to the editor: As a defender of free speech guaranteed by the First Amendment, I disagree with the jury's verdict and am deeply concerned about the future of Internet freedom (“Landmark LA Jury Verdict Finds Instagram and YouTube Were Designed for Child Addicts”. March 25).
I don't know what the plaintiff's early history was that might have contributed to the psychological problems she described, but I do know one thing: social media companies are certainly not responsible for that.
I'm not just talking about the plaintiff in this case. It is the job of parents to teach their children the difference between right and wrong, and to cultivate in them a strong will to avoid addictive behaviors. Parents should monitor their children's viewing activities and set limits. As children become teenagers, they should learn to set their own limits.
After all, people must be able to resist incorrect or inappropriate behavior on their own. This includes not only “bad” speech, but also government overreach in many areas.
Alice Lillie, Pomona
..
to the editor: I couldn't agree more with guest contributor Daniel Katz (“Social media platforms are not the new cigarettes. They are worse.” March 25). Social platforms are worse than cigarettes and I would like to see the platforms and the companies that run them face sanctions and bans like the tobacco companies.
It is not used in certain public places. Sure, it'll be hard to control because anyone using your phone in a restaurant can tell you're texting a friend, but it's a start. Ban books so that the public perception of these platforms follows the path of Big Tobacco. And how about a warning label every time a user accesses one of these sites? “Warning: This site is known to be potentially dangerous to your health. Please proceed with extreme caution.”
And let the trials and monetary sentences continue.
Craig Rosen, Los Angeles
