United News of Bangladesh

TikTok has finalized an agreement to create a new American entity, easing years of uncertainty and sidestepping the prospect of a US ban on the short-video platform used by more than 200 million Americans. In a statement issued Thursday, the company said it has signed deals with major investors, including Oracle, Silver Lake and Abu Dhabi-based investment firm MGX, to form a TikTok US joint venture. TikTok said the new version will operate with “defined safeguards” aimed at protecting US national security, including strengthened data protections, algorithm security, content moderation and software assurances for American users. The company said users in the United States will continue using the same app. President Donald Trump welcomed the announcement in a post on Truth Social, publicly thanking Chinese President Xi Jinping and saying he hoped TikTok users would remember him for keeping the platform available. Snap settles social media addiction lawsuit ahead of trial China has not publicly commented on TikTok’s announcement. Earlier on Thursday, Chinese Embassy spokesperson Liu Pengyu said Beijing’s position on TikTok remained “consistent and clear.” TikTok said the new US venture will be led by Adam Presser, a former top executive who previously oversaw operations and trust and safety. The entity will have a seven-member board that the company said will be majority American, and it will include TikTok CEO Shou Chew. The deal follows years of political and regulatory pressure in Washington over national security concerns tied to TikTok’s Chinese parent company, ByteDance. A law passed by large bipartisan majorities in Congress and signed by then-President Joe Biden required TikTok to change ownership or face a US ban by January 2025. TikTok briefly went offline ahead of the deadline, but Trump later signed an executive order on his first day in office to keep the service running while negotiations continued. TikTok said US user data will be stored locally through a system run by Oracle, while the new joint venture will also focus on the platform’s content recommendation algorithm. Under the plan, the algorithm will be retrained, tested and updated using US user data. The algorithm has been central to the debate, with China previously insisting it must remain under Chinese control. The US law, however, said any divestment must sever ties with ByteDance, particularly regarding the algorithm. Under the new arrangement, ByteDance would license the algorithm to the US entity for retraining, raising questions about how the plan aligns with the law’s ban on “any cooperation” involving the operation of a content recommendation algorithm between ByteDance and a new US ownership group. UK to consult on possible social media ban for under-16s “Who controls TikTok in the U.S. has a lot of sway over what Americans see on the app,” Georgetown University law and technology professor Anupam Chander was quoted as saying. Under the disclosed ownership structure, Oracle, Silver Lake and MGX will serve as the three managing investors, each taking a 15% stake. Other investors include the investment firm of Dell Technologies founder Michael Dell. ByteDance will retain 19.9% of the joint venture. 

Snapchat’s parent company, Snap, has reached a settlement in a high-profile social media addiction lawsuit just days before the case was set to go to trial in Los Angeles. The settlement terms were not disclosed. At a California Superior Court hearing, lawyers confirmed the resolution, and Snap told the BBC that both parties were “pleased to have been able to resolve this matter in an amicable manner.” Other tech giants named in the lawsuit, including Instagram owner Meta, TikTok parent ByteDance, and YouTube owner Alphabet, have not settled. The lawsuit was filed by a 19-year-old woman, identified only by her initials K.G.M., who claimed that the platforms’ algorithmic designs left her addicted and negatively impacted her mental health. UK to consult on possible social media ban for under-16s With Snap now settled, the trial will proceed against Meta, TikTok, and Alphabet, with jury selection scheduled for 27 January. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg is expected to testify, while Snap CEO Evan Spiegel was slated to appear before the settlement. Meta, TikTok, and Alphabet did not respond to BBC requests for comment regarding Snap’s settlement. Snap remains a defendant in other consolidated social media addiction lawsuits. Legal experts say the cases could test a long-standing defense used by social media companies, which relies on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 to avoid liability for content posted by third parties. Australia cracks down on child social media use, 4.7 million accounts taken down Plaintiffs argue that the platforms are intentionally designed to foster addictive behavior through algorithms and notifications, contributing to mental health issues such as depression and eating disorders. Social media companies maintain that the evidence presented so far does not establish responsibility for these alleged harms. #With inputs from BBC 

The UK government has announced plans to consult on whether social media use should be banned for children under 16, alongside steps to tighten controls on mobile phone use in schools. As part of “immediate action”, Ofsted will be given authority to review schools’ phone-use policies during inspections, with schools expected to become “phone-free by default”. Staff may also be advised not to use personal devices in front of students. The move follows growing political and public pressure, including a letter from more than 60 Labour MPs and calls from Esther Ghey, the mother of murdered teenager Brianna Ghey. “Some argue that vulnerable children need access to social media to find their community,” she wrote. “As the parent of an extremely vulnerable and trans child, I strongly disagree. In Brianna's case, social media limited her ability to engage in real-world social interactions.” The Department of Science, Innovation and Technology said the consultation will “seek views from parents, young people and civil society” and assess stronger age-verification measures. It will also consider limiting features that “drive compulsive use of social media”. The government is expected to respond in the summer. Technology Secretary Liz Kendall said existing online safety laws were “never meant to be the end point”, adding: “We are determined to ensure technology enriches children's lives, not harms them and to give every child the childhood they deserve.” Opposition parties and education unions offered mixed reactions. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch criticised the move as “more dither and delay”, while Liberal Democrats warned the consultation could slow action. Teaching unions broadly welcomed the shift but raised concerns about Ofsted’s role and the wider impact of screen time. Read More: Australia cracks down on child social media use, 4.7 million accounts taken down The issue is also being debated in the House of Lords, though experts and child safety organisations remain divided on whether age-based bans are effective.

Social media platforms have taken down about 4.7 million accounts identified as belonging to children in Australia since the country enforced a ban on under-16s using major platforms, officials said. Communications Minister Anika Wells said the government had proven critics wrong by compelling some of the world’s biggest tech companies to comply. “Now Australian parents can be confident their kids can have their childhoods back,” she told reporters on Friday. The figures, submitted to the government by 10 platforms, offer the first indication of the impact of the landmark law, which came into force in December amid concerns about harmful online environments for young people. The move triggered heated debate over technology use, privacy, child safety and mental health and has prompted other countries to consider similar measures. Under the law, Facebook, Instagram, Kick, Reddit, Snapchat, Threads, TikTok, X, YouTube and Twitch can be fined up to A$49.5 million ($33.2 million) if they fail to take reasonable steps to remove accounts of Australian users under 16. Messaging services such as WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger are exempt. Platforms can verify age by requesting identification, using third-party facial age-estimation tools, or drawing inferences from existing account data, such as how long an account has been active. Australia’s eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant said about 2.5 million Australians are aged 8 to 15 and previous estimates showed 84% of 8- to 12-year-olds had social media accounts. While it is unclear how many accounts existed across the 10 platforms, she said the 4.7 million “deactivated or restricted” accounts was an encouraging sign. “We’re preventing predatory social media companies from accessing our children,” Inman Grant said, adding that the companies covered by the ban had complied and reported removal figures on time. She said enforcement would now focus on stopping children from creating new accounts or evading the restrictions.  Read more: Wikipedia turns 25, announces AI partnerships with tech giants Australian officials did not release platform-by-platform numbers. However, Meta, which owns Facebook, Instagram and Threads, said it removed nearly 550,000 accounts believed to belong to under-16s by the day after the ban took effect. In a blog post, Meta criticised the policy and warned that smaller platforms not covered by the ban might not prioritise safety. The law has been widely backed by parents and child-safety advocates, though privacy groups and some youth organisations oppose it, arguing that vulnerable or geographically isolated teenagers find support online. Some young users say they have bypassed age checks with help from parents or older siblings.

Meta has acquired artificial intelligence startup Manus as the Facebook and Instagram parent intensifies efforts to expand AI capabilities across its platforms. The California-based tech company did not reveal the financial terms of the deal, though The Wall Street Journal reported that the acquisition was valued at more than $2 billion. Manus, headquartered in Singapore with links to China, introduced its first general-purpose AI agent earlier this year. The platform provides paid subscription services that allow users to deploy its AI tools for research, coding and other professional tasks. In a statement issued Monday, Meta said Manus already supports millions of users and businesses globally and that the company plans to scale the technology across its consumer and business products, including Meta AI. Manus CEO Xiao Hong said the acquisition would help the company grow on a stronger and more sustainable footing without altering how the platform operates or how decisions are made. He confirmed that Manus will continue offering subscriptions through its own app and website. The startup has seen rapid growth, announcing earlier this month that it had surpassed $100 million in annual recurring revenue just eight months after its launch. Manus previously received backing from investors including China’s Tencent Holdings, ZhenFund and HSG. The platform was initially launched by Butterfly Effect, also known as monica.im, a company founded in China before relocating to Singapore. Meta said there will be no remaining Chinese ownership in Manus following the transaction, and that the platform will shut down its services and operations in China. Manus confirmed it will continue operating in Singapore, where the majority of its workforce is based. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has been seeking to reinvigorate the company’s AI strategy amid stiff competition from rivals such as Google and OpenAI, the developer of ChatGPT. In June, Meta invested $14.3 billion in AI data firm Scale and brought in its CEO, Alexandr Wang, to help lead efforts to develop advanced artificial intelligence systems.  

Australia has implemented a world-first law banning children under 16 from accessing social media platforms, a move Prime Minister Anthony Albanese described as empowering families and curbing the influence of tech giants. The ban, effective Wednesday, affects platforms including Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, Reddit, YouTube, X, Threads, Kick, and Twitch. Companies failing to comply face fines of up to 49.5 million Australian dollars ($32.9 million). Parents reported some children were upset upon being locked out, and a few attempted to bypass age restrictions using virtual private networks or facial modifications. The law will be enforced by eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant, who said platforms already have the data and technology to implement the rules. Notices will be sent Thursday requiring details on account closures and age verification, with public updates expected before Christmas. Albanese acknowledged the rollout would be challenging and “won’t be perfect,” emphasizing social responsibility for tech companies. Communications Minister Anika Wells said over 200,000 TikTok accounts had already been deactivated, warning children trying to evade detection would eventually be caught. Australia to proceed with under-16 social media ban despite court challenge Advocates hailed the move as a vital step for child safety online. Wayne Holdsworth, whose son died in an online sextortion scam, called the law “a start” to protect children. Twelve-year-old Flossie Brodribb said the ban would help kids grow up “healthier, safer and more connected to the real world.” Some families, however, warned of financial impacts. Simone Clements said the law affects her 15-year-old twins, who rely on social media for their careers as actors, models, and influencers. Source: AP 

Popular political accounts on X with names like @TRUMP_ARMY and @MAGANationX often appear to be run by passionate American supporters of former President Donald Trump. Their profiles feature Trump’s image, U.S. flags and rally scenes — and they post relentlessly about U.S. politics. But a new update to X has shown that many of these high-profile accounts are actually operated from regions including South Asia, Africa and Eastern Europe. Over the weekend, X introduced a feature allowing users to see the region an account is based in. Researchers and online investigators quickly discovered that numerous influential pro-MAGA accounts with large followings are administered outside the United States, renewing worries about potential foreign involvement in American political discourse. NewsGuard, a misinformation-monitoring group, found that several accounts that appeared to be run by politically engaged Americans were instead based overseas. Many of these accounts had spread misleading or divisive narratives, such as unsubstantiated claims that Democrats bribed moderators at a 2024 presidential debate. How the new feature works Nikita Bier, X’s head of product, announced the launch of an “About This Account” tool that shows the region or country associated with an account. Users can see this information by clicking on the signup date. Some users in countries with restrictive speech environments can opt to show only a broader region, such as “South Asia” instead of a specific country. Bier said the tool would soon be “99.99% accurate,” though this has not been independently verified. VPNs and proxy servers can still obscure a user’s true location, and some profiles carry disclaimers indicating that the displayed location may be unreliable. Experts say the tool is useful but not foolproof. “Location data will always need to be used cautiously,” said Alexios Mantzarlis of Cornell Tech, noting that misinformation persists across platforms despite similar features elsewhere. Mobile internet shutdowns spark rising public frustration across Russia Accounts drawing attention Several of the accounts identified had supported conservative figures such as the late activist Charlie Kirk and members of the Trump family. One account, @BarronTNews_, appears to be based in “Eastern Europe (Non-EU),” despite listing “Mar A Lago” as its location. It has more than 580,000 followers and claims to be an independent fan account. NewsGuard also reported cases of misinformation circulating about the feature itself — including fake screenshots falsely suggesting that certain American users were posting from abroad. Motives behind the accounts vary. Some might be linked to state-backed influence efforts, but experts say many are likely financially driven, using viral political content to generate engagement. Mixed reactions The new transparency tool has drawn a divided response from users. Some welcomed the added insight, while others argued it infringes on privacy. “Isn’t this kind of an invasion of privacy?” one user asked. “No one needs to see this info.” Source: AP 

Meta has removed a Facebook page used to track the presence of immigration agents at the request of the Department of Justice, the company confirmed on Tuesday. Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a post on X that “following outreach” from the DOJ, Facebook removed a “large group page” that was being used to target ICE officials. Meta said in a statement that the group "was removed for violating our policies against coordinated harm.” Meta is the latest tech company to restrict tools used to track ICE agents on its platform. Earlier this month, Apple and Google blocked downloads of phone apps that flag sightings of U.S. immigration agents, just hours after the Trump administration demanded that one particularly popular iPhone app be taken down. Bondi has said that such tracking puts Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers at risk. But users and developers of the apps say it’s their First Amendment right to capture what ICE is doing in their neighborhoods — and maintain that most users turn to these platforms in an effort to protect their own safety as President Donald Trump steps up aggressive immigration enforcement across the country. While a Facebook group for ICE sightings in Chicago does appear to have been taken down, as of Tuesday evening, dozens of other groups, some with thousands of members, remained visible on Facebook.  

Meta announced on Tuesday that teenagers using Instagram will now be limited to PG-13 content by default, and they won’t be able to change the setting without parental consent. The new restriction means teens will only see photos and videos similar to what would be allowed in a PG-13 movie — excluding sex, drugs, strong language, or dangerous stunts. “This includes hiding or not recommending posts with strong language, risky stunts, or content that promotes harmful behavior,” Meta said in a blog post, calling the change its biggest update since launching teen accounts last year. Parents will also be able to apply an even stricter “limited content” mode that further blocks sensitive posts and restricts interactions such as comments and messages. The move follows mounting criticism over Instagram’s impact on young users’ mental health. Despite Meta’s previous promises to protect teens from harmful content, reports found that teen accounts were still being recommended sexual or self-harm-related material. Under the new system, teens won’t be able to follow or interact with accounts that share explicit or inappropriate content, including those linked to adult platforms like OnlyFans. Meta will also expand its list of blocked search terms to include words such as “alcohol” or “gore,” even if misspelled.

Snapchat will start charging users to store older photos and videos, prompting backlash from those with large archives of past posts. Since the introduction of its Memories feature in 2016, the app has allowed users to save content previously shared for 24 hours or less. Under the new rules, users with more than 5GB of saved Memories will need to pay to retain them. Snap, the parent company, has not disclosed UK pricing but said the change will be implemented as part of a “gradual global rollout.” The company said the move will help it continue investing in the Memories feature, which has seen users save over one trillion items to date. Users exceeding the limit will be offered a 100GB storage plan, with higher tiers available through Snapchat+ or Snapchat Premium subscriptions. Existing content can be downloaded, and Snap will provide 12 months of temporary storage for those affected. In the US, the 100GB plan is priced at $1.99 per month, with 250GB included in the $3.99 Snapchat+ subscription. Most users, who have less than 5GB of Memories, will not be affected. However, some longtime users expressed frustration on social media, calling the move “unfair” and “greedy,” as they now face additional costs to preserve years of saved content. Snapchat has over 900 million monthly active users, while competitors such as Instagram and TikTok have billions. Drew Benvie, CEO of social media consultancy Battenhall, said charging for storage is an “inevitable” evolution as platforms adapt to changing user behavior, where people save more content for longer periods.   Source: BBC