Now is the time to act, as Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg recently testified before Congress. He unequivocally rejected the claims that the company is collecting audio data through users’ devices. This statement is just one piece of a broader discussion about privacy practices at Meta. The company has been under fire recently for its data collection practices. In response to concerns about privacy and users’ data, Zuckerberg stated that Meta does not use users’ microphones to serve ads or customize news feeds.
Zuckerberg was probably just hoping to bury his testimony alongside this big news. He introduced a new privacy policy that enables Meta to empower the company with data from users’ experiences with the company’s AI products across all sectors. This change marks a shift in how Meta intends to leverage user data, focusing on interactions with AI rather than audio surveillance.
Zuckerberg assured everyone that “Meta is not listening to users via their phone’s microphone. He highlighted this especially to signal the company’s intentions about advertising appearing in people’s personalized news feed stories. This claim is partially meant to soothe fears about privacy and data use as the automaker shifts toward AI-based ad targeting.
As though all of that wasn’t enough, on top of these surprising developments, Meta has recently settled multiple landmark privacy violation lawsuits. The corporation has settled a class-action lawsuit over the usage of privacy breaches for $550 million. Moreover, it recently settled a similar lawsuit in the U.K. over its ad tracking practices. Under this settlement, Meta agreed to stop stalking the plaintiff’s movements online. In addition to this, Meta has created a $50 million Australian privacy payment fund to resolve the active litigation in Australia.
These settlements continue a trend of problems Meta has had with user privacy. In 2019, the company was penalized $101.5 million for a breach that left hundreds of millions of Facebook passwords exposed. The cumulative effect of these legal complications highlights the need for stronger infrastructure surrounding the organization’s privacy esteem.
This expansion of Meta’s advertising strategy raises alarming questions about how widely data from Meta’s AI products will be used. Zuckerberg’s testimony was incredibly timed. Most recently, in September, Meta announced it would begin targeting ads across its social platforms, using insights from users’ interactions with its generative AI systems.
In a subsequent hearing, the head of Instagram, Adam Mosseri, further explained what advertising on Meta’s platforms really looks like. He noted that advertisers can’t know that users have already viewed an ad until after they’ve engaged with it. “You could have seen that ad prior to having the conversation and not known it.”
Mosseri went on to discuss some of the psychological underpinnings that go into ad targeting, pointing to the quick pace with which users are scrolling through content. As we swipe faster and faster through our timelines, we hardly notice advertisements, but occasionally those messages breakthrough and inform our conversations down the road,” he explained. This recognition points in the direction of how user behavior can shape what is perceived to be relevant without explicit monitoring.
While every form of surveillance is a violation of privacy principles, both Zuckerberg and Mosseri pointed out that this kind of eavesdropping is a serious infringement on privacy standards. Mosseri even went so far as to call the idea of paying attention to users “a gross violation of privacy.” Their statements aim to reassure users about the integrity of their data security practices as Meta continues to adapt its business model in response to evolving technology and regulatory environments.
Meta plans to train its AI models on publicly available content within the European Union, aligning its operations with local regulations while expanding its technological capabilities.
