Breaking AI & Tech News Analyzed

Austria is set to introduce a compulsory minimum age of 14 for social media use, with the government citing concerns that certain online platforms are addictive and harmful to young people. The announcement was made by conservative junior minister for digitisation, Alexander Proell, at a joint news conference.“We will decisively protect children and young people in future from the negative effects of social media,” said Vice Chancellor Andreas Babler of the Social Democrats. “We will no longer stand by and watch while these platforms make our children addicted and often also sick … The risks associated with this use were ignored for long enough, and now it is time to act.”The Austrian government plans to draft legislation by June, which will determine which platforms are affected based on their addictive algorithms and content, such as “sexualised violence”. The ban will not target specific platforms but will focus on their impact on young users.This move follows a landmark social media addiction lawsuit in the US, where a jury found Alphabet’s Google and Meta liable for $6m in damages. The case involved a 20-year-old woman who claimed she became addicted to social media apps at a young age due to their platform design. Meta plans to appeal the decision.Other nations in Europe, including France, the UK, Denmark, Spain, and Greece, are also considering or have implemented bans on social media use for children, amid growing concerns about online bullying and mental health risks. The European Parliament has called for the EU to set minimum ages for children to access social media, although it is up to member states to impose age limits.

Meta, the world's most powerful social media company, has faced a severe public reckoning in recent days, with juries in California and New Mexico delivering back-to-back verdicts that hold the company liable for harming young people. This marks a significant shift in accountability for social media companies, which have long operated with minimal regulation and few consequences in the US.In the California case, a jury ordered Meta and YouTube to pay $6 million in damages over claims that they deliberately designed addictive products to hook young users. The following day, a jury in New Mexico ordered Meta to pay $375 million in damages over claims that its products led to child sexual exploitation, among other harms.These verdicts are the first to go to court, and they set a precedent for over 2,000 plaintiffs, including families, school districts, and state attorneys general, who have brought lawsuits against Meta, YouTube, TikTok, and Snap. The cases borrow from a familiar playbook, echoing those brought against big tobacco companies in the 1990s, which focused on cigarettes' addictive qualities and their makers' public denials despite knowledge of their products' harms.Lawyers for the plaintiffs argue that social media companies have profited from targeting children while concealing their addictive and dangerous design features. The verdicts signal that public perception of social media and its makers is shifting, with jurors now laying blame on the business practices of a multi-trillion-dollar industry.Meta and YouTube have both said they disagree with the verdicts and will appeal. However, the rulings mark a significant turning point in the growing scrutiny of social media companies and their impact on young people.The cases are part of a broader effort to challenge tech companies' practices, with online safety advocates urging Congress to pass regulation, forming coalitions of parents, teens, and advocates, and bringing thousands of lawsuits front and center. The goal is to force social media companies to redesign their products and do more to protect children online.

Ryan Murphy's drama series 'Love Story' has become Disney+'s most-streamed drama ever, captivating audiences worldwide with its schlocky, glossy portrayal of the doomed marriage between John F Kennedy Jr and Carolyn Bessette. The series, which consists of nine episodes, tells the story of the couple's whirlwind romance and tragic fate.The show's success can be attributed to its unique blend of camp nostalgia, paparazzi exposure, and cultural symbolism. According to TV critic Scott Bryan, Murphy's formula for success involves targeting subjects with tragic backstories and workable legal margins, which in practice means the longer they have been dead, the smoother the adaptation.The series begins as a Cinderella romance between a Kennedy scion and a Calvin Klein publicist who became the most famous and scrutinised couple in the US – and evolves into a lesson in what happens when marriage becomes a form of branding. The show's relatability factor also lies in its portrayal of universal dating themes, great hair, and a wardrobe full of Prada and Kangol caps worn backwards.Social media searches for JFK Jr and Bessette grew by more than 9,100% in the past month, according to FX, which created the show. The show's success has also sparked speculation about Murphy's next subject, with names like Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston, John Lennon and Yoko Ono, and Liz Taylor and Richard Burton being floated on social media.The show's impact can be seen in its ability to resonate with audiences, particularly Gen Z women, who have connected with the show's themes of relationships, style, and tragedy. As Bryan noted, 'Love Story' is 'unapologetically schmaltzy' and doesn't try to be anything more than a show that looks the part, making it a refreshing change from the usual prestige television dramas.

Ipswich Town chairman and chief executive, Mark Ashton, has issued a public apology for the distress and hurt caused by Nigel Farage's visit to Portman Road earlier this week. The visit, which included Farage holding up an Ipswich No 10 shirt with his name on it, was widely criticized by fans on social media.The club has stated that it remains 'apolitical' and that the visit was not endorsed by the club. However, fans described the visit as 'shameful' and 'embarrassing', leading to a significant backlash on social media.In a statement, Ashton said: 'I unreservedly apologise for any hurt, pain or distress that's been caused'. He acknowledged that mistakes were made and that the club would reconsider its approach to engaging with local politicians and political parties.The controversy has come at a critical time for Ipswich Town, who are currently third in the Championship table and fighting for a return to the Premier League. The unwanted distraction has added pressure to the team's promotion bid, with eight games remaining in the season.Ashton emphasized the importance of moving forward together, stating: 'We are better when we move together as one and there is lots to fight for on and off the pitch'. The club will now review its policy on engaging with politicians and political parties to prevent similar incidents in the future.

Five Guys' chief executive officer, Jerry Murrell, revealed that he gave a $1.5m bonus to employees of his US-based burger restaurant chain to make up for the chaos caused by a recent promotion. The buy-one-get-one-free offer, which was intended to celebrate the company's 40th anniversary, proved to be much more popular than expected, causing the chain's app to crash and many locations to become overwhelmed.Murrell stated that he gave the bonus because "I didn't want anybody shooting me in the back or anything … because we really screwed it up." The comment was made in an interview with Fortune, where he also joked that he preferred the employees receiving the bonus over his wife getting "a new fur coat."The promotion, which was launched in February, was initially met with intense criticism on social media, prompting Five Guys to apologize and restart the offer for four days. Murrell attributed the chaos to the company's underestimation of the promotion's popularity, stating that "we had no idea that we were going to get that kind of response."Five Guys currently operates 1,900 locations and employs 30,000 people in 28 countries worldwide. The company's CEO since its founding in 1986, Murrell has taken steps to address the backlash and improve customer satisfaction.

The recent landmark decisions against Meta and YouTube by two US juries have sent a strong message to tech companies. The cases, which focused on the deliberate design of addictive products that harmed a child, have been hailed as a major victory for campaigners pushing for change.In one case, Meta was found liable for $375m in civil liabilities over the use of Facebook and Instagram for child sex trafficking in New Mexico. The state's attorney general is seeking platform changes and financial penalties.The verdicts, which are expected to be appealed, demonstrate a shifting attitude towards tech companies and their responsibility to protect users, particularly children. Internal documents revealing executives' cavalier approach to young people's safety have been made public, providing critics with valuable evidence.While it is too early to declare a reckoning similar to that faced by big tobacco in the 1990s, the current push towards stronger regulation is gaining momentum. Governments and civil society are increasingly holding tech companies accountable for their impact on public health.The precautionary approach to children's safety has been highlighted as crucial, with young minds being particularly vulnerable to the attention economy's assault. Fortunately, governments and courts are taking steps to regulate social media companies and force them to take responsibility for their impact.In Australia, social media companies have been told to leave children alone, while in the UK, the government has issued guidance on screen time and is considering restricting children's use. Design features such as infinite scroll and gaming-type rewards have been identified as key factors in the addictive nature of social media.Ultimately, a whole society approach is needed to reduce our dependence on social media and work out what safeguards are needed for adults and children alike. The events of the past week have made this goal a bit more achievable.

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer has pledged to take on social media companies in a bid to protect children from addiction, as new guidelines recommend limiting screen time for children under five to no more than an hour a day. The guidelines, developed by a panel led by the children's commissioner, Rachel de Souza, and children's health expert Prof Russell Viner, advise that children under two should avoid screen time except for shared activities. Ministers are also exploring Australia-style measures to limit or ban social media for under-16s, as part of a broader effort to regulate social media companies and protect children. Starmer emphasized that regulating social media companies will require a 'fight' to ensure they do not prioritize profits over children's well-being. 'Some of this will require a fight,' he said. 'If we're going to do more to protect children, we're going to have to fight some of the platforms that are putting the material up there because they're putting this addictive stuff up there for a reason.' The guidelines advise families to avoid fast-paced social media-style videos and toys or tools that use artificial intelligence for children aged two to five. They also recommend screen-free bedtimes and mealtimes, and encourage shared screen activities like video calling or looking through photos together. According to the government, about 98% of children watch screens daily by the age of two. Infants with high screen time are less likely to be read to or go on outdoor trips, which can impact language development. Experts have welcomed the guidelines, with Dr. Mike McKean, vice-president for policy at the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, saying they will help parents protect 'short, but developmentally crucial early years.'

The UK government is facing mounting pressure to appoint a Conservative former cabinet minister as the next chair of Ofcom, the media regulator. Jeremy Wright, a former culture secretary and sitting Conservative MP, is competing against Margaret Hodge, a Labour peer and former MP, for the role.The appointment has become crucial amid concerns over the rapid growth of online content and the rise of politically partisan broadcasting. The Online Safety Act, which aims to tackle harmful online content, has created legal pitfalls for Ofcom, leading to claims of paralysis at the regulator.Wright, who was involved in drafting laws to tackle harmful online content, is seen as a strong candidate due to his legal background as a king's counsel and his knowledge of the Online Safety Act. He is believed to be willing to take risks in confronting big digital platforms.On the other hand, Hodge has been seen as the favourite to be appointed by the Labour administration. As chair of the public accounts committee, she built a reputation for attacking big tech over its tax bill and has previously suggested banning online anonymity and making social media directors personally liable for defamatory posts.The delay in appointing a new chair is causing concern, with some warning that it could leave Britain at risk. The new chair must address fundamental flaws in Ofcom's implementation of the Online Safety Act and restore the frayed support and confidence of civil society.A government source said a decision would be made very soon. An Ofcom spokesperson said the regulator looks forward to working with whoever the government appoints as its next chair to make life safer online.

A California jury has ruled that Meta and Google are liable for $3m in damages in a landmark social media addiction lawsuit. The case, which began over a month ago, accused the companies of designing features intended to hook young users, including notifications and autoplay features.The plaintiff, a 20-year-old woman referred to as KGM or Kaley, claimed that she became addicted to social media at a young age, which exacerbated her mental health issues. She began using YouTube at age six and Meta-owned Instagram at age nine.The jury deliberated for over 40 hours across nine days before reaching a verdict. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Instagram head Adam Mosseri testified in the case, although YouTube chief executive Neal Mohan was not called to testify.The verdict is the latest in a wave of lawsuits targeting social media companies. There is a looming federal social media addiction case slated to begin in June in Oakland, California. On Tuesday in New Mexico, a jury found that Meta violated state law by misleading users about the safety of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, and by enabling child sexual exploitation on those platforms.Legal experts say the verdict will shape future litigation. 'The fact the jury found Meta and Google liable represents that these cases have real exposure to the social media giants, and are going to frame how future litigation will proceed,' entertainment lawyer Tre Lovell told Al Jazeera.