Zuckerberg repeatedly fell back on accusing Lanier of “mischaracterizing” his previous statements. When it came to emails, Zuckerberg typically objected based on how old the message was, or his lack of familiarity with the Meta employees involved. “I don’t think so, no,” he replied when directed to clarify if he knew Karina Newton, Instagram’s head of public policy in 2021. And Zuckerberg never failed to point out when he wasn’t actually on an email thread entered as evidence.
Perhaps anticipating these detached and repetitive talking points from Zuckerberg—who claimed over and over that any increased engagement from a user on Facebook or Instagram merely reflected the “value” of those apps—Lanier early on suggested that the CEO has been coached to address these issues. “You have extensive media training,” he said. “I think I’m sort of well-known to be pretty bad at this,” Zuckerberg protested, getting a rare laugh from the courtroom. Lanier went on to present Meta documents outlining communication strategies for Zuckerberg, describing his team as “telling you what kind of answers to give,” including in a context such as testifying under oath. “I’m not sure what you’re trying to imply,” Zuckerberg said. In the afternoon, Meta counsel Paul Schmidt returned to that line of questioning, asking if Zuckerberg had to speak to the media because of his role as head of a major business. “More than I would like,” Zuckerberg said, to more laughter.
In an even more, well, “meta” moment after the court had returned from lunch, Kuhl struck a stern tone by warning all in the room that anyone wearing “glasses that record”—such as the AI-equipped Oakley and Ray-Ban glasses sold by Meta for up to $499—had to remove them while attending the proceedings, where both video and audio recordings are prohibited.
K.G.M.’s suit and the others to follow are novel in their sidestepping of Section 230, a law that has protected tech companies from liability for content created by users on their platforms. As such, Zuckerberg stuck to a playbook that framed the lawsuit as a fundamental misunderstanding of how Meta works. When Lanier presented evidence that Meta teams were working on increasing the minutes users spent on their platforms each day, Zuckerberg countered that the company had long ago moved on from those objectives, or that those numbers were not even “goals” per se, just metrics of competitiveness within the industry. When Lanier questioned if Meta was merely hiding behind an age limit policy that was “unenforced” and maybe “unenforceable,” per an email from Nick Clegg, Meta’s former president of global affairs, Zuckerberg calmly deflected with a narrative about people circumventing their safeguards despite continual improvements on that front.
Lanier, though, could always return to K.G.M., who he said had signed up for Instagram at the age of 9, some five years before the app started asking users for their birthday in 2019. While Zuckerberg could more or less brush off internal data on, say, the need to convert tweens into loyal teen users, or Meta’s apparent rejection of the alarming expert analysis they had commissioned on the risks of Instagram’s “beauty filters,” he didn’t have a prepackaged response to Lanier’s grand finale: a billboard-sized tarp, which took up half the width of the courtroom and required seven people to hold, of hundreds of posts from K.G.M.’s Instagram account. As Zuckerberg blinked hard at the vast display, visible only to himself, Kuhl, and the jury, Lanier said it was a measure of the sheer amount of time K.G.M. had poured into the app. “In a sense, y’all own these pictures,” he added. “I’m not sure that’s accurate,” Zuckerberg replied.
When Lanier had finished and Schmidt was given the chance to set Zuckerberg up for an alternate vision of Meta as a utopia of connection and free expression, the founder quickly gained his stride again. “I wanted people to have a good experience with it,” he said of the company’s platforms. Then, a moment later: “People shift their time naturally according to what they find valuable.”
Source link
#Mark #Zuckerberg #Play #Safe #Social #Media #Addiction #Trial #Testimony
![The Pope’s AI Warning Could Help Workers Seek Religious Exemptions From Using AI
Pope Leo XIV’s recent encyclical on AI could set off a wave of workers seeking religious exemptions from using the tech at work. One software engineer in North Carolina already secured one last month, Business Insider reports. Erin Maus, a Unitarian Universalist, first sought the accommodation in April at the large tech-entertainment company where she works, which she described as progressive. She argued that using AI did not align with her religious beliefs because of environmental and ethical concerns. Maus was granted the exemption in May, before the pope’s AI remarks. “I’m writing my code and reviewing my code by hand, which seems crazy to say,” Maus told Business Insider. “Just two years ago, how else would you do it?”
Maus is unlikely to be the only person seeking a similar accommodation as companies increasingly invest in AI and push, sometimes even mandate, employees to use the technology. In the U.S., the share of employees who say they use AI at least a few times a year at work has nearly doubled from 21% to 40% in 2025, according to Gallup.
Now, the pope’s remarks and official theological document could give some workers a stronger argument. “In the era of artificial intelligence, when human dignity is threatened by new forms of dehumanization, ours is the pressing duty to remain profoundly human,” the pope wrote in his 43,000-word encyclical titled Magnifica Humanitas, published last month. He wrote that AI is dehumanizing society by reducing “the mystery of the person into data and performance” and called on the tech industry to avoid “the idolatry of profit that sacrifices the weak.”
The pope continued that “a slower pace in adopting AI does not mean opposing progress; instead, it is an exercise of responsible care for the human family.” That call for a slower adoption of AI could be enough for some workers to argue they should not be required to use it on the job. “When he’s speaking, he’s speaking as the pontiff—as a religious figure—so he’s raising these human dignity issues as religious issues, theological issues,” Jonathan Segal, an employment attorney and Duane Morris partner, told HR Brew this month. “I think it is inevitable that some employees will rely on this to say…I can’t use AI because it conflicts with a religious belief that I have.” Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, employers are required to make reasonable accommodations for workers whose sincerely held religious beliefs conflict with a work requirement, unless the accommodation creates an undue hardship for the employer.
And it’s not a stretch to think some of these requests could at least get serious consideration. Just a few months ago, Rex Healthcare agreed to pay 0,000 to settle a lawsuit from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission accusing the company of unlawfully denying a remote employee’s request to be exempted from its mandatory COVID-19 vaccine policy over religious beliefs. “I think this opens a door—or it’s a little bit of a road map—for employees to raise concerns,” Segal told HR Brew. “What the courts have said—what the EEOC has most definitely said—is that, as the general proposition, we shouldn’t question the legitimacy [of] sincerely held religious beliefs.” #Popes #Warning #Workers #Seek #Religious #ExemptionsAI,Pope Leo XIV,work](https://i1.wp.com/gizmodo.com/app/uploads/2026/05/shutterstock_2666910201-1280x853.jpg?ssl=1 "The Pope’s AI Warning Could Help Workers Seek Religious Exemptions From Using AI
Pope Leo XIV’s recent encyclical on AI could set off a wave of workers seeking religious exemptions from using the tech at work. One software engineer in North Carolina already secured one last month, Business Insider reports. Erin Maus, a Unitarian Universalist, first sought the accommodation in April at the large tech-entertainment company where she works, which she described as progressive. She argued that using AI did not align with her religious beliefs because of environmental and ethical concerns. Maus was granted the exemption in May, before the pope’s AI remarks. “I’m writing my code and reviewing my code by hand, which seems crazy to say,” Maus told Business Insider. “Just two years ago, how else would you do it?”
Maus is unlikely to be the only person seeking a similar accommodation as companies increasingly invest in AI and push, sometimes even mandate, employees to use the technology. In the U.S., the share of employees who say they use AI at least a few times a year at work has nearly doubled from 21% to 40% in 2025, according to Gallup.
Now, the pope’s remarks and official theological document could give some workers a stronger argument. “In the era of artificial intelligence, when human dignity is threatened by new forms of dehumanization, ours is the pressing duty to remain profoundly human,” the pope wrote in his 43,000-word encyclical titled Magnifica Humanitas, published last month. He wrote that AI is dehumanizing society by reducing “the mystery of the person into data and performance” and called on the tech industry to avoid “the idolatry of profit that sacrifices the weak.”
The pope continued that “a slower pace in adopting AI does not mean opposing progress; instead, it is an exercise of responsible care for the human family.” That call for a slower adoption of AI could be enough for some workers to argue they should not be required to use it on the job. “When he’s speaking, he’s speaking as the pontiff—as a religious figure—so he’s raising these human dignity issues as religious issues, theological issues,” Jonathan Segal, an employment attorney and Duane Morris partner, told HR Brew this month. “I think it is inevitable that some employees will rely on this to say…I can’t use AI because it conflicts with a religious belief that I have.” Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, employers are required to make reasonable accommodations for workers whose sincerely held religious beliefs conflict with a work requirement, unless the accommodation creates an undue hardship for the employer.
And it’s not a stretch to think some of these requests could at least get serious consideration. Just a few months ago, Rex Healthcare agreed to pay 0,000 to settle a lawsuit from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission accusing the company of unlawfully denying a remote employee’s request to be exempted from its mandatory COVID-19 vaccine policy over religious beliefs. “I think this opens a door—or it’s a little bit of a road map—for employees to raise concerns,” Segal told HR Brew. “What the courts have said—what the EEOC has most definitely said—is that, as the general proposition, we shouldn’t question the legitimacy [of] sincerely held religious beliefs.” #Popes #Warning #Workers #Seek #Religious #ExemptionsAI,Pope Leo XIV,work")
![The Pope’s AI Warning Could Help Workers Seek Religious Exemptions From Using AI
Pope Leo XIV’s recent encyclical on AI could set off a wave of workers seeking religious exemptions from using the tech at work. One software engineer in North Carolina already secured one last month, Business Insider reports. Erin Maus, a Unitarian Universalist, first sought the accommodation in April at the large tech-entertainment company where she works, which she described as progressive. She argued that using AI did not align with her religious beliefs because of environmental and ethical concerns. Maus was granted the exemption in May, before the pope’s AI remarks. “I’m writing my code and reviewing my code by hand, which seems crazy to say,” Maus told Business Insider. “Just two years ago, how else would you do it?”
Maus is unlikely to be the only person seeking a similar accommodation as companies increasingly invest in AI and push, sometimes even mandate, employees to use the technology. In the U.S., the share of employees who say they use AI at least a few times a year at work has nearly doubled from 21% to 40% in 2025, according to Gallup.
Now, the pope’s remarks and official theological document could give some workers a stronger argument. “In the era of artificial intelligence, when human dignity is threatened by new forms of dehumanization, ours is the pressing duty to remain profoundly human,” the pope wrote in his 43,000-word encyclical titled Magnifica Humanitas, published last month. He wrote that AI is dehumanizing society by reducing “the mystery of the person into data and performance” and called on the tech industry to avoid “the idolatry of profit that sacrifices the weak.”
The pope continued that “a slower pace in adopting AI does not mean opposing progress; instead, it is an exercise of responsible care for the human family.” That call for a slower adoption of AI could be enough for some workers to argue they should not be required to use it on the job. “When he’s speaking, he’s speaking as the pontiff—as a religious figure—so he’s raising these human dignity issues as religious issues, theological issues,” Jonathan Segal, an employment attorney and Duane Morris partner, told HR Brew this month. “I think it is inevitable that some employees will rely on this to say…I can’t use AI because it conflicts with a religious belief that I have.” Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, employers are required to make reasonable accommodations for workers whose sincerely held religious beliefs conflict with a work requirement, unless the accommodation creates an undue hardship for the employer.
And it’s not a stretch to think some of these requests could at least get serious consideration. Just a few months ago, Rex Healthcare agreed to pay $150,000 to settle a lawsuit from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission accusing the company of unlawfully denying a remote employee’s request to be exempted from its mandatory COVID-19 vaccine policy over religious beliefs. “I think this opens a door—or it’s a little bit of a road map—for employees to raise concerns,” Segal told HR Brew. “What the courts have said—what the EEOC has most definitely said—is that, as the general proposition, we shouldn’t question the legitimacy [of] sincerely held religious beliefs.” #Popes #Warning #Workers #Seek #Religious #ExemptionsAI,Pope Leo XIV,work](https://gizmodo.com/app/uploads/2026/05/shutterstock_2666910201-1280x853.jpg "The Pope’s AI Warning Could Help Workers Seek Religious Exemptions From Using AI
Pope Leo XIV’s recent encyclical on AI could set off a wave of workers seeking religious exemptions from using the tech at work. One software engineer in North Carolina already secured one last month, Business Insider reports. Erin Maus, a Unitarian Universalist, first sought the accommodation in April at the large tech-entertainment company where she works, which she described as progressive. She argued that using AI did not align with her religious beliefs because of environmental and ethical concerns. Maus was granted the exemption in May, before the pope’s AI remarks. “I’m writing my code and reviewing my code by hand, which seems crazy to say,” Maus told Business Insider. “Just two years ago, how else would you do it?”
Maus is unlikely to be the only person seeking a similar accommodation as companies increasingly invest in AI and push, sometimes even mandate, employees to use the technology. In the U.S., the share of employees who say they use AI at least a few times a year at work has nearly doubled from 21% to 40% in 2025, according to Gallup.
Now, the pope’s remarks and official theological document could give some workers a stronger argument. “In the era of artificial intelligence, when human dignity is threatened by new forms of dehumanization, ours is the pressing duty to remain profoundly human,” the pope wrote in his 43,000-word encyclical titled Magnifica Humanitas, published last month. He wrote that AI is dehumanizing society by reducing “the mystery of the person into data and performance” and called on the tech industry to avoid “the idolatry of profit that sacrifices the weak.”
The pope continued that “a slower pace in adopting AI does not mean opposing progress; instead, it is an exercise of responsible care for the human family.” That call for a slower adoption of AI could be enough for some workers to argue they should not be required to use it on the job. “When he’s speaking, he’s speaking as the pontiff—as a religious figure—so he’s raising these human dignity issues as religious issues, theological issues,” Jonathan Segal, an employment attorney and Duane Morris partner, told HR Brew this month. “I think it is inevitable that some employees will rely on this to say…I can’t use AI because it conflicts with a religious belief that I have.” Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, employers are required to make reasonable accommodations for workers whose sincerely held religious beliefs conflict with a work requirement, unless the accommodation creates an undue hardship for the employer.
And it’s not a stretch to think some of these requests could at least get serious consideration. Just a few months ago, Rex Healthcare agreed to pay $150,000 to settle a lawsuit from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission accusing the company of unlawfully denying a remote employee’s request to be exempted from its mandatory COVID-19 vaccine policy over religious beliefs. “I think this opens a door—or it’s a little bit of a road map—for employees to raise concerns,” Segal told HR Brew. “What the courts have said—what the EEOC has most definitely said—is that, as the general proposition, we shouldn’t question the legitimacy [of] sincerely held religious beliefs.” #Popes #Warning #Workers #Seek #Religious #ExemptionsAI,Pope Leo XIV,work")
Post Comment