Meta has removed Facebook and Instagram advertisements linked to malicious apps that allegedly targeted Indian banking users. The development highlights growing concerns over online scams, fraudulent applications and cyber threats aimed at stealing sensitive financial information from users.


Meta removes banking scam ads from Facebook, Instagram amid rising cyber fraud

Meta removes ads linked to banking scams

After being sued by multiple U.S. states over its products fueling social media addiction, Meta announced a $18 billion settlement. In a big win for accountability, it has also decided to curb Instagram and Facebook use for teenagers. Now, it remains to be seen whether these curbs are extended to other countries like India. 


US curbs Instagram for kids, India's META users still victims

A landmark trial began in August 2026 in a federal court in Oakland, California, where Meta Platforms is accused of deliberately designing Facebook and Instagram to hook young users. A bipartisan coalition of 29 U.S. states brought the suit, alleging the tech giant engineered addictive features that exploit adolescent psychology, causing severe youth mental health harms while prioritising corporate profit. Meta strongly rejects the allegations, claiming the lawsuit's mathematical financial demands are completely unsubstantiated.

META accused of designing Facebook & Instagram to hook young users 

Meta is facing growing scrutiny over a question that goes far beyond social media: when a technology company becomes powerful enough to shape childhood, how much responsibility should it bear for the consequences?&nbsp;Facebook was launched in 2004, while Meta became the parent-company brand in 2021. Since then, the digital landscape has transformed dramatically. Smartphones, algorithms, influencers and artificial intelligence have become central to how a new generation communicates, learns and sees the world.Now, Meta is facing multiple legal battles in the United States over child safety, alleged social-media addiction and its business practices.&nbsp;In one major case, 29 U.S. states accuse Meta of designing Facebook and Instagram in ways that allegedly encouraged young users to remain engaged, exposed children to harmful content and contributed to youth-related harms. Meta denies the allegations.&nbsp;The controversy raises a fundamental question: are the guardrails protecting today's children strong enough for the digital world they inhabit?&nbsp;Meta says it has invested heavily in safety, including parental controls, age protections and technology designed to detect child exploitation. But critics argue that removing harmful content after it appears is not enough. They want platforms to take greater responsibility for preventing foreseeable harm through the way their products are designed.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-says-tougher-iran-sanctions-make-large-scale-war-less-likely-tehran-condemns-economic-terrorism-1787242779961">US says tougher Iran sanctions make large-scale war less likely; Tehran condemns 'economic terrorism'</a>&nbsp;Social media is unlikely to disappear. The challenge is ensuring that commercial success does not come at the expense of vulnerable users.&nbsp;Parents have a role. Governments have a role. Schools have a role.&nbsp;And Big Tech has a role too.&nbsp;Because children are more than clicks, engagement metrics or advertising audiences.They are the next generation.&nbsp;And perhaps the real question is not whether Big Tech can operate with stronger guardrails, but whether our children can thrive without them.&nbsp;And that's The Verdict.

Meta faces growing legal and public scrutiny over whether its social media platforms do enough to protect children from harmful content, addiction risks and other potential online harms.

Meta is facing growing scrutiny over a question that goes far beyond social media: when a technology company becomes powerful enough to shape childhood, how much responsibility should it bear for the consequences? Facebook was launched in 2004, while Meta became the parent-company brand in 2021. Since then, the digital landscape has transformed dramatically. Smartphones, algorithms, influencers and artificial intelligence have become central to how a new generation communicates, learns and sees the world. Now, Meta is facing multiple legal battles in the United States over child safety, alleged social-media addiction and its business practices. In one major case, 29 U.S. states accuse Meta of designing Facebook and Instagram in ways that allegedly encouraged young users to remain engaged, exposed children to harmful content and contributed to youth-related harms. Meta denies the allegations. The controversy raises a fundamental question: are the guardrails protecting today's children strong enough for the digital world they inhabit? Meta says it has invested heavily in safety, including parental controls, age protections and technology designed to detect child exploitation. But critics argue that removing harmful content after it appears is not enough. They want platforms to take greater responsibility for preventing foreseeable harm through the way their products are designed. Also Read: US says tougher Iran sanctions make large-scale war less likely; Tehran condemns 'economic terrorism' Social media is unlikely to disappear. The challenge is ensuring that commercial success does not come at the expense of vulnerable users. Parents have a role. Governments have a role. Schools have a role. And Big Tech has a role too. Because children are more than clicks, engagement metrics or advertising audiences. They are the next generation. And perhaps the real question is not whether Big Tech can operate with stronger guardrails, but whether our children can thrive without them. And that's The Verdict.

Meta faces growing legal and public scrutiny over whether its social media platforms do enough to protect children from harmful content, addiction risks and other potential online harms.

Meta under scrutiny: Big Tech, bigger responsibility

Meta is facing one of its biggest legal challenges yet as a coalition of 29 US states accuses the technology giant of deliberately designing Facebook and Instagram to keep children hooked, while downplaying the risks associated with its platforms. The closely watched trial began in a federal court in Oakland, California, on Tuesday (Aug 18). Four states, including California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey, are leading the case, alleging that Meta’s products contributed to anxiety, depression and other mental health problems among young users.The states also accuse Meta of violating federal law by collecting and using children’s personal information improperly.Opening the case for California, deputy attorney general Megan O’Neill alleged that Meta’s business model was to “hook the users, hold them for as long as they can, harvest their data, and then hide the truth from the public.”“It worked especially well for kids,” O’Neill told the eight-member jury.Meta rejected the allegations. The company’s lawyer, Paul Schmidt, acknowledged that some young people struggle with social media but argued that research does not establish a clear connection between adolescent social media use and poor wellbeing.“They don’t believe they’re going to do well if people don’t like their service,” Schmidt said, referring to Meta’s leadership.The case could have significant consequences for Facebook and Instagram. US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers will ultimately decide Meta’s liability, while jurors are expected to issue an advisory verdict.If Meta is found liable, the judge could impose civil penalties and order changes to the platforms. The states have proposed measures including removing likes and infinite scrolling, introducing time limits for younger users and strengthening restrictions on children under 13.Former Meta safety engineer Arturo Bejar, who has previously criticised the company’s child-safety measures, was the first witness called by the states.The trial is expected to last six weeks, with Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Instagram chief Adam Mosseri among those expected to testify. &nbsp;

Meta faces a landmark US trial as 29 states accuse Facebook and Instagram of deliberately ‘hooking’ children, harming their wellbeing and exploiting their data for profit.

Meta is facing one of its biggest legal challenges yet as a coalition of 29 US states accuses the technology giant of deliberately designing Facebook and Instagram to keep children hooked, while downplaying the risks associated with its platforms. The closely watched trial began in a federal court in Oakland, California, on Tuesday (Aug 18). Four states, including California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey, are leading the case, alleging that Meta’s products contributed to anxiety, depression and other mental health problems among young users. The states also accuse Meta of violating federal law by collecting and using children’s personal information improperly. Opening the case for California, deputy attorney general Megan O’Neill alleged that Meta’s business model was to “hook the users, hold them for as long as they can, harvest their data, and then hide the truth from the public.” “It worked especially well for kids,” O’Neill told the eight-member jury. Meta rejected the allegations. The company’s lawyer, Paul Schmidt, acknowledged that some young people struggle with social media but argued that research does not establish a clear connection between adolescent social media use and poor wellbeing. “They don’t believe they’re going to do well if people don’t like their service,” Schmidt said, referring to Meta’s leadership. The case could have significant consequences for Facebook and Instagram. US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers will ultimately decide Meta’s liability, while jurors are expected to issue an advisory verdict. If Meta is found liable, the judge could impose civil penalties and order changes to the platforms. The states have proposed measures including removing likes and infinite scrolling, introducing time limits for younger users and strengthening restrictions on children under 13. Former Meta safety engineer Arturo Bejar, who has previously criticised the company’s child-safety measures, was the first witness called by the states. The trial is expected to last six weeks, with Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Instagram chief Adam Mosseri among those expected to testify.

Meta faces a landmark US trial as 29 states accuse Facebook and Instagram of deliberately ‘hooking’ children, harming their wellbeing and exploiting their data for profit.

Did Meta ‘hook’ children to Facebook, Instagram for profit? 29 US states take tech giant to trial

A New Mexico court has ordered Meta to pay $567 million into a teen mental health fund, ruling that Facebook and Instagram contributed to harming young users and created a public nuisance.

The court also directed Meta to implement stronger youth safety measures, including limits on teen usage, stricter controls on adult interactions with minors, notification restrictions, and safeguards against inappropriate AI chatbot interactions.

The landmark ruling could influence similar lawsuits across the United States, where dozens of states and more than 1,300 school districts are pursuing legal action against social media companies over alleged harm to children.

Meta Hit With $567 Million Penalty Over Teen Mental Health | Facebook & Instagram Under Fire

India has introduced stricter rules for social media platforms to combat AI-generated deepfakes and unlawful synthetic content. Under the amended IT Rules, platforms must remove illegal AI-generated content within three hours of receiving a valid notice from the government or a court. The new framework also mandates clear labeling of AI-generated content, metadata for traceability, and faster grievance redressal for complaints involving impersonation, nudity, and child sexual abuse material.

India Tightens Deepfake Rules: Social Media Platforms Must Remove Illegal AI Content Within 3 Hours

A powerful panel of the Indian Parliament asked some uncomfortable questions to representatives of some of the world's biggest social media companies. The context was the recent protests against exam paper leaks led by the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP), the removal of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's video, alleged algorithmic manipulation, and broader concerns about platform accountability. Representatives of Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, as well as those from Google, YouTube, X and Snapchat attended the meeting. Here is what happened:<h2>The Parliament committee was on regulating social and digital platforms</h2>The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Communications and Information Technology was chaired by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MP Nishikant Dubey. Its meeting was also attended by Union Home Secretary Govind Mohan, Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) Secretary S Krishnan, Information and Broadcasting Secretary Sanjay Jaju, and other senior officials. The subject of the meeting held on Monday (Aug 3) was "Social and Digital Platforms and Their Regulation".<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/meta-under-fire-as-panel-seeks-answers-over-pm-modi-video-takedown-1785825943604/embed">https://www.wionews.com/videos/meta-under-fire-as-panel-seeks-answers-over-pm-modi-video-takedown-1785825943604/embed</a><h2>The removal of PM Modi's video came up for discussion</h2>The Prime Minister released a reel-style video on the night of 23 July addressing India's youth amid protests in Delhi and other cities over alleged examination paper leaks, including NEET-UG. The CJP-led agitation was demanding the resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan, who eventually resigned. Modi's video was briefly restricted or removed on Facebook for around five hours, from approximately 12.30 am to 5.00 am. Meta attributed the incident to a technical error and restored the video. MeitY had earlier described the explanation as "inadequate".At the Parliament committee hearing, members pressed Meta to fix responsibility beyond a company-level apology, according to media reports. The company was asked as to who authorised the removal of the PM's video and how such an error could occur with official content from the Prime Minister's office.The underlying question was whether this represented a serious systems failure, a flaw in Meta's moderation processes, or a deliberate act that resulted in the Prime Minister's official communication being taken down.Meta representatives expressed regret and indicated their readiness to apologise. Dubey sought a personal apology from Meta Chief Executive Officer Mark Zuckerberg. If the CEO does not apologise, Meta's safe harbour protection under Section 79 of India's Information Technology Act, 2000 should be withdrawn, Dubey reportedly recommended. The panel also sought a written reply from Meta within 10 days.<h2>Did tech giants amplify the viewership of CJP protest content?</h2>Dubey noted that the CJP had exceptionally high social media viewership. According to some media reports cited, its content generated up to 27 billion views across platforms. The figure exceeded the combined reach of content from major political parties. An anti-reservation forum also reportedly generated around 7 billion views.These figures were presented as possible evidence that the algorithms of social media platforms may be favouring newcomers, highly engaging content, or particular types of political material. Panel members sought an explanation of how such content achieved such extraordinary reach and whether platform recommendation systems played a role. The broader issue was the role of social media platforms during the protests, including the spread of deepfakes, morphed images and misleading content targeting the prime minister and Union ministers.Police cases have already been registered, and investigations are underway, in connection with some such content, including a case against Meta India's head in Hyderabad over allegedly objectionable posts.Also read:<a href="https://www.wionews.com/trending/why-did-meta-remove-pm-modi-s-facebook-video-on-paper-leaks-tech-giant-blames-technical-error-1785220710914"> Why did Meta remove PM Modi's Facebook video on paper leaks? Tech company blames 'technical error'</a><h2>Is there algorithmic bias in the recommendation systems of social media?</h2>The panel members questioned the platforms, particularly Meta, over alleged algorithmic bias.Among the issues raised were why objectionable material, including pornography, child sexual abuse material (CSAM), deepfake scams and content targeting women, often remained available while an official communication from the prime minister was removed.The tech giants were asked how their recommendation, ranking and amplification systems function, who oversees them, what safeguards exist against bias, and how content moderation decisions are reviewed.They also faced questions on whether political or ideological bias exists in their content moderation systems and what responsibilities platforms bear in matters affecting public order, elections and national security.Specifically, members questioned the capability of platform algorithms and artificial intelligence systems to detect deepfakes involving the Prime Minister and other public figures before they spread widely.MeitY has already summoned Meta's global team to discuss algorithmic processes, potential bias and the company's responsibilities relating to public order and compliance with Indian law.Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/after-pm-fb-post-issue-meta-assures-rigorous-safeguards-for-posts-by-prominent-accounts-1785343588801">After PM FB post issue, Meta assures rigorous safeguards for posts by prominent accounts</a><h2>Foreign ownership of platforms and control over content</h2>Another issue discussed was the foreign ownership of major technology platforms and the extent to which content moderation decisions affecting Indian users are made outside India. There has been growing criticism that these companies do not adequately comply with Indian law despite earning substantial revenues from the country. Their handling of unlawful content, including cyber fraud, online harassment of women and other illegal material, was criticised as inadequate.Members also raised concerns that, in some instances, platforms had failed to respond promptly to official communications from Indian authorities, including the Ministry of Home Affairs and MeitY.<h2>Are social media platforms merely intermediaries?</h2>A key legal issue discussed was whether these platforms can continue to claim protection under the safe harbour provisions of Indian law. Under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, intermediaries receive limited immunity from liability for user-generated content, provided they comply with prescribed legal obligations and due diligence requirements.Some panel members argued that if platforms actively recommend, amplify, suppress or otherwise influence the visibility of content through algorithms, they cannot simply describe themselves as neutral intermediaries. Others maintained that the existing legal framework must be applied carefully to preserve free expression while ensuring accountability.Opposition members on the panel stressed that criticism of the government should not automatically be treated as anti-national and that democratic space for dissent must remain protected.However, the committee was largely unanimous on the need for stricter enforcement against unlawful content, greater transparency in content moderation and stronger accountability from social media platforms.&nbsp;

An Indian parliamentary panel questioned Meta, Google, X, YouTube and Snapchat over a number of issues regarding their alleged bias. Issues discussed include PM Modi's video removal, algorithmic bias, content moderation and social media accountability.



A powerful panel of the Indian Parliament asked some uncomfortable questions to representatives of some of the world's biggest social media companies. The context was the recent protests against exam paper leaks led by the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP), the removal of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's video, alleged algorithmic manipulation, and broader concerns about platform accountability. Representatives of Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, as well as those from Google, YouTube, X and Snapchat attended the meeting. Here is what happened: The Parliament committee was on regulating social and digital platforms The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Communications and Information Technology was chaired by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MP Nishikant Dubey. Its meeting was also attended by Union Home Secretary Govind Mohan, Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) Secretary S Krishnan, Information and Broadcasting Secretary Sanjay Jaju, and other senior officials. The subject of the meeting held on Monday (Aug 3) was "Social and Digital Platforms and Their Regulation". https://www.wionews.com/videos/meta-under-fire-as-panel-seeks-answers-over-pm-modi-video-takedown-1785825943604/embed The removal of PM Modi's video came up for discussion The Prime Minister released a reel-style video on the night of 23 July addressing India's youth amid protests in Delhi and other cities over alleged examination paper leaks, including NEET-UG. The CJP-led agitation was demanding the resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan, who eventually resigned. Modi's video was briefly restricted or removed on Facebook for around five hours, from approximately 12.30 am to 5.00 am. Meta attributed the incident to a technical error and restored the video. MeitY had earlier described the explanation as "inadequate". At the Parliament committee hearing, members pressed Meta to fix responsibility beyond a company-level apology, according to media reports. The company was asked as to who authorised the removal of the PM's video and how such an error could occur with official content from the Prime Minister's office. The underlying question was whether this represented a serious systems failure, a flaw in Meta's moderation processes, or a deliberate act that resulted in the Prime Minister's official communication being taken down. Meta representatives expressed regret and indicated their readiness to apologise. Dubey sought a personal apology from Meta Chief Executive Officer Mark Zuckerberg. If the CEO does not apologise, Meta's safe harbour protection under Section 79 of India's Information Technology Act, 2000 should be withdrawn, Dubey reportedly recommended. The panel also sought a written reply from Meta within 10 days. Did tech giants amplify the viewership of CJP protest content? Dubey noted that the CJP had exceptionally high social media viewership. According to some media reports cited, its content generated up to 27 billion views across platforms. The figure exceeded the combined reach of content from major political parties. An anti-reservation forum also reportedly generated around 7 billion views. These figures were presented as possible evidence that the algorithms of social media platforms may be favouring newcomers, highly engaging content, or particular types of political material. Panel members sought an explanation of how such content achieved such extraordinary reach and whether platform recommendation systems played a role. The broader issue was the role of social media platforms during the protests, including the spread of deepfakes, morphed images and misleading content targeting the prime minister and Union ministers. Police cases have already been registered, and investigations are underway, in connection with some such content, including a case against Meta India's head in Hyderabad over allegedly objectionable posts. Also read: Why did Meta remove PM Modi's Facebook video on paper leaks? Tech company blames 'technical error' Is there algorithmic bias in the recommendation systems of social media? The panel members questioned the platforms, particularly Meta, over alleged algorithmic bias. Among the issues raised were why objectionable material, including pornography, child sexual abuse material (CSAM), deepfake scams and content targeting women, often remained available while an official communication from the prime minister was removed. The tech giants were asked how their recommendation, ranking and amplification systems function, who oversees them, what safeguards exist against bias, and how content moderation decisions are reviewed. They also faced questions on whether political or ideological bias exists in their content moderation systems and what responsibilities platforms bear in matters affecting public order, elections and national security. Specifically, members questioned the capability of platform algorithms and artificial intelligence systems to detect deepfakes involving the Prime Minister and other public figures before they spread widely. MeitY has already summoned Meta's global team to discuss algorithmic processes, potential bias and the company's responsibilities relating to public order and compliance with Indian law. Also read: After PM FB post issue, Meta assures rigorous safeguards for posts by prominent accounts Foreign ownership of platforms and control over content Another issue discussed was the foreign ownership of major technology platforms and the extent to which content moderation decisions affecting Indian users are made outside India. There has been growing criticism that these companies do not adequately comply with Indian law despite earning substantial revenues from the country. Their handling of unlawful content, including cyber fraud, online harassment of women and other illegal material, was criticised as inadequate. Members also raised concerns that, in some instances, platforms had failed to respond promptly to official communications from Indian authorities, including the Ministry of Home Affairs and MeitY. Are social media platforms merely intermediaries? A key legal issue discussed was whether these platforms can continue to claim protection under the safe harbour provisions of Indian law. Under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, intermediaries receive limited immunity from liability for user-generated content, provided they comply with prescribed legal obligations and due diligence requirements. Some panel members argued that if platforms actively recommend, amplify, suppress or otherwise influence the visibility of content through algorithms, they cannot simply describe themselves as neutral intermediaries. Others maintained that the existing legal framework must be applied carefully to preserve free expression while ensuring accountability. Opposition members on the panel stressed that criticism of the government should not automatically be treated as anti-national and that democratic space for dissent must remain protected. However, the committee was largely unanimous on the need for stricter enforcement against unlawful content, greater transparency in content moderation and stronger accountability from social media platforms.

An Indian parliamentary panel questioned Meta, Google, X, YouTube and Snapchat over a number of issues regarding their alleged bias. Issues discussed include PM Modi's video removal, algorithmic bias, content moderation and social media accountability.&nbsp;

What did the Indian Parliament panel ask Meta, Google, X and Snapchat? PM Modi's video removal, CJP protest, algorithm manipulation

Days after Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s video post was briefly removed from Facebook, Meta has assured the government that the content posted by the prime minister and other prominent accounts will get rigorous safeguards and additional oversight, according to sources. The post, uploaded on Instagram on July 23 and shared on Facebook, featured PM Modi’s first direct selfie video addressing India’s youth. In the video, the Prime Minister promised stringent action against paper leaks and announced that the government would introduce legislation to tackle the issue.&nbsp;The Mark Zuckerberg-owned platform wrote to the IT ministry on Wednesday, outlining the specific details of enhanced and rigorous safeguards it has now implemented for content posted by the prime minister and other prominent accounts, reported news agency PTI.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/anti-paper-leak-bill-passed-by-voice-vote-in-lok-sabha-amid-opposition-uproar-1785321067909">Anti-paper leak bill passed by voice vote in Lok Sabha amid opposition uproar</a><h2>Assures multiple checks at levels of senior company officials</h2>&nbsp;Meta has informed the IT Ministry that posts by the Prime Minister and prominent accounts will have additional oversight on the platform and that multiple checks will take place at levels of senior company officials, sources said, citing the social media firm’s communication.&nbsp;Besides, a Meta team is likely to meet government officials later this week or early next week over the prime minister's Facebook post issue, sources added.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/anti-paper-leak-bill-passed-by-voice-vote-in-lok-sabha-amid-opposition-uproar-1785321067909">Anti-paper leak bill passed by voice vote in Lok Sabha amid opposition uproar</a>&nbsp;On Tuesday, the government summoned a top Meta executive after PM Modi’s post addressing India’s youth and promising stringent measures against paper leaks was briefly restricted by Facebook.&nbsp;The US-headquartered social media giant blamed a technical glitch for the post removal and apologised, but the IT ministry found the explanation “inadequate” as PM Modi’s post was aimed at engaging with the youth and underscoring the government’s commitment to crack down on paper leaks.&nbsp;Following this, the IT ministry had summoned the global head of public policy of Meta (Facebook and Instagram).&nbsp;<h2>Meity not happy with explanation, seeking more details</h2>&nbsp;&nbsp;IT Secretary S Krishnan said on Tuesday that while Meta has apologised and admitted that they made a mistake, the Ministry of Electronics and IT (Meity) is not happy with the explanation given and is seeking more details from the company.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/anti-paper-leak-bill-passed-by-voice-vote-in-lok-sabha-amid-opposition-uproar-1785321067909">Anti-paper leak bill passed by voice vote in Lok Sabha amid opposition uproar</a>&nbsp;“It is good that they have apologised and admitted what they did was a mistake. But we are not happy with the explanation…it is not adequate, and we are seeking more details,” Krishnan said.&nbsp;Meanwhile, sources said that Meta has told the government that a glitch in its automated content filters caused the removal of the prime minister's Facebook post for a brief while.&nbsp;<h2>Meta blames AI-powered automated content filters for ‘error’</h2>&nbsp;According to a Meta spokesperson, the content was removed “in error” and has since been restored on the platform.&nbsp;IT Ministry sources said on Tuesday that Meta’s explanation citing a technical glitch in the automated content filters was “not reasonable”, and that the matter was “not settled and done”.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/ex-pm-manmohan-singh-gets-supreme-court-clean-chit-in-coal-block-scam-case-after-his-death-1785337284497">Ex-PM Manmohan Singh gets Supreme Court clean chit in coal block scam case after his death</a>&nbsp;They quipped that if indeed a glitch in the automated system caused the error, then Meta, being a technology company, must hasten to improve its tools.&nbsp;Meta officials, it is learnt, attributed the error to AI-powered automated content filters that were reviewing shared posts and subsequent content that circulated following the original post by the Prime Minister.Meta claimed that its automated filters inadvertently ended up briefly removing the original post itself.&nbsp;&nbsp;

The Mark Zuckerberg-owned platform wrote to the IT ministry on Wednesday, outlining the specific details of enhanced and rigorous safeguards it has now implemented for the content posted by the prime minister and other prominent accounts.

Days after Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s video post was briefly removed from Facebook, Meta has assured the government that the content posted by the prime minister and other prominent accounts will get rigorous safeguards and additional oversight, according to sources. The post, uploaded on Instagram on July 23 and shared on Facebook, featured PM Modi’s first direct selfie video addressing India’s youth. In the video, the Prime Minister promised stringent action against paper leaks and announced that the government would introduce legislation to tackle the issue. The Mark Zuckerberg-owned platform wrote to the IT ministry on Wednesday, outlining the specific details of enhanced and rigorous safeguards it has now implemented for content posted by the prime minister and other prominent accounts, reported news agency PTI. Also Read: Anti-paper leak bill passed by voice vote in Lok Sabha amid opposition uproar Assures multiple checks at levels of senior company officials Meta has informed the IT Ministry that posts by the Prime Minister and prominent accounts will have additional oversight on the platform and that multiple checks will take place at levels of senior company officials, sources said, citing the social media firm’s communication. Besides, a Meta team is likely to meet government officials later this week or early next week over the prime minister's Facebook post issue, sources added. Also Read: Anti-paper leak bill passed by voice vote in Lok Sabha amid opposition uproar On Tuesday, the government summoned a top Meta executive after PM Modi’s post addressing India’s youth and promising stringent measures against paper leaks was briefly restricted by Facebook. The US-headquartered social media giant blamed a technical glitch for the post removal and apologised, but the IT ministry found the explanation “inadequate” as PM Modi’s post was aimed at engaging with the youth and underscoring the government’s commitment to crack down on paper leaks. Following this, the IT ministry had summoned the global head of public policy of Meta (Facebook and Instagram). Meity not happy with explanation, seeking more details IT Secretary S Krishnan said on Tuesday that while Meta has apologised and admitted that they made a mistake, the Ministry of Electronics and IT (Meity) is not happy with the explanation given and is seeking more details from the company. Also Read: Anti-paper leak bill passed by voice vote in Lok Sabha amid opposition uproar “It is good that they have apologised and admitted what they did was a mistake. But we are not happy with the explanation…it is not adequate, and we are seeking more details,” Krishnan said. Meanwhile, sources said that Meta has told the government that a glitch in its automated content filters caused the removal of the prime minister's Facebook post for a brief while. Meta blames AI-powered automated content filters for ‘error’ According to a Meta spokesperson, the content was removed “in error” and has since been restored on the platform. IT Ministry sources said on Tuesday that Meta’s explanation citing a technical glitch in the automated content filters was “not reasonable”, and that the matter was “not settled and done”. Also Read: Ex-PM Manmohan Singh gets Supreme Court clean chit in coal block scam case after his death They quipped that if indeed a glitch in the automated system caused the error, then Meta, being a technology company, must hasten to improve its tools. Meta officials, it is learnt, attributed the error to AI-powered automated content filters that were reviewing shared posts and subsequent content that circulated following the original post by the Prime Minister. Meta claimed that its automated filters inadvertently ended up briefly removing the original post itself.

The Mark Zuckerberg-owned platform wrote to the IT ministry on Wednesday, outlining the specific details of enhanced and rigorous safeguards it has now implemented for the content posted by the prime minister and other prominent accounts.

After PM FB post issue, Meta assures rigorous safeguards for posts by prominent accounts

Snap has become the latest major social media platform to settle a high-profile child safety lawsuit, joining TikTok and YouTube. The settlement leaves Meta as the only remaining defendant in a growing legal battle over the alleged impact of addictive platform features on children and teenagers. The lawsuit claims social media companies knowingly designed products that harmed young users' mental health. Legal experts believe these cases could force major tech companies to strengthen child safety protections, improve parental controls, and redesign key platform features.

Snap settles Child Safety Lawsuit | Meta left alone as legal pressure mounts

A US court has begun a trial against Meta Platforms, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, over allegations that it deliberately designed addictive features targeting teenagers. Jury selection began in Nashville, Tennessee, on Monday (Jul 20), in a lawsuit brought by the Tennessee Attorney General under the state's consumer protection law.<h2>'Instagram, the addiction machine'</h2>Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti accused Meta of knowingly designing Instagram as an "addiction machine" that drives compulsive use among teenagers. The lawsuit alleged that Meta failed to disclose its own internal research on the platform's harms to young users and misled the public about its safety. According to the complaint, Meta continued deploying features it allegedly knew were harmful, while downplaying the associated risks.Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg previously testified that the company's algorithms are not intentionally designed to make young users addicted and that Meta has invested in safety features for teenagers.The trial is expected to last six to seven weeks. If Meta is found liable, the court could impose civil penalties of up to US$1,000 for each violation of Tennessee's Consumer Protection Act. it could also order changes to Instagram's design and practices.&nbsp;Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/broken-ai-useless-products-mark-zuckerberg-is-steering-meta-towards-a-disaster-1780207649003">'Broken AI, useless products': Mark Zuckerberg might be steering Meta towards a disaster</a><h2>Meta is facing several cases across the US</h2>The Tennessee case overlaps with a growing number of lawsuits against Meta alleging that its platforms were deliberately designed to maximise engagement at the expense of young users' mental health.In May this year, Meta settled a lawsuit brought by Breathitt County Schools in Kentucky for US$9 million. The school district had alleged that addictive design features on Instagram and Facebook harmed students and had sought US$60 million in damages. Meta denied wrongdoing as part of the settlement.<a href="https://embed.wionews.com/videos/meta-hit-with-1-4-trillion-penalty-claim-by-us-states-1783449721227/embed">https://embed.wionews.com/videos/meta-hit-with-1-4-trillion-penalty-claim-by-us-states-1783449721227/embed</a><h2>Social media addiction: The case of Kaley Glenn-Mills</h2>In March 2026, a Los Angeles jury in the K.G.M. v. Meta Platforms, Inc. et al case found Meta and Google liable for negligently designing addictive features on Instagram and YouTube that harmed the plaintiff, Kaley Glenn-Mills. The verdict is viewed as one of the first successful individual social media addiction cases to go before a jury.The lawsuit centred on platform features including infinite scroll, algorithmic recommendations, autoplay and other engagement-driven design elements. The plaintiff's lawyers argued that these features contributed to compulsive use, leading to anxiety, depression, body dysmorphia and other mental health problems.Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/technology/instagram-will-now-let-anyone-generate-deepfake-of-your-face-unless-you-opt-out-right-now-1783477170729">Instagram will now let anyone generate deepfake of your face, unless you opt out right now</a>&nbsp;According to court testimony, Glenn-Mills began using YouTube at the age of six and Instagram at the age of nine. Her lawyers argued that years of compulsive social media use contributed to severe mental health difficulties, including depression, self-harm, suicidal ideation, eating disorders and repeated psychiatric hospitalisations during her adolescence.&nbsp;The jury awarded US$6 million in total damages — US$3 million in compensatory damages and US$3 million in punitive damages. It apportioned 70 per cent of the liability , or US$4.2 million, to Meta and 30 per cent, or US$1.8 million, to Google.Meta said it "respectfully disagrees" with the verdict. The company argued that teenage mental health is "profoundly complex" and cannot be attributed to a single app. It added: "We will continue to defend ourselves vigorously as every case is different, and we remain confident in our record of protecting teens online."Also in March, a New Mexico jury ordered Meta to pay US$375 million in civil penalties after finding that it violated the state's consumer protection law by misleading consumers about the safety of its platforms and concealing what it knew about child sexual exploitation risks on Facebook and Instagram. &nbsp;The case was brought by New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez. The jury awarded the maximum statutory penalty of US$5,000 per violation, amounting to US$375 million.Both the California verdict in K.G.M. v. Meta Platforms, Inc. et al. and the New Mexico judgment have been appealed by Meta.<h2>Social media, Big Tech and consumers: Several cases going on</h2>Meta, Google and other Big Tech companies are facing thousands of lawsuits consolidated in federal multidistrict litigation, as well as separate actions brought by more than 40 US state attorneys general, school districts and individual plaintiffs.The main allegation is that social media platforms were designed to foster compulsive use among children and teenagers and failed to adequately warn users about the associated risks.

Meta faces trial in Tennessee over claims Instagram was designed to addict teenagers. This case adds to growing US lawsuits over addictive algorithms, teen mental health and platform safety. Here is why it matters

A US court has begun a trial against Meta Platforms, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, over allegations that it deliberately designed addictive features targeting teenagers. Jury selection began in Nashville, Tennessee, on Monday (Jul 20), in a lawsuit brought by the Tennessee Attorney General under the state's consumer protection law. 'Instagram, the addiction machine' Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti accused Meta of knowingly designing Instagram as an "addiction machine" that drives compulsive use among teenagers. The lawsuit alleged that Meta failed to disclose its own internal research on the platform's harms to young users and misled the public about its safety. According to the complaint, Meta continued deploying features it allegedly knew were harmful, while downplaying the associated risks. Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg previously testified that the company's algorithms are not intentionally designed to make young users addicted and that Meta has invested in safety features for teenagers. The trial is expected to last six to seven weeks. If Meta is found liable, the court could impose civil penalties of up to US$1,000 for each violation of Tennessee's Consumer Protection Act. it could also order changes to Instagram's design and practices. Also read: 'Broken AI, useless products': Mark Zuckerberg might be steering Meta towards a disaster Meta is facing several cases across the US The Tennessee case overlaps with a growing number of lawsuits against Meta alleging that its platforms were deliberately designed to maximise engagement at the expense of young users' mental health. In May this year, Meta settled a lawsuit brought by Breathitt County Schools in Kentucky for US$9 million. The school district had alleged that addictive design features on Instagram and Facebook harmed students and had sought US$60 million in damages. Meta denied wrongdoing as part of the settlement. https://embed.wionews.com/videos/meta-hit-with-1-4-trillion-penalty-claim-by-us-states-1783449721227/embed Social media addiction: The case of Kaley Glenn-Mills In March 2026, a Los Angeles jury in the K.G.M. v. Meta Platforms, Inc. et al case found Meta and Google liable for negligently designing addictive features on Instagram and YouTube that harmed the plaintiff, Kaley Glenn-Mills. The verdict is viewed as one of the first successful individual social media addiction cases to go before a jury. The lawsuit centred on platform features including infinite scroll, algorithmic recommendations, autoplay and other engagement-driven design elements. The plaintiff's lawyers argued that these features contributed to compulsive use, leading to anxiety, depression, body dysmorphia and other mental health problems. Also read: Instagram will now let anyone generate deepfake of your face, unless you opt out right now According to court testimony, Glenn-Mills began using YouTube at the age of six and Instagram at the age of nine. Her lawyers argued that years of compulsive social media use contributed to severe mental health difficulties, including depression, self-harm, suicidal ideation, eating disorders and repeated psychiatric hospitalisations during her adolescence. The jury awarded US$6 million in total damages — US$3 million in compensatory damages and US$3 million in punitive damages. It apportioned 70 per cent of the liability , or US$4.2 million, to Meta and 30 per cent, or US$1.8 million, to Google. Meta said it "respectfully disagrees" with the verdict. The company argued that teenage mental health is "profoundly complex" and cannot be attributed to a single app. It added: "We will continue to defend ourselves vigorously as every case is different, and we remain confident in our record of protecting teens online." Also in March, a New Mexico jury ordered Meta to pay US$375 million in civil penalties after finding that it violated the state's consumer protection law by misleading consumers about the safety of its platforms and concealing what it knew about child sexual exploitation risks on Facebook and Instagram. The case was brought by New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez. The jury awarded the maximum statutory penalty of US$5,000 per violation, amounting to US$375 million. Both the California verdict in K.G.M. v. Meta Platforms, Inc. et al. and the New Mexico judgment have been appealed by Meta. Social media, Big Tech and consumers: Several cases going on Meta, Google and other Big Tech companies are facing thousands of lawsuits consolidated in federal multidistrict litigation, as well as separate actions brought by more than 40 US state attorneys general, school districts and individual plaintiffs. The main allegation is that social media platforms were designed to foster compulsive use among children and teenagers and failed to adequately warn users about the associated risks.

Meta faces trial in Tennessee over claims Instagram was designed to addict teenagers. This case adds to growing US lawsuits over addictive algorithms, teen mental health and platform safety. Here is why it matters&nbsp;

Addictive algorithms: Meta trial opens in Tennessee as Instagram accused of 'addiction machine’ design

Meta has quietly launched a new standalone app called Forum, designed to give users a focused space for discussions built around Facebook Groups. The app is currently available only for iOS users in the United States and has not yet been rolled out globally.&nbsp; The launch is part of Meta’s broader strategy to experiment with new social apps, especially as artificial intelligence tools make it easier and faster to build and test products.<h2>What the Forum app offers</h2>Forum is built to create deeper conversations within communities. Once users log in with their Facebook account, the app shows a feed of posts from the Groups they are part of. The interface is similar to platforms like Reddit, where discussions are the main focus rather than general social media updates.Users can:Post using nicknames Browse group discussions Discover new communities Continue conversations where they left off Posts shared on Forum are also visible within Facebook Groups, keeping both platforms connected.<figure class="image"><img src="https://images.indianexpress.com/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-24-121046.png" alt="Forum"></figure>

<h2>AI features at the centre of the app</h2>One of the key features of Forum is its AI-powered ‘Ask’ tool. This allows users to ask questions and receive answers based on conversations happening across multiple groups.The AI: Summarises discussions Shows sources of information Suggests relevant groups to joinGroup administrators also get access to an AI assistant that helps with moderation and content management.<h2>How Forum is different from other Meta apps</h2>Unlike Facebook or Instagram, Forum focuses only on group discussions. It removes distractions like general feeds and highlights conversations that matter to users. The app is part of a wider push by Meta to launch more standalone apps. Recently, the company also introduced new features like Instants for sharing disappearing photos. This approach allows Meta to test new ideas without changing its main platforms.<h2>Meta’s strategy behind launching new apps</h2>Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has indicated that the company plans to build more apps using AI-driven development tools. Reports suggest Meta is exploring the idea of launching multiple apps quickly to see what users prefer. This strategy is made possible by faster development cycles enabled by AI. However, some analysts question whether users want more separate apps, especially when many features already exist within existing platforms.<h2>Challenges and competition</h2>Forum enters a space already dominated by platforms like Reddit, which are built entirely around community discussions. Meta had previously launched a Facebook Groups app in 2014, which was later shut down after a few years. This raises questions about whether the new app will succeed in the long term. At the same time, Meta’s strong user base and integration with Facebook Groups could give Forum an advantage.<h2>What happens next</h2>For now, Forum remains in limited release, and Meta has not confirmed when it will expand to other regions. The company is likely to monitor user engagement before making further decisions about a wider rollout. The launch reflects Meta’s ongoing efforts to reshape social media experiences, with a stronger focus on communities and AI-driven interactions.

Meta has quietly launched a new standalone app called Forum, designed to give users a focused space for discussions built around Facebook Groups. The app is currently available only for iOS users in the United States and has not yet been rolled out globally.


Meta has quietly launched a new standalone app called Forum, designed to give users a focused space for discussions built around Facebook Groups. The app is currently available only for iOS users in the United States and has not yet been rolled out globally. The launch is part of Meta’s broader strategy to experiment with new social apps, especially as artificial intelligence tools make it easier and faster to build and test products. What the Forum app offers Forum is built to create deeper conversations within communities. Once users log in with their Facebook account, the app shows a feed of posts from the Groups they are part of. The interface is similar to platforms like Reddit, where discussions are the main focus rather than general social media updates. Users can: Post using nicknames Browse group discussions Discover new communities Continue conversations where they left off Posts shared on Forum are also visible within Facebook Groups, keeping both platforms connected.

Meta has quietly launched a new standalone app called Forum, designed to give users a focused space for discussions built around Facebook Groups. The app is currently available only for iOS users in the United States and has not yet been rolled out globally.

What is Meta’s new Forum app? Facebook Groups gets a standalone AI-powered platform

Social media giant Meta Platforms is under legal pressure as the U.S. state of New Mexico seeks $3.7 billion in damages. The case targets platforms like Instagram and Facebook, alleging serious concerns over user safety and platform accountability.

The lawsuit marks a significant escalation in regulatory scrutiny of big tech, raising broader questions about social media governance, user protection, and corporate responsibility.

Instagram, Facebook Under Legal Scrutiny: New Mexico State Seeks $3.7 BN From Meta

In a landmark ruling that could redefine the legal liability of social media giants, a New Mexico jury has ordered Meta Platforms to pay $375 million in civil penalties. On Tuesday (Mar 24), after a six-week trial, the jury found that the tech titan violated state consumer protection laws by misleading parents about the safety of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. The verdict marks the first time a jury has held Meta accountable for claims that its platforms enabled child sexual exploitation and prioritised engagement over teen mental health. While Meta has vowed to appeal, the decision signals a major defeat for the company’s long-standing Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act defence. It sets a high-stakes precedent for thousands of similar lawsuits pending across the United States.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/no-dog-left-behind-7-stolen-pets-trek-17km-in-homeward-bound-escape-from-china-s-meat-market-their-story-is-breaking-the-internet-watch-video-1774330849117">No dog left behind: Tiny Corgi leads pack of 7 stolen dogs on miraculous 17km journey home — their story is breaking the internet | Watch video</a><h2>'Profits Over Kids'</h2>A New Mexico jury has ruled that Meta engaged in unfair and deceptive practices and ordered the company to pay $375 million in civil penalties. The case, brought by New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez, accused Meta of misleading users about the safety of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, while allowing child sexual exploitation to persist on its platforms."This is a historic victory for every child and family who has paid the price for Meta’s choice to put profits over kids’ safety." Torrez said, calling the ruling "a ​clear message to big tech executives that no company is beyond the reach of the law". The jury found 75,000 violations of the state’s consumer protection law, awarding $5,000 for each.<h2>What the case revealed</h2>At the heart of the lawsuit was an undercover operation carried out by the attorney general’s office in 2023. Investigators created accounts posing as users under the age of 14. According to the state, those accounts were quickly exposed to explicit material and contacted by adults seeking similar content, leading to multiple criminal cases.Prosecutors argued that Meta was aware of these risks but failed to act. They pointed to internal documents that, they said, acknowledged problems around sexual exploitation and mental health harm among young users. However, despite that the company, the state says, did not institute basic safety tools such as age verification and insisted its platforms were safe.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/did-patriot-missiles-down-3-american-f-15-jets-over-kuwait-trump-accidentally-reveals-little-mishap-1774396550862">Did Patriot missiles down 3 American F-15 jets over Kuwait? Trump accidentally reveals 'little mishap'</a>The state also accused the company of designing features such as infinite scroll and auto-play to foster addictive behaviour and keep users, especially minors, engaged despite potential harm.<h2>Meta pushes back</h2>Meta has denied the allegations and said it will appeal the verdict. "We respectfully disagree with the verdict and will appeal," a company spokesperson said, adding that Meta has invested heavily in safety tools and continues to work to remove harmful content. "We work hard to keep people safe on our platforms and are clear about the challenges of identifying and removing bad actors or harmful content."

Meta hit with a $375M verdict in a landmark case over child safety on its platforms. A US jury says the company misled parents and enabled harm, shaking its legal shield. What this means for Big Tech? Scroll down to read.

In a landmark ruling that could redefine the legal liability of social media giants, a New Mexico jury has ordered Meta Platforms to pay $375 million in civil penalties. On Tuesday (Mar 24), after a six-week trial, the jury found that the tech titan violated state consumer protection laws by misleading parents about the safety of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. The verdict marks the first time a jury has held Meta accountable for claims that its platforms enabled child sexual exploitation and prioritised engagement over teen mental health. While Meta has vowed to appeal, the decision signals a major defeat for the company’s long-standing Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act defence. It sets a high-stakes precedent for thousands of similar lawsuits pending across the United States. Also read | No dog left behind: Tiny Corgi leads pack of 7 stolen dogs on miraculous 17km journey home — their story is breaking the internet | Watch video 'Profits Over Kids' A New Mexico jury has ruled that Meta engaged in unfair and deceptive practices and ordered the company to pay $375 million in civil penalties. The case, brought by New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez, accused Meta of misleading users about the safety of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, while allowing child sexual exploitation to persist on its platforms. "This is a historic victory for every child and family who has paid the price for Meta’s choice to put profits over kids’ safety." Torrez said, calling the ruling "a clear message to big tech executives that no company is beyond the reach of the law". The jury found 75,000 violations of the state’s consumer protection law, awarding $5,000 for each. What the case revealed At the heart of the lawsuit was an undercover operation carried out by the attorney general’s office in 2023. Investigators created accounts posing as users under the age of 14. According to the state, those accounts were quickly exposed to explicit material and contacted by adults seeking similar content, leading to multiple criminal cases. Prosecutors argued that Meta was aware of these risks but failed to act. They pointed to internal documents that, they said, acknowledged problems around sexual exploitation and mental health harm among young users. However, despite that the company, the state says, did not institute basic safety tools such as age verification and insisted its platforms were safe. Also read | Did Patriot missiles down 3 American F-15 jets over Kuwait? Trump accidentally reveals 'little mishap' The state also accused the company of designing features such as infinite scroll and auto-play to foster addictive behaviour and keep users, especially minors, engaged despite potential harm. Meta pushes back Meta has denied the allegations and said it will appeal the verdict. "We respectfully disagree with the verdict and will appeal," a company spokesperson said, adding that Meta has invested heavily in safety tools and continues to work to remove harmful content. "We work hard to keep people safe on our platforms and are clear about the challenges of identifying and removing bad actors or harmful content."

Meta hit with a $375M verdict in a landmark case over child safety on its platforms. A US jury says the company misled parents and enabled harm, shaking its legal shield. What does this mean for Big Tech? Scroll down to read.

'Profits over kids' safety': New Mexico slaps $375m penalty on Meta for enabling child exploitation on Facebook & Instagram

In a move to attract creators from rival platforms, Facebook has launched a new monetisation initiative called “Creator Fast Track”. The programme aims to help creators grow faster on Facebook by offering guaranteed earnings and increased content reach. The company said it paid nearly $3 billion to creators in 2025, marking a 35 per cent increase compared to the previous year.<h2>What is Creator Fast Track?</h2>Creator Fast Track is designed for creators who already have an audience on platforms like TikTok, YouTube, or Instagram.Instead of building a following from scratch, eligible creators can:Get increased reach on Facebook ReelsReceive guaranteed monthly paymentsAccess monetisation tools immediatelyAccording to Facebook, the programme is focused on easing the transition for creators moving across platforms.“We wanted to address creators’ concerns about starting from scratch,” said Yair Livne, Vice President of Creator Product at Facebook.

<h2>How much can creators earn?</h2>The programme offers fixed monthly payouts based on a creator’s existing audience:$1,000 per month for creators with at least 100,000 followers$3,000 per month for creators with over 1 million followersThese payments are available for the first three months of participation.Facebook said creators can also continue earning through its existing monetisation tools after the programme ends.<h2>More reach and no strict entry barriers</h2>One of the key features of the programme is easier access. Creators do not need to meet Facebook’s usual eligibility criteria, such as minimum follower counts on the platform. This allows them to start earning immediately. The company also said it will continue boosting creators’ reach even beyond the three-month payment period if needed, until they establish an audience. Another important detail is that creators do not need to produce entirely new content. They can reuse their existing content library, including previously published videos.<h2>Facebook’s growing creator economy</h2>Facebook shared several figures to highlight its growing creator ecosystem: Nearly $3 billion paid to creators in 2025 35 per cent year-on-year growth in payouts Over 30 per cent increase in creators earning more than $10,000 annually 60 per cent of payouts came from Reels The company is clearly focusing on short-form video to compete with TikTok and YouTube.<h2>New tools to track earnings</h2>Alongside the programme, Facebook is introducing new performance metrics to help creators understand their earnings better.These include:Qualified views: Views that are eligible for monetisationEarnings rate: Estimated earnings per 1,000 qualified viewsNon-qualified views: Explanation of why some views do not generate revenueFor example, very short views such as users scrolling past a video quickly may not count towards earnings.<h2>What this means for creators</h2>The launch of Creator Fast Track shows increasing competition between social media platforms for top creators. With guaranteed payments, wider reach and easier entry, Facebook is trying to position itself as a strong alternative for creators looking to diversify their income. For creators, the programme offers a chance to test a new platform without losing income during the transition. As short-form video continues to dominate online content, platforms are investing more to retain and attract talent.&nbsp;

Facebook has launched Creator Fast Track, a new programme aimed at attracting creators from other platforms by offering guaranteed earnings and reach. Eligible creators can earn up to $3,000 per month for three months, gain boosted visibility, and access monetisation tools immediately.

In a move to attract creators from rival platforms, Facebook has launched a new monetisation initiative called “Creator Fast Track”. The programme aims to help creators grow faster on Facebook by offering guaranteed earnings and increased content reach. The company said it paid nearly $3 billion to creators in 2025, marking a 35 per cent increase compared to the previous year. What is Creator Fast Track? Creator Fast Track is designed for creators who already have an audience on platforms like TikTok, YouTube, or Instagram. Instead of building a following from scratch, eligible creators can: Get increased reach on Facebook Reels Receive guaranteed monthly payments Access monetisation tools immediately According to Facebook, the programme is focused on easing the transition for creators moving across platforms. “We wanted to address creators’ concerns about starting from scratch,” said Yair Livne, Vice President of Creator Product at Facebook.

Facebook has launched Creator Fast Track, a new programme aimed at attracting creators from other platforms by offering guaranteed earnings and reach. Eligible creators can earn up to $3,000 per month for three months, gain boosted visibility, and access monetisation tools immediately.

What is Facebook’s creator fast track? Meta promises payouts and reach for new creators

Meta is facing scrutiny after a UK review found more than 1,000 high-risk financial advertisements appearing on its platforms within just one week.

The review identified thousands of rogue ads, raising concerns over the spread of potentially illegal financial promotions and scams targeting users.

The findings have intensified pressure on Meta to strengthen oversight and enforcement against harmful and misleading financial content online.


Meta Under Fire as UK Review Flags 1,000+ High-Risk Financial Ads | WION

A California court questioned Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg over the company’s policies regarding teen safety on social media, focusing on content moderation, algorithmic impacts, and regulatory compliance. The legal proceedings reflect growing scrutiny by US authorities and public interest groups on how platforms handle youth-focused content and related risks. The hearing underscores broader debates over tech accountability, platform responsibility, and user protection.


California Court Quizzes Meta CEO Over Teen Social Media Policy | WION 

"Death is only the beginning," proclaimed Imhotep, the antagonist from 'The Mummy,' a popular movie on ancient curses and reincarnation from the 2000s. Now, Mark Zuckerberg's Meta may actually be on its way to make this a reality. Meta, as per reports, has been granted the patent for a technology that can make our social media accounts and, in turn, us immortal. How? By letting artificial intelligence "simulate" a person's online activity even after their death. But how much would the service cost? How ethical is monetising grief? Here's all you need to know.<h2>Meta patents 'life after death' online</h2>In December 2025, Zuckerberg's Meta was granted a patent for a technology that can "simulate" how a real person would respond to content posted online by their loved ones. This technology can potentially be used by content creators during media detox, and more alarmingly, to keep alive a person's online legacy after they die. How? The language model will theoretically do this by replicating the individual's online footprint from when they were alive.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/technology/ai-attempts-to-bring-dead-back-to-life-give-people-closure-601951">AI attempts to bring dead back to life, give people closure</a> &nbsp;The tool, as per Business Insider, seems to be specifically designed for Meta's own platforms, Facebook and Instagram."The language model may be used for simulating the user when the user is absent from the social networking system, for example, when the user takes a long break or if the user is deceased," reads the patent granted to Meta, with Andrew Bosworth, the company's CTO, listed as the primary author. The request for this patent, as per reports, was filed in 2023.Once the tech is executed, it can not only leave comments but also respond to messages. The patent also refers to more advanced technological feats, including simulating audio and even video calls. How? Meta will train its model on user-specific data to understand how you would (or rather, did) behave.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/-jesus-watches-over-her-whoops-disturbing-epstein-files-email-mocking-young-victim-s-faith-goes-viral-1771055911141">'Jesus watches over her… whoops': Disturbing Epstein files email mocking young victim’s faith goes viral</a><h2>When will this technology be available?</h2>Talking to Business Insider, a spokesperson for the tech giant said that while Meta files patents to disclose technological concepts, it does not necessarily mean the company will pursue, develop or implement the technology.<h2>Monetising grief?</h2>Despite Meta's assurances that it does not have any plans to float the technology at the moment, the patent raises important ethical questions about technology and monetising grief. Automated legacy accounts are not a new concept; Meta previously introduced a feature that allows users to assign someone to operate their account in the event of their passing.&nbsp;Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/trending/advances-in-artificial-intelligence-mean-deadbots-can-haunt-users-warn-ai-experts-heres-what-it-means-719542">Advances in artificial intelligence mean 'deadbots' can 'haunt' the living, warn experts. Here's what it means</a>Similarly, as previously reported by WION, many companies offer services like "deadbots" or "griefbots" that can bring a dead loved one back to life. These chatbots can simulate the personality and speech patterns of a dead loved one using the digital footprints— messages, etc— they've left behind. But how ethical is this? AI ethicists have earlier warned that such services would do more harm than good and can even "haunt" users.&nbsp;

Meta has patented technology that could let AI keep posting, messaging, and even “talking” as you after death, using your social media history to simulate you. It sounds like science fiction, but the ethical questions are even bigger. Scroll down to see why.

"Death is only the beginning," proclaimed Imhotep, the antagonist from 'The Mummy,' a popular movie on ancient curses and reincarnation from the 2000s. Now, Mark Zuckerberg's Meta may actually be on its way to make this a reality. Meta, as per reports, has been granted the patent for a technology that can make our social media accounts and, in turn, us immortal. How? By letting artificial intelligence "simulate" a person's online activity even after their death. But how much would the service cost? How ethical is monetising grief? Here's all you need to know. Meta patents 'life after death' online In December 2025, Zuckerberg's Meta was granted a patent for a technology that can "simulate" how a real person would respond to content posted online by their loved ones. This technology can potentially be used by content creators during media detox, and more alarmingly, to keep alive a person's online legacy after they die. How? The language model will theoretically do this by replicating the individual's online footprint from when they were alive. Also read | AI attempts to bring dead back to life, give people closure The tool, as per Business Insider, seems to be specifically designed for Meta's own platforms, Facebook and Instagram. "The language model may be used for simulating the user when the user is absent from the social networking system, for example, when the user takes a long break or if the user is deceased," reads the patent granted to Meta, with Andrew Bosworth, the company's CTO, listed as the primary author. The request for this patent, as per reports, was filed in 2023. Once the tech is executed, it can not only leave comments but also respond to messages. The patent also refers to more advanced technological feats, including simulating audio and even video calls. How? Meta will train its model on user-specific data to understand how you would (or rather, did) behave. Also read | 'Jesus watches over her… whoops': Disturbing Epstein files email mocking young victim’s faith goes viral When will this technology be available? Talking to Business Insider, a spokesperson for the tech giant said that while Meta files patents to disclose technological concepts, it does not necessarily mean the company will pursue, develop or implement the technology. Monetising grief? Despite Meta's assurances that it does not have any plans to float the technology at the moment, the patent raises important ethical questions about technology and monetising grief. Automated legacy accounts are not a new concept; Meta previously introduced a feature that allows users to assign someone to operate their account in the event of their passing. Also read | Advances in artificial intelligence mean 'deadbots' can 'haunt' the living, warn experts. Here's what it means Similarly, as previously reported by WION, many companies offer services like "deadbots" or "griefbots" that can bring a dead loved one back to life. These chatbots can simulate the personality and speech patterns of a dead loved one using the digital footprints— messages, etc— they've left behind. But how ethical is this? AI ethicists have earlier warned that such services would do more harm than good and can even "haunt" users.

Meta has patented technology that could let AI keep posting, messaging, and even “talking” as you after death, using your social media history to simulate you. It sounds like science fiction, but the ethical questions are even bigger. Scroll down to see why.

Death is only the beginning? Meta patents tech that'll let AI run your social media from beyond the grave | WION Explains

Meta, the company behind Facebook and Instagram, along with Google-owned YouTube, on Monday (Feb 9) were accused of "engineering addiction" in children. The accusation against the tech giants was levelled as a closely watched trial against major social media companies began in California. The trial would see Meta and YouTube facing accusations that their platforms were deliberately designed to be addictive for children. It marks one of the first times a jury will directly consider whether social media companies can be held legally responsible for the mental health impact of their platforms on children.<h2>"Engineered addiction"</h2>The case, unfolding before a Los Angeles jury, could set an important legal precedent for hundreds of similar lawsuits across the United States. At the centre of the trial is a 20-year-old woman identified in court documents as Kaley G.M., who claims she suffered severe mental harm after becoming addicted to social media as a child.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/jimmy-lai-s-son-sebastien-lai-asks-trump-to-tell-xi-the-prison-sentence-is-a-mistake-warns-if-he-dies-1770685339030">Jimmy Lai’s son asks Trump to tell Xi the prison sentence is a ‘mistake’</a>In opening arguments, plaintiffs’ attorney Mark Lanier accused tech companies of intentionally engineering their platforms to hook young users. "This case is about two of the richest corporations in history who have engineered addiction in children's brains," Lanier told the jury. Stacking children's toy bricks, he described the case "as easy as A-B-C," A for addicting, B for brains, and C for children.Lanier argued that companies built systems designed to maximise engagement, comparing social media features to gambling mechanisms. "They don't only build apps; they build traps," he said, adding that Meta and YouTube pursued "addiction by design".He told jurors that Kaley began using YouTube at the age of six, and her family was never warned that "the goal was viewer addiction," or about the risks of algorithm-driven addiction among children.The case is being treated as a “bellwether” trial, meaning its outcome could influence how future lawsuits against social media companies are handled, including potential compensation for plaintiffs.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/trending/trump-health-secretary-robert-f-kennedy-jr-s-bizarre-link-with-paedophile-revealed-in-latest-epstein-file-dump-dinosaur-hunt-emails-1770444507541">Trump health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr’s bizarre link with paedophile revealed in latest Epstein file dump</a><h2>Companies reject responsibility</h2>Lawyers for Meta strongly pushed back against the claims, arguing that social media was not the primary cause of the young woman’s struggles. "If you took Instagram away and everything else was the same in Kaley's life, would her life be completely different, or would she still be struggling with the same things she is today?" Defense attorney Paul Schmidt asked jurors. He said that personal challenges, including bullying and family issues, played a larger role in her mental health difficulties.YouTube also denied the allegations. A company spokesperson said the claims were "simply not true,” pointing to ongoing efforts to introduce safety tools for younger users.

A landmark trial in California has begun against Meta and YouTube, with plaintiffs accusing the companies of deliberately designing their platforms to ‘addict’ children and harm their mental health. All you need to know.

Meta, the company behind Facebook and Instagram, along with Google-owned YouTube, on Monday (Feb 9) were accused of "engineering addiction" in children. The accusation against the tech giants was levelled as a closely watched trial against major social media companies began in California. The trial would see Meta and YouTube facing accusations that their platforms were deliberately designed to be addictive for children. It marks one of the first times a jury will directly consider whether social media companies can be held legally responsible for the mental health impact of their platforms on children. "Engineered addiction" The case, unfolding before a Los Angeles jury, could set an important legal precedent for hundreds of similar lawsuits across the United States. At the centre of the trial is a 20-year-old woman identified in court documents as Kaley G.M., who claims she suffered severe mental harm after becoming addicted to social media as a child. Also read | Jimmy Lai’s son asks Trump to tell Xi the prison sentence is a ‘mistake’ In opening arguments, plaintiffs’ attorney Mark Lanier accused tech companies of intentionally engineering their platforms to hook young users. "This case is about two of the richest corporations in history who have engineered addiction in children's brains," Lanier told the jury. Stacking children's toy bricks, he described the case "as easy as A-B-C," A for addicting, B for brains, and C for children. Lanier argued that companies built systems designed to maximise engagement, comparing social media features to gambling mechanisms. "They don't only build apps; they build traps," he said, adding that Meta and YouTube pursued "addiction by design". He told jurors that Kaley began using YouTube at the age of six, and her family was never warned that "the goal was viewer addiction," or about the risks of algorithm-driven addiction among children. The case is being treated as a “bellwether” trial, meaning its outcome could influence how future lawsuits against social media companies are handled, including potential compensation for plaintiffs. Also read | Trump health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr’s bizarre link with paedophile revealed in latest Epstein file dump Companies reject responsibility Lawyers for Meta strongly pushed back against the claims, arguing that social media was not the primary cause of the young woman’s struggles. "If you took Instagram away and everything else was the same in Kaley's life, would her life be completely different, or would she still be struggling with the same things she is today?" Defense attorney Paul Schmidt asked jurors. He said that personal challenges, including bullying and family issues, played a larger role in her mental health difficulties. YouTube also denied the allegations. A company spokesperson said the claims were "simply not true,” pointing to ongoing efforts to introduce safety tools for younger users.

A landmark trial in California has begun against Meta and YouTube, with plaintiffs accusing the companies of deliberately designing their platforms to ‘addict’ children and harm their mental health. All you need to know.

‘Addiction by design’? Meta, YouTube accused of 'engineering addiction' in children during US trial

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg says artificial intelligence will define the next phase of social media; in the future, it will change how people create and consume content on platforms like Facebook and Instagram. Speaking during Meta’s latest earnings call, Zuckerberg said AI will power new media formats that are more immersive, interactive and personalised than anything seen before.He said social media has evolved with technology, first moving from text to photos, then to video. The next shift, he said, will be driven by AI-generated content that combines text, images and video in new ways.<h2>AI could change content on Facebook and Instagram</h2>He explained that advances in artificial intelligence will allow social media platforms to better understand users and generate content tailored to individual interests. Unlike current recommendation systems, future AI tools could create personalised posts, images and videos rather than only showing existing content.“Soon, we’ll see an explosion of new media formats that are more immersive and interactive, and only possible because of advances in AI,” Zuckerberg said during the call.He added that users may be able to create digital worlds, games and interactive experiences using AI tools, and then share or remix them with friends. These experiences, according to Meta, would allow people to engage with content rather than just scroll past it.<h2>AI content already appearing on Meta platforms</h2>AI-generated images and videos are already visible across Meta’s apps. The Meta AI app, for example, includes a feed where users can scroll through short AI-generated videos in a format similar to TikTok. However, this has also led to criticism, with many users referring to low-quality AI visuals as “AI slop”.While Zuckerberg did not directly address these concerns, he stressed that AI would improve over time and enable more meaningful forms of expression. Meta believes better tools and stronger controls will help improve the quality of AI-generated content.<h2>AI replaces the metaverse as Meta’s main focus</h2>Notably, Zuckerberg did not highlight the metaverse during the earnings call. Meta’s Reality Labs division, which oversees virtual reality and Horizon Worlds, reported an operating loss of $6.02 billion for the quarter. In contrast, Meta posted $59.9 billion in revenue and $22.8 billion in profit, reflecting strong growth driven largely by AI-related products and advertising.The shift suggests that Meta is now placing its long-term bets on artificial intelligence rather than virtual reality. According to Zuckerberg, AI-generated content and tools will play a central role in keeping users engaged and driving the company’s next stage of growth.As social media platforms compete for attention, Meta is betting that AI-created content rather than traditional posts will shape how people connect online in the years ahead

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg says AI-generated content will drive the next phase of social media. From personalised posts to interactive experiences, AI will reshape how users create and consume content on Facebook and Instagram, replacing the metaverse as Meta’s core focus.

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg says artificial intelligence will define the next phase of social media; in the future, it will change how people create and consume content on platforms like Facebook and Instagram. Speaking during Meta’s latest earnings call, Zuckerberg said AI will power new media formats that are more immersive, interactive and personalised than anything seen before. He said social media has evolved with technology, first moving from text to photos, then to video. The next shift, he said, will be driven by AI-generated content that combines text, images and video in new ways. AI could change content on Facebook and Instagram He explained that advances in artificial intelligence will allow social media platforms to better understand users and generate content tailored to individual interests. Unlike current recommendation systems, future AI tools could create personalised posts, images and videos rather than only showing existing content. “Soon, we’ll see an explosion of new media formats that are more immersive and interactive, and only possible because of advances in AI,” Zuckerberg said during the call. He added that users may be able to create digital worlds, games and interactive experiences using AI tools, and then share or remix them with friends. These experiences, according to Meta, would allow people to engage with content rather than just scroll past it. AI content already appearing on Meta platforms AI-generated images and videos are already visible across Meta’s apps. The Meta AI app, for example, includes a feed where users can scroll through short AI-generated videos in a format similar to TikTok. However, this has also led to criticism, with many users referring to low-quality AI visuals as “AI slop”. While Zuckerberg did not directly address these concerns, he stressed that AI would improve over time and enable more meaningful forms of expression. Meta believes better tools and stronger controls will help improve the quality of AI-generated content. AI replaces the metaverse as Meta’s main focus Notably, Zuckerberg did not highlight the metaverse during the earnings call. Meta’s Reality Labs division, which oversees virtual reality and Horizon Worlds, reported an operating loss of $6.02 billion for the quarter. In contrast, Meta posted $59.9 billion in revenue and $22.8 billion in profit, reflecting strong growth driven largely by AI-related products and advertising. The shift suggests that Meta is now placing its long-term bets on artificial intelligence rather than virtual reality. According to Zuckerberg, AI-generated content and tools will play a central role in keeping users engaged and driving the company’s next stage of growth. As social media platforms compete for attention, Meta is betting that AI-created content rather than traditional posts will shape how people connect online in the years ahead

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg says AI-generated content will drive the next phase of social media. From personalised posts to interactive experiences, AI will reshape how users create and consume content on Facebook and Instagram, replacing the metaverse as Meta’s core focus.

AI-generated content will shape the future of social media, says Mark Zuckerberg

A recent lawsuit in the US claims that WhatsApp can read private or encrypted messages, basing its arguments on whistleblower revelations. Meta, the Mark Zuckerberg–led parent company of WhatsApp which also owns Facebook and Instagram, has strongly rejected these claims. The lawsuit’s claim about ‘whistleblowers’ is yet to be substantiated, as they are not named. Nevertheless, the case has brought renewed attention to the reliability of WhatsApp’s end-to-end encryption (E2EE).<h2>What is WhatsApp’s encryption technology?</h2>E2EE uses the widely respected Signal protocol, a golden standard considered secure by experts. WhatsApp has often resisted government requests to decrypt chats, and there have been no known backdoor entries that allow the company or third parties to access message content. Enabled by default in WhatsApp, the E2EE encryption keys are stored only on users’ devices, theoretically preventing Meta from decrypting messages in transit or on servers. While metadata, such as who sent a message to whom, can be collected, the system is generally considered robust and capable of ensuring privacy and secrecy for users.<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/meta-tiktok-youtube-face-court-case-over-social-media-addiction-in-children-1769486751202/embed">https://www.wionews.com/videos/meta-tiktok-youtube-face-court-case-over-social-media-addiction-in-children-1769486751202/embed</a><h2>What is the new case against Meta on WhatsApp message encryption?</h2>An international group of plaintiffs from Australia, Brazil, India, Mexico and South Africa filed the lawsuit on January 24 at the US District Court for the Northern District of California in San Francisco. They are seeking 'global class action' status for their complaint, aiming to represent billions of WhatsApp users across the world.The suit claims that Meta and WhatsApp ‘mislead users by advertising E2EE, while secretly storing, analysing and accessing virtually all private communications’.Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/meta-launches-2-variants-of-ai-enabled-smart-glasses-price-features-revealed-1758186792998">Meta launches 2 variants of AI-enabled smart glasses: Price, features&nbsp;revealed</a>&nbsp;Employees can allegedly request such access via an internal system, which apparently involves sending a “task” to engineers who grant access without scrutiny.The messages, the lawsuit claims, can be viewed in real time through a widget using a user’s ID.Past messages since an account was created could be accessed with no decryption needed, contradicting Meta’s promises that only senders and recipients can read messages, the suit claims.According to reports, the lawsuit argues that Meta’s alleged conduct amounts to 'fraud on billions of users worldwide' who rely on WhatsApp’s privacy assurances. &nbsp;It is seeking damages and injunctive relief.Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/trending/who-is-vishal-shah-meta-ceo-zuckerberg-appoints-head-project-management-for-ai-division-1761634315870">Who Is Vishal Shah? Meta CEO Zuckerberg appoints head of project management for AI Division</a>The lawsuit cited unnamed ‘courageous whistleblowers’ as the source of these revelations.&nbsp; Among other things, it alleged that non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) at Meta are suppressing this information from becoming public.However, the lawsuit provides no names or roles of the whistleblowers, or specific evidence or technical information in the complaint.<h2>Meta rejects claims as false and absurd</h2>Calling the allegations categorically false, absurd, and a “frivolous work of fiction”, Meta spokesperson Andy Stone said WhatsApp has used the Signal protocol for E2EE for nearly a decade.Meta also vowed to seek sanctions against the plaintiffs’ lawyers, and fight the lawsuit from the beginning.&nbsp;&nbsp;

A US lawsuit claimed that Meta misled users by saying WhatsApp chats are private. It alleged that staff can have internal access to the messages. Meta rejected the claims in the lawsuit, which is allegedly based on whistleblower revelations

A recent lawsuit in the US claims that WhatsApp can read private or encrypted messages, basing its arguments on whistleblower revelations. Meta, the Mark Zuckerberg–led parent company of WhatsApp which also owns Facebook and Instagram, has strongly rejected these claims. The lawsuit’s claim about ‘whistleblowers’ is yet to be substantiated, as they are not named. Nevertheless, the case has brought renewed attention to the reliability of WhatsApp’s end-to-end encryption (E2EE). What is WhatsApp’s encryption technology? E2EE uses the widely respected Signal protocol, a golden standard considered secure by experts. WhatsApp has often resisted government requests to decrypt chats, and there have been no known backdoor entries that allow the company or third parties to access message content. Enabled by default in WhatsApp, the E2EE encryption keys are stored only on users’ devices, theoretically preventing Meta from decrypting messages in transit or on servers. While metadata, such as who sent a message to whom, can be collected, the system is generally considered robust and capable of ensuring privacy and secrecy for users. https://www.wionews.com/videos/meta-tiktok-youtube-face-court-case-over-social-media-addiction-in-children-1769486751202/embed What is the new case against Meta on WhatsApp message encryption? An international group of plaintiffs from Australia, Brazil, India, Mexico and South Africa filed the lawsuit on January 24 at the US District Court for the Northern District of California in San Francisco. They are seeking 'global class action' status for their complaint, aiming to represent billions of WhatsApp users across the world. The suit claims that Meta and WhatsApp ‘mislead users by advertising E2EE, while secretly storing, analysing and accessing virtually all private communications’. Also read: Meta launches 2 variants of AI-enabled smart glasses: Price, features revealed Employees can allegedly request such access via an internal system, which apparently involves sending a “task” to engineers who grant access without scrutiny. The messages, the lawsuit claims, can be viewed in real time through a widget using a user’s ID. Past messages since an account was created could be accessed with no decryption needed, contradicting Meta’s promises that only senders and recipients can read messages, the suit claims. According to reports, the lawsuit argues that Meta’s alleged conduct amounts to 'fraud on billions of users worldwide' who rely on WhatsApp’s privacy assurances. It is seeking damages and injunctive relief. Also read: Who Is Vishal Shah? Meta CEO Zuckerberg appoints head of project management for AI Division The lawsuit cited unnamed ‘courageous whistleblowers’ as the source of these revelations. Among other things, it alleged that non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) at Meta are suppressing this information from becoming public. However, the lawsuit provides no names or roles of the whistleblowers, or specific evidence or technical information in the complaint. Meta rejects claims as false and absurd Calling the allegations categorically false, absurd, and a “frivolous work of fiction”, Meta spokesperson Andy Stone said WhatsApp has used the Signal protocol for E2EE for nearly a decade. Meta also vowed to seek sanctions against the plaintiffs’ lawyers, and fight the lawsuit from the beginning.

A US lawsuit claimed that Meta misled users by saying WhatsApp chats are private. It alleged that Meta staff can have internal access to the messages. Meta rejected the claims in the lawsuit, which is allegedly based on whistleblower revelations

WhatsApp can read users' encrypted messages, claims lawsuit against Meta in the US, citing whistleblowers

Meta has blocked more than 544,000 accounts under Australia's new under-16 ban. The tech giant, on Monday (Jan 12), urged the Australian government to rethink its world-first social media ban for teenagers, even as it revealed it has already removed more than half a million underage accounts to comply with the new law. The legislation, which came into force on December 10, requires major platforms, including Meta, TikTok and YouTube, to prevent under-16s from holding accounts. Companies that fail to take what the law describes as "reasonable steps" face penalties of up to 49.5 million Australian dollars, roughly 33 million US dollars.<h2>Over half a million accounts blocked</h2>Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, in a statement, said that his company had blocked over 544,000 accounts in the first week of enforcement alone. This included around 331,000 accounts on Instagram, 173,000 on Facebook, and another 40,000 on Threads. The company said it remains committed to following Australian law, but warned that the ban risks creating new problems rather than solving existing ones.Also read | &nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/trending/australian-teens-defy-under-16-social-media-bans-by-using-dog-pictures-so-how-safe-are-they-1765354324465">Australian teens defy under-16 social media bans by using dog pictures. So, how 'safe' are they?</a>In a statement, Meta called on Canberra to work more closely with the tech industry to develop alternatives. "We call on the Australian government to engage with industry constructively to find a better way forward, such as incentivising all of industry to raise the standard in providing safe, privacy-preserving, age-appropriate experiences online, instead of blanket bans," said Meta.<h2>Why is Meta concerned?</h2>Meta said that at the heart of its concern is enforcement. The company revived its earlier call that app stores should be responsible for verifying users' ages and securing parental consent before minors can download an app. Without this, Meta said, companies are locked into a constant game of "whack-a-mole" race to try and stop teens from one platform only to see them reappear on another, often with fewer safeguards.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/technology/would-you-give-rights-to-hostile-aliens-godfather-of-ai-warns-this-could-doom-humanity-1767165040322">Would you give rights to hostile aliens? Godfather of AI warns THIS could doom humanity</a><h2>Australia insists social media companies must take responsibility</h2>The Australian government, however, insists that it's holding social media companies accountable for the harm they cause young Australians. A spokesperson said social media companies already collect vast amounts of user data and should be able to use those systems to keep children off their platforms. They can and must use that information to comply with Australian law and ensure people under 16 are not on their platforms," said the government spokesperson.Meta countered that many parents and child development experts fear the ban could isolate teenagers from supportive online communities and push them toward less regulated apps or hidden corners of the internet. The company claimed that early signs "suggest it is not meeting its objectives of increasing the safety and well-being of young Australians".

Meta says it has blocked more than 544,000 under-16 accounts in Australia in the first week of a new law banning teenagers from social media, but warns that the policy may backfire.

Meta has blocked more than 544,000 accounts under Australia's new under-16 ban. The tech giant, on Monday (Jan 12), urged the Australian government to rethink its world-first social media ban for teenagers, even as it revealed it has already removed more than half a million underage accounts to comply with the new law. The legislation, which came into force on December 10, requires major platforms, including Meta, TikTok and YouTube, to prevent under-16s from holding accounts. Companies that fail to take what the law describes as "reasonable steps" face penalties of up to 49.5 million Australian dollars, roughly 33 million US dollars. Over half a million accounts blocked Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, in a statement, said that his company had blocked over 544,000 accounts in the first week of enforcement alone. This included around 331,000 accounts on Instagram, 173,000 on Facebook, and another 40,000 on Threads. The company said it remains committed to following Australian law, but warned that the ban risks creating new problems rather than solving existing ones. Also read | Australian teens defy under-16 social media bans by using dog pictures. So, how 'safe' are they? In a statement, Meta called on Canberra to work more closely with the tech industry to develop alternatives. "We call on the Australian government to engage with industry constructively to find a better way forward, such as incentivising all of industry to raise the standard in providing safe, privacy-preserving, age-appropriate experiences online, instead of blanket bans," said Meta. Why is Meta concerned? Meta said that at the heart of its concern is enforcement. The company revived its earlier call that app stores should be responsible for verifying users' ages and securing parental consent before minors can download an app. Without this, Meta said, companies are locked into a constant game of "whack-a-mole" race to try and stop teens from one platform only to see them reappear on another, often with fewer safeguards. Also read | Would you give rights to hostile aliens? Godfather of AI warns THIS could doom humanity Australia insists social media companies must take responsibility The Australian government, however, insists that it's holding social media companies accountable for the harm they cause young Australians. A spokesperson said social media companies already collect vast amounts of user data and should be able to use those systems to keep children off their platforms. They can and must use that information to comply with Australian law and ensure people under 16 are not on their platforms," said the government spokesperson. Meta countered that many parents and child development experts fear the ban could isolate teenagers from supportive online communities and push them toward less regulated apps or hidden corners of the internet. The company claimed that early signs "suggest it is not meeting its objectives of increasing the safety and well-being of young Australians".

Meta says it has blocked more than 544,000 under-16 accounts in Australia in the first week of a new law banning teenagers from social media, but warns that the policy may backfire.

Meta pushes back against Australia’s under-16 social media ban after blocking 544,000 users

Social media trends in the U.S. are shifting as X (formerly Twitter) experiences a decline in users, while platforms like TikTok and Reddit continue to grow. Analysts attribute the changes to evolving user preferences, content trends, and platform policies, signaling a significant reshaping of the social media landscape in America.

Young Americans Shift Social Media Use

Unsealed court documents in the United States reveal that Meta quietly shut down after early signs showed that people felt emotionally better when they stepped away from its platforms. 


META Hid Own Study Showing Facebook Causes Depression

The European Union has accused social media companies Meta and TikTok of violating the bloc's digital content rules. The European Commission said on Friday that Meta's Facebook and Instagram platforms and TikTok breached the Digital Services Act (DSA). This is the first time the panel has&nbsp;accused the Mark Zuckerberg-led company of breaching the law.&nbsp;The European Union's rules require tech companies to stop the spread of illegal content and ensure that the digital markets follow free competition rules.&nbsp;The announcement also includes Chinese-owned ByteDance.&nbsp;The move can anger US President Donald Trump, who often threatens countries with fresh tariffs if they harm American technology.&nbsp;The European Union said in its preliminary view that Meta and TikTok were failing to grant researchers "adequate access to public data".&nbsp;It said that the rules require the platforms to allow researchers&nbsp;to carry out essential work, such as understanding how much children are exposed to dangerous content on popular platforms, AFP reported.&nbsp;In a statement, TikTok said it is reviewing the European Commission's findings. It said that the requirements to ease data safeguards place the DSA and GDPR in direct tension.&nbsp;It said it isn't possible to comply with both. It said the EU must give clarity on how these obligations can be reconciled with each other.<h2>What the EU said on the alleged violation of rules</h2>The European Union has said that Meta's platforms, including Facebook and Instagram, were not providing user-friendly mechanisms to flag illegal content.It also accused the platforms of employing dark patterns.&nbsp;"Such practices can be confusing and dissuading," the commission said.Meta said it hadn't breached the DSA.&nbsp;&nbsp;"In the European Union, we have introduced changes to our content reporting options, appeals process, and data access tools since the DSA came into force, and we are confident that these solutions match what is required under the law," it added.

The European Union has accused social media companies Meta and TikTok of violating the bloc's digital content rules. 

The European Union has accused social media companies Meta and TikTok of violating the bloc's digital content rules. The European Commission said on Friday that Meta's Facebook and Instagram platforms and TikTok breached the Digital Services Act (DSA). This is the first time the panel has accused the Mark Zuckerberg-led company of breaching the law. The European Union's rules require tech companies to stop the spread of illegal content and ensure that the digital markets follow free competition rules. The announcement also includes Chinese-owned ByteDance. The move can anger US President Donald Trump, who often threatens countries with fresh tariffs if they harm American technology. The European Union said in its preliminary view that Meta and TikTok were failing to grant researchers "adequate access to public data". It said that the rules require the platforms to allow researchers to carry out essential work, such as understanding how much children are exposed to dangerous content on popular platforms, AFP reported. In a statement, TikTok said it is reviewing the European Commission's findings. It said that the requirements to ease data safeguards place the DSA and GDPR in direct tension. It said it isn't possible to comply with both. It said the EU must give clarity on how these obligations can be reconciled with each other. What the EU said on the alleged violation of rules The European Union has said that Meta's platforms, including Facebook and Instagram, were not providing user-friendly mechanisms to flag illegal content. It also accused the platforms of employing dark patterns. "Such practices can be confusing and dissuading," the commission said. Meta said it hadn't breached the DSA. "In the European Union, we have introduced changes to our content reporting options, appeals process, and data access tools since the DSA came into force, and we are confident that these solutions match what is required under the law," it added.

EU vs Meta: The European Union's rules require tech companies to stop the spread of illegal content and ensure that the digital markets follow free competition rules.

European Union accuses Meta, TikTok of breaking digital content rules

Amid growing concern over social media content, Instagram on Tuesday (Oct 14) announced that it will limit what users under 18 can see on the platform. Meta, the platform’s parent company, will be using filters inspired by the PG-13 movie rating system in a move taken to address criticism over the protection of teenagers online. The move comes after growing backlash from advocacy groups and lawsuits, which cite the company’s failure to protect young users on its platform from harmful content that may lead to psychological harm.Earlier in September, reports surfaced showing that several safety features implemented on Instagram by Meta did not work well or exist. Reuters reported in August that Meta allowed provocative chatbot behaviour, including enabling the bot to engage in “conversations that are romantic or sensual.”<h2>What are Meta’s latest PG-13 safeguards?</h2>The new system adopted by Meta, which is based on the Motion Picture Association’s ratings, will restrict posts featuring strong language, drug references, risky stunts and other mature themes for teenagers. The guidelines will also be implemented for the company’s generative AI tools.Under the latest safeguards, teen accounts will be automatically placed under the PG-13 settings. It added that parents can adjust the settings to add stricter content filters and screen time controls with a “limited content setting”. Teen users will also not be able to interact with accounts sharing mature content.“We hope this update reassures parents,” Meta said in a blog post. “We know teens may try to avoid these restrictions, which is why we’ll use age prediction technology to place teens into certain content protections — even if they claim to be adults.”The new setting will be first released in the US, the UK, Australia and Canada, with full launch likely by the end of this year. Meta said that it will also introduce additional safeguards for teens on Facebook.

The new setting will be first released in the US, the UK, Australia and Canada, with full launch likely by the end of this year.

Amid growing concern over social media content, Instagram on Tuesday (Oct 14) announced that it will limit what users under 18 can see on the platform. Meta, the platform’s parent company, will be using filters inspired by the PG-13 movie rating system in a move taken to address criticism over the protection of teenagers online. The move comes after growing backlash from advocacy groups and lawsuits, which cite the company’s failure to protect young users on its platform from harmful content that may lead to psychological harm. Earlier in September, reports surfaced showing that several safety features implemented on Instagram by Meta did not work well or exist. Reuters reported in August that Meta allowed provocative chatbot behaviour, including enabling the bot to engage in “conversations that are romantic or sensual.” What are Meta’s latest PG-13 safeguards? The new system adopted by Meta, which is based on the Motion Picture Association’s ratings, will restrict posts featuring strong language, drug references, risky stunts and other mature themes for teenagers. The guidelines will also be implemented for the company’s generative AI tools. Under the latest safeguards, teen accounts will be automatically placed under the PG-13 settings. It added that parents can adjust the settings to add stricter content filters and screen time controls with a “limited content setting”. Teen users will also not be able to interact with accounts sharing mature content. “We hope this update reassures parents,” Meta said in a blog post. “We know teens may try to avoid these restrictions, which is why we’ll use age prediction technology to place teens into certain content protections — even if they claim to be adults.” The new setting will be first released in the US, the UK, Australia and Canada, with full launch likely by the end of this year. Meta said that it will also introduce additional safeguards for teens on Facebook.

The new setting will be first released in the US, the UK, Australia and Canada, with full launch likely by the end of this year.

Instagram to limit content for teens? Here’s what we know about Meta’s new move

Meta Brings AI To Facebook Dating To Tackle Swipe Fatigue 

Meta is giving its dating platform a significant upgrade by integrating artificial intelligence into Facebook Dating. The company believes that AI could help reduce what it calls "swipe fatigue," making the online dating process less repetitive and more personalized for users.


Meta Brings AI To Facebook Dating To Tackle Swipe Fatigue

Facebook has transformed how people connect, communicate, and consume information over the past two decades. What began as a university networking site in Harvard's dormitory has now evolved into Meta's flagship platform. Now it is serving over 3 billion users worldwide and reshaping the digital landscape.Mark Zuckerberg launched "Thefacebook" on 4 February 2004, initially restricting access to Harvard students before expanding to other universities. The BBC reports that within its first month, half of Harvard's undergraduate population had signed up.

<h2>Rise of Facebook</h2>Facebook's rise began with strategic university rollouts across America. By December 2005, the platform had reached 6 million users, according to Reuters. The company's decision to open registration to the general public in September 2006 marked a pivotal moment in social media history.The platform's initial public offering in May 2012 valued Facebook at $104 billion, making it one of the largest technology IPOs in history, as reported by The Verge. This milestone demonstrated investor confidence in social media's commercial viability and Facebook's dominant market position.Key acquisitions further solidified Facebook's dominance. The $1 billion purchase of Instagram in 2012 and the $19 billion acquisition of WhatsApp in 2014 created a social media empire that Meta continues to leverage today, according to company filings.&nbsp;Influence on Society and MediaFacebook has revolutionised how news spreads and public discourse occurs. A Pew Research Center studies show that 36 per cent of Americans regularly get news from Facebook, making it a primary information source for millions of people worldwide.&nbsp;Facebook's algorithm-driven news feed has influenced information consumption patterns globally. The platform's ability to personalise content has created both opportunities for relevant information delivery and concerns about echo chambers and filter bubbles, as documented by various media studies.

<h2>Privacy Challenges and Controversies</h2>Facebook has faced numerous privacy challenges that have shaped global conversations about data protection. The Cambridge Analytica scandal in 2018 revealed that personal data from 87 million users had been harvested without consent, which later led to intense regulatory scrutiny worldwide.The company paid $5 billion in fines to the Federal Trade Commission in 2019, the largest privacy penalty in history at that time. This settlement highlighted the growing tension between tech innovation and user privacy protection, according to regulatory filings.Content moderation challenges have tested Facebook's ability to balance free speech with platform safety. The platform has struggled with misinformation, hate speech, and harmful content, prompting the establishment of independent oversight bodies and revised community standards.&nbsp;<h2>Facebook's Lasting Legacy</h2>Facebook's transformation into Meta in 2021 showed the company's commitment to virtual and augmented reality technologies. The metaverse vision represents Facebook's attempt to define the next phase of digital interaction, building upon its social networking foundations.The platform's influence on digital communication extends beyond social networking. Features like live streaming, marketplace functionality, and business pages have created new economic opportunities and communication methods that competitors continue to emulate.Facebook's data collection and algorithmic systems have influenced how other technology companies approach user engagement and platform design. The social media model pioneered by Facebook continues to shape digital product development across the technology industry.Educational institutions now incorporate social media literacy into curricula, recognising Facebook's role in changing how young people interact with information and each other. This educational shift reflects the platform's profound impact on social development and digital citizenship.&nbsp;As Facebook enters its third decade, its legacy encompasses both remarkable connectivity achievements and significant societal challenges. The platform's evolution from university networking tool to global communication infrastructure demonstrates technology's power to reshape human interaction, highlighting the responsibilities that accompany such influence.

Facebook has changed how billions connect, share, and get news over 20 years. From a harvard site to meta’s core platform, it shaped social media, faced privacy issues, and now leads in digital innovation. Know how facebook’s journey reshaped the digital world.

Facebook has transformed how people connect, communicate, and consume information over the past two decades. What began as a university networking site in Harvard's dormitory has now evolved into Meta's flagship platform. Now it is serving over 3 billion users worldwide and reshaping the digital landscape. Mark Zuckerberg launched "Thefacebook" on 4 February 2004, initially restricting access to Harvard students before expanding to other universities. The BBC reports that within its first month, half of Harvard's undergraduate population had signed up.

Facebook has changed how billions connect, share, and get news over 20 years. From a Harvard site to Meta’s core platform, it shaped social media, faced privacy issues, and now leads in digital innovation. Know how facebook’s journey reshaped the digital world.

20 years of Facebook: How it shaped the digital world

The K.P. Sharma Oli government on Thursday (September 4, 2025) decided to ban as many as 26 social media platforms, including Facebook, X (formerly Twitter), Instagram, and YouTube, citing their failure to meet the deadline to comply with registration requirements in Nepal.


Nepal Social Media Ban: 26 Major Apps Blocked Nationwide Over Registration Failure | WION

facebook

Facebook, News on Facebook, stories on Facebook, articles on Facebook, Facebook stories at Wion, Facebook news, Facebook latest news

facebook

Meta removes banking scam ads from Facebook, Instagram amid rising cyber fraud

Meta removes ads linked to banking scams

US curbs Instagram for kids, India's META users still victims

META accused of designing Facebook & Instagram to hook young users

Meta under scrutiny: Big Tech, bigger responsibility

Did Meta ‘hook’ children to Facebook, Instagram? Tech giant faces US trial

Meta Hit With $567 Million Penalty Over Teen Mental Health | Facebook & Instagram Under Fire

India Tightens Deepfake Rules: Social Media Platforms Must Remove Illegal AI Content Within 3 Hours

What did Indian Parliament panel ask Meta? Modi video to algorithm bias and more

Meta writes to govt, assures rigorous checks for posts by PM, prominent accounts

Snap settles Child Safety Lawsuit | Meta left alone as legal pressure mounts

Meta trial opens in Tennessee as Instagram 'addiction machine' slammed

Meta launches Forum: Reddit-style app with AI features

Instagram, Facebook Under Legal Scrutiny: New Mexico State Seeks $3.7 BN From Meta

Meta fined $375M: Jury finds Big Tech put ‘profits over kids’ in historic ruling

Meta’s new programme promises payouts and reach for incoming creators

Meta Under Fire as UK Review Flags 1,000+ High-Risk Financial Ads | WION

California Court Quizzes Meta CEO Over Teen Social Media Policy | WION

Death is only the beginning? Meta patents 'life after death' online | Explained

Meta, YouTube accused of 'engineering addiction' in children during US trial

AI-generated content will shape the future of social media, says Mark Zuckerberg

WhatsApp can read your private messages? US court case against Meta claims...

Meta asks Australia to rethink under-16 social media ban, blocks 544k users

Young Americans Shift Social Media Use

META Hid Own Study Showing Facebook Causes Depression

META Hid Own Study Showing Facebook Causes Depression