• ebolapie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        I 100% believe that Facebook and friends are contributing to this trend but it’s important to note that the linked study does not conclude that causation is present:

        There is an independent association between problematic use of social media/internet and suicide attempts in young people. However, the direction of causality, if any, remains unclear. Further evaluation through longitudinal studies is needed.

  • faltryka@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    355
    ·
    5 days ago

    At some point we need to start criminalizing shit like this and actually holding people accountable.

      • thejml@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        145
        ·
        5 days ago

        Thus far, they’d basically be right. Any fines are simply chocked up to “cost of doing business” expenses and since no one wants to either make solid laws against this stuff OR hold them accountable for current ones, they’ll just keep at it.

          • stoy@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            That depends on if it is a dayfine or not.

            A fine of €500 for speeding will only really affect poor people, 30 dayfines which value is dictated by the wealth of the individual is a better system.

            • azertyfun@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 days ago

              This can be hard to implement and avoidable through “creative accounting” (e.g. living off daddy money with no declared income) so as a hybrid/additional solution fines should turn into penalties over repeat offences.

              Some countries use points licensing where your driver’s license will simply be taken away if you have too many recent infractions on record.

              Companies should also be prevented from doing certain kinds of business if they repeatedly break the law. We have legal frameworks for this, we are just refusing to apply them due to politics and corruption.

    • venusaur@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      74
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      5 days ago

      It’s so much bigger than this. It starts young. iPad kids. Strict gender roles. Sexualization of children. Learning from parents who have been conditioned by capitalism, sexism and more. We got little girls that want skincare products and teens talking about plastic surgery. It’s bad.

      Agreed though. Punish people for ruining society. I think I read a while ago that France had required social media posts to flag when images have been altered. We need more laws like this too.

      • Little8Lost@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        5 days ago

        As little kids we got like no genderbased education from our parents. When we moved our grandmother got a lot more control and dumped blue boyish stuff on my brother and forbid the girly things. Has never worn a dress since and now is still not willing to wear one

        (it could be that us older sisters influenced that he wants to wear dresses too)

        • venusaur@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 days ago

          Bummer. Happens to almost all men in the US. Maybe less now, but this new red pill generation is wild.

        • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 days ago

          I need context to understand your story. How old was your brother when you moved? How often was he wearing dresses before the move? How quickly did it stop? And how old is he now?

          • Little8Lost@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 days ago
            • he was ~4 years old
            • i actually dont know how often, but i would guess as often as we others too. from what i understood he actually liked it so often enough
            • a few weeks or months (was 5 at the time so its mostly something i heard from older siblings & mother)
            • 21 i think
      • ABCDE@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        And mass sharing of images/videos which has made it so much easier to connect people, specifically in one case I saw today of someone on Telegram sharing child porn. How do you even put the cat back in the box?

          • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            4 days ago

            Unfortunately, the “used intelligently and responsibly” part is why people dislike AI - they don’t trust companies or people to use it that way (and for good reason based on the results so far).

            Plus, it’s not gonna put everything back into Pandora’s Box. What we’re in is a societal and cultural arms race where AI is just another escalation that’s being used by both sides.

            • venusaur@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 days ago

              It’s funny you reference Pandora’s Box. I often use it to refer to the growth of AI and people’s resistance towards it. It’s not going anywhere. It’s not slowing down. We gotta make it work for us.

          • ABCDE@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            That does make sense, although I’m not sure we can trust it to work like that.

        • JacksonLamb@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          5 days ago

          It has always been this way. When you get old, 15 year olds and 19 year olds start to all look the same.

          Similarly, to teenagers a 40 year old and a 60 year old look the same. Old.

        • venusaur@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          5 days ago

          It’s hard to say if it’s one of those things that older gens say is different with newer gens even though it the same. I will say though, the convergence of sexualization of children and infantilization of adults have been narrowing the gap and maybe one is winning over the other.

    • Landless2029@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      Oh you mean fines? Sure here’s some money $$.
      Meanwhile AD rev is $$$$$. Just the cost of doing business!
      Hahahaa

    • Tire@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      3 days ago

      We don’t hate them, it’s just that capitalism has found them to be an easy and vulnerable target for manipulation.

      • gradual@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        I agree.

        I feel like the powers that b have people working overtime to ensure that most Western women feel like they need to consume to be accepted by their peers.

        What’s particularly sad is it’s the exact opposite. That culture of consumption also comes with an aura of exclusivity. Most of these girls are miserable because they’ve been conditioned to consume as much as possible while thinking anyone who consumes less isn’t good enough for them.

        It’s really good for putting them to work, not so good for making them or the people around them happy.

    • Tattorack@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      3 days ago

      It’s mot that we hate teenage girls (and women) so much. It’s just money. Soulless, apathetic money making.

      A teenager is in a vulnerable state. Some more than others. But self esteem, self worth, and existentialism are things that a teenager as, at the very least, a brush with.

      An emotionally vulnerable person is more open to suggestion. Religion does this a lot. Advertising is no different.

      • Zink@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        3 days ago

        And I genuinely loved all that stuff as a kid, usually liking the ad (e.g., TMNT cartoon) more than the toys (e.g., TMNT action figures).

        As your typical Lemmy user who loves Linux and hates advertisements, I sometimes have to remind myself about that when my son is watching today’s dumb kid shows. Teaching him about the systems in play rather than isolating him from it has been working well IMO.

        The bonus is that he doesn’t watch full-on advertisements and commercial breaks like we were forced to in the 80s when it was live TV or no TV.

        • andros_rex@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          3 days ago

          The bonus is that he doesn’t watch full-on advertisements and commercial breaks like we were forced to in the 80s when it was live TV or no TV.

          I think the problem for modern youth is that there’s no way to tell what’s an ad anymore. Scrolling through TikTok or any social media will show you tons of advertisements which are not marked as advertisements.

          The mainstream internet is driven by advertising. At least when I was a kid we could step out during the commercial breaks.

          • Zink@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 days ago

            I think the problem for modern youth is that there’s no way to tell what’s an ad anymore.

            Too true. Fortunately my kid is too young for full blown social media, so I have a few more years to keep teaching him.

          • mcv@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            I know one example of advertising that I liked: the creators of Penny Arcade had only advertisements for computer games that they liked. And they made those ads in the same art style as their own comic.

            Advertisements are good when they’re an honest endorsement. Any others are inherently deceptive and often invasive.

          • Fredthefishlord@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            4 days ago

            Some level of advertising is a necessary evil when you’re in a capitalist system because otherwise people have no way to get their products out ti the market. There’s a balance to be struck.

            Hell even in other systems advertising is still important for finding out about cool new things even if money no longer exists

        • psivchaz@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          3 days ago

          It’s the state of advertising tbh. If ads were still of the “Look, here’s a cool product” variety, or even the “Look, here’s people happily using a cool product” kind then the world would probably be a better place. Even targeting isn’t so bad, when it’s broad like “We want businesses to know about our B2B product.”

          The evil in modern advertising is the overly specific targeting, the lying, the psychological tricks, and the way they seem to invade every possible space.

        • markovs_gun@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          4 days ago

          This is one of those bizarre Lemmy echo chamber things. I’ve never seen this sentiment that advertising is evil and should be stopped at all costs anywhere else but on Lemmy it’s super common. Idk where it comes from. I get that advertising kind of sucks but it just seems like a weird thing to get so passionate about especially considering how many other things are wrong with the world. Sorry you’re getting downvoted to hell, you’re not crazy, Lemmy is.

        • RedditIsDeddit@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          For anyone that is downvoting this. Go ahead and try to run a business without advertising, let me know how that works out for you.

        • Olhonestjim@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          They can put up signs inside their business windows. That’s plenty. Everything else is a blight.

            • Snowclone@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 days ago

              They are making billboards illegal in most places. And it’s a pretty awesome improvement I must say.

            • Olhonestjim@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              3 days ago

              Oh they had roadside billboards in 1950. And they were a blight back then. Advertising is a cancer.

                • Olhonestjim@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 days ago

                  Haha what? I’m not burning billboards and slaughtering CEOs. I’m just sick to death of all these ads. Advertising is a distributed global brainwashing campaign, by the wealthy, against the working class. They don’t hire psychologists to exploit our lizard brains for no reason, and that’s why it needs to be outlawed.

  • katy ✨@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    115
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    can’t believe a social network started by incels in college to rate girls sexually would do something like this.

  • Therobohour@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    96
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    That’s 0% surprising. FB had always been about making girls feel bad. It’s in its sorce code

    • andros_rex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      4 days ago

      Facebook started as a Hot or Not website. Fucking creepy.

      YouTube also started because the founders wanted to see the Janet Jackson nipple slip. (Which fuck them for that.)

      • Therobohour@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        Ya FB is,was and will forever be bad for society and woman especially

        I mean,do you really think janet jackson didn’t want people to see?

        • andros_rex@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          I mean,do you really think janet jackson didn’t want people to see?

          No, I don’t.

          It’s interesting how Justin Timberlake had a career after that incident; when was the last time anyone’s heard from Janet Jackson?

          I don’t see how this is different from revenge porn.

      • Therobohour@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        Ya FB is,was and will forever be bad for society and woman especially

        I mean,do you really think jackson didn’t want people to see

    • seeigel@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      5 days ago

      As if there would be no social networking without Zuckerberg.

      Like any sin, the change starts with us. If we want a healthy social network, we can build a healthy social network.

      • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        I’m not sure if it’s possible to build a healthy social network.

        Smaller communities can work, if they’re well moderated. The small size also helps norms become established.

        Once the network gets really big, you have eternal September problems. You have too many bad actors in absolute numbers to deal with.

        So yeah, the problem is us but we suck.

        Maybe federation would work, since that can keep the moderation workload smaller and distributed.

      • kingthrillgore@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        If I could go back in time to the moment when ARPANET was created and show them what it would become, I would also beg them to stop their efforts.

        “You will create the thing that will destroy us.”

    • misteloct@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      4 days ago

      Even though Luigi Mangione didn’t actually commit any crime and his trial is a flimsy sham, I agree. He is the public face of whoever really did it, and they are an icon of justice.

    • andallthat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      47
      ·
      5 days ago

      Not just teenagers. Facebook and quite a few others should outright be banned. Not only they are scientifically proven to be a mental health catastrophe and a political threat to democracy, it’s also pretty clear now that both these things are part of their design, not bugs or unintended emerging properties.

      • ToastedRavioli@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        4 days ago

        Facebook actively contributed to the genocide in Myanmar, and did basically nothing about it because they didnt want to hire more moderators that spoke the language, so that they could adequately remove pro-genocidal content

    • Someone8765210932@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      5 days ago

      Ok, but the genie is already out of the bottle. Arguing like this is kinda pointless.

      I don’t think it will be possible to get them off social media (or the internet in general), so you need to find ways to make it work.

      E.g. minors can not be advertised to, no algorithmic content, no doom-scrolling, and heightened data protection. I think teenager should get access to as much as possible to reduce the “risk” of them trying to go around it. “Their” version of social media might even be the superior one in the end.

      If the world wasn’t on fire at the moment, people could calmly discuss possible solutions and propose laws in every country to actually protect their children from e.g. the stuff mentioned in the linked article. Sadly, this isn’t going to happen …

      • andallthat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        The thing is that social media have an oversized influence that makes a calm discussion of possible solutions very hard to have. When the US recognized the implications of letting a foreign power exert so much control over their people, they tried banning TikTok, or breaking it up so their US operation would be under US control.

        Facebook should also be split and its EU operation purchased by a European company, that could then spend more time implementing the other changes you mention (doom-scrolling, data protection) and less time lobbying to get all these pesky EU regulations removed.

        And yes, it does feel heartbreaking to count the US as a threat to national security, but China has never threatened to annex Greenland with military force, so what would have been paranoia and extreme anti-americanism last year is now the sensible, level-headed thing to do.

      • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        Ya!

        Important to keep a semi-reasonable option in the major app stores, unless we want Social-Media-Tor dot Mirror or something to become the new hotness

      • theblips@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        4 days ago

        How isn’t it possible? Just don’t give them phones, it’s not that complicated

        • cooperativesrock@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 days ago

          Ok, when was the last time you saw a working payphone? 2010? It isn’t safe for teens to not have a phone because payphones don’t exist any more.

        • brandon@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 days ago

          You can walk into any Walmart in America and buy a cheap smartphone for $30.

          This approach is even less effective than “just don’t give them drugs”.

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            Ok, but you also need a data plan to go along w/ it (or regular visits to top up; is that still a thing?), plus hide it from parents, or you’re going to have a bad time.

            Drugs are a different story. You can often get drugs from friends (free to start), can buy them a little at a time, and you don’t need to stash any at home. For a phone to be useful, it needs to be readily accessible, which means you’ll have it with you everywhere.

            It’s possible, but it’s going to take a fair amount of work to hide a phone from a parent who’s paying even a little bit of attention.

            The real problem here is parents. Parents need to step up and do a better job. Source: am a parent.

            • thatonecoder@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              4 days ago

              Prohibition never works; people will always find other bad — maybe even worse — things to do. The human pressure to have social interactions may lead to creating terrible IRL friendships, ones that can be much more dangerous.

              Instead, I would strongly advise for honest, mature conversations about the risks that social media comes along with. This can lead to a highly positive impact, especially if you teach how to observe interactions between people through social media, even if not interacting, yourself.

              • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                4 days ago

                Prohibition works… temporarily. If you believe your child is not ready for SM, then prohibiting them from it until they are can work.

                So yes, have a mature conversation with your kids, set boundaries, etc. That’s something that should happen between a parent and a child, not between a government and a child.

                • thatonecoder@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 days ago

                  I actually agree with you, especially in the last sentence. Knowing the Cambridge Analytica Scandal, governments are definitely willing to manipulate children through control of information.

            • brandon@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              4 days ago

              Look, maybe it’s true that parents should be doing a better job here. The thing is, that’s an individual solution. This is a systemic problem. How kids (and adults) interact socially and consume media is fundamentally changed over the last thirty years and we’re going to have to find ways to adapt to that as a society.

              Yeah, in any particular individual case you can probably come up with a list of things the parent could have done differently. The reality is that this is a problem for tens (hundreds?) of millions of parents.

              You can hand wave away any problem that affects children with “parents should do a better job”. It didn’t work for obesity, it didn’t work for child traffic deaths, it didn’t work for fentanyl overdoses, it didn’t work for school shootings, it didn’t work for measles, and it’s not going to work for this either.

              I’m just going to copy/paste what I wrote in a previous comment in a similar thread:

              Everybody is so quick to blame the parents in these situations. Maybe there is some truth to that, but people also need to reckon with the fact that kids (and adults) are being constantly inundated by Skinner box apps, and “platforms” full of engagement bait designed to be as addictive and attractive as possible. All run by corporations with functionally no regard for the safety of their users.

              Yeah, sure, if you’re giving advice to an individual parent, they should probably be keeping a closer eye on what their kids are doing.

              But there are systemic problems here that can’t be fixed with individual action. By laying the blame solely at the feet of the parents here, you are in effect putting individual parents up against dozens of huge corporations, each with armies of expert advertisers, designers, and psychologists working to build these products. It’s hardly a fair fight.

            • raynethackery@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              4 days ago

              You don’t need a data plan if you can access wifi. There is public wifi and I don’t think most parents even know how to check the devices using their home wifi.

              • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 days ago

                It’s not hard, and parents can easily change the WiFi password if they don’t know how to check the leases if they suspect something is up.

                I’m very much in the camp of no filters and building a relationship on trust, but occasionally verifying if that trust is misplaced.

                • raynethackery@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  I’m a GenX that works with IT. I can tell you that none of my coworkers that are the same generation would know how to do any of that.

                  I agree that parents should be more involved with their children, but when do we hold a company responsible for the harm it causes?

    • wellheh@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 days ago

      I wish I could ban old people from it as well because when their mental processing ability declines, so does their ability to detect bullshit news from bots

    • misteloct@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      They shouldn’t, but also PSA to any parents but modern parenting advice typically is to let your kids use social media if they choose, and guide them through the social and emotional difficulties with good communication. Don’t blanket ban it because they’ll just use it anyways without guidance, and be unprepared the moment they turn 18.

      It’s a case of: 99.9% of kids are smoking cigarettes so yours will too. Better to show them how to use a weekly cigar without inhaling, than just ban it which won’t work.

      • vegetvs@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        That’s a fallacy. Teenagers are the victims here. So I’m obviously blaming greedy corporations, lack of good parenting and proper regulation from authorities.

      • phar@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        4 days ago

        So teens should be allowed to go anywhere adults make it dangerous because it’s the adults’ faults? I hope you don’t have kids.

    • TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      I hearby petition an amendment for an expansion of the child protective laws to widen the definition of abuse, neglect, and reckless abandonment of children to include:

      “letting children browse without ad blockers”

      • chellomere@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        32
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        Translation of article from behind paywall:

        "The Facebook CEO’s enormous yacht has been anchored in a Norwegian fjord near the Swedish border.

        Now DN can reveal that several Sami villages have been offered compensation for not saying no to a “prominent person” going on a luxury helicopter skiing trip in the mountains.

        • They wanted to buy our silence, says a representative of a Sami village.

        At least three villages were contacted in March by a company that arranges helicopter skiing trips. The Sami villages have been offered compensation, ahead of a very secret group of tourists arriving to ski in the Swedish mountains in April. A Norwegian village team has also received a similar offer.

        • We understood that it was something special. The organizers were very keen for us to say yes, even though this is before the calving season when the ewes are pregnant and all the reindeer are very fragile after a tough winter, says a representative of a Sami village.

        Helicopter skiing in untouched lands, known as heliskiing, has been criticized by reindeer owners for destroying nature and disturbing the reindeer – and the issue has been raised by the Norrbotten County Administrative Board to the government.

        According to sources from several Sami villages, the plans for this particular April visit were somewhat out of the ordinary.

        The Sami villages, which use helicopters in their reindeer husbandry, were offered six hours of helicopter use by the organizer – which corresponds to around 50,000 kronor.

        On April 1, one of the largest private luxury yachts in existence arrived in Bodö, Norway – something that caused a stir in the Norwegian media.

        It is owned by Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of the Facebook company Meta, who is one of the richest people in the world. He is one of the billionaires who has tried to approach US President Donald Trump by, among other things, donating money.

        Zuckerberg’s luxury yacht is called Launchpad, and he bought it last year for $330 million. The boat is almost 120 meters long. There is room on board for 26 guests and 42 crew members.

        “Among the distinctive features are a private outdoor owner’s deck with a jacuzzi, two certified helipads, a swimming pool with a moving floor and a spacious beach club,” the manufacturer writes on its website.

        Zuckerberg’s smaller “supply ship” Wingman, which was included in the purchase of Launchpad, was also seen in Bodö. Wingman is also equipped with a helipad and helicopter.

        Both ships then headed north and last week they arrived in a small coastal village, Drag, in northern Norway, where, according to information to DN, a house has been rented in order to, among other things, be able to cook for the guests from the boat.

        • There were several helicopters on site and a hell of a lot of people. A big operation, says a source to DN.

        It is from there that the controversial extreme sports event is said to have taken place. Helicopters are said to have traveled across the border to Sweden to drop off guests in the Swedish mountains for skiing on the pristine top snow. According to several sources to DN, the yachts’ own helicopters were used. In addition, at least one more from a local entrepreneur.

        • We see them flying from here every day, a source in the Norwegian Drag told DN this weekend.

        A businessman in the area who was asked early on to contribute to the event, tells DN that the plan was for the group to come with a large yacht with its own helicopters and that they hired a Swiss organizer as an intermediary:

        • It was the crème de la crème, no ordinary millionaires. They wanted a three-star chef up in the mountains and they would fly their own helicopters and bring their own guides. It felt so unnecessary. It didn’t make sense. We said no.

        DN has not been able to confirm that Mark Zuckerberg himself was on board any of the ships.

        A representative for a company that accepted said to DN before the visit:

        – We have a duty of confidentiality when it comes to the customer. But honestly, I don’t know who is going to ski. That it is some prominent person possibly, if they can afford to pay for all that. But I have no idea who or what they are. We sell a flight service. We fly a helicopter – it is a logistical solution for this event.

        There has been reluctance from Sami villages that you have been in contact with. What do you say about that?

        – The Sami villages are very important customers for us too and we have constant contact with them. It is an ongoing dialogue that takes place continuously all the time.

        The company does not want to comment on the fact that the event takes place in connection with the calving period.

        One of the villages that has been offered compensation is Unna tjerusj Sami village. They have – like the other respondents that DN has spoken to – declined the compensation. Chairwoman Helena Omma:

        – My position is no. There is a word in Sami called joavdelaš. It means something like “useless”, things that you do completely unnecessarily. And heliskiing is the definition of joavdelaš, there is no benefit in this, she says.

        – It is harmful to the climate, it disturbs reindeer as well as wildlife and nature in the area and I am completely against using nature as a playhouse. Nature has its own value and its own rights. In this case, it is not even the public’s interest in outdoor recreation that is being taken into account – only the richest people have the opportunity to do something like this.

        How do you feel about the fact that the arrangement seems to have been carried out despite you and the other Sami villages having said no?

        – Then they have asked so that – if we are lucky and we say yes – they can say that they are doing it in cooperation with the Sami villages. So it is only worth something if we are positive, otherwise they ignore what we say.

        Both Launchpad and Wingman have crossed the Atlantic to get to the Norwegian ports, with very large climate emissions as a result. When the lifestyle website Luxury Launches in December calculated the emissions of the two ships during the 10 months that Zuckerberg had owned them until then, they concluded that the emissions amounted to over three million liters, equivalent to 52,000 full tanks in a normal-sized car.

        – My advice is to respect the sensitive environment you have the privilege of visiting and understand that you have arrived at the planet’s “ground zero” when it comes to climate change. The temperature is increasing two to three times faster in the Arctic Circle, which has caused sharp shifts in snow and ice conditions that are blocking reindeer pastures, changing vegetation and causing accelerated melting of all glaciers, Johan Rockström tells DN.

        A reindeer herder who wishes to remain anonymous tells DN that it feels ironic that a group of people using private jets, luxury yachts and helicopters are traveling around the world to find the last snow-covered mountains.

        – Climate change is clearly visible – it is an extremely snow-poor year and this may lead to having to move the reindeer to the northwest earlier than usual.

        After the adventure in the Swedish mountains, Zuckerberg’s luxury yachts continue towards Svalbard according to the port’s arrival lists.

        On Monday, he was in court in Washington DC to defend Meta’s purchase of Instagram and Whatsapp, which according to the US Competition and Consumer Protection Authority has created a monopoly.

        DN has sought Mark Zuckerberg through Meta’s press service.

        Criticism of heliskiing for several reasons

        At the end of March, Professor Johan Rockström, among others, called for a ban on heliskiing in an opinion article in Expressen, due to high emissions, destruction of sensitive nature and the fact that the activity itself is dangerous.

        In March, two men died in an avalanche accident in Abisko during a heliskiing excursion. The organizer is now suspected of causing death to another person, among other things.

        Many Sami villages elsewhere are experiencing major problems with heliskiing on their land.

        In the areas currently in question, several people DN spoke to say that heliskiing must be said no – regardless of whether there are reindeer in the area at the time or not. The risk, they say, of allowing one operator in is that more will gradually join, who will later run tours where reindeer are present."

          • MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            Well, i’m Swiss and here it’s something most people do once or twice per season. But yeah, plebs from Zucks view: anything than the richest or most powerful people.