The Internet as we know it is on trial. A major suit claiming social media addiction could give the government unprecedented power.Support my independent journalism:🙏 Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cw/taylorlorenz 🗞️ Substack: https://www.usermag.co A landmark lawsuit in California claims that social media giants like Meta, TikTok, YouTube, and Snapchat are intentionally designing their platforms to be addictive, causing severe mental health issues in minors. But is this really about protecting children, or is it a backdoor to destroy the free and open web? Experts say this lawsuit would set a dangerous legal precedent that gives the government total authority to regulate, censor, and control online content.I sat down with journalist Liz Nolan Brown to break down the bellwether case that could end Section 230 protections and force Big Tech to work with the government to censor the internet like never before. We discuss the controversial claims of "social media addiction," the lack of scientific evidence linking apps to depression, and why this moral panic is similar to that surrounding the telephone decades ago.Ultimately, this lawsuit is about who controls the internet and whether the government should have the power to control 100% of what we see and read online. Follow me:https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz3.0 https://www.tiktok.com/@taylorlorenzhttps://bsky.app/profile/taylorlorenz.bsky.social https://twitter.com/taylorlorenz Topics covered:The "Kagome" lawsuit against Meta, Google, and TikTokDoes social media cause depression and anxiety?The threat to Section 230 and free speechWhy "design defects" are the new legal weaponThe history of moral panics in technology online privacy and surveillancegovernment control of the internet

Ask this episode

“What did the council decide on item 42?” — answered with the speaker and the moment.

Transcript

Related