this post was submitted on 25 Apr 2025
1094 points (99.0% liked)

Technology

69972 readers
3689 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

From their own internal metrics, tech giants have long known what independent research now continuously validates: that the content that is most likely to go viral is that which induces strong feelings such as outrage and disgust, regardless of its underlying veracity. Moreover, they also know that such content is heavily engaged with and most profitable. Far from acting against false, harmful content, they placed profits above its staggering—and damaging—social impact to implicitly encourage it while downplaying the massive costs.

Social media titans embrace essentially the same hypocrisy the tobacco industry embodied when they feigned concern over harm reduction while covertly pushing their product ever more aggressively. With the reelection of Trump, our tech giants now no longer even pretend to care.

Engagement is their business model, and doubt about the harms they cause is their product. Tobacco executives, and their bought-off scientists, once proclaimed uncertainty over links between cigarettes and lung cancer. Zuckerberg has likewise testified to Congress, “The existing body of scientific work has not shown a causal link between using social media and young people having worse mental health, ” even while studies find self-harm, eating disorder and misogynistic material spreads on these platform unimpeded. This equivocation echoes protestations of tobacco companies that there was no causal evidence of smoking harms, even as incontrovertible evidence to the contrary rapidly amassed.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

Wait. If tobacco companies do not exist anymore, then who are making cigarettes?

Or do they mean that Meta, X and Google are producing cigarettes like tobacco companies are doing right now, like with filters or that they are putting warning labels on their products? Because I haven't seen any warning labels or Google cigarettes.

The title is very confusing.

Although I do think Google, X and Meta should have at least 75% of their banner state their platforms are brainrot and spreads misinformation. You know, like modern day tobacco companies have to warn for the risks of using their junk.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Meta whistleblower Sarah Wynn-Williams says company targeted ads at teens based on their ‘emotional state’

[...] She said the company was letting advertisers know when the teens were depressed so they could be served an ad at the best time.

[...]

https://techcrunch.com/2025/04/09/meta-whistleblower-sarah-wynn-williams-says-company-targeted-ads-at-teens-based-on-their-emotional-state/

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Have we collectively forgotten that Facebook tested manipulating users emotional states all the way back in 2014?

Where they tested to see if people with depression can be even more depressed if their social media feeds are manipulated to take away positive interaction.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

That’s back when I attempted suicide

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

considering that tobacco companies are still here, it's kind of a weird title

[–] [email protected] 37 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

I would liken them to the automotive industry. Both have deeply harmed society by isolating people from each other (it sounds counterintuitive, I know). Both have created infrastructure that prioritizes individual consumption over collective well being, restructured daily life around corporate products, and normalized a form of privatized existence that erodes public space, shared culture, and relational life. Just as cars gutted walkable communities and made human scale living subordinate to machines, Big Tech has gutted organic social interaction, subordinating communication and attention to platforms designed for extraction and control. #fuckcars #fuckbigtech

[–] [email protected] -5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Cave men said the same thing about the horse. They gutted our communal caves and made human scale subordinate to a domesticated animal. #fuckmounts

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago

Reminds me of a part I've recently read on The Dawn of Everything, comparing the Great Lakes natives' freedoms to our corporate owned "freedoms": while we're busy with the "possibility of freedom", they cared about the exercise of their freedoms.

Before the colonization, they were free to visit other places because they almost always had someone that belonged to their clan living there and who would receive them with open arms. They didn't have to pay anything for the travel proper, but obviously needed to take some supplies to spend the days on the wilderness. For us, if we don't have money, we don't have freedoms: gotta pay for the car+gas (or plane or ship ticket), food, housing.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 weeks ago

Don't forget the cycle of buying up all patents and shelving them if they are a threat to their goals. What a future we've wasted.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 weeks ago

i wouldnt go as far calling them that, more like big box stores like walmart,,,,etc.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Thank You for Posting (2025)

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Great callback. I haven't thought of Thank You For Smoking in ages.

That is a prescient little film from my teenage years back in earlly 00's. The film was a nice stab at the culture of "spin" and how lobbying was gonna dig us into the hell we are now.

Hmmm, Thank You For Posting would be an actual relevant sequel in the time of endless sequels. Backdropping it with the lobbying for the Turd Reich and the ascension of Fascism and you got something there...

Thank you for reminding me of Thank You For Smoking.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

20 years ago, as well

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I think that, in 10-20 years, the research around social media addiction will bear out this way, yes. It's wild to me how every time the discussion around regulating social media comes up, most people just kind of ignore its effects on kids' mental health.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago

It's not very wild when you realize you're talking to addicts. The whole world is addicted.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Mandatory physical exercise too, an hour minimum a day, no contact sports, punishable by jail time. Also diet, we should all be eating healthy, no more sugar or high cholesterol food being sold. We can mandate everyone's well being by the barrel of a gun.

load more comments
view more: next ›