from Hacker News

Ontario school boards sue social media giants for $4.5B

by johnny_canuck on 3/28/24, 2:00 PM with 78 comments

• by figassis on 3/28/24, 2:59 PM

  I often feel very hopeless about this. As an adult, I have to put a non insignificant portion of my brain and willpower to fight against social media addition. I have Twitter, use it rarely. I have instagram and have both a business and a personal account. I’ve always prided myself in never giving it any of my time. It was dormant for almost a decade and my friends called me a social hermit. I liked it. Then I started taking a peek, and noticed myself sinking deeper and deeper. I enabled the timer and I ignore it every time. I’m likely going to have to delete the app. I won’t even dare install or signup to TikTok. I use HN because I actually get a lot of value from it. Great dev tool recommendations, it’s a great GitHub repo discovery tool, product ideas, I learn a lot and I get to hear/read from many startup founders.

  From this experience I know kids have no hope. I mean none. And I think we all know this, and Zuck knows this, I mean everyone. So now when we argue agains regulation we’re just regurgitating things like “rights”, “free speech”, “section 230”, etc. but what do we owe do the social contract that makes us better without sabotaging future generations? What is the actual, practical solution that does not take 2 generations to improve 1%?

  I know that an actual solution will hurt a lot of companies, a lot of revenue and forecasts will disappear. But should that sometimes not be the solution? It certainly is for less protected/influential people.

• by thelastgallon on 3/28/24, 2:42 PM

  I wonder why nobody is suing the food giants[1] for addiction to junk food and causing/accelerating disease.

  [1]https://www.businessinsider.com/10-companies-control-the-foo...

• by julianlam on 3/28/24, 3:01 PM

  > "Just take the phones away," said Gillian Henderson. > >"I don't think we need to sue anybody, that seems like a long, expensive process. Just take away their phones in class and give them back to them when they need them."

  Tried, and failed. Even before these social media apps, school boards back in ~2006 (!!) already attempted to enact these bans.

  They failed. Teachers don't want an additional item to enforce, and students are FANTASTIC at hiding them. Ask any millennial what it was like typing T9. We can probably still do it without looking.

• by bryanlarsen on 3/28/24, 2:31 PM

  As a parent of a 9th grader in one of the plaintiff school districts, there is certainly a massive difference between grade 8 and grade 9. In grade 8 their school was very good at ensuring phones stayed in the locker during school time. In grade 9, phones are allowed in class. Nominally it's only for school stuff (Google Classroom, spelling, translation, etc.), but...

• by nickwarren on 3/28/24, 2:30 PM

  > "Snapchat opens directly to a camera — rather than a feed of content — and has no traditional public likes or comments. While we will always have more work to do, we feel good about the role Snapchat plays in helping close friends feel connected, happy and prepared as they face the many challenges of adolescence."

  Snapchat has a long history of accusations regarding the damage to youth. It feels like there isn't much winning for these companies. I also wonder the effectiveness of going direct to social media companies, versus having the government pass laws about restricting social media for youth under a certain age.

• by superkuh on 3/28/24, 3:43 PM

  This has about as much basis in science as gay conversion therapies. Or people saying they're OCD because of a habit. There is absolutely no science published in science journals (not some person's book or "treatment program") supporting the idea of "social media" addiction. Addiction has a meaning and when it is repeatedly mis-used and conflated with other things you end up with well meaning social institutions, like the Ontario school board, supporting very unscientific and damaging positions just because of a moral panic.

• by wara23arish on 3/28/24, 3:00 PM

  Schools should sue the parents for allowing their kids unfettered access to social media and smartphones.

• by mtrovo on 3/28/24, 3:32 PM

  There was a related episode of the Hard Fork podcast about the subject https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/22/podcasts/hard-fork-apple-.... The conversation touches a lot on how peer pressure has a lot of power on keeping kids around those apps and this fact is just amplified by the fact that IRL interactions are very limited to younger generations compared to the older ones where you could just walk to your friends house and spend your whole day outside without too much adult supervision.

  There's no doubt that there's an addiction problem on how these apps play with younger folks mind and as much as I hate a nanny state I really think government should have a mandate on what's allowed and what's not on online interactions for kids. Disabling monetization for kids content is probably the best way to hurt in the pocket of the companies without being too specific about what exactly is allowed or not.

  Having this being pushed on parents is really done in bad faith at this point, I don't want my kids feeling the only ones left out because of their hippie parents.

• by ziptron on 3/28/24, 2:42 PM

  I think claims like this have the potential to bring out a great deal of research into the public sphere about the effects of social media, but looking at the law firm acting on behalf of the plaintiff, I see it's a personal injury law firm with ~20 lawyers (https://neinstein.com/about), and they have taken on the assignment on a contingency basis. Sadly, I doubt they will have the resources to go up against the major tech companies for long...... but, assuming they have not taken the assignment on as a PR stunt, I am rooting for them.

• by k12sosse on 3/28/24, 8:25 PM

  The best I can do is lead by example and continue to hound my children to think critically and be mindful of the moments they find themselves in, with the hopes that one day it will all become a chore they're no longer interested in chasing and be born into real life.

  Technology isn't the problem it's how it's used and encouraged. Society deserves the right to fight back against unfettered profiteering.

• by billy99k on 3/28/24, 4:21 PM

  How about parents actually watch their kids and prevent them from going on Tik-Tok and other social media sites? It's too easy to let phones do the babysitting.

  Typical response from Liberal governments like Ontario: blame everyone else for your own problems (and sue them over it).

• by swader999 on 3/28/24, 2:38 PM

  I don't see how these public schools have any standing. Parents for sure would.

• by snapplebobapple on 3/28/24, 5:18 PM

  This seems like one of those things where it doesn't matter if you are for or against social media for children, it should be universally agreed that it is utterly inappropriate for the school board to be spending time and money on this. It's yet more insane mission creep from a government institution to a realm far beyond what is reasonable and expected by the families using the service and the tax payer paying for the service.

• by gspencley on 3/28/24, 2:31 PM

  I have no love for social media companies, but as a citizen of Ontario this is also not what I want my tax dollars going towards. The public school system here needs to focus a bit more on improving the quality of our education system, and a bit less on attacking the private sector. Children's relationships with social media is the domain of the parents in my opinion.

• by bearjaws on 3/28/24, 2:28 PM

  I've recently been working in EdTech for K12 in the US.

  I have to say, I cannot imagine being a teacher today.... I know this is a history meme but it's appalling how far behind teens are. Certain states have the audacity to require students to know 10th grade English and Algebra to graduate. A significant percentage are failing and being left behind.

  That is to say some drop out at 10th grade, or some even get to continue on until 12th grade, where they will be unable to graduate.

  Many are given 2+ more years to learn 10th grade English, and attempt the state exam 4-8 times without passing.

  Want to be terrified? Go look up what 10th grade English is, we are talking some of the most foundational knowledge one needs. Themes and plots, character perspective, writing formal arguments... It's not something we should skip.

  This is not like .4% of students, the total is nearing double digit percentages, depending on which state you are talking about.

  Teachers now have to contend with students who's entire lives revolve around social media, and have had a phone / tablet in front of them 24/7 for a decade or more.

  No wonder teachers keep leaving in droves.

• by ilrwbwrkhv on 3/28/24, 2:45 PM

  This is the Canadian problem. You change your behaviour. We won't change ours. Instead of suing how about making laws to prevent Canadian children from not accessing social media till they are 16?