More than 40 attorneys generals are calling on Facebook to “abandon its plans” for an Instagram for kids under the age of 13, an idea that has raised mental health and privacy concerns since it was announced less than two months ago. “Facebook has historically failed to protect the welfare of children on its platforms,” a letter addressed to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and signed by 44 attorneys general read, CNN reports. Noting the targeted age group is “simply too young to navigate the complexities of what they encounter online” and research demonstrating that “use of social media can be detrimental to the health and well-being of children,” the bipartisan group of attorneys beseeched Facebook to nip the service in the bud.
Plans to build such a product were first reported back in March, with an internal Instagram memo identifying “youth work as a priority” and announcing executives’ intent to expand its user base—news that came just two days after the company pledged to “make Instagram safer for the youngest members of our community” amid reports of harassment and abuse of teen users. In an interview with Buzzfeed, Instagram head Adam Mosseri said developing “a version of Instagram for young people or kids where parents have transparency or control” is “part of the solution” to the company’s trouble with enforcing its age policy, as Instagram currently prohibits anyone under 13 from making an account but doesn’t do much to verify that criteria. Facebook executives continued to claim that the product would be to parents’ benefit, telling CNN that “kids are already online” and the company wants “to improve this situation by delivering experiences that give parents visibility and control over what their kids are doing.”
But the attorneys on Monday pushed back against that argument, citing Facebook’s “record of failing to protect the safety and privacy of children on its platform, despite claims that its products have strict privacy controls.” That history, coupled with the fact that children “may not fully appreciate what content is appropriate for them to share with others, the permanency of content they post on an online platform, and who has access to what they share online,” positions the product as one serving Facebook’s growth interests, rather than—as the company has claimed—those targeted by the proposed platform. “It appears that Facebook is not responding to a need, but instead creating one, as this platform appeals primarily to children who otherwise do not or would not have an Instagram account,” the AGs point out.
Zuckerberg suggested as much when asked about the proposed plans during a congressional hearing on misinformation in March. “Given the free services, how exactly will you be making money?” Florida Rep. Gus Biliraki inquired. “Or, are you trying to monetize our children, too, and get them addicted early?” To which the Facebook CEO said: “There is clearly a large number of people under the age of 13 who would want to use a service like Instagram.”
— The Great Villain of the Financial Crisis Is Dead
— Inside the Antiracism Tug-of-War at an Elite NYC Private School
— Ivanka Trump’s Vaccine Selfie Didn’t Go Over as Planned
— The Clubhouse Party Is Over
— Will Bill Barr Spill the Beans on Donald Trump?
— Brett Kavanaugh Rules Children Deserve Life in Prison With No Chance of Parole
— With Eye-Popping Auctions, News Outlets Are Jumping on the NFT Gravy Train
— From the Archive: Bernie Madoff’s World
— Not a subscriber? Join Vanity Fair to receive full access to VF.com and the complete online archive now.