The Agenda with Steve Paikin (Audio) - What Responsibility Does Big Tech Have to Kids?

Episode Date: September 16, 2026

Social media companies are facing growing scrutiny over their impact on young people. As lawsuits against tech giants move through Ontario courts and new restrictions on teen accounts take effect in the U.S., what changes could be coming in Canada? Sonia Nijjar and Carmi Levy assess the legal and policy implications, while Sara Austin discusses how online harms are affecting young people's mental health and what can be done to make social media safer.Donate Today : https://tvo.me/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

What a difference a year can make. When you support TVO, you're helping bring trusted stories, inspiring ideas, and lifelong learning to people across Ontario. And as a thank you, you can receive the 2027 TVO calendar. Filled with beautiful photography from the documentaries and programs your support helps make possible. It's a year-long reminder of the learning, beauty, and discovery your generosity supports. Donate $40 or more to claim yours today at TVO.com slash calendar 2027 and make every month a little more inspiring. Parents and experts have been saying for years that kids and teenagers don't just like social media. They're addicted to it.

So a few U.S. states took the parent company of Facebook and Instagram meta to court trying to prove just that. And recently, there was a major development in the world. that case. While META hasn't admitted it did anything wrong, it is agreed to a settlement of $18 billion. And that could have implications here in Canada. Ontario school boards have their own lawsuit against META, Snapchat, and TikTok. They're arguing the apps are negatively rewiring students thinking. So, are we reaching a turning point in how we regulate social media for kids? And while that fight plays out, what can we actually do to protect young people's mental health right now. I'm Jay and Jagganaldon. Welcome to the rundown.

Okay, so let's start with what's happening in the U.S. In addition to the billions they've agreed to pay over the next 10 years, META will have a two-hour daily time limit that teens can only turn off with a parent's consent and a default block between midnight and 6 a.m. What kind of impact will this have on Canadian policy and lawsuits underway here in Ontario? Carmi Levy, great to have you joining us from London, Ontario. And Sonia Niger, great to have you in our studios. Thank you for having me. Sonia, we're going to start with you.

You began representing Ontario school boards in their lawsuits against social media companies over two years ago. Help us catch us up. Where are we today? So, unfortunately, the wheels of justice in Canada can be slow. We are still in preliminary motions. The defendants brought a motion to strike our claims about a year. ago now, actually about a year and a half ago now, and we successfully resisted that motion. And the, you know, court at first instance found for us and said, you can go ahead and this

is a triable issue. The defendants have since sought leave of that decision to appeal. And now we are off to divisional court for an appeal actually in about six weeks. In six weeks. Okay. So the date on that calendar, we're looking late October? It's late October. Okay. Two days in late October. Carmie, as a technology analyst, break it down for us. Why are lawmakers calling this meta's quote unquote big tobacco moment? Because it's the inflection point in a, frankly, decades-long effort to finally bring this industry to account. We've known, as the reports as the research has piled up, we've known the toxic relationship between exposure to these platforms and the mental health of those who use it, particularly. kids and teens who haven't yet developed the kinds of defense mechanisms necessary to navigate

a turbulent digital landscape. And so just like with tobacco, as the research piled up, prosecutors, litigators, the court system, as well as the political machine, you know, slowly garnered more ammunition against this industry that up until then had been acting with near impunity. They made up the rules as they went along, knowing full well that the laws did not apply to them. And they essentially ignored the research. Well, we're finally at the point that that begins to change in cases like this are the catalysts for that change.

You know, if meta is paying $18 billion to make this case go away and then denying liability, it's pretty clear that where there's smoke, there's fire. And going forward, things are not going to get better for this industry. They're going to get worse just like they did for tobacco. Sonia, he talks about the inflection point. And I am curious to know one of the courts that is quite important is the Court of Public Opinion. Two years ago, a lot can change in those two years.

And I'm sure we've seen, what have we seen in terms of those conversations? I think we've changed tremendously with respect to the public opinion. And we were in a very different spot two and a half years ago, largely because of the things that Karmie has talked about. academia, clinical opinion about what the harmful effects are has evolved greatly in the last two and a half years, favorably, of course, to the positions that we're taking. But you're right, the public opinion on this has changed. And I think it's because of all of these watershed moments. And this is not, I mean, we, as a litigator, I believe, obviously, that litigation is a change-making tool, but it is just one tool. And it is part of the effort,

which is multifaceted and multi-pronged, and we're seeing all of that come together. So I think, yeah, we're seeing a big, big change in the way that people are sort of accepting now. Finally, what is really happening. Well, let's dig a little bit into sort of the changes that we're seeing for meta, Instagram, Facebook. As part of the settlement, meta is rolling out major changes

to how teens use its platforms. Here's a look at the new automatic protections and controls hitting accounts for anyone under the age of 18. So as we mentioned, time limit, we will see a two-hour daily time limit. Another feature, a blackout mode. Apps will be blocked from midnight to 6 a.m. Notifications will also be muted from 8 a.m. to 3 p.m., which will be in line with school hours. Some of the other features, hidden likes.

Teens won't be able to view likes and reactions. And then there will be some filtering content restrictions. Filters with extreme makeup will be blocked and stronger age-appropriate content restrictions as well. Carmi, will these new terms lead to concrete change? I mean, they'll certainly help. Any time we see greater levels of restriction on platforms like this, it gives parents, caregivers, communities that surround kids, more, let's call it, oxygen to help kids navigate this landscape.

And, of course, it allows parents to have important conversations, probably long overdue conversations with their kids, about the insidious effects of using these apps that, you know, when a child is handed a smartphone and starts using these, they don't really think of it, but, you know, this makes it visible. The problem is, is it also gives us a false sense of security. We seem to think, oh, these protections are now in place on the platform, therefore we're okay. We can dial back our efforts because, well, meta has taken care of it. All is good.

That, of course, can lead to even more harm. And so let's not low ourselves into believing that we've magically crossed the finish line, looking at Australia in the wake of their social media ban, months after it went into effect last December, 80 to 85% of the kids who were supposed to be banned from these platforms were in fact still using them. So you can put all the restrictions you want in place. Kids are smart. They will always figure out ways around them. They're not 100% solution. And like Sonia said, it's one piece among many and we shouldn't expect it to be 100% effective. All right. A few points that I want to pick up on there.

Let's talk, first off, will we see some concrete change here with these? I think we need to address maybe something more fundamental here, which is that meta, since this settlement has come to light in late August, has been very clear that these changes will not apply outside of those 29 signatory states. That is a problem, you know. We want the same protections, more protections, frankly, for our children as well. and where is that accountability and where will those changes come from?

So I'm really concerned about that selectivity, for sure. The other thing I'll say about some of these changes, although like Karmie, I welcome really any change, you know, especially some of these really important ones, like not having notifications during the school day. That's relevant. That's important. You know, overnight limits, that sort of thing.

But I am a bit concerned that the changes are not really structural and not really focused on some of the most insidious parts of these, we say design defects, which is what's causing sort of compulsive addictive use. So the algorithmic amplification, for example, it's sort of touched on on some of these, I think a bit vaguely, and I'm really concerned about how compliance and regulation of these changes will go. And I think that's going to be a big next frontier. on how this is all going to get rolled out.

But it's a good start. I agree with Karmie. I think it's a good start. And it's going to get us talking for sure more about, you know, about these design issues. Help me understand a little bit then. If that's, let's call that the bare minimum then in sense of perhaps what you would like to see. What would you like, spell it out for us exactly what you would like? You know, I think there's many specific things about the design that we could talk about.

like let's talk about infinite scroll for a second, the fact that the product doesn't have a natural end. That's, you know, we can talk about the design defects, but really at the end of the day, the common theme here is the approach to targeting children's time and eyeballs. So it's a cumulative effect for sure because of the way structurally, you know, these programs or these products are designed.

And it's not just meta, right? Right. We're talking here about a settlement with meta, but they aren't the only, the company that has products that are, we say, problematic. So Snapchat, TikTok, they're both defendants in our lawsuit. Those are designed slightly differently as well. And that's sort of underlying ethos that we must have eyeballs on this product for as long as possible

and target these users so that we can sell ad space so that our revenue is not affected to, you know, no concern really of safety. is what we're talking about. And so it's a wholesale, you know, ethos that I think needs to be looked at. Sonia, you had mentioned YouTube, TikTok, Snapchat, as other platforms that have some concerns as well. Part of the settlement with META is that they're contingent on the actions of some of those social media platforms.

How are lawmakers going to ensure? There are already some challenges there about enforcement there. How are lawmakers going to ensure that the other companies abide? Yeah. So I think this goes back to this is an all hands-on-deck holistic approach to ensuring that these changes are made and that even more changes that we've talked about are needed are implemented. So I think that's a very good question. It's one that I'm concerned about, obviously, in terms of the overall compliance and regulation.

But, you know, this is where litigation can be a really great change-making tool. all of those companies that we've talked about are facing similar lawsuits, you know, from various affected plaintiffs. And so I think it's a combined coordinated effort for sure to hold accountable these companies for the conduct. I think bottom line impact is money talks, unfortunately. What is a little, I mean, we saw sort of, you know,

a watershed moment being published. and the headline of this settlement in particular is very eye-catching and for sure something to pay attention to. When you break it down, though, so it's essentially a $12 billion settlement with another $5 or $6 billion to the extent that this coordination amongst the other companies has achieved, that's about one quarter's worth of revenue or profit for META and paid over 10 years. It's not as, I would say, impactful as a settlement as perhaps the headline would have you believe just on the numbers. I think what this moment does, as Karmie says, is give us an opportunity, all of us, public, you know, government, our regulators to come and say, there is a problem here. We need to name that problem. This is not a value judgment.

This is not just social media as wholesale bad or good. this is there are specific safety issues that affect our children. And our children are our next leaders. And we must protect them. Karmie. Sonia mentions government. Government can be a tad bit slow to responding sometimes. That's a gentle way of critiquing it here.

I am curious, how can this settlement influence Canadian policy ships as we move forward? are we going to be in front of this, even though it feels like we're quite behind here. Yeah, I mean, I admire your politeness in saying we're a tad slow because really, I mean, we're toward us like in our ability to bring tech-aware legislation to the national, you know, onto the national agenda and get these laws passed within a reasonable amount of time before the technology leaps ahead yet again. And that's really the problem we're facing, that gap between the bleeding edge of technology and the law's ability to keep up with it continues to increase as technology accelerates still

further. And so, you know, the problem here is is that Canada isn't keeping up. You know, we had an AI law, the AI and Data Act that was working its way through Parliament last year. Then Parliament got prorogued and it died. And we're still waiting for it to be reintroduced a year and a half later. I don't have an answer to that. And this happens again and again and again where the government it tries to introduce something and then just absolutely stalls out. And even when it comes, when it is, receives royal assent, it still isn't enough and it's still woefully obsolete. And so in the ideal world, that gap would be minimized.

And we would have governments that recognize this is what our population both wants and needs. And ideally, we should be bringing forth tech-aware legislation that addresses those needs and satisfies the, you know, the whims of the population. But it doesn't seem to be happening. I'm pleased to see, for example, that we established an AI and digital innovation ministry. Evan Solomon is the minister that we're starting to hold these conversations and starting to issue, you know, updates on kind of who they're talking to and what they're talking about. But we still need those laws in place and we've got to hit the gas pedal on those. Sonia?

Yeah, I'll say I echo many of those comments. And I think all of us should be concerned about that gas. Where I do see progress, Bill C-34 is up for debate this fall, you know, similar to the act that Carmi mentioned it was, you know, stalled when Parliament is proroged. But there are a lot of good things that are coming at the federal level and the provincial level to show us that there's an awareness for sure about these harms. Where I see a continued gap is that we are almost not exclusively. but pretty close to exclusively focused on content as opposed to design. Right. And so a lot of our efforts, you know, our contemporaries, our allies on this issue are talking about that and making recommendations that we hope will be heard on how to address design defects and how to name the problem.

And I keep coming back to that. It's important that we name the problem. This is not about social media going away. it's about making a product that is safer in design to use. And we really got to make sure that the right terms are used and the right problem is being addressed. It's not just content. We're talking about design.

Karmie, it's kind of crazy to think that 20 plus years ago we were talking about meta and what we were able to do with it, with Facebook, and be able to connect. And here we are having conversations about lawsuits and sort of still being behind and reacting. I am curious, some experts say this is just the start. There are thousands of lawsuits to come. Is this a turning point, turning point rather, for social media as we know it?

I think it is. I think Meta settled this case because they were hoping to sort of slow down the bleeding, maybe reduce the velocity of those 3,000-plus other cases that are waiting in the wings and to sort of telegraph to the legal community that we want to talk. we're willing to make a deal. But at the same time, I think they see the writing on the wall. Social media by design is tainted. This is the way the industry has evolved,

and it's not sustainable across society. It's killing our kids. And something needs to be done. And what's worse is the settlements that are being proposed here apply specifically to these platforms. So, you know, like Sonia said, just these particular tools, not the industry at large. And of course, as teens increasingly turn their attention,

away from social media towards, say, AI platforms, we might be in a situation where the settlements that are being proposed don't apply to this next generation of technology where kids are spending their time. So we have to broaden out the umbrella a little bit, obviously include meta in the conversation, but every other technology company applied to the entire industry, not specific platforms.

This is a story that we will continue to follow. Karmie, thank you so much for joining us on the line. And Sonia, you are going to be busy. So we will be checking in with you. Thank you so much for joining us in studio. Thank you for having me. Thank you. Here's the thing.

Whatever happens in court, social media isn't disappearing from kids' lives anytime soon. And according to a recent report from Children First Canada, online harms are the number one threat facing young people in this country. And they're helping drive other issues, like poor mental health. So if social media is part of growing up now, how do we make using it healthier? Sarah Austin, it's great to have you on the rundown. You are the founder and CEO of Children First Canada. Help me understand here, what is the state of youth mental health today? Well, thanks so much for having me.

I started Children First Canada a decade ago because Canada has been on a downward trajectory for the health and well-being of kids for quite some time. We used to be a top 10 country to raise children. Sadly, we've now fallen to 22nd place amongst well-heated nations for kids' well-being. and one of the reasons why is because of the liking indicators around kids' mental health. And every year we produce a report on the state of the nation's children. It's called Raising Canada, and we look at the top ten threats to children. And sadly, every year, poor mental health has been one of the most concerning issues affecting kids from coast to coast to coast.

And this year, you know, we've seen that online harms have risen to be the number one threat to children. And it's having a significant impact on children's mental health. There are some pretty damning data points in this year's report. Suicide is now the second leading cause of death for kids ages 10 and above. Now, I'm not only an advocate for kids, I'm also a mom. So this one hits really close to home to think that kids so young are facing that sense of desperation and feeling like there's no hope for them. Other alarming statistics in this report really point to the fact that there have been

rising rates of eating disorders, self-harm, addictions, And just generally, a poor state of mental health for the vast majority of kids across our country. From all different walks of life, there are certainly certain populations that are even more vulnerable. But, you know, the kids are not all right. And that's the clear message. And they need support in our homes, in our schools. And we need, you know, stronger investments to ensure that kids have a safe and healthy start to childhood. Kids today face way different mental health pressures than my generation did.

And you mentioned online harms. But let's get into the nitty-gritty of it's, we're talking social media here. What does social media play in all of us? Social media certainly has a significant role. I mean, we've seen such a drastic change and a relatively short period of time. You know, my son just turned 16 this week. And I've seen just a really big role that it's played in his life and the life of his peers. And we're clearly seeing it in the data from this new Raising Canada report that we've just issued.

Social media has become so prevalent in the lives of. of our children, not only teenagers, but also even much younger children who are having access to these platforms, but it also extends well beyond social media. Kids are on gaming platforms, they're on messaging apps, you know, they're on live stream platforms and often, you know, they're moving from one platform to the next. The average young person right now is spending upwards of five to seven hours of time on technology every single day. And, you know, for some teens, even more than that. And, you know, five to seven hours a day is a lot of time lost in typical childhood activities. That's time away from physical activity, you know, sports and playtime. It's time

away from family and friends. It's also time away from sleep. You talk about sort of the age ranges here. These are crucial years for a lot of young people. Help me understand sort of the effect, social media plays sort of across the board when we look at demographics. When it comes to demographics, the mental health of young people has impacted differently. There's significant differences for boys and girls, for instance, girls are much more likely to be dealing with issues of cyber bullying, but also impacts around their body esteem and their self-image for boys. We've seen a huge surgeance around what's called the Manosphere, and even very young boys being targeted by very often dangerous and unhealthy practices, you know,

trends like jawbreaking, young boys being exposed to content that promotes them to, you know, to damage their jaws or to attain, you know, inject themselves with peptides or or other harmful content. You know, it's, we're seeing boys and girls impacting differently and, and also gender diverse youth in a different way because often for gender diverse youth, social media can be an outlet and an access to a community that they don't have in their day-to-day lives. you know, they may face stigma or shame because of their culture and their family home, their religious beliefs. And social media can be an outlet for them to build community, to learn and connect with others who share their values and help them build itself with steam. And so,

you know, those are just a few examples of how kids may experience the impacts of mental health in unique ways. I want to get your thoughts on who's responsible here. The tech companies themselves, meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, has said, it doesn't find itself. responsible for the negative impacts of its platforms and says that the onus is on the individual. Now, I'm sure a lot of that has to probably do with a number of lawsuits that are out there. But I am curious, you know, how much of this is their responsibility? There's no doubt that parents have a responsibility around the protection and the well-being of kids. That is our primary duty for us parents as to protect our kids.

But we have seen, sadly, you know, far too much offloading and blame of responsibility and blaming, of parents. I think the average parent is doing their very best to protect their kids these days. There's a lot more awareness right now than there ever has being around the impacts of social media and other harms on kids, but we're fighting this impossible battle. It's often described as this David and Goliath's battle of kids and parents against this multi-billion dollar tech industry that is profiting off of harming our children. We've seen so many lawsuits just very recently the headlines around meta and the massive settlement that they've reached, but, you know, they're not alone. TikTok, Instagram, you know, TikTok, Snapchat, you know,

we can go on and on naming these different platforms. They're all getting sued and those lawsuits will continue to unfold. And it's very clear that voluntary efforts on the part of the tech industry are failing. You know, there's no other industry that we let operate like this, whether it's food, medicine, toys, or even pajamas. They all have to meet basic safety standards before they can be put on the market. And if they make our kids sick, cause an injury or death, those products are immediately recalled. You know, we should be applying the same standard to the tech industry. We're in this age of reckoning here in Canada with new legislation that's just being tabled that will come before Parliament this fall, the Safe Social Media Act. It's really long overdue that we

shift the responsibility that's fallen on the shoulders of parents do everything and hold these companies accountable to the safety standards that, you know, that should be rightfully applied. There are probably listeners and viewers who are listening to our conversation about social media and these tech giants and thinking, we've had this moral panic before. Perhaps different things. We're talking about televisions, rock and roll, even comic books for certain generations. How is this different from those moral panics? I think it's profoundly different. We can see clearly from the data the impacts on kids' survival and development.

In the past year alone, a quarter of our kids experiencing cyberbullying over, you know, every single month, the Canadian Center for Child Protection receives 100,000 reports of online sexual exploitation of children. 100,000 reports every single month, Canadian kids being sexually exploited. Those are just a couple of the very concerning examples that we can point to you. This is demonstrable harm that's affecting our children. And, you know, we can't afford. forward to be naive about this and to think this could never happen to my child or your child

or like the kids that we know and love because we've seen far too many parents losing their children to suicide resulting from cyberbullying and sex torsion and other egregious harms that happen this is measurable harm the tech companies know it our government knows it and parents know it this isn't you know we're not overstating it to say that kids lives are on the line. I say all that, but also want to send us clear message to parents. This is not a time to panic, and it's certainly not a time to be punishing our children. Our kids are not to blame for this. Parents are not to blame for this. This is a reckoning around the accountability that's really owed to the tech industry that we've allowed to run wild in the lives of our children with

devastating consequences. We talk about the responsibility and role of parents and guardians. Help us understand how can they protect their children without forcing them off their screens, which we know that probably isn't the best way of doing it. Yeah. I mean, delay is always the way. I mean, I think, as I said, I'm a parent raising a kid in the digital world. We've delayed his access to a phone as long as possible we delayed social media access. And delay is the first thing you can do. But I think that the second most important message I can send to parents is for our kids. We need to have conversations with our kids from a very early age about what they could be experiencing in the digital world, to be naming the things that they might be witnessing

or experiencing. And most importantly, for our kids to know that they can come to us as parents to, if they see or experience something harmful online, you know, the worst thing a kid could do is to hide it. And we see that so often that, you know, kids don't tell their parents because they're afraid of having their technology taken away. They're afraid of being punished. they're also just ashamed and embarrassed because they feel like it's their fault. So our kids need to know that they should be coming to us, that we're their number one advocate. We will help them navigate through this. We will help them find their way.

My son just clearly knows if he tells me first, if he's the one to tell me he won't be punished. That's just a simple thing that we message we need to keep sending home to our kids so that they know when they face and can't, because inevitably they will, some form of harm online, whether it's just, witnessing something, seeing something happen to somebody else, to be able to come to their parents and ask for help. Speaking of conversations, I want to thank you, Sarah, for this conversation. A really important message. I really appreciate your work.

If you're a parent, I want to know, do you have rules around social media and screen time for your kids and how hard are they actually to enforce? Let us know. Send an email to rundown at tbO.org or drop us a comment. Until then, I will see you tomorrow. If your social feed is suddenly full of political hot takes, you know, events matter, campaigns matter. If your group chat has opinions about bike lanes, housing, or city hall, you may not like the decision, you may like the decision, whatever.

And if you've ever wondered, wait, what's actually going on? We've got you covered. Welcome everyone to the On Polly podcast. This fall, the OnPoly podcast with Steve Paken and John Michael McGrath returns with the story shaping Ontario. The money comes from the province, and that comes with strings. From Queens Park to municipal elections happening across the province. Smart analysis, great conversations, no political science degree required. On Polly returned September 18th. Watch it Fridays at 8pm on TVO at any time on YouTube, or listen to it wherever you get your podcasts.