Senators Condemn Meta's Failure to Guard Kids From Sexually Explicit AI Interactions
In a letter issued to Zuckerberg on April 29, the lawmakers said they were "appalled" by an April 26 report published by The Wall Street Journal detailing how Meta's AI-powered chatbots-available on Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp-have on some occasions engaged in sexually explicit conversations with underage users.
"This is not merely an innocent oversight; it is a flagrant violation of the trust that parents and families place on your platforms," Blackburn and Blumenthal wrote. "Despite repeated warnings and apparent internal concerns, Meta has once again prioritized profit over the safety and well-being of children."
Internal communications at Meta suggest that staffers raised ethical concerns about the company's decision to loosen chatbots' safeguards, including by way of "endowing AI personas with the capacity for fantasy sex," the Journal reported. In some cases, the chatbots engaged with users under the voices and personas of celebrities or popular fictional characters.
Tech Leaders' Quotes From the Contentious Child Safety Senate Hearing
Despite Meta's claims that sexually inappropriate behavior from its chatbots with underage users is fringe and unrepresentative, both official and user-created bots frequently enabled or escalated inappropriate content, the Journal reported.
After observing a sexual role-playing AI character titled "Submissive Schoolgirl"-which is available to all users more than 13 years old on Meta's platforms-engaging in explicit conversations with a test user, the Journal flagged its observations to the tech company. As of April, however, the persona is still accessible.
In Blackburn's and Blumenthal's view, Meta's lax approach to regulating its AI chatbots is indicative of a larger, more problematic pattern; they wrote that it "underscores a disturbing trend: Meta consistently chooses growth and engagement metrics over the protection of its most vulnerable users."
Both Blackburn and Blumenthal are sponsors of the bipartisan Kids Online Safety Act, a proposed law that would require social platforms to implement greater measures for shielding minors from potentially harmful material related to self-harm, eating disorders, substance abuse, and sexual exploitation. The law would also enhance transparency into social platforms' content algorithms.
"Meta's repeated failures highlight the urgent need for this legislation," Blackburn and Blumenthal wrote in their address to Zuckerberg.
Children's online safety has become a key priority among both Republican and Democratic lawmakers in recent years. Early last year, execs from Meta, TikTok, Snap, X, and Discord were grilled by Senators in an intensive hearing on children's online safety. During the course of that hearing, Zuckerberg was pressured by Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) to apologize directly to families whose children had been exploited on social media.
Now, Blackburn and Blumenthal are urging Zuckerberg to implement change-starting with the elimination of AI chatbots that are able to engage in sexual conversations with minors.
"We call on you to take immediate action to address these egregious lapses. Meta should immediately cease the deployment of AI chatbots that can engage in any form of sexual or romantic conversation with minors."
The lawmakers also requested documentation outlining Meta's internal decision-making process related to the development and governance of the AI chatbots by May 13.
The news comes in the midst of Meta's LlamaCon AI event. On April 29, Meta announced the debut of a standalone ChatGPT competitor. Dubbed the Meta AI App, the platform has text, voice, and image capabilities.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
7 minutes ago
- New York Post
Oklahoma state superintendent under investigation after board members report seeing naked women on his office TV
Oklahoma's controversial state superintendent is under investigation after state Board of Education members alleged they saw images of naked women on his office's television during a closed meeting last Thursday. State Superintendent Ryan Walters, the fiery Republican pick leading one of the nation's lowest-ranked education systems, was in the middle of a meeting during an executive session of the Oklahoma State Board of Education when images of naked women allegedly popped up on his television screen, two board members told The Oklahoman. 4 Pictures of naked women were allegedly seen on a television behind Oklahoma State Superintendent Ryan Walters during a meeting last Thursday. BRYAN TERRY/THE OKLAHOMAN / USA TODAY NETWORK via Imagn Images One of the board members said she could barely believe what she was seeing. 'And I was like, 'Those are naked women'. And then I was like, 'No, wait a minute. Those aren't naked, surely those aren't naked women. Something is playing a trick on my eye. Maybe they just have on tan body suits. This is just really bizarre',' board member Becky Carson told the outlet. 'I saw them just walking across the screen, and I'm like, 'No.' I'm sorry I even have to use this language, but I'm like, 'Those are her nipples.' And then I'm like, 'That's pubic hair.' What in the world am I watching? I didn't watch a second longer. I was so disturbed by it, I was like, 'What is on your TV?' I was very stern, like I'd been a mother or a classroom teacher. And I said, 'What am I watching? Turn it off now!'' Ryan Deatherage, another board member, added that Walters was sitting with his back to the television, so he wasn't able to see the alleged X-rated video in the moment. 4 Walters has denied all allegations about the situation — calling them 'falsehoods.' DOUG HOKE/THE OKLAHOMAN / USA TODAY NETWORK via Imagn Images 'I am in shock and I'm not wanting to distract them. I'm trying to listen. Quite frankly, I didn't know how to handle it. I was just in shock. I was being human and I didn't know what to think. I kept thinking that it was just going to go away and so I quit watching it,' Deatherage told the outlet. Carson wound up having to tell Walters about the lewd images lingering on the screen behind him, which he then shut off without any explanation or apology. Walters later issued a statement Sunday denying all claims as 'categorically false.' 4 Two Oklahoma Board of Education members claimed that Walters offered no apology or explanation for the bizarre images. AP 'These falsehoods are the desperate tactics of a broken establishment afraid of real change. They aren't just attacking me, they're attacking the values of the Oklahomans who elected me to challenge the status quo. I will not be distracted. My focus remains on making Oklahoma the best state in the nation, in every category,' Walters said. Other members of the board told the outlet that while they didn't see the images themselves, Walters appeared 'shook up' and 'flustered or embarrassed' by whatever Carson pointed out. Walters, a staunch conservative, has previously made national headlines for his stances and policies in Oklahoma schools. He repeatedly sought to enforce strict rules about what's permitted inside the classroom, including restrictions against LGBTQ+ students that have come under fire from critics on the left. 4 Walters is best known for the anti-LGBTQ+ policies he's put forward, along with other rules loosening restrictions on Christian education in public schools. DOUG HOKE/THE OKLAHOMAN / USA TODAY NETWORK via Imagn Images At the same time, he's loosened prohibitions on the separation of church and state by requiring the Bible to be taught in public schools as a 'historical document.' Deatherage and Carson said Walters should hold himself to the same standards he enforces on educators, noting that the board has 'suspended teaching certificates for less than this.' It's unclear who may have been responsible for the racy images and why they were bizarrely featured on the government office's system. The investigation into the incident is being led by the Office of Management and Enterprise Services.
CNBC
2 hours ago
- CNBC
Massie warns blocking Epstein vote in the House could be political liability for GOP in midterms
House Speaker Mike Johnson on Sunday criticized the push to force a vote in the U.S. House on releasing more federal files pertaining to sex offender Jeffrey Epstein as "reckless," while the measure's co-sponsors fired back against Republican Party leadership. "House Republicans insist upon the release of all credible evidence and information related to Epstein in any way," Johnson, R-La., said on NBC News. "But we are also insisting upon the protection of innocent victims," Johnson continued. "And our concern is that the ... discharge petition is reckless in the way that it is drafted and presented, it does not adequately include those protections," he added, referring to the measure introduced by Reps. Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Ro Khanna, D-Calif. Meanwhile, Massie and Khanna took to the airwaves on Sunday to defend their bill — and criticize the Republican leadership, whom they see as standing in the way of holding a vote on the measures. Massie and Khanna both repudiated the allegations that releasing the Epstein files would hurt victims of the financier and convicted sex abuser. In an interview on NBC News, Massie said that Johnson was making a "straw man argument" when the speaker said that the bill does not include protections for victims. "Ro and I carefully crafted this legislation so that the victims' names will be redacted and that no child pornography will be released," Massie said. The lawmaker's comments underscore the ongoing divisions within the GOP over the Epstein files, which continue to fuel conspiracy theories among the party's MAGA base and infuriate some of President Donald Trump's strongest supporters. On Friday, Trump deflected questions about Epstein, a former friend. Epstein died from suicide while in jail weeks after being arrested on child sex trafficking charges in 2019. "I have nothing to do with the guy," Trump said of the man he had socialized with for years before a falling out in the mid-2000s with the convicted pedophile. The Trump administration has faced growing backlash in recent weeks after the Justice Department walked back on earlier plans to release the files related to Epstein's case. Massie also criticized Johnson on Sunday for beginning its August recess early in the U.S. House, avoiding being forced to take the vote on the motions related to the Epstein files. "The question is, why isn't Mike Johnson having this vote? Why did he send us home early?" Massie said on ABC News. He also warned of the political implications if Johnson does not hold a vote on the bill. "I'll tell you what's politically going to be a liability is, if we don't vote on this, and we go into the midterms and everybody ... they just check out because Republicans didn't keep their promise," he said. "We'll lose the majority," he continued. Massie said that he thinks pressure will build to hold a vote on it through the August recess period. Some Democrats, including Reps. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) are also backing the bill. Massie was also asked how he would react if Trump granted convicted Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell some form of clemency. "I don't think she deserves that or needs that," Massie said on ABC News, adding that "it's hard to believe that she, herself, and Epstein did these crimes by themselves," which means it's "time to find out who else was involved," by evaluating documents, bank records and others including plea bargains previously under seal. In recent days, Maxwell was granted limited immunity by the Justice Department to answer questions about the Jeffrey Epstein case. This type of immunity allowed Maxwell to answer questions from Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, Trump's former personal lawyer, without fear that the information she provided could later be used against her in any future cases or proceedings. When Johnson was asked what he thought of a possible pardon for Maxwell, he reiterated that the decision is ultimately up to Trump. "Obviously that's a decision of the president," Johnson said, adding, "that's not my lane."
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
What polls show about a very confusing political landscape
The political landscape right now is more confusing than a corn maze. For every data point that suggests Republicans face headwinds, there seems to be another that suggests Democrats should hold their britches. It all leaves this political analyst wondering just what the heck is going on out there, to paraphrase the great Vince Lombardi. Trump's popularity Let's start with President Donald Trump's approval rating. Gallup released a poll last week putting Trump's approval rating (37%), way down from the beginning of his second term (47%). The poll made a lot of press. Then you have the Wall Street Journal survey, which got a lot less play and showed something very different. Trump's net approval ratings among registered voters (approval - disapproval), while still negative at -6 percentage points, have barely declined from earlier this year. His approval rating of 46% looks a lot like it did at the start of the year. There are even surveys that have Trump's approval rating basically equal to his disapproval rating. Diving deeper into the data can leave one more befuddled, even when looking at the averages. Trump's approval rating with independents is lower than any president at this point in office. Yet he's lost very little ground with Republicans since the beginning of the year. This is important because there are a lot of them (e.g. see the section below this one). The average overall, regardless of how you compute the average, still does have Trump's net approval negative. That's where I think it is. Yet, I can't guarantee it. We've seen too many times in the last decade that the range of the results gave us a better understanding of the potential outcomes than the average did at pinpointing where things would end up. Party identification Pollsters will almost always ask how people identify themselves: Democrat, Republican or independent. Then they'll follow that up by asking independents whether they lean toward the Democratic or Republican side of the aisle. Party identification is one of the fundamental variables to understand how people will vote. Most Democrats will vote for Democratic candidates, while most Republicans will vote for Republican candidates. No wonder a lot of people took note of the Pew Research Center's annual benchmark poll that was released last week that showed 46% of the country were Republican or leaned Republican to 45% who were Democratic or leaned Democratic. That margin is no different from last year's version of the poll, before Trump won the presidency again. Pew's data, however, isn't the only data. I asked Quinnipiac University for their polls conducted during roughly the same period. Quinnipiac shows a pretty clear swing to the Democrats over the course of the year. During the January-to-February period, Republicans (including leaners) held a 1- to 3-point advantage on party affiliation. Democrats, however, were ahead by 2 to 4 points in the April and June polls. This included two 4-point edges in both June surveys they put into the field. I don't know who is right. The truth probably lies somewhere in between. Democrats may be slightly ahead, though that's not great on a metric where they have usually been ahead over the years. The generic congressional ballot This question is one of my favorites. It asks respondents some form of 'would you vote for the Democratic or Republican candidate from your district?' The polling does seem to have the Democrats up. The Journal has them up narrowly among registered voters by 3 points. A Reuters/Ipsos poll from June finds the parties about evenly matched, with Democrats at 40% to Republicans' 38%. This is well behind the pace of where Democrats were in either 2005 or 2017 — the years before they won wave elections in the midterms. The Democratic lead in those cycles was closer to 7 points. Confused? You haven't seen anything yet. Ipsos' poll actually looks no different from their final poll on the subject in 2024, the year Republicans held on to the House. The Journal poll, which is one of Trump's better ones, shows the Democrats gaining significantly from its final survey in 2024, when Republicans were up by 4 points. But the seat-by-seat landscape in the House isn't the most appealing for Democrats. Both the Cook Political Report and Inside Elections show more potential pickup opportunities for the Republicans than Democrats. This is without any pro-Republican redistricting that might occur in Texas — or potential pro-Democratic redistricting in other states as retaliation for whatever Texas does. Democrats had more pickup chances than Republicans by this point in both 2005 and especially 2017, according to Cook. I should point out, however, that Democrats don't need a wave to take back the House. They need a small gain given the GOP's razor-thin majority. But with a smaller-than-usual lead on the generic ballot for Democrats and potential redistricting, that may not happen. The bottom line All of this leaves me a little befuddled. I believe Trump is more unpopular than not. Given that fact, I believe Republicans are in clear trouble for 2026. I'd probably have said the same thing during the 2022 cycle, when Joe Biden's approval rating was awful heading into those midterms. And while Democrats lost the House that fall, Republicans barely pulled it off. This cycle strikes me as even more confusing. And who can forget the most important variable? It's still 2025. It was only months before the 2022 midterms that Roe v. Wade got overturned and gave Democrats a political shot in the arm. We have a long way to go.
