Shocking Allegations Against Meta’s Moderation Policy
A former Meta executive has revealed that the company permitted accounts linked to sex trafficking to accumulate up to 17 strikes before facing a permanent ban. This bombshell claim, made by an anonymous ex-safety team member, raises serious concerns about Meta’s commitment to fighting exploitation on Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp.
The 17-Strike Rule: A Dangerous Loophole?
The whistleblower compared Meta’s moderation system to a “baseball count”—accounts received multiple warnings before removal. “Only after the 17th violation would the account be permanently banned,” the source stated.
Critics argue this leniency gave traffickers ample time to operate unchecked, putting victims at greater risk. Despite Meta’s public pledges to combat exploitation, the policy suggests profits may have outweighed safety.
Meta Denies the Claims—But Evidence Suggests Otherwise
Meta dismissed the allegations as “inaccurate and misleading,” insisting it has “zero tolerance” for exploitation. A spokesperson cited collaborations with law enforcement and NGOs.
However, past investigations contradict Meta’s stance:
– A 2021 Wall Street Journal report found Facebook’s algorithms promoted harmful content.
– Court filings revealed flagged accounts stayed active for months.
Why Would Meta Implement Such a Policy?
Experts speculate the 17-strike rule prioritized user retention over safety.
Dr. Ritu Srivastava, cybersecurity researcher (IIT Delhi):
“A 17-strike policy is absurd. Meta seemed more worried about false bans than protecting victims.”
Legal and Ethical Repercussions
The allegations could lead to:
– New U.S. Senate hearings on tech accountability.
– Heightened scrutiny in India, where WhatsApp is linked to trafficking cases.
Priya Menon, Anti-Trafficking Collective:
“Every strike allowed is another day a victim suffers. Meta must be held accountable.”
3 Changes Advocates Demand
- Full transparency—Meta should disclose moderation strike thresholds.
- Stronger AI detection to remove exploitative content faster.
- Stricter legal penalties for platforms failing to act.
Conclusion
The whistleblower’s claims expose critical flaws in Meta’s enforcement. While the company denies wrongdoing, past patterns suggest delayed action endangers victims. Advocates demand real reform—not just PR statements.
Follow NextMinuteNews for updates on this developing story.
