 |
|
|
|||||
Three of the world’s biggest tech companies face a landmark trial in Los Angeles starting this week over claims that their platformsMeta’s Instagram, ByteDance’s TikTok, and Google’s YouTubedeliberately addict and harm children.Jury selection starts this week in the Los Angeles County Superior Court. It’s the first time the companies will argue their case before a jury, and the outcome could have profound effects on their businesses and how they will handle children using their platforms. The selection process is expected to take at least a few days, with 75 potential jurors questioned each day through at least Thursday. A fourth company named in the lawsuit, Snapchat parent company Snap Inc., settled the case last week for an undisclosed sum.At the core of the case is a 19-year-old identified only by the initials “KGM,” whose case could determine how thousands of other, similar lawsuits against social media companies will play out. She and two other plaintiffs have been selected for bellwether trialsessentially test cases for both sides to see how their arguments play out before a jury and what damages, if any, may be awarded, said Clay Calvert, a nonresident senior fellow of technology policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute.KGM claims that her use of social media from an early age addicted her to the technology and exacerbated depression and suicidal thoughts. Importantly, the lawsuit claims that this was done through deliberate design choices made by companies that sought to make their platforms more addictive to children to boost profits. This argument, if successful, could sidestep the companies’ First Amendment shield and Section 230, which protects tech companies from liability for material posted on their platforms.“Borrowing heavily from the behavioral and neurobiological techniques used by slot machines and exploited by the cigarette industry, Defendants deliberately embedded in their products an array of design features aimed at maximizing youth engagement to drive advertising revenue,” the lawsuit says.Executives, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, are expected to testify at the trial, which will last six to eight weeks. Experts have drawn similarities to the Big Tobacco trials that led to a 1998 settlement requiring cigarette companies to pay billions in healthcare costs and restrict marketing targeting minors.“Plaintiffs are not merely the collateral damage of Defendants’ products,” the lawsuit says. “They are the direct victims of the intentional product design choices made by each Defendant. They are the intended targets of the harmful features that pushed them into self-destructive feedback loops.”The tech companies dispute the claims that their products deliberately harm children, citing a bevy of safeguards they have added over the years and arguing that they are not liable for content posted on their sites by third parties.“Recently, a number of lawsuits have attempted to place the blame for teen mental health struggles squarely on social media companies,” Meta said in a recent blog post. “But this oversimplifies a serious issue. Clinicians and researchers find that mental health is a deeply complex and multifaceted issue, and trends regarding teens’ well-being aren’t clear-cut or universal. Narrowing the challenges faced by teens to a single factor ignores the scientific research and the many stressors impacting young people today, like academic pressure, school safety, socio-economic challenges and substance abuse.”Meta, YouTube, and TikTok did not immediately respond to requests for comment Monday.The case will be the first in a slew of cases beginning this year that seek to hold social media companies responsible for harming children’s mental well-being. A federal bellwether trial beginning in June in Oakland, California, will be the first to represent school districts that have sued social media platforms over harms to children.In addition, more than 40 state attorneys general have filed lawsuits against Meta, claiming it is harming young people and contributing to the youth mental health crisis by deliberately designing features on Instagram and Facebook that addict children to its platforms. The majority of cases filed their lawsuits in federal court, but some sued in their respective states.TikTok also faces similar lawsuits in more than a dozen states. Barbara Ortutay, AP Technology Writer
Category:
E-Commerce
Americas most iconic shoe giant is starting 2026 by laying off workers. Nike has confirmed that it will lay off 775 employees in the United States. The move marks the third year in a row that Nike has cut jobs. Heres what you need to know about the latest Nike layoffs. Whats happened? On Monday, CNBC reported that shoe giant Nike would eliminate 775 jobs. The job cuts will primarily encompass positions at the companys distribution centers in Mississippi and Tennessee. Nike has warehouses in those states that act as major hubs in the companys supply chain. The distribution centers store the companys inventory before shipping the products out to customers and retail partners. Nikes most recent round of job cuts is the third in as many years. In 2024, Nike announced it would cut 2% of its total workforce, or about 1,600 roles. Those cuts were made so the company could reduce expenses in response to weakening sales. Then last year, Nike announced in August that it would cut about 1% of its corporate staff. Those cuts were part of a company realignment, Nike said at the time. In May 2025, Nike had around 77,800 employees. Todays confirmed layoffs of 775 workers mean the latest job cuts equate to around 1% of its workforce. Why is Nike cutting jobs? When reached for comment, a Nike spokesperson told Fast Company that the job cuts were part of the steps the company was taking to strengthen and streamline our operations so we can move faster, operate with greater discipline, and better serve athletes and consumers. As part of those steps, Nike said it’s sharpening our supply chain footprint, accelerating the use of advanced technologyand automation, and investing in the skills our teams need for the future. The company said its actions to consolidate its footprint will primarily impact its U.S. distribution operations. These actions are designed to reduce complexity, improve flexibility, and build a more responsive, resilient, responsible, and efficient operation and to support our path back to long-term, profitable growth, including contributing to improved EBIT (earnings before interest and taxes) margins over time, the spokesperson added. Under former Nike CEO John Donahoe, the company moved away from wholesale partners in favor of direct selling, which necessitated a buildup of employees at its distribution centers. But ultimately, Nikes lackluster sales demand could not support the number of employees at the distribution centers. Nikes new CEO Elliott Hill has flipped its sales playbook, embracing wholesale partners again, and focusing on cutting costs to increase margins. How has Nikes stock price reacted? As of yesterdays closing price, Nike shares (NYSE: NKE) were trading at $64.99. In premarket trading this morning, shares are essentially flat. In other words, investors so far seem to have shrugged off the fact that the layoffs will have an immediate impact on the companys finances or operations. After reaching an all-time high of around $180 in 2021, Nikes share price has steadily declined, falling to as low as the $62 range in March of last year. Over the past 12 months, Nikes share price has declined by more than 11%, and over the past five years, the stocks price has collapsed by more than 50%. Since the new year began, NKE shares have risen about 2%.
Category:
E-Commerce
In todays experience economy, cultural capital is increasingly valuable, especially for cities seeking to differentiate themselves. Municipalities routinely invest in traditional industries, physical infrastructure, and innovation pipelines, but music is often siloed as entertainment. Music can function as an economic engine, a form of cultural connective tissue, and a powerful competitive differentiator. The scale of the opportunity is significant. The music industry contributes more than $212 billion to the U.S. GDP and accounts for 2.5 million jobs nationwide. Cultural exports are not just symbolic; they shape global perception, attract investment, and support workforce retention. According to the Recording Academy, when an out-of-town visitor buys a concert ticket for $100, the local economy sees an additional $335 in related spending. New models show that with the right civic support, music can and should be treated like any other high-impact export. MUSIC AS A BRAND AND A BRIDGE City-supported music touring programs are emerging as effective tools for both artist development and place branding. When artists tour, they become de facto cultural diplomats who carry a citys stories, aesthetics, and identity into new markets. As artists expand their reach, the citys cultural profile grows alongside them, creating a powerful feedback loop of visibility and credibility. This reframes the relationship between municipalities and creators. Rather than acting as passive supporters, cities become strategic amplifiers. One of the things that we have found that operationalizes this approach is to provide financial support to musicians who promote the city while on tour. When our city launched its Music Ambassador Program (MAP), we learned through Memphiss MAP initiative that cash touring grants and facilitated media opportunities generate artist growth and a stronger global position as a music destination. The benefits are twofold: artists receive tangible career support, and the city gains authentic, artist-led storytelling. A STRATEGY FROM THE TECH PLAYBOOK The private sector, music companies, and recording studios are beginning to recognize the value of these partnership models closely mirror what the tech industry has been doing for years. When private sector, government, music companies, and recording studios collaborate, artists gain regional and national exposure with cities extending their cultural footprint. For example, weve teamed up with Universal Music Groups East Iris Studios in Nashville, the MidCity District and Apollo Coalition here in Huntsville to expand visibility for the artist and our community. Partnerships like this mirror successful long-standing economic exchange programs in tech and business that also apply toward creative capital. BEYOND VENUES: RETHINKING MUSIC INFRASTRUCTURE Supporting music as an export requires more than building amphitheaters and creating performance spaces. It demands logistical support, funding mechanisms, professional pathways, and investment in the systems that allow artists to scale their careers. High-impact, cost-effective strategies include: Stipends or grant programs for touring Mentorship pipelines connecting local talent with established and influential industry professionals Relationships, residencies, or cultural exchange programs with peer cities Public-private partnerships that lower barriers to touring and cross-market visibility The goal here is to reduce friction in talent mobility and help artists build sustainable, long-term careers that extend beyond local gigscareers that have a ripple effect on job creation, production, marketing, hospitality, and tourism across the broader music ecosystem. PROMOTE ARTISTS WITH EQUITY AND AUTHENTICITY Here in Huntsville, Alabama, we have seen great success with our music export programs and have also learned many important lessons along the way. These three lessons in particular are helpful to consider when building or expanding a program in your city. 1. Programs must be intentionally designed to avoid favoritism or the commodification of local culture for external approval. Exporting culture carries the risk of disproportionately favoring established artists unless equity is prioritized. 2. Authenticity matters. The most successful music export initiatives reflect the true dynamics, diversity, and texture of a citys creative communitynot a curated version of its scene. 3. Community engagement is essential. Listening sessions, grassroots input, and shared ownership are crucial components needed for ensuring music strategies are sustainable and scalable. Bringing the local community into the fold is critical to the long-term success of cultural exports. THE FUTURE: CULTURE AS ECONOMIC INFRASTRUCTURE As the boundaries between industry, culture, and identity continue to blur, cities that treat music as an exportnot just an amenitywill gain a measurable advantage. Municipal governments and chambers of commerce have long focused on exporting products, ideas, and innovation. In an era where identity, experience, and narrative shape everything from tourism to talent recruitment, it is time to recognize music and the arts not simply as local assets but as exportable engines of economic growth. Matt Mandrella is the music officer for the City of Huntsville, Alabama.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||