Bitcoin News Australia

As the tagline for “The Social Network” put it: “You don’t get to 300 million friends without making a few enemies.” Likewise, you can’t operate a $130 billion advertising business without a few enemies of the state buying up ads.

US prosecutors have begun investigating Meta for the role it plays in the sale of illicit drugs on its various social media platforms, according to reporting by The Wall Street Journal published over the weekend. Consider it the latest battle over the efficacy of content self-moderation.

OMG, FDA

Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act has long granted a legal shield for internet companies against possible criminal speech conducted by users on their platforms, such as defamation, libel, hate speech, or incitement to violence. But the clause’s blanket protections don’t necessarily extend to all cases on the margins, and this latest investigation, brought by federal prosecutors in Virginia and aided by the FDA, is probing whether Meta facilitated and profited from the sale of illegal drugs on its platform, sources told the WSJ.

Subpoenas seen by the WSJ and delivered to Meta last year seek records related to “violative drug content on Meta’s platforms and/or the illicit sale of drugs via Meta’s platforms.” And while Meta has several systems in place — including the use of third-party moderators — to prevent the advertising of illicit drugs on its platform, recent history suggests they’re far from foolproof:

• In August, the WSJ also reported that scores of counterfeit companies were using Meta platforms to advertise for unapproved knockoff versions of the ultra-popular weight-loss drugs Wegovy and Ozempic. Though Meta removed ads flagged by the WSJ, similar ads soon popped up across its platforms, the WSJ reported. 
• Facebook and Instagram were also found to be hotbeds for ads from telehealth companies hawking medications for anxiety, depression, ADHD, and other mental health concerns during the pandemic, often without mentioning side effects and otherwise skirting FDA regulations.

As part of the investigation, subpoenas have also been served to the Alliance to Counter Crime Online as well as the Algorithmic Transparency Institute, which handed over thousands of documents concerning telehealth ads to the prosecutors, the WSJ reported.

Judging from all the pearl-clutching surrounding a possible ban on TikTok in the US, one might think the Chinese-owned social media platform is an indestructible juggernaut and that all of humanity is destined to spend every nonsleeping hour on the app. 

The reality is that TikTok isn’t even the world’s biggest social media app – or second, third or fourth biggest. Depending on how and when you scrape the data, it’s the fifth- or sixth-most popular social media site — a little more popular than, say, LinkedIn, but nowhere near Facebook and its 3 billion monthly active users. And as a mere mortal, TikTok is subject to the same changing whims and growth trajectories as any other company. 

Reality Bites

Lately, as The Wall Street Journal reported on Sunday, that trajectory appears to be slowing:

• According to the WSJ’s sources, TikTok is still gaining users but nearly as many users are quitting the app. The platform’s US average monthly users aged 18 to 24 declined by nearly 9% from 2022 to 2023, according to Data.ai numbers cited by the WSJ. And they’re not necessarily leaping to other social media sites. Some of them are — get this — choosing to focus more on life and work!
• That’s not an inviting trend for TikTok’s advertisers, who were drawn to the platform because of its huge pull with the younger generation. Indeed, TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew’s disclosure to Congress in January that the app was growing massively among people over age 35 stoked some internal debate, the WSJ said, because nothing signals “we are no longer cool” than becoming the stomping grounds of people born before Bill Clinton was president.

The Biden administration sees a path to an electric future through the tailpipe. 

To juice the transition to EVs, the White House and the Environmental Protection Agency are expected to introduce far more stringent restrictions on tailpipe emissions for combustion-engine vehicles as soon as this week, according to a report last weekend from Bloomberg.

The Smog of War

The EPA is on a mission to cut the country’s total greenhouse gas emissions by half by the end of the decade, as agreed to in the 2015 Paris Climate Accords. Cars and light trucks account for roughly one-fifth of the nation’s total emissions, Manish Bapna, head of the Natural Resources Defense Action Fund, told Bloomberg. And the government agency estimates that EVs need to account for at least two-thirds of all cars on the road by 2032 to achieve its climate goals — quite a ways up from the market share of less than 8% that EVs had in 2023.

But achieving that milestone is easier said than done. Carmakers pushed back hard after an earlier, stricter version of new emissions standards were reported by The New York Times last month. The agency is hoping that its slightly revised new rules still carry the nation down the same road to decarbonization:

• Carmakers argued that overly strict emissions rules too soon would effectively destabilize the emerging EV market, which still needs to build out effective charging infrastructure and strengthen its manufacturing supply chains before the industry can truly take off.
• The EPA’s revised rules, then, will roll out slightly lower standards in the next couple of years before ramping up to achieve the same 2032 target, sources told Bloomberg.

“The rule doesn’t meet the moment,” David Cooke, a senior analyst with the Union of Concerned Scientists, told Bloomberg while noting that the new standards will still create “some guarantees around movement toward zero-emission vehicles nationwide.”