Mentioning how bad it is in other places shouldn't be needed to try to improve it in one place. The question here is not how bad it is in other places but how

Mentioning how bad it is in other places shouldn't be needed to try to improve it in one place. The question here is not how bad it is in other places but how much does Meta do against it and is this another lobby approach to push through things abusing the suffering of children as an excuse. Through then the "single largest market" claim might be a try to carter public outrage beyond what a fully honest reporting might have produced. Through also it depends a lot on how much Meta actually does against it. If the answer is Meta doesn't care at all then that would be a very reasonable thing to do. Through as far as I can tell Meta does care at least to the degree they legally have too. But it's hard to say because it's always easy to pic examples where it looks like they do not with a company of that size but all the cases where they did care you likely will never hear about. So if this court case goes ahead we might gain some interesting insights.