When I was 14, I was looking for a video on the most popular file-sharing app of the time — Limewire — and started a download.
The video that arrived did not match the description. What I saw instead is as vivid in my mind today as it was in the seconds after I had shut it off, reacting too slowly to miss the horror of a young woman’s murder. That is the sort of thing that could happen in those days, when the Internet was a true Wild West. It was the risk you took when you used those kinds of services.
There should be no such danger for people who use Instagram.
Illustration: Yusha
Yet on Thursday last week, reports circulated — in 404 Media, the Wall Street Journal and elsewhere — of an “error” on the app that pushed videos of extreme violence and death into their feeds, nestled between their usual serving of friends and influencers.
Feeds started to take a dark turn on Wednesday, the Wall Street Journal reported. Those affected are thought to include minors.
Some of the videos were presented with a “sensitive content” warning that requires a user to tap before the clip is revealed. However, many of them did not — they just automatically started to play.
Reading through comments from unsuspecting users, I was reminded of my 14-year-old self and the lingering effects of a violent video you were not expecting or emotionally prepared for.
“I watched 10 people die today,” one user told the Wall Street Journal.
“I feel like I lost some humanity today,” another wrote on Reddit, saying it caused sleeplessness.
Meta Platforms Inc, Instagram’s parent, has apologized.
“We have fixed an error that caused some users to see content in their Instagram Reels feed that should not have been recommended,” a spokesman said. The company declined to share how many people were involved. Chatter online suggests it is far from an isolated incident.
Affected users need to hold Meta to account. Never before has there been such a clear-cut case of the company’s algorithm actively working to traumatize its users. What caused this error? What steps would be taken to make sure it does not happen again? Would anyone be held responsible? Meta would not voluntarily say.
One question for Meta might be why that content was on Instagram at all, shared on pages with names such as “BlackPeopleBeingHurt.”
Late last year, more than 140 Kenya-based content moderators working for Meta were diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder — the result of endless hours of sifting through traumatic material, doctors said. Mercifully, what Instagram users saw on Wednesday (and perhaps Thursday) was just a tiny reflection of the harrowing job those workers do for up to 10 hours a day. However, take it from me, it takes only one clip to sear into your brain for a lifetime.
The company insisted that the error was unrelated to its recently announced changes to its moderation policies. Last month, it said it would stop removing some content that would have previously been prohibited, although it has not provided a full updated breakdown of what is now considered acceptable.
It said it would use fewer automated processes to remove harmful material, instead relying on user reports.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg conceded it would mean the company would “catch less bad stuff.”
Meta’s existing policy on violent material is that even the most disturbing scenes are permitted on the platform. Footage of human “dismemberment” and displaying “innards” are fine if given a warning label. So, too, are images and video of “burned or charred” people and “throat slitting.” However, Meta’s staff would remove such content at the request of a family member — which is mighty good of them.
It is unfortunate, and not Meta’s fault, that there exists an eager audience for such videos, known colloquially on the Internet as “gore.” Other social networks have contended with the issue, too. Reddit, for instance, took steps to remove forums such as “WatchPeopleDie.” However, in those cases, those who wanted such material had to go actively looking. This is different: a catastrophic failure for a company that billions trust to shield them from this harm.
What does it do to young minds to see extreme violence on their Instagram feeds? Meta’s apology does not cut it.
Dave Lee is Bloomberg Opinion’s US technology columnist. He was previously a correspondent for the Financial Times and BBC News.
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
RSS