<p><strong>一份新的法庭文件顯示，性交易在 Meta 平台上難以報告且被廣泛容忍。根據週五解封的文件，這起訴訟是針對四家社交媒體公司的更大訴訟的一部分。</strong></p>
<p>在原告的簡報中，Instagram 的安全與福祉負責人 Vaishnavi Jayakumar 作證稱，當她在 2020 年加入 Meta 時，她瞭解到公司對進行性交易的人類賬户有 17 次違規政策。這意味着用户可以在 16 次違規後繼續使用，只有在第 17 次違規時才會被暫停賬户。她補充道：“在整個行業中，這個違規閾值是非常非常高的。”</p>
<h3>Meta 被指責淡化對兒童的風險並誤導公眾</h3>
<p>針對 Meta 的指控源於一份在前所未有的多地區訴訟中提交的簡報。超過 1800 名原告，包括兒童、父母、學區和州檢察長，聯合提起了訴訟。訴訟聲稱，TikTok、Snapchat 和 YouTube 背後的母公司 “無情地追求不惜一切代價的增長策略，魯莽地忽視了其產品對兒童心理和身體健康的影響。”</p>
<p>根據原告在加利福尼亞北區提交的簡報，Meta 被指控意識到其平台上存在嚴重危害，並採取了一系列欺騙行為來淡化對年輕用户的風險。這些平台聲稱，內部公司文件可以證實這些證詞。此外，原告聲稱 Meta 知道數百萬成年人在其平台上與未成年人聯繫。</p>
<p>原告還聲稱，Meta 意識到其產品增加了青少年的心理健康問題，涉及飲食失調、自殺和兒童性虐待的內容經常被檢測到，但幾乎沒有被刪除。簡報還指出，公司未向公眾或國會披露這些危害，並拒絕實施安全修復措施以保護年輕用户免受這些危害的影響。</p>
<p>“Meta 設計了社交媒體產品和平台，他們知道這些產品對孩子們具有上癮性，並且他們意識到這些上癮會導致一系列嚴重的心理健康問題，” 案件的原告共同首席律師 Previn Warren 表示。“就像煙草一樣，這是一種危險產品被推向兒童的情況，” Warren 補充道。“他們還是這樣做了，因為更多的使用意味着公司更多的利潤。”</p>
<h3>簡報描繪了公司內部結構的糟糕狀況</h3>
<p>原告的簡報首次由 TIME 報道，基於現任和前任 Meta 高管的宣誓證詞、內部通訊以及在發現過程中獲得的公司研究和演示材料。它包含了數千頁證詞和內部公司文件中的多個引用和專家意見。由於這些材料被封存，TIME 在當時無法查看簡報中引用的證詞或研究。</p>
<p>然而，簡報仍然描繪了公司內部研究和關於自 2017 年以來影響其平台的問題的糟糕狀況。原告指出，自 2017 年以來，Meta 一直在吸引年輕用户，儘管其內部研究表明其社交媒體產品可能對兒童具有上癮性和危險性。根據簡報，Meta 員工提出了減少這些危害的方法，但常常被高管阻止。</p>
<p>與此同時，在訴訟提起後的幾年裏，Meta 實施了新的安全功能，旨在解決原告所描述的一些問題。去年，該公司推出了 Instagram 青少年賬户，默認將用户賬户設置為私密，前提是他們年齡在 13 至 18 歲之間。此外，它限制敏感內容，夜間關閉通知，並禁止與不相關的成年人進行溝通。</p>
<p>最聰明的加密貨幣頭腦已經閲讀了我們的新聞通訊。想加入他們嗎？</p>

META

<p>一份法庭文件指控 Meta 誤導公眾關於兒童風險的信息，揭示其平台上容忍性交易。該訴訟涉及超過 1800 名原告，聲稱 Meta 忽視了對年輕用户的傷害，並未披露諸如心理健康影響和與未成年人接觸等問題。儘管內部研究表明存在危險，Meta 仍優先考慮增長。最近實施了一些安全功能，但該訴訟突顯了過去的疏忽</p>

<p><strong>A new court filing has revealed that sex trafficking was difficult to report and widely tolerated on Meta platforms. According to the filing, which was unsealed on Friday, the lawsuit was a part of a wider lawsuit filed against four social media companies.</strong></p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><strong>一份新的法庭文件顯示，性交易在 Meta 平台上難以報告且被廣泛容忍。根據週五解封的文件，這起訴訟是針對四家社交媒體公司的更大訴訟的一部分。</strong></p>
</div><p>In the plaintiffs brief, Instagram’s head of safety and well-being, Vaishnavi Jayakumar, testified that when she joined Meta in 2020, she learned that the company had a 17x strike policy for accounts that carried out trafficking of humans for sex. This meant that users could incur this infringement 16 times, with the company only suspending their account on the 17th occurrence. “By any measure across the industry, [it was] a very, very high strike threshold,” she added.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>在原告的簡報中，Instagram 的安全與福祉負責人 Vaishnavi Jayakumar 作證稱，當她在 2020 年加入 Meta 時，她瞭解到公司對進行性交易的人類賬户有 17 次違規政策。這意味着用户可以在 16 次違規後繼續使用，只有在第 17 次違規時才會被暫停賬户。她補充道：“在整個行業中，這個違規閾值是非常非常高的。”</p>
</div><h3>Meta accused of downplaying risks to children and misleading the public</h3>
<div class="lb-trans"><h3>Meta 被指責淡化對兒童的風險並誤導公眾</h3>
</div><p>The allegations against Meta stem from a brief filed in an unprecedented multi-district litigation. More than 1,800 plaintiffs, including children, parents, school districts, and state attorneys general, have banded together in the lawsuit. The lawsuit claims that parent companies behind TikTok, Snapchat, and YouTube “relentlessly pursued a strategy of growth at all costs, recklessly ignoring the impact of their products on children’s mental and physical health.”</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>針對 Meta 的指控源於一份在前所未有的多地區訴訟中提交的簡報。超過 1800 名原告，包括兒童、父母、學區和州檢察長，聯合提起了訴訟。訴訟聲稱，TikTok、Snapchat 和 YouTube 背後的母公司 “無情地追求不惜一切代價的增長策略，魯莽地忽視了其產品對兒童心理和身體健康的影響。”</p>
</div><p>According to the brief filed by the plaintiffs in the Northern District of California, Meta was alleged to have been aware of serious harms on its platform and engaged in a pattern of deceit to downplay risks to young users. The platforms claim that internal company documents can corroborate the testimonies. In addition, the plaintiffs claimed Meta was aware that millions of adults were contacting minors on their platforms.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>根據原告在加利福尼亞北區提交的簡報，Meta 被指控意識到其平台上存在嚴重危害，並採取了一系列欺騙行為來淡化對年輕用户的風險。這些平台聲稱，內部公司文件可以證實這些證詞。此外，原告聲稱 Meta 知道數百萬成年人在其平台上與未成年人聯繫。</p>
</div><p>The plaintiffs also claimed that Meta was aware that its products increased mental health issues in teens, and content related to eating disorders, suicide, and child sexual abuse was frequently detected, yet hardly removed. The brief also noted that the company failed to disclose these harms to the public or to Congress, and also refused to implement safety fixes to protect young users from being exposed to them.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>原告還聲稱，Meta 意識到其產品增加了青少年的心理健康問題，涉及飲食失調、自殺和兒童性虐待的內容經常被檢測到，但幾乎沒有被刪除。簡報還指出，公司未向公眾或國會披露這些危害，並拒絕實施安全修復措施以保護年輕用户免受這些危害的影響。</p>
</div><p>“Meta has designed social media products and platforms that it is aware are addictive to kids, and they’re aware that those addictions lead to a whole host of serious mental health issues,” says Previn Warren, the co-lead attorney for the plaintiffs in the case. “Like tobacco, this is a situation where there are dangerous products that were marketed to kids,” Warren adds. “They did it anyway, because more usage meant more profits for the company.”</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>“Meta 設計了社交媒體產品和平台，他們知道這些產品對孩子們具有上癮性，並且他們意識到這些上癮會導致一系列嚴重的心理健康問題，” 案件的原告共同首席律師 Previn Warren 表示。“就像煙草一樣，這是一種危險產品被推向兒童的情況，” Warren 補充道。“他們還是這樣做了，因為更多的使用意味着公司更多的利潤。”</p>
</div><h3>Brief paints a bad picture of its internal structure</h3>
<div class="lb-trans"><h3>簡報描繪了公司內部結構的糟糕狀況</h3>
</div><p>The plaintiffs’ briefs, which were first reported by TIME, were based on sworn depositions of current and former Meta executives, internal communications, and company research and presentation materials obtained during the discovery process. It includes several quotes and experts from thousands of pages of testimony and internal company documents. TIME was unable to view the testimonies or research quoted in the brief at the time because they were sealed.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>原告的簡報首次由 TIME 報道，基於現任和前任 Meta 高管的宣誓證詞、內部通訊以及在發現過程中獲得的公司研究和演示材料。它包含了數千頁證詞和內部公司文件中的多個引用和專家意見。由於這些材料被封存，TIME 在當時無法查看簡報中引用的證詞或研究。</p>
</div><p>However, the brief still paints a bad picture of the company’s internal research and deliberations about issues that have affected its platforms since at least 2017. Plaintiffs noted that since 2017, Meta has been enticing young users, even though its internal research suggests its social media products could be addictive and dangerous to kids. According to the brief, Meta employees proposed ways to reduce these harms but were often blocked by executives.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>然而，簡報仍然描繪了公司內部研究和關於自 2017 年以來影響其平台的問題的糟糕狀況。原告指出，自 2017 年以來，Meta 一直在吸引年輕用户，儘管其內部研究表明其社交媒體產品可能對兒童具有上癮性和危險性。根據簡報，Meta 員工提出了減少這些危害的方法，但常常被高管阻止。</p>
</div><p>Meanwhile, in the years after the lawsuit was filed, Meta has implemented new safety features designed to address some of the problems that the plaintiffs described. Last year, the company unveiled its Instagram Teen Account, which sets a user’s account private by default, provided they are between 13 and 18. In addition, it limits sensitive content, turns off notifications at night, and bars communications from unconnected adults.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>與此同時，在訴訟提起後的幾年裏，Meta 實施了新的安全功能，旨在解決原告所描述的一些問題。去年，該公司推出了 Instagram 青少年賬户，默認將用户賬户設置為私密，前提是他們年齡在 13 至 18 歲之間。此外，它限制敏感內容，夜間關閉通知，並禁止與不相關的成年人進行溝通。</p>
</div><p>The smartest crypto minds already read our newsletter. Want in? Join them.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>最聰明的加密貨幣頭腦已經閲讀了我們的新聞通訊。想加入他們嗎？</p>
</div>

Court filings allege Meta misled public on risks to children

- Meta 平台被指控在性交易問題上反應遲緩且廣泛容忍。  
- 超過 1800 名原告聯合起訴，稱 Meta 未能保護年輕用户。  
- 原告稱 Meta 知曉其產品對青少年心理健康的危害，卻未採取有效措施。  

法庭文件指控 Meta 在兒童風險問題上誤導了公眾