By MORGAN LEE

SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) — Jurors in a bellwether trial about the impacts of social media on teenagers and children on Wednesday watched a deposition of Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg that explores what the architects of Facebook and Instagram knew from internal research about the negative experiences by young users and how the company responded since its early years.

Related Articles

Google settles with Epic Games with offer to lower its app store commissions

White House formally nominates Warsh to be Federal Reserve chair

Lawsuit alleges Google’s Gemini guided man to consider ‘mass casualty’ event before suicide

Elon Musk takes stand in Twitter shareholder trial accusing him of deflating stock before purchase

Apple’s ‘big week’ launches a pair of $599 devices aimed at budget buyers

Prosecutors are alleging that Meta violated state consumer protection laws in failing to disclose what it knew about the dangers of addiction to social media as well as child sexual exploitation on the company’s platforms, while attorneys for Meta say the company discloses risks, makes efforts to weed out harmful content and experiences, and acknowledges that some bad material still gets through its safety net.

In pretrial depositions recorded last year, prosecutors confronted Zuckerberg with internal company communications and emails from platform users spanning back to the infancy of Facebook in 2008 that discuss “problematic” and addictive use of social media.

“Over the past 15 years, users of your products have repeatedly told your company and you personally that they find the products to be addictive, that’s true isn’t it?” said Previn Warren, an attorney for the state of New Mexico, to Zuckerberg.

Zuckerberg took issue with the word “addictive.”

“I think people sometimes use that word colloquially,” he said “That’s not what we’re trying to do with the products, and it’s not how I think they work.”

At the same time, Zuckerberg said he wants to “make sure that we can understand so we can improve the products and make them better for people in ways that they want.”

Zuckerberg went on to concede that he initially set goals for employees to increase the amount of time teenagers spent on its platform amid efforts to expand business revenue and the number of platform users.

“Yes, I think we focused on time spent as one of the major engagement goals,” Zuckerberg said. “Sometime during 2017 and beyond — for at this point most of the last 10 years — we’ve focused on other metrics.”

The deposition also delved into Zuckerberg’s decision lift a temporary Instagram ban on the use of cosmetic filters that changed people’s appearance in a way that seemed to promote plastic surgery.

“I care a lot about not cracking down on the ways that people can express themselves and there’s, like, always been a lot of pressure to do that and censor our services,” Zuckerberg said. “I didn’t find any of the anecdotal examples that people used to be convincing that it was actually clear evidence that this was going to be harmful.”

The deposition was recorded last year and shown on Wednesday during the fourth week of the civil trial against Meta, which also oversees WhatsApp.

On Tuesday, the New Mexico jury watched a video in which prosecutors peppered Instagram head Adam Mosseri with questions about Meta’s approach to safety, corporate profits and social media features. They also asked him about policies for young users that might contribute to unwanted communications with adults.

The New Mexico case and a separate trial playing out in Los Angeles could set the course for thousands of similar lawsuits against social media companies.

Zuckerberg testified last month in Los Angeles about young people’s use of Instagram and has answered questions from Congress about youth safety on Meta’s platforms.

During his 2024 congressional testimony, he apologized to families whose lives had been upended by tragedies they believed were caused by social media. But while he told parents he was “sorry for everything you have all been through,” he stopped short of taking direct responsibility for it.

By ALANNA DURKIN RICHER and STEPHEN GROVES, Associated Press

WASHINGTON — The House Oversight Committee voted Wednesday to subpoena Attorney General Pam Bondi to answer questions over the Justice Department’s handling of files regarding the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking investigation.

Five Republicans joined Democrats to support the subpoena proposed by GOP Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina in a sign of continued frustration among conservatives with the department’s review and release of a tranche of documents related to the disgraced financier. The move amounted to a sharp rebuke of Bondi by Republicans who have been clamoring for information about Epstein’s abuse of young girls and his interactions with rich and powerful people.

“The American people want answers on the Epstein files, and so do we,” Mace said in a post on X.

The Justice Department had no immediate comment on the subpoena.

The Epstein files remain a political headache for the Trump administration more than a year after Bondi sparked backlash by handing out binders of documents to conservative influencers at the White House that included no bombshells.

Bondi has defended the department’s handling of the files and has accused Democrats of using the Epstein files to distract from Trump’s successes, although some of the most vocal criticism has come from members of the president’s own party.

Former President Bill Clinton and his wife, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, recently sat with lawmakers on the committee for their own depositions over the former Democratic president’s connections to Epstein from more than two decades ago.

After raising the expectations of conservatives with promises of transparency last year, the Justice Department said in July that it had concluded a review and determined that no Epstein “client list” existed and there was no reason to make additional files public. That set off a furor that prompted Congress to pass legislation demanding that the Justice Department release the files.

The Justice Department said last week that it was looking into whether it had improperly withheld documents from the files after several news organizations reported that some records involving uncorroborated accusations made by a woman against Trump were not among those released to the public.

That announcement followed news reports saying that a massive tranche of records released by the Justice Department did not include several summaries of interviews that the FBI conducted with an unidentified woman who came forward after Epstein’s 2019 arrest and claimed to have been sexually assaulted by both Trump and Epstein when she was a minor in the 1980s.

Related Articles

An Arkansas man accused of killing his daughter’s alleged abuser wins GOP sheriff’s nomination

White House formally nominates Warsh to be Federal Reserve chair

US interior secretary is in Venezuela to discuss critical minerals

IRS leader Bisignano declines to answer questions over unlawful taxpayer data disclosures to ICE

Top FDA drug official is trying to hire a friend who’s seeking a bold new warning on antidepressants

By MICHAEL LIEDTKE

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Google will lower the lucrative fees imposed on its Android app store and offer a way for rival options to gain its stamp of approval, ending a bruising legal battle that led to one of several rulings condemning its tactics as an illegal monopoly.

Related Articles

White House formally nominates Warsh to be Federal Reserve chair

Lawsuit alleges Google’s Gemini guided man to consider ‘mass casualty’ event before suicide

Elon Musk takes stand in Twitter shareholder trial accusing him of deflating stock before purchase

Apple’s ‘big week’ launches a pair of $599 devices aimed at budget buyers

Supply chain disruptions from the Iran war could raise prices for drugs, electronics and more

The proposed changes filed Wednesday with a federal court in San Francisco mark the latest twist in a case that began in August 2020 when video game maker Epic Games filed an antitrust case seeking make it easier for alternative payment options to compete against Google’s Play Store system, which charges 15% to 30% commissions on a wide variety of in-app transactions.

Google’s concessions come five months after the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of the company’s attempt to overturn a federal judge’s order requiring a far more extensive overhaul of the Play Store following a 2023 trial that culminated in a jury declaring the setup an illegal monopoly.

Backed into a legal corner, Google is now prepared to decrease its baseline commissions for subscriptions and e-commerce transactions into the 10% to 20% range while creating a new option that would charge 5% for payment processing.

App developers could still choose to rely on another payment processing system besides Google’s and consumers will be able to download apps from alternative stores that go through a certification process. Although not required, alternative app stores that go through the Google’s registration process are less likely to provoke warnings about security risks.

U.S. James Donato still must approve the proposed changes as an alternative to a more dramatic shakeup that he ordered in October 2024. Google is seeking an April 9 hearing before the judge to answer any questions about the revisions, which are being backed by Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney, whose North Carolina company is best known for making the Fortnite video game.

“Epic has been advocating for open platforms for a long time and this really brings Android up to the status of a truly open platform,” Sweeney told The Associated Press during an interview that also included Sameer Samat, the Google executive in charge of Android.

“We think it’s really great to focus more energy and time on building than on quarreling,” Samat said about Google’s decision to finally strike a truce with Epic after years of acrimony.

Google is planning to extend this new Play Store template to the rest of the world, contingent on regulatory approval in other countries. The Mountain View, California, company intends to begin the rollout in the United States, the United Kingdom and the European Union, Samat said.

The lower fees are likely to dent the profits of Google’s corporate parent, Alphabet Inc., which is in a better position to weather the blow now that its market value stands at $3.7 trillion — four times more than when Epic filed its lawsuit.

Alphabet also faces other possible setbacks with Google’s search engine being ordered to share more of its collected data after being being declared an illegal monopoly in a different case brought by the U.S. Justice Department. Parts of the technology powering Google’s digital ad network also were deemed an abusive monopoly last year in yet another federal lawsuit. A federal judge in Virginia is weighing whether to order a breakup in order to restore competition in that case.

Epic’s 2020 attack against Google’s Play Store coincided with a similar crusade against Apple’s iPhone app store that still remains entangled in some legal disputes about how alternative payment systems can be managed.

Sweeney isn’t optimistic about reaching a deal with Apple that mirrors the Google concessions because the cases played out differently. In the Apple lawsuit, a federal judge concluded that the iPhone app store isn’t a monopoly but still ordered changes designed to make it easier for consumers to navigate to alternative payment options — a shift that Epic argues still hasn’t occurred.

For now, Sweeney intends to savor the outcome of the Play Store case set to the soundtrack of a classic tune by the Rolling Stones.

“As the song says, ‘You can’t always get what you want, but if you try, you can often get what you need,’ ” Sweeney said. “And what we need is competition.”

The House DFL released its affordability plan on Wednesday highlighting upward of 20 bills aimed at curbing the cost of health care, child care, housing, groceries and energy for Minnesotans.

“Minnesotan families deserve to be able to afford their lives and live a good life on an average salary, but for too many families, they are struggling to make ends meet,” said House DFL Floor Leader Jamie Long, of Minneapolis. “The Minnesota economy is working just great if you are a corporation, or if you are wealthy, but for the average Minnesotan, they are feeling the pinch in their budget every single day.”

Senate Republicans released a tax relief plan earlier this week, featuring proposals such as property tax caps, no tax on tips and overtime, and lowering license tab fees. The no tax on tips and overtime proposal alone would cost the state $391 million in its first fiscal year, according to Speaker of the House Lisa Demuth, R-Cold Spring.

“I think we’re going to have to have a big conversation about federal tax conformity and those specific proposals, and a big part of that question is, how do you pay for it?” House DFL Leader Zack Stephenson, of Coon Rapids, said Wednesday.

Rep. Zack Stephenson, DFL-Coon Rapids. (Courtesy of the Minnesota House of Representatives)

Stephenson said that most of the House DFL proposals don’t carry a cost, but that he plans to take a comprehensive look at the budget for potential spending cuts — and also look for new revenue for the state.

But his pitch for new revenue contradicts the Republican position. Asked Monday if any tax increases are on the table, Senate Minority Leader Mark Johnson, R-East Grand Forks, said: “Absolutely not.”

Lawmakers and Gov. Tim Walz are not legally required to pass a budget this year, but have said they intend to push a supplemental budget.

Several other proposals and a bonding bill could carry a price tag this session.

Democrats have asked for up to $50 million to support those affected by Operation Metro Surge. And, Republicans have asked for school safety measures and some bipartisan anti-fraud proposals, such as establishing an Office of Inspector General or updating outdated technology systems.

But the state is working with a $3.7 billion surplus in 2026-27 and a $377 million surplus in 2028-29 — one that budget officials warned could easily disappear or even turn back into a deficit.

One proposal from the House DFL is a bill aimed at stopping price gouging and surveillance pricing in grocery stores. The effort is headed by Rep. Emma Greenman, DFL-Minneapolis, and Rep. Carlie Kotyza Witthuhn, DFL-Eden Prairie.

Kotyza Witthuhn said the bill would ensure that corporations are not taking personal data from apps, purchase history, geographic locations, and not using AI to predict how much people make, what their household income is and the urgency of any one purchase.

“I’ve had really great conversations with grocers, with retailers, who ensure me that in most places in Minnesota, these actions are not yet happening, but we know that they’re happening at the corporate level,” Kotyza Witthuhn said.

“We know that they are investing millions and millions and millions and millions of dollars into this technology. Just for fun? No. We know that they’re investing this money to capitalize on the private data of Minnesotans and folks all across the country,” she said.

Related Articles

Hugo woman accused of threatening Demuth and Dellwood lawmaker

St. Paul: Mayor Kaohly Her announces new strategy on Grand Casino Arena

Minnesota Senate Republicans propose tax cuts

Letters: I have 2 handguns, 3 shotguns, 2 rifles, and I support a ban on some weaponry

Sweeney’s Saloon offers free meal to legislators if DFLers and Republicans sit together