Meta is accused of negligence in cases of sex trafficking – 03/21/2023 – Market

A new lawsuit accuses Mark Zuckerberg and other Meta Platforms executives and directors of not doing enough against sex trafficking and child sexual exploitation groups on Facebook and Instagram.

The complaint made public on Monday (20) by several pension and investment funds that own shares in Meta claims that Meta’s leadership and board of directors failed to protect the interests of the company and shareholders, turning a blind eye to “systemic evidence” of criminal activities.

Given the board’s failure to explain how it attempts to eradicate the problem, “the only logical inference is that the board knowingly decided to allow Meta’s platforms to promote and facilitate sex/human trafficking,” the complaint states.

Meta rejected the lawsuit’s arguments.

“We prohibit human exploitation and child sexual exploitation in unequivocal terms,” ​​the company said in a statement on Tuesday. “The claims in this lawsuit misrepresent our efforts to combat this type of activity. Our goal is to prevent people who seek to exploit others from using our platform.”

Zuckerberg, Meta’s billionaire co-founder and chief executive, told the US Congress in 2019 that child exploitation was “one of the most serious threats we focus on”.

Meta has long faced accusations that its platforms are a haven for crimes such as human trafficking and sexual abuse.

In June 2021, the US Supreme Court of the US state of Texas allowed three people who engaged with their attackers through Facebook to sue the company, arguing that the social network was not a “lawless no man’s land” and immune responsibility for human trafficking.

Meta separately faces hundreds of lawsuits from families of teenagers and children who allege they suffer from mental health problems as they become addicted to using Facebook and Instagram. Some school districts have also filed lawsuits over the issue.

Monday’s lawsuit is a derivative case in which shareholders sue executives and directors who allegedly violated their duties. Damages in this case, if awarded, will be paid to the company, often by the insurers of the executives and directors rather than the shareholders.