Category Archives: Meta

Meta Threatens To Block News Access If C-18 Bill Passes

Meta, ,

Meta says it would end news access on its platforms for Canadians if the country passes legislation requiring companies like Meta and Alphabet parent Google to pay news outlets for linking to news articles, PCMag reported. The original source of this information appears to be Reuters (who put it behind a paywall).

According to PCMag, Meta has criticized the planned legislation, the Online News Act (Bill C-18), for compelling it to pay for content it does not post but is instead shared by its users.

C-18 is titled: “An Act respecting online communications platforms that make news content available to persons in Canada”. The sponsor of this bill is Minister of Canadian Heritage.

Here is the summary portion of the bill:

This enactment regulates digital news intermediaries to enhance fairness in the Canadian digital news marketplace and contribute to its sustainability. It establishes a framework through which digital news intermediary operators and news businesses may enter into agreements respecting news content that is made available by digital news intermediaries. The framework takes into account principles of freedom of expression and journalistic independence.

The enactment includes a long list of items – here are some of them:

  • Applies in respect of a digital news intermediary if, having regard to specific factors, there is a significant bargaining power imbalance between its operator and news businesses;
  • Requires the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission… to maintain a list of digital news intermediaries in respect of which the enactment applies;
  • Establishes a bargaining process in respect of matters related to the making available of certain news content by digital news intermediaries;
  • Requires the Commission to establish a code of conduct respecting bargaining in relation to news content;
  • Requires the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation to provide the Commission with an annual report if the Corporation is a party to an agreement with an operator;
  • Authorizes the Commission to impose, for contraventions of the enactment, administrative monetary penalties on certain individuals and entities and conditions on the participation of news business in the bargaining process;
  • Establishes a mechanism for the recovery, from digital news intermediary operators, of certain costs related to the administration of the enactment;

PCMag reported that in its protests against the Canadian legislation, Meta has stressed that news content is neither the main reason people use its platforms nor does it represent a significant revenue source for the company. Meta has also criticized the legislation for not reflecting the interests of small independent media outlets that benefit from the sharing of the news content.

Speaking to Reuters, Meta spokesperson Lisa Laventure said: “A legislative framework that compels us to pay for links or content that we do not post, and which are not the reason the vast majority of people use our platforms, is neither sustainable nor workable.”

The Star reported that tech giants like Meta and Google have long fought against the proposed law known as Bill C-18, which would require digital giants such as Meta and Google to negotiate deals that would compensate Canadian media companies for linking to or otherwise repurposing their content online. 

Large Canadian media companies and the federal Liberal government have supported the bill, saying it would level the playing field for news outlets that compete with tech firms for advertising dollars. 

Several years ago, I wrote on Geek News Central that the Australian federal government asked the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) to create a mandatory code of conduct that would require companies like Google and Facebook to pay media companies for news.

A few months later, Facebook rejected the proposal to share advertising revenue with Australian news organizations, saying that there would “not be significant” impacts on its business if it stopped sharing news altogether. Several months later, Facebook reversed its block on Australian users sharing news on its site after the government agreed to make amendments to the proposed bargaining laws that would force tech giants to pay news outlets for their content.

I fully expect the same shenanigans to happen as Meta and Google push back against paying news organizations for their content that is shared on Meta and/or Google’s services.

Meta Exploring Plans For Twitter Rival

Meta,

Meta Platforms Inc. is exploring plans to launch a new social media app in its bid to displace Twitter as the world’s “digital town square”, Reuters reported.

“We’re exploring a standalone decentralized social network for sharing text updates. We believe there’s an opportunity for a separate space where creators and public figures can share timely updates about their interests,” a Meta spokesperson told Reuters in an emailed statement.

According to Reuters, Meta’s app will be based on a similar framework that powers Mastodon, a Twitter-like service that was launched in 2016. A Twitter-like app would allow Meta to take advantage of the current chaos at the Elon Musk-led company, where cost-cutting has been rampant.

Twitter has been struggling to hold on to its advertising base since Musk’s takeover of the platform last year. Companies have pulled back spending following Twitter’s move to restore suspended accounts and release a paid account verification that resulted in scammers impersonating firms.

TechCrunch wrote: If there is a social media phenomenon getting some kind of popularity, Meta will try to jump in. We have seen the company copy different kinds of formats ranging from Stories to short videos after seeing the success of other platforms. Now, the Mark Zuckerberg-led company is working on a decentralized text-based app.

Meta confirmed this development in a statement, but didn’t give out details about when it plans to release the app.

This new decentralized app, codenamed P92, is still under development – as first reported by MoneyControl According to documents seen by the publication, the app will let users log-in through their Instagram credentials. This could irk people who might not want to share that data with another Meta app.

According to TechCrunch, a report by Platformer said that the project will be overseen by Instagram head Adam Mosseri. The company is already involving the legal department to sniff out early privacy concerns before the app is public, the report added.

Engadget reported that P92 will carry Instagram’s branding and will let users register and log in using their Instagram credentials, according to the sources. It will populate users’ profile with their Instagram account details if they use their login on the photo-sharing app. But based on the product brief MoneyControl saw, “data sharing from Instagram to P92 will be minimal, if not one” after the initial sign up.

According to Engadget, a source told MoneyControl that the app will allow users to broadcast their posts to those on other servers, but it remains to be seen whether they will be able to follow each other, as well. If the app supports ActivityPub, though, people will likely expect it to be somewhat interoperable with Mastodon and other decentralized apps that use the protocol.

Personally, I believe that if you want something Twitter-like, you could easily join a Mastodon server that matches your interests. Most are run by a small handful of moderators who – unlike Twitter – actually do make changes in order to keep the people on their server safe from harm. I strongly prefer my Mastodon instance over the mess that Twitter has become.

Meta Is Testing Meta Verified – A Paid Subscription Service

Meta, ,

Meta announced they are testing Meta Verified, a new subscription bundle that includes account verification with impersonation protections and access to increased visibility and support. Personally, I think this decision was influenced by Twittter’s Twitter Blue subscription service.

The subscription is available for direct purchase on Instagram or Facebook in Australia and New Zealand starting later this week. People can purchase a monthly subscription (USD) $11.99 on the web and (USD) $14.99 on iOS and Android.

With Meta Verified, you’ll get:

  • A verified badge, confirming you’re the real you and that your account has been authenticated by a government ID.
  • More protection from impersonation with proactive account monitoring for impersonators who might target people with growing online audiences.
  • Help when you need it with access to a real person for common account issues.
  • Increased visibility and reach with prominence in some areas of the platform – like search, comments and recommendations.
  • Exclusive features to express yourself in unique ways.

Meta stated: Its important to feel confident that your identity and accounts are safe and that the people you’re interacting with are who they say they are. That’s why we’re building a series of checks into Meta Verified before, during, and after someone applies.

  • To be eligible, accounts must meet minimum activity requirements, such as prior posting history and be at least 18 years old.
  • Applicants are then required to submit a government ID that matches the profile name and photo of the Facebook or Instagram account they’re applying for.
  • Subscriptions will include proactive monitoring for account impersonation.

TechCrunch reported that Facebook-parent Meta has launched a subscription service called Meta Verified that will allow users to add the coveted blue check mark to their Instagram and Facebook accounts for up to a $15 a month by verifying their identity, its chief executive Mark Zuckerberg said on Sunday, tapping a revenue channel that has returned mixed success for its smaller rival Twitter.

According to TechCrunch, the revenues of Meta, which has opted not to charge its customers for most of its services in more than a decade and a half since its founding, have taken a hit in recent years following Apple’s decision to introduce stringent privacy change on iOS that curtails the social firm’s ability to track users’ internet activities.

The Zuckerberg-led firm, which makes nearly all of its money from advertising, said last year that Apple’s move would cost the company more than $10 billion in lost ads revenue in 2022.

TechCrunch also reported that Meta’s announcement follows Snap launching its own subscription service last year, through which it has converted over a million users into paid customers already.

I have an Instagram account, but I don’t use Facebook. The idea of giving Meta access to a government ID that matches the profile name on my Instagram is alarming. I don’t feel that giving that type of information to Meta is safe, especially since the company has a history of tracking people.

Meta Introduces Instagram Broadcast Channels

Meta,

Mark Zuckerberg introduced broadcast channels on Instagram with his own “Meta Channel”. Broadcast channels are a public one-to-many messaging tool that creators can invite all of their followers into and share text, video and photo updates.

Meta stated that creators can also use voice notes to share their latest updates and behind-the-scenes moments, and even create polls to crowdsource fan feedback. Only creators can send messages in broadcast channels, while followers can react to content and vote in polls.

According to Meta, more features will be added to broadcast channels in the coming months, like the ability to bring another creator into the channel to discuss upcoming collars, crowdsource questions for an “ask me anything” and more.

How Do Broadcast Channels Work?

Once a creator gets access to broadcast channels and sends the first message from their Instagram inbox, their followers will receive a one-time notification to join the channel. Anyone can discover the broadcast channel and view the content, but only followers who join the channel will receive notifications whenever there are updates.

Followers can leave or mute broadcast channels at any time and can also control their notifications from creators by going to a creator’s profile, tapping the bell icon and selecting “broadcast channel”.

Notifications will default to “some,” but this setting can be changed to “all” or “none.” Other than the invitation notification, followers will not get any other notifications about a broadcast channel unless they add the channel to their inbox. Once a channel is added to their inbox, it will appear among other message threads, and notifications will be turned on and function like any other chat.

When a broadcast channel is live, creators can also encourage their followers to join by using the “join channel” sticker in Stories or by pinning the channel link to their profile (coming soon).

TechCrunch reported that the new feature gives creators a new way to update their followers within the app. In the past, creators have usually posted a story to share news and updates with their followers, but they now have the option to use a more direct way to engage with their fans. The feature also lets creators get feedback on certain things and promote their content.

According to TechCrunch, Meta is debuting channels on Instagram first, the company plans to bring the feature to Messenger and Facebook in the coming months (according to Zuckerberg).

Gizmodo reported that Mark Zuckerberg said, “We’re starting to roll out Instagram channels – a new broadcast chat feature.” Zuckerberg continued, “I’m starting a channel to share news and updates on all the products and tech we’re building at Meta. It will be the place where I share Meta product news first.”

In my opinion, it sounds like Instagram Broadcasts could be interesting to people who use Instagram – especially if it provides an alternative to Instagram Stories. It remains to be seen if the feature will be as popular on Facebook or Messenger.

John Carmack Is Leaving Meta

Meta, ,

John Carmack, a pioneer of virtual reality technology, is leaving Meta after more than eight years at the company, according to an internal post reviewed by The New York Times.

The New York Times reported that in the post, which was written by Mr. Carmack, the technologist criticized his employer. He said Meta, which is in the midst of transitioning from a social networking company to one focused on the immersive world of the metaverse, was operating at “half the effectiveness” and has “a ridiculous amount of people and resources, but we constantly self-sabotage and squander the effort.”

“It’s been a struggle for me,” Mr. Carmack wrote in the post, which published on an internal forum this week. “I have a voice at the highest levels here, so it feels like I should be able to move things, but I’m evidently not persuasive enough.”

Mr. Carmack was the former chief technology officer of Oculus, the virtual reality company that Facebook bought for $2 billion in 2014. Mr. Carmack was one of the most influential voices leading the development of V.R. headsets. He stayed with Facebook after Mark Zuckerberg, the chief executive, decided to shift the company last year to focus on the meta verse and renamed Facebook as Meta.

According to The New York Times, Mr. Carmak’s post, which said he was ending his decade in V.R., concluded by saying he had “wearied of the fight” and would focus on his own start-up. (He announced in August that his artificial intelligence firm Keen Technologies, had raised $20 million.)

This week, Mr. Carmack testified in a court hearing over the Federal Trade Commission’s attempt to block Meta’s purchase of Within, the virtual reality start-up behind a fitness game called Supernatural. The agency has argued that the tech giant will snuff out competition in the nascent meta verse if it is allowed to complete the deal.

CNN reported that Carmack was celebrated for his work developing Wolfenstein 3D, Quake and Doom, and co-founded video game company id Software. He was an early advocate for virtual reality, though it was not uncommon for him to criticize Meta.

When asked for comment by CNN, Meta pointed to Carmack’s post and a tweet from CTO Andrew Bosworth.

“It is impossible to overstate the impact you’ve had on our work and the industry as a whole,” Bosworth tweeted. “Your technical prowess is widely known, but it is your relentless focus on creating value for people that we will remember most. Thank you and see you in VR.”

CBS News reported that John Carmack cut his ties with Meta Platforms, a holding company created last year by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, in a Friday letter that vented his frustration as he stepped down as an executive consultant in virtual reality.

“There is no way to sugar coat this; I think our organization is operating at half the effectiveness that would make me happy,” Carmak wrote in the letter, which he shared on Facebook. “Some may scoff and contend we are doing just fine, but others will laugh and say ‘Half? Ha! I’m at quarter efficiency!”

Carmack’s departure comes at a time that Zuckerberg, Meta’s CEO, has been battling widespread perceptions that he has been wasting billions of dollars trying to establish the Menlo Park, California, company in the “metaverse” – an artificial world filled with avatars of real people.

It seems to me that John Cormack finally got frustrated enough with the metaverse project, and its apparent lack of progress, to decide to leave the company. I hope his own startup will be more efficient and interesting for him than the “metaverse” was.

Meta’s Oversight Board Criticizes ‘Cross Check’ Program For VIPs

Meta, ,

Meta Platforms Inc. has long given unfair deference to VIP users of its Facebook and Instagram services under a program called “cross check” and has misled the public about the program, the company’s oversight board concluded in a report issued Tuesday, The Wall Street Journal reported.

According to The Wall Street Journal, the report offers the most detailed review of cross check, which Meta has billed as a quality-control effort to prevent moderation errors on content of heightened public interest. The oversight board took up the issue more than a year ago in the wake of a Wall Street Journal article based on the internal documents that showed that cross check was plagued by favoritism, mismanagement and understaffing.

Meta’s Oversight Board posted information titled: “Oversight Board publishes policy advisory opinion on Meta’s cross-check program”. From the information:

Key Findings: The Board recognizes that the volume and complexity of content posted on Facebook and Instagram pose challenges for building systems that uphold Meta’s human rights commitments. However, in its current form, cross-check is flawed in key areas which the company must address:

Unequal treatment of users. Cross-check grants certain users greater protection than others. If a post from a user on Meta’s cross-check lists is identified as violating the company’s rules, it remains on the platform pending further review. Meta then applies its full range of policies, including exceptions and context-specific provisions, to the post, likely increasing its chances of remaining on the platform.

Ordinary users, by contrast, are much less likely to have their content reach reviewers who can apply the full range of Meta’s rules. This unequal treatment is particularly concerning given the lack of transparent criteria for Meta’s cross-check lists. While there are clear criteria for including business partners and government leaders, users whose content is likely to be important from a human rights perspective, such as journalists and civil society organizations, have less clear paths to access the program.

Lack of transparency around how cross-check works. The Board is also concerned about the limited information Meta has provided to the public and its users about cross-check. Currently, Meta does not inform users that they are on cross check lists and does not publicly share its procedures for creating and auditing these lists. It is unclear, for example, whether entities that continuously post violating content are kept on cross-check lists based on their profile. This lack of transparency impedes the Board and the public from understanding the full consequences of the program.

NPR reported that the board said Meta appeared to be more concerned with avoiding “provoking” VIPs and evading accusations of censorship than balancing tricky questions of free speech and safety. It called for the overhaul of the “flawed” program in a report on Tuesday that included wide-ranging recommendations to bring the program in line with international principles and Meta’s own stated values.

Personally, I don’t think it is fair for Meta to pick and choose which users are exempt from Meta’s rules about what people can, and can not, post. Hopefully, the Oversight Board’s review will require Meta to treat all users equally.

Meta Releases Community Standards Enforcement

Meta, ,

Earlier this year, Meta Platforms quietly convened a war room of staffers to address a critical problem: virtually all of Facebook’s top-ranked content was spammy, over sexualized, or generally what the company classified as regrettable, The Wall Street Journal reported.

Meta’s executives and researchers were growing embarrassed that its widely viewed content report, a quarterly survey of the posts with the broadest reach, was consistently dominated by stolen memes, engagement bait and link spam for sketchy online shops, according to documents viewed by The Wall Street Journal and people familiar with the issue.

Meta posted “Integrity and Transparency Reports, Third Quarter 2022”. It was written by Guy Rosen, VP of Integrity. Part of the report included Community Standards Enforcement Report Highlights.

It includes the following:

“Our actions against hate speech-related content decreased from 13.5 million to 10.6 million in Q3 2022 on Facebook because we improved the accuracy of our AI technology. We’ve done this by leveraging data from past user appeals to identify posts that could have been removed by mistake without appropriate cultural context.

“For example, now we can better recognize humorous terms of endearment used between friends, or better detect words that may be considered offensive or inappropriate in one context but not another. As we improve this accuracy, or proactive detection rate for hate speech also decreased from 95.6% to 90.2% in Q3 2022.”

Part of the report states that Meta’s actions against content that incites violence decreased from 19.3 million to 14.4 million in Q3 2022 after their improved AI technology was “better able to recognize language and emojis used in jest between friends.”

For bullying and harassment-related content, Meta’s proactive rate decreased in Q3 2022 from 76.7% to 67.8% on Facebook, and 87.4% to 87.3% on Instagram. Meta stated that this decrease was due to improved accuracy in their technologies (and a bug in their system that is now resolved).

On Facebook, Meta Took Action On:

1.67 million pieces of content related to terrorism, an increase from 13.5 million in Q2. This increase was because non-violating videos were added incorrectly to our media-matching technology banks and were removed (though they were eventually restored).

4.1 million pieces of drug content, an increase from 3.9 million in Q2 2022, due to improvements made to our proactive detection technology.

1.4 billion pieces of spam content, an increase from 734 million in Q2, due to an increased number of adversarial spam incidents in August.

On Instagram, Meta Took Action On:

2.2 million pieces of content related to terrorism, from 1.9 million on Q2, due to non-violating videos added incorrectly to our media-matching technology banks and were removed (though they were eventually restored).

2.5 pieces of drug content, an increase from 1.9 million, due to improvements in our proactive detection technology.

AdWeek reported that Meta removed three networks during the third quarter of this year for violations of Meta’s policies against inauthentic behavior.

According to AdWeek, the first originated in the U.S. and was linked to individuals associated with the U.S. military, and it operated across many internet services and focused on Afghanistan, Algeria, Iran, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Somalia, Syria, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Yemen.

The second one originated in China and targeted the Czech Republic, the U.S., and, to a lesser extent, Chinese- and French-speaking audiences around the world. The third originated in Russia, primarily targeting Germany but also France, Italy, Ukraine and the U.K.

It appears that Meta has put some effort into cleaning up its platforms. I suppose that’s what happens when Meta’s own researchers were “embarrassed” by what was appearing on Facebook and Instagram!