5 ms·

I've reported a lot of prostitution ads on Instagram, but they always responded to the report with "we found nothing wrong". After reporting these ads, Meta dec

I've reported a lot of prostitution ads on Instagram, but they always responded to the report with "we found nothing wrong". After reporting these ads, Meta decided I liked them and started showing me more and more, but I've given up on reporting them, since no action is taken. Meta seem to not actually check reports. My theory is that they just rely on some percentage of reports maybe relating to followers, reports, and time. If it exceeds a threshold, there's an action. Otherwise, no action.

immibis 1y ago
My Occam's razor is they do whatever makes them the most money. Are the prostitutes paying lots for ads? Leave them up. Are you complaining a bunch and not paying for ads? Ban you. Are people complaining about you a bunch (including 1000 identical complaints from sockpuppets) and you're not paying for ads? Ban you.
- yellow_lead 1y ago
  Right, banning their customers will lose them money in this case.
lynx97 1y ago
I suspect not reacting to that kind of problem is intentional. Just like YouTube didn't do anything against the pirated music uploads in the 2010 years, simply because being able to play your favourite pop song via YouTube was attractive to early users. Same with audio books these days. Some pirated accounts are being used to upload complete Audible books. They dont even bother to remove the "This isAudible" intro, which apparently could easily be used to autodetect such uploads. As said, I am guessing porn ads do provide Meta some form of income, and thats why they don't do anything about it. Big tech is shady like f**.
dsign 1y ago
I believe that part of the problem is how trigger happy the platforms are to reports of CSAM and other "black issues". They don't do any research, they just ban and call it a day. Your government could go to them and say, "hey, you should do due research before banning a user,", and the platform will turn back and say "you passed a law last month where I would be banned from operating in the country if I allowed any photo of somebody under 18 wearing less than a full-body skimo wolly suit, but I'm not allowed to ask for an ID to know the user's age. What am I supposed to do? Deploy a trigger happy AI? I just did!" So, in a sense, we live in the best world possible. May I suggest that you just block and mute the prostitutes, if they offend your sensibilities? That's what I do. Because in the next iteration of censorship, we might lose the social networks altogether.
- bigfatkitten 1y ago
  Meta don't seem to care much about actual CSAM at all. I have a throwaway account on Facebook that follows no pages and has no friends. In the absence of anything else to go on, Facebook somehow decided that I would most like to see anti-vax conspiracy, flat earth theory and child sexual abuse material. Every report I've made about the CSAM has met the same "we found nothing wrong" response, and it keeps bubbling up in my feed.
  - BobaFloutist 1y ago
    Might be worth reporting to the FBI, at that point.
    - dredmorbius 1y ago
      Might want to try a different jurisdiction these days. EU, Canada, Australia, Japan, f'rex.
      - bigfatkitten 1y ago
        I'm in Australia, so I kick it to the Australian Federal Police (FBI equivalent) via https://www.accce.gov.au/ https://www.accce.gov.au/
    - immibis 1y ago
      "To whom it may concern, I have discovered an international child porn sharing ring which I believe to be much bigger than any previously known or imagined. The ring operates openly on the Internet, without anonymous technologies. Therefore it should be easy to track down the perpetrators. The name of the ring is Instagram. You can view their recruiting page at instagram.com. Yours truly, anonymous reporter"
      - BobaFloutist 1y ago
        I mean I would probably link the content, but that's just me.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
voidUpdate 1y ago
Same reason twitch don't ban big accounts that break ToS, only the small ones. The big accounts make them money so they don't want to ban them. I recommend watching an Amouranth stream and keeping the ToS open in another window, and counting the violations.
- philistine 1y ago
  It is possible that those high-value users sign different terms of service once they reach a treshold. Doesn't make it better, but it's an interesting thought.
  - dogleash 1y ago
    If the press ever got ahold of an alternate TOS tailored to softcore porn, it would really undercut Twitch's attempt to convince the press they're not a softcore pron website.
graemep 1y ago
The only time I reported anything to Meta, I reported a blatantly racist comment to FB ("do not interbreed with them because they are evil") and the assessment was that it did not breach their community standards.
- thrance 1y ago
  They changed their TOS recently to allow calling LGBT people "mentally ill" or saying racist slurs in an attempt to please the bigoted GOP.
  - graemep 1y ago
    This was at least an year ago, maybe two.
    - immibis 1y ago
      They've been following their new TOS, but only when Trump became the president were they able to write down the TOS without fear of repercussion. All the most successful political actors are able to selectively control the flow of information. They don't put their beliefs in the TOS until doing so confers an advantage to them. Once it does, they do. The TOS still doesn't contain all their rules - only the ones that are advantageous for them to announce publicly.

immibis 1y ago

My Occam's razor is they do whatever makes them the most money. Are the prostitutes paying lots for ads? Leave them up. Are you complaining a bunch and not paying for ads? Ban you. Are people complaining about you a bunch (including 1000 identical complaints from sockpuppets) and you're not paying for ads? Ban you.

yellow_lead 1y ago
Right, banning their customers will lose them money in this case.

lynx97 1y ago

I suspect not reacting to that kind of problem is intentional. Just like YouTube didn't do anything against the pirated music uploads in the 2010 years, simply because being able to play your favourite pop song via YouTube was attractive to early users. Same with audio books these days. Some pirated accounts are being used to upload complete Audible books. They dont even bother to remove the "This isAudible" intro, which apparently could easily be used to autodetect such uploads. As said, I am guessing porn ads do provide Meta some form of income, and thats why they don't do anything about it. Big tech is shady like f**.

dsign 1y ago

I believe that part of the problem is how trigger happy the platforms are to reports of CSAM and other "black issues". They don't do any research, they just ban and call it a day. Your government could go to them and say, "hey, you should do due research before banning a user,", and the platform will turn back and say "you passed a law last month where I would be banned from operating in the country if I allowed any photo of somebody under 18 wearing less than a full-body skimo wolly suit, but I'm not allowed to ask for an ID to know the user's age. What am I supposed to do? Deploy a trigger happy AI? I just did!" So, in a sense, we live in the best world possible. May I suggest that you just block and mute the prostitutes, if they offend your sensibilities? That's what I do. Because in the next iteration of censorship, we might lose the social networks altogether.

bigfatkitten 1y ago
Meta don't seem to care much about actual CSAM at all. I have a throwaway account on Facebook that follows no pages and has no friends. In the absence of anything else to go on, Facebook somehow decided that I would most like to see anti-vax conspiracy, flat earth theory and child sexual abuse material. Every report I've made about the CSAM has met the same "we found nothing wrong" response, and it keeps bubbling up in my feed.
- BobaFloutist 1y ago
  Might be worth reporting to the FBI, at that point.
  - dredmorbius 1y ago
    Might want to try a different jurisdiction these days. EU, Canada, Australia, Japan, f'rex.
    - bigfatkitten 1y ago
      I'm in Australia, so I kick it to the Australian Federal Police (FBI equivalent) via https://www.accce.gov.au/ https://www.accce.gov.au/
  - immibis 1y ago
    "To whom it may concern, I have discovered an international child porn sharing ring which I believe to be much bigger than any previously known or imagined. The ring operates openly on the Internet, without anonymous technologies. Therefore it should be easy to track down the perpetrators. The name of the ring is Instagram. You can view their recruiting page at instagram.com. Yours truly, anonymous reporter"
    - BobaFloutist 1y ago
      I mean I would probably link the content, but that's just me.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

voidUpdate 1y ago

Same reason twitch don't ban big accounts that break ToS, only the small ones. The big accounts make them money so they don't want to ban them. I recommend watching an Amouranth stream and keeping the ToS open in another window, and counting the violations.

philistine 1y ago
It is possible that those high-value users sign different terms of service once they reach a treshold. Doesn't make it better, but it's an interesting thought.
- dogleash 1y ago
  If the press ever got ahold of an alternate TOS tailored to softcore porn, it would really undercut Twitch's attempt to convince the press they're not a softcore pron website.

graemep 1y ago

The only time I reported anything to Meta, I reported a blatantly racist comment to FB ("do not interbreed with them because they are evil") and the assessment was that it did not breach their community standards.

thrance 1y ago
They changed their TOS recently to allow calling LGBT people "mentally ill" or saying racist slurs in an attempt to please the bigoted GOP.
- graemep 1y ago
  This was at least an year ago, maybe two.
  - immibis 1y ago
    They've been following their new TOS, but only when Trump became the president were they able to write down the TOS without fear of repercussion. All the most successful political actors are able to selectively control the flow of information. They don't put their beliefs in the TOS until doing so confers an advantage to them. Once it does, they do. The TOS still doesn't contain all their rules - only the ones that are advantageous for them to announce publicly.