adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Business

U.S. Senators go after head of Instagram over how platform can harm children – CBC News

Published

 on


The head of a U.S. Senate panel examining social media’s negative effects on young people has dismissed as “a public relations tactic” some safety measures announced by Instagram, the popular photo-sharing platform associated with Facebook. 

Adam Mosseri, the head of Instagram, on Wednesday faced off with senators angry over revelations of how the platform can harm some young users and demanding that the company commit to making changes.

Under sharp questioning by senators of both parties, Mosseri defended the company’s conduct and the efficacy of its new safety measures. He challenged the assertion that Instagram has been shown by research to be addictive for young people. Instagram has an estimated one billion users of all ages.

300x250x1

On Tuesday, Instagram introduced a previously announced feature that urges teenagers to take breaks from the platform. The company also announced other tools — including parental controls due to come out early next year — that it says are aimed at protecting young users from harmful content.

The parental oversight tools “could have been announced years ago,” Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal told Mosseri, saying the newly announced measures fall short and noting many of them are still being tested. 

U.S. Senators Marsha Blackburn, left, Richard Blumenthal and Amy Klobuchar speak prior to the hearing. Blumenthal said many of Instagram’s newly announced measures fall short of what’s needed. (Elizabeth Frantz/Reuters)

‘Trust is over,’ says senator

A pause that Instagram imposed in September on its work on a kids’ version of the platform “looks more like a public relations tactic brought on by our hearings,” Blumenthal said.

“I believe that the time for self-policing and self-regulation is over,” he said. “Self-policing depends on trust. Trust is over.”

Mosseri testified as Facebook, whose parent company is now named Meta Platforms, has been roiled by public and political outrage over the disclosures by former Facebook employee Frances Haugen in October.

She made the case before lawmakers in the U.S., Britain and Europe that Facebook’s systems amplify online hate and extremism and that the company elevates profits over the safety of users.

Haugen, a data scientist who had worked in Facebook’s civic integrity unit, buttressed her assertions with a trove of internal company documents she secretly copied and provided to U.S. federal securities regulators and Congress.

The Senate panel has examined Facebook’s use of information from its own researchers that could indicate potential harm for some of its young users, especially girls, while it publicly downplayed the negative impacts.

For some Instagram-devoted teens, peer pressure generated by the visually focused app led to mental health and body image problems, and in some cases, eating disorders and suicidal thoughts, the research detailed in the Facebook documents showed.

WATCH | Head of Instagram grilled over teen safety concerns:

U.S. Senators challenge head of Instagram over teen safety concerns

8 hours ago

Duration 1:59

The head of Instagram, Adam Mosseri, received heavy criticism during testimony before a Senate subcommittee about the negative consequences the app has had on teen safety and mental health. The platform’s new rules meant to protect teens online didn’t convince the committee that concrete change had been made. 1:59

Instagram says safety measures protect kids

The revelations in a report by The Wall Street Journal, based on the documents leaked by Haugen, set off a wave of recriminations from lawmakers, critics of Big Tech, child-development experts and parents.

“As head of Instagram, I am especially focused on the safety of the youngest people who use our services,” Mosseri testified.

“This work includes keeping underage users off our platform, designing age-appropriate experiences for people ages 13 to 18, and building parental controls. Instagram is built for people 13 and older. If a child is under the age of 13, they are not permitted on Instagram.”

Mosseri outlined the suite of measures he said Instagram has taken to protect young people on the platform. They include keeping kids under 13 off it, restricting direct messaging between kids and adults, and prohibiting posts that encourage suicide and self-harm.

But, as researchers both internal and external to parent company Meta have documented, the reality is different.

Kids under 13 often sign up for Instagram with or without their parents’ knowledge by lying about their age. And posts about suicide and self-harm still reach children and teens, sometimes with disastrous effects.

Parent activists gathered on Capitol Hill ahead of Mosseri’s testimony, including one dressed up as The Grinch, who piled up ‘gifts’ they say Instagram gives to vulnerable children, including bullying, addiction and depression. (Eric Kayne/ParentsTogether/The Associated Press)

Senators push Instagram head to support legislation

Senators of both parties were united in condemnation of the social networking giant and Instagram, the photo-sharing juggernaut valued at some $100 billion US that Facebook acquired for $1 billion in 2012.

Already in July, Facebook said it was working with parents, experts and policymakers when it introduced safety measures for teens on Instagram.

In fact, the company has been working with experts and other advisers for another product aimed at children — its Messenger Kids app that launched in late 2017.

Senators pressed Mosseri to support legislative remedies for social media.

Among the legislative proposals put forward by Blumenthal and others, one bill proposes an “eraser button” that would let parents instantly delete all personal information collected from their children or teens.

Another proposal bans specific features for kids under 16, such as video auto-play, push alerts, “like” buttons and follower counts. Also being floated is a prohibition against collecting personal data from anyone aged 13 to 15 without their consent. And a new digital “bill of rights” for minors that would similarly limit gathering of personal data from teens.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Oil Firms Doubtful Trans Mountain Pipeline Will Start Full Service by May 1st

Published

 on

 

Pipeline

Oil companies planning to ship crude on the expanded Trans Mountain pipeline in Canada are concerned that the project may not begin full service on May 1 but they would be nevertheless obligated to pay tolls from that date.

300x250x1

In a letter to the Canada Energy Regulator (CER), Suncor Energy and other shippers including BP and Marathon Petroleum have expressed doubts that Trans Mountain will start full service on May 1, as previously communicated, Reuters reports.

Trans Mountain Corporation, the government-owned entity that completed the pipeline construction, told Reuters in an email that line fill on the expanded pipeline would be completed in early May.

After a series of delays, cost overruns, and legal challenges, the expanded Trans Mountain oil pipeline will open for business on May 1, the company said early this month.

“The Commencement Date for commercial operation of the expanded system will be May 1, 2024. Trans Mountain anticipates providing service for all contracted volumes in the month of May,” Trans Mountain Corporation said in early April.

The expanded pipeline will triple the capacity of the original pipeline to 890,000 barrels per day (bpd) from 300,000 bpd to carry crude from Alberta’s oil sands to British Columbia on the Pacific Coast.  

The Federal Government of Canada bought the Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion (TMX) from Kinder Morgan back in 2018, together with related pipeline and terminal assets. That cost the federal government $3.3 billion (C$4.5 billion) at the time. Since then, the costs for the expansion of the pipeline have quadrupled to nearly $23 billion (C$30.9 billion).

The expansion project has faced continuous delays over the years. In one of the latest roadblocks in December, the Canadian regulator denied a variance request from the project developer to move a small section of the pipeline due to challenging drilling conditions.

The company asked the regulator to reconsider its decision, and received on January 12 a conditional approval, avoiding what could have been another two-year delay to start-up.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Tesla profits cut in half as demand falls

Published

 on

Tesla profits slump by more than a half

Tesla logo.

Tesla has announced its profits fell sharply in the first three months of the year to $1.13bn (£910m), compared with $2.51bn in 2023.

It caps a difficult period for the electric vehicle (EV) maker, which – faced with falling sales – has announced thousands of job cuts.

Boss Elon Musk remains bullish about its prospects, telling investors the launch of new models would be brought forward.

Its share price has risen but analysts say it continues to face significant challenges, including from lower-cost rivals.

300x250x1

The company has suffered from falling demand and competition from cheaper Chinese imports which has led its stock price to collapse by 43% over 2024.

Figures for the first quarter of 2024 revealed revenues of $21.3bn, down on analysts’ predictions of just over $22bn.

But the decision by Tesla to bring forward the launch of new models from the second half of 2025 boosted its shares by nearly 12.5% in after-hours trading.

It did not reveal pricing details for the new vehicles.

However Mr Musk made clear he also grander ambitions, touting Tesla’s AI credentials and plans for self-driving vehicles – even going as far as to say considering it to be just a car company was the “wrong framework.”

“If somebody doesn’t believe Tesla is going to solve autonomy I think they should not be an investor,” he said.

Such sentiments have been questioned by analysts though, with Deutsche Bank saying driverless cars face “technological, regulatory and operational challenges.”

Some investors have called for the company to instead focus on releasing a lower price, mass-market EV.

However, Tesla has already been on a charm offensive, trying to win over new customers by dropping its prices in a series of markets in the face of falling sales.

It also said its situation was not unique.

“Global EV sales continue to be under pressure as many carmakers prioritize hybrids over EVs,” it said.

Despite plans to bring forward new models originally planned for next year the firm is cutting its workforce.

Tesla said it would lose 3,332 jobs in California and 2,688 positions in Texas, starting mid-June.

The cuts in Texas represent 12% of Tesla’s total workforce of almost 23,000 in the area where its gigafactory and headquarters are located.

However, Mr Musk sought to downplay the move.

“Tesla has now created over 30,000 manufacturing jobs in California!” he said in a post on his social media platform X, formerly Twitter, on Tuesday.

Another 285 jobs will be lost in New York.

Tesla’s total workforce stood at more than 140,000 late last year, up from around 100,000 at the end of 2021, according to the company’s filings with US regulators.

Musk’s salary

The car firm is also facing other issues, with a struggle over Mr Musk’s compensation still raging on.

On Wednesday, Tesla asked shareholders to vote for a proposal to accept Mr Musk’s compensation package – once valued at $56bn – which had been rejected by a Delaware judge.

The judge found Tesla’s directors had breached their fiduciary duty to the firm by awarding Mr Musk the pay-out.

Due to the fall in Tesla’s stock value, the compensation package is now estimated to be around $10bn less – but still greater than the GDP of many countries.

In addition, Tesla wants its shareholders to agree to the firm being moved from Delaware to Texas – which Mr Musk called for after the judge rejected his payday.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Stock market today: Nasdaq futures pop, Tesla surges after earnings with more heavyweights on deck

Published

 on

Tech stocks rose on Wednesday, outstripping the broader market as investors welcomed Tesla’s (TSLA) cheaper car pledge and waited for the next rush of corporate earnings.

The Nasdaq Composite (^IXIC) rose roughly 0.6%, coming off a sharp closing gain. The S&P 500 (^GSPC) was up 0.2%, continuing a rebound from its longest losing streak of 2024, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average (^DJI) fell 0.1%.

Tesla shares jumped nearly 12% after the EV maker’s vow to speed up the launch of more affordable models eclipsed its quarterly earnings and revenue miss. That cheered up investors worried about growth amid a strategy shift to robotaxis and the planned cancellation of a cheaper model.

The results from the first “Magnificent Seven” to report have intensified the already high hopes for Big Tech earnings, that the megacaps can revive the rally in stocks they powered. The spotlight is now on Meta’s (META) report due after the market close, as the Facebook owner’s shares rose after the Senate voted for a potential ban on rival TikTok. Microsoft (MSFT) and Alphabet (GOOG) next up on Thursday.

300x250x1

Meanwhile, Boeing (BA) reported better than expected first quarter results before the opening bell with a loss per share of $1.13, narrower than the $1.72 estimated by Wall Street. Shares rose about 2% in morning trade.

Live6 updates

  • Tech leads at the open

    Tech stocks rose on Wednesday, outstripping the broader market as investors welcomed Tesla’s (TSLA) cheaper car pledge and waited for the next rush of corporate earnings.

    The Nasdaq Composite (^IXIC) rose roughly 0.6%, coming off a sharp closing gain. The S&P 500 (^GSPC) was up 0.2%, continuing a rebound from its longest losing streak of 2024, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average (^DJI) fell 0.1%.

  • Just off the phone: Otis CEO Judy Marks

    Many in the Yahoo Finance newsroom know of my joy for reading up on elevator and escalator maker Otis Worldwide (OTIS) — I am fascinated by what the company makes, how it makes it and what it all says about the health of the global economy.

    I just got off the phone with Otis CEO Judy Marks. Her comments to me on China — following her trip in March to the country (an important market for Otis) — left an impression:

    “The message from the Chinese government is we want economic development. We want foreign direct investment. We’re going to celebrate 40 years in China this year, and it’s an important market to us, but we’ve watched as the market has developed and some of the challenges in the property market and they’re really continuing. I would tell you that the property market and the new equipment market similar to the last 18 to 24 months, it remains weak. Liquidity and credit constraints are weighing on the developers, and the top 50 developer sales this quarter were down almost 50% versus this quarter last year. So on the equipment side, we’re calling this a down high single digit to down 10% market for the year.”

    Marks doesn’t see growth returning to Otis’ China business in 2024.

  • Hilton continues to buy its company back

    Hilton (HLT) continues to be one of the most aggressive acquirers of its stock out of the gazillion companies I follow closely.

    In many respects, it almost feels like Hilton is taking itself private again! The hotel and resorts company went public again in 2013 after being bought by Blackstone in 2007.)

    This from the company’s just-released earnings report:

    “During the three months ended March 31, 2024, Hilton repurchased 3.4 million shares of its common stock at an average price per share of $196.17, for a total of $662 million, returning $701 million of capital to shareholders during the quarter including dividends. The number of shares outstanding as of April 19, 2024 was 250.0 million.”

    For perspective, Hilton ended 2022 with a share count of 277 million.

  • Toymaker earnings not coming in fun

    No playing around here, earnings from major toymakers Mattel (MAT) and Hasbro (HAS) aren’t very fun to look at.

    Not exactly a great earnings report from Mattel last night — now saying it will return to revenue growth in 2025. Mattel is unique in that the Barbie movie really drove up its results last year, so things mathematically will be down. Sales fell 1% year-over-year in the first quarter.

    Hasbro’s earnings this morning are also tough on the eyes for investors. The company is calling out a 21% sales plunge in its key consumer products business due to “broader industry trends, exited businesses and reduced closeout sales as a result of last year’s inventory clean-up.”

    Both weak reports say a lot about where shoppers minds are at right now … not with buying dolls, action figures and board games.

  • One stat to know on AT&T

    I am still wading through AT&T’s (T) long earnings report, but one number caught my attention right off the jump.

    $4.7 billion.

    That’s how much debt AT&T repaid in the quarter, as it continues to try to bring down leverage in life after Time Warner. CEO John Stankey has told me a few times within the past year that paying down debt is one of the most important goals for his management team.

    As it should be — AT&T still ended the first quarter with about $132.8 billion in total debt! The company’s market cap is $118 billion.

  • A list of questions Tesla investors need to ponder

    The day after.

    Tesla (TSLA) CEO Elon Musk has played investors like a fiddle. He gave them what they were clamoring for ahead of earnings — details on a cheaper Tesla — and they are eating it up. Shares are up 10% in pre-market trading, and the company’s ticker is dominating the Yahoo Finance Trending Ticker page.

    All of that is fine and good, but it all detracts (likely by Musk’s design) from the main story at Tesla that has weighed on its stock price this year: The company is struggling, and any bold promises by Musk that sends its stock higher inside an awful year for the company should be questioned big-time.

    Here are some questions the Tesla bulls need to ask themselves.

    • Musk promises robotaxis, shows off in the earnings slide-deck what their ride-sharing app may look like. But…
      • What do regulators have to say about this? How feasible is this launch within the next 12-months?
      • Musk does know that Uber (UBER) exists right? And that it’s nicely making profits finally and investing aggressively in its business.
      • Musk seems to think people will want to share their Teslas and make this platform a success. What happens if they don’t want to share their tricked out Model 3?
      • Musk mentions Tesla will own some of the robotaxi fleet. What does that do to its cash flow and margin profile? Do investors and analysts want to see Tesla saddled with these extra costs while the pure EV business is under pressure and they are trying to make humanoid Optimus robots?
    • Musk promises he is fully engaged at Tesla. But …
      • Some interesting dialogue on the earnings call on how long Musk plans to stay CEO of Tesla. He didn’t answer precisely with a timeline, said he works on Sunday and seemingly around the clock (like many other humans). He then questioned whether Tesla could get out its robots if he weren’t leading the company. Is now the time to ponder a Musk-less Tesla within the next few years? What does that even look like for investors? So many of his top execs have left or are leaving, including one of the guys on the earnings call last night! If buttoned-up/corporate Disney (DIS) CEO Bob Iger is seen as failing at succession planning, then Musk could be seen as one of the worst succession planners in CEO history.
    • Musk pounds the table on Tesla being an AI company again. But …
      • Sure, Tesla has some amazing technology. But doesn’t Tesla make cars first that then use its technology? Who would you rather own stock in? A pure play AI company such as Microsoft (MSFT) or a car company masquerading as an AI company?
    • Musk hypes a cheaper Tesla. But …
      • Tesla is no stranger to recalls and concerns about product quality. Just check out the Cybertruck recall last week! So, how high quality is a $25,000 Tesla going to be? This sounds like it could be a dreadful ownership experience, not unlike when my parents bought a cheap 1986 Ford Tempo and a 1987 Ford Escort when they came out.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending