Rise in 'Harmful Content' Since Meta Policy Rollbacks, Survey Shows

The logo of Meta is seen at the entrance of the company's temporary stand ahead of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland January 18, 2025. (Reuters)
The logo of Meta is seen at the entrance of the company's temporary stand ahead of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland January 18, 2025. (Reuters)
TT
20

Rise in 'Harmful Content' Since Meta Policy Rollbacks, Survey Shows

The logo of Meta is seen at the entrance of the company's temporary stand ahead of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland January 18, 2025. (Reuters)
The logo of Meta is seen at the entrance of the company's temporary stand ahead of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland January 18, 2025. (Reuters)

Harmful content including hate speech has surged across Meta's platforms since the company ended third-party fact-checking in the United States and eased moderation policies, a survey showed Monday.

The survey of around 7,000 active users on Instagram, Facebook and Threads comes after the Palo Alto company ditched US fact-checkers in January and turned over the task of debunking falsehoods to ordinary users under a model known as "Community Notes," popularized by X.

The decision was widely seen as an attempt to appease President Donald Trump's new administration, whose conservative support base has long complained that fact-checking on tech platforms was a way to curtail free speech and censor right-wing content.

Meta also rolled back restrictions around topics such as gender and sexual identity. The tech giant's updated community guidelines said its platforms would permit users to accuse people of "mental illness" or "abnormality" based on their gender or sexual orientation.

"These policy shifts signified a dramatic reversal of content moderation standards the company had built over nearly a decade," said the survey published by digital and human rights groups including UltraViolet, GLAAD, and All Out.

"Among our survey population of approximately 7,000 active users, we found stark evidence of increased harmful content, decreased freedom of expression, and increased self-censorship".

One in six respondents in the survey reported being the victim of some form of gender-based or sexual violence on Meta platforms, while 66 percent said they had witnessed harmful content such as hateful or violent material.

Ninety-two percent of surveyed users said they were concerned about increasing harmful content and felt "less protected from being exposed to or targeted by" such material on Meta's platforms.

Seventy-seven percent of respondents described feeling "less safe" expressing themselves freely.

The company declined to comment on the survey.

In its most recent quarterly report, published in May, Meta insisted that the changes in January had left a minimal impact.

"Following the changes announced in January we've cut enforcement mistakes in the US in half, while during that same time period the low prevalence of violating content on the platform remained largely unchanged for most problem areas," the report said.

But the groups behind the survey insisted that the report did not reflect users' experiences of targeted hate and harassment.

"Social media is not just a place we 'go' anymore. It's a place we live, work, and play. That's why it's more crucial than ever to ensure that all people can safely access these spaces and freely express themselves without fear of retribution," Jenna Sherman, campaign director at UltraViolet, told AFP.

"But after helping to set a standard for content moderation online for nearly a decade, (chief executive) Mark Zuckerberg decided to move his company backwards, abandoning vulnerable users in the process.

"Facebook and Instagram already had an equity problem. Now, it's out of control," Sherman added.

The groups implored Meta to hire an independent third party to "formally analyze changes in harmful content facilitated by the policy changes" made in January, and for the tech giant to swiftly reinstate the content moderation standards that were in place earlier.

The International Fact-Checking Network has previously warned of devastating consequences if Meta broadens its policy shift related to fact-checkers beyond US borders to the company's programs covering more than 100 countries.

AFP currently works in 26 languages with Meta's fact-checking program, including in Asia, Latin America, and the European Union.

 

 



Google Loses Appeal in Antitrust Battle with Fortnite Maker

Audience members gather at Made By Google for new product announcements at Google on Aug. 13, 2024, in Mountain View, Calif. (AP Photo/Juliana Yamada, File)
Audience members gather at Made By Google for new product announcements at Google on Aug. 13, 2024, in Mountain View, Calif. (AP Photo/Juliana Yamada, File)
TT
20

Google Loses Appeal in Antitrust Battle with Fortnite Maker

Audience members gather at Made By Google for new product announcements at Google on Aug. 13, 2024, in Mountain View, Calif. (AP Photo/Juliana Yamada, File)
Audience members gather at Made By Google for new product announcements at Google on Aug. 13, 2024, in Mountain View, Calif. (AP Photo/Juliana Yamada, File)

A federal appeals court has upheld a jury verdict condemning Google's Android app store as an illegal monopoly, clearing the way for a federal judge to enforce a potentially disruptive shakeup that's designed to give consumers more choices.

The unanimous ruling issued Thursday by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals delivers a double-barreled legal blow for Google, which has been waylaid in three separate antitrust trials that resulted in different pillars of its internet empire being declared as domineering scofflaws monopolies since late 2023, The AP news reported.

The unsuccessful appeal represents a major victory for video game maker Epic Games, which launched a legal crusade targeting Google’s Play Store for Android apps and Apple’s iPhone app store nearly five years ago in an attempt to bypass exclusive payment processing systems that charged 15% to 30% commissions on in-app transactions.

The jury's December 2023 rebuke of Google's app store for Android-powered smartphones began a cascade of setbacks that includes monopoly judgements against the company's ubiquitous search engine last year and the technology underlying its digital ad network earlier this year.

Although not as lucrative as Google's search engine or ad system, the Play Store for Android apps has long been a gold mine that generated billions of dollars in annual revenue by taking a 15% to 30% cut from in-app transactions funneled through the company's own payment processing system.

Following a month-long trial, a nine-person jury determined that Google had rigged its system to thwart alternative app stores from offering better deals to consumers and software developers. That verdict resulted in US District Judge James Donato ordering Google to tear down digital walls shielding the Play Store from competition, triggering the company's appeal to overturn the jury's finding and void the judge's mandated shakeup.

But a three-judge panel that heard Google's appeal in February rejected its lawyers' contention that Donato erred by allowing the case to be determined by a jury that deviated from the market definition outlined by another federal judge who mostly sided with Apple in Epic's case against the iPhone maker's app store.

Epic's lawsuit "was replete with evidence that Google’s anticompetitive conduct entrenched its dominance, causing the Play Store to benefit from network effects," the judges wrote in the decision.

The ruling “will significantly harm user safety, limit choice, and undermine the innovation that has always been central to the Android ecosystem,” Google’s vice president of regulatory affairs Lee-Anne Mulholland said in a statement.

Unless Google can extend the enforcement delay placed on Donato's order issued last October, the company will have to begin an overhaul that includes making the Play Store's entire library of more than 2 million Android apps available to would-be rivals and also help distribute the alternative options. Google has argued that the required revisions will raise privacy and security risks by exposing consumers to scam artists and hackers masquerading as legitimate app stores.

But Epic's lawyers have ridiculed Google's warnings about the changes as scare tactics in a desperate attempt to protect the fortunes of its corporate parent Alphabet Inc.

Although Epic fell short in its attempt to have the iPhone's app store declared a monopoly, that case resulted in a judge issuing an order that required Apple to surrender exclusive control over the payment processing of in-app transactions and allow links to alternative systems without collecting a commission.

Besides being hit with Donato's order, Google still faces further trouble ahead that could leave an even bigger dent in its finances.

As part of the effort to address Google’s illegal monopoly in search, a federal judge is weighing a proposal by the US Justice Department that would require the sale of its Chrome web browser and ban the multibillion dollar deals that company has been making with Apple and others to lock-in its search engine as the main gateway to the internet.

Google is also facing a proposed breakup of its advertising technology as part of the countermeasures to its monopoly in that business. A trial on that proposal is scheduled to begin in September.