Zuckerberg Cites Apple as Reason for Meta to Do Less Safety Research

New emails unsealed this week and spotted by The Verge show Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg suggesting the company should conduct less research into how its platforms harm users, bizarrely citing Apple as a model to follow.

The email was sent in 2021 following a report from The Wall Street Journal that Meta was more than aware that Instagram was "toxic for teen girls," and had done in-depth research on the topic. In a subsequent email to Sheryl Sandberg, Meta's then-COO, and Nick Clegg, head of global affairs, Zuckerberg posited that Meta should do less of this proactive research.

Zuckerberg cited Apple as inspiration for this idea:

"Apple, for example, doesn't seem to study any of this stuff. As far as I understand, they don't have anyone reviewing or moderating content and don't even have a report flow in iMessage. They've taken the approach that it is people's own responsibility what they do on the platform, and by Apple not taking that responsibility upon themselves, they haven't created a staff or plethora of studies examining the tradeoffs in their approach. This has worked surprisingly well for them."

Zuckerberg also referenced Apple's plans to detect known CSAM images when they are stored in iCloud Photos, which the company announced in 2021. After backlash from privacy advocates, however, Apple walked back that initiative.

The Verge explains:

While Apple seemed to evade critique, in Zuckerberg's view, Meta instead "faced more criticism" because it reports more child sexual abuse material (CSAM), which "makes it seem like there's more of that behavior on our platforms." On the other hand, he noted, "when Apple did try to do something about CSAM, they were roundly criticized for it, which may encourage them to double down on their original approach."

What Zuckerberg seems to overlook, however, is that Apple isn't in the social media business (RIP Ping). Meta operates the two largest social media platforms in the world, and therefore it should be proactively researching how those platforms affect users. Zuckerberg's comparison to iMessage, an end-to-end encrypted messaging platform, makes zero sense. Apple does, of course, also offer a number of digital wellbeing features built based on research, including Screen Time, tools for child accounts, communication safety, and more.

The comparison is particularly ironic given Apple's extensive work on digital wellbeing and child safety features. While Apple doesn't moderate iMessage content due to its end-to-end encryption, the company has implemented numerous safety measures across its platforms, including:

• Screen Time for monitoring device usage
• Communication Safety for detecting sensitive content
• Family Sharing controls
• Child account protections
• App Store review processes

Zuckerberg's email suggests a troubling approach to platform responsibility, essentially arguing that Meta should do less research into potential harms because Apple faces less scrutiny. This logic ignores the fundamental differences between Apple's product ecosystem and Meta's social media platforms, which have been shown to have significant impacts on user mental health and wellbeing.

The emails provide insight into Meta's internal thinking during a critical period when the company was facing increasing scrutiny over its impact on users, particularly teenagers. Rather than doubling down on understanding and addressing these concerns, Zuckerberg's email suggests a desire to reduce the company's investment in this type of research.

This approach stands in stark contrast to Apple's philosophy of building features based on user research and wellbeing considerations. While Apple may not moderate iMessage content, the company has consistently invested in understanding how its products affect users and building features to promote healthy usage patterns.

The timing of these emails, coming in the wake of the Wall Street Journal's reporting on Instagram's impact on teen girls, makes Zuckerberg's suggestion to do less research particularly concerning. Instead of addressing the documented issues, the emails suggest Meta was considering reducing its investment in understanding platform impacts.

As one top comment on the article notes: "Just when I think Elon Musk is obviously the worst human being to hold the title of CEO, then Zuck steps up and says, 'hold my beer.'" The sentiment reflects growing frustration with tech CEOs who seem more focused on avoiding criticism than addressing legitimate concerns about their platforms' impacts on society.

The unsealed emails provide a rare glimpse into the thinking of one of the world's most powerful tech executives during a period of intense scrutiny. They suggest that rather than embracing transparency and proactive research into platform impacts, Meta was considering a strategy of doing less in hopes of facing less criticism.

This approach would be a significant departure from what many experts believe is needed in the social media industry: more research, more transparency, and more proactive measures to understand and address the impacts of these powerful platforms on users and society.