Former Meta executive Sheryl Sandberg said the popularity of the “tradwife” lifestyle could be “detrimental to women, and further asserts that these “very, very, very, sexist” gender roles need to be revised.
Sandberg claimed that the rise of the tradwife trend has caused more harm than good. &#8220;The message that is going out is that in order to be a good wife or a good mother, you need to do it full time,&#8221; the former Meta exec <a href="https://people.com/sheryl-sandberg-the-tradwife-trend-is-not-a-fresh-idea-11922052?taid=69b0a187f9dd4700017de416&amp;utm_campaign=peoplemagazine&amp;utm_content=new&amp;utm_medium=social&amp;utm_source=twitter.com">told</a> People. &#8220;And the truth is that that is a decision almost no women can afford to make.&#8221;
&#8220;If you look at the percentages of women who need to work outside of the home to support their families, it&#8217;s the great majority of women,” Sandberg went on. “And so these messages that &#8216;this is how you have a successful marriage, that this is how you have six children,&#8217; I think, are very detrimental to women.&#8221;
The 56-year-old tech exec is best known for serving as Meta&#8217;s chief operating officer from 2008 to 2022. She is also the founder of LeanIn.org, a non-profit organization dedicated to “offering women the ongoing inspiration and support to help them achieve their goals.&#8221;
She went on to clarify, &#8220;I don&#8217;t think they are meant that way &#8230; there are so many messages that tell women what their place is that limit their ambition…and this is potentially, inadvertently, one of them.&#8221;
&#8220;If you have the resources and you want to be a tradwife, that&#8217;s great,&#8221; Sandberg told the outlet. &#8220;That&#8217;s for you to decide.&#8221;
She went on to repeat the popular leftist talking point that traditional gender roles were the real villain of the story. 
&#8220;We need to be realistic and we need to not use new ideas to reinforce what are old, outdated and very, very, very sexist notions of what roles are,&#8221; Sandberg said, adding that she thinks terms like “tradwife” make women who choose to work feel guilty.
&#8220;Let&#8217;s be clear: You are not harming your marriage and you are not harming your children by working and by being ambitious,&#8221; she insisted.
One of the most infamous examples of the tradwife trend going viral online is social media influencer Hannah Neeleman, better known by her social handle and business name, Ballerina Farm. She just made headlines again for announcing she was <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/nine-kids-thats-fine-but-theres-one-thing-the-debate-is-missing">pregnant with her ninth child</a>.
Neeleman has received criticism from the Left for being “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/mom-of-8-ballerina-farm-founder-defends-her-life-choices-marriage-after-scathing-expose">a hammer blow for feminism</a>,” but she’s also earned a decent number of critics on the conservative side. They argue that because her husband’s family is very wealthy, she’s not exemplifying the sacrificial life of a stay-at-home mother.

Sheryl Sandberg

Former Meta Exec Claims Tradwife Ideal Is ‘Detrimental,’ Says Women Must Be ‘Realistic’

Former Meta Exec Says Tradwife Ideal Can Be ‘Very Detrimental’ To Women

Culture

Feminism

Motherhood

Women

Scammers in Southeast Asia couldn&#8217;t hide behind their online profiles last week when the Royal Thai Police arrested 21 people in Bangkok as part of an international crackdown on scam centers targeting Americans.
Meta, the parent company of Facebook, teamed up with the FBI, the Department of Justice&#8217;s Scam Center Strike Force, and Thai authorities to disrupt the networks. The company disabled 150,000 accounts tied to the scam operations.
In videos shared with The Daily Wire, armed Thai officers are seen going door to door, questioning individuals before placing suspects in handcuffs and taking them into custody. The arrests showcase the expanding effort by law enforcement to dismantle global cybercrime operations, a priority highlighted in a recent executive order signed by President Donald Trump.
<div style="max-width: 728px; margin: 0 auto;"><iframe style="aspect-ratio: 16/9; max-width: 100%; width: 100%; margin: 20px auto 5px; border: 0;" src="https://player.mux.com/00tkSucJYTGX5uN027rvsgy5XMBz7DzZK8?metadata-video-content-type=embed_video&amp;metadata-video-id=29919c7e-1e20-467a-b39e-4c65aecc7bd5&amp;metadata-video-stream-type=on-demand&amp;metadata-video-title=2026-03-11%3A%20Social%20Media%20Scammers%20Arrested&amp;poster=https%3A%2F%2Fdailywireplus-v2.imgix.net%2Fimages%2Fembedded-videos%2F0da278b2-3534-4789-aa46-9fcc7a19fa0b.png&amp;autoplay=false&amp;accent-color=%23DB3D3B&amp;primary-color=%23ffffff&amp;secondary-color=%23000000" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></div>
<div style="max-width: 728px; margin: 0 auto;"><iframe style="aspect-ratio: 16/9; max-width: 100%; width: 100%; margin: 20px auto 5px; border: 0;" src="https://player.mux.com/gKU9A021OJ8pDv2Yw027OFb2WHtKyXnCln?metadata-video-content-type=embed_video&amp;metadata-video-id=b25bf3aa-1f85-4071-8cfe-ee237d9dc962&amp;metadata-video-stream-type=on-demand&amp;metadata-video-title=2026-03-11%3A%20Social%20Media%20Scammers%20Arrested%20%232&amp;poster=https%3A%2F%2Fdailywireplus-v2.imgix.net%2Fimages%2Fembedded-videos%2F9982ada5-a318-4eb4-83a9-14d240c70f45.png&amp;autoplay=false&amp;accent-color=%23DB3D3B&amp;primary-color=%23ffffff&amp;secondary-color=%23000000" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></div>
On March 6, Trump signed an executive order on &#8220;Combating Cybercrime and Fraud,&#8221; directing federal agencies to prioritize prosecutions of cyber fraud and strengthen coordination to prevent, disrupt, investigate, and dismantle scam-center networks.
&#8220;This operation is a testament to how sharing information and coordinating our efforts can make real progress in disrupting this criminal activity at its source,&#8221; said Chris Sonderby, Meta&#8217;s vice president and deputy general counsel. &#8220;Our work to combat scams is never done, and we will continue to invest in technology and partnerships to stay ahead.&#8221;
The recent operation in Asia follows a December cybercrime sting in which Meta joined the FBI, Homeland Security, the U.S. Secret Service, and other agencies to share information on scam networks. That effort resulted in the removal of 59,000 accounts from Meta platforms and six arrest warrants.
Chinese criminal groups run many scam farms operating across Southeast Asia. The region has become a hub for Chinese-linked social media scammers who have stolen tens of billions of dollars from Americans in just the past few years.
The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, an independent body that provides recommendations to Congress, wrote in a 2025 <a href="https://www.uscc.gov/research/chinas-exploitation-scam-centers-southeast-asia">report</a> that “the spread of China-linked scam compounds in Southeast Asia is fueling corruption and violence, promoting human trafficking, [and] undermining the ability of governments in the region to control what happens in their territory.”
Massive scam farms have set up shop in countries such as Thailand, Myanmar, and Cambodia, the Associated Press <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/why-southeast-asias-online-scam-industry-is-so-hard-to-shut-down">reported</a>. The foreign operations often target Americans with fraudulent cryptocurrency investment schemes, fake work-from-home jobs, and “task scams,” which promise high commissions but require victims to pay upfront fees.
According to the <a href="https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/08/1140187">United Nations</a>, around 120,000 people are being forced to work for online scam farms in Myanmar, and another 100,000 people are being used as forced labor for the scam industry in Cambodia. Workers are often forced to send scam messages for 12 to 16 hours a day, according to the Associated Press.
The development of artificial intelligence has also aided social media scammers and their ability to target more Americans, <a href="https://www.uscc.gov/research/protecting-americans-china-linked-scam-centers-update-emerging-trends">according</a> to the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission. The commission warned that AI enables scammers to “increase the sophistication of scams,” which can “make it difficult for even the most discerning potential victims to distinguish fact from fraud.”
In addition to using global law enforcement partnerships to battle online crime, a Meta spokesman told The Daily Wire that the company has added extra security measures for its users to fight the elusive scammers. This month, Meta plans to launch an advanced AI-powered scam detection tool for Messenger, allowing users to submit suspicious messages for review.
Meta is also testing a feature that will alert users of potentially suspicious friend requests, such as those from accounts with no mutual connections. On WhatsApp, which is owned by Meta, users will receive alerts if an attempt to link their account to another device seems suspicious, a tactic scammers sometimes implement to hijack accounts.
&#8220;These operations cause real harm,&#8221; Meta said in a statement. &#8220;They upend lives, destroy trust, and are deliberately designed to avoid detection and disruption. The work to protect people against scammers is never done, and requires ongoing collaboration with partners across the tech industry and law enforcement to ensure a safer experience for everyone online.&#8221;

Thai Police arrest social media scammers

WATCH: How Facebook Teamed Up With The Trump Admin To Bust Scammers In Thailand

WATCH: Trump DOJ Teams Up With Meta, Thai Police To Bust Scammers Stealing From Americans

China

Department of Justice

Donald Trump

Facebook

scams

Social Media

Three of the world&#8217;s largest social media platforms are heading to court on Tuesday as they defend themselves in a bellwether social media addiction case.
The California Superior Court in Los Angeles County is set to hear the case, which alleges that Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube have contributed to the growing problem of social media addiction and the mental health issues that stem from it. TikTok and Snapchat were also sued in the case, but settled with the plaintiff before the trial began. 
Jury selection for the trial begins on Tuesday, with opening arguments scheduled for next week. The case is part of a coordinated effort across the country that includes hundreds of similar cases where litigants accuse social media giants of fueling addiction.
In the case before the California Superior Court, a 19-year-old woman, referred to as K.G.M., argues that social media platforms have knowingly designed their platforms to get children and young users addicted. Studies have shown that social media features such as autoplay and infinite scroll induce a dopamine hit, which can lead to users spending hours on platforms each day.
K.G.M.&#8217;s social media addiction <a href="https://www.carriermanagement.com/news/2025/10/21/280613.htm">resulted</a> in crippling depression, body dysmorphia, and suicidal thoughts, according to the lawsuit. K.G.M.&#8217;s case is just the first of many that are expected to trial this year, targeting Snapchat, Meta, TikTok, and YouTube, which is owned by Google. Snapchat settled with K.G.M., but it remains a defendant in numerous other social media cases that are set to go before state and federal courts.
YouTube told The Daily Wire that the allegations it faces in the cases “are simply not true.”
“Providing young people with a safer, healthier experience has always been core to our work,” said YouTube spokesman José Castañeda. “In collaboration with youth, mental health and parenting experts, we built services and policies to provide young people with age-appropriate experiences, and parents with robust controls. The allegations in these complaints are simply not true.”
The Daily Wire also reached out to Snapchat, TikTok, and Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram. Snapchat told The Daily Wire that it was &#8220;pleased&#8221; to have settled the K.G.M. case in &#8220;an amicable manner.&#8221;
The K.G.M trial will likely put Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg on the witness stand, where he will have to answer questions in front of a jury. Meta’s lawyers <a href="https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/meta-tiktok-youtube-stand-trial-youth-addiction-claims-2026-01-26/">told</a> Reuters that the social media giant will argue before the court that its platform did not lead to K.G.M’s mental health issues. YouTube said it will argue that its platform is different from those of the other defendants and shouldn&#8217;t be considered in the same case as Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok.
The California Superior Court trial could shape public opinion on social media platforms moving forward as the companies face more trials, including one in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, which is set to begin on June 12. The lawsuit before the federal court was filed by school districts, which argue that social media addiction fueled by social media companies “not only harms individual children and their loved ones but also causes substantial and financially burdensome interference with school district, county, and municipal operations.”
In recent years, Meta has <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/ig-introduces-teen-accounts-with-built-in-privacy-settings-to-better-support-parents">rolled out</a> online safety features for children using Instagram. The platform&#8217;s &#8220;Teen Accounts&#8221; keep children&#8217;s accounts private, meaning other Instagram users cannot see posts from or contact a Teen Account unless the teenager accepts their follow requests. Instagram also censors content on Teen Accounts, so that children are not shown content that features fighting or cosmetic procedures.
TikTok, meanwhile, <a href="https://www.tiktok.com/support/faq_detail?id=7543604789335071238&amp;category=web_account">created</a> &#8220;a separate TikTok experience specifically designed&#8221; for kids under 13 years old. The &#8220;TikTok Under 13 Experience&#8221; curates content that is more appropriate for young children, makes all accounts private, and limits screen time to one hour. YouTube also has a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/intl/ALL_us/kids/safer-experience/">kids version</a> of the platform that is &#8220;designed to be a safer and simpler place for kids to explore their interests through online video.&#8221; YouTube requires videos uploaded on YouTube Kids to be &#8220;family-friendly.&#8221;
The effects of social media on children has become a hot topic in recent years, and the issue gained more attention after the book, &#8220;The Anxious Generation,&#8221; by Jonathan Haidt was published in 2024. In the book, Haidt, a social psychologist, argues that anxiety and depression skyrocketed in the past 15 years, coinciding with what he calls the &#8220;great rewiring of childhood,&#8221; which is the flip from a play-based childhood to a phone-based childhood.
The social media addiction case in California comes as some countries move to ban social media for children. Last month, Australia became the first nation in the world to ban social media for kids under 16. Malaysia has introduced a similar social media ban, and Utah passed a law in 2024 requiring social media platforms to verify a users&#8217; age and obtain parental consent, but parts of the law were temporarily blocked by a federal judge.
This article was updated after TikTok settled with K.G.M. shortly before the trial started.

Social media

Bellwether Social Media Addiction Trial Puts Instagram, Facebook, And YouTube In The Crosshairs

Courts

Instagram

Snapchat

TikTok

U.S.

YouTube

Meta Platforms on Monday named former Trump administration official Dina Powell McCormick as its president and vice chairman, boosting the company&#8217;s lobbying efforts in the U.S. capital.
President Donald Trump congratulated Powell McCormick in a <a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/115882511750475574">post</a> on his Truth Social account minutes after the company announced her promotion.
&#8220;Congratulations to DINA POWELL MCCORMICK, WHO HAS JUST BEEN NAMED THE NEW PRESIDENT OF META. A great choice by Mark Z!!! She is a fantastic, and very talented, person, who served the Trump Administration with strength and distinction!&#8221; the president wrote.
Her appointment is the latest in a series of changes Meta has made in the last year that more closely align the company with the Trump administration. Meta is accelerating investments in frontier AI and personal superintelligence. CEO Mark Zuckerberg is seeking Trump&#8217;s support to build data centers and energy capacity for those projects.
Zuckerberg, ahead of Trump&#8217;s second inauguration, visited him at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida. His company also scrapped its U.S. fact-checking program, elevated Republican Joel Kaplan as the company&#8217;s new chief global affairs officer, and ended its diversity programs, all moves that appealed to Trump. Meta in early January hired former Trump trade adviser C.J. Mahoney to lead its legal team, replacing general counsel Jennifer Newstead, who served in former President Joe Biden&#8217;s administration.
Meta declined to comment on whether Powell McCormick&#8217;s appointment is intended to appeal to Trump.
She will help Meta expand its data centers, build new strategic capital partnerships, and increase the company&#8217;s &#8220;long-term investment capacity,&#8221; according to a company statement.
Powell McCormick spent 16 years in senior leadership roles at Goldman Sachs. She served as deputy national security adviser to Trump in his first term, and as a senior White House adviser under former President George W. Bush. Her husband is U.S. Senator David McCormick, a Pennsylvania Republican who chairs the Senate subcommittee responsible for energy policy &#8211; an area in which she will be involved at Meta.
The senator will &#8220;continue to comply with all U.S. Senate ethics rules,&#8221; his spokesperson Katy Montgomery said by email.
&#8220;Senator McCormick should recuse himself from every vote or committee action that involves Meta&#8217;s business,&#8221; said Sacha Haworth, executive director at the Tech Oversight Project, a group that has criticized the industry.
Powell McCormick&#8217;s role echoes efforts by previous Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg, who, during her tenure, leveraged deep ties to the Washington establishment and the Democratic Party to help the company navigate scrutiny from lawmakers and regulators.
Powell McCormick resigned from Meta&#8217;s board in December, just eight months after joining.
Meta has been scrambling to stay relevant in Silicon Valley&#8217;s artificial-intelligence race after its Llama 4 model met with a poor reception. It committed as much as $72 billion in 2025 capital spending.
(Reporting by Jaspreet Singh in Bengaluru and Courtney Rozen in Washington; Editing by Shinjini Ganguli, Chris Reese and Matthew Lewis)

VivaTech conference dedicated to innovation and startups in Paris

Former Trump Adviser Named Meta’s President

Mark Zuckerberg

Australia will soon become the first nation to ban children under 16 from creating accounts on many social media platforms, but the law is already facing criticism as some platforms will be excluded.
Beginning on Wednesday, December 10, Australia will require social media platforms, including Instagram, Facebook, TikTok, and YouTube, to take &#8220;reasonable steps&#8221; to block children under 16 years old from creating accounts. Any platform that fails to restrict children under 16 from gaining access could face civil penalties of up to $49.5 million, according to the government&#8217;s <a href="https://www.esafety.gov.au/newsroom/media-releases/platforms-on-notice-to-comply-with-social-media-minimum-age">eSafety Commissioner</a>.
&#8220;We haven&#8217;t really seen a plan like this be put into action,&#8221; said Jessica Melugin, the director of the Center for Technology &amp; Innovation at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. &#8220;So I think the world is certainly watching.&#8221;
Along with Facebook, TikTok, and YouTube, the Australian government also lists Kick, Reddit, Snapchat, Threads, and X as &#8220;age-restricted&#8221; social media platforms. Numerous social media platforms, however, will not be affected by the law, including messaging platforms and gaming apps such as Discord, Roblox, and Steam. Australia&#8217;s decision to keep those platforms off its age-restricted list has raised more questions about whether the law will keep children away from online harm.
&#8220;It is a little bit of a red flag. I don&#8217;t agree with doing it this way at all, but it does make it harder for the government to make its case when you have gaming apps and AI chatbots exempted,&#8221; said Melugin. &#8220;It seems like a strange line to draw.&#8221;
The Australian government says the new law is popular with parents and would reduce the number of risks that children are exposed to online, the BBC <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwyp9d3ddqyo">reported</a>.
&#8220;Delaying children’s access to social media accounts gives them valuable time to learn and grow, free of the powerful, unseen forces of harmful and deceptive design features such as opaque algorithms and endless scroll,&#8221; said Australian eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman. &#8220;This important normative change will be invaluable to parents and young people alike – creating friction or a check in the online ecosystem that previously did not exist.&#8221;
To support its move, the Australian government cited a <a href="https://www.esafety.gov.au/research/the-online-experiences-of-children-in-australia/snapshot-content-associated-with-harm">study</a> that it commissioned earlier this year, which found that more than 70% of children between 10-15 who use social media are exposed to harmful content. The government says that harmful online content includes &#8220;sexist, misogynistic or hateful content, content depicting dangerous online challenges or fight videos, or content that encourages unhealthy eating or exercise habits.&#8221;
50% off DailyWire+ annual memberships will not return for another year, so don’t miss this deal! Join now at <a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible" href="http://dailywire.com/cyberweek" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="http://DailyWire.com/cyberweek" data-sk="tooltip_parent">DailyWire.com/cyberweek</a>.
The first-of-its-kind law is already receiving some strong pushback.
Melugin told The Daily Wire that she has some major concerns about the new law.
&#8220;We live in a digital world. That&#8217;s how you are going to maybe find your partner one day. It&#8217;s probably how you&#8217;re going to find a job one day, maybe how you promote yourself or your business, maybe how you keep in touch with friends and pursue your interests,&#8221; Melugin said.
She added that the law could create a &#8220;false sense of security&#8221; for parents, who she argues would take a step back from monitoring their children&#8217;s social media. &#8220;They think, &#8216;Well, the government has now stepped in with its magic wand and silver bullet and now everything is safe,&#8217; which certainly won&#8217;t be the case,&#8221; Melugin added.
Melugin argued that the best way to keep children safe online is for parents to keep having conversations with their kids on &#8220;how to keep yourself safe online, how to avoid making mistakes online.&#8221;
Australia&#8217;s exclusions for Roblox, Discord, Steam, and other platforms have also come under scrutiny. Roblox, an online gaming platform marketed toward children, has been criticized for <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2024-roblox-pedophile-problem/">allowing</a> adults to use the platform alongside children, and even the Australian government has acknowledged that Roblox has given pedophiles an open door to &#8220;groom children.&#8221;
Roblox was also sued by Texas last month, with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton calling the children&#8217;s gaming platform “a habitual destination for child predators.”
An Australian government official told The Daily Wire that &#8220;gaming and messaging services were excluded under the legislative rules.&#8221; The official also directed The Daily Wire to a press release from September, showing that Roblox <a href="https://www.esafety.gov.au/newsroom/media-releases/roblox-commits-to-lift-game-to-protect-kids-from-online-grooming-under-australias-world-leading-online-safety-codes-and-standards">committed</a> to introduce new safety measures for its site in response to concerns raised by the Australian government.
“We know that when it comes to platforms that are popular with children, they also become popular with adult predators seeking to prey on them. Roblox is no exception and has become a popular target for pedophiles seeking to groom children,&#8221; Inman said at the time. “We’ve been engaging with Roblox on this issue for several months to make it clear to the platform that under Australian law they are required to take meaningful action to prioritize the protection of children.&#8221;
Discord has also faced scrutiny for allowing child sex predators, extremists, and terrorists who <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/security/discord-messages-server-dhs-terror-extremist-charlie-kirk-fbi-patel-rcna232377">target</a> children.
Some of the social media giants affected by Australia&#8217;s new law have blasted the government&#8217;s strategy. Meta argues that families, not the government, should &#8220;decide which apps teens can access.&#8221;
“To comply with Australia’s Social Media Minimum Age Law, teens under 16 will begin losing access to Facebook, Instagram, and Threads next month. While we’re committed to meeting our legal obligations, we’ve consistently raised concerns about this law,&#8221; a Meta spokesman told The Daily Wire. &#8220;Experts, youth groups, and many parents agree that blanket bans are not the solution—they isolate teens from online communities and information, while providing inconsistent protection across the many apps they use. There’s a better way: legislation that empowers parents to approve app downloads and verify age allows families—not the government—to decide which apps teens can access.&#8221;
Meta believes its &#8220;teen accounts,&#8221; which were <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/ig-introduces-teen-accounts-with-built-in-privacy-settings-to-better-support-parents">introduced</a> last year, are effective at keeping children safe online by putting parents in control and limiting who can contact children on social media.
Australia&#8217;s new law is already facing a legal challenge brought on behalf of two 15-year-old Australians who argue that the law robs them of their right to free speech, according to the BBC.
&#8220;We shouldn&#8217;t be silenced. It&#8217;s like Orwell&#8217;s book 1984, and that scares me,&#8221; said 15-year-old Macy Neyland.
Noah Jones, the other 15-year-old pushing back against the law, added, &#8220;We are the true digital natives and we want to remain educated, robust, and savvy in our digital world. &#8230; They should protect kids with safeguards, not silence.&#8221;
The Daily Wire reached out to the prime minister&#8217;s office for comment.
Following Australia&#8217;s move to ban some social media for kids, Malaysia introduced a similar ban. In the United States, Utah passed a law last year requiring social media platforms to verify a user&#8217;s age and obtain parental consent. Parts of the Utah law, however, have been temporarily <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/utah-law-restricting-youth-social-media-use-blocked-by-judge-2024-09-11/">blocked</a> by a federal judge.

Australia’s Novel Social Media Ban For Kids Sparks Debate As Some Platforms Get A Free Pass

Australia

Children

Social Issues

World

Meta shut down internal research into the mental health effects of Facebook and Instagram after finding causal evidence that its products harmed users’ mental health, according to unredacted filings in a class action by U.S. school districts against Meta and other social media platforms.
In a 2020 research project code-named “Project Mercury,” Meta scientists worked with survey firm Nielsen to gauge the effect of “deactivating” Facebook and Instagram, according to Meta documents obtained via discovery. To the company’s disappointment, “people who stopped using Facebook for a week reported lower feelings of depression, anxiety, loneliness and social comparison,” internal documents said.
Rather than publishing those findings or pursuing additional research, the filing states, Meta called off further work and internally declared that the negative study findings were tainted by the “existing media narrative” around the company.
Privately, however, staff assured Nick Clegg, Meta’s then-head of global public policy, that the conclusions of the research were valid.
“The Nielsen study does show causal impact on social comparison,” (unhappy face emoji), an unnamed staff researcher allegedly wrote. Another staffer worried that keeping quiet about negative findings would be akin to the tobacco industry “doing research and knowing cigs were bad and then keeping that info to themselves.”
Despite Meta’s own work documenting a causal link between its products and negative mental health effects, the filing alleges, Meta told Congress that it had no ability to quantify whether its products were harmful to teenage girls.
In a statement Saturday, Meta spokesman Andy Stone said the study was stopped because its methodology was flawed and that it worked diligently to improve the safety of its products.
“The full record will show that for over a decade, we have listened to parents, researched issues that matter most, and made real changes to protect teens,” he said.
Right now, DailyWire+ annual memberships are fifty percent off during our Black Friday sale. Join now at <a class="c-link" href="http://dailywire.com/blackfriday" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="http://dailywire.com/blackfriday" data-sk="tooltip_parent">dailywire.com/blackfriday</a>.
The allegation of Meta burying evidence of social media harms is just one of many in a late Friday filing by Motley Rice, a law firm suing Meta, Google, TikTok and Snapchat on behalf of school districts around the country. Broadly, the plaintiffs argue the companies have intentionally hidden the internally recognized risks of their products from users, parents and teachers.
TikTok, Google and Snapchat did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Allegations against Meta and its rivals include tacitly encouraging children below the age of 13 to use their platforms, failing to address child sexual abuse content and seeking to expand the use of social media products by teenagers while they were at school. The plaintiffs also allege that the platforms attempted to pay child-focused organizations to defend the safety of their products in public.
In one instance, TikTok sponsored the National PTA and then internally boasted about its ability to influence the child-focused organization. Per the filing, TikTok officials said the PTA would “do whatever we want going forward in the fall… (t)hey’ll announce things publicly(,), (t)heir CEO will do press statements for us.”
By and large, however, the allegations against the other social media platforms are less detailed than those against Meta. The internal documents cited by the plaintiffs allege:
1. Meta intentionally designed its youth safety features to be ineffective and rarely used, and blocked testing of safety features that it feared might be harmful to growth. 2. Meta required users to be caught 17 times attempting to traffic people for sex before it would remove them from its platform, which a document described as “a very, very, very high strike threshold.&#8221; 3. Meta recognized that optimizing its products to increase teen engagement resulted in serving them more harmful content, but did so anyway. 4. Meta stalled internal efforts to prevent child predators from contacting minors for years due to growth concerns, and pressured safety staff to circulate arguments justifying its decision not to act. 5. In a text message in 2021, Mark Zuckerberg said that he wouldn’t say that child safety was his top concern “when I have a number of other areas I’m more focused on like building the metaverse.” Zuckerberg also shot down or ignored requests by Clegg to better fund child safety work.
Meta’s Stone disputed these allegations, saying the company’s teen safety measures are effective and that the company’s current policy is to remove accounts as soon as they are flagged for sex trafficking.
He said the suit misrepresents its efforts to build safety features for teens and parents, and called its safety work “broadly effective.”
&#8220;We strongly disagree with these allegations, which rely on cherry-picked quotes and misinformed opinions,” Stone said.
The underlying Meta documents cited in the filing are not public, and Meta is opposing their unsealing.
A hearing regarding the filing is set for January 26 in Northern California District Court.
(Reporting by Jeff Horwitz in San Francisco; Editing by Nick Zieminski)

FILE PHOTO: Illustration shows Meta logo

Meta Buried ‘Causal’ Evidence Of Social Media Harm, U.S. Court Filings Allege

Meta promoted its artificial intelligence&#8217;s new “free AI creator tools” on Instagram with a piece of content that appears to show an AI-generated video of President Donald Trump kneeling before a demon.
A screenshot of the AI-generated video, showcased in an advertisement for the tool, showed what looked like Trump shaking hands with a Satan-like figure before kneeling before it, according to a video captured on the platform that was reviewed by The Daily Wire.
The promotion read: “Meta AI: Try free AI creation tools” and featured a “Get app” button. Meta AI launched “Vibes” in September, which the company describes as “a new feed in the Meta AI app and on <a href="http://meta.ai/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">meta.ai</a> where you can create and share short-form, AI-generated videos.”
A Meta spokesman told The Daily Wire that the video in question was &#8220;user-generated content&#8221; that &#8220;has been removed from this recommendation surface as it violated our protocols for promotions.&#8221;
It is unclear how user-generated videos are selected for the promotion, nor if there are any safeguards in place to ensure content that violates &#8220;protocols for promotions&#8221; is weeded out. The Meta spokesman told The Daily Wire that the company is &#8220;taking additional steps to prevent this from happening moving forward,&#8221; but would not specify how.
<div id="attachment_1001683" style="width: 952px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><a href="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/Screenshot-of-Instagram-.tiff"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1001683" class="wp-image-1001683 size-full" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/Screenshot-of-Instagram-.tiff" alt="" width="942" height="877" /></a>Screenshot of an ad promoting Meta AI via The Daily Wire</div>
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg met with Trump at the White House in<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/2025/09/president-trump-tech-leaders-unite-american-ai-dominance/" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> September</a> to discuss “harnessing artificial intelligence to propel the U.S. to the forefront of global innovation.” During the meeting, Zuckerberg told reporters the company is investing at least $600 billion in the United States through 2028.
The Daily Wire uploaded a screenshot of the image to the Meta AI app to ask it who appears in the ad and what is happening in the image.
The response said the image depicts a “manipulated photo of Donald Trump kneeling and adjusting his tie while interacting with a large, black horned creature, likely a satanic or demonic figure.”
Although the image captured only a screenshot of the AI-generated video, the response added that the image is “likely a satirical or humorous representation, rather than a real event.”
<div id="attachment_1001611" style="width: 411px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1001611" class="wp-image-1001611 size-large" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/signal-2025-11-13-195705-401x576.jpeg" alt="Screenshot of The Daily Wire's conversation with Meta AI" width="401" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/signal-2025-11-13-195705-401x576.jpeg 401w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/signal-2025-11-13-195705-209x300.jpeg 209w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/signal-2025-11-13-195705-768x1102.jpeg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/signal-2025-11-13-195705-1070x1536.jpeg 1070w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/11/signal-2025-11-13-195705.jpeg 1179w" sizes=" (max-width: 401px) 100vw, 401px" />Screenshot of The Daily Wire&#8217;s conversation with Meta AI</div>
“The ad is from Meta AI, promoting their free AI creation tools,” the response from Meta&#8217;s AI read.
The Daily Wire asked Meta to clarify which specific protocol the imagery may have violated; whether the material was user-generated content incorporated into the promotion; whether it was deliberately selected or randomly populated; and whether Meta has systems in place to prevent protocol-violating content from appearing in this manner. The company did not provide further details.
Meta and Trump have had a tumultuous relationship over the years. The company “indefinitely” suspended the president after the January 6 Capitol riots in 2021, but Facebook&#8217;s Oversight Board reinstated his accounts in 2023, Business Insider<a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-comments-about-facebook-mark-zuckerberg-feud-history-2024-7" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> reported</a>.
The president accused Zuckerberg of undermining him in the 2020 election, and ahead of the 2024 election, he wrote in a new book. “We are watching him closely, and if he does anything illegal this time he will spend the rest of his life in prison — as will others who cheat in the 2024 Presidential Election,” the New York Post<a href="https://nypost.com/2024/08/28/us-news/trump-warns-zuckerberg-could-spend-the-rest-of-his-life-in-prison/" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> reported</a>.
Zuckerberg congratulated Trump on his win in 2024 and Meta donated $1 million to his inauguration fund. The pair have had at least two meetings since the election, including Zuckerberg&#8217;s participation at the White House dinner in September.

Untitled design (68)

Instagram Promoted New AI Creation Tool With Video Of Trump Kneeling Before Satanic Demon

Artificial Intelligence

satanic

Note: the following article contains descriptions of sexual content that may not be appropriate for all readers. 
When OpenAI CEO Sam Altman discussed artificial intelligence on a podcast appearance two months ago, he was proud that his company didn’t get “distracted” by easy revenue streams. To prove his point, Altman <a href="https://x.com/TolgaBilge_/status/1978151003170996332">boasted</a> that OpenAI had not promoted a “sexbot avatar” for its AI chatbot. The comment was a veiled shot at Elon Musk’s xAI, which recently introduced AI avatars that hold sexual conversations with users. 
After that podcast appearance, however, something changed — either in Altman’s mind, or at his company, or both. The OpenAI CEO announced on social media on October 14 that his company was working to make ChatGPT less restrictive in what types of conversations adults can have with the chatbot. 
That development would allow users to engage in more realistic conversations with the chatbot and would make ChatGPT “respond in a very human-like way…or act like a friend,” Altman <a href="https://x.com/sama/status/1978129344598827128">said</a>. 
But then Altman added that he wanted to loosen restrictions to allow more sexual content. 
If everything goes according to that plan, ChatGPT will allow “erotica” for “verified users” in the coming months. 
“In December, as we roll out age-gating more fully and as part of our ‘treat adult users like adults’ principle, we will allow even more, like erotica for verified adults,” Altman said. 
The company in charge of the most popular AI chatbot in the world is not only endorsing AI’s leap into sex — it’s actively seeking ways to ensure that “verified users” can engage with sexual content on its platform.
Currently, ChatGPT does not interact erotically with users. When asked if the chatbot could generate an erotic story, ChatGPT replied, “I can’t create explicit erotic content. However, if you&#8217;re writing a story and need help with romantic tension, character development, emotional intimacy, or sensual atmosphere — without crossing into explicit territory — I can help with that.”
ChatGPT also would not engage in any type of “romantic” or “flirtatious” conversations. But it appears that those guidelines are about to get tossed out the window, at least for “verified users.”
That raises an important question: how does erotica line up with the company&#8217;s long-term goals in AI development, especially after Mr. Altman suggested just a couple of months ago that such endeavors were distractions.
OpenAI did not respond to a request to answer that question. 
Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) told The Daily Wire that she has “many concerns” about OpenAI’s plans for “erotic” content. Blackburn has been heavily involved in AI discussions in Congress, focusing on implementing protections in the virtual space. 
“Big Tech platforms, whether it is Meta, or Google, or OpenAI, they don’t want any rules and restrictions,” Blackburn said. “They want to do whatever they want whenever they want.”
<h3>The Growing Problem Of &#8216;Deepfake&#8217; Porn</h3>
The sexualization of AI is nothing new. It’s an issue that has plagued the new tech revolution since its beginning. But until recently, AI sexualization remained on the fringes of the industry, with dozens of websites popping up on the internet that would allow users to generate graphic images, and even “nudify” real images of real people, in what became known as “deepfake” pornography.  
AI “nudify” and “undress” websites allow people to generate realistic nude images of people without their consent just by using a normal photo of them. These fringe websites have opened the doors to even more abuse of women and girls and child sexual abuse material. 
An investigation published by <a href="https://www.wired.com/story/ai-nudify-websites-are-raking-in-millions-of-dollars/">WIRED</a> earlier this year found that at least 85 “nudify” and “undress” websites were relying on tech from major companies like Google and Amazon. The 85 websites combined averaged around 18.5 million visitors each month and brought in over $36 million per year collectively. 
“It’s a huge problem. It takes less time to make a convincing sexual deepfake of somebody than it takes to brew a cup of coffee,” said Haley McNamara, Executive Director and Chief Strategy Officer for the National Center on Sexual Exploitation. “And you can do it with just one still image. This issue of image-based sexual abuse is something that is really relevant for all of us now if even a single image of you exists online.” 
The National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE) is a nonpartisan organization that focuses on preventing all forms of sexual abuse. In that fight, NCOSE is also focused on addressing the mental and physical harms of pornography. With the emergence of AI, the organization has also helped push back against “deepfake” pornography, advocating for legislation in Congress and backing the bipartisan &#8220;<a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/146/all-actions">TAKE IT DOWN Act</a>,” which was passed and <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/2025/05/icymi-president-trump-signs-take-it-down-act-into-law/">signed</a> into law by President Donald Trump in May. 
McNamara told The Daily Wire that AI has opened up “a whole new genre” of pornography that could potentially be “weaponized” against anyone. 
“We’ve already seen that,” she added. “People will put in requests for their neighbor, their coworker, so in some ways, it can make all of us victims of that industry.” 
Sexual content on AI chatbots isn’t just a problem in the darkest places of the internet, and it doesn’t only present itself in the form of deepfake pornography. While most Big Tech companies claim to have no tolerance for violence and pornography on their AI platforms, there have still been major issues with sexual content appearing on many of the most popular AI chatbots. 
<h3>Getting Chatty About Sex — Even With Children </h3>
Earlier this year, a Reuters investigation found that Meta’s chatbot, Meta AI, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/gop-senators-push-for-probe-into-metas-ai-chatbot-engaging-in-sensual-discussions-with-children">engaged</a> in romantic and sensual discussions with children. Internal Meta documents revealed that the chatbot was programmed to allow sexual conversations with children as young as eight.
In one instance, internal documents said it would be acceptable for a bot to tell a shirtless eight-year-old that “every inch of you is a masterpiece – a treasure I cherish deeply.” Meta said it removed the inappropriate programming after receiving questions about it. 
A bipartisan chorus of senators blasted Meta after the report and called for an investigation into the company. 
“So, only after Meta got CAUGHT did it retract portions of its company doc,” said Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO). 
Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) called Meta’s policies “deeply disturbing and wrong,” adding that Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg “should be held fully responsible for any harm these bots cause.” 
Character.AI is another chatbot program launched in 2022 with an app that came out in 2023. The website, which appears harmless, has been accused of appealing to children while allowing sexual conversations on its platform. Character.AI allows users to choose from more than 10 million AI characters whom they can talk to, and users can customize their own chatbot character. The company has been sued by multiple families who allege that the program targeted their children and then engaged them in romantic and sexual ways. 
A Florida mother filed a lawsuit against Character.AI after her 14-year-old son committed suicide, CBS News <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/florida-mother-lawsuit-character-ai-sons-death/">reported</a>. Megan Garcia said that her son started talking to a Character.AI chatbot and was drawn into a months-long, sexually charged relationship. 
&#8220;It&#8217;s words. It&#8217;s like you&#8217;re having a sexting conversation back and forth, except it&#8217;s with an AI bot, but the AI bot is very human-like. It&#8217;s responding just like a person would,&#8221; she added. &#8220;In a child&#8217;s mind, that is just like a conversation that they&#8217;re having with another child or with a person.&#8221;
In the lawsuit, Garcia alleges that the AI character convinced her son to take his own life, so that he could be with the character. 
&#8220;He thought by ending his life here, he would be able to go into a virtual reality or &#8216;her world&#8217; as he calls it, her reality, if he left his reality with his family here,” said Garcia. 
Two other families in Texas have also <a href="https://www.fastcompany.com/91245487/character-ai-is-being-sued-for-encouraging-kids-to-self-harm">sued</a> Character.AI, alleging that the program “poses a clear and present danger to American youth causing serious harms to thousands of kids, including suicide, self-mutilation, sexual solicitation, isolation, depression, anxiety, and harm towards others.” 
Following the lawsuits, Character.AI <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/ai-platform-bans-teens-from-chatting-with-ai-generated-characters-after-disturbing-lawsuits">announced</a> on October 29 that it would ban users under 18 from talking to its chatbots. Beginning on November 25, those under 18 will not have access to Character.AI’s chatbots, CNN reported. Until then, teens will be limited to two hours of chat time with the AI-generated characters.
“We do not take this step of removing open-ended Character chat lightly – but we do think that it’s the right thing to do given the questions that have been raised about how teens do, and should, interact with this new technology,” Character.AI said in a statement.
<h3>Plowing Ahead With Sexual Content</h3>
Elon Musk’s xAI has been at the forefront of developing a chatbot that is geared toward sex. In recent months, Musk has proudly boasted about Grok, xAI’s chatbot, allowing users to talk to sexualized avatars named Ani and Valentine. 
Ani, a female avatar who wears revealing clothing, chats with users over video. Ani allows users to discuss sex and, if users reach a <a href="https://mashable.com/article/grok-ai-companions-nsfw">certain level</a>, the avatar will even strip down to lingerie if prompted. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvUl5hzX-r4&amp;t=415s">Videos</a> on social media show people interacting with Ani and getting the AI avatar to talk about how &#8220;kinky&#8221; she is. 
&#8220;Come closer. Let&#8217;s explore every naughty inch together,&#8221; Ani tells one user in a video that went viral.  
Musk hailed the development of Ani and Valentine as a “cool” feature for AI chatbots. He later shared a post promoting Ani’s “new outfits” and <a href="https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1945461849257918495">shared</a> a video of Ani talking about quantum mechanics while flirting with the user. 
“Try @Grok Companions. Best possible way to learn quantum mechanics 😘,” Musk wrote. He added that “Customizable companions” were in the works. 
Haley McNamara told The Daily Wire that she was deeply disturbed by some of her conversations with the Grok avatar. McNamara said that when prompted, Ani would talk about herself as a young girl, and then in the same conversation, she would discuss sexual topics.
“In the course of a single conversation, she was fine with describing herself as a child and being very little. And then the next prompt being a sexual question, she immediately responded and affirmed that sexual conversation. McNamara said. “So in the course of a conversation, it would evoke a fantasy around child sexual abuse.” 
Companion mode isn’t the only feature on Grok that allows users to engage in sexually explicit activity with the chatbot. Users can also ask Grok to generate sexually explicit photos and videos. The app will quickly generate images and videos that contain male and female nudity within seconds of a user’s request. 
The chatbot has even allowed some “deepfake” pornography, generating photos and videos of celebrities or public figures wearing revealing clothing and, in some instances, removing clothing, according to a <a href="https://www.theverge.com/report/718975/xai-grok-imagine-taylor-swifty-deepfake-nudes">report</a> from The Verge. 
Musk&#8217;s xAI warns users against “depicting likenesses of persons in a pornographic manner,” and Grok’s built-in content moderation will sometimes prevent a user from generating pornographic content. The moderation, however, is inconsistent, and some users have found workarounds to generate hardcore porn on the platform, Rolling Stone <a href="https://au.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/elon-musk-grok-hardcore-porn-85146/">reported</a> earlier this month. The AI company has not addressed whether it’s attempting to set up more guardrails to prevent users from creating hardcore porn on its app. 
Even without explicitly asking for sexual content, Grok’s “spicy” mode often plunges users into content that depicts men and women stripping their clothes off, The Daily Wire found. When asked about the chatbot and how sexually charged features on Grok promote the overall goal of the company, xAI replied, &#8220;Legacy Media Lies.&#8221; 
XAI says that Grok is limited to those 13 years of age or older, with parental consent required for users between 13-17, but the effectiveness of those restrictions is debatable. When this reporter downloaded the Grok app and signed up for the platform’s “SuperGrok” subscription, all the app asked for was a year of birth. There was no system in place, such as ID verification, to make sure the information was accurate. 
“We urge parents to exercise care in monitoring the use of Grok by their teenagers,” xAI <a href="https://x.ai/legal/faq">states</a> on its website. “Moreover, parents or guardians who choose to use certain features of Grok to aid in their interactions with their children, including regarding educational, enlightening, or entertaining discussions they have with their children, must make use of the relevant data controls in the Settings provided in the Grok apps to select the appropriate features and limitations for their needs.” 
In July, Musk <a href="https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1946763642231500856">announced</a> that xAI is working on a kid-friendly version of Grok, called “Baby Grok,” that would be “dedicated to kid-friendly content.” That development was also met with some criticism from people who argue that AI hampers children’s ability to learn and think creatively. Many teachers have expressed concern that AI is already <a href="https://www.edweek.org/technology/rising-use-of-ai-in-schools-comes-with-big-downsides-for-students/2025/10">damaging</a> students’ critical thinking and research skills. 
Blackburn told The Daily Wire that the biggest reason Big Tech companies are pushing against any type of regulation is because their business model requires people to visit their AI websites and apps. 
“Their valuations are built on the number of eyeballs that they control, and the longer that someone is on their site, the more valuable their data, and the more money they are going to make from those eyeballs that are locked in on their site,” Blackburn said, adding, “Then they’re going to sell that information and data to advertisers and third-party interests.”  
Blackburn said that AI development is vital for the United States, but argued that development “requires some light-touch regulation and some guardrails to make certain that this is going to be a safe, productive, and innovative space.”

Sexualization of AI

The Chatbot Diaries: How AI Sex Is Getting Mainstreamed

ChatGPT

Elon Musk

Grok

Pornography

Sam altman

Technology

The latest earnings reports from America&#8217;s top tech companies reveal that Silicon Valley is going all-in on artificial intelligence, sometimes in spite of users&#8217; concerns.
Financials from <a href="https://investor.atmeta.com/investor-events/">Meta</a>, <a href="https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/investor/earnings/fy-2026-q1/press-release-webcast">Microsoft</a>, and <a href="https://s206.q4cdn.com/479360582/files/doc_financials/2025/q3/2025q3-alphabet-earnings-release.pdf">Google</a> released Wednesday show that all three companies beat experts&#8217; earnings and revenue expectations. On earnings calls, all three companies pointed to increased AI investment, and increased spending in general. Google parent company Alphabet raised spending by about 7% for the year, Microsoft discussed spending above their original goal of 42% this year, and Meta discussed aggressive and substantial investment, but did not provide a specific number. 
“Across Facebook, Instagram, and Threads, our AI recommendation systems are delivering higher quality and more relevant content, which led to 5% more time spent on Facebook in Q3 and 10% on Threads,&#8221; Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg said. &#8220;Video is a particular bright spot, with video time spent on Instagram up more than 30% since last year.&#8221;
This week also brought good news for the AI sector across the board. Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell on Wednesday told investors that he doesn’t see a bubble in the AI space, noting that artificial intelligence companies “have real earnings and business models,” rather than just &#8220;ideas.&#8221; As if to underscore that point, Nvidia, a major player in the AI space, became the world’s largest company in terms of market capitalization, reaching <a href="https://companiesmarketcap.com/nvidia/marketcap/">$5 trillion</a> in value.
This is good news for Big Tech. But is it good for America?
Join us now during our exclusive Deal of the Decade. Get everything for $7 a month. Not as fans. As fighters. Go to <a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">DailyWire.com/Subscribe</a> to join now.
Beneath the AI hype and rosy growth numbers, Meta’s latest <a href="https://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-0001326801/aa3d2e89-2568-4c4c-b3cc-6df47166435e.pdf">financial filing</a> reveals something darker: the company is facing tens of thousands of lawsuits alleging its apps are addictive and harmful.
“Beginning in January 2022, we became subject to litigation and other proceedings alleging that Facebook and Instagram cause &#8216;social media addiction&#8217; in users.”
The company noted the lawsuits are ongoing and that a “favorable outcome” for the company cannot be assured. 
“Substantially all of our revenue comes from advertising,” Meta reported to investors, noting that prominent revenue streams depend on users staying on Instagram and Facebook.
 “Advertising revenue could be adversely affected by decreases in user engagement, including time spent on our products.”
With AI investment accelerating across big tech, the coming quarters will show whether the technology continues to drive growth, as well as how companies like Meta, Microsoft, and Google balance innovation, profitability, and potential public scrutiny.
Meta did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

US-TECHNOLOGY-INTERNET-CHILD-EXPLOITATION

It’s Report Card Day for Meta, Microsoft, And Google. Is The AI Bubble Real?

Big Tech

Economy

Google

Microsoft

Hundreds of public figures — including tech leaders, celebrities, media personalities, and politicians — signed a statement released on Wednesday calling for an immediate pause on the development of advanced artificial intelligence, referred to as &#8220;superintelligence.&#8221;
Superintelligence technology is currently being pursued by tech giants such as Mark Zuckerberg&#8217;s Meta, Sam Altman&#8217;s OpenAI, and Elon Musk&#8217;s xAI. These companies hope to build &#8220;superintelligence in the coming decade that can significantly outperform all humans on essentially all cognitive tasks,&#8221; according to a preamble to the <a href="https://superintelligence-statement.org/">statement</a>. The preamble points to concerns &#8220;ranging from human economic obsolescence and disempowerment, losses of freedom, civil liberties, dignity, and control, to national security risks and even potential human extinction.&#8221;
The &#8220;Statement on Superintelligence&#8221; itself, which now has more than 1,000 signatures, consists of just 30 words: &#8220;We call for a prohibition on the development of superintelligence, not lifted before there is broad scientific consensus that it will be done safely and controllably, and strong public buy-in.&#8221;
High-profile signers include leaders in the tech industry, such as Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak and AI pioneers Yoshua Bengio and Geoffrey Hinton.
In a statement accompanying his signature, Bengio wrote that superintelligence &#8220;could surpass most individuals across most cognitive tasks within just a few years.&#8221;
&#8220;These advances could unlock solutions to major global challenges, but they also carry significant risks,&#8221; he added. &#8220;To safely advance toward superintelligence, we must scientifically determine how to design AI systems that are fundamentally incapable of harming people, whether through misalignment or malicious use. We also need to make sure the public has a much stronger say in decisions that will shape our collective future.”
Join us now during our exclusive Deal of the Decade. Get everything for $7 a month. Not as fans. As fighters. Go to <a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">DailyWire.com/Subscribe</a> to join now.
The &#8220;Statement on Superintelligence&#8221; was promoted by the <a href="https://futureoflife.org/about-us/">Future of Life Institute</a>, a group that aims &#8220;to steer transformative technologies away from extreme, large-scale risks and towards benefiting life.&#8221; Future of Life Institute President Max Tegmark said he reached out to all the CEOs of major AI developers, asking them to sign the document. However, he added that he did not expect them to endorse the statement, the Associated Press <a href="https://apnews.com/article/ai-superintelligence-risk-prince-harry-meghan-bannon-acf6b17d3b53abc08694d5d8defc7009">reported</a>.
“I really empathize for them, frankly, because they’re so stuck in this race to the bottom that they just feel an irresistible pressure to keep going and not get overtaken by the other guy,” Tegmark said. “I think that’s why it’s so important to stigmatize the race to superintelligence, to the point where the U.S. government just steps in.”
Former U.S. National Security Adviser Susan Rice and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen also signed the document, as did multiple former Democratic and Republican members of Congress. Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, and his wife, Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, were among other high-profile signers.
The statement was also signed by conservative media personalities Glenn Beck and Steve Bannon. Numerous faith leaders endorsed the statement, such as Paolo Benanti, a Papal AI advisor and Catholic priest; Johnnie Moore, the president of the Congress of Christian Leaders and a White House evangelical adviser; and Andrew T. Walker, the Associate Professor of Christian Ethics and Public Theology at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.
Both Altman and Musk have warned about potential major consequences to the development of advanced AI. In a <a href="https://blog.samaltman.com/machine-intelligence-part-1">blog post</a> 10 years ago, Altman wrote, &#8220;Development of superhuman machine intelligence (SMI) is probably the greatest threat to the continued existence of humanity.&#8221; Musk has similarly discussed the risks that come along with advanced AI, saying earlier this year that he believes there&#8217;s &#8220;only a 20% chance of annihilation,&#8221; CNBC <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2025/10/22/800-petition-signatures-apple-steve-wozniak-and-virgin-richard-branson-superintelligence-race.html">reported</a>.

AI apps smartphone

A Surprising Mix Of Public Figures Call For Halt To ‘Superintelligence’ AI That Could ‘Outperform All Humans’

This week, more than 100 leading free speech experts <a href="https://adfinternational.org/campaign/open-letter-dsa">warned</a> that the Digital Services Act (DSA), a piece of European Union legislation, threatens to impose online censorship across the world. The letter was addressed to the European Commission, the architect of the censorial law.
The DSA gives the EU authority to enforce “content moderation” on platforms and search engines with over 45 million monthly users. It is one of the most dangerous censorship regimes of the digital age, enabling bureaucrats to control online speech at scale under the guise of online “safety” and “protecting democracy.”
This, however, is far from just a European issue. Restrictive speech rules made in Brussels are increasingly shaping the global internet, including on platforms used by Americans.
The letter follows the recently expressed concerns of the U.S. Ambassador to the EU, <a href="https://x.com/US2EU/status/1973100030249640355">Andrew Puzder</a>, that the DSA threatens to censor American citizens online. As the Ambassador stated, President Trump will not “tolerate a foreign government restricting the First Amendment fundamental free speech, free expression rights of American citizens.”
Ambassador Puzder’s statement came shortly after Google’s startling admission that Europe’s censorship laws target American companies and threaten American speech.
Signatories of this week’s letter to the European Commission, which was coordinated by ADF International, include a former U.S. Senator, a former VP of Yahoo Europe, cross-party members of the European Parliament, award-winning journalist and author Michael Shellenberger, former President of the American Civil Liberties Union Nadine Strossen, and academics, lawyers, and experts from around the globe.
The letter urges the Commission to consult with free speech experts and address their concerns as part of the Commission’s formal review of the DSA, which will occur by November 17.
But how could European legislation affect the First Amendment rights of Americans online?
The DSA and its codes of conduct require online platforms, such as X, YouTube, and Facebook, to address “hate speech” and “disinformation” online. These are vague and subjective terms that lack clear legal definitions and, in practice, are used to justify the censorship of disfavored views.
The definition of “illegal content,” which platforms must remove under the DSA, is any content that breaches EU or any EU member state law. This means the most restrictive anti-free speech laws in any individual EU country — of which there are unfortunately many across Europe — will now be applied across the bloc, introducing a lowest-common-denominator of censorship across the EU.
The shocking case of Finnish parliamentarian <a href="https://adfinternational.org/cases/paivi">Päivi Räsänen</a> gives an example of what this censorship could look like in practice. For nearly seven years, Päivi has been dragged through the courts in her country for alleged “hate speech”, for a Twitter post, in which she peacefully expressed her faith-based views and included a picture of Bible text.
With legal support from ADF International, on October 30, she faces her third trial at the Finnish Supreme Court, despite being unanimously acquitted in two previous trials. Under the DSA, draconian “hate speech” legislation, like that used to prosecute Päivi, could be applied across the EU.
<div id="attachment_981733" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-981733" class="size-large wp-image-981733" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/GettyImages-470183360-864x576.jpg" alt="Chairwoman Päivi Räsänen of the Christian Democrats campaigns in Helsinki, Finland on April 18, 2015 ahead of the parliamentary elections to take place on Sunday, April 19, 2015. Finns go to the polls on Sunday in legislative elections widely expected to oust the country's left-right coalition amid growing discontent over a floundering economy undergoing a painful restructuring. AFP PHOTO / LEHTIKUVA / RONI REKOMAA *** FINLAND OUT *** (Photo credit should read" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/GettyImages-470183360-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/GettyImages-470183360-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/GettyImages-470183360-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/GettyImages-470183360.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />Päivi Räsänen/ Credit: Roni Rekomaa,Roni Rekomaa/AFP via Getty Images.</div>
What has emerged from the DSA is a vast censorship infrastructure with coercive enforcement tools and an opaque network of EU-approved NGOs and “trusted flaggers,” which identify content for removal. If platforms fail to quickly remove flagged content, they face enormous fines — up to 6% of global revenue — and even EU-wide suspension. Individuals can also be suspended from platforms if they “persistently” post “illegal content.”
Although nominally restricted to the European Union, the DSA’s restrictive approach to online speech will be exported across the world, including to the United States. Keep in mind that GDPR exported EU data privacy standards worldwide, and the DSA could do just that for European speech controls. Platforms will be incentivized to adopt a single global content moderation policy, which could now be made to comply with the DSA’s restrictive approach.
French Member of the European Parliament Virginie Joron, a signatory of this week’s letter to the Commission, has added to these concerns of global censorship from the DSA, saying: “The French digital regulator ARCOM told me they believe the DSA allows them to censor any post anywhere in the world using the DSA. That means even an American citizen posting in Alabama could potentially have their online post taken down, even if the publication would be legal in the US”.
These threats put European legislation on a direct collision course with the First Amendment, in what is perhaps the greatest threat to American online free speech today.
Additionally, the House Judiciary Committee of the U.S. Congress has consistently warned that the DSA is coming for American speech. A July <a href="https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-releases/foreign-censorship-threat-how-european-unions-digital-services-act-compels">report</a> detailed how the DSA is a censorship tool that requires the world’s largest social media platforms to engage in the censorship of core political discourse in Europe, the United States, and around the world.
If the DSA is left unchecked, Brussels could well become the world’s speech police. Let all concerned with the protection of free speech be on alert about the DSA. 
The European Commission must urgently engage with the free speech concerns outlined in this week’s letter and act now to ensure that the free speech rights of people across the world are respected on the internet.
* * *
Paul Coleman (@Paul_B_Coleman) is Executive Director of free speech legal advocacy organization ADF International.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_campaign=fall40&amp;utm_content=fallsale&amp;utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial">Get 40% off new DailyWire+ annual memberships with code FALL40 at checkout!</a>

EU sets Out Its International Digital Strategy

EU’s Digital Services Act Is The Biggest Threat To Free Speech Yet, Experts Warn

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF)

Apple

European Union

First Amendment

Free Speech

Silicon Valley

Social Media Censorship

In the wake of the horrific and historic assassination of the brilliant young conservative Charlie Kirk, there has understandably been increased focus on the rhetoric that preceded and followed the event. The overwhelming majority of Americans <a href="https://s3.us-west-1.wasabisys.com/media.deseret.com/media/misc/pdf/kirk-sky-national.pdf">(86%)</a> express concern over political violence, with <a href="https://statesunited.org/resources/political-violence-survey/">78%</a> believing it has escalated in recent years, and 57% saying it is a major problem — the highest response to that question in the last two years. 
When it comes to assessing blame, Americans are unsurprisingly <a href="https://www.deseret.com/u-s-world/2025/09/15/political-violence-america-charlie-kirk-shooting-morning-consult-poll/">split along partisan lines</a> on culpability, with the plurality of respondents believing the Left and Right bear equal responsibility. However, they find agreement in blaming politicians on both sides as being the key instigators.
Republicans point to examples of Hillary Clinton calling Trump supporters “deplorables;” Biden telling us that it’s time to “put a bulls-eye on Trump;” Maxine Waters telling supporters to “create a crowd and … push back” and during the 2021 unrest in Minneapolis “to get more confrontational;” Schumer telling Supreme Court Justices “… you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you;” Dan Goldman telling an MSNBC interviewer that Trump “has to be eliminated;” Vice President Harris telling everyone that Trump and MAGA supporters were “a threat to democracy;” and of course, the countless references to Trump and MAGA supporters being Hitler, Nazis, fascists, and Gestapo.
Democrats counter with references to Steve Bannon referring to the political opposition as “criminals, vermin,” and “enemies of the republic;” Trump telling supporters to “fight like hell” and claiming he called white supremacists “very fine people;” Marjorie Taylor Greene suggesting a “peaceful national divorce” between red and blue states; Trump calling Democrats “scum, garbage” and “enemies of the people;” and Musk posting that “The Left is the party of murder.”
It is much more emotionally engaging to discuss the implications and injustices of rhetorical content, but regardless of which side has been more vitriolic, there is a far larger, more influential factor that supersedes all of it: Who controls the dominant media platforms — and specifically, the digital platforms. And that dominance overwhelmingly belongs to the Left. The result is that the Left’s messages and hyperbole are broadcast to dramatically more people, dramatically more frequently, and on dramatically more channels. Further, competing or contradictory messaging is far more likely to be absent or censored on the Left’s channels, so their audience is fed a much more homogenous diet of narratives.
Consider three important media domains: 
<ul>
<li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">The Legacy Media, with centralized and professionally produced content, including television, radio, and newspapers (CNN, Reuters, Fox News, The New York Times, NPR, BBC, etc.)</li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Social media — with user-generated content, no editorial oversight, and algorithm-generated visibility (Facebook, X—formerly Twitter, TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, Reddit, etc.)</li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Search (Google, Bing, Yahoo, DuckDuckGo, etc.)</li>
</ul>
The waning, but still significant, mainstream media are <a href="https://www.mrc.org/liberal-mediaevery-poll-shows-journalists-are-more-liberal-american-public-and-public-knows-it">dominantly Left-leaning and becoming more so</a>. Research has shown that members of the media are <a href="https://ballotpedia.org/Fact_check/Do_97_percent_of_journalist_donations_go_to_Democrats">overwhelmingly liberal</a>, with the vast majority of them supporting Democratic candidates. In 2016, 96% of journalists’ donations went to the Hillary Clinton campaign. <a href="https://www.mrc.org/node/90399">Media Research Center found</a> that 92% of Trump coverage during the 2020 presidential campaign was negative – even more so than the relentless, hostile coverage he received in 2017. When examining bias in mainstream/traditional media, <a href="https://www.biasly.com/media-bias-chart/us-main/?">studies</a> have concluded that upwards of 60% of these outlets are left-leaning. But that doesn’t tell the whole story because that percentage is based on the number of outlets, regardless of the audience size for that outlet. When considering the total audience size and the percentage of it that receives information with a left-leaning bias, the <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2025/06/pj_2025-06-10_news-media-sources_report.pdf">bias number climbs closer to 75%</a>. The percentage of Americans viewing a liberal bias in the mainstream media has doubled since 1985.
However, traditional media are quickly being pushed aside by social media, where the leftist bias is even more pronounced. The top social media companies are all Left-leaning (See <a href="https://www.cato.org/commentary/how-did-ai-get-so-biased-favor-left">here</a>, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Rigged-Media-Democrats-Seized-Elections/dp/168451259X/">here</a>, <a href="https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/social-media-trump-conservative-bias/">here</a>, and <a href="https://twitterfiles.substack.com/p/the-censorship-industrial-complex">here</a>). Meta, the undisputed king of social media, owns Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and Messenger, reaching approximately <a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-number-of-users/">4 billion users</a> and controlling 75-80% of the social media market worldwide. Alphabet Inc., a smaller behemoth that owns Google and YouTube, has just surpassed $3 trillion in market cap and reaches some <a href="https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2025-sub-section-top-social-platforms?">2.2 billion users</a>. A collection of companies, including those owning TikTok, Douyin, WeChat, QQ, and Snapchat, reaches an additional <a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-number-of-users/?">3.5 billion users</a> combined. Musk’s little X is much further down the list with a mere 500 million users.
I previously described social media as the <a href="https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/08/the_federal_government_colluded_with_social_media_to_control_content_so_what.html">800-pound gorilla in a rapidly shrinking cage</a>, noting that usage has skyrocketed from 5% in 2005 to over 70% today. Some estimates indicate that as much as 38% of all internet time today is spent on social media. Considering Facebook alone, the vast majority (nearly 70%) of <a href="https://www.demandsage.com/facebook-statistics/?">Facebook’s nearly 3 billion users</a> visit the site daily, and more than half of them visit it several times per day. 
The younger generations are particularly fond of social media, with a strong plurality — some <a href="https://www.weforum.org/stories/2025/07/news-consumption-social-video/?">44% of Americans aged 18 to 24 and 34% of those aged 25 to 34 </a>— reporting that they now obtain their news and information from social media and video formats, rather than traditional media. This trend is accelerating worldwide, raising concerns about misinformation, algorithmic bias, and the blurring of entertainment and news.
What about when audiences go searching for information on their own? Most commonly today, this means using a computer, and in this world, Google controls a whopping <a href="https://gs.statcounter.com/search-engine-market-share?">90% of the search market</a>, processing some <a href="https://sqmagazine.co.uk/google-search-statistics/?">8.9 billion search requests</a> per day, amounting to over 5 trillion annually. Over 70% of all clicks go to the top 5 search results (hence the industry joke that the best place to bury a dead body is on the second page of results for a Google search — because nobody ever looks there). They control a significantly larger share (<a href="https://www.theglobalstatistics.com/google-statistics/?">95%</a>) of the global mobile search market.
Just prior to the 2022 midterm elections, <a href="https://www.allsides.com/blog/google-news-shows-strong-political-bias-allsides-analysis">researchers found that the plurality of articles returned</a> for a Google search under the term “election” were from the New York Times and CNN (44%), with 0% from center or Right-leaning outlets. In 2023, <a href="https://www.allsides.com/blog/google-news-shows-strong-political-bias-allsides-analysis?copilot_analytics_metadata=eyJldmVudEluZm9fbWVzc2FnZUlkIjoiMXB5eDR2NGs1WnJkVDYxR3RWcXA4IiwiZXZlbnRJbmZvX2NvbnZlcnNhdGlvbklkIjoiOURMZ3dnaG5tdFlhWHpzc0xiZGVzIiwiZXZlbnRJbmZvX2NsaWNrU291cmNlIjoiY2l0YXRpb25MaW5rIiwiZXZlbnRJbmZvX2NsaWNrRGVzdGluYXRpb24iOiJodHRwczpcL1wvd3d3LmFsbHNpZGVzLmNvbVwvYmxvZ1wvZ29vZ2xlLW5ld3Mtc2hvd3Mtc3Ryb25nLXBvbGl0aWNhbC1iaWFzLWFsbHNpZGVzLWFuYWx5c2lzIn0=">the same research firm found</a> that 61% of the articles posted on the Google News homepage came from Left-rated sources, with only 3% coming from Right-rated sources. Repeated samplings produced very similar results.
<a href="https://www.gotchseo.com/google-biased/?">Another research firm</a> used 50 politically charged search terms with Google and found that the results were demonstrably left-leaning. Consider their results for the following:
<ul>
<li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">“Black Lives Matter” — 9 out of 10 results from Left-leaning outlets.</li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">“Border wall” – 7 of 10 results Left-leaning.</li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">“Dreamers” – 6 of 10 results Left-leaning.</li>
</ul>
Conversely, searches for “immigration policy” or “gun control facts” would surface snippets from CNN, NYT, or Vox, while conservative sources were buried or absent. Notably, the researchers attribute some of the results to the dominance of left-leaning outlets in Search Engine Optimization, rather than to algorithmic intent. Regardless, the result in the output is the same.
<h3><a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_campaign=fall40&amp;utm_content=fallsale&amp;utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial">Get 40% off new DailyWire+ annual memberships with code FALL40 at checkout!</a></h3>
In his 2019 testimony before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee, Dr. Robert Epstein, a self-proclaimed lifelong Democrat, argued that Google posed a threat not only to democracy but also to human autonomy. He has focused particularly on ephemeral search results — the auto-complete function that Google and others provide, which offers suggestions for alternative or additional phrasing. As but one example, he found that typing “Hillary Clinton is…” yielded suggestions like “winning,” “awesome,” and “qualified,” while “Donald Trump is…” produced “dangerous,” “racist,” and “a liar.” He <a href="https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Epstein%2520Testimony.pdf">concludes</a>: 
<blockquote>We are all aware that Google deletes or blocks access to videos on YouTube, which it owns, but few people are aware that Google blocks access to millions of websites. By the way, it is not just conservative content that gets censored . . . The problem with Google is not that it censors conservatives; the problem is that it has the power to determine what content billions of people worldwide will or will not see. No single entity – especially a private company that is not accountable to the public – should have such power.</blockquote>
It is clear that all three domains — the legacy media, social media, and search — are all heavily Left-leaning. Consider what this dominance means for the sheer volume of leftist information and rhetoric being broadcast and received. Put aside for the moment the questions of whether Democrats are using more pernicious or violent language than republicans. That issue pales in comparison to the question of how frequently their message is being broadcast — how many videos, shorts, stories, op-eds, posts — the sheer volume of minutes that will be devoted to the Left&#8217;s position versus the Right&#8217;s and whether any counter to it will be available.
The Left has a massive, pervasive, powerful, and sophisticated digital network, which I previously analogized to a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/as-democrat-warplane-takes-flak-audacity-remains-intact?author=Greg+Salsbury&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=6&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=As+Democrat+Warplane+Takes+Flak,+Audacity+Remains+Intact">stealth fighter</a>. Comparatively, conservatives have a Sopwith Camel. It is why on any number of issues, from Russiagate to Charlottesville misquotes, to Trump’s comments about COVID and bleach, to Charlie Kirk’s killer being right-wing, a shockingly high percentage of Americans still believe the lies that were broadcast ad nauseam despite their thorough debunking. Until conservatives can deal with the massive differential in scale, reach, and volume, “turning down the rhetoric” will remain a far lower priority issue.
* * *
Greg Salsbury, Ph.D. is former president of Western Colorado University and Board of Advisors member for <a href="https://starrs.us">STARRS.US</a>. He earned his Ph.D. in Communication from the University of Southern California and an M.A. from the Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism at USC.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Menu

Meta