|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
By: Donny Simcha Guttman
In recent days, a report from Stanford University has revealed bombshell evidence in terms of social media algorithms permitting access to sexual content, including child pornography to viewers. The report found that a lack of enforcement on Instagram accounts has allowed pedophilic “communities” to completely reign online. The report recommended more human resources to tackle the ongoing issues.
The study, headed by Stanford’s David Thiel, Alex Stamos, and Renee DiResta found that accounts that they visited, even briefly, were sexualized in content and they were subsequently recommended by Instagram to see other similar accounts. The researchers were able to confirm this as a standard practice on Instagram, by setting up personal accounts and putting in keywords that led them to such content.
Alex Stamos, one of the researchers, commented to the Washington Journal, “That a team of three academics with limited access could find such a huge network should set off alarms at Meta.” Part of the content on these accounts are “menus” which included buyers the right to “commission specific acts” and “meet up” with kids for sexual purposes. Content of children committing acts of bestiality is further content that is included in the “menu” option.
Despite the content that is on Instagram, the mass spread to viewers who have had no specific history of visiting such accounts, has also plagued Instagram.
Sarah Adams, a Canadian mother of two who runs an Instagram account focusing on combating child sexual exploitation, was recently sent a link by one of her followers labeled, “incest toddlers”. Sarah only viewed the page briefly, nevertheless, Instagram algorithms recommended many of the viewers of her account to similar pages.
After the incident, Meta, Instagram’s parent company, confirmed to the New York Post that the incident violated their policies and that they restricted “thousands of additional search terms and hashtags on Instagram.” Meta also commented that, “[Meta is] continuously exploring ways to actively defend against this behavior [and has] set up an internal task force to investigate these claims and immediately address them. Child exploitation is a horrific crime. We work aggressively to fight it on and off our platforms, and to support law enforcement in its efforts to arrest and prosecute the criminals behind it.”
Meta also reported on their efforts in tackling child exploitation by citing 490,000 instances where they disabled accounts due to violations of their child safety policies, an additional 29,000 blocked devices for similar violations, and also their efforts between 2020 and 2022 of them taking down 27 networks that spread abusive content.
Generally, as reported by the Washington Post, social media tracks “illegal-content” accounts by tracking account behavioral patterns, rather than specific subjects. This allows social media companies to track more instances of violations. The Wall Street Journal has reported that Meta has even engaged in such practices in other instances, like after the events of January 6. Based on internal documents in Meta, the platform was able to stop content from spreading from the election-skeptic, Trump-aligned movement, “The Patriot Party”.
As the document admits, “We were able to nip terms like ‘Patriot Party’ in the bud before mass adoption.” Meta’s policy in terms of elections post the 2020 election was, “an individual can question election results. But when it’s amplified by a movement, it can damage democracy. There is harm in the way movements shift norms and an understanding of collective truth.” To redirect “susceptible users”, Meta would redirect those account to other non-controversial content.
With the recent release of the Stanford report, UMass Director of Cybersecurity Institute Matt Levine called for, “[to] Pull the emergency brake. Are the economic benefits worth the harm to these children?” Instagram continues to alleviate the public with the recent bombshell report with a pledge to improve enforcement technology. It remains to be seen if widespread and equal policies across all subjects will be enforced.
