Latest / Question Everything / Judge Compares Meta to a Factory Emitting ‘Noxious Pollution’ in a Landmark Ruling

Transcript

Judge Compares Meta to a Factory Emitting ‘Noxious Pollution’ in a Landmark Ruling · Question Everything

• 0:02
  Speaker 1: Hey, everybody. This is Question Everything from KCRW and Placement Theory,
• 0:09
  Speaker 1: where we investigate how the truth gets buried, distorted, denied,
• 0:12
  Speaker 1: and the ways people are fighting to make it matter again.
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: I'm Brian Reed. And today on the show, a ruling
• 0:18
  Speaker 1: on the legal showdown in New Mexico with Meta.
• 0:21
  Speaker 2: It's a big one.
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: We break it down with our reporter who was at
• 0:23
  Speaker 1: the trial in Santa Fe, one of the only reporters
• 0:26
  Speaker 1: who was there. Stick around. This is just a tiny
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: peek into our production process here. We worked on this
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: series about New Mexico suing META, a big landmark suit,
• 0:41
  Speaker 1: the first of its kind, sent two reporters, producer Zach St.
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: Louis and executive producer Robin Simeon, to Santa Fe to
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: watch part of this trial. We put out two episodes.
• 0:50
  Speaker 1: You should go listen to them. We'll link to them
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: in the show notes, including one last week, the most
• 0:54
  Speaker 1: recent one. And the question of those episodes was, What
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: is the judge, Judge Brian Biedscheid was his name, a
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: New Mexico state judge, going to force Meta to change
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: about its apps, Instagram, Facebook, WhatsApp, to keep the kids
• 1:09
  Speaker 1: of New Mexico safe? The state had proven to a
• 1:12
  Speaker 1: jury that Meta's apps were dangerous for kids, they were addictive,
• 1:16
  Speaker 1: and also they were exposing them on a mass scale
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: to sexual predators. We didn't know when the judge was
• 1:22
  Speaker 1: going to rule when we released this episode last week.
• 1:25
  Speaker 1: We just said, when he does, we will come back
• 1:27
  Speaker 1: and let you know what he decided. Our producer, Zach St. Louis,
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: back with me here this week.
• 1:32
  Speaker 2: Hi, Brian.
• 1:33
  Speaker 1: In the studio. Good to see you again, Zach.
• 1:35
  Speaker 2: Thank you.
• 1:36
  Speaker 1: And this is kind of crazy. So basically, we dropped
• 1:38
  Speaker 1: this episode last week on Thursday.
• 1:41
  Speaker 3: Okay.
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: Four in the morning Eastern time.
• 1:43
  Speaker 2: Which is the normal time.
• 1:45
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it wasn't a special time. That's when our episodes
• 1:46
  Speaker 1: go live. And then when did he issue his ruling?
• 1:49
  Speaker 2: I got an email just before seven o'clock that evening
• 1:52
  Speaker 2: that he had issued his ruling. And we had no
• 1:54
  Speaker 2: idea that it was coming last week. It could have
• 1:56
  Speaker 2: been another month. It could have been later this year.
• 1:58
  Speaker 1: Waiting for a couple months at that point, right?
• 2:00
  Speaker 2: Yeah, we've been waiting since mid-June.
• 2:02
  Speaker 1: Okay. So really, what a stroke of timing.
• 2:05
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 2:05
  Speaker 1: So this ruling came in, top line, what did the
• 2:08
  Speaker 1: judge decide?
• 2:10
  Speaker 2: I would say the headline you could put into two buckets.
• 2:13
  Speaker 2: The first bucket is the abatement plan, it's called. These
• 2:17
  Speaker 2: are things that the state asked the judge to consider
• 2:22
  Speaker 2: funding for to fix the harms that they say met
• 2:26
  Speaker 2: a cause to teens in New Mexico.
• 2:29
  Speaker 1: And the harm is what that they're trying to fix?
• 2:31
  Speaker 2: The harm is, you know, connecting children to predators is
• 2:34
  Speaker 2: a big thing that they found in the evidence in
• 2:36
  Speaker 2: this case that formed the basis of this ruling. and
• 2:41
  Speaker 2: mental health harms to teens and to kids in New Mexico.
• 2:45
  Speaker 1: And how much money?
• 2:47
  Speaker 2: The abatement plan is $ 567 million, and that's on top
• 2:51
  Speaker 2: of the $ 375 million that the jury already ordered Mehta
• 2:56
  Speaker 2: to pay in penalties to the state for breaking the law.
• 3:00
  Speaker 2: That was in the first phase of this trial. So
• 3:01
  Speaker 2: in total, that's $ 942 million that Mehta will have to
• 3:05
  Speaker 2: pay New Mexico.
• 3:06
  Speaker 1: Nearly a billion dollars.
• 3:07
  Speaker 3: Mm-hmm.
• 3:07
  Speaker 2: It's the most Meta has ever had to pay in
• 3:10
  Speaker 2: any trial ever. Okay.
• 3:12
  Speaker 1: So that's bucket one. What's the other bucket?
• 3:14
  Speaker 2: Bucket two are changes, actual changes, that Meta has to
• 3:18
  Speaker 2: make to their apps to continue operating legally in the state.
• 3:22
  Speaker 2: And there's a bunch of these that the state asked for.
• 3:24
  Speaker 2: The judge granted some, not all.
• 3:26
  Speaker 1: This is that menu, the seven-page menu we talked about
• 3:28
  Speaker 1: in our show last week about all the recommendations and
• 3:31
  Speaker 1: suggestions for New Mexico had for how they wanted Instagram
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: and Facebook and WhatsApp to change.
• 3:35
  Speaker 2: Exactly. It's that list. It's called injunctive relief.
• 3:39
  Speaker 1: Reading through this decision, like you were at the trial,
• 3:41
  Speaker 1: you watched the judge listening closely, like, where does the
• 3:44
  Speaker 1: judge feel sound like he's skeptical? Where does the judge sound,
• 3:48
  Speaker 1: you know, like he's riled up? Where does the judge
• 3:50
  Speaker 1: sound like he's confused? Like you were really paying close
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: attention to this. And now here is his ruling. How
• 3:55
  Speaker 1: did you feel reading it?
• 3:58
  Speaker 2: You know, it's a 68 page document. If you read it,
• 4:00
  Speaker 2: you can sort of see him puzzling through some of
• 4:03
  Speaker 2: these questions that no other American judge has had to
• 4:05
  Speaker 2: consider before and lay out his thinking for why some
• 4:08
  Speaker 2: of these things are okay under the law, why some
• 4:12
  Speaker 2: of them might not be, his thinking about why he
• 4:14
  Speaker 2: ordered certain things and not others. The overall feeling I
• 4:17
  Speaker 2: had was, wow, this judge is really, really thoughtful about
• 4:20
  Speaker 2: some of these things that he's ordering.
• 4:21
  Speaker 1: And do you think the things he chose to go
• 4:23
  Speaker 1: for and grant to the state versus the things he
• 4:26
  Speaker 1: chose to say no to like in the overall picture,
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: what was your takeaway?
• 4:33
  Speaker 2: In terms of the child sexual exploitation, and I think
• 4:36
  Speaker 2: this might be the most impactful thing that the judge decided,
• 4:40
  Speaker 2: is that teens in New Mexico, so New Mexico teens
• 4:43
  Speaker 2: on Instagram and on Facebook who have accounts, will no
• 4:46
  Speaker 2: longer be able to be found in search or be
• 4:49
  Speaker 2: recommended to adults that they're not connected to on these apps.
• 4:54
  Speaker 2: So basically putting up a wall between kids and adults
• 4:57
  Speaker 2: they're not connected to I should say that Meta made
• 4:59
  Speaker 2: this a policy in the last couple of years with
• 5:01
  Speaker 2: their teen accounts. But the judge here is mandating it,
• 5:03
  Speaker 2: saying that they have to keep it. No teen account
• 5:06
  Speaker 2: will be able to be recommended to an adult they're
• 5:09
  Speaker 2: not connected to. And like a people you may know
• 5:12
  Speaker 2: or in any other kind of way, the adult in
• 5:14
  Speaker 2: order to follow that teen account will need to know
• 5:18
  Speaker 2: the specific username of that teen. So that still allows,
• 5:21
  Speaker 2: you know, aunts and uncles and your parents to be
• 5:23
  Speaker 2: able to connect with and follow the teen accounts. But
• 5:27
  Speaker 2: it won't recommend those accounts to any adults they're not
• 5:30
  Speaker 2: already connected to.
• 5:31
  Speaker 1: And that was happening?
• 5:32
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, this came out in the course of
• 5:34
  Speaker 2: this trial that Meta acknowledged internally that at one point
• 5:38
  Speaker 2: the Instagram algorithm was funneling the accounts of minors to
• 5:41
  Speaker 2: suspected groomers at four times the rate than they were
• 5:44
  Speaker 2: being recommended to, you know, just normal adults. So there
• 5:47
  Speaker 2: was something... That is so crazy. Yeah, I mean, there
• 5:51
  Speaker 2: was something in the algorithm that was connecting the groomers
• 5:54
  Speaker 2: to the kids.
• 5:55
  Speaker 1: Well, yeah, it's like a groomers account might be looking
• 5:57
  Speaker 1: at kids' accounts a little more than a non-groomer adult account.
• 6:01
  Speaker 1: And so the algorithms tries to give you more of
• 6:03
  Speaker 1: what you like. That's a very dark, I guess, inference,
• 6:06
  Speaker 1: but that seemed to be what was happening.
• 6:07
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 6:08
  Speaker 2: And there was evidence to that end that the judge
• 6:10
  Speaker 2: heard in the trial, and he based his decision on that.
• 6:12
  Speaker 2: And so he found that this point in particular was
• 6:16
  Speaker 2: what was putting kids most at risk. There were some
• 6:18
  Speaker 2: others that I was maybe surprised that he didn't go for.
• 6:23
  Speaker 2: One was one that we talked a lot about in
• 6:24
  Speaker 2: our last episode, which was end-to-end encryption, which is the
• 6:27
  Speaker 2: technology that means that only the sender and receiver of
• 6:31
  Speaker 2: a private message can actually read the message. Even the
• 6:34
  Speaker 2: company that's hosting it, in this case Meta, can't read
• 6:37
  Speaker 2: that message. The state really wanted that to be turned
• 6:40
  Speaker 2: off for teens in New Mexico.
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: Just to put a fine point on it, a teen
• 6:44
  Speaker 1: might be talking to an adult who is sending them
• 6:48
  Speaker 1: porn or asking them to send them porn. asking to
• 6:53
  Speaker 1: meet up in person like this is specifically the kind
• 6:55
  Speaker 1: of stuff that New Mexico's investigators found in their sting
• 7:00
  Speaker 1: operation where they made fake profiles for kids on the
• 7:03
  Speaker 1: platforms which we talked about in the first episode we
• 7:05
  Speaker 1: did about this.
• 7:05
  Speaker 2: Case yeah I mean it's a very real thing that
• 7:08
  Speaker 2: happens and the judge heard a lot of evidence about
• 7:10
  Speaker 2: just how frequently that happens that kids are being connected
• 7:13
  Speaker 2: to groomers or predators on these platforms.
• 7:16
  Speaker 1: So did he say Yeah, State, you're right. Kids shouldn't
• 7:19
  Speaker 1: have end-to-end encryption on Meta's platforms.
• 7:21
  Speaker 2: Not exactly. So one important thing to know here is
• 7:24
  Speaker 2: that Meta actually shut down end-to-end encryption on its messaging
• 7:29
  Speaker 2: on Instagram in May. That was during this trial. So
• 7:33
  Speaker 2: that shut down fully on Instagram.
• 7:35
  Speaker 1: They did it on their own, just like they weren't
• 7:37
  Speaker 1: forced to. They just chose to.
• 7:38
  Speaker 2: They chose to do it on their own. You know,
• 7:40
  Speaker 2: you could read into it that they're doing it because
• 7:42
  Speaker 2: of these trials. They're doing it because they're being sued
• 7:44
  Speaker 2: by all of these states.
• 7:46
  Speaker 3: But.
• 7:46
  Speaker 2: Regardless, they did shut it down on Instagram. And so
• 7:50
  Speaker 2: what the judge ordered is that Instagram has to keep
• 7:53
  Speaker 2: end-to-end encryption shut off for a period of at least
• 7:56
  Speaker 2: five years so that kids won't be able to use
• 7:59
  Speaker 2: end-to-end encryption. But also, the judge did not make a
• 8:01
  Speaker 2: ruling about end-to-end encryption on Facebook Messenger and on WhatsApp,
• 8:05
  Speaker 2: Meta's two other apps. So Meta is allowed to keep
• 8:08
  Speaker 2: end-to-end encryption technology on those platforms.
• 8:11
  Speaker 1: For teens as well?
• 8:12
  Speaker 2: For everyone, yeah.
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: Why did he allow it there?
• 8:14
  Speaker 2: Well, for two reasons. One is he said many, many
• 8:17
  Speaker 2: more teens are using Instagram than are using Facebook and WhatsApp.
• 8:20
  Speaker 2: So he just didn't see it as big of a
• 8:22
  Speaker 2: risk there. Also, he heard a lot of evidence about
• 8:25
  Speaker 2: the benefits to privacy that end-to-end encryption provides on Facebook
• 8:30
  Speaker 2: Messenger and on WhatsApp. And he felt that people have
• 8:33
  Speaker 2: a right to that privacy, even teens. And so that
• 8:36
  Speaker 2: outweighed some of the child safety concerns when it came
• 8:39
  Speaker 2: to end-to-end encryption.
• 8:40
  Speaker 1: And so what surprised you about this part of his decision?
• 8:43
  Speaker 2: What surprised me about that is that I spoke to
• 8:46
  Speaker 2: an expert witness for the state, this computer scientist from
• 8:49
  Speaker 2: UMass Amherst. His name is Dr. Brian Levine. I'm sure
• 8:51
  Speaker 2: you remember. This was the biggest thing he wanted to
• 8:56
  Speaker 2: see the judge do in this case. He wanted to
• 8:58
  Speaker 2: see end-to-end encryption go away. In his experience as a
• 9:01
  Speaker 2: child safety expert, as an online child safety expert, somebody
• 9:04
  Speaker 2: who builds tools to help stop child sexual exploitation online.
• 9:08
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 9:09
  Speaker 2: His expert advice was get rid of this. Stop end-to-end
• 9:13
  Speaker 2: encryption on these apps.
• 9:14
  Speaker 1: For kids.
• 9:15
  Speaker 2: For kids.
• 9:15
  Speaker 1: And he was saying specifically keep it for adults and
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: get rid of it for kids.
• 9:19
  Speaker 2: Oh, yeah. He's like a privacy researcher. He's a very
• 9:21
  Speaker 2: pro-privacy guy. He just said that in his experience, this
• 9:24
  Speaker 2: is a big problem for kids specifically. You might remember
• 9:28
  Speaker 2: he said that analogy about a car seat. You know,
• 9:30
  Speaker 2: we don't keep kids out of cars. We just give
• 9:32
  Speaker 2: them a car seat until they're the appropriate age. That's
• 9:34
  Speaker 2: the type of measure he wanted to see done here
• 9:36
  Speaker 2: with end-to-end encryption. And it didn't happen. So that's why
• 9:39
  Speaker 2: it was surprising to me. The state argued quite forcefully
• 9:41
  Speaker 2: for it. And the judge kind of seemed like he
• 9:44
  Speaker 2: was open to it. But in the end, yeah, he
• 9:47
  Speaker 2: didn't create a ban on end-to-end encryption for kids.
• 9:50
  Speaker 1: But he kind of did. Like, if I'm listening to
• 9:52
  Speaker 1: you correctly, like, and maybe it's kind of because Meta
• 9:54
  Speaker 1: gave him an out. Meta got rid of end-to-end encryption
• 9:57
  Speaker 1: wholesale of their own volition. on Instagram. And that's where
• 10:02
  Speaker 1: most of the activity of kids is, according to the judge.
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: And so he said, I am going to order you
• 10:09
  Speaker 1: to keep doing that. You're going to continue to ban
• 10:11
  Speaker 1: end-to-end encryption on Instagram.
• 10:13
  Speaker 2: Yeah, and that is what the state wanted for not
• 10:16
  Speaker 2: just this request, but for a lot of these requests.
• 10:18
  Speaker 2: They were pretty clear that if in any of these
• 10:20
  Speaker 2: instances Meta is already doing some of these things, we
• 10:23
  Speaker 2: think that that's great. But we want a court order
• 10:25
  Speaker 2: to force them to continue doing the things that are
• 10:28
  Speaker 2: good and to stop doing the things that are bad.
• 10:30
  Speaker 1: Some actual outside accountability rather than just, you know, scouts
• 10:34
  Speaker 1: on her.
• 10:34
  Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly. Exactly.
• 10:36
  Speaker 1: So another thing that I know the state asked for
• 10:38
  Speaker 1: in our first episode about this case, where Robin, REP,
• 10:42
  Speaker 1: talked to the attorney general in New Mexico, we heard
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: about how much his investigative team, looking into sex crimes,
• 10:49
  Speaker 1: used undercover accounts that they made on Facebook and Instagram
• 10:54
  Speaker 1: in order to catch child predators and also to show
• 10:57
  Speaker 1: how easy it was for child predators to prey on
• 11:00
  Speaker 1: children on those platforms and groom kids. And so the
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: state was like, These undercover accounts are really important. They're
• 11:07
  Speaker 1: helping us catch predators. Meta actually doesn't allow us to
• 11:11
  Speaker 1: have undercover accounts, which really, you know, impedes their investigations.
• 11:16
  Speaker 2: It's against Meta's policy.
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: And so New Mexico, I know, was saying, Judge, we
• 11:20
  Speaker 1: want you to force Meta to allow undercover accounts. And
• 11:23
  Speaker 1: the judge landed where on that one?
• 11:25
  Speaker 2: He didn't weigh in on that at all, actually. He
• 11:27
  Speaker 2: didn't say one way or another. So That's frustrating. Yeah.
• 11:31
  Speaker 2: So Meta can keep that policy. I'm sure these officers
• 11:34
  Speaker 2: will continue trying to have those accounts, but Meta can
• 11:39
  Speaker 2: continue to shut them down.
• 11:40
  Speaker 1: This is one of the ones that you thought that
• 11:43
  Speaker 1: the judge might go for, just from listening to him
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: ask questions of the witnesses in the courtroom.
• 11:48
  Speaker 2: Yeah. I mean, he seemed really skeptical of Meta's defense,
• 11:51
  Speaker 2: that it's just against their policy. He was kind of
• 11:53
  Speaker 2: just like, Why is it not logical to let some
• 11:57
  Speaker 2: law enforcement help you do the enforcement you can't? You know,
• 12:00
  Speaker 2: he's saying to Meta, I'm hearing testimony from you that
• 12:03
  Speaker 2: this is hard, that enforcement is hard.
• 12:05
  Speaker 1: That's what he said in the courtroom.
• 12:06
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 12:06
  Speaker 1: And then in the decision, he just says nada about
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: it at all.
• 12:10
  Speaker 2: So the ruling does lay out some new ways that
• 12:14
  Speaker 2: Meta has to work with law enforcement in New Mexico,
• 12:17
  Speaker 2: work with these internet crimes against children officers. Um, it
• 12:21
  Speaker 2: gets as granular as like someone at Meta needs to
• 12:23
  Speaker 2: have the contact information of an ICAC officer and vice versa.
• 12:28
  Speaker 1: What's ICAC again?
• 12:29
  Speaker 2: ICAC is stands for internet crimes against children. These are
• 12:32
  Speaker 2: units that exist within justice departments and states across the country. Okay.
• 12:37
  Speaker 1: So wait, who needs whose phone number?
• 12:39
  Speaker 2: Um, Let me see exactly what it says in the order.
• 12:42
  Speaker 2: So basically the judge is saying somebody at Meta. needs
• 12:59
  Speaker 2: to give their email and phone number, their direct email
• 13:01
  Speaker 2: and phone number to someone in the Internet Crimes Against
• 13:04
  Speaker 2: Children Division at the New Mexico Department of Justice. And
• 13:07
  Speaker 2: that needs to be maintained. So the judge is ordering
• 13:09
  Speaker 2: a few things that make it so that the ICAC
• 13:12
  Speaker 2: unit can better work with META.
• 13:14
  Speaker 1: Was this an issue that the sex crimes investigators in
• 13:17
  Speaker 1: New Mexico were having? They were trying to call META
• 13:19
  Speaker 1: and couldn't get through?
• 13:20
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, the testimony that I heard from, his
• 13:24
  Speaker 2: name is Jonathan Talley. He's an ICAC investigator who testified
• 13:27
  Speaker 2: in this phase of the trial. Robin and I interviewed
• 13:30
  Speaker 2: him after his testimony, and I had heard him on
• 13:32
  Speaker 2: the stand. And I told him, I said, you know,
• 13:34
  Speaker 2: your testimony, you made it sound like I could kind
• 13:37
  Speaker 2: of sum it up with the headline of meta makes
• 13:39
  Speaker 2: my job harder. And he kind of laughed and was like, yeah,
• 13:41
  Speaker 2: that's exactly right. Meta makes my job harder. And it's
• 13:43
  Speaker 2: for exactly this reason. They make it difficult to get
• 13:45
  Speaker 2: the cyber tips they need, difficult to get the information
• 13:48
  Speaker 2: they need. Sometimes they're hard to communicate with. And so
• 13:51
  Speaker 2: this order is trying to make it so that ICAC
• 13:54
  Speaker 2: and Meta can work together more closely to prosecute predators.
• 13:58
  Speaker 1: And how do you feel about the fact that the
• 14:00
  Speaker 1: judge didn't give this ask that we force Meta to
• 14:03
  Speaker 1: allow undercover accounts?
• 14:05
  Speaker 2: I thought he was going to go for it. On
• 14:07
  Speaker 2: the other hand, it's like allowing police officers to operate
• 14:11
  Speaker 2: undercover digital accounts. Like, is that a slippery slope to
• 14:16
  Speaker 2: a surveillance state of law enforcement? Obviously, I don't want
• 14:19
  Speaker 2: predators contacting children on these apps, but are they going
• 14:23
  Speaker 2: to start going after people for who knows what? Are
• 14:26
  Speaker 2: ICE agents going to get undercover accounts to be able
• 14:28
  Speaker 2: to track down undocumented immigrants and deport them? Like, I
• 14:32
  Speaker 2: can see how the judge maybe had to weigh that.
• 14:35
  Speaker 1: So let's move on to another part of the ruling
• 14:37
  Speaker 1: where Judge Beachside did give a little more explanation behind
• 14:40
  Speaker 1: his thinking. And that's part of the case that wasn't
• 14:42
  Speaker 1: so much about sexual predators targeting kids on Facebook and Instagram.
• 14:47
  Speaker 1: This had to do more with the mental health of
• 14:49
  Speaker 1: teens and the effect that Instagram and Facebook have on that. Right.
• 14:53
  Speaker 2: So that's where we get into how Facebook and Instagram
• 14:55
  Speaker 2: Meta's products are addictive. And, you know, they heard a
• 14:58
  Speaker 2: lot of evidence in this trial that Meta builds their
• 15:00
  Speaker 2: social media apps to be addictive, specifically to teens.
• 15:04
  Speaker 1: Meta calls it problematic use, not addiction, if I remember correctly.
• 15:07
  Speaker 2: Yes. And the judge says whether or not it's called
• 15:09
  Speaker 2: problematic use or addiction, to me, it's all the same.
• 15:13
  Speaker 2: And he heard evidence.
• 15:14
  Speaker 1: Tomato, tomato.
• 15:15
  Speaker 2: Right. And so he heard evidence in this trial that
• 15:17
  Speaker 2: excessive social media use in teens is leading to all
• 15:20
  Speaker 2: of these negative consequences for them, like depression, suicidal ideation,
• 15:24
  Speaker 2: eating disorders.
• 15:25
  Speaker 1: And so what features, what aspects of the product design
• 15:30
  Speaker 1: specifically was the state of New Mexico asking Meta to
• 15:34
  Speaker 1: or demanding that Meta get rid of or change in
• 15:36
  Speaker 1: some way?
• 15:37
  Speaker 2: So that was things like autoplay, infinite scroll, push notifications.
• 15:43
  Speaker 1: Push notifications, like you're not even on Instagram and you
• 15:46
  Speaker 1: look at your phone and there's like a new notification saying, hey,
• 15:48
  Speaker 1: come check out your friend who just posted.
• 15:49
  Speaker 2: Yeah. Also, like counts, being able to see how many
• 15:52
  Speaker 2: people like your post, a bunch of actual features of
• 15:55
  Speaker 2: the app that are designed to keep you looking at
• 15:57
  Speaker 2: your screen, designed to keep kids on the phone. And
• 16:01
  Speaker 2: the state also asked that Meta change their algorithm to
• 16:05
  Speaker 2: be prioritized for what they called integrity over engagement. And
• 16:09
  Speaker 2: so could it somehow prioritize teen well-being in some way?
• 16:13
  Speaker 2: Or could it somehow be about something other than keeping
• 16:17
  Speaker 2: you locked onto your screen?
• 16:18
  Speaker 1: So New Mexico asked the judge to ban or limit
• 16:21
  Speaker 1: or change a bunch of those features for kids. Where
• 16:24
  Speaker 1: did the judge land on that?
• 16:26
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 16:26
  Speaker 2: So the judge was kind of split down the middle
• 16:30
  Speaker 2: on this. There were kind of six big addictive features,
• 16:32
  Speaker 2: the features that keep kids on the phone. And on
• 16:37
  Speaker 2: three of them, he said, yes, I'm going to make
• 16:40
  Speaker 2: a ruling on this. And on three, he left alone.
• 16:44
  Speaker 2: The three he left alone are autoplay, infinite scroll, and
• 16:48
  Speaker 2: the algorithm. These all have to do with content being
• 16:51
  Speaker 2: fed to teens. And he said that infringes on Meta's
• 16:55
  Speaker 2: First Amendment rights to present the content on their apps
• 16:58
  Speaker 2: the way that they want to present it. So he
• 17:01
  Speaker 2: said no to those, but said yes to Getting rid
• 17:04
  Speaker 2: of push notifications for teens during school hours and sleep
• 17:08
  Speaker 2: hours and actually sets the time that those push notifications
• 17:11
  Speaker 2: would have to be turned off. Turning off like counts
• 17:15
  Speaker 2: on posts so teens won't be able to see how
• 17:18
  Speaker 2: many people like their posts and they won't be able
• 17:21
  Speaker 2: to see like counts on other teens' posts.
• 17:24
  Speaker 1: Why is that addictive?
• 17:25
  Speaker 2: I mean, the judge heard testimony in this case that
• 17:27
  Speaker 2: it's addictive because it, you know, it rewards social approval
• 17:30
  Speaker 2: and keeps you, you know, wanting to get more likes.
• 17:33
  Speaker 2: Can I post a new thing that gets more likes?
• 17:35
  Speaker 2: And they heard evidence that that is true for teens.
• 17:37
  Speaker 2: And so that is turned off by default. You can
• 17:39
  Speaker 2: get your parents permission to turn it back on in
• 17:41
  Speaker 2: the judge's order, but by default, it'll be shut off
• 17:43
  Speaker 2: for teens. And the third one, and I think this
• 17:47
  Speaker 2: one is sort of the most Interesting to me, just
• 17:51
  Speaker 2: because I've never heard of anything quite like it in
• 17:53
  Speaker 2: the U.S., and that is time limits on these apps
• 17:56
  Speaker 2: for teens in New Mexico. So no teen in New
• 17:59
  Speaker 2: Mexico is going to be able to spend more than
• 18:01
  Speaker 2: 90 hours a month in total across Facebook and Instagram combined.
• 18:05
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I don't think I've ever heard of anything like that,
• 18:08
  Speaker 1: you know, in terms of a legal order about how
• 18:10
  Speaker 1: much time a kid can use an app.
• 18:12
  Speaker 2: Yeah, and it's going to be up to Meta to
• 18:13
  Speaker 2: figure out, you know, what happens when a kid hits
• 18:15
  Speaker 2: 90 hours and five seconds. Does the app shut off?
• 18:19
  Speaker 2: Does it freeze? I'm going to be very curious to
• 18:21
  Speaker 2: see how this is going to work, if it goes
• 18:22
  Speaker 2: into effect.
• 18:23
  Speaker 1: Okay, and a big question from your reporting, Zach, what
• 18:26
  Speaker 1: we spent the bulk of last week's episode on was
• 18:30
  Speaker 1: age verification. Basically, the state of New Mexico wanted the
• 18:34
  Speaker 1: judge to force Meta to really confirm a user's age
• 18:39
  Speaker 1: when they sign up.
• 18:40
  Speaker 3: Mm-hmm.
• 18:41
  Speaker 1: For the platform to make sure, in part, that no
• 18:43
  Speaker 1: one under the age of 13 was getting on the platform.
• 18:45
  Speaker 1: That's Meta's own limit, you know, age limit for using it.
• 18:49
  Speaker 1: What did the judge decide on this one?
• 18:51
  Speaker 2: So the judge really didn't go for the state's strict
• 18:53
  Speaker 2: age verification request that they asked for. He went with
• 18:57
  Speaker 2: something much lighter, which was he's asking Meta to improve
• 19:01
  Speaker 2: their model for knowing when a kid is under the
• 19:04
  Speaker 2: age of 13 so that they can kick them off
• 19:06
  Speaker 2: the platform. He ruled that Meta has to improve that
• 19:09
  Speaker 2: model within the next two years. You know, he's asking
• 19:12
  Speaker 2: META to just get better generally at age verification, but
• 19:17
  Speaker 2: is not mandating the specific kind of age checks that
• 19:22
  Speaker 2: the state was asking for.
• 19:23
  Speaker 1: So, like, did he give a metric even? Like, you
• 19:26
  Speaker 1: have to be correct about people's kids' ages this amount
• 19:29
  Speaker 1: of the time?
• 19:30
  Speaker 2: No, there's no metric. It is a little bit vague.
• 19:32
  Speaker 2: And so I think that that, in effect, makes it
• 19:35
  Speaker 2: easier for META to comply with because they don't have
• 19:38
  Speaker 2: to hit some really high bar. The state was asking
• 19:40
  Speaker 2: for 99% accuracy at knowing when kids are under 13.
• 19:44
  Speaker 2: This is much looser. They just have to get better.
• 19:47
  Speaker 1: It doesn't sound like anything's really different.
• 19:48
  Speaker 2: Well, if they get worse. somebody can bring them back
• 19:51
  Speaker 2: to court and say you're not complying with the order. Okay.
• 19:54
  Speaker 2: So some level of pressure on them.
• 19:56
  Speaker 1: Why did he say he wasn't going to mandate, you know,
• 19:59
  Speaker 1: more strict age verification or age checks?
• 20:02
  Speaker 2: The biggest reason the judge said that he couldn't mandate
• 20:05
  Speaker 2: a lot of the age verification requests the state was
• 20:07
  Speaker 2: asking for was because of this federal law. It's called COPPA.
• 20:09
  Speaker 2: It stands for the Children Online Privacy Protection Act. It's
• 20:13
  Speaker 2: from 1998. It's enforced by the FTC. And it's this
• 20:17
  Speaker 2: law that makes it so that online companies, websites, apps
• 20:21
  Speaker 2: cannot track and maintain the personal data of kids under 13.
• 20:25
  Speaker 2: And so.
• 20:27
  Speaker 2: If you're trying to verify their ages and you're trying
• 20:29
  Speaker 2: to get their birthdays, then by definition, you are tracking
• 20:33
  Speaker 2: data about them. And it creates this weird catch-22 where
• 20:36
  Speaker 2: companies are like, yeah, we would love to verify these
• 20:39
  Speaker 2: ages of kids under 13, but we can't because of
• 20:42
  Speaker 2: this law from the 90s.
• 20:43
  Speaker 1: Wait, is Meta saying we would love to verify the
• 20:45
  Speaker 1: ages of kids under 13?
• 20:47
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 20:47
  Speaker 1: Really?
• 20:48
  Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, yeah. In Meta's opening statement, they said exactly that,
• 20:51
  Speaker 2: that this law is what's preventing them from doing that. Here,
• 20:54
  Speaker 2: I can play it actually. This is one of Meta's lawyers,
• 20:57
  Speaker 2: Alex Parkinson.
• 20:58
  Speaker 4: The state wants a system that verifies that users are
• 21:01
  Speaker 4: at least 13 years old to 99% accuracy.
• 21:04
  Speaker 1: Gee, what a great idea.
• 21:05
  Speaker 4: I wish we had thought of that.
• 21:06
  Speaker 1: We did.
• 21:07
  Speaker 4: We tried for four years to build that kind of classifier.
• 21:11
  Speaker 4: And your honor heard the technological problem is COPPA, which
• 21:14
  Speaker 4: the state has no answer for.
• 21:17
  Speaker 2: Snarky. Yeah. Well, yeah, that's sort of Alex Parkinson's MO.
• 21:22
  Speaker 2: That was my impression of him anyway.
• 21:25
  Speaker 1: Okay, interesting. So Meta used this as a defense, basically.
• 21:28
  Speaker 2: Yeah, that's exactly right. And the judge seemed to side
• 21:30
  Speaker 2: with them on this. He says, you're right. This law
• 21:33
  Speaker 2: does kind of prevent you from doing a lot of
• 21:35
  Speaker 2: the things the state is asking for.
• 21:36
  Speaker 1: It is kind of an interesting paradox, because here you
• 21:38
  Speaker 1: have the state of New Mexico, but other places too,
• 21:42
  Speaker 1: saying there's something we feel these companies, these social media
• 21:45
  Speaker 1: companies could do to really protect kids under 13. And
• 21:48
  Speaker 1: that is make sure that no kids under 13 are
• 21:51
  Speaker 1: getting on the apps. And then the thing that's stopping
• 21:54
  Speaker 1: that from happening is another law that's meant to protect
• 21:57
  Speaker 1: kids online, which also seems well-intentioned.
• 22:00
  Speaker 2: Yeah. It speaks to the moment we're in. The internet
• 22:03
  Speaker 2: was so different in the 90s. So it's hard to
• 22:06
  Speaker 2: hold modern technology to a 90s legal standard. And that
• 22:11
  Speaker 2: is what this judge is saying pretty clearly in this ruling.
• 22:14
  Speaker 1: So I know you spent a lot of time just
• 22:15
  Speaker 1: digging into Age verification, particularly because age verification kind of,
• 22:21
  Speaker 1: in a lot of ways, hung over a lot of
• 22:23
  Speaker 1: the other recommendations that the state was asking for. You know, like,
• 22:27
  Speaker 1: how do you know who the time limits, 90 hours
• 22:30
  Speaker 1: time limit for Instagram applies to if you don't really
• 22:33
  Speaker 1: know everyone's age for sure?
• 22:34
  Speaker 3: Right.
• 22:35
  Speaker 2: It shows that this is a really complicated problem. It's
• 22:38
  Speaker 2: a really complicated legal problem. This judge can't even really
• 22:41
  Speaker 2: see his way through it. And I think a lot
• 22:43
  Speaker 2: of people would agree that this law is sort of
• 22:45
  Speaker 2: in the way. of being able to do some of
• 22:49
  Speaker 2: this age verification. So to me, it doesn't reveal this
• 22:52
  Speaker 2: judge's unwillingness to do age verification or that he saw
• 22:56
  Speaker 2: it as unnecessary, but just that it is legally difficult,
• 23:00
  Speaker 2: if not impossible, to do right now.
• 23:03
  Speaker 1: You were telling me in the office a little while
• 23:05
  Speaker 1: ago That polling shows that a lot of Americans support
• 23:10
  Speaker 1: some kind of age checks for kids using social media,
• 23:13
  Speaker 1: like almost three quarters.
• 23:14
  Speaker 2: Or something like that? Yeah, I was really surprised by this.
• 23:15
  Speaker 2: It was definitely over 70% of Americans approve of age verification.
• 23:18
  Speaker 2: It was this Pew poll that I saw. And yeah,
• 23:21
  Speaker 2: I was really, really surprised by that as well.
• 23:23
  Speaker 1: And so if you're one of those Americans listening, it
• 23:26
  Speaker 1: sounds like we might need to change this law kappa
• 23:29
  Speaker 1: in order to allow age verification, at least according to
• 23:32
  Speaker 1: this judge.
• 23:33
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 23:34
  Speaker 2: And you can actually, you know, if you read the
• 23:36
  Speaker 2: verdict carefully, you can see the judge over and over
• 23:40
  Speaker 2: again saying, these are the limits of my role as
• 23:43
  Speaker 2: a judge. You know, this court order can only do
• 23:45
  Speaker 2: so much. A lot of this has to happen throughout
• 23:48
  Speaker 2: the legislative process, whether that's in state houses across the
• 23:50
  Speaker 2: country or in Congress. He actually says in the ruling,
• 23:55
  Speaker 2: you know, this issue, this issue, this issue is better
• 23:57
  Speaker 2: dealt with by passing new laws. All right.
• 24:01
  Speaker 1: We're going to take a quick break, Zach. And when
• 24:03
  Speaker 1: we get back, we're going to talk about who's the
• 24:05
  Speaker 1: winner here. Is it Meta? Is it New Mexico? Is
• 24:08
  Speaker 1: it teenagers in New Mexico? What does this all mean?
• 24:13
  Speaker 1: Stick around. So Zach, I read through the decision and
• 24:24
  Speaker 1: I don't know, I've even just been like chatting with
• 24:26
  Speaker 1: people about it, texting about it with people as they've
• 24:28
  Speaker 1: read the news about it. And I think on its face,
• 24:31
  Speaker 1: it can kind of seem like Meta got a fair
• 24:33
  Speaker 1: number of wins out of the judge here. You know,
• 24:36
  Speaker 1: a lot of the stuff that was maybe kind of
• 24:38
  Speaker 1: the bigger ask, possibly the judge did not force them
• 24:42
  Speaker 1: to do, like age verification, for instance. Do you read
• 24:45
  Speaker 1: it that way?
• 24:45
  Speaker 2: No, I don't, actually. I read it as this is
• 24:49
  Speaker 2: the first state to successfully get this type of ruling
• 24:52
  Speaker 2: against Meta. But I also know that there are 41
• 24:55
  Speaker 2: other states that have near identical lawsuits against Meta pending
• 25:02
  Speaker 2: right now.
• 25:03
  Speaker 1: That is so many states.
• 25:04
  Speaker 2: It's so many. There's a very similar trial actually happening
• 25:07
  Speaker 2: in Tennessee, like right now as we speak. A jury
• 25:10
  Speaker 2: is hearing testimony from some of the same Meta lawyers
• 25:13
  Speaker 2: that I saw in the courtroom in Santa Fe. They
• 25:16
  Speaker 2: are on a national tour. Tennessee's their next stop, you know?
• 25:20
  Speaker 2: And so I see this as the beginning. It's like
• 25:22
  Speaker 2: the first spark of this wildfire that I think is
• 25:25
  Speaker 2: just going to spread across the country.
• 25:26
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 25:26
  Speaker 1: And I also, you know, I thought it was just
• 25:29
  Speaker 1: noteworthy that, you know, even if the judge was relatively
• 25:32
  Speaker 1: circumspect on certain things or used a fair amount of restraint,
• 25:35
  Speaker 1: I don't think that's surprising. Like he said as much
• 25:38
  Speaker 1: in some of the, you know, clips that you played
• 25:39
  Speaker 1: for us last week, like, I'm going to be wary
• 25:42
  Speaker 1: of overstepping my authority as a single judge in New
• 25:45
  Speaker 1: Mexico with these giant companies. But he did not mince
• 25:48
  Speaker 1: words in the decision about Meta's bad behavior and the
• 25:53
  Speaker 1: really harmful impact that they're apps have had on kids
• 25:56
  Speaker 1: in New Mexico. He compared them to a factory, basically,
• 26:00
  Speaker 1: that emits pollution that harms people all throughout the state
• 26:04
  Speaker 1: and wrote, this is a direct quote, the court finds
• 26:07
  Speaker 1: and concludes that just as noxious pollution produced by the
• 26:10
  Speaker 1: factory can harm the common public right to reasonably clean air,
• 26:14
  Speaker 1: the harmful effects of meta's platforms on children do not
• 26:17
  Speaker 1: stay contained by its platforms and instead migrate to the
• 26:21
  Speaker 1: internet as a whole and perhaps most concerning to the
• 26:24
  Speaker 1: real world. and create a common societal burden on and
• 26:27
  Speaker 1: harm to the affected children and their families and schools,
• 26:31
  Speaker 1: as well as hospitals and law enforcement. He's basically saying,
• 26:34
  Speaker 1: I mean, this was a public nuisance case. That's actually
• 26:36
  Speaker 1: the legal term for this, right?
• 26:38
  Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly.
• 26:38
  Speaker 1: He's saying META is a public nuisance to the state
• 26:41
  Speaker 1: of New Mexico. It is polluting the air, metaphorically.
• 26:45
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 26:46
  Speaker 1: And it's air everywhere. It's not just on the internet.
• 26:48
  Speaker 1: It is jumping into the real world. It's affecting our schools, our,
• 26:51
  Speaker 1: you know, medical establishments, law enforcement, and Meta has to pay.
• 26:56
  Speaker 1: And maybe his hands were tied in certain ways, or
• 26:58
  Speaker 1: he felt like this isn't my authority to do. But
• 27:01
  Speaker 1: he wasn't saying Meta's behavior wasn't so bad here.
• 27:05
  Speaker 4: Right.
• 27:05
  Speaker 2: And this held up in New Mexico with this judge.
• 27:07
  Speaker 2: And New Mexico is one state. It's a pretty small state.
• 27:11
  Speaker 2: But if this happens over and over and over again,
• 27:14
  Speaker 2: this is going to be a huge deal for Meta.
• 27:17
  Speaker 2: Maybe they can write off one decision from this state
• 27:20
  Speaker 2: and a second one from that state. But if 41
• 27:22
  Speaker 2: states have rulings exactly like this one, they're going to
• 27:26
  Speaker 2: be in the hole for billions, billions of dollars. And
• 27:30
  Speaker 2: it's going to have a huge impact on them.
• 27:31
  Speaker 1: You know, on the one hand, you can look and
• 27:33
  Speaker 1: say like, OK, less than a billion dollars penalty here.
• 27:37
  Speaker 1: You know, that is a drop in the bucket for Meta.
• 27:39
  Speaker 1: They made 200 billion in revenue last year alone. But
• 27:42
  Speaker 1: there's starting to be indications that this is having a
• 27:45
  Speaker 1: serious effect on them, the New Mexico case and the
• 27:47
  Speaker 1: many others, too.
• 27:48
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 27:48
  Speaker 1: You know, they actually had warned their shareholders on a
• 27:51
  Speaker 1: call that they could see a material loss because of
• 27:55
  Speaker 1: the child safety cases. That was even before this decision
• 27:57
  Speaker 1: came in. That was in July. And then I found
• 28:00
  Speaker 1: I saw this reporting recently from Reuters, which is that
• 28:03
  Speaker 1: Meta has been lobbying lawmakers in Washington, federal lawmakers, to
• 28:08
  Speaker 1: give them immunity. Legal immunity from these child harm cases
• 28:12
  Speaker 1: around the country.
• 28:13
  Speaker 2: Well, like they're actually making a deal or something.
• 28:15
  Speaker 1: They're trying to say, like, we'll sign on to some
• 28:17
  Speaker 1: of your federal child safety legislation if you give us
• 28:20
  Speaker 1: immunity from all these other cases.
• 28:21
  Speaker 2: Well, there you go. They're worried about this.
• 28:23
  Speaker 1: What does this really mean for kids? Are they going
• 28:26
  Speaker 1: to be safer because of this ruling based on your
• 28:29
  Speaker 1: read of it, your reporting?
• 28:31
  Speaker 2: So Meta has said that they're going to appeal this decision, unsurprisingly. And,
• 28:35
  Speaker 2: you know, none of this can go into effect until
• 28:37
  Speaker 2: that appeals process fully plays out.
• 28:38
  Speaker 1: Oh, that's how it works?
• 28:39
  Speaker 2: That's how it works.
• 28:40
  Speaker 1: It doesn't go into effect and then can be rolled
• 28:41
  Speaker 1: back if it's appealed?
• 28:42
  Speaker 3: Right.
• 28:43
  Speaker 2: It's the appeals process freezes the order from going into effect.
• 28:47
  Speaker 2: And so that has to fully play out. That could
• 28:50
  Speaker 2: take a very long time. Okay. But let's say it
• 28:51
  Speaker 2: does go into effect. It'll be the first state that's
• 28:54
  Speaker 2: tried anything like this. And... You know, the ruling is
• 28:58
  Speaker 2: very well-intentioned. The state's requests are very well-intentioned to try
• 29:01
  Speaker 2: to protect kids. But yeah, nothing like this has ever
• 29:05
  Speaker 2: been tried. And so once it goes into effect, I
• 29:08
  Speaker 2: think we're just going to have to see how it
• 29:10
  Speaker 2: all plays out.
• 29:11
  Speaker 1: Okay, and who's going to make sure Meta's doing all
• 29:13
  Speaker 1: this stuff? How's that going to work?
• 29:14
  Speaker 2: Yeah, so the judge is requiring Meta to report to
• 29:17
  Speaker 2: the court every six months, compile a report showing how
• 29:20
  Speaker 2: well they're complying with the mandated terms that the judge
• 29:23
  Speaker 2: has ruled. The state asked for what they call the
• 29:27
  Speaker 2: monitor to oversee, like a person to oversee this plan
• 29:31
  Speaker 2: to make sure that Meta is doing what the ruling
• 29:33
  Speaker 2: says to basically enforce the ruling. The judge didn't go
• 29:37
  Speaker 2: for that. He said that the monitor's role was a
• 29:40
  Speaker 2: bit too vague, according to the state, and he didn't
• 29:42
  Speaker 2: quite see how it would work. So he said no
• 29:44
  Speaker 2: to that. So now what the state can do is
• 29:46
  Speaker 2: if they feel Meta is not complying with the order,
• 29:48
  Speaker 2: they would have to bring them back to court and
• 29:50
  Speaker 2: have the judge again review the evidence to see are
• 29:53
  Speaker 2: they or are they not holding up their end of
• 29:55
  Speaker 2: the deal. And the judge said, you know, he maybe
• 29:57
  Speaker 2: could appoint a monitor later if he felt like Meta
• 30:00
  Speaker 2: wasn't doing enough to comply with the order.
• 30:02
  Speaker 1: Yeah, what I'm taking away from the decision, just kind
• 30:05
  Speaker 1: of ruminating on it after talking to you and reading it,
• 30:08
  Speaker 1: is I do think Judge Beechad was really thoughtful and
• 30:12
  Speaker 1: kind of surgical in the things he chose to force
• 30:16
  Speaker 1: Meta to do. And the two I think of, like
• 30:18
  Speaker 1: you mentioned, are making, you know, forcing Meta to make
• 30:22
  Speaker 1: sure that strange adults can't find or contact Meta. teens.
• 30:27
  Speaker 1: Because as the judge says, and as the experts said,
• 30:30
  Speaker 1: that's one of the most, the highest impact things that
• 30:32
  Speaker 1: he could have done to protect kids. It's like, kids
• 30:35
  Speaker 1: should not be algorithmically recommended to strangers on the internet.
• 30:39
  Speaker 1: That is really dangerous. Let's stop that. And that doesn't
• 30:42
  Speaker 1: seem to have the downsides that some of these other
• 30:45
  Speaker 1: proposals might have, or that people claim they have, like
• 30:48
  Speaker 1: age verification. The downside of that is that You might
• 30:51
  Speaker 1: be in a position where you're asking all sorts of
• 30:53
  Speaker 1: adults to prove who they are and there could be
• 30:55
  Speaker 1: security breaches about their information or you're really limiting their
• 30:58
  Speaker 1: ability to take part in public debate because they have
• 31:00
  Speaker 1: to show an ID before they can like go join a,
• 31:02
  Speaker 1: you know, local block association group or something.
• 31:06
  Speaker 3: Right.
• 31:06
  Speaker 1: You know, that doesn't seem to have a downside and
• 31:09
  Speaker 1: seems like he picked one, you know, that change. He's like,
• 31:11
  Speaker 1: this could really help kids and there's not a lot
• 31:12
  Speaker 1: of downsides.
• 31:13
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 31:13
  Speaker 1: And then even if kids did end up chatting with
• 31:16
  Speaker 1: an adult.
• 31:16
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 31:17
  Speaker 1: It's going to be a lot harder for them to
• 31:18
  Speaker 1: be in a private chat with end-to-end encryption, where if
• 31:20
  Speaker 1: something bad were to happen in that chat, law enforcement
• 31:23
  Speaker 1: wouldn't be able to access it.
• 31:24
  Speaker 2: Yeah, on Instagram. Yeah.
• 31:26
  Speaker 1: And so when you think about those two things, if
• 31:29
  Speaker 1: the appeal fails and this goes into effect, that does
• 31:31
  Speaker 1: seem like a big difference to me.
• 31:33
  Speaker 2: Yeah. And the attorney general of New Mexico clearly feels
• 31:37
  Speaker 2: that way as well. And he also feels like this
• 31:42
  Speaker 2: decision is a is the beginning that New Mexico and
• 31:46
  Speaker 2: this complaint that his office brought against Meta is the
• 31:49
  Speaker 2: beginning of a whole line of dominoes that's about to fall.
• 31:52
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 31:52
  Speaker 1: What's he saying about this? Is he doing a victory
• 31:54
  Speaker 1: lap or.
• 31:55
  Speaker 2: He's kind of doing a victory lap. Here's one thing
• 31:57
  Speaker 2: he said. This is on Here and Now, the NPR show.
• 32:00
  Speaker 3: We've always understood that we by ourselves couldn't do this,
• 32:05
  Speaker 3: but by taking a lead and showing... that this is
• 32:08
  Speaker 3: a line that can be taken by other states and
• 32:11
  Speaker 3: other jurisdictions. We've fundamentally provided a blueprint for everyone else
• 32:15
  Speaker 3: in this country and around the world to hold this
• 32:18
  Speaker 3: company accountable.
• 32:19
  Speaker 1: So you expect your suit to be the precedent in
• 32:21
  Speaker 1: future suits from other states against Meta?
• 32:25
  Speaker 3: Absolutely. And more than that, even though the judge did
• 32:28
  Speaker 3: not grant all of the injunctive relief that we've been
• 32:32
  Speaker 3: looking for, if you read his order carefully, he was
• 32:35
  Speaker 3: actually restrained in part because he expects the legislature and
• 32:40
  Speaker 3: Congress to take up some of the more sweeping calls
• 32:43
  Speaker 3: for change that we included in this case. And that's
• 32:46
  Speaker 3: exactly what we're going to be focusing on in the
• 32:48
  Speaker 3: upcoming legislative session here in New Mexico.
• 32:51
  Speaker 2: And so he's looking forward to legislation being brought up,
• 32:54
  Speaker 2: but also this, like I was saying, being a blueprint
• 32:56
  Speaker 2: for other states. He's like, Congress isn't doing anything. This
• 33:00
  Speaker 2: is our path. These attorneys general have said, we're going
• 33:03
  Speaker 2: to do this ourselves because we're not seeing the results
• 33:05
  Speaker 2: we want in Congress.
• 33:07
  Speaker 1: Thank you, Zach.
• 33:08
  Speaker 2: Thank you.
• 33:11
  Speaker 1: That was our producer, Zach St.
• 33:13
  Speaker 2: Louis.
• 33:13
  Speaker 1: He and executive producer Robin Simeon covered the New Mexico
• 33:16
  Speaker 1: versus Meta trial for us. We did reach out to
• 33:18
  Speaker 1: Meta for an interview about Judge Biedscheid's ruling. The company
• 33:21
  Speaker 1: sent back a statement saying they disagree with his decision
• 33:24
  Speaker 1: and that they work hard to keep people safe on
• 33:26
  Speaker 1: their platforms. They said they've been transparent about how hard
• 33:30
  Speaker 1: it is to identify and remove bad actors and harmful content,
• 33:33
  Speaker 1: but they stand behind their record of, quote, protecting teens online.
• 33:43
  Speaker 1: If you're relatively new to our show, we've done a
• 33:45
  Speaker 1: bunch of coverage of Meta and social media over the
• 33:47
  Speaker 1: last year or so that you might be interested in,
• 33:49
  Speaker 1: in addition to this episode and the ones about New Mexico.
• 33:52
  Speaker 1: Check out our episode that we did with a lawyer
• 33:54
  Speaker 1: from the other big case that resulted in a damning
• 33:57
  Speaker 1: verdict against Meta this year. It's in our feed called
• 34:00
  Speaker 1: Meta Knew They Were Addicting Kids, Now They're Paying For It.
• 34:03
  Speaker 1: Also an episode we did about one of those kids
• 34:05
  Speaker 1: who was addicted, one of the most honestly arresting and
• 34:08
  Speaker 1: memorable interviews I've done all year. That's called I Was
• 34:10
  Speaker 1: 11 When Instagram Took Over My Life. Look for that one.
• 34:14
  Speaker 1: And last one I'll mention, we did an interview with
• 34:17
  Speaker 1: a Reuters reporter who won the Pulitzer this year for
• 34:20
  Speaker 1: his reporting about Meta and how they're making so much
• 34:22
  Speaker 1: money from scam advertisements and other scams, which I found infuriating,
• 34:27
  Speaker 1: especially in the context of the New Mexico trial, where
• 34:30
  Speaker 1: they went on this whole diatribe about how authenticity is
• 34:33
  Speaker 1: such an important part of their products. Anyway, that episode
• 34:35
  Speaker 1: is called How Meta is Making Billions from Scam Advertising.
• 34:40
  Speaker 1: All worth checking out if you haven't already. As always,
• 34:45
  Speaker 1: follow Question Everything, rate and review us, please, on your
• 34:48
  Speaker 1: podcast app of choice or all of them, especially if
• 34:50
  Speaker 1: you like us. And follow us on Instagram where we're
• 34:52
  Speaker 1: poking meta in the eye with this coverage at questioneverything.podcast.
• 34:57
  Speaker 1: Today's show was produced by Zach St. Louis and Kevin
• 34:59
  Speaker 1: Sullivan and edited by Robin Simeon. Robin and I are
• 35:02
  Speaker 1: the executive producers of Question Everything. Our team also includes
• 35:05
  Speaker 1: producer Sam Egan, associate producer Kevin Shepard, and contributing editors
• 35:09
  Speaker 1: Neil Drumming and Jen Kinney. Evie Kwong manages our social media,
• 35:12
  Speaker 1: production help by Emma Grillo. This episode was fact-checked by
• 35:15
  Speaker 1: Annika Robbins, mixing and sound design by Brendan Baker. Our
• 35:18
  Speaker 1: music is by Matt McGinley. And thanks to our partners
• 35:20
  Speaker 1: at KCRW, who include Arnie Seipel, Tejal Ajmera, Natalie Hill,
• 35:24
  Speaker 1: and Jennifer Farrow. We'll see you next Thursday.