Big Tobacco Whistleblower Sees Chilling Parallels in Social Media Addiction Lawsuits
Jeffrey Stephen Wigand, a former vice-president of research at Brown & Williamson, played a pivotal role in the landmark tobacco trials of the 1990s by revealing how companies targeted children and concealed the addictive nature of cigarettes. Now, he is watching the legal battles against big tech with a profound sense of déjà vu. In a recent interview, Wigand expressed that social media companies, through their advertising and product designs, are attempting to addict children in ways reminiscent of the tobacco industry's past strategies.
Recent Court Verdicts Against Meta and YouTube
Last week, a Los Angeles jury found Meta and YouTube negligent in a case where plaintiffs' lawyers used internal documents to show that company leadership dismissed concerns about harmful social media features. In a separate trial in New Mexico, Meta was found liable for failing to prevent child sexual exploitation. These verdicts mark the first time Meta has been held accountable for the impact of its products on young people, following years of criticism from parents who believe social media has damaged their children's mental health.
Whistleblowers, such as former Meta employee Arturo Béjar, have been instrumental in these cases by providing crucial internal documents that expose the inner workings of tech giants. Wigand sees a direct parallel to his own experiences, where he raised alarms about carcinogenic substances in cigarettes at Brown & Williamson, only to be fired and see the safer cigarette program scrapped.
Wigand's Insights on Addiction and Corporate Tactics
When asked about the social media trials, Wigand's immediate thought was addiction. He pointed to how social media companies target their ads at adolescents, as evidenced by their own internal documents. "The tobacco industry – similar to social media companies – intentionally addicted people, especially children, so they could use them as cashflow," Wigand explained. "They deliberately and intentionally develop programs that attack the vulnerabilities of our children."
He elaborated on the similarities and differences between the two industries. While tobacco involves burning and consuming a physical product, social media relies on electronic transmissions. However, both industries knew their products were addictive and focused on creating a base of vulnerable users, particularly children. Wigand highlighted brain development as a key factor, noting that children's malleable brains make them easy targets for addiction, where tolerance builds and more of the substance is needed to achieve the same effect.
Historical Context and Future Implications
In the tobacco cases, much of the legal focus was on young people, with tactics like Joe the Camel cartoons designed to appeal to children. Wigand believes similar reforms could be implemented for social media, such as increasing the minimum age for account access and adding content guardrails. He noted that the tobacco industry has evolved since the 1990s, with new products like nicotine pouches, suggesting that social media companies might also adapt rather than cease harmful practices.
Regarding concerns about free speech limitations, Wigand acknowledged the issue but emphasized the need for corrective action. "I always considered social media evil," he said, sharing that he never allowed his children to use it due to its addictive nature.
Challenges and Advice for Potential Whistleblowers
Wigand reflected on the personal toll of whistleblowing, including death threats that required 24/7 protection from ex-Secret Service agents for him and his family. He earned nothing from the tobacco settlement but felt a moral duty to act. "I was involved directly in creating harm and death. And that bugged me a lot," he admitted.
His message to tech workers considering whistleblowing is to weigh their career against their character. "You have to balance out: what is your career worth, versus what your soul or character is worth," Wigand advised. He urged those who see harm in their industry to come forward, despite the life-altering consequences, as it can save lives and hold corporations accountable.
Wigand concluded by encouraging people to consider their role in creating harm, whether as programmers or project managers, and to act ethically to prevent negative impacts on society.
