Tag: social media

SICKENING: Youths Viciously Attack and Rob Single Father as Part of a TikTok Stunt While He Relaxes in His Jacuzzi

Two youths committed a sickening act of violence last week against a hard-working single California father who regularly helped those less fortunate.

As NBC Los Angeles reported, 48-year-old San Bernardino chef Greg Medina was relaxing in his jacuzzi after a long day at work when two teenagers suddenly snuck up behind him and attacked.

One youth kicked the father hard in the back of the head while the other snatched his phone. Both then run away.

KTLA shared footage of the horrific and cruel attack on Friday.

Medina, who works as a chef at the nonprofit Lutheran Social Services, where he has been feeding the homeless for more than a year, suffered a concussion and had to go to the emergency room. He says he still suffers from dizzy spells and headaches.

Keep reading

Meta Whistleblower Testifies Meta Took ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Approach to Child Safety

A former Meta safety engineer told a federal jury this week that company leaders repeatedly received warnings about harm to children on Facebook and Instagram and largely failed to act.

Quartz reports that Arturo Béjar, who worked as a safety engineer at Meta, testified that the company operated under what he described as a “don’t ask, don’t tell” philosophy toward child safety. He said internal studies showed children encountering harmful material at elevated rates, including recommendations that surfaced content from sexual predators and graphic violent images. Béjar said he brought these findings to Facebook and Instagram executives multiple times, and those conversations produced little meaningful change.

Béjar also testified that during his second stint at Meta, from 2019 to 2021, the company replaced the term “addiction” with “problematic use,” a framing he said did not meet the thresholds academic researchers use to define addiction. He said the metrics Meta made public gave a false picture of safety because they measured violations of content policies rather than actual harm experienced by users.

Béjar told the jury that in 2021 he emailed Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg after Zuckerberg publicly stated that the company does not prioritize profit over safety. “I felt that he created a false and misleading impression of Facebook’s commitment to young people,” Béjar testified. He said he briefed Zuckerberg on product issues at least 100 times during his tenure at the company.

Béjar was the first witness called in the trial, which opened Tuesday in federal court in Oakland, California, before U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. The case was brought by 29 state attorneys general who allege Meta intentionally designed Facebook and Instagram to be addictive to minors, collected data on children under 13 without parental consent in violation of the federal Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, and misled the public about platform safety. Opening arguments were delivered by lawyers representing California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey.

Meta attorney Paul Schmidt argued that the states had selectively quoted internal documents to build a misleading narrative. He pointed to the company’s safety measures, including parental controls, privacy defaults for teenage users, and reminders encouraging users to limit time on the app.

Keep reading

Polling Firm Showing Karen Bass, Francesca Hong in Lead Admits Fake Polls: ‘Short-Term Social Experiment’

A fake polling firm projecting Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and Wisconsin Democrat socialist gubernatorial candidate Francesca Hong with leads over their opponents admits these were fake polls as part of a “short-term social experiment.”

In a statement posted to the website for Median Strategies, the fake polling firm explained it “has concluded its polling project and will not publish additional polls.”

The statement from Median Strategies goes on to say, “All previously published polling releases have been withdrawn and should not be cited or treated as genuine polling data.”

“Median Strategies was created as a short-term social experiment examining how purported polling information could enter and spread through the political information ecosystem without independent verification,” the statement continued.

The statement from Median Strategies comes as the firm released a fake poll which showed Karen Bass with a 12-point lead over her opponent Nithya Raman prior to the Los Angeles mayoral runoff race in November, the Los Angeles Times reported.

Median Strategies explained that the “results were based on a survey of 560 Los Angeles voters between July 30 and Aug. 5. It said it had a 4.1 percent margin of error,” according to the outlet.

Keep reading

Cam Higby’s TikTok Account Permanently Banned After He Posted Clips Exposing Minnesota’s Insane ‘Voter Vouching’ System

TikTok permanently banned journalist Cam Higby’s account after he posted two video clips from his undercover report inside Minnesota polling stations.

James O’Keefe and Cam Higby went undercover in Muslim garb to expose Minnesota’s insane ‘voter vouching’ system.

“Under Minnesota’s Statutes § 201.061, a registered voter can sign an affidavit affirming that they know another individual resides in the same precinct, allowing that person to register at the polls without presenting standard proof of residence. One registered voter can vouch for up to eight people,” O’Keefe said.

“We wanted to find out what this actually looks like inside a polling place and how far election workers would let us take it,” he said.

O’Keefe was dressed in a ‘thobe’ and Cam Higby wore a black burka as they entered polling stations across Minneapolis.

“I have a question about the vouching program, yeah? Vouching? I can vouch for them but they are not registered,” O’Keefe asked the poll workers.

“Yeah, that’s fine,” the poll workers said.

Keep reading

Meta Faces Unprecedented Legal Reckoning Over Youth Mental Health As Massive Multistate Trial Begins

Meta Platforms is facing a critical juncture in its battle over youth online safety. Just weeks after suffering a massive legal defeat in New Mexico, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram is now defending itself in a California federal court against a bipartisan coalition of 29 states. The states say Meta deliberately designed its platforms to addict children and harvested their data in violation of federal law.

The California Showdown

A sweeping multistate trial opens Tuesday in Oakland, California, overseen by U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. Attorneys for Colorado, California, New Jersey and Kentucky – leading a bipartisan group of 29 states – will deliver opening statements. Those four states’ claims about addictive design and deceptive marketing are what this trial tests, while all 29 states are involved over data-harvesting claims. 

Interestingly – the eight-person jury hearing the case won’t actually decide it. Rogers empaneled it in a purely advisory capacity, which is rare. The jurors will answer specific questions she selects, and she is free to disregard their findings entirely when she issues her ruling after the trial concludes in October, Reuters reports.

The states argue that features like infinite scroll were purposely engineered to keep young users hooked, that Meta misled the public about the safety of its platforms for adolescents, and that the company improperly collected and monetized children’s personal data in violation of federal law.

The financial exposure is the largest of any case Meta has faced. The company has warned that maximum statutory penalties could theoretically reach $1.4 trillion, while the attorneys general have indicated they may seek around $200 billion.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll released last week found that 85 percent of Americans believe social media can be addictive for children.

Beyond money, the coalition wants nationwide structural changes: age restrictions, deletion of algorithms and AI models built with children’s data, elimination of infinite scroll and notifications, strict time limits for young users, and an algorithm retuned to prioritize well-being over engagement. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Instagram head Adam Mosseri are both expected to testify, alongside former employees and outside experts.

What Happened In New Mexico

The multistate trial arrives on the heels of a devastating legal blow in New Mexico. On Aug. 6, State Judge Bryan Biedscheid ruled that Meta had created a public nuisance and ordered the company to pay $567 million into a youth mental health fund, allocating $420 million to treatment, $90 million to screening and assessment, $33 million to prevention and awareness, and $15 million to referrals and care coordination over five years. The award followed a $375 million penalty a New Mexico jury imposed in March for violations of the state’s Unfair Practices Act.

The award fell well short of New Mexico’s request. The state had sought $1 billion toward a $3.7 billion plan to expand children’s mental health services.

“The Court finds that the weight of the evidence presented demonstrates that Meta’s platforms are a cause of and substantial contributing factor to the youth mental health crisis in New Mexico.”

Biedscheid compared the platforms to a polluting factory, writing that the harms “do not stay contained” but migrate “to the real world” and burden families, schools, hospitals and law enforcement.

The order, a win for New Mexico Attorney General Raul Torrez, also imposes five years of operational changes: monthly limits on teen use of Facebook and Instagram, restrictions on notifications, tighter controls on adult contact with minors, safeguards for AI chatbots, and enhanced review of child sexual abuse reports. Meta must file written progress reports twice a year. The template is now sitting in front of the 29-state coalition.

Meta’s Defense

Meta plans to appeal the New Mexico ruling and maintains that the attorneys general in the California trial are chasing an “outlandish payout” without proof of actual harm. “We remain confident in our record of protecting teens online and will continue to defend ourselves against claims that misrepresent the facts,” the company said after the New Mexico decision.

The company argues it has invested heavily in creating a safe environment for teens, employing child safety experts and deploying technology to root out predators and harmful content. Company spokespeople have characterized the state lawsuits as an attempt to penalize Meta for industry-wide problems, such as the complexities of age verification.

The litigation traces back to 2021, when whistleblower Frances Haugen testified before the U.S. Senate and provided internal documents indicating Meta knew its platforms could harm young users but prioritized engagement over safety.

Meta is not alone. Alongside Snap, TikTok parent ByteDance and YouTube parent Alphabet, it faces more than 3,000 federal lawsuits consolidated before Rogers and another 3,300 pending in Los Angeles state court. Eight states, including Tennessee and Arkansas, opted out of the federal case and filed in their own courts. Tennessee’s trial is already underway.

Meta has told investors that legal and regulatory blowback over youth safety “could significantly impact our business and financial results.”

Keep reading

X Wins Australian Case Over Private Message Scanning Rule

Australia’s eSafety Commissioner wrote a rule requiring online services to scan what their users send each other. Not to act on reports, but to run detection systems across private messages before anyone has complained, hunting child sexual abuse and pro-terror material. Top censor, Julie Inman Grant, wrote it herself, under powers the Online Safety Act hands her, and breaching it carries penalties of up to $49.5 million.

Then she took the view that it covered social media platforms as well, because they let users send each other messages.

On August 12, the Federal Court told her it does not. The Relevant Electronic Services Standard “does not apply” to X, Justice Elizabeth Raper held, ruling for the platform in a case it brought in May 2025. It “would be rather perverse for a social media service…not to enable messaging or chat between end users,” X’s barrister had argued — on eSafety’s reading, having a DM function was enough to pull a platform into a rulebook written for something else.

The distinction is important because of who writes what. Social media services in Australia are covered by a code developed with the industry, X included. The RES Standard is not a negotiated code. It is an instrument the Commissioner drafts and enforces herself. The standard says it applies “to the exclusion of any industry code” — so reading it to cover social media would have let the instrument she controls displace the one she negotiated.

Raper said so directly. “I accept X Corp’s characterisation of the facts that the RES Standard has been made by the commissioner…as a standard applicable to participants in a different section of the online industry, that are specified…as ‘providers of relevant electronic services’,” she wrote.

Keep reading

States take Meta to trial in California in the biggest fight yet over social media harms to children

Of the thousands of lawsuits Meta faces over child safety on its platforms, none may be more consequential than one going to trial this week in California.

States are seeking extensive financial damages that could, in theory, total as much as $1.4 trillion, plus changes to how the company operates Facebook and Instagram.

The lawsuit accuses the social media giant of contributing to the youth mental health crisis by knowingly and deliberately designing features that get children addicted to its platforms. It also claims that Meta routinely collects data on children under 13 without their parents’ consent, in violation of federal law.

“Meta has harnessed powerful and unprecedented technologies to entice, engage, and ultimately ensnare youth and teens. Its motive is profit, and in seeking to maximize its financial gains,” the lawsuit says.

Dozens of states filed the lawsuit three years ago. The trial set to begin Tuesday in federal court in Oakland, California, features four of the states as plaintiffs — California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey. The other 25 states are expected to have trials later.

Meta said it disputes the allegations, and the trial evidence will show its commitment to supporting young people. “We’ve listened to parents, worked with experts and law enforcement, and conducted in-depth research to understand the issues that matter most,” the company said in a statement.

States seek to land a major blow against Meta
For Meta, which already lost two pivotal cases over harms to children and teens this year, the stakes are high. The company reported a rare profit decline last month, in part due to $2.4 billion in legal expenses.

The $1.4 trillion figure, which Meta disclosed in a legal filing, is almost as high as the Menlo Park, California, company’s entire market capitalization — that is, the value of all its outstanding shares on the stock market. Paying it would inevitably put Meta Platforms in bankruptcy and perhaps put the company under state ownership.

“The state attorneys general are going for the gusto,” said Eric Goldman, a professor and co-director of the High Tech Law Institute at Santa Clara University School of Law. “They are trying to set the definitive precedent in this case and they have asked for extraordinary damages and they are going to seek extraordinary structural remedies if they succeed.”

Meta calls the possible penalty “untethered to any claimed violation” by the states.

“A sanction of that size has no analog in the history of consumer protection enforcement,” Meta said in a July 6 filing with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

If Meta loses the trial, the court would have wide discretion over the size of any financial penalty, and legal experts say anything close to $1.4 trillion would be unlikely.

“It’s not plausible in the sense that Meta doesn’t have that much money and could not get it,” said James Grimmelmann, a law professor at Cornell Law School and Cornell Tech. “An award that large would put Meta into bankruptcy, wipe out its owners, and effectively result in the states owning Meta.”

Keep reading

Former Police Officer Convicted of Sharing ‘Grossly Offensive’ Meme About Islam in Britain

A former British police officer has been convicted of posting offensive content on Facebook after he reposted an image mocking Islam, sparking accusations that blasphemy laws have returned to the United Kingdom.

A former British police officer has been convicted of posting offensive content on Facebook after he reposted an image mocking Islam, sparking accusations that blasphemy laws have returned to the United Kingdom.

Retired police officer Stephen Gray, 65, has been found guilty by the Newton Aycliffe magistrates’ court of breaching Section 127(1)(a) of the Communications Act 2003 over a post he reshared on Facebook, which was deemed to be “grossly offensive”.

According to The Telegraph, Gray was reported to the Durham Constabulary for two Facebook memes by a non-Muslim neighbour of his, whom Gray had previously been in a separate dispute with.

The first post reported to the police featured the title “time for mass deportations” next to a Middle Eastern man in his 20s or 30s with the words “Children in need”. It was captioned with: “12-year-old Mohammed recently arrived at Dover. Please donate to help him move from a three-star to a five-star hotel, which has a better halal menu, free Wi-Fi, and Sky and is nearer to a girls’ school”.

This post was not deemed by the court to violate the law, as it concerned a political issue that had been debated in Parliament.

The second meme depicted a picture of a man wearing a turban next to some bacon with the caption: “Fun facts about Bacon! People who eat bacon have a lower chance of marrying a 9-year-old!”

As the post was not considered to be a political message, but rather critical of a religion, it was found to be “grossly offensive” by the court. For this, Gray was found guilty of violating the Communications Act and was ordered to pay £1,000 in fines and court costs.

Gray said of the ruling: “I made a joke, an ironic joke, about Islam. That is all it was at the end of the day. A joke. I certainly never, not for one second, thought it would be deemed abusive.”

Keep reading

French Constitutional Court Blocks Macron’s Social Media Ban for Under 15s To Uphold Freedom of Expression and Protect Privacy

But Macron is not giving up.

As Emmanuel Macron, who is failing, approaches the end of his second and last French presidential term, he is clearly thinking about his legacy.

But, with no less than 7 prime ministers under his rule, the legacy is instability, mass migration, and social chaos.

So, he needs shiny new legislation that’ll look good – he thinks – in the pages of future history books.

Such is the case of his social media ban for under-15s.

While the core idea is not so divisive, the actual plans for implementation bear all the marks of the Globalist ideas he is always advancing.

Yesterday, France’s top court blocked the social media ban bill, saying it infringed upon freedom of ‌expression.

Reuters reported:

“The bill would have barred children younger than 15 from opening a social media account from September 1. Accounts already open would be ​closed within four months by social media platforms, which would also need to use age ​verification approved by the French privacy regulator.

But France’s Constitutional Council found that the ⁠bill, while requiring everyone to give proof of age, failed ‘to specify the conditions and limits’ under ​which it should be provided, as well as infringing on freedoms and privacy.

‘The Council holds that the ​contested provisions, on the one hand, disproportionately infringe upon the freedom of expression and communication and, on the other, fail to provide the legal safeguards necessary to ensure the right to respect for private life’, it said.”

Keep reading

Appeals Court Allows Thousands of Social Media Addiction Lawsuits Against Meta, TikTok, Google to Continue

A federal appeals court ruled Monday that more than 3,000 lawsuits accusing Meta, TikTok, Google, Snap and other tech companies of deliberately designing addictive platforms for young users can proceed.

Time reports that the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the thousands of lawsuits, filed by states, municipalities, school districts and individuals, can move forward in district court. The plaintiffs allege that addictive algorithms and insufficient safeguards against harmful content have contributed to rising rates of depression, anxiety and body image issues among young people.

The cases had been consolidated before U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, who ruled in 2023 and 2024 that most of the litigation could proceed. Meta and TikTok appealed those orders, arguing they were shielded from liability under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996, a federal law that generally protects companies from being sued over content posted by users.

In a 24-page opinion, Judge Jacqueline Nguyen wrote that Section 230 provides a “defense to liability,” not blanket immunity from lawsuits. During oral arguments in January, Nguyen had signaled skepticism toward the companies’ position, saying, “When Congress wants to give immunity from suit, it knows how to say that.” Plaintiffs have argued that the law does not shield claims focused on how companies intentionally designed and operated their products.

The appeals court did not decide whether Section 230 bars those product-design claims, ruling instead that the appeal was premature because the trial court’s decision was not final. That question, which could shape other litigation against tech companies, remains unresolved. The lawsuits will continue in district court, where plaintiffs are seeking damages, civil penalties and restitution.

Separately, roughly 3,300 similar cases are being coordinated in California state court. In the first bellwether trial in March, a Los Angeles jury awarded $6 million to a 20-year-old woman who said she developed depression, anxiety and body dysmorphia after becoming addicted to Instagram and YouTube as a child. The jury found Meta and Google negligent in designing their platforms and failing to warn of the risks. TikTok and Snap had settled with the plaintiff before trial. All companies have denied the allegations and filed appeals.

Keep reading