Mark Zuckerberg vetoed a proposal by Meta Platform Inc. to ban filters that replicate the effects of plastic surgery, knowing it would harm the mental health of children and teenagers.
What’s the matter?
Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell, representing the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, alleged that the tech giant’s public statements about youth well-being being its “top priority” were misleading.
A lawsuit was initially filed last month in federal court in Oakland.The details were detailed in an unredacted copy distributed by California Attorney General Rob Bonta, citing concerns about the potential harm to girls’ mental health caused by these filters.
In the lawsuit, it was revealed that, among other things, the Meta CEO vetoed the removal of cosmetic surgery filters that harmed young users, especially women.
These filters and “effects” in question on meta platforms like Instagram allow users to digitally alter their photos and videos with “simulate makeup,” “cosmetic surgery,” “Botox,” “clear skin,” and other enhancements.
Experts have expressed concern over how some filters visual effects that can digitally change a user’s appearance could harm teen mental health.
According to the lawsuit, Zuckerberg verbally vetoed a proposal to ban filters that mimic plastic surgery on Meta-owned platforms and ignored requests from top executives to increase investment in teen wellness.
Why is this controversial?
More than 30 states of Us have poised in on Mark Zuckerberg’s controversial decision against Meta Platforms, Inc., the parent company of Facebook and Instagram.
The decision has sparked controversy because it signals a priority over user welfare.
According to the lawsuit, despite concerns raised by internal discussions surrounding Zuckerberg’s decision to reject a ban on plastic surgery filters, Meta has emphasized its own commitment to keeping teens safe online.
Alligations
The undocumented lawsuit also alleged that the company’s internal documents show Meta set targets for the amount users spend on the platform, despite public statements to the contrary. The states claim the company misrepresented the safety of the platform.
Rob Bonta said in a statement, “Meta knows what it’s doing is bad for kids.Thanks to our overwhelming federal indictment, it’s now in black and white, and it’s disgusting.”
We want teenagers to have a safe, age-appropriate experience online,” said the Menlo Park, California-based company. ” According to the lawsuit, in 2020, company CEO Zuckerberg was given an internal memo on filters that detailed Meta’s consultation with independent experts “about the effects of these effects on body dysmorphia and eating disorders,” particularly for teenage girls.
Academic researchers have shown that the use of Facebook and Instagram creates body image problems and anxiety among users, and especially among women and adolescents. There was supposed to be a discussion meeting in this regard earlier as well. But in early April, Zuckerberg canceled a meeting to discuss about the same issue.
Some have argued that Meta prioritizes user metrics over user welfare. The unredacted version of the lawsuit claims that Meta actively sought out young users and failed to take adequate measures to limit the use of the platform by children under 13. It has been alleged that the company takes action only after verifying possible minor accounts.
California’s state and federal judges have allowed negligence claims against Meta, Google, TikTok and Snap to move forward. The lawsuit leaves Meta, along with other social media giants, facing personal injury claims and accusations that the school district created a public nuisance.
.
