A prominent whistleblower from the tobacco industry’s significant legal battles in the 1990s has been closely observing the recent court cases involving major technology firms. Jeffrey Stephen Wigand, a biochemist who played a crucial role in exposing how tobacco companies targeted minors and concealed the addictive nature of cigarettes, feels a sense of d\u00e9j\u00e0 vu. The recent ruling in a notable case against social media giants Meta and YouTube\u2014finding that they intentionally created addictive products\u2014has intensified comparisons with the legal actions taken against the tobacco sector. Wigand\u2019s immediate reaction to the California litigation was the realization that social media companies, through their advertising strategies, were engaging in similar tactics aimed at enticing children, akin to the approaches used by the tobacco industry.<\/p>\n
In a verdict handed down last week, a jury in Los Angeles determined that Meta and YouTube exhibited negligence. Attorneys representing the plaintiffs leveraged internal communications and documents to illustrate how the companies’ executives overlooked warnings regarding the potential dangers of their platforms. Additionally, in a separate case in New Mexico, Meta was found liable for failing to safeguard children from sexual exploitation. These judgments mark the first instances of Meta being held accountable for the impact of its products on youth, following years of criticism predominantly from parents who believe social media has adversely affected their children’s mental health.<\/p>\n
Whistleblowers, including former Meta staff member Arturo B\u00e9jar, have been vital in these social media lawsuits. Over time, they have supplied essential internal documents revealing the operations of tech companies, reinforcing claims that these firms did not adequately protect minors.<\/p>\n
Wigand had a comparable role in the 1990s concerning the tobacco industry. He was employed by Brown & Williamson (B&W) in 1989 to work on a safer cigarette. As the company\u2019s vice president of research, he voiced concerns regarding a carcinogenic substance in cigarettes, which were ignored by company leadership. Ultimately, he was dismissed, and the initiative to create a safer product was abandoned. Following his boss’s testimony to Congress asserting that cigarettes were not addictive, Wigand publicly countered this claim, stating that the industry functioned primarily as a “nicotine delivery business” and assisted federal investigations.<\/p>\n
The Guardian recently interviewed Wigand about the parallels he perceives between the tobacco and social media trials, as well as his advice for tech employees contemplating becoming whistleblowers. This interview has been condensed for brevity and clarity.<\/p>\n
Reflecting on the 1990s, Wigand was asked what it meant to publicly state that the tobacco industry concealed the harmful effects of smoking. He replied, “No, I wouldn\u2019t change anything. I was uncomfortable knowing I was part of a system that was addicting children, so I felt compelled to act. After reading a report from the National Toxicology Program about the carcinogenic properties of an additive in cigarettes, I reached out to B&W\u2019s CEO to warn him. He suggested finding a substitute but ultimately decided against it because removing it would make the cigarettes less appealing, potentially losing consumers. I was surrounded by people who adhered to the company\u2019s ethos, and I chose to dissent.”<\/p>\n
Turning to the present, Wigand was asked about his thoughts on the ongoing social media trials. He responded, “My initial thought was addiction.” When questioned about his certainty, he explained, “I observed how these platforms target their advertisements at adolescents, which was evident in their own internal documents.”<\/p>\n
Wigand noted the similarities between the tobacco industry’s and social media companies\u2019 practices, stating both sought to create addiction, particularly among children, to ensure a steady revenue stream. “Once someone becomes addicted, they require increasing amounts of the substance to achieve the same effect. They deliberately design their products to exploit the vulnerabilities of our youth,” he emphasized.<\/p>\n
When asked to elaborate on the commonalities and differences between the two industries, Wigand acknowledged distinctions, stating, “Tobacco is a combustible product, while social media involves electronic interactions. However, social media companies recognized their products were addictive and strategically targeted children, just as tobacco companies did.”<\/p>\n
On the topic of children\u2019s vulnerability, he explained that their developing brains make them particularly susceptible to addiction. “Young children have highly adaptable brains, which makes them easy targets. Addiction creates a tolerance, requiring more of the addictive substance to achieve the same feeling.”<\/p>\n
Wigand was also asked if the allegations of harm in the tobacco cases primarily focused on young people. He affirmed this, stating, “A significant aspect of the case centered on children. For instance, the Joe Camel campaign was not aimed at 25-year-olds. Psychologists were employed to design the packaging and branding specifically to appeal to children. They targeted young audiences with strategies like cartoon characters in cigarette advertising.”<\/p>\n
Lastly, the discussion turned to the timeline of reforms following legal action against the tobacco industry and what it might imply for the future of social media companies. Wigand noted, “There are potential safeguards and regulations that could be implemented concerning age restrictions and content access, similar to tobacco regulations. We can strive to raise the minimum age for social media access. Today, the tobacco industry is in a markedly improved position compared to 1996. While many social media platforms set a minimum account age of 13, they face criticism for not doing enough to prevent younger children from using their services.”<\/p>\n
Wigand concluded by highlighting the challenges children face in recognizing harmful influences, noting, “As children, it is difficult for them to discern what is harmful. They often think, if it\u2019s popular or widely accepted, it can\u2019t be bad.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
A prominent whistleblower from the tobacco industry’s significant legal battles in the 1990s has been closely observing the recent court cases involving major technology firms. Jeffrey Stephen Wigand, a biochemist who played a crucial role in exposing how tobacco companies targeted minors and concealed the addictive nature of cigarettes, feels a sense of d\u00e9j\u00e0 vu. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":3018,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[157,238,35,98,89,85,239,88,176,164],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3019","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uk-ai-artificial-intelligence","category-uk-children-s-health","category-sl-health","category-uk-mental-health","category-social-media","category-us-technology","category-uk-tobacco-industry","category-uk","category-us-news","category-uk-youtube"],"yoast_head":"\n