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.

  • easily3667@lemmus.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    It’s called “history”, not “outdated”. Op is comparing a historical behavior with a current behavior.

    • NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      18 hours ago

      The current tobacco companies are no longer any more evil than any other business is my point. It’s a bad comparison for a modern day Social Media company, especially since so little of the population today was around for when Tobacco companies were at their worst.

        • NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          19 minutes ago

          “Op didn’t say social media companies today are like tobacco companies today”

          I don’t see how anybody wouldn’t infer it from the headline.

          also, I read your source and they don’t go into any specific detail about the actions of the big tobacco companies with the exception of labeling cigarette packs as “light, ultra light, mild, etc…” I was around for that and nobody was under the impression that there was a safe cigarette and the remedy just changed from asking the cashier for a pack of “Camel lights” to a pack of “Camel blues.” -At this point in time the Tobacco industry was also already banned from most television and radio marketing, even bilboards ads were disappearing. If comparing social media companies to tobacco companies from 1999 is the standard we’re trying to establish here, then I would have expected RICO cases against Twitter, Facebook, and Google back around some time between 2010-2015 -They are so much worse than that now.