Instagram is not interested in child protection. Gains are more important
The initial appearance, when the owner of Instagram, the company Facebook, sets and limits targeted advertising in order to protect minors, turns out to be superficial and weak. Especially if it keeps the focus according to age.
One article is enough
The American space, which follows events in the field of public life, is not so different from the Slovak one, especially in one essential feature. If an article from a well-known periodical is already published, increased attention is paid to it and politicians immediately activate themselves to solve issues that were known, but there was no article that would move things forward. We have recently written how we perceive the limitation of targeted advertising to minors (children under 18), which is only an apparent protection of children on Instagram. Now comes The Wall Street Journal and goes even further. Through its sources, Facebook accuses itself of knowing how Instagram negatively affects young girls. And he tolerates it because he has advertising profits in the first place.
More about Instagram at www.mojandroid.sk:
As soon as the findings were published, the newspaper immediately began to initiate American politicians to get involved in the solution. And they are extremely prompt in their activity. The person who brings the information to Facebook is obviously from their own environment, while the full set of his knowledge, in addition to journalists, is already in the US Senate. And the reaction? The challenge for American society not to tolerate these practices and for American children to leave Instagram begins. Of course, its effects will be negligible, if any at all. However, the US political spectrum is preparing for radical change, increasing the budget to $ 3.5 billion to cover the investigation and detection of the impact of technology on children. Facebook itself was asked about what was going on, but according to reports, it provided only evasive answers.
So far, the conclusion, based on a report by The Wall Street Journal for US lawmakers, is clear:
Obviously, Facebook is not able to take responsibility. Reports from the Wall Street Journal reveal that Facebook’s leadership is focused on growth at all costs, and is putting profits above the health and lives of children and adolescents.
The question now is how serious and negative the Instagram setting is towards children, with the constant need to grow and achieve increased sales. Facebook keeps repeating that its priority is to protect the rights of children and is taking steps to do so. Although it is regularly reported, it is only a superficial announcement that can hide behind the scenes where the stories take place, as described by The Wall Street Journal. Despite everything, it is clear that two billion active users will not leave Instagram. And even the masses, which would already be feeling the declining sales, will not leave it. This is how the reactions to the previous cases of both social networks developed in this way.
