SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
'The Creepiest Possible Path': Meta Letting Facebook, Instagram Use Your Personal Posts for AI Image Generation
"People should not wake up to discover their face has become raw material for someone else’s AI experiment. This is another invasion of consumers’ privacy."
Jul 08, 2026
Tech giant Meta on Tuesday introduced an artificial intelligence image generation model that critics say is a major potential risk to users' personal privacy.
Meta, the parent company of social networks including Facebook and Instagram, described its new Muse Image model as a "creative partner that knows your world, making it easy to turn your ideas into high-quality visuals that you can download and share anywhere, including directly to your feed, story, or chat."
In its announcement, Meta explained how users can either alter existing images or create new ones from scratch using AI prompts.
"You can describe what you want in simple, conversational language, and Meta AI handles the rest thanks to Muse Image," the company said. "Ask it to mock up an image of you in front of a historical landmark, cleanly erase a photobomber from the background of a shot, or write a custom prompt to build a functional QR code."
However, tech publication The Verge on Tuesday flagged a potentially troublesome feature that could compromise user privacy, noting that "users can... mention other Instagram accounts in Muse Image prompts," which will let the AI model "incorporate their likeness into its output."
According to a Tuesday report from Wired, the feature will let users snatch photos from any public Instagram and Facebook accounts unless those accounts' owners specifically choose to opt out of the system.
What's more, opting out of the system is not a simple one-click operation.
"If you want to avoid these AI generations of your Instagram posts without switching your account to private, you’ll have to dig into the app’s settings," reported Wired. "Open the Instagram app, tap your profile, and then tap the three lines in the top-right corner of the screen. Then, scroll down to the Sharing and reuse tab. Here is where you should see a section labeled 'Allow people to use your content on Instagram and with AI features on Meta,' with a toggle for Posts and one for Reels."
JB Branch, director of federal AI governance and technology policy at Public Citizen, blasted Meta for being careless with its users' privacy by making them jump through hoops to stop others from swiping their photos.
"Meta has once again chosen the creepiest possible path," said Branch. "People should not wake up to discover their face has become raw material for someone else’s AI experiment. This is another invasion of consumers’ privacy. Instead of asking for meaningful consent, Meta quietly defaults users into the system and buries the opt-out in account settings."
Branch added that while Meta had a long history of violating user privacy, forcing them to opt out of its new AI image generation model "crosses what should be a bright line."
"If our faces can be repurposed for AI simply because we posted a public photo, then very little remains off limits," Branch emphasized. "Congress should establish clear privacy protections that require affirmative consent before companies can use a person’s image or likeness for AI products."
Keep ReadingShow Less
A Global Message to TikTok: Stop Your Profit Model of 'Toxic and Addictive' Content for Kids
"TikTok must make its platform safe for children and young people to socialize, learn and access information and not be harmed."
Nov 25, 2025
A group of digital activists is set to deliver a message to social media giant TikTok on Tuesday to clean up its "toxic and addictive" business model.
The petition, which has more than 170,000 signatures and is being circulated by human rights watchdog Amnesty International, will be delivered to TikTok's office in Dublin, Ireland by activists Mary Kate Harten and Trinity Kendi of Ireland; Abril Perazzini of Argentina; and Noe Hamon of France.
In the petition, Amnesty accuses TikTok of becoming "a space that is more and more toxic and addictive," and can potentially harm the "self-image, mental health, well-being of younger users."
Amnesty International campaigner Zahra Asif Razvi said that the petition is demanding that TikTok completely redo its business model to be built around user safety.
"These signatures represent a global demand for TikTok to replace its current business model of an app that is addictive by design with one that is safe by design," she said. "TikTok must make its platform safe for children and young people to socialize, learn and access information and not be harmed."
The human rights group says that its own research released last month shows that TikTok prioritizes user engagement over safety, and will often send young users to videos featuring "depression, self-harm and suicide content" on its platform.
Lisa Dittmer, Amnesty International's researcher on children and young people's digital rights, explained that teen users who express interest in content related to mental health can be pulled into "toxic rabbit holes" that glorify self-harm.
"Within just three to four hours of engaging with TikTok’s ‘For You’ feed, teenage test accounts were exposed to videos that romanticized suicide or showed young people expressing intentions to end their lives, including information on suicide methods," she explained. "The testimonies of young people and bereaved parents in France reveal how TikTok normalized and exacerbated self-harm and suicidal ideation up to the point of recommending content on 'suicide challenges.'"
Amnesty's petition comes one week after the American Psychological Association (APA) published research that accumulated data collected in more than 70 other studies and found that excessive use of short-form video apps such as TikTok and Instagram "is associated with poorer cognitive and mental health in both youths and adults."
The research's findings were particularly troublesome concerning the impacts on young people's cognitive development, as they found that "repeated exposure to highly stimulating, fast-paced content may contribute to habituation, in which users become desensitized to slower, more effortful cognitive tasks such as reading, problem solving, or deep learning."
The APA's study found that having the ability to swipe away from videos that don't offer instant gratification "could support a pattern of rapid disengagement from stimuli that do not provide immediate novelty or excitement," and thus "may diminish attentional control and reduce the capacity for sustained cognitive engagement, as cognitive processing becomes increasingly oriented toward brief, high-reward interactions rather than extended, goal-directed tasks."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Something Is Really Working': New Numbers Show Massive Reach of Mamdani's Campaign
"There are huge lessons here about how to appeal to a broad audience, not just immediate followers," said the founder of a global consulting firm of the Mamdani campaign's viral video success.
Jul 28, 2025
New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani has made waves for putting out videos during his campaign that have gone viral on social media, and The New Republic's Greg Sargent on Monday got a peak at exactly how many viewers these videos are reaching.
Citing internal data from the Mamdani campaign, Sargent reported that the recent video of Mamdani announcing his vacation in Uganda that also ridiculed right-wing New York tabloids racked up 4.5 million views on the social media platform Instagram, and more than half of those views came from users who were not already followers of the campaign's account.
While that video was a particularly successful example of Mamdani's campaign videos, others got similarly impressive numbers of views, such as a video of him dissecting the problems with sluggish traffic in Manhattan that got 2.5 million views on Instagram and a video of him getting endorsed by Haitian-American New York Assemblywoman Rodneyse Bichotte Hermelyn that got 1.6 million views on the platform.
And the success of these videos isn't just relegated to one platform, as Techdirt journalist Mike Masnick told Sargent that 10 of Mamdani's recent videos have scored a million views or more on TikTok.
"To consistently pull really high numbers, even with wonky material, shows something is really working," Masnick explained to Sargent. "People spend a lot of time on short-form video apps looking to be entertained by real people. He's been able to produce political content that meets that need."
Sargent also says that both the tone of the videos—which he describes as being of a "cheerful populism" bent—and their substance have proven to be a winning formula.
"Much of Mamdani's messaging is about fixing the government so it makes people's daily lives more livable," wrote Sargent. "The positive vibe that New Yorkers are fortunate to live in such a great city—and that it can be made even more awesome—suffuses everything."
Danielle Butterfield, executive director of super PAC Priorities USA, told Sargent that the secret of the videos' success has been simple because it just involves "letting him speak authentically to what he believes."
Elizabeth Cronise McLaughlin, a political activist and the founder of executive coaching and consulting firm The Gaia Project, recommended Sargent's reporting on Mamdani's campaign and said it offered lessons more Democrats could take to heart.
"This... needs to be read by anyone in campaign work," she wrote on Bluesky. "There are huge lessons here about how to appeal to a broad audience, not just immediate followers. Also lines up with everything I wrote this morning about the need for positive, hopeful vision right now that appeals to the masses."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Nonprofits and Advocates Can’t Rely on Social Media Giants. Here’s How They Can Adjust.
Given all the upheaval in today’s landscape, organizations must ensure they can reach their audiences in a multitude of ways, without relying on a single platform.
May 04, 2025
Nonprofits and advocacy groups are in the midst of a mounting crisis: Social media giants are growing more chaotic, untrustworthy, and dangerous.
Just consider what’s happened in the past few weeks. Without warning, explanation, or human review, Meta suspended the Instagram account of Presbyterian Outlook—a progressive, well-established news outlet for the Presbyterian Church. The outlet noted that it had thoughtfully invested in the platform to expand its reach, but would not return given the possibility of another abrupt cancellation.
Then, weeks later, X—which has been plagued by reports of increasing misinformation and amplifying far-right accounts—was hit with cybersecurity attacks that downed the platform.
Just as social media platforms revolutionized our world decades ago—we are in the midst of another pivotal technology movement.
And Meta recently announced that it would draw from X’s technology to employ “Community Notes” on its platforms—which are purportedly meant to fill in the gaps left after the company fired its fact-checking team. Experts have warned that such a system could easily be exploited by groups motivated by their own interests.
These events are just the latest in a growing pile of evidence that organizations and advocates can’t count on social media giants like they once did. They’re fueling misinformation, inflammatory perspectives, and partisan divisions—all in the name of profits.
To continue to be effective in our increasingly digital world, organizations will need to adjust to this new landscape.
Unquestionably, charting the path forward is challenging. Many organizations and advocates have spent years investing in and building profiles on established media platforms. These groups depend on this technology to share their messaging, organize, provide educational tools, fundraise, and more. It’s difficult to shift all these resources.
Other organizations have yet to build up a robust digital presence, but don’t know where to begin, especially in today’s chaotic climate.
Wherever nonprofits and advocates fall on this spectrum, they can and should invest in technology. Here’s how they can be most effective.
First, organizations must recognize that—just as social media platforms revolutionized our world decades ago—we are in the midst of another pivotal technology movement. Given all the upheaval in today’s landscape, organizations must ensure they can reach their audiences in a multitude of ways, without relying on a single platform.
As such, they should build out opportunities for subscription-based data creation. That means reinvesting in collecting more traditional contact methods—like emails and phone numbers. It also means investing in technologies that allow them to share their messages without censorship from outside sources. Blogs and newsletter platforms can be powerful tools to communicate with audiences and provide rich discourse free from external interference.
Protected digital communities—which are only open to certain groups or are invitation-based—can also help strengthen connections between an organization’s supporters. We’re starting to employ this strategy at the Technology, Innovation, and Digital Engagement Lab (TIDEL), which is housed at Union Theological Seminary. Right now, we’re working with a cohort of faith and social justice leaders to deploy new technology to advance their missions.
We’ve recommended a platform called Mighty Networks, which uses AI to help creators build and manage online communities. Two of our fellows are using this service to support Black clergywomen through education and practical application, focusing on mental health awareness and balance. Another pair of fellows is aiming to use the platform to deliver digitally-based educational programming and sustain a community of care professionals committed to improving access to spiritually integrated, trauma-informed care.
Make no mistake: Nonprofits and advocacy organizations need a digital presence to be effective. But they’ll have to adjust to shield themselves from the chaos and malice of social media giants.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Human Rights Experts: Meta's Trump-Friendly Policies Could Be 'Conduit' for 'Genocide'
"Rather than learning from its reckless contributions to mass violence in countries including Myanmar and Ethiopia, Meta is instead stripping away important protections that were aimed at preventing any recurrence of such harms."
Feb 17, 2025
An expert on technology and human rights and a survivor of the Rohingya genocide warned Monday that new policies adopted by social-media giant Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, could incite genocidal violence in the future.
On January 7, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced changes to Meta policies that were widely interpreted as a bid to gain approval from the incoming Trump administration. These included the replacement of fact-checkers with a community notes system, relocating content moderators from California to Texas, and lifting bans on the criticisms of certain groups such as immigrants, women, and transgender individuals.
Zuckerberg touted the changes as an anti-censorship campaign, saying the company was trying to "get back to our roots around free expression" and arguing that "the recent elections also feel like a cultural tipping point toward, once again, prioritizing speech."
"With Zuckerberg and other tech CEOs lining up (literally, in the case of the recent inauguration) behind the new administration's wide-ranging attacks on human rights, Meta shareholders need to step up and hold the company's leadership to account to prevent Meta from yet again becoming a conduit for mass violence, or even genocide."
However, Pat de Brún, head of Big Tech Accountability at Amnesty International, and Maung Sawyeddollah, the founder and executive director of the Rohingya Students' Network who himself fled violence from the Myanmar military in 2017, said the change in policies would make it even more likely that Facebook or Instagram posts would inflame violence against marginalized communities around the world. While Zuckerberg's announcement initially only applied to the U.S., the company has suggested it could make similar changes internationally as well.
"Rather than learning from its reckless contributions to mass violence in countries including Myanmar and Ethiopia, Meta is instead stripping away important protections that were aimed at preventing any recurrence of such harms," de Brún and Sawyeddollah wrote on the Amnesty International website. "In enacting these changes, Meta has effectively declared an open season for hate and harassment targeting its most vulnerable and at-risk people, including trans people, migrants, and refugees."
Past research has shown that Facebook's algorithms can promote hateful, false, or racially provocative content in an attempt to increase the amount of time users spend on the site and therefore the company's profits, sometimes with devastating consequences.
One example is what happened to the Rohingya, as de Brún and Sawyeddollah explained:
We have seen the horrific consequences of Meta's recklessness before. In 2017, Myanmar security forces undertook a brutal campaign of ethnic cleansing against Rohingya Muslims. A United Nations Independent Fact-Finding Commission concluded in 2018 that Myanmar had committed genocide. In the years leading up to these attacks, Facebook had become an echo chamber of virulent anti-Rohingya hatred. The mass dissemination of dehumanizing anti-Rohingya content poured fuel on the fire of long-standing discrimination and helped to create an enabling environment for mass violence. In the absence of appropriate safeguards, Facebook's toxic algorithms intensified a storm of hatred against the Rohingya, which contributed to these atrocities. According to a report by the United Nations, Facebook was instrumental in the radicalization of local populations and the incitement of violence against the Rohingya.
In late January, Sawyeddollah—with the support of Amnesty International, the Open Society Justice Initiative, and Victim Advocates International—filed a whistleblower's complaint against Meta with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) concerning Facebook's role in the Rohingya genocide.
The complaint argued that the company, then registered as Facebook, had known or at least "recklessly disregarded" since 2013 that its algorithm was encouraging the spread of anti-Rohingya hate speech and that its content moderation policies were not sufficient to address the issue. Despite this, it misrepresented the situation to both the SEC and investors in multiple filings.
Now, Sawyeddollah and de Brún are concerned that history could repeat itself unless shareholders and lawmakers take action to counter the power of the tech companies.
"With Zuckerberg and other tech CEOs lining up (literally, in the case of the recent inauguration) behind the new administration's wide-ranging attacks on human rights, Meta shareholders need to step up and hold the company's leadership to account to prevent Meta from yet again becoming a conduit for mass violence, or even genocide," they wrote. "Similarly, legislators and lawmakers in the U.S. must ensure that the SEC retains its neutrality, properly investigate legitimate complaints—such as the one we recently filed, and ensure those who abuse human rights face justice."
The human rights experts aren't the only ones concerned about Meta's new direction. Even employees are sounding the alarm.
"I really think this is a precursor for genocide," one former employee told Platformer when the new policies were first announced. "We've seen it happen. Real people's lives are actually going to be endangered. I'm just devastated."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Zuckerberg Extols 'Masculine Energy' in Corporate America as Meta Kills DEI Programs
"Remember, Zuckerberg built Facebook not for social connection but to rate the hotness of his female college mates," noted one critic.
Jan 11, 2025
As numerous U.S. corporations bend to the right with the political winds swirling around Republican President-elect Donald Trump's imminent return to power, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg is following up on his company's termination of its fact-checking program by ending its diversity, equity, and inclusion programs and praising "masculine energy" in corporate America.
"I think a lot of the corporate world is, like, pretty culturally neutered," Zuckerberg said during an interview with the eponymous host of "The Joe Rogan Experience" podcast on Friday. Meta is the parent company of social platforms including Facebook, Instagram, and Threads.
Explaining that he has "three sisters, no brothers" and "three daughters, no sons," Zuckerberg continued: "So I'm, like, surrounded by girls and women, like, my whole life. And it's like...I don't know, there's something, the kind of masculine energy, I think, is good."
"And obviously, you know, society has plenty of that, but I think corporate culture was really like trying to get away from it," he said. "And I do think that... all these forms of energy are good. And I think having a culture that, like, celebrates the aggression a bit more has its own merits that are really positive."
The tech industry is built on 'masculine energy', a bro--no girls allowed--culture. Remember Zuckerberg built Facebook not for social connection but to rate the hotness of his female college mates. www.bloomberg.com/news/article...
[image or embed]
— Amy Diehl, Ph.D. (@amydiehl.bsky.social) January 11, 2025 at 8:09 AM
Zuckerberg elaborated:
I do think that if you're a a woman going into a company, it probably feels like it's too masculine. Right? And it's like there isn't enough of the kind of the energy that you may naturally have. And it probably feels like there are all these things that are set up that are biased against you. And that's not good either, 'cause you want women to be able to succeed.
But I think these things can... go a little far. And I think it's one thing to say we want to be kind of, like, welcoming and make a good environment for everyone. And I think it's another to basically say that masculinity is bad. And I, I just think we kind of swung culturally to that part of the... spectrum where, you know, it's all like, okay, masculinity is toxic. We have to, like, get rid of it completely.
No... Both of these things are good, right? It's like, you want, like, feminine energy, you want masculine energy... I think that that's all good. But I do think the corporate culture sort of had swung towards being this somewhat more neutered thing. And I didn't really feel that until I got involved in martial arts, which I think is still a more, much more masculine culture.
While some social media observers attributed Zuckerberg's shift to factors like "the power of gym bro masculinity," others noted the rightward shift in corporate America accompanying Trump's White House return and Republicans' control of both houses of Congress.
"Zuck is a Cuck": Meta's Billionaire Bends The Knee to MAGA Mark Zuckerberg joins a rogue's gallery of billionaires capitulating to Donald Trump's threats and promoting MAGA's agenda against truth, democracy, and diversity for the sake of self-preservation. thelefthook.substack.com/p/zuck-is-a-...
[image or embed]
— Wajahat Ali (@wajali.bsky.social) January 10, 2025 at 6:47 PM
Nowhere is this more pronounced than in the wave of companies ending or dialing back diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs. The growing list includes McDonald's, Walmart, Boeing, Molson Coors, Ford, Harley-Davidson, John Deere, Amazon, and—as of Friday—Meta.
According to an internal memo from Meta vice president of human resources Janelle Gale viewed by several media outlets, Meta is immediately ending DEI programs in hiring, training, and supplier selection because the "legal and policy landscape surrounding diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts in the United States is changing."
"The term 'DEI' has also become charged, in part because it is understood by some as a practice that suggests preferential treatment of some groups over others," Gale explained.
Meta's move follows Tuesday's announcement that the company is ending its third-party fact-checking program because it is "too politically biased" and replacing it with community notes à la X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter and owned by Elon Musk, who will co-chair the Trump administration's Department of Government Efficiency.
The announcement also said Meta "will be moving the trust and safety teams that write our content policies and review content out of California to Texas and other U.S. locations."
As part of its broad new "free expression" policy, Meta will also permit certain speech widely considered hateful by human rights defenders.
According to training materials
viewed by The Intercept and other media outlets, Meta users will be able to say things like "immigrants are grubby, filthy pieces of shit," "Black people are more violent than whites," "Italians are dickheads," women are "household objects" or "property," and transgender people are mentally ill. Calling trans people "trannies" or "it" is now also acceptable on Meta sites.
I got a warning for posting "you are an evil man" to Zuck but not for posting "you are a degenerate tranny." Real nice system they have at Meta.
[image or embed]
— Alejandra Caraballo (@esqueer.net) January 10, 2025 at 7:50 PM
The New York Times reported Friday that Meta has ordered its offices in Silicon Valley, New York, and Texas to remove the tampons which had been offered to transgender and nonbinary employees who use men's restrooms. The report also said that Meta has removed trans and nonbinary themes from its Messenger chat app.
Zuckerberg has also appointed UFC CEO Dana White, a friend and supporter of Trump, to Meta's board of directors,
explaining, "I've admired him as an entrepreneur and his ability to build such a beloved brand."
These moves followed a November meeting between Trump and Zuckerberg at the former's Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, after which Meta reportedly also gave $1 million to the president-elect's inauguration fund.
Zuckerberg's alignment with key elements of Trumpism represents a stark departure from just a few months ago, when, in a new book, Trump accused him of inimical "plotting" during the 2020 election and said he threatened to imprison the tech billionaire for life if he did so again in 2024.
Now, Zuckerberg's blasting outgoing Democratic President Joe Biden. He told Rogan Friday that during the coronavirus pandemic, Biden administration officials would "call up and, like, scream... and curse" at Meta leaders over Covid-19 misinformation.
Some internet users poked fun at Meta's new policies, with one popular meme satirically claiming that Zuckerberg "died of coronavirus and complications from syphilis."
Who needs dumb old facts anyways?
[image or embed]
— JonZoidberg ( @jonzoidberg.bsky.social) January 7, 2025 at 8:42 PM
But others took a more serious view of Zuckerberg's about-face, with the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) asserting this week that "these changes reveal that Meta seems less interested in freedom of expression as a principle and more focused on appeasing the incoming U.S. administration."
"Meta has long been criticized by the global digital rights community, as well as by artists, sex worker advocacy groups, LGBTQ+ advocates, Palestine advocates, and political groups, among others," EFF added. "A corporation with a history of biased and harmful moderation like Meta [needs] a careful, well-thought-out, and sincere fix that will not undermine broader freedom of expression goals."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Study Finds Over 33 Million Instagram, TikTok Posts Promoting Harmful Content to Kids
The Ekō report came as a U.S. Senate panel held a hearing about online child sexual exploitation featuring testimony from five Big Tech CEOs.
Jan 31, 2024
As five Big Tech executives appeared before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, the group Ekō released a report highlighting how "social media companies are not only failing to safeguard young users from harm, but actively profiting from it."
"This briefing serves as an urgent call for legislative action," says the 17-page publication from Ekō—previously called SumOfUs—which is addressed to the Senate panel on the first page and urges constituents to contact their members of Congress.
The report builds on Ekō research from 2021 and 2023. Again, the group focused on TikTok and Meta-owned Instagram, examining posts about "body image issues, skin whitening, mental health issues, including suicide and self-harm, as well as incel and misogynistic content."
"A handful of tech CEOs have manufactured a new public health crisis and it's harming kids with increasing ferocity."
"This updated research, conducted between January 18th-25th, 2024 provides concrete data for members of the committee on how this kind of problematic content not only remains rampant on the platforms but in some cases has increased in volume," the document states.
Ekō's investigation uncovered over 33.26 million posts on both platforms "under hashtags housing problematic content directed at young users."
Specifically, researchers found:
- 8 hashtags about suicide leading to 1.54 million posts—a 33% increase in content since the group's research last year;
- 14 hashtags about involuntary celibate (incel) and manosphere content, leading to over a million posts—a 161% increase from 2023;
- 5 hashtags about eating disorders leading to more than 1.28 million posts;
- 16 hashtags about plastic and body modification surgeries leading to over 24.84 million posts—a 67% increase from 2021; and
- 22 hashtags about skin whitening leading to 4.54 million posts.
Meanwhile, the report points, "social media giants are making a staggering $11 billion in U.S. ad revenue from ads targeted at minors, and despite promising to take action to stop directing personalized ads to children, they continue to do so."
"Health experts are increasingly worried about the role of social media platforms in fueling the child mental health crisis, while
multiple studies have exposed the growing problem of child sexual exploitation online; and academics point to the growing evidence of addiction to social media among young people," the document adds, urging "decisive actions from lawmakers."
Ekō campaigner Maen Hammad echoed that call to action in a statement, saying that "this research underscores what we've known for a very long time now—a handful of tech CEOs have manufactured a new public health crisis and it's harming kids with increasing ferocity."
"Senators can ask Mark Zuckerberg as many questions as they like, but it's not going to fix the problem unless we also get robust new laws," Hammad added, referring to Meta's CEO. "The real question is how much more evidence do U.S. lawmakers need before they act to defend our children from these predatory tech monopolies."
In addition to Zuckerberg, whose company also owns Facebook, members of the Senate Judiciary Committee heard testimony from TikTok's Shou Chew, Snap's Evan Spiegel, Discord's Jason Citron, and Linda Yaccarino of X, the platform formerly called Twitter and owned by billionaire Elon Musk.
Ekō—which supports a full ban on surveillance advertising, the establishment of an algorithmic oversight board, and ending Big Tech's predatory business model based on personal data harvesting—was far from alone in demanding legislative action as the panel held its "Big Tech and the Online Child Sexual Exploitation Crisis" hearing.
"Another hearing, more evasions and deflections from big tech CEOs," Josh Golin of the child advocacy group Fairplay said Wednesday. "If Congress really cares about the families who packed the hearing today holding pictures of their children lost to social media harms, they will move the Kids Online Safety Act. Pointed questions and sound bites won't save lives, but KOSA will."
In September, Fairplay acknowledged concerns that KOSA "will have unintended consequences and cut off LGBTQ+ youth from online resources, or expand censorship powers" of right-wing state attorneys general, but said the group had consulted with "attorneys, leading queer advocates, First Amendment experts, and platform design experts who all agreed that any attempt by conservative AGs to censor LGBTQ+ content would not succeed."
However, some digital rights advocates remain concerned about KOSA and other internet-related bills including the Eliminating Abusive and Rampant Neglect of Interactive Technologies (EARN IT) Act; Strengthening Transparency and Obligation to Protect Children Suffering from Abuse and Mistreatment (STOP CSAM) Act; Cooper Davis Act; and Restricting the Emergence of Security Threats that Risk Information and Communications Technology (RESTRICT) Act.
"Strict privacy and antitrust legislation would... go a long way toward reducing harm and diminishing the power and dominance of Big Tech giants."
Fight for the Future director Evan Greer said Wednesday that "Big Tech is harming kids. That's not up for debate. We commend the parents and young people who are speaking up and demanding that lawmakers do something. Fight for the Future has worked for years to expose and address the harms of Big Tech monopolies and their surveillance capitalist business model."
"But unfortunately, today's hearing shows once again that many senators are actively helping Big Tech harm kids because they're more interested in creating sound bites for TV than the actual work of legislating," she argued. "Experts have repeatedly explained why, as written, dangerous and misguided bills like KOSA, STOP CSAM, and the EARN IT Act would make kids less safe, not more safe. Hundreds of thousands of young people and others have spoken up, calling for legislation that protects privacy rather than leads to censorship."
Greer suggested that "these bills could be amended to ensure they target specific harmful business practices like autoplay, infinite scroll, and use of minor's personal data to power recommendation algorithms, rather than being a blank check for censorship and expanding surveillance. Strict privacy and antitrust legislation would also go a long way toward reducing harm and diminishing the power and dominance of Big Tech giants."
While praising the Senate panel for "bringing social media CEOs in to testify on the harms their companies cause or exacerbate for kids and families," Demand Progress corporate power director Emily Peterson-Cassin also promoted antitrust bills on Wednesday.
"As the committee considers new legislation to address online harms to youth and families, we urge them to stay open-minded about types of solutions that could address these and other harms," she said. The American Innovation and Choice Online Act and Open Apps Market Act, she noted, "would weaken the power of large companies to command our attention and our money."
The Federal Trade Commission's rulemaking on commercial surveillance "could ensure our privacy and safety against the abuses that stem from a data-hoarding business model," she added. "These all have the potential to make the internet a better and safer place for everyone."
The U.S. 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline can be reached by calling or texting 988, or through chat at 988lifeline.org. It offers 24/7, free, and confidential support.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Social Media Giants Make Billions Advertising to US Kids
"Our study suggests they have overwhelming financial incentives to continue to delay taking meaningful steps to protect children," said one Harvard researcher.
Dec 27, 2023
Researchers at Boston Children's Hospital and Harvard University revealed Wednesday that social media giants made nearly $11 billion in advertising revenue from U.S.-based users younger than 18 last year.
"As concerns about youth mental health grow, more and more policymakers are trying to introduce legislation to curtail social media platform practices that may drive depression, anxiety, and disordered eating in young people," said senior author Dr. Bryn Austin, a professor and founding director of the Strategic Training Initiative for the Prevention of Eating Disorders.
"Although social media platforms may claim that they can self-regulate their practices to reduce the harms to young people, they have yet to do so," she continued, "and our study suggests they have overwhelming financial incentives to continue to delay taking meaningful steps to protect children."
For the study, published Wednesday in the journal PLOS ONE, the researchers focused on Google's YouTube; Meta-owned Facebook and Instagram; Snapchat; TikTok; and Twitter—which its billionaire owner, Elon Musk, recently rebranded as X.
"Our finding that social media platforms generate substantial advertising revenue from youth highlights the need for greater data transparency as well as public health interventions and government regulations."
"This is the first known study to estimate social media platform-specific advertising revenue from youth," the researchers noted. "There were several limitations to our study methods and analysis. We heavily relied upon secondary estimated and projected data, as well as the assumption that youth and adults may see a similar number of advertisements; however... social media platforms do not publicly disclose any data on user base ages, nor the advertising revenue generated from them."
To build their simulation model, the team used 2021-22 data from Common Sense Media and Pew Research surveys, the market research company eMarketer, the parental control application Qustodio, and the U.S. Census Bureau.
They found that in 2022, YouTube had 49.7 million U.S.-based users under 18, followed by TikTok (18.9 million), Snapchat (18 million), Instagram (16.7 million), Facebook (9.9 million), and X (7 million)—from which the companies collectively generated $8.6 billion in ad revenue from users ages 13-17 and another $2.1 billion from those 12 and under.
For users 13-17, Instagram led the pack with $4 billion in ad revenue, followed by TikTok ($2 billion) and YouTube ($1.2 billion). For younger children, YouTube was on top at $959.1 million, followed by Instagram ($801.1 million) and Facebook ($137.2 million).
"Our finding that social media platforms generate substantial advertising revenue from youth highlights the need for greater data transparency as well as public health interventions and government regulations," said lead author Dr. Amanda Raffoul, an instructor in pediatrics at Harvard Medical School.
Demands for U.S. regulators and lawmakers to rein in Big Tech—particularly to protect children—have mounted in recent years. Bolstering those calls, U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy in May issued an advisory calling attention to "the growing concerns about the effects of social media on youth mental health," as the White House unveiled federal actions to better serve kids online.
In October, the District of Columbia and 41 states led by both Democrats and Republicans filed a pair of federal lawsuits against Meta over features allegedly designed to keep young people hooked on the firm's platforms, including Facebook and Instagram.
The following month, in a move that Fight for the Future's Evan Greer called "absurd and dangerous," Meta sued the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) after the agency proposed an order that would prohibit the company from monetizing minors' data.
Last week, the FTC suggested significant updates to the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act. Zamaan Qureshi of the Design It for Us coalition celebrated that "the proposed rule directly targets Big Tech's toxic business model by requiring the invasive practice of surveillance advertising to be off by default, limiting harmful nudges that keep young people coming back to the platform even when they don't want to, and including protections against the collection of biometric information."
Keep ReadingShow Less
After Two Years of Failed Promises To Change, Time to Break Up Facebook’s Monopoly
It's now the only option that makes any sense.
Dec 16, 2023
In the fall of 2021, Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen shocked the world by exposing just how much harm the company has inflicted on young users—and the fact that the company knew every last detail about it. After years of calls across the aisle to rein in Big Tech, the revelations in the “Facebook Files” felt like the perfect catalyst to get the ball rolling on tech reform in Congress. Haugen’s bravery came just a year after the FTC launched its 2020 antitrust suit against Facebook, and coincided with a historic push in Congress to pass tech antitrust legislation. In an environment like this, it’s easy to see why Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) declared that ‘this time feels distinctly different’: that the time for Congress to clamp down on Big Tech had finally come.
Unfortunately, two years later, it’s self-evident that the company now known as Meta is as harmful and unaccountable as ever. Facebook’s status as a modern-day monopoly allowed the company to withstand public outcry, and the tech giants’ all-out war against antitrust legislation in 2022 killed the bills in the 117th Congress. Fantastical notions that markets would force Facebook to change, popular during Meta’s stock slump in 2022, look even more absurd amid Meta’s stock turnaround this year. Critical reporting on Meta’s harmful influence, such as The Wall Street Journal’s horrifying exposé this summer on Instagram’s role in enabling pedophiles, has received scant attention compared to Haugen’s revelations.
Make no mistake: Without action in Congress, Meta and the other tech giants’ ongoing war on accountability will continue.
As Haugen acknowledged in a recent op-ed, Meta and the other tech giants are still wielding their lobbying might to crush accountability measures across the country. In other words, even as Meta feigns support for accountability measures, ‘self-regulation’ won’t and cannot stop the company’s corrosive impact. To stop Facebook from exploiting children, stealing users’ data, and destroying global democracy, Congress needs to cut to the central issue at hand: Facebook’s monopolistic dominance, which enables the company to commit harm with impunity.
Over the past year, lawmakers looking to rein in Big Tech have largely set their sights on specific policy areas, be it child online safety or artificial intelligence (AI). To be sure, there’s no doubt that these issues and other specific tech policy matters deserve proper attention in their own right. But it’s crucial that the heart of the problem—the fact that Meta and other Big Tech companies’ monopoly power give them free reign to continue their destructive behavior—is not lost on Congress.
And make no mistake: Without action in Congress, Meta and the other tech giants’ ongoing war on accountability will continue. Two years ago, Meta demanded that FTC chair Lina Khan, a noted Big Tech critic, recuse herself from scrutiny of the company over frivolous conflict of interest accusations. Armed with virtually unlimited financial resources at their disposal, Meta and its team of lawyers have only intensified their war against the administrative state.
Amid a separate legal battle with the FTC over child privacy, Meta has gone as far as to target the FTC’s very constitutional authority. At a time when right-wing activists are working to weaponize the justice system in favor of corporate interests, this development should be welcomed with grave concern. As Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) noted, these ludicrous demands from Meta are akin to “Big Tobacco trying to gut the FDA because they didn't want to be held accountable for hooking kids onto nicotine.”
Contrary to naysayers, the movement to break up Big Tech monopolies is anything but dead. Rapid developments in AI over the past year have raised widespread concerns that Big Tech giants will leverage control of the technologies to entrench their monopolies. As Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), a top proponent of the tech antitrust bills last session recently acknowledged, the rise of AI makes the cause of reining in Big Tech perhaps more relevant than ever. Recent polling has affirmed that Americans are still eager to rein in tech giants’ monopoly power, with a historic September survey finding strong support for AI anti-monopoly measures.
Between the Meta’s aggressive push into AI to its apparent hands-off approach to dangerous deepfake content ahead of the 2024 election, it’s more important than ever to rein in Facebook. Lawmakers should stand with the FTC as it pursues its historic antitrust case against Meta, and vigorously fight any efforts by tech-friendly members of Congress to gut the agency’s funding. Moreover, Congress should finish the work it started last session by passing the reintroduced American Innovation and Choice Act (AICO) to clamp down on Meta and other tech giants’ monopolistic abuses.Keep ReadingShow Less
Warren Demands Facebook-Instagram Explain Censorship of Pro-Palestinian Content
"It is more important than ever that social media platforms do not censor truthful and legitimate content, particularly as people around the world turn to online communities to share and find information."
Dec 15, 2023
Progressive U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren on Thursday sent a letter to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg demanding answers to questions about the Facebook and Instagram parent company's alleged suppression of pro-Palestinian content during the ongoing Israeli obliteration of Gaza.
"Over 90 human rights and civil society organizations have raised alarm about Meta's reported suppression, filtering, and mistranslation of Palestine-related content over the past two months, calling on the company to provide additional transparency as to content moderation and to address discriminatory algorithmic design," Warren (D-Mass.) wrote.
The senator is seeking clarification regarding documented occurrences on Facebook and Instagram of censorship of pro-Palestinian content, labeling the Palestinian flag as "potentially offensive," and translating the words "Palestinian" and "Alhamdulilah"—Arabic for "praise be to God"—as "Palestinian terrorist."
"Even more concerning, Meta reportedly manipulated its content filters to apply stricter standards to content generated in Palestine compared to the standards in place in the rest of the region and the world," Warren noted.
The senator wrote:
Meta generally hides comments designated as hateful only when its content moderation systems are 80% certain that they violate the platform's policies. The Wall Street Journal reported that after Hamas' October 7 attacks, Meta tightened those filters, "as part of 'temporary risk response measures'—emergency calming efforts of the sort that Meta has previously deployed in wars, potential genocides, and the Jan. 6, 2021 U.S. Capitol riot—Meta cut that threshold in half over a swath of the Middle East, hiding any comment deemed 40% likely to be inflammatory." Meta also changed the default settings on Facebook to limit who could comment on content created "in the region." Soon thereafter, however, Meta lowered the bar further for Palestine only, hiding comments from users in the occupied Palestinian territories if its automated system judged there was at least a 25% chance they violated Meta's rules.
"Unsurprisingly given these changes, Instagram users have reported numerous instances of account suspensions and content suppression linked to communications regarding Palestine," Warren said. "The social media nonprofit 7amleh, also known as the Arab Center for Social Media Advancement, documented more than 200 cases of alleged censorship by Meta in the three weeks following Hamas' October 7 attack. Instagram users reported they were restricted from posting or livestreaming and had their content marked as 'sensitive.'"
"Other users posted screenshots showing their Stories about Palestine received significantly fewer views than other Stories posted on the same day, suggesting that Instagram may be shadowbanning material—that is, limiting the visibility of users posts without notifying them," she added. "Multiple journalists have also reported issues with their accounts, including reports of flagging Arabic posts but not identical English or Hebrew versions."
As Warren noted in her letter, "these problems are not new for Meta." Past probes by Human Rights Watch, The New York Times, and others have exposed Meta's suppression of pro-Palestinian posts and revelations of Israeli human rights abuses, as well as the company's over-enforcement of Arabic language content.
Meanwhile, "Meta's content moderation systems and practices have also exacerbated violence and failed to combat hate speech," Warren asserted. "Facebook... recently approved paid advertisements by a right-wing Israeli group calling for the assassination of a pro-Palestine activist, and subsequent test ads submitted by 7amleh calling for the murder of Palestinian civilians."
"Amidst the horrific Hamas terrorist attacks in Israel, a humanitarian catastrophe including the deaths of thousands of civilians in Gaza, and the killing of dozens of journalists, it is more important than ever that social media platforms do not censor truthful and legitimate content," she added, "particularly as people around the world turn to online communities to share and find information about developments in the region."
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy