Jeremy Strong’s slow-talking Facebook founder turns into a cameo, background to a thriller about a whistleblower that somehow never mentions Trump

Here is a film for all those people who solemnly deplore social media in conversation but haven’t quite got round to deleting their accounts. Sixteen years have gone by since The Social Network, written by Aaron Sorkin and directed by David Fincher; this was the addictive, obsessive-compulsive movie about the birth of Facebook in Harvard’s macho-competitive cauldron of student sexism and nerdy self-pity, starring Jesse Eisenberg as the fast-talking, arrogant, not-necessarily-evil genius Mark Zuckerberg. Now Sorkin is back with a sequel of sorts, directing his own script – and now Zuckerberg is basically evil, but also weirdly slow talking, as if all the zinging, smart-alecky Sorkinesque dialogue energy of the first film has been siphoned away in early middle age and dispersed among the insurgents in the new cast.

Sorkin’s jittery, funny, syncopated style is unmistakable, as distinctive in its way as David Mamet, although he has one joke about “spatula” being a Yiddish word that he has borrowed from Philip Roth’s Portnoy’s Complaint. It is the story of how in 2021, Zuckerberg’s Facebook empire was challenged by courageous whistleblower-employee Frances Haugen and Wall Street Journal investigative reporter Jeff Horwitz, who were on a mission to tell the world how Zuckerberg, scared by falling revenue, changed the algorithm so that engagement was supercharged by rage bait and hate speech, malice and envy. Facebook, moreover, didn’t factcheck political ads, thus driving a huge, nationwide surge in extremist groups and teen bullying and becoming a major player in the Capitol riots. (Having said that, this film does not say aloud the word “Trump” and rather cravenly declines to specify Maga activity.)

Exclusive: Social platforms and police are failing women abused online, report finds, with many saying complaints are not taken seriously

When Jane* learned that intimate photos of her had been posted on a website without her consent, she expected the police would help her. Instead, she was warned that researching where her photos had been shared might put her at risk of breaking the law.

After she was handed a leaflet on internet safety and told to go to tech companies for help, but to expect little from them, the case was closed.

Theatre told that Facebook and Instagram filter out ads mentioning ‘social topics’ such as civil rights or feminism

A theatre in Barcelona has been banned from promoting a stage adaptation of Virginia Woolf’s A Room of One’s Own on Instagram and Facebook because the work includes “social topics”.

When the newly reopened Teatre Raval, which seats 193 spectators, asked Meta, the parent company of the two social media sites, why its publicity had been blocked, it was told “any mention of civil rights, feminism or social reform [topics that are central to Woolf’s work] are usually classified as ‘social topics’ by our automatic system” and are filtered out.

Action against Ofcom comes as social media companies are being accused of using courts to slow down implementation

Meta has launched a fresh legal challenge against Britain’s media regulator in the latest of a slew of actions by social media companies who are accused of using the courts to slow down implementation of the Online Safety Act.

Lawyers for the parent company of Facebook served notice during the week in an appeal against placing WhatsApp and Instagram, which are also owned by Meta, in a category that subjects them to additional duties.

Facebook told it was wrong in leaving up AI-generated videos of a Labour councillor and Muslim campaigner, amid calls to curb fakes

Meta’s “supreme court” has ordered the tech company to take down deepfake videos of a UK politician and a young Muslim woman from Facebook and do more to tackle AI-generated fake imagery.

A fake video showing a Labour party councillor in Scotland making inflammatory comments about refugees should not have been left up by Facebook, the board said. It also ruled that an AI-generated video of a Muslim campaign volunteer should have been removed after it falsely depicted her offering health advice while carrying out absurd exercises or eating junk food.

In Oklahoma City bricht ein Mann beim Rasenmähen zusammen, die Feuerwehr rettet ihn. Doch damit sehen die Einsatzkräfte ihre Arbeit keineswegs als getan an.

Exclusive: Supermarket joins line of firms and sports stars including Bellingham and Haaland to have their image hijacked via ads

Tesco has alerted City of London police after it became the latest in a string of companies and sports stars, including Barclays bank and Lewis Hamilton, to have its image hijacked in a “scam” by unlicensed casinos advertising via Facebook and Instagram.

The supermarket chain is among several household-name businesses to have been targeted in an apparent effort by casinos that cannot legally operate in Britain to capitalise on their brand recognition.

Thanks to a little-known feature in Instagram, I try to travel back to 2012 – before everything on the internet was an ad

• Follow our Australia news live blog for latest updates

• Get our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcast

I have a confession. I love my social media algorithm. It is a perfectly curated window into my insane and inquiring mind. It knows precisely which videos will tickle me and which memes will gently distract me from the slow collapse of humankind.

On Tuesday the Australian government announced “world-leading” reforms that would force social media platforms to allow users to opt-out of algorithms, dubbed “my feed, my way”. On the same day, I was delighted to be confronted with a video on Instagram of a woman accidentally spilling a bucket of eels on a Chinese train. Dozens of eels slithered among the passengers, who appeared not as surprised as I would have expected.

The CEO is the throughline in a history of billion-dollar blunders that have caused real harm, culminating in last week’s settlement

Last week, Meta, the parent company of Instagram and Facebook, agreed to a settlement of up to $18bn after dozens of US states accused it of harming children with addictive products. The settlement’s regulatory implications for social media will affect every user, far beyond teens.

But if Meta is truly interested in prioritizing the safety of users, the board should request the resignation of Mark Zuckerberg and restructure to put safety above profit.

In einem Stausee in British Columbia stößt ein Bootsfahrer auf eine bislang unentdeckte bewaldete Insel. Kurz darauf ist sie verschwunden und taucht später wieder auf – 32 Kilometer entfernt. Was hat es damit auf sich?

New child safety measures are welcome, but the wider risks posed by these platforms remain unaddressed

“Hook, hold, harvest and hide” was how Megan O’Neill, a lawyer for the US state of California, characterised Meta’s business model in the trial that ended last week with an $18bn settlement, to be shared between the states and territories that brought the case. It was a clever way to describe the company’s approach to users’ attention and data. But the sharpness of her words was not matched by the deal. While the strengthening of child safety features is welcome, the tech giant once again batted off efforts to alter its products.

Meta’s decision to settle enabled it to avoid any admission of liability. It put a stop to the awkward questions being asked of witnesses including Adam Mosseri, Instagram’s CEO, and the damaging claims made by whistleblowers such as Arturo Béjar. This former Meta safety engineer told the court that his own daughter had been sent unsolicited photos of male genitals on Instagram.

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.

Those who said Meta harms children struck a blow, but the ability of big tech to gouge profits and cause harm is barely diminished. That’s the battle to come

Follow the money. If you want to know how the tech giant Meta really feels about the $18bn it agreed to fork out to end a landmark lawsuit against it – an outcome widely hailed as a victory for campaigners – just look at its share price. It didn’t go down when word came on Wednesday that Meta had settled with the 29 US states that had argued that the company’s Facebook and Instagram platforms harmed children. On the contrary, Meta stock went up, initially surging by 5%, before levelling out at a gain of just over 1.25%. There could be no clearer proof that the money men reckon Meta dodged a bullet.

To be sure, there was plenty to hearten those who have long believed that social media damages teenagers especially, whether by exposing them to content they shouldn’t see or by sapping their self-esteem, offering them filters that show how much prettier they would look if they had cosmetic surgery or giving them a metric of their popularity – and unpopularity – in the form of a running tally of “likes” and views.

Jonathan Freedland is a Guardian columnist

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.

Other governments could seek similar concessions, while separate legal action is pending in places ranging from Kenya to the Netherlands

In October 2021, Abrham Meareg’s father, a professor of chemistry in Ethiopia’s northern town of Bahir Dar, was shot at close range and died outside his family home. This was in the middle of the country’s civil war.

For weeks, Facebook’s algorithm had actively promoted posts calling for the academic to be murdered, according to Meareg and Foxglove, a nonprofit organisation supporting Meareg’s lawsuit against the company in Kenya. These posts included photos of his father and his home address.

This week’s settlement without liability was pragmatic, but it doesn’t change the inevitability of further lawsuits around the world

Not many people would count paying $18bn they didn’t expect to when they woke up that morning as a victory. Yet for Meta, the owners of Facebook and Instagram, the agreement with 52 US attorneys general to settle claims that it designed its products to be addictive to children, and misled people about their safety, could be described as a win of sorts.

Meta denies wrongdoing, and the amount it plans to pay will be spread over a decade. Some of it is contingent on other big tech firms not named in its case coughing up too. The cash is chump change for Meta, which made around $60bn in profit last year. More damaging to the tech giant in the long run could be the agreement to unwind some of the mechanics it has spent two decades perfecting to keep us on its platforms.

Chris Stokel-Walker is the author of TikTok Boom: The Inside Story of the World’s Favourite App

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.

Zeitlimits, Ruhe in der Nacht und der Schule, keine „extremen Make-up-Filter“ mehr: Meta sagt in einer historischen Einigung Änderungen am Design seiner US-Apps zu. Aber damit ist der Fall noch lange nicht geklärt.

Der Facebook-Mutterkonzern soll bis zu 16,68 Milliarden Dollar an die US-Staaten zahlen. Meta wurde vorgeworfen, Minderjährige süchtig zu machen.

Instagram and Facebook’s parent company agreed to sweeping alterations and a payment of upto $18bn to settle a landmark trial

Meta’s agreement to change how teenagers use its social networks marks a major turning point for the US tech giant, setting a precedent that could significantly reshape how other social media operates in the coming years.

Meta agreed to substantial alterations to Instagram and Facebook on Wednesday as part of a settlement to end a landmark lawsuit. Dozens of US states had accused it of addicting and harming children with dangerous products. The company also agreed to pay up to a combined $18bn over a decade to several US states and territories involved in the suit.

Settlement agreement says Meta must make many safety and wellness features the default option for young users

Meta has agreed to put new guardrails on teenagers’ use of its apps, in a decision that could fundamentally change the social media experience for young people in the US.

In a turnaround, the social media giant will make several safety limitations the default option for young users, instead of requiring them to opt in.

Meta wurde vorgeworfen, Minderjährige süchtig zu machen. Der Tech-Gigant verpflichtet sich nun, bestimmte Mechanismen anzupassen, sodass Gefahren minimiert werden.