currently protect social media companies by restricting lawsuits against them relating to content users posted on their sites. This could potentially protect Meta and Instagram from a product liability claim.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

These lawsuits, if successful, could have a significant impact both for the social media companies and for users. For example, if it were proven in court that the algorithms used by social media companies are defective products and cause harm to users, the social media companies could, of course, face significant legal and financial consequences, including large damage awards to affected users. This could also have implications for their business operations and reputation.

Regarding Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Act, if the court finds that the algorithms are defective products, this could lead to a re-evaluation of the protections provided by Section 230 to social media companies. Section 230 provides immunity from liability for third-party content posted on their platforms, but if the algorithms themselves are deemed to be the cause of harm, this immunity may no longer apply. This could lead to increased regulation and oversight of the algorithms used by social media companies, resulting in a potential shift in the balance of power between these companies and the users they serve.

Drop-in audio conversation social network app ‘Clubhouse’ has launched its Android (beta) version for download in the UK.

Clubhouse Android Launched In English-Speaking Countries

San Francisco-based Clubhouse announced on May 9 that, starting in the U.S., and quickly following in other English-speaking countries, it was rolling out of the beta Android version of its popular app.

Still Invite Only

Clubhouse has stressed, however, that despite what will be a worldwide rollout over the next few weeks, the app will continue to have the waitlist and invite system in order to “keep the growth measured”. Clubhouse says that the plan is to continue to scale out the backend over the coming months in order to open up further to the millions of people on its iOS waitlist. The app will also be expanding its language support and adding accessibility features to help with the growth in membership.

Android users in the UK can now download the Clubhouse app from the Google Play Store.

Problems Earlier in the Year

Clubhouse has acknowledged that the problems that it experienced earlier in the year, such as server outages, notification failures, and surpassing the limits on its early discovery algorithms were a result of rapid growth. The company says that it has switched its focus from “hiring, fixing, and company building” to investing to enable the growing app to be able function well for the membership.

Hype and Benefits

The Clubhouse app has grown very quickly, accompanied by quite a bit of hype, but also because it appears to offer users the kind of direct access to an audience with influential people and industry leaders from around the world that it would be very difficult, costly, and time-consuming to get normally. Also, the real-time conversations mean that time is saved while issues, ideas and plans can be addressed and discussed instantaneously. As such, it has proven to be very appealing to business users.

Privacy Concerns

Important aspects of the Clubhouse app that were not mentioned in the recent announcement are the possible security and privacy concerns. For example, the Clubhouse app doesn’t appear to have end-to-end encryption (like WhatsApp), user data is routed through Chinese servers (and by implication, the Chinese state) and the requirement on sign-up that users must upload their device address books, thereby sharing other peoples’ contact details without consent.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

The rapid initial growth of Clubhouse has been fuelled by some of the potential benefits valued by businesses (e.g. the possibility of getting direct access to an audience with influential people) and finding new business opportunities, coupled with the exclusivity (invite only) and the other benefits of getting in early before the crowd. The app had some problems due to its growth exceeding its capacity but the promise to invest by Clubhouse may mean that it may suffer fewer outages going forward. Now that Clubhouse is really growing it can expect some stiff competition from other popular meeting apps (e.g. Zoom) and the threat of big social media players quickly launching their own versions (e.g. Twitter’s ‘Spaces’). The security and privacy concerns remain, however, despite the big Android rollout, and for users it may simply be a case of weighing up the known risks against the possible benefits, accepting that this is simply an exclusive space to meet and chat but that it comes with potential privacy and security risks at this stage in the app’s life.