Report finds major gaps in Instagram’s teen safety features, Meta rejects claims
New Delhi: Several safety tools that Meta has promoted as safeguards for teenagers on Instagram are either ineffective, flawed, or in some cases absent, according to a study released by child-safety advocacy groups and corroborated by researchers at Northeastern University.
The report, titled “Teen Accounts, Broken Promises”, reviewed 47 safety features that Instagram has publicly announced over the past decade. Of these, only eight were found to function as intended. The rest, the study said, were “substantially ineffective,” discontinued, or easily bypassed, as reported by Reuters.
Researchers found that measures designed to block self-harm-related searches could be circumvented with minor spelling variations. Anti-bullying filters often failed to activate, even when tested with phrases Meta itself had cited as examples. Another tool, meant to redirect teens from bingeing self-harm content, did not trigger in tests.
Some features were found to be effective, such as “quiet mode,” which mutes notifications at night, and parental controls that require approval for changes to teen account settings.
The study was led by the UK-based Molly Rose Foundation and the U.S.-based Parents for Safe Online Spaces, both founded by parents who allege their children died after exposure to harmful content on social media platforms. Northeastern University researchers validated the findings, with professor Laura Edelson noting: “Using realistic testing scenarios, we can see that many of Instagram’s safety tools simply are not working.”
Meta rejected the report’s conclusions. Company spokesperson Andy Stone described it as “dangerously misleading,” arguing that the review misstated how Meta’s tools function and how families use them. “Teens who were placed into these protections saw less sensitive content, experienced less unwanted contact, and spent less time on Instagram at night,” Stone said.
The criticism was partly informed by internal tips from Arturo Bejar, a former Meta safety executive. Bejar, who worked with Instagram until 2021, said management repeatedly watered down effective ideas. “I experienced firsthand how good safety ideas got whittled down to ineffective features,” he said, stressing the need for independent scrutiny.
Reuters, which reviewed the report, confirmed some findings through its own tests and by examining internal Meta documents. In one case, a teen test account was able to access eating-disorder-related content by searching “skinnythighs,” a banned term altered slightly. Internal documents further revealed lapses in updating automated systems designed to detect and limit promotion of eating-disorder and suicide-related material, as well as delays in updating lists of search terms used by child predators.
Stone said Meta has since addressed these deficiencies, combining automation with human oversight.
The report follows Meta’s heightened scrutiny in the U.S. Last month, senators launched an investigation after disclosures showed company chatbots could engage minors in inappropriate conversations. Former employees also told a Senate Judiciary subcommittee that the company downplayed internal findings about children’s exposure to predators in virtual reality spaces. Meta dismissed these claims as “nonsense.”
On Thursday, Meta announced that its teen account protections are being expanded to Facebook users outside the U.S. The company also said it is building partnerships with middle and high schools to bolster awareness of online safety. “We want parents to feel good about their teens using social media,” Instagram head Adam Mosseri said.
Meanwhile, Instagram confirmed a new rule barring users under 16 from livestreaming without parental consent. The company also reported removing 635,000 accounts that sexualised children.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
'Sharjeel Imam not a disciple of Umar Khalid,' his counsel tells court
New Delhi (PTI): The counsel for the jailed activist Sharjeel Imam told a court here on Thursday that Umar Khalid never mentored his client before the 2020 Delhi riots, and the prosecution's allegation that Imam was a disciple of Khalid was "absurd."
The submissions were made before Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai, who was hearing arguments on the charge against Imam, an accused in the 2020 Northeast Delhi riots conspiracy case.
Counsels for Imam, Ahmad Ibrahim, and Talib Mustafa submitted before the court that, despite their client and Khalid being the students of the same varsity, Jawaharlal Nehru University, there was no direct or indirect communication between them.
"The allegations find no support from the materials relied upon by the prosecution. Rather, the applicant (Imam) never spoke to Umar Khalid. It is highly improbable and rather unbelievable that the applicant, who, as per the prosecution, was mentored by Umar Khalid, never had any calls or messages with him," Imam's counsel Mustafa said in the court.
He said both were added to two groups, the Muslim Students of JNU (MSJ) and the CAB TEAM, just because they were students of the same university.
Referring to the prosecution's allegation that Imam hatched a criminal conspiracy with the other accused persons to cause a 'chakka jam,' which was later escalated into violent riots, his counsel said that there was no evidence that showed that at any point in time Imam had any intention to incite violence.
"In none of the materials relied upon by the prosecution, including speeches. pamphlets, chats and Facebook posts of Imam, there is nothing which could even remotely suggest that the applicant at any point of time had any intention to incite violence," he said.
He also contended that the prosecution tried to create a narrative of religious extremism around Imam by conflating purported discussions of issues affecting a particular religious community.
"Notably, mere academic criticism of events perceived by the applicant to be against a community doesn't make one communal, much less an extremist," he said.
According to the prosecution, Imam, along with other MSJ members, participated in a protest called by Jamia Milia Islamia students, where allegedly pamphlets were distributed to incite communal feelings among the Muslim community and induce them to protest against the CAA.
"Nothing communal in the alleged pamphlet. Merely talks about the discriminatory nature of CAA and its possible consequence if implemented coupled with NRC (National Register of Citizens)," his counsel said, concluding his arguments.
The case pertains to the February 2020 riots in northeast Delhi that left 53 people dead and more than 700 injured.
The violence erupted during widespread protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC).
The Delhi Police has alleged that Imam was involved in deliberate mobilisation, radicalisation and preparation of ground conditions through organised chakka jams, blockage of arterial roads, and disruption of essential services.
He allegedly created and administered the WhatsApp group, Muslim Students of JNU, which functioned as a coordinating mechanism for mobilisation, identification of protest sites.
Police accused Imam of attending and participating in conspiratorial meetings in Jangpura, where the strategy of chakka jam and escalation of protests was discussed.
Imam's role was allegedly not geographically confined to Delhi and acted as a mobiliser and ideologue, as the appellant travelled to Aligarh and other locations, police said.
Police also accused Imam of playing a decisive role in the creation and sustenance of the Shaheen Bagh protest site, which evolved into a prolonged round-the-clock blockade of a major arterial road.
They alleged that the Imam's role was foundational and preparatory, and that liability for conspiracy does not require physical presence at the scene of violence once the plan has been set in motion.
