Instagram and Facebook could change forever if Meta loses child privacy trial

0:00Hello, I'm James Kamara Sami. Thank you for downloading the BBC's World Tonight podcast for Monday 17th August. Another big moment for big tech as the trial begins tomorrow in a multi-state case against Meta. We speak to the Attorney-General of California, where the trial is taking place. As Reform UK sets out its welfare policy, we hear from Robert Jenrick, the man who unveiled it, and ask whether it might end up costing the party some of its core voters. Plus, a senior FIFA critic of Gianni Infantino leaves world football's governing body. Why rail traffic in the Channel Tunnel might be getting a bit busier and why Russia's anti-war voters are now officially politically homeless.

0:40If you have trouble keeping up with the latest developments in social media, try keeping track of the court cases that social media companies are facing. There are thousands going through the US courts, with some major verdicts already this year. In March, a judge in California ruled that Meta and YouTube had designed addictive products and ordered them to pay a young woman millions of dollars in damages. And then last month, the court in New Mexico ordered Meta to pay$375 million, that's around£280 million, for endangering children on its platforms. The companies are appealing both verdicts. Well, tomorrow, a jury trial opens in California, which could pose the biggest threat yet to the way that Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, operates.

1:25Well, I'm joined live now from San Francisco by our North America technology correspondent, Lily Jamali. So, Lily, there's a lot to get your head around with all these cases, but let's focus on tomorrow's. Who's brought this case and what exactly is it about? Sure thing. Well, this is a case brought by dozens of U.S. states in 2023. And in the complaint filed then, the states alleged that Meta incorporated harmful features into its Instagram and Facebook platforms, all to drive engagement, especially among young users, with the end of boosting their profits. And not only that, the claim is that they misled the public about what they were doing.

2:04So think things like infinite scroll or push notifications likes. The states call these a set of psychologically manipulative features. And this trial that starts tomorrow here in California will be led by the state of California, along with Colorado, New Jersey and Kentucky. Meta calls the claims unsubstantiated and says the states are trying to penalise them for things that are really problematic across the tech industry, things like age verification. They also, we should note, are asking the states are for more than a trillion dollars in damages. That's an amount approaching Meta's entire market cap.

2:43Meta calls those financial demands vastly disproportionate. And this comes after a series of other court losses for Meta and for other tech giants recently, doesn't it, when it comes to how they do or don't protect young people? Exactly. And those two cases you mentioned, I think, are the most important ones. So the first took place in Los Angeles this year, brought by a 20-year-old woman from here in California who claimed that she had suffered mental health impacts from design features on Meta's platforms, as well as Google's YouTube. So there were two other social media platforms, TikTok and Snapchat.

3:18Their parent companies settled that case before it went to trial. But Meta and Google lost that case. They lost with a$6 million jury verdict going to the plaintiff. Not a huge dollar amount, but it was the fact that that case even made it to trial that was historic because for a long time, these companies, including Meta, have used something known as Section 230, this legal provision to avoid going to trial. saying they're not responsible for content on the platforms. This was about the design choices the companies made. So big precedent set there. At the same time, there was that case you mentioned in New Mexico.

3:56The state had claimed Meta wasn't doing enough to stop child endangerment on its platform. Another loss for Meta there. And now a fine that is approaching$1 billion, plus you have a judge demanding design changes there. That's very historic as well. So what about this case? How long is it expected to last? I mean, as you say, several states involved in this one. And beyond that sort of eye-watering figure of potential damages of excess of a trillion dollars, what are the other potential impacts on Metr if they lose? Right. So this case is expected to last about six weeks. And the jury's decision is actually an advisory verdict.

4:38Ultimately, this decision, this verdict rests with the judge in this case. She is a well-known judge here in Northern California who also oversaw the Musk versus Altman case a couple of months ago and has been very involved in a number of very high profile tech cases. So she knows this issue very well. I think what's really important to watch for is, does Meta, if the states win, have to make changes to its platforms? Because that's what New Mexico was able to wrest from the company, getting a judge to say you have to make changes to your age enforcement. You have to make changes to push notifications for users of a certain age.

5:19That's going to be the real history-making piece of these trials if the states are able to win and get the judge on their side. Lily, many thanks. Our North America technology correspondent Lily Jamali there in San Francisco. Well, earlier I spoke to California's Attorney General Rob Bonta, who, as we were just hearing, has brought the case alongside three other attorneys general from Colorado, Kentucky, New Jersey. He told me more about the Meta features that he believes are harming children. We are bringing a lawsuit that the trial for which starts tomorrow in federal court in California against Meta for designing a dangerous product that is dangerous, defective and illegal.

6:04They had created features that harm children, the mental health of children, features that created anxiety, depression, addictive tendencies, body image issues, learning loss. And they were features like autoplay and infinite scroll, beeps and alerts, likes, ephemeral content that disappears. And they knew about the dangers that were created in these features, and they lied about them to the public. That is the core our case, the lying, the deception, the knowing harm visited upon millions of children and their lies about it publicly that they made to Congress and to other places. They've also misused and mishandled the privacy of children under 13 that violates federal law.

6:49So that is the core of our allegations that we look forward to holding Mehta accountable in court with the trial that starts tomorrow. And what would that look like being held accountable? Yeah, we want the lies to end the deception to end. We are also hopeful that the features that harm kids will be no longer used going forward prospectively. And there is also, based on the laws that we are bringing our complaint under, the possibility for financial penalties, restitution, and disgorgement. Those are the three categories. They're all financial. So we're looking for significant financial payments by Metta in those categories as well.

7:32Very significant from what I read in excess of a trillion dollars. That's what Metta says and that's I'll call it fuzzy math. The judge is going to decide what's appropriate at the end. I think Metta has looked at you know the absolute highest possible in any scenario that a financial penalty could be imposed against them. And it's a little bit ironic to see Meta, which grossed$200 billion just last year, to cry poor and talk about the financial pain that they might endure. Should we win? But a judge is going to make the ultimate decision. Maybe it's one year of revenue,$200 billion. Maybe it's more.

8:16Maybe it's less. But I'm doubtful that that$1.3 or$1.4 trillion number, Meta is advancing, will be what it will be. Meta wasn't available for an interview with us. they did send us the following statement. I'm going to read it in full because you've set out your case clearly. They say the state AGs, state attorney generals, may call this a landmark case, but their limited claims are unsubstantiated. Their financial demands are vastly disproportionate. The AGs offer no proof anyone in their states was misled, claim benign features like having an additional Instagram account somehow harm their residents and attempt to penalise Meta for industry-wide challenges like age verification.

8:55Rather than sticking to the facts or the law, The states have instead decided to chase an outlandish payout. We stand by our record of creating strong protection for teens and look forward to making our case in court. How do you respond to that? That's an extraordinary amount of minimization of the conduct that they've engaged in that has led to massive court losses already in L.A., in New Mexico. We're up next. So it feels like a little denialism. nihilism but if they want to put their head in the sand and deny what they've done and go into court against my state and three other states with that position that's of course up to them.

9:36What about their allegation that you're singling them out because you are talking about industry-wide issues aren't you? We are I've always said this is an industry-wide issue and you know they're playing the victim and seeing they're being singled out is demonstrably false they know that we have sued TikTok they know that we have a lawsuit against TikTok right now they We know that there are over 40 lawsuits across the country against TikTok that, you know, this crying poor and playing the victim, not very becoming for one of the richest companies in the world. But if that's their strategy, they're free to advance it.

10:09We are concerned about the industry. We're concerned with YouTube. We're concerned with Snap. We're concerned with TikTok. We've taken action to address this industry wide issue. and we hope that the industry can stop hurting kids. As a father and as the Attorney General for the biggest state in the nation, that is my hope here, that prospectively the practices that hurt kids, that not only hurt kids, will end and that there will be accountability from all of those in the industry, including Meta, for doing so. That is Rob Bonta, the Attorney General of California. He's the Attorney General taking the lead in that case, which a number of states are taking against Meta and it begins tomorrow.

10:47Coming up later on the programme, new destinations and new trains on the horizon for Eurostar and for services to the continent, which leaves one dilemma, where to sit. I'll need to make sure I get a good seat on the top deck of these double-deck trains. That's the place to be. You don't want to be downstairs. You want to be upstairs with the best views. On a double, double, double-decker train. We'll hear how an announcement today will mean new experiences and new ways for us to get to Europe in just a few years' time. now though the next general election could be nearly three years away or it could be sooner well whenever it comes reform uk is already setting out its stall on one of the big issues of the day welfare reform the party's finance spokesman robert jenrick today unveiled the details of a plan which reform says would save up to 50 billion pounds their proposals include stopping foreign nationals from receiving most benefits and requiring long-term claimants to help to clean up their local high street or face being stripped of their payments.

11:44Well, the BBC's Joe Pike spoke to Robert Jenrick earlier today and he joins me now. So, Joe, what did he have to say? Jamie, he argues these plans are bold and radical yet compassionate. Opposition parties, or other parties rather, say they're unworkable. Other parts of the policies in this big document include replacing the disability benefits regime, introducing more face-to-face reassessments and also making companies pay for employees off sick for the first couple of years. That would be cost neutral reform, say, because it will be offset by a national insurance cut. But do the numbers add up?

12:20When I sat down with Robert Jenrick, he couldn't actually tell me how the party got to this£50 billion a year saving, how many people would have their benefits cut to get to that point. And I put it to him that critics might argue the party isn't ready for government and it's not a serious plan. What an insult to all of the people who've contributed to this piece of work, which is the most comprehensive plan that any political party has put forward. But you can't say how many people will be affected. Let's just say the Tory party have done a two or three page note. But you're not able to say how many millions were affected by this.

12:58The Labour government have produced a series of reports. They keep kicking this thing into the long grass, never getting anything done. What about your plan, Mr General? We've put forward a 50-page plan. Without any details of how many people will be affected. People have travelled the world, looking at other countries, taking inspiration from the places where they've got things right. Is this a serious plan? Learning from the places. Of course it is. This is the most serious plan that any political party has put forward in a very long time. Now, Labour argue these plans are fantasy economics and built on stripping support from disabled people and shifting costs onto employers.

13:34The Conservatives say it's a half-baked policy aimed at distracting from what they call Farage's fishy five million and his embarrassing underperformance in what they call his pointless by-election. To be fair, there is political consensus that the benefit system does need reform. Disagreement, of course, on how to do it. The government have this TIMSS review into disability and sickness benefits. that's due to report this autumn, Jamie, and one major unknown, of course, is what Labour MPs will make of it and whether they will vote for their government's next set of reforms on this area of welfare reform.

14:08Joe, many thanks. Joe Pike there. Well, let's turn to what the impact of this might be politically for reform. Call us to Five Lives phone in this morning. They were fairly evenly split on what they thought of the party's new policies. This is Ronnie, though, calling in from Northampton. And he said he'd voted reform at the last election, but would now be switching back to Labour at the next one. And Five Lives Arena Ahmed asked whether that was because of what had been announced today. Yes, it has. Yeah. Yeah. And this is the only factor? Yes, it's picking on, well, it's picking on disabled people.

14:47It's like the Green Party spokesman said, punching hard on disabled people. and I think that is wrong and it's just pure evil. So is that a straw in the wind as the reform party tries to appeal to new voters? Does it risk losing some of its existing supporters in the process and is that perhaps something they've factored in? Well, joining us to discuss that, Luke Trill, Director of the polling company More in Common. Good evening, Luke. Good evening. So what do reform voters think or what have they told you and other pollsters they think about, for example, spending on benefits like PIP? But are they less united on that issue than on something like immigration, for example?

15:28Well, there's no doubt that reform voters tend to think that the welfare bill is too big and that it is currently disincentivising people from going into work. And in fact, there's actually quite a lot of cross-party agreement on that question. However, when it comes to how do you deal with that, and in particular whether the current benefit regime is too generous, that's actually something that splits the reform coalition. So reform voters are very united on questions of immigration, on crime, on this sort of broader sense of national decline. But actually on economic questions like how generous are benefits, but also other questions around things like nationalisation, there's actually quite a wedge in the party between voters who've come to reform from parties like the Conservatives, and they tend to favour much less generous benefits and less generous welfare system.

16:25But voters who come to the party from Labour tend to take a different type of view. And in fact, last year, when we were talking to people about the government's proposed cuts to PIP, actually one of the biggest reasons for people saying they'd previously voted Labour but were now voting reform was actually that they didn't like the government's PIP cuts. So there's a danger for reform, particularly on its left flank, if it looks like it's been overly punitive in this benefits policy. So I wonder what you think today's announcement tells us about, you know, reform's broader strategy. Well, I think particularly since the defection of Robert Jenrick and some other conservatives to reform, What we've seen is the party adopt a more kind of traditionally right-wing, traditionally conservative economic policy.

17:19In fact, previously, some of their policies were a bit more statist. It wasn't that long ago that actually Nigel Farage backed a partial repeal of the two-child benefit cap. Since the defection of Jenrick, the party has moved in a more right-leaning defection. And I think what they're trying to do there is basically to establish themselves as the major party on the right, and at the same time show that they've got more to offer than just policies on immigration, which is a criticism from voters. The challenge, of course, there is that that strategy relies on them really squeezing the Conservatives.

17:58and in recent months, if not recovery, the Conservatives seem to have shown, you know, a bit of stabilisation. Kemi Baden-Ock's personal ratings are up, the party is hovering around 20%. Not great, but not squeezed. And I think that's the challenge for reform. They can lean right on economics if they can squeeze the Conservatives, but if they can't, they need more voters from the left too who might not like, as I say, what they see as a more punitive approach. And what of laying out policy like this in some detail, what could be several years before general election? Well, I think, again, I think this is trying to get past this sort of criticism that reform is both a one policy party, the idea that they only focus on immigration, which is a big issue for lots of voters and the primary driver of voters to reform, but also perhaps a little bit as well that there are one man band in Nigel Farage, and it's notable Robert Jenrick has been the face of this.

18:58So I think this is the party trying to diversify and perhaps as well respond to the fact that they have had a little bit of a dip in the polls. They've gone from being close to 30 % or above this time last year to down in the mid-20s and leapfrogged by Labour this year, particularly since Andy Burnham came in. So it might be an attempt to get back on the front foot. Luke, many, many thanks. Luke Trill, director of the polling company More in Common there. Now, in the past couple of hours, FIFA has confirmed that one of its most senior executives, Chief Operating Officer Kevin Lamour, has left the governing football body.

19:36Three weeks ago, he strongly criticised FIFA President Gianni Infantino's aborted plan to sell stakes in competitions to private investors. FIFA has declined to comment on reports that Lamour had been sacked. Well, the BBC's Football Issues correspondent, Dale Johnson, is on the line. So, Dale, first of all, just remind us about the controversy that led to Kevin Lamour making those comments about Gianni Infantino. Yeah, so it centres around what you just mentioned there and the attempt to get private investment into the commercial rights of competitions like the World Cup. And this was controversial because it was seemingly done by a small group of senior leaders at FIFA, including Infantino.

20:19And then this was presented to member associations. We have a short window to accept the deal. And if it didn't accept it, they would miss out on millions of pounds of extra funding that came with it. Now, there was an angry action from many confederations, including UEFA, European football's governing body, as well as North America and the Caribbean and also Asia. And Infantino eventually scrapped the idea after UEFA said it would pull out of all FIFA competitions, a threat which has not yet been fully removed. But, well, whether he's been removed or not, he's gone. Kevin Lemoyne, he was the highest profile person within FIFA.

20:53Was he to criticise the plans? Yeah, he has in terms of him being an actual employee, being the chief operating officer and a member of the management board. So clearly when somebody comes out and says that FIFA's own administration was deceived about this plan, then he was likely to lose his job. And I think he knew that himself when he said, after he made the comments, that he would sleep well tonight after he got that off his chest. Now, there's also Carlos Cadero, who is one of Infantino's closest senior revisers. Now, he actually quit on the same day that Le Mans had made that criticism. He called it a bad deal for football and a bad deal for the long-term future of the game.

21:33Where does this all leave Gianni Infantino in a stronger position within FI? Well, it's not really anything's changed, I don't think, because when you consider that Le Mans was so critical, I don't think there was any way that he could stay on as part of the management board after he'd made that accusation of deception. Now, what happens next? We don't really know. Infantino is carrying on as though it's business as usual. He was on duty at the Women's African Champions League final at the weekend. But there's a real split in world football now. And what's going to be really interesting is a FIFA council meeting, which is next due to meet in October, that has 36 members of confederations and FA heads.

22:09And that seems to be a split almost completely down the middle in terms of pro-Infantino and anti-Infantino. Now, Infantino may be able to get the 106 votes he needs to be elected from the member associations, but whether he's got the political power there to still govern the organisation, that seems to be unclear. Dale, many thanks to BBC's Football Issues correspondent, Dale Johnson, there. Quick reminder, if you want to listen back to any of this programme or to previous ones, you can go to BBC Sounds, where you can also download the podcast. The main headline so far on The World Tonight, a landmark court case will begin in California tomorrow about children and social media addiction.

22:49The state's Attorney-General told this programme that as a father, he hoped that, in his words, the industry will stop hurting kids. And one more story to bring you. In the past few moments, the government has announced that from next year, all eligible disabled people in England will get free bus travel all day, every day. Currently, disabled bus passes are only valid for travel between 9.30 and 11pm during weekdays. the government is now removing these time restrictions so that disabled bus pass holders can always travel for free. Now, any Russian who wants to use next month's parliamentary elections to register their opposition to a war with Ukraine that's well into its fifth year is now politically homeless.

23:32Two court verdicts today confirm that Russia's one anti-war party, Yabloka, a small liberal voice in a sea of broadly pro-Kremlin parties, is no longer tolerated. Yabloka, which means apple in English, is now a forbidden fruit after Russia's Supreme Court upheld a ban on its participation in the election. In a separate ruling in the western city of Pskov, the party's deputy chairman Lev Schlossberg was sentenced to 11 years in a penal colony for condemning the war in Ukraine. His fellow Yabloka politician Dmitry Anisimov gave this reaction outside the court.

24:10From the perspective of the Constitution, this verdict is completely unlawful. Lev Markovitch Slosberg was sentenced, just think about it, to 11 years for two online posts. Not for some crime against a person, but simply for words. Well, as he put it, such is the price of peace and freedom. I hope this verdict will be challenged in the appellate courts. it's absolutely Stalinist and barbaric, unworthy of our Russia. We'll get more on that case against Lev Schlossberg in a moment. First, though, to Moscow and the ruling against the Yabloka Party more generally. I've been hearing more from our Russia editor, Steve Rosenberg.

24:48This was an appeal hearing. Yabloka appealed the decision by the Supreme Court taken a few days ago to bar it from next month's parliamentary election. The official reason given for that decision was alleged violations of copyright in campaign materials and alleged financing from abroad. That was the reason given. But it's widely believed that this was a political decision to remove Jabloka from the ballot paper and from the election because of its anti-war view. And in this appeal hearing, the judge rejected the appeal. And so Yablaka will not be taking part in the parliamentary election, which is actually quite extraordinary.

25:31When you think that a couple of weeks ago, this party was officially registered and was allowed to take part in the election. And yet a few days later, the decision was overturned, was overruled. And what had happened in the intervening days? It's a key question. And it seems that after the party was registered, it became clear to the people in power here that actually Yabloka's anti-war views, anti-war program was more popular with the Russian public than had been anticipated. that Jablika was going up in the polls faster than the Kremlin had expected. And so the decision was taken, probably at a very high level, to change the plan and remove Jablika from the race.

26:19And a senior member of the party separately sent to prison. That's right. Further pressure on the Jablika party when Lev Schlossberg was sentenced to 11 years, more than 11 years in prison. He'd been accused of discrediting the Russian armed forces and spreading false information about the Russian army. He had condemned the war in Ukraine and many of his supporters claimed this was a political trial, a show trial, and that he was being punished for his anti-war views. I think this is another sign that in Russia right now, there is less and less space for views which are different from those of the Kremlin.

27:06You know, Yabloka's program, Yabloka's official slogan is peace and freedom. But it's clear that the Kremlin wants to push on with its so-called special military operation, the war in Ukraine. And so the Yabloka position contradicts the Kremlin position. That's why Yabloka is not taking part in the election. separate development today that senior Russian banker losing his job after making comments a short while ago about the impact that the war in Ukraine is having on the Russian economy. Yeah, Andrei Klepach was a senior economist at a key Russian bank, Vneshek Anonbank. He'd been working there in that position for years.