social

Meta has agreed to a landmark $18bn settlement in a major US federal case accusing it of endangering children, the terms of which will force the social media giant to introduce new safety features to platforms including Instagram and Facebook.

The social media giant has faced an avalanche of legal cases against it this year, mostly arguing that it deliberately designed its platforms to be addictive and that they have harmed children. It has already lost two of these and been forced to pay damages.

Under the agreement, child users under the age of 18 will see a slew of changes to their Facebook and Instagram accounts, ranging from night curfews to two-hour usage limits, which Meta must implement as part of the settlement reached on Wednesday with 48 US states.

The agreement could have a global ripple effect as several countries around the world are already taking regulatory action against Meta and other social media companies over their platforms.

So, what is in the settlement Meta has reached in the United States, and how will Instagram and Facebook change for users?

What was the lawsuit about?

Twenty-nine US states sued Meta, accusing it of designing its platforms in ways that “encourage addictive behaviour, fail to verify users’ ages, encourage adolescents to bypass parental controls, and inadequately safeguard against harmful content and/or intentionally amplify harmful and exploitative content”, according to filings at the Court of Appeal in California.

The first four of the states that originally filed their federal lawsuit against Meta in 2023 – California, Kentucky, Colorado and New Jersey – began their cases in a California federal trial last week.

The attorneys general bringing the case also asked the court to order that changes be made to Meta’s platforms to protect young social media users. In particular, they demanded that Meta introduce a process of parental verification for teenage users; change its “dopamine-manipulating” algorithms; remove image filters for users’ personal images; forbid the creation of multiple accounts; and end “disappearing” messages and posts.

The lawsuit also alleged Meta had violated the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act by collecting, ⁠retaining and using personal data from children under 13 without proper parental consent.

In February this year, Meta lost a multimillion-dollar case brought on similar grounds by a young woman referred to as KGM in Los Angeles, over platform features linked to addiction in younger users.

In March, a US jury ordered Meta to pay $375m for endangering children in a case brought by the state of New Mexico.

Last month, a judge in New Mexico also ordered Facebook and Instagram owner Meta to pay a further $567m in a second phase of the trial.

Meta denied wrongdoing but agreed to settle after evidence was heard that Meta knew its products harmed children’s mental health. The total payout – to be paid over 10 years – is a fraction of Meta’s 2025 revenue of $201bn.

The company, which was originally founded as Facebook in 2004 by Mark Zuckerberg, agreed to make maximum payments totalling $16.7bn to 47 US states as well as Washington, DC; Puerto Rico; American Samoa; and the Northern Mariana Islands.

Among those, California could receive a $2.2bn payout, while New York could receive $1.1bn. Texas reached a separate settlement worth more than $1bn. Some states will deposit funds they receive in general accounts, while others will earmark portions to address children’s mental health services.

The settlement does not require Meta to discontinue personalised recommendations or targeted advertising.

It also does not address some content researchers found particularly problematic, including posts that made Instagram users uncomfortable with their body image.

“Ensuring teens have a safe and productive experience on our platforms is an absolute imperative for Meta,” Meta said in a blog post. “We want to get this right for parents and teens.”

What changes will be seen on Instagram and Facebook?

Under the agreement, children under 18 using Meta platforms will be restricted to two hours’ use per day, with a night curfew in place from midnight to 6am. Meta will limit “social comparison” features by hiding likes and reactions to children’s accounts, and will ban “cosmetic procedure filters” that alter the appearance of a user’s image, as a default setting. These settings will only be able to be overruled by parental consent.

The company also agreed to disable the majority of push notifications from the platforms during school hours – 8am to 3pm – for teenage users.

It will also facilitate much closer parental supervision of social media accounts by giving designated adults the ability to more extensively monitor and change settings on a social media account.

Parents and guardians will be able to receive information about time spent on platform apps, and usernames of social connections and accounts sending messages to children.

Supervising parents will also receive daily notifications from Meta any time the teen account messages an adult account for the first time, as well as a link to the adult’s account. Parental accounts will also be notified any time the teen account searches for keywords related to suicide, self-harm or eating disorders.

Meta also agreed to improve the technology used to check children’s ages, using its own as well as third-party tools, with regular outside audits on how well this monitoring is working. This measure is particularly notable because Australia banned under-16s from using social media platforms in December last year. However, the Australian internet watchdog, eSafety, found in August this year that more than eight in 10 young Australian teens and preteens continue to use them – largely because age-check procedures are ineffective.

So far, Meta has only agreed to pay 70 percent of the settlement, or roughly $12.7bn, over the next 10 years. It will only pay the remaining amount, about $5bn, if its rivals – including Snapchat, TikTok and Alphabet-owned YouTube – adopt similar measures and agree to pay the same. It also said it would reduce time restrictions to one hour per day if other platforms do the same.

These changes would be phased over time. Once the court approves the settlement, non-personalised feeds would be introduced within four months; broader compliance measures within six months; and major age-assurance requirements within one year.

While these changes will apply to users in the US, it is unclear if Meta plans to introduce them worldwide. However, Meta is already under rising regulatory pressure in European Union countries and those elsewhere to implement similar changes.

How much difference will these changes make?

Critics and child safety advocates have acknowledged that this settlement has forced landmark changes by Meta, the world’s biggest social media company, which owns Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp and Messenger, each of which has more than two to three billion monthly active users.

However, critics say the central plank of Meta’s latest settlement deal is the move to restrict teens to two hours per day on platforms, rather than fundamentally changing their addictive algorithms.

Sacha Haworth, executive director of The Tech Oversight Project, which campaigns for youth safety online, said the deal is a “historic settlement that will have a lasting impact, but we cannot truly protect all children and teens until these protections are required on every platform and are permanent – that’s something only Congress can do”.

Ella Bradshaw, policy officer for child safety online at the NSPCC, a UK children’s charity, welcomed moves to rein in “addictive” design features like personalised algorithms and likes. “These are the things that we know keep children hooked and feeling out of control of their screen time, so action here is necessary and welcome. However, important gaps remain,” she told Al Jazeera.  

Bradshaw described the settlement as taking “piecemeal action” on tackling risky features and addictive design choices which drive harm of children.

“This means features like disappearing messages, infinite scroll, the ability to gift and livestreaming remain unaddressed. Similarly, little has been announced on how Meta’s AI chatbots will be made safer – better guardrails are needed, particularly when children raise safeguarding concerns.”

Bradshaw also called for stronger protections for younger children as well as protections that “don’t suddenly drop away the moment a teenager turns 18.”   

Furthermore, she said: “Not all children have families they can rely on to oversee their online worlds and help them to stay safe. We know that the issue of patchy online protections extends across the online world.

“This settlement must spur governments and regulators to go further faster; taking stronger action across the online ecosystem including private messaging, AI tools and online gaming. Without that wider shift, children will continue to face avoidable harm.”

What action are other countries taking against Meta?

While action against social media giants in the US is mostly taking the form of lawsuits, elsewhere it is regulators who are leading the charge.

In the European Union, regulators are pursuing several legal and regulatory cases against Meta, covering antitrust rules for artificial intelligence (AI) on WhatsApp, as well as child safety protections and addictive platform features under the Digital Services Act (DSA).

The EU specifically accused the group of designing Facebook and Instagram to be “addictive”, adding that Meta has failed to adequately assess the danger its products pose to users’ physical and mental health.

On Thursday, a European Commission spokesperson said it is waiting on Meta to present changes to limit the addictive designs of its social networks.

“We have been very clear … Meta knows what we are expecting from them. … the ball is in Meta’s court,” Thomas Regnier said. “Now it is for the company to offer these commitments in the European Union to protect our kids here, too.”

In June, the UK government also announced a sweeping ban on social media for those below 16 to come into force next year, following a global trend after Australia pioneered it. The UK is also considering overnight curfews and ways to prevent infinite scrolling for those under 18.

In Brazil, a prominent consumer rights organisation, the Collective Defence Institute, filed twin lawsuits for three billion reais ($525m) in damages against the Brazilian subsidiaries of Meta, TikTok and Kwai in October 2024.

Those lawsuits also accuse the groups of failing to implement safeguards against addiction and use by children and adolescents. Since March this year, platforms have been required to link the accounts of children below 16 to legal guardians under Brazil’s Digital Statute for Children and Adolescents.

South Korea’s media regulator also reacted on Thursday to Meta’s settlement, calling for better protections for young users to be ideally applied worldwide, rather than just in specific markets.

Aug. 26 (UPI) — Meta agreed to pay up to $18 billion to 48 states, the District of Columbia and three U.S. territories on Wednesday, in settlements resolving lawsuits over the mental health risks its social media platforms pose to children as well as spearate privacy claims.

Court filings state that the settlements, pending judicial approval, include payments of $16.68 billion to 51 U.S. jurisdictions, more than $1 billion to Texas and another $459 million to 46 states, Puerto Rico and Northern Mariana Islands to resolve privacy claims tied to the 2018 Cambridge Analytica data scandal.

The filings also state that Meta must implement safeguards on its platform for minors, including limits on daily use, blocking access at night, more parental tools, stricter age-assurance standards, the hiding of likes on posts and banning cosmetic-procedure filters, among other measures.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced that his state may receive between $1.5 billion and $2.1 billion in the settlement.

“Today, we have secured a settlement with Meta that will make social media less dangerous for our kids and make a world of difference for children and their families,” Bonta said in a statement. “Meta has agreed to make massive transformations that will reduce the risk of harm from its platforms — and will do it within months.”

Meta said that 70% of the funds will be distributed over a 10-year period, with the remaining 30% to be released only after Alphabet-owned YouTube and ByteDance’s TikTok implement a one-hour dayily limit, night mode and age-assurance measures as well as each pay a matching $5.3 billion.

The Mark Zuckerberg-led Meta said the structure was designed to enforce an industry-wide adoption of the measures it has agreed to and ensure teens receive the same level of protection across major social media platforms.

“Because teens move fluidly across dozens of apps, we need an industry-wide solution. We therefore call on our industry peers, TikTok and YouTube, to implement this new framework, right away,” C.J. Mahoney, chief legal officer at Meta, said in a statement.

As part of the settlement, all parties, including Meta, waive all rights to appeal the final judgment.

“The focus of this case was to protect our kids: stopping notifications and alerts at night and when they are in school, encouraging them to take breaks from social media, protecting them against harmful features,” Phil Weiser, Colorado attorney general, said in a statement.

The cases brought by U.S. states are among several across the globe investigating social media companies over the harms they pose to children. Elsewhere, countries, such as Australia, have implemented age restrictions and called for the end to addictive features that encourage compulsive use, such as endless scrolling.

Meta still faces additional lawsuits in the United States still. Several school districts and individuals have filed lawsuits against Meta and other social media platforms for contributing to mental health problems among children.

Meta settles $16.68bn lawsuit over child addiction claims, agreeing to major changes in Facebook and Instagram features.

Meta Platforms has agreed to settle a lawsuit that accused the company of designing Facebook and Instagram in a way that addicted children, misled consumers about safety, and collected personal data of children on the platform.

On Wednesday, the social media giant agreed to pay a maximum of $16.68bn as part of a settlement to resolve claims brought in the United States case, championed by a coalition of 29 US states. The case, which started on August 18, was expected to last six weeks.

Meta, based in Silicon Valley in California, has also agreed to make changes to Facebook and Instagram nationwide as part of the settlement. Among these are daily usage limits of two hours for those under the age of 18, which can only be removed by a parent, and nighttime blocks.

The California State Attorney General’s Office said that the Mark Zuckerberg-led company would also identify and remove children under the age of 13 from the platform.

Meta denied any wrongdoing as part of the settlement, which still needs court approval. It had faced up to $1.4 trillion in fines in the case, but the coalition had been seeking a penalty closer to $200bn.

The settlement comes after a loss in a comparable landmark case in New Mexico, where a jury ordered Meta to pay $375m in March and another $567m in August.

Meta’s stock tumbled in early trading on Wall Street, down 0.1 percent since the market opened.

Ministers have announced where more than 70,000 social and affordable homes will be built in England over the next 10 years as part of an initial allocation of almost £10bn, in a bid to address the housing crisis.

Funding has been granted to Greater Manchester, the West Midlands, West Yorkshire, South Yorkshire, North East England, and Liverpool. An additional £6bn was previously announced for London.

It is the first part of a wider plan to build 300,000 social and affordable homes across the nation, under the government’s £39bn social housebuilding programme.

Earlier this year, before he became prime minister, Andy Burnham had called for the entire 10-year £39bn affordable housing budget for England to be spent on homes for social rent – which means the cost of the unit is about half that of market rents, and there are strict criteria for who can apply for it.

“I would actually devote all of it to social housing,” Burnham told The Social Housing Podcast in May.

But of the new homes announced on Monday, 60% would be for social rent.

Housing Minister Matthew Pennycook told BBC Breakfast he did not accept Burnham had failed to meet his previous commitment, saying the government had taken a “pragmatic approach” and wants to “get money out the door”.

He said the next tranche of funding would be more focused on council houses – which are usually also classed as homes for social rent.

It is understood ministers decided against giving councils more of the funding announced in the first tranche because they did not believe councils would be in a position to build the required number of social homes.

SHE’S been an integral part of the Kardashian family’s success for the last decade. 

But recently it seems things between businesswoman and Dragon’s Den star Emma Grede and the KarJenners – especially Khloe, 42 – have cooled off dramatically. 

Emma, 43, and KoKo partnered to launch denim brand Good American back in October 2016, which made a staggering $1million in its first day.

But fast forward ten years, and while Khloe remains an owner of the fashion line today, she’s since expressed she no longer feels the need to be as involved.

“Good American is doing so well, and Good American is strong enough and stable enough to sustain on its own,” she explained during a recent episode of her podcast Khloe in Wonderland.

With Khloe and Emma now spending less time working together their friendship has essentially dissolved, The Sun understands.

RACING KAR

Kim Kardashian shares intimate new pics with Lewis Hamilton as fans gush

DASHING THEIR HOPES

New Kardashian reality show ‘flops’ before even starts

A well-placed insider tells us: “Over time, Khloe just wasn’t as involved – she started cancelling events and not promoting the brand.

“She has a lot on in her personal life, as fans know, but Emma is a businesswoman first and foremost and that just didn’t wash with her. 

“Khloe has so much going on and it just wasn’t a priority in her life. In theory, Khloe is still the founder of Good American but it’s Emma who does the hard work behind the scenes. I don’t think Khloe & Emma are on speaking terms now.”

Earlier this year, Khloe dropped the biggest hint yet she was ‘consciously uncoupling’ from her friendship with Emma when she unfollowed her on Instagram. 

Our source adds: “They are both smart women who realised it was time to part ways professionally, and they had to navigate it carefully so the brand wasn’t damaged as they are both heavily involved.”

After setting up Good American with Khloe, Emma later teamed up with Kim, 45, to work on her shapewear line SKIMS which debuted in 2019. 

And she also joined forces with Kylie Jenner, 29, in 2023 to launch her fashion brand KHY.

But in recent years Emma’s own star has been on the rise. She joined Dragon’s Den in 2024 and she’s been a recurring guest investor on the American version Shark Tank since 2021. 

She launched her podcast Aspire in 2025 and earlier this year released her book Start With Yourself: A New Vision for Work & Life. 

The Sun understands that, while she was initially happy to fade into the background on projects with the Kardashians, Emma is keen for her hard work to be seen these days. 

“As her profile has grown over the last few years, Emma wants her own hard work recognised,” an insider said. “Good American was Emma’s brain child, but it was Khloe’s investment and her profile that made it happen.

“The fall out with Khloe didn’t affect Emma’s relationship with Kim or the rest of the family, they’ve compartmentalised that off, but it’s very much a business-only relationship. 

“Emma is still very involved with Skims, and despite Kim being a mum of four, she’s still extremely hands on and promotes the brand all the time.”

Fans were left convinced that Emma was taking a swipe at Khloe during an interview with Cardi B on her podcast earlier this year. 

Rapper Cardi, 33, said: “Oh my God, please y’all – if you ever want to build something, please choose good partners.

“Not everybody with money [is a] good partner. I’m telling you.”

Sparking speculation that she was taking aim at Khloe, Emma was quick to quip loudly: “Oh yeah, say that again…”

Our source added: “Going their separate ways professionally has not been easy and it has affected Emma and Khloe’s friendship, because it’s hard to move past ending a working partnership and there are grievances on both sides.”

The Sun has reached out to representatives for Khloe and Emma for comment. 

Russian ballistic missile attacks have begun to cause record civilian deaths in Ukrainian cities without any Patriot interceptors to stop them, but Ukraine’s long-range strikes have destroyed Russian fuel supplies.

With the Russian economy struggling, a top expert warned that social unrest could unfold in a matter of time – and consequently lost his job.

On Tuesday, Russian missiles killed at least 10 people in Pechenihy, a town 40km (25 miles) east of Ukraine’s northern city of Kharkiv. On Thursday, they killed 15 people in Kyiv, three in the western city of Zhytomyr and injured 40 at a border crossing between Odesa and Moldova.

Russia said it was targeting weapons manufacturing sites in Kyiv, but Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Russian forces struck 30 residential buildings, a school and a children’s hospital.

The United Nations said Russia killed a record 437 people in July and injured 2,610, surpassing its previous record in June by 30 percent.

Civilian casualties have continued in August, because Ukraine has run out of Patriot interceptors and has been unable to stop incoming ballistic missile attacks since the beginning of the month.

As Zelenskyy pointed out, Ukraine’s interception rate of cruise missiles and drones is still in the 90-percent range. But Russia is doubling down on the use of ballistic missiles and has brought in an additional 50 North Korean weapons, according to Ukrainian military intelligence.

Ukraine strikes back

Since June 25, Ukraine has launched a campaign of mid-range strikes to disrupt Russian logistics and has harassed fuel and ammunition supplies so effectively that it has made 233sq km (90 square miles) of territorial gains this year.

By August 16, Ukraine’s Unmanned Systems Forces announced it had put 228 supply ships out of action in the Black Sea and Sea of Azov, as well as destroying 243 power stations, electricity substations and gas distribution nodes in Crimea.

They have also been striking relay antennas used to guide Russian drones and radar stations that detect Ukrainian counterstrikes. On August 20, Ukraine struck drone launch sites in Donetsk City and Primorsko-Akhtarsk on the Sea of Azov, as well as a fuel terminal in the Kerch Strait used to supply Crimea.

Ukraine’s long-range strikes have served a different purpose – to undermine the Russian economy’s ability to fund its war.

On August 15, Ukraine managed to fly two of its Flamingo cruise missiles into the Progress Rocket and Space Centre, 800km (500 miles) east of Moscow, despite Russia’s use of four A-50 early warning aircraft and its reported downing of 822 Ukrainian drones that day.

Ukraine said it hit an engine assembly workshop for Soyuz rockets, causing a fire covering half a hectare.

Russia is using Soyuz to launch satellites for its Rassvet constellation to replace dependence on the US Starlink system, after Ukraine managed to cut Russian access to Starlink on February 1 . Russia needs satellites to increase the speed and precision of its counter-battery fire on Ukrainian positions. Its loss of that capacity has been partly responsible for Ukrainian gains this year.

“One Soyuz-2.1b launch vehicle can put 20 satellites into orbit,” said Ukrainian electronics expert Serhiy Beskrestnov. “To create a basic satellite constellation in orbit, Russia needs to carry out 12-15 launches.”

The following day, Ukraine set ablaze a 25-hectare warehouse belonging to the Wildberries online retail chain, Russia’s equivalent of Amazon, and said it had destroyed seven out of Wildberries’ ten largest logistical hubs.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on July 28 that the Kremlin was monitoring the damage to Wildberries.

Russian President Vladimir Putin implied on Thursday that he might provide government funds for Wildberries to rebuild, saying “logistics and warehousing capacity certainly needs to be restored, including with government support”.

Ukraine has also succeeded in destroying Russian oil refineries and starving its economy of petrol

It has recently struck the Ust-Luga refinery, the Taneco refinery in Tatarstan and the Perm refinery, 1,500km (930 miles) from its borders.

Similar strikes this year have so reduced petrol supply in Russia. The Izvestia newspaper reported that only 28 percent of petrol stations across the country could supply fuel this week, citing mobile app GdeBENZ, which monitors real-time fuel availability.

Izvestia said only five petrol stations in Moscow were selling high-octane AI-98 fuel. Russians posted video of Rosgvardia police units sitting outside petrol stations to avert some of the fights involving motorists in recent months.

Deputy Prime Minister, Alexander Novak, said lower-grade fuel was being supplied to ease market tensions, and confirmed that Russia is now importing refined fuel for the domestic market.

“We expect a number of oil refineries to complete maintenance work soon and the situation to improve significantly,” Novak told Vesti journalist Pavel Zarubin, but that may be wishful thinking. Ukraine has struck Russia’s largest refineries not once but repeatedly. On Wednesday [August 19 ], it struck a refining unit at Ufa, which was undergoing repairs from a previous strike. It is 1,300km (810 miles) from Ukraine.

Ukraine also struck significant military targets during the week, including the Kamenyy Kombinat plant in Rostov, which makes solid rocket fuel for missiles, and the Savasleika airfield, from where MiG fighters armed with Kh-47M2 ballistic missiles take -off.

Russian economy in trouble

Some Russian economists have begun to warn of impending social and political upheaval as a result of the slowing economy.

Andrey Klepach, chief economist at Vnesheconombank, a state bank that finances the Kremlin’s national projects, warned on August 18 that, “Losses from Ukrainian military strikes … are already becoming a significant macroeconomic barrier to Russian economic growth.

“I believe Russia won’t collapse, but I’m almost certain we’ll reach a social crisis.”

He was removed from his post after making the comments during a discussion at the Moscow Exchange’s Nikitsky Club.

Russians are withdrawing savings in increasing amounts, reported The Washington Post. While businesses are increasing “voluntary” donations to the state defence budget, in addition to having to pay for their own air defences, putting further strain on the economy.

At a meeting of the Council for Strategic Development and National Projects this week, Putin acknowledged that Ukraine’s strikes are “certainly” causing damage, adding that “overall economic performance is modest but positive”.

That damage took financial form in the $1.18bn Putin newly released to aid regional budgets, in addition to previous financial assistance. Some $52m of that was destined for Crimea.

Ukraine’s defence ministry estimated that every dollar spent on drone strikes caused five times that amount in costs to the Russian economy.

Social media giant Meta is facing a landmark trial that could impact its future.

Opening statements began on Tuesday in a US federal court case brought by 29 state attorneys general, who have accused Facebook and Instagram’s parent company of designing platforms to encourage infinite scrolling and keep their youngest users hooked, despite allegedly knowing they could fuel addictive behaviour. The company is also accused of collecting data on minors.

The case is expected to last as long as six weeks. If the attorneys general get their way, the Silicon Valley-based tech company might have to make structural changes to its platform and pay as much as $1.4 trillion in fines.

While Meta denies the allegations, the potential consequences of this case could be significant for the company, which is already facing low employee morale, waves of layoffs and a series of lagging investments.

Significant financial impact

The potential exposure to Meta is significant. State penalties could reach as high as $1.4 trillion, Meta has said, although that is unlikely, as the coalition of states said it is seeking $200bn in damages.

To put that in context, the amount is roughly the equivalent of Meta’s revenue last year. In 2025, the tech giant generated nearly $201bn in revenue, and it had $83.2bn in operating income.

The $200bn ask is significantly higher than any penalty the company has had to face so far. In March, a jury in a separate New Mexico lawsuit ordered Meta to pay $375m in civil penalties, and another $567m was ordered by a judge earlier this month.

At the time of the March penalty, financial services firm Morningstar said it was not overly concerned about the impact of the looming court cases on Meta’s valuation, even if governments around the world use these cases as a reason to push for structural changes to the business.

“We think that any algorithmic changes imposed on the firm via legislation are also a manageable risk, given the firm’s monetizable user base, which is overwhelmingly adult, thereby insulating the firm against such legislation,” a Morningstar analyst note said.

While no one can predict which way the coalition case will go, Meta’s problems extend to concerns about significant financial exposure in some of its investments and business units.

For instance, Reality Labs, the division responsible for Meta’s virtual and augmented reality tools and software like the metaverse, has lost $70bn since 2020.

Meta has also ramped up spending to build out AI infrastructure as growing concerns about an AI bubble loom over the sector.

Cash flow for the business fell significantly, from $12bn in the first quarter to $784m in the second quarter, although it did not go into negative territory as some analysts had expected.

“I think it’s [Meta] in an unenviable spot, because it’s facing pressure from multiple fronts,” Aleksandar Tomic, associate dean for strategy, innovation, and technology at Boston College, told Al Jazeera.

“These verdicts are going to put pressure on their advertising business. The AI development seems to have stalled, and the virtual reality thing seems to be dead on arrival, at least for now. So the only bright spot is that they might be able to get into the AI infrastructure game, but that is no guarantee.”

Meta itself is worried about the financial strain. “There can be no assurances that a favorable final outcome will be obtained in all our cases, and defending any lawsuit is costly and can impose a significant burden on management and employees,” the company said in a January Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filing.

Can the lawsuit impact its core product?

While financial penalties might be a strain, a legal requirement to fundamentally alter the machinery that makes Instagram and Facebook so valuable to advertisers would be much harder for Meta to absorb.

The lawsuit calls for changes to its business model, including eliminating the infinite scroll that allows users to continually look at new posts. Meta’s advertising business is dependent on impressions, or the number of times a content appears on a user’s screen. The longer someone is on the app, the more impressions they can see.

“Our financial performance has been and will continue to be significantly determined by our success in adding, retaining, and engaging active users of our products that deliver ad impressions, particularly for Facebook and Instagram,” the company said in an SEC filing.

“User growth and engagement are also impacted by a number of other factors, including competitive products and services, such as TikTok, that have reduced some users’ engagement with our products and services,” the filing added.

In 2025, Meta reported 12 percent more advertisement impressions than in 2024, while the average price per advertisement jumped by 9 percent.

The plaintiff states want the company to make other changes, including getting rid of algorithms and AI models made from data compiled from minors. The states are also asking the court to compel the company to promote the wellbeing of its users and set time restrictions for its youngest consumers.

Meta has introduced features that have reminded teens of their time use on their platforms. In January 2023, it gave teens ways to manage the kinds of advertisements they could see on Instagram and Facebook. In June 2023, it introduced a feature to notify teen users that they have spent more than 20 minutes on the platform and to set daily time limits.

“We stand by our record of creating strong protections for teens, and look forward to making our case in court,” Stephanie Otway, a Meta spokesperson, told Al Jazeera.

But the lawsuit says that is not enough, alleging that teens could easily dismiss the notification and continue scrolling.

How will this impact future lawsuits?

Meta is currently facing lawsuits from more than 100,000 different parties, according to its SEC filings, including individuals, cities, states, and school districts around the US.

“These first few cases going out are really going to set the standard,” Tre Lovell, a Los Angeles-based media law and entertainment lawyer, told Al Jazeera.

Lovell predicted that, ultimately, there will be a combined settlement.

“We’re going to get close to some type of global settlement, a global resolution. I think, ultimately, that’s where this is going to end.”

Snap, TikTok, and Google’s YouTube have also faced litigation amid allegations that their products are built to encourage compulsive use by young people, Tomic told Al Jazeera. The claims could open the floodgates to the type of litigation that challenged the tobacco industry in the late 1990s, he said.

“This is the tobacco litigation of the information age. They [the plaintiffs in the Meta lawsuit] have identified this addiction component of social networks. Now that there is a judgement against Meta, I would be shocked if we don’t see everybody else getting sued, and once they get sued, it will be pretty much the same,” Tomic said.

In 1998, 46 states settled lawsuits with major cigarette makers over health costs and forced the companies to impose restrictions on advertising, especially targeting younger audiences.

Opening statements in a landmark US case brought by a bipartisan coalition of 29 states against Meta – the parent company of Facebook and Instagram – began on Tuesday, with Colorado, California, New Jersey and Kentucky arguing that the company’s popular social media apps were designed in ways that harmed the mental health of young users.

The trial, which is expected to last several weeks, began in a US federal court in California before District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. While there is an eight-person jury, the group is serving in an advisory role as Judge Rogers will ultimately decide the case.

Megan O’Neill, a deputy California attorney general, in her opening statement said that the company designed its products to “hook the users, hold them for as long as they can, harvest their data, and then hide the truth from the public”.

She added that it worked “especially well for kids”.

The lawsuit, which was first filed in 2023, alleges that Meta made decisions to design its apps to hook users and facilitate excessive use among the platforms’ youngest users. The coalition also alleges that the company collected data on children under the age of 13 in violation of federal law.

“Meta needed kids, and it needed to reassure the people who cared about those kids that the kids are safe,” O’Neill said.

‘Limited claims’

Meta has long pushed back on allegations against the Silicon Valley social media behemoth.

In a statement before the trial, a Meta spokesperson said the states’ claims are unsubstantiated, and the company stands by its record of creating strong protections for teenagers, including launching Instagram Teen Accounts in 2024, which limit who can contact underage users, as well as a feature that allows parents to set time limits on usage.

“The State AGs may call this a landmark case, but their limited claims are unsubstantiated and their financial demands are vastly disproportionate,” Stephanie Otway, a Meta spokesperson, told Al Jazeera in a statement.

“The AGs offer no proof anyone in their states was misled, claim benign features like having an additional Instagram account somehow harmed their residents, and attempt to penalize Meta for industry-wide challenges like age verification. Rather than sticking to the facts or the law, the states have instead decided to chase an outlandish payout.”

The potential impact on Meta’s bottom line is existential. The company could face fines as high as $1.4 trillion, which is just shy of its $1.5 trillion market cap. However, the coalition is seeking fines of roughly $200bn.

Meta has already been ordered to pay $942m in fines in a separate New Mexico lawsuit – $375m in civil penalties in a March jury verdict and $567m ordered by a judge earlier this month.

Meta has acknowledged that the lawsuits it faces, including those related to youth social media addiction, could lead to “substantial monetary damages or fines” in a Securities and Exchange Commission filing in January.

A long time coming

Meta, along with other social media giants, has faced a growing slate of cases across the United States, including from cities, states, school districts and even individuals.

The coalition of states is asking Meta to make changes to its platforms, including introducing new age restrictions and cutting the infinite scroll.

The case’s impetus came from a US Senate committee hearing in 2021, when whistleblower Frances Haugen, a former data scientist at Facebook, claimed that the company knowingly pushed products that could impact the health of young users as the Mark Zuckerberg-led company pursued higher profits.

Meta has repeatedly tried to end the coalition lawsuit, including in 2024 and as recently as June, when it sought summary judgement – a decision that a court might make without going to trial – which would have ended the lawsuit.

The case is impacting the company’s stock. On Wall Street, the social media giant is down more than 3 percent in midday trading.

CRUZ Beckham left fans blindsided as he shared a throwback photo with his two brothers Romeo and Brooklyn.

In what at first appeared to be a regular post of recent snaps, Cruz included a photo of when he and his brothers were children, posing together while on holiday.

The photo of happier times was simply captured “Brothers” with a blue heart emoji.

This surprised his followers, given Brooklyn is currently estranged from the rest of the Beckhams amid their very public fall-out.

Brooklyn has not been pictured with the rest of the family since then – but Cruz’s inclusion of the childhood throwback set tongues wagging in the Instagram comments.

“Brothers forever Cruz!” one person penned, followed by another who wrote: “Precious memories forever!”

ICE GIRL

David and Victoria Beckham enjoy quality time with Harper, 15, & grab ice cream

block-lyn

Brooklyn and Nicola in new feud with comic as they are accused of ‘blocking her’

Elsewhere, Cruz’s sister-in-law Nicola Peltz also shared a series of snaps, captioning them “summer magic”.

Amid a slew of snaps featuring luxury homes and bouquets of flowers, was a picture of her husband Brooklyn, grinning happily.

Brooklyn declared in January that he was not speaking to his family, claiming they had tried to interfere with his marriage to Nicola, and that they “humiliated” him at their 2022 wedding.

He stated that he was not interested in reconnecting with mum and dad Victoria and David Beckham, and his siblings Cruz, Romeo and Harper Beckham were seemingly dragged into the feud as a result.

Just last week, fans believed Cruz had taken a swipe at Brooklyn in a TikTok post.

Cruz’s clip showed him cracking an egg into a pan, before removing and throwing away the shell.

He struggled to crack the egg, having to scoop out pieces of shell with his fingers.

Cruz captioned the post: “The shell is the best part.”

Meanwhile, the lyric “I wanna wear you down” from Cruz’s single Wear & Tear played over the video.

Cruz’s followers believed he was referencing aspiring chef Brooklyn’s own cooking videos.

This includes fans recently being left baffled with Brooklyn’s bizarre cooking hack on a yacht, when he used seawater to cook tomato pasta during a holiday with his wife.

Writing underneath Cruz’s video, one fan penned: “Second best cook in the family after ya dad….”

While another added: “It took me a minute, but this has to be a dig. The cooking and the song lyrics.”

Earlier this month, David and Victoria missed bumping into Brooklyn by minutes after the whole clan holidayed in St. Tropez separately.

The Beckhams enjoyed a summer break away in the South of France but estranged son Brooklyn was enjoying his own outing with wife Nicola Peltz just around the corner.

The clan have been split for over a year with Posh and Becks attempting to extend an olive branch on numerous occasions.

The decisions mark both a victory and a setback for President Emmanuel Macron, who had championed both policies.

France’s Constitutional Council has upheld a law passed by parliament to legalise assisted dying in specific circumstances, while striking down a separate bill that sought to ban under-15s from using social media.

The council, France’s highest constitutional authority, issued its rulings on Friday. The decisions mark both a victory and a setback for President Emmanuel Macron, who had championed both policies.

France is set to join several European countries that have already legalised assisted dying, including Belgium, Germany and Luxembourg, among others.

“This decision marks the culmination of a long democratic and parliamentary effort, conducted with listening, respect, and rigour,” Elisabeth Borne, MP and former French prime minister, said in a post on X about the assisted-dying decision.

“I welcome this definitive validation of a text that guarantees everyone the freedom to choose, within a strict and protective framework.”

The council upheld the law in its entirety while clarifying three provisions, including the so-called conscience clause, under which pharmacists may refuse to assist a patient in ending their life.

Private treatment centres can also refuse to participate in the procedure if it goes against their mission, and other centres can serve local needs. Lastly, in the case of protected patients, the opinion of the person responsible for their welfare must be taken into account.

French citizens and legal residents can request medical support in ending their lives under strict conditions. The legislation stipulates that the patient must be “suffering from an incurable, life-threatening illness in an advanced or terminal phase”, and that the illness must cause “constant physical or psychological suffering that is untreatable or unbearable”. Lastly, the patient must exercise free and informed consent.

The French National Assembly passed the bill last month by a majority of 50, with 291 voting in favour and 241 against.

Meanwhile, the Constitutional Court struck down legislation banning under-15s from social media, citing freedom of expression.

“By prohibiting minors under the age of fifteen from accessing certain online services, the law inherently requires every person, even an adult, to prove their age before accessing them,” the court said in its decision.

“However, by failing to specify the conditions and limits under which such proof must be provided, the legislature has not established the legal safeguards necessary to ensure compliance with these requirements,” it added. The court also said that the law fails to safeguard people’s privacy.

The bill was one of Macron’s flagship policies and was passed by parliament last month.

It stipulated that everyone in France would have to verify their age to access social media sites, and it was supposed to come into effect in January 2027. Macron was eager for the bill to be passed before the presidential election next year.

After Friday’s ruling, Macron asked Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu to work on a new “legally robust draft” of the legislation.

Last month, Amnesty International responded to the French parliament’s decision to impose the social media ban on teens, urging lawmakers to focus their efforts on forcing companies to redesign their apps, including what it described as “addictive features”.

“There is no doubt that regulating platforms to protect children is an imperative of our time. We commend states for taking social media harms seriously but rather than pursuing blanket bans, efforts should be on forcing platforms to abandon their reckless pursuit of profit to the detriment of human rights,” Secretary General Agnes Callamard said.

“Building safe platforms requires a robust response. To ensure platforms are spaces where children can access community, connection and knowledge in a healthy and safe way, governments should first focus on banning the features that drive harm, including engagement-based algorithms that Amnesty International’s research has shown can draw children into rabbit holes of depressive and suicidal content.”

People got up at 6.30am on their holidays to stand in line for a picture opportunity

The grim reality of a tourist hotspot has been exposed as ‘thousands’ of holidaymakers were filmed queueing for an Instagram picture at 6.30am. Tayyba Adeel woke up early to secure a cinematic sunrise snap on her trip abroad.

Unfortunately, it seems like every other visitor on the holiday island had the same idea. The Brit was left stunned after joining a queue of ‘thousands’ of tourists waiting to get a picture in front of the iconic blue dome.

According to Tayyba, tourists flooded the streets of Santorini, known for its whitewashed cave houses, blue-domed churches, and vibrant sunsets. Santorini sees around 3.4m visitors every year – with the huge number of travellers creating long queues for the perfect holiday photo.

Posting the clip online, the video racked up over 110,000 views. Tayyba said: “The famous Santorini blue dome photo spot at 6.30am. The whole internet got the same travel tip. Social media ruined it (Santorini). You only see people without noticing the beauty of the place.”

The footage shows Tayyba walking up the huge line, where she claimed ‘thousands’ of tourists waited. One woman in her wedding dress with her photographer was also sitting waiting for her turn to get her dream snap.

Members of the public have slammed the long queues. One viewer said: “I’d be p*ssed if this was outside my home or rental.”

Another commenter said: “What a waste of a holiday.”

One other person added: “People are so embarrassing.”

Another viewer said: “This makes me never want to go to Santorini. Why do people just ruin everything for likes on social media.”

One person commented: “Surely there’s a better way to spend your time on holiday than that?”

Things people don’t want to do this summer, as evidenced by poor ratings: Watch CBS news anchor Tony Doukopil. Tune into Paramount+’s sci-fi teen drama “Star Trek: Starfleet Academy.” Read President Trump’s Truth Social posts.

No matter how much Trump posts, and he has been posting a lot lately, traffic to the platform he uses as his megaphone for official White House statements and personal rants has fallen off significantly this summer. Last month, the overall number of monthly visitors to Truth Social was down about 36% from where it was in 2025, according to the online tracking firm Similarweb. The numbers were similarly dismal in June.

But Trump’s slumping media fortunes may soon get an infusion of cash, or bitcoin, or whatever it takes to line his coffers before the jig is up.

Never one to leave a source of income untapped, the president has come up with yet another way to add to the $2.2 billion he made in just the first year of his second term. His majority-owned Trump Media & Technology Group earlier this month announced that it was rolling out a new service aimed at cashing in on the president’s every word.

Truth API is a subscription service that offers early access to posts from Trump and other notable users of the platform, for a price. It’s charging fees of up to $100,000 and month.

But there’s a hiccup in the president’s latest grift. On Wednesday, media organizations Freedom of the Press Foundation and The Intercept sued Trump, filing a complaint saying that providing quicker access to his posts to those who pay was “extraordinary, corrupt, and unconstitutional.”

Their suit alleges that Truth API contradicts the First Amendment’s guarantee of equal public access to the president’s statements and violates the Fifth Amendment by granting preferential access for “unreasonable sums.” The lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, asked the court to block Trump from publishing official government information exclusively on Truth Social.

So why is this particular money-making scheme garnering so much attention outside Trump’s many other grifts? Because a president’s words can, and often do, sway the stock market. In the frenetic world of Wall Street trading, early access to statements and news from the Commander-in-Chief gives subscribers an edge, and as NPR pointed out, that could mean a difference of millions of dollars.

Unlike any other sitting U.S. president, Trump in his second term has ignored traditional means of communication such as press briefings, live addresses or posting official announcements, executive actions, press releases, and statements on the official White House Website. He’s done so in favor of communicating through his own privately controlled platform, delivering wild posting sprees that often forgo the fact-based, informative briefings we the people still need from our elected officials. But even back when he was using Twitter (now X) during his first term, the White House said his tweets should be considered official statements.

That standard still holds for his frequent barrages of boasts, insults, threats, grouses and indecipherable dispatches via Truth Social. After the humiliating failure of his America 250 celebration, he fired off 67 posts on Truth Social in just two hours, posting almost every single minute between 11:12 a.m. and 1:14 p.m. His musings ranged from attacks on a federal judge to a photo of himself at a 1991 New York City tree-lighting ceremony with his “Home Alone 2” co-stars.

That spree is now among the thousands more posts from the president, that have not been followed up by announcements from the White House outside of Truth Social. “In other words, President Trump’s posts are the only way to get official government news,” the lawsuit said.

Trump Media & Technology Group, or TMTG, is majority-owned by the president. It was launched following Trump’s account suspension across mainstream social platforms including Twitter, Facebook and YouTube. The platforms cited risks of inciting violence following the Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol riot. Trump responded by creating his own platform, and Truth Social debuted in 2022.

But the platform’s parent company, TMTG, has lost money ever since it went public in 2024. On Monday, Trump Media reported a $238-million loss for the second quarter, tied mostly to cryptocurrency assets. Executives told investors on a conference call that they are now going to focus their energy on Truth Social and soft-explained their latest scheme to profit off the presidency.

“Our customers will get published and publicly available posts fractionally faster” than everyone else,” said Kevin McGurn, the company’s interim chief executive. He added that such early access is a “well-established business practice.”

Unless it’s a sitting U.S. president doing the selling. We’re in uncharted territory, once again. But another big question around this new subscription service is whether investors and traders can trust the intelligence they get from early access to Trump’s posts.

It was revealed this week that the president published deceptive information last month, putting the lives of dozens in danger. Before leaving a NATO meeting in Turkey, he posted that he’d be riding on the older Air Force One “for old time’s sake” instead of the newly retrofitted, Qatari-donated jet. His misdirection was part of an elaborate ruse to mask his transfer from Air Force One to a military fighter jet following intel that Iran may be targeting the president’s plane. The subterfuge involved him stowing away in an airport catering container to sneak onto the jet. Of course a president has to be protected, but Air Force One still had members of the press and his administration aboard when they sent it into the sky. Essentially, they were unwitting decoys.

Sometimes a president has to lie to stay safe. And often times this president peddles misinformation as a means to other ends, like amassing more money for himself while holding onto his seat of power. Paying for early access to Trump’s posts is a great idea — for Trump.

A few of Friday’s editorials reflect the anger about the government’s early release scheme for prisoners in England and Wales. The Daily Express, external calls on the prime minister to halt what it calls a “preposterous plan”, which it says will reward sex offenders and the killers of police officers. The Sun calls Andy Burnham’s failure to exempt two of PC Andrew Harper’s killers from the scheme a “terrible decision”, external.

The Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph lead on Conservative proposals to scrap social housing for many foreign nationals. The Mail calls it a “bold move”, external. According to the Telegraph, the Tories believe the change will stop Britain from being treated as a “cash machine for the world”, external. But it also highlights concerns from Labour about the effect on long-term UK residents, including “NHS staff”.

The Guardian, external says the government’s review of youth unemployment will recommend that primary schools in England should identify children at risk of leaving education at 16 without a job. Alan Milburn, who is leading the review, tells the paper that “the warning signs are there from a very, early age”.

The Financial Times calls the sale of EasyJet, external to an American private equity firm the “latest foreign swoop”. The paper says the £5.7bn-takeover paves the way for “another London listed company to be taken private”, with the airline joining an “exodus from UK listings”.

“Number 10 aides show blokey Burnham the red card”, declares the Times. It says Downing Street social media experts have told the prime minister to tone down his “blokeish”, external videos – by limiting references to “football and the pub”.

Some of the papers poke fun at the suggestion drinkers could be discouraged from standing in pubs in London’s West End. The Daily Mirror, external asks “wouldn’t this effort be better spent making it a crime to leave when it’s your round?” The Daily Star , externaldeclares it “madness”, and pictures the band of the same name standing in a Soho pub.

Britain’s new Prime Minister Andy Burnham is using social media to reshape Labour’s public image and challenge the growing online influence of populist parties, particularly Reform UK. By combining informal, relatable content with government messaging, Burnham is seeking to connect with younger voters while projecting a more approachable leadership style.

A New Digital Approach

Since taking office, Burnham has rapidly expanded his presence on TikTok, X, and Instagram through light-hearted videos, behind-the-scenes content, and policy announcements packaged in an accessible format.

Unlike traditional political messaging, Burnham’s posts often feature humor and everyday topics, ranging from debating popular pub snacks to joking about his own appearance. Communications experts say this approach presents him as relatable without undermining the seriousness of his office.

Labour Seeks to Close the Digital Gap

Burnham’s strategy reflects Labour’s effort to compete in an online space where Reform UK and its leader Nigel Farage have built significant audiences over several years.

Political analysts argue that while former Prime Minister Keir Starmer struggled to connect through digital platforms, Burnham’s communication style is more natural and engaging. Early polling suggests Labour has narrowed Reform UK’s lead since Burnham became prime minister, although the next general election remains years away.

Positive Messaging Over Polarisation

Communications specialists describe Burnham’s strategy as one focused on inclusion rather than confrontation. Instead of relying on divisive rhetoric, Labour is attempting to broaden its appeal through optimistic messaging and accessible political communication.

Videos highlighting government policies such as tax relief for hospitality businesses have attracted millions of views, demonstrating how policy announcements can gain wider attention when presented through social media trends.

Building a Professional Digital Operation

The government has expanded its investment in digital communications, recruiting specialists in content production, strategy, and social media engagement.

Burnham’s online campaign is being coordinated by experienced digital strategists, reflecting a broader recognition that political influence increasingly depends on platforms where younger audiences consume information.

Analysis: Social Media Is Becoming a Core Political Battleground

Burnham‘s early success illustrates how political communication is evolving beyond traditional speeches and television appearances. Social media has become a central arena where leaders compete not only on policy but also on personality, authenticity, and accessibility. While Burnham’s informal style may help Labour regain ground against populist rivals such as Reform UK, digital popularity alone is unlikely to determine long-term political success. As analysts note, sustained public support will ultimately depend on whether the government delivers tangible improvements on the economy, living standards, and public services. If policy outcomes fail to match the positive online narrative, social media momentum could prove difficult to maintain.

With information from Reuters.

A new study by Australia’s internet regulator has revealed that more than eight in 10 young Australian teens and preteens are continuing to use social media platforms despite the government’s prohibition for children under 16.

The ban came into effect in December last year.

Here is what we know about how it’s going.

What did the latest report find?

Australia’s internet regulator, eSafety, said it had found that more than eight in 10 Australian under-16s are continuing to use social media despite being banned from doing so.

The report also found that most of those children aged 10 to 15 were using social media just as frequently in March as they had been before the ban came into force on December 10 last year.

“Most under-16s who had social media accounts before commencement were able to either retain them or create new ones at the three-month ⁠mark, with social media platforms’ failure to implement effective age assurance measures cited as the main reason,” eSafety said in a statement.

About half the children who retained their accounts said platforms had not checked their age, the most common reason they were able to stay on the services. Others said that their accounts listed them as aged 16 or older or ‌that age-checking ⁠systems had incorrectly determined they were older.

Prior to the ban, nearly 86 percent of children surveyed reported using at least one age-restricted platform. Three months later, that figure remained above 81 percent, the eSafety report said.

Around 58 percent of teenagers reported using social media daily, the report found. Before the ban, the number was roughly 60 percent.

The report showed minimal change in “sports and physical activity, arts and music, spending time with friends and family, and attendance at community events”.

At the time the new rule was introduced, experts warned that enforcing it would be extremely difficult.

Joanna Orlando, a researcher in digital wellbeing and the author of Generation Connected: How to Parent in a Digital World, told Al Jazeera in December last year: “Tech-savvy teens simply use VPNs, fake birth photos for face scans, or migrate to less regulated platforms like Lemon8, or to platforms not part of the ban like video games. Enforcement is proving to be difficult in the days leading up to the ban.”

In December 2025, Australia prohibited children under 16 from using social media platforms, becoming the world’s first country to do so. Video game platforms are not included in the ban.

The government said this was prompted by increasing concerns about the effects of cyberbullying, sexual exploitation and self-harm content on the mental and physical health of children and young people.

Research commissioned by the Australian government in 2023 found four out of five children aged eight to 16 use social media, often beginning between the ages of 10 and 12. That report was led by former National Australia Bank CEO Andrew Thorburn, who recommended age restrictions.

Under the law, 10 of the biggest social media platforms face $33m in fines if they fail to take “reasonable steps” to block Australian-based users younger than 16. Such steps include using age-verification tools to determine how old users are.

As of January 16, social media companies had revoked access to about 4.7 million accounts identified as belonging to children in Australia, according to officials.

“We stared down everybody who said it couldn’t be done, some of the most powerful and rich companies in the world and their supporters,” Australian Communications Minister Anika Wells told reporters in January.

However, several months later, it now appears that youngsters have been able to open new accounts with relative ease.

Days after Australia’s ban took effect, Reddit, one of the 10 platforms required to block minors, lodged a challenge to the ban in the High Court, while still complying with it. The case is still ongoing.

How has the Australian government responded to the latest findings?

On Saturday, Andrew Leigh, Australia’s assistant minister for productivity, competition, charities and treasury, defended the new law, arguing that the social media ban has already reshaped the “national debate” about the use of social media by children.

The ban has been “an important game changer in the conversation among parents”, Leigh said in televised remarks.

“We’ve had millions of accounts shut down,” he said.

“We never expected that this would have 100 percent compliance. We don’t get 100 percent compliance out of minimum drinking age laws, but it’s still appropriate that we have that law on the books.”

While social media has long provided easy access to unregulated and often harmful content, misinformation and hate speech, the recent explosion of AI‑generated material poses new risks to the wellbeing of children and young people, experts say.

The American Psychological Association published an advisory last year warning that generative artificial intelligence (AI) systems can amplify harmful content such as violent or sexual videos.

It also added that adolescents are less likely than adults to question the accuracy of AI-generated content. “They may also be unaware of the persuasive intent underlying an AI system’s advice or bias,” the advisory stated.

AI can also amplify pre-existing societal prejudices, according to Ayo Tometi, co-creator of the US-based antiracist movement Black Lives Matter.

Children worldwide are also worried about the misuse of AI for online child sexual exploitation and “deepfakes”, according to research by the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) on children’s perspectives and AI, which it published in October 2025.

Following the introduction of Australia’s landmark law, some other countries are contemplating similar bans.

In the United Kingdom, the government has announced that it also plans to introduce a ban on social media platforms such as TikTok, Snapchat and Instagram from spring 2027 onward. 

Messaging platforms such as WhatsApp and Signal, educational tools, and e-commerce and music streaming will be excluded.

The government will announce the new regulations by the end of this year.

In November 2025, Denmark’s government said it also plans to prohibit social media platforms for children under 15, saying it had secured majority support in parliament. The ban is due to come into effect later this year.

Around the same time, Malaysia said it would ban social media accounts for people under 16 from this year.

In April, Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis formally announced plans to prohibit social media access for children under 15 from January 1, 2027, subject to parliamentary approval.

Andy Burnham has told the BBC “the NHS will collapse” if social care is not reformed but said he could not put a timeline on changes.

In his first major interview since becoming prime minister, Burnham said he would not want to leave office without bringing in “substantial change” to the social care system.

The prime minister also suggested making it harder to claim benefits, saying the country had to get serious about getting the welfare bill down.

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has meanwhile written to the prime minister, saying he should rule out tax rises or increased borrowing to fund social care reform.

Burnham told the BBC that if the government did not reform social care, the NHS would “collapse under the weight of trying to care for people who’ve really not needed to end up in the NHS system”.

But pressed on whether he would create a new system before the next election, he said he “couldn’t put a timeline on it right here, right now”, though he would put “whatever political capital I have into fixing broken social care”.

Burnham first proposed a universal system of social care in England in 2009 when he was health secretary under Gordon Brown and pursued the idea of a compulsory levy to fund it.

That Labour government also floated the idea of allowing people to defer the payment until after they died, which led to the Tories branding it a “death tax”.

Burnham is due to make a speech on adult social care on Wednesday.

The BBC understands the PM will stop short of unveiling plans for a new system in this speech, instead announcing he is speeding up the Casey Commission, an independent review that has been considering possible solutions for social care.

Baroness Louise Casey is not expected to give her final recommendations until 2028, but Burnham wants to bring her schedule forward.

Adult social care provides state support to help people live more independently, including assistance at home.

Unlike the NHS, social care is not free at the point of use. In England and Northern Ireland, people with savings worth more than £23,250 are not entitled to help with care costs from their council.

In Wales and Scotland, different rules apply in terms of eligibility.

Sarah Woolnough, chief executive of healthcare think tank the King’s Fund, said the current “punitive system” meant that “quite a lot of people go without care that they need”, with one in seven paying in excess of £100,000 for social care.

While Burnham has not yet outlined any plans, Woolnough told the BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that reforms could range from making social care free at the point of need to placing a cap on the amount people spend.

“The PM has for a long time mooted the idea of a social care system similar to NHS,” she said.

“It would be expensive but on the scale of what we spend on other public services – around £200bn on the NHS – we are talking for some of these options low billions per year.”

Adult social care has proved a complex issue to tackle for successive governments.

Two years ago Sir Keir Starmer was criticised when Labour scrapped plans for an £86,000 cap on the amount people in England would spend on social care in their lifetime.

Badenoch wrote in her letter to Burnham that “any solution to the issues around social care must also be fair to those who have made provisions and saved up over the course of their lives”.

Layla Moran, the Liberal Democrat MP who chairs the Health and Social Committee, told the Today programme: “We do need to discuss where the money is going to come from but also we need to all be putting our political capital into this.”

Lib Dem leader Sir Ed Davey said he was ready to do “whatever I can to find a real and lasting consensus on social care”.

“Family carers must be at the heart of any new system, everyone must get the care they need and no one should lose their home as a result,” he said.

Reform Treasury spokesman Robert Jenrick said social care needed fixing but warned the party would fight any proposal for a “universal death tax”.

He said: “It’s not fair to raid people’s life savings and drags hundreds of thousands more families into paying tax when their loved ones pass away.”

India’s young protesters are mocking their government. And the jokes are landing.

As thousands of demonstrators take to the streets in the Indian capital, they are waging a parallel campaign online, flooding social media with memes, parody videos and self-deprecating jokes.

In doing so, they are also beating Narendra Modi – the powerful but image-conscious prime minister – at his own game.

Modi built his political brand through social media. Now protesters are using that same platform to mock his administration, ridicule pro-government television news coverage, transform confrontation with police into viral content and seize control of the online narrative.

The campaign has taken the protests demanding accountability and education reforms beyond the streets, broadening its reach and intensifying pressure on a government wary of appearing to yield to a rapidly growing youth movement.

Strava streaks and Subway Surfers

The “Cockroach” movement’s digital campaign has been largely powered by humour.

Clashes with police have become viral content. Videos showed protesters joking about keeping their Strava streaks alive — a reference to the fitness tracking app used by runners — as they ran from police baton charges.

Others edited footage of themselves dodging police barricades to mimic the popular endless runner mobile game Subway Surfers.

Some women have borrowed influencer culture, posting “get ready with me” videos before marches and “fit check” posts featuring helmets, goggles and other homemade protest gear. Other protesters have created spoof videos mocking pro-government television anchors and their dramatic style of broadcasts that have labelled the protesters “anti-national” and “foreign-funded conspirators”.

Several protesters spoke to The Associated Press on the condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals from authorities.

One 25-year-old protester said the memes are more than comic relief; they are a way of coping. She sees them as a generational trait.

Unlike older generations, who learned to endure hardship, hers has little patience for “simply putting up with it,” she said.

“If our phone data runs out, we can’t even bear that. So we’re definitely not going to tolerate this,” she said, referring to Monday’s police crackdown on protesters in the capital.

‘We find speeches boring’

The street protests erupted a month ago, fuelled by anger over a string of exam scandals, including the illegal sharing of entrance exams for the national medical programme.

Young people say the scandals have jeopardised their futures and eroded trust in the education system. They blame Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan, who resigned on Saturday.

But the demonstrations have expanded into wider anger over government accountability, spreading to other cities.

Much of that expansion has been driven by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), a satirical group that started the movement two months ago. Through memes, humour and satire, it has given younger Indians a new way to express their frustration with the government and helped turn a single-issue campaign into a broader youth movement.

At the main protest site in New Delhi, that influence was hard to miss.

Some protesters marched in Spider-Man masks and Batman costumes, carrying tongue-in-cheek placards. Other protest signs echoed the irreverent tone of social media, with memes and pop culture references woven into the demonstrations.

One poster featuring the education minister asked: “When will AI take his job?” Another captured the movement’s spirit with the slogan: “Every joke is a [tiny] revolution.”

Some slogans and posters took on an overtly profane and risque tone. A 23-year-old student said the protesters were simply speaking the language of their generation.

“We find speeches boring, we are the summary generation. We have a habit of consuming things in a short span of time, so we are using the same ways to put our message across,” she said.

Jokes now target Modi

For Modi, who is entering his 13th year in office, the protests present an unusual challenge.

His image is built on strength and decisiveness, but he risks alienating young people if he responds too forcefully. Nearly half of India’s population is under 25, making young voters one of the country’s most influential electoral groups.

But the protests have broken a longstanding taboo: mocking Modi himself.

Jokes about Modi were rare during earlier protests, when his government was criticised for suppressing dissent. But now, even he has become a target of taunts.

Modi’s gestures, pauses and mannerisms have been turned into viral edits that turn his own words into political jokes.

When Modi released a late-night, selfie-style video on Thursday addressing the protesters, he promised swift legal action against those responsible for leaking academic or job exams.

But many internet users edited the clip with parody voiceovers and references to his past promises they said had gone unfulfilled.

One video went particularly viral.

Modi’s original address began with him referring to the protesters as “friends”. A parody video kept that opening, and abruptly cut to three young girls staring into the camera and responding: “No, we are not.”

A 21-year-old student said there is no better way to challenge Modi than by using social media that helped build his political brand.

“We are just answering him in his language,” he said.

New Delhi, India — She darted through a sprinting crowd, running from a cloud of tear gas just above her head. Her eyes stung so badly she could barely see, yet she filmed the chaos on her phone.

“I saw policemen brutally beating up unarmed girls and peaceful children,” said Avanshika Singh, who has been turning up for student protests that shut down the national capital, demanding the education minister’s resignation.

On her return home, the 18-year-old put together a rough cut from the chaos and captioned it on Instagram: “Today, we rang Parliament’s doorbell and ran.”

The march to the Indian parliament on July 20 against serial examination paper leaks brought the nation’s capital to a standstill as tens of thousands of protesters occupied central roads leading to the country’s corridors of power. More than 100 students were injured in a crackdown by police, operating under the direct instructions of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government.

But since then, Indian internet has turned into a relentless reel of police excesses: shaky smartphone footage, rapid-fire edits pulsing to hip-hop tracks, and a tidal wave of memes and expletives.

“This is the only thing anyone is talking about. If nothing, we are televising our revolution,” Singh, a teenager, told Al Jazeera, standing amid a sea of protesters choking Parliament Street on Wednesday. “The entire country today feels the sting of batons and tear gas with us.”

Twelve years ago, Modi rode to power and pioneered in many ways, leveraging social media platforms to reach the masses. Today, Gen Z is flipping his Hindu majoritarian party’s dominance on social platforms, weaponising against it the very tools the Bharatiya Janata Party has long relied on.

“Hating Modi is cool on the internet now, after years of criminalising dissent,” she said, before bursting into slogans: “Uncle Modi, go back, go back.”

Evidence of police excess

After the July 20 demonstrations against the government’s handling of paper leaks, the police denied all the protesters’ allegations and media reports of excess force in the crackdown.

But by then, social media was flooded with evidence, recorded by the protesting students.

A New Delhi police officer thrusting a baton on a female protester’s back; usage — potentially by a paramilitary force that was deployed alongside the police — of lethal pellet guns, for the first time in the national capital; a mother crying and pleading with dozens of police officials; another officer slapping and chasing unarmed students; police officers wearing Meta glasses; law enforcement agents planting a damaged car outside a protest strip; and footage where an officer casually trips the students running from tear gas.

No sight escapes the cameras at the Jantar Mantar protest strip, where thousands of protesters keep recording round the clock. The visuals from July 20 have prompted protests across India, in cities like Mumbai, Bengaluru, Patna, Lucknow and Aizawl.

The Cockroach Janta Party, a political pressure group that has been leading the students’ protest, has said the demonstrations would continue “peacefully” until three demands are met. They want Dharmendra Pradhan, the education minister, to resign; for the Modi government to assure that no criminal cases would be pursued against protesters; and for compensation of about $105,000 for families of students who died by suicide due to exam paper leaks and cancellations.

Niharika Soni, a 19-year-old, stood among the thousands-strong crowd that occupied Parliament Street on Wednesday, distributing water bottles to protesters. She did not take part in the July 20 march and did not care much about it either.

Then, the visuals appeared on her feed.

“My mother and I cried for two hours, watching the videos together at home,” she said, adding that her mother has been a staunch supporter of PM Modi.

“We hugged each other and come here every day now,” she added, now holding her mother’s hands, as part of a human chain, ready to confront government forces if attacked.

‘Leaking any responsibility’

It is also a meme fest on the Indian internet.

Protesters pose, mock and tease police personnel stationed near the protest site. Some offer flowers to them while reminding them that the officers only offered baton hits.

A stroll through the protest site and nearby roads is like scrolling an Instagram feed: posters and graffiti now line central New Delhi.

Even when they speak, protesters use language riddled with smart one-liners and mockery of the government.

“This government is leaking any responsibility towards the youth of this country,” Ipshita Gulyari, a 20-year-old, told Al Jazeera. Modi, she said, had messed with the “wrong generation”.

“There is a lot of arrogance in him — and, you know, teenagers do not tolerate that, bro.”

Another duo carried the popular Japanese manga One Piece, a symbol adopted by Gen Z protest movements worldwide. A group of friends donned fictional superhero costumes from Marvel’s Avengers: Spider-Man, Iron Man and Hulk, sitting together on police barricades, looking onto Parliament Street.

“We, the Gen Z people, are born on and for the internet. We were using Instagram before I could read a clock,” said Gulyari.

Mainstream television news channels friendly to Modi have faced accusations of not covering the protests adequately. But young people like Gulyari rely increasingly on independent small publications, and, even more, on social media.

“Gen Z is taking it lightly, being funny about it, because humour is our coping mechanism,” said 18-year-old Yashvi Kumar, a friend of Gulyari at the protest.

“In the middle of all chaos, somewhere we decided that to rebel, we need to find a way that unites us. The memes are uniting us.”

On the other hand, social media posts put up by the BJP are spammed by thousands, calling for the minister to resign.

Flipping the game

In 2014, Modi was among the first world leaders to understand and leverage social media to take his narrative to the masses. The Congress party, now in opposition, was trounced by Modi’s BJP in national elections that year, and has long struggled to keep up with the BJP’s social media dominance.

But with years in power, as India slid in multiple democratic indices, Modi’s government faced mounting accusations that it was criminalising dissent, with several critics jailed for years without a trial.

Modi’s party also mobilised extensive resources in the last decade in its so-called IT Cell, where a bunch of anonymous accounts, or creators friendly to the government, dox, troll and delegitimise social media criticism.

It is fitting, therefore, analysts say, that the biggest challenge Modi has faced on the streets stems from an online joke. After India’s chief justice casually likened the youth to “cockroaches” and “parasites”, the resulting fury led to the formation of the Cockroach Janta Party.

Before the Cockroach movement, “there was an undercurrent of memes from anonymous accounts, masked people, mocking the government,” said Anurag Minus Verma, a cultural critic and author of The Great Indian Brain Rot.

“In a post-ironical world, anything said with irony travels faster — and irony becomes a central feature of the internet during this kind of protest,” he said. “The pent-up anger found a channel at Jantar Mantar, allowing youth to do their thing, speak in their language.”

The most remarkable turnaround for Verma, he said, has been the unmasking of critics at the protest, where demonstrators ridicule and mock Modi, erasing the fear.

Verma argued that the Modi government had crushed and criminalised protests by labelling them anti-nationals and breaking them into sections. “The Gen Z protesters already identify themselves ridiculously enough: they are cockroaches,” he said. “It becomes a single identity — and that becomes easier to penetrate the virality zone.”

“Some are recreating the popular memes from Nepal, Bangladesh and Hong Kong uprisings,” he told Al Jazeera. “The criticism and hate directed at Modi in the capital is not only acceptable now, but even cool.”

Modi, in a tacit acknowledgement of the power of the social media wave that’s against his government, on Thursday morning offered his first comments on the student protests — on X.

“Nothing is more important than the welfare and future of our youth!” he wrote, before mentioning that his government had set up fast-track courts to punish those behind the paper leaks.

But the CJP’s leader Abhijeet Dipke was quick with his riposte on X.

Playing on Modi’s own words, overlaid on a photo of Education Minister Pradhan, Dipke wrote: “Hi, my name is Nothing”.

July 21 (UPI) — The French parliament passed a new law to ban children younger than 15 from using social media.

The law was a pet project of President Emmanuel Macron, who is near the end of his term limits. He announced the ban on X immediately after it passed Wednesday.

“I had committed to it, and now it’s been voted on: social media will be banned for those under 15 starting back-to-school. Thanks to the parliamentarians. It’s up to the Constitutional Council to rule, then on to action to make this measure concrete and protect our children online,” Macron said.

The French Senate and National Assembly approved the ban, despite criticism from some on the left, which has said it prevents online anonymity.

The law will be implemented in two stages: Beginning in September, children under 15 can’t open accounts, and age verification will be required for all new accounts; and in January 2027, the age verification rule applies to all existing accounts.

The French privacy regulator would have to approve the age-verification tools used, and everyone in France would have to verify their age on social media. The law doesn’t create penalties against children or parents who don’t comply or for social media providers. Those would likely need to come from the European Union.

In December, Australia was the first country to ban children under 16 from using social media apps, though a June New York Times report showed it is largely failing to keep kids off social media. Britain and Canada are working on implementing similar bans, and Italy, Poland, Portugal, Spain have all written laws. The EU is expected to create a bill this fall.

“France wants to push its own legislation to make the EU act, and the EU act fast,” Jessica Galissaire, a senior policy researcher at Interface, a Berlin-based think tank, told The Times. “I see it more as a political announcement.”

Macron, last year, argued for the ban.

“It is clear that before the age of 15 or 16, social media is not a good thing. This is because at that age, we have not yet sufficiently consolidated things on an affective, emotional and cognitive level,” he said.

He likened it to age restrictions on drinking alcohol.

“Sixty years ago, kids were served wine,” he said. “There may still be people who serve beer to infants, but in my opinion, they are not in a majority in the country today.”

Influencer brothers Andrew and Tristan Tate, whose social media empire promoting wealth, male dominance and misogyny has made them among the world’s most polarizing internet personalities, were arrested Saturday in Miami as British authorities sought their extradition on rape and sex trafficking charges.

The brothers were taken into custody by the U.S. Marshals Service on a sealed warrant, agency spokesperson Brady McCarron told the Associated Press, placing the United States at the center of an international legal saga that has stretched from Romania to Britain.

British prosecutors announced Saturday that they were seeking the brothers’ extradition on charges alleging they raped and trafficked women between 2010 and 2017.

The dual U.S. and British citizens moved to Romania in 2016. They were arrested there in 2022, accused of participating in schemes to lure women for sexual exploitation. They denied those allegations, and the Romanian case hasn’t gone forward because of legal and procedural problems.

Last year, they were allowed to leave Romania and flew to Florida on a private jet.

The brothers are expected to appear in Miami’s federal court early next week, according to a person familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive law enforcement operations.

The pending charges in the United Kingdom accused the brothers of abusing women in an area north of London, where they grew up. Their lawyers had said they denied the allegations.

Joseph McBride, an attorney representing the Tate brothers, said in a phone interview Saturday evening that he has not been able to speak with his clients but called the new charges in the U.K. “filth and slander” intended to derail defamation lawsuits filed by the brothers in the U.S.

“They’re pulling out all the stops to make sure these guys never get their day in court,” McBride said.

“We are confident that once a competent judge sees the facts, and once the Department of Justice confronts this egregious abuse of its own authority, Andrew and Tristan Tate will walk free. America does not do Britain’s political dirty work.”

Andrew Tate, 39, first reached a mainstream audience as a contestant on the U.K. reality television show “Big Brother” in 2016. He was removed from the show when a video surfaced that appeared to show Tate assaulting a woman. He and his brother Tristan, 38, are vocal supporters of President Trump.

Andrew Tate has amassed more than 10 million followers on X but has been banned from platforms including YouTube, TikTok and Instagram for violating hate speech guidelines. His most widely condemned rhetoric includes comments that women who are sexually assaulted should bear some responsibility for their attacks, graphic descriptions of how he might attack women and criticisms of people who seek treatment for mental illness.

The Tate brothers have consistently denied allegations of abuse and human trafficking, claiming that violent and misogynistic statements have been taken out of context or were intended as jokes.

In a statement Saturday, the U.K.’s Crown Prosecution Services said that in addition to the charges announced against the brothers in 2025, involving alleged crimes against three women, it was bringing a total of 38 new charges related to “four further victims.”

Both brothers are accused of rape and human trafficking. Andrew Tate faces an additional charge of profiting from prostitution, and 19 charges “for offenses relating to indecent images of a child and extreme pornography,” according to U.K. authorities.

“There is no place for male violence against women and girls, and we will continue to work tirelessly to support victims and investigate all reports made to us,” said Karena Thomas, an assistant chief constable of the Bedfordshire Police, which investigated the case.

Durkin Richer writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Savannah Peters in Santa Fe, N.M., contributed to this report.

The only thing you might have in common with a World Cup football player is posting on Instagram as soon as you’re back home from a social gathering. Or, in the case of Erling Haaland, while you’re still in the dressing room after a win.

Football’s biggest stars are giving an insider look into the World Cup, their training, and personal lives at the six-week tournament through social media, and for some of them, their following has grown by tens of millions. Their on-pitch heroics, popularity, and personal stories have led them to overnight social media stardom during the World Cup.

Of course, football icons like Cristiano Ronaldo, Lionel Messi, and Neymar have seen an exponential rise in their Instagram following as well. But the 2026 World Cup wasn’t the first rodeo for these veterans, who have an evergreen social media boom outside the tournament.

Al Jazeera Sport takes a look at some of the biggest social media stars from this World Cup:

Erling Haaland — Netherlands

The goofy, witty and relatable six-foot-five-inch (195cm) Viking has been one of the World Cup’s most loveable personalities on the pitch and online.

The 25-year-old Norwegian striker, like many Gen Z social media users, seems to be chronically online when he’s not leading his country to new World Cup heights.

From candid Snapchat stories to Instagram posts right after winning to taking a taxidermied raccoon on the plane ride home, Haaland has become a social media phenomenon this World Cup.

It’s all thanks to his authentic posting style, compared with more carefully curated accounts that PR firms manage for similar high-profile personalities.

Of Haaland’s Instagram following of more than 70 million, 29 million were added in the past 30 days, according to analytics tool Social Blade. He is projected to reach 75 million after the World Cup final and nearly 322 million by the end of the year.

Vozinha — Cape Verde

One of the best feel-good stories of the tournament belongs to Vozinha, the Cape Verde goalkeeper whose heroics kept some of the world’s best teams from scoring a single goal against the island nation — all of which his mother eventually saw in person after she finally received a US visa to attend the World Cup.

He leapt, dived and executed a string of saves in Cape Verde’s tournament opener against Spain to end the match in a shock 0-0 draw. By the time he opened his Instagram a few hours later, his following surged from 500,000 to nearly five million.

It currently sits at 29.3 million followers, and the initial hype around him still stands as his posts garner millions of likes and interactions.

The 40-year-old joked how most people couldn’t even point out Cape Verde on a map before the World Cup, but his team’s standout performance in the group stages and knockout match helped change that.

Jude Bellingham — England

Good looks, loveable personality, Golden Boot contender — is there anything Jude Bellingham isn’t great at? And a massive 50 million Instagram following, of course.

The English midfielder’s World Cup journey may have ended in disappointment earlier this week, but there’s a lot to be said about a player whose fans sing “Hey Jude” for him after leading his team to victory at previous World Cup stages before the semifinal loss.

Bellingham, 23, has gained nearly nine million followers in the past 30 days, according to Social Blade, but his online popularity spiked by three million in October, when he opened up about his struggles with mental health.

Lamine Yamal — Spain

The teen sensation has been on the up and up since bursting to stardom two summers ago with Spain’s UEFA 2024 win, and his social media reflects the cool, candid, level-headed personality he carries on and off the pitch.

The 19-year-old’s Instagram feed is a mix of post-match photos, brand partnerships, multiple trophy wins and pictures with family members with whom he shares a close relationship.

His younger brother, Keyne, has become something of a celebrity at the World Cup, too, with his endearing antics as Yamal shepherds the three-year-old around the stadium pitch or watches him try — and fail — at golf.

The Barcelona striker could see his popularity gain new heights — and more Instagram followers, which currently number 49.6 million — after this Sunday’s World Cup final as Spain take on Messi’s Argentina.

Social media has already been fawning over the full-circle moment that began with a now-viral photo of Messi and Yamal in 2007 for a UNICEF fundraising shoot.

Tim Payne — New Zealand

Payne’s viral moment may have come before the World Cup, but it was touching nonetheless.

The New Zealand defender’s Instagram following exploded late in May after an Argentinian influencer decided he was the least-known player at the World Cup.

Valen Scarsini, known as “elscarso” on Instagram and TikTok, made a video encouraging his audience to give the Wellington Phoenix and All Whites defender’s account likes, comments and follows.

Payne’s Instagram following grew from fewer ⁠⁠than 5,000 before the campaign to about 5.8 million, turning the 32-year-old into one of the tournament’s most unlikely viral stars.

He even addressed the outpouring of love in a video on Instagram, and eventually met up with Scarsini at the team’s hotel in Boca Raton, Florida, ahead of the World Cup.