🤔 Last Week in Humane Marketing - Bianca's Take #6
legal showdowns, AI hiccups and big-tech pivots
Yes, I know… it’s been a month, and you probably thought I’d run off to a remote island to become a coconut influencer. Unfortunately, that is only partially true (the island part, not the influencer part.) The reality is that the holiday hustle took the wheel and “life happened.” But I’m back now and so is our weekly-ish deep dive into all things humane marketing and tech.
A lot has bubbled up since we last chatted; legal showdowns, AI hiccups, big-tech pivots, so buckle up, because you’re about to get right back into the thick of it.
1. TikTok on Trial: The Ban, the Lawsuits, and the Backup Plan
The News
The Supreme Court will hear arguments on whether TikTok should be banned or forced to sell, potentially making the U.S. the first Western nation to give the app the legal axe.
TikTok faces a separate lawsuit from Utah alleging that its livestream features knowingly exploit minors.
ByteDance, TikTok’s parent company, is quietly ushering U.S. users onto its sister app Lemon8, a “Plan B” if TikTok’s fate is sealed.
Bianca’s Take
We’ve got a social media giant perched on the gallows, and the world is watching to see if the rope drops. On one hand, you have regulators pounding the drum of “national security.” On the other hand, you’ve got free-speech advocates worried that this sets a dicey precedent. TikTok’s pivot to Lemon8 reminds me of that friend who packs an overnight bag mid-argument, just in case. But the real tragedy here is the young creators and small businesses who’ve built entire livelihoods on TikTok could face whiplash if the platform vanishes overnight.
This TikTok saga is packed with teachable moments that will probably inspire a whole library of books, but for now, all I’ll say is this...
Relying on a single platform isn’t just a personal business risk; it places disproportionate social and economic power in the hands of one corporate gatekeeper. When that gatekeeper changes course (whether from market meltdowns, legal showdowns, or a sudden change in policies), entire communities and microeconomies lose their footing. It’s not just your audience count that gets gutted; it’s the cultural conversations, the homegrown businesses, and all the social connections made in that space. Diversifying your channels isn’t just brand self-preservation; it’s a move toward a more resilient, equitable marketplace where no single entity can yank the rug out from under 170 million people in one smooth pull.
2. Meta’s “New” Free Speech: Fact-Checking? What Fact-Checking?
The news
Meta ends its fact-checking program, opting for a user-powered “Community Notes” system.
Nick Clegg steps down as Meta’s global policy chief, replaced by a Republican insider, coincidentally right as Trump is set to return to the White House.
The company simultaneously pulls back on DEI (Diversity, Equity & Inclusion) initiatives.
Bianca’s take
Ever since I began diving into Meta’s fact-checking rollback, I’ve heard countless variations of “Nobody really believes that stuff anyway.” That kind of dismissal might be fine if Facebook were just another app. But for millions globally (especially in Asia and South America) Facebook isn’t just a social network; it’s the national soapbox, the real-time newswire, and in some cases, the only gateway to political discourse. When there’s no coherent oversight or accountability on that platform, the ripple effects can spark revolutions or, worse, accelerate existing tensions with dire human consequences (think Myanmar.)
Even in more regulated Western contexts, it’s unnerving to accept that we must treat every post or headline as potential misinformation. Canada’s Bill C-18 offers a glimpse of just how legislation could push social platforms to shoulder more responsibility. And while Bill C-18 may not be a cure-all, it signals a global need for policy frameworks that ensure these digital spaces serve the public good, rather than amplify chaos or profit from mistrust. After all, if we keep waving off misinformation with a casual “nobody believes it,” we effectively hand the public square to the loudest or most nefarious voices, and that’s a risk we can’t afford to keep ignoring.
Listen, I’m all for a freer internet, but can we at least keep the anti-spam filters on? It’s like they’re saying, “We want to be a democracy of ideas—without the messy nuance of verifying those ideas.” Mno… you can't have your cake and eat it too.
3. Apple’s AI Fumbles
The news
Apple settles a $95 million lawsuit over Siri allegedly recording conversations without consent.
Apple’s AI-generated news summaries have repeatedly served up errors, prompting the company to clarify they’re “machine-made.”
Bianca’s take
Seems even the mighty Apple can stumble when chasing that generative AI gold rush. It’s one thing to have your AI guess the plot of a K-Drama incorrectly; it’s another to have it deliver misleading news that shapes public opinion. But the bigger question here is how a tech giant so famed for user-centric design fell short on transparency in the first place.
For marketers, Apple’s fiasco is a sobering reminder that hyper-personalized user experiences often mask a lot of complicated, glitchy code, and, sometimes, questionable data practices. If Apple, with its deep pockets and reputation for quality control, can mishandle AI, what does that mean for smaller firms using similar technologies without the same resources? Once a brand’s credibility wavers, no software update can fully patch the hole in public confidence.
Honorable Mentions
I don't have enough seconds in a day to summarize the story here - both camps allegedly weaponized influencer outreach to shape the narrative. A reminder that information online (particularly around cancel culture) is often taken at face value and can have permanent effects, whether true or not.
An appeals court just punched a hole in the FCC’s authority to uphold net neutrality, reminding us how fragile our open-internet ideals are. If the internet fractures into “fast lanes” and “slow lanes,” small businesses and social initiatives could be priced out of visibility, yet another reason humane marketers should keep an eye on policy shifts.
Meta tested AI-generated Facebook and Instagram profiles, faced a backlash, then yanked them faster than you can say “unblock button.” Maybe rolling out half-baked AI personas wasn’t such a hot idea.
If your brand’s marketing claims aren’t airtight, you’re one viral call-out away from exposing the cracks in your credibility.
Promoting shapewear during raging wildfires? Even for a Kardashian, that came off as tone-deaf.
General Invalid Traffic skyrocketed by 86%, thanks in part to AI bots running amok. It’s like the “zombie apocalypse” of digital marketing—tons of fake clicks with zero real engagement. Why does it matter? Because when ads are fed to bots, real humans lose out on relevant, meaningful content.
Anthropic settled with music publishers over AI-trained lyrics. Turns out creative work is, well, work. And it deserves protection, even if you’re a cutting-edge AI company.
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion programs are getting cut back at some of the biggest corporate players. I can’t help but think, are these companies truly committed to inclusive workplaces, or did they just do a quick PR dance when it was trendy?
A court reversed its prior ruling on whether claiming “carbon-neutral” is misleading.
Next time you slap “carbon-neutral” on your packaging, don’t forget the footnotes or you might end up explaining yourself to a judge.
The data’s in: consumers want eco-friendly cosmetics, but they also want proof.
That sums up all the humane marketing drama from last week. If you’re feeling both inspired and slightly concerned… who isn’t?
So let me throw it back to you: How do you see marketing evolving in a world teetering between convenience and responsibility?
Drop me a reply, rant, or existential epiphany, I’m all ears, or eyes in this case.
And if this newsletter gave you even a spark of insight, I’d love it if you forwarded it to a friend (or three).
The whole tiktak thing sounds so silly, especially when people who change platform (I haven't even heard of Lemon8, I thought everyone was fleeing to an even more Chinese controlled app!) call themselves 'digital refugees' because their freedom of speech has been taken. It's an app! It has ZERO to do with freedom of speech. Land and homes are burning and these people are whining. I get it, some are making a living out of tiktak, but they have done it once, they can do it again on another platform that's safer and more transparent. How is data protection not at the core of this discussion?