Latest news with #moderation
Irish Times
14 hours ago
- Health
- Irish Times
Alcohol labels fool nobody
Sir, – The logic behind placing warning labels on bottles of alcohol seems to be that the product can cause health and other problems and, therefore, people must be told. Apart from the fact that this is condescending – people already know that – it is unwise to take the same approach to alcohol as has been adopted towards tobacco. Alcohol only causes problems in excess, while most people use it in moderation. Last Saturday, for example, in the Drinks section of The Irish Times, there was an article headlined 'Wine shops moonlighting as bars are saving the neighbourhood'. On the opposite page were the four recommended tipples of the week. READ MORE Should that, too, be banned as it encourages dangerous behaviour? There is no evidence that warning labels will have any effect, in particular on problem drinkers. Labelling a bottle of wine 'This could kill you' is an irrelevant message for most people and will be regarded as laughable and therefore ignored. The obvious measure to take is to properly fund addiction treatment and services. That takes time, money and political will. Slapping warning labels on bottles is an exercise in 'Something must be seen to be done. Here is something'. – Yours, etc, DAVE SLATER, Co Kildare.
TechCrunch
4 days ago
- TechCrunch
Facebook Group admins complain of mass bans; Meta says it's fixing the problem
After a wave of mass bans impacting Instagram and Facebook users alike, Meta users are now complaining that Facebook Groups are also being impacted by mass suspensions. According to individual complaints and organized efforts on sites like Reddit to share information, the bans have impacted thousands of groups both in the U.S. and abroad, and have spanned various categories. Reached for comment, Meta spokesperson Andy Stone confirmed the company was aware of the issue and working to correct it. 'We're aware of a technical error that impacted some Facebook Groups. We're fixing things now,' he told TechCrunch in an emailed statement. The reason for the mass bans is not yet known, though many suspect that faulty AI-based moderation could be to blame. Based on the information shared by impacted users, many of the suspended Facebook groups aren't the type that would regularly face moderation concerns, as they focus on fairly innocuous content — like savings tips or deals, parenting support, groups for dog or cat owners, gaming groups, Pokémon groups, groups for mechanical keyboard enthusiasts, and more. Facebook Group admins report receiving vague violation notices related to things like 'terrorism-related' content or nudity, which they claim their group hasn't posted. While some of the impacted groups are smaller in size, many are large, with tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or even millions of users. Those who have organized to share tips about the problem are advising others not to appeal their group's ban, but rather wait a few days to see if the suspension is automatically reversed when the bug is fixed. Currently, Reddit's Facebook community (r/facebook) is filled with posts from group admins and users who are angry about the recent purge. Some report that all the groups they run have been removed at once. Some are incredulous about the supposed violations — like a group for bird photos with just under a million users getting flagged for nudity. Others claim that their groups were already well-moderated against spam– like a family-friendly Pokémon group with nearly 200,000 members, which received a violation notice that their title referenced 'dangerous organizations,' or an interior design group that served millions, which received the same violation. At least some Facebook Group admins who pay for Meta's Verified subscription, which includes priority customer support, have been able to get help. Others, however, report that their groups have been suspended or fully deleted. It's unclear if the problem is related to the recent wave of bans impacting Meta users as individuals, but this seems to be a growing problem across social networks. In addition to Facebook and Instagram, social networks like Pinterest and Tumblr have also faced complaints about mass suspensions in recent weeks, leading users to suspect that AI-automated moderation efforts are to blame. Pinterest at least admitted to its mistake, saying the mass bans were due to an internal error, but it denied that AI was the issue. Tumblr said its issues were tied to tests of a new content filtering system, but did not clarify if that system involved AI. When asked about the recent Instagram bans, Meta had declined to comment. Users are now circulating a petition that has topped 12,380 signatures so far, asking Meta to address the problem. Others, including those whose businesses were impacted, are pursuing legal action. Meta has still not shared what's causing the issue with either individual accounts or groups.
Daily Mail
18-06-2025
- Health
- Daily Mail
Trump admin to scrap alcohol limits in stunning U-turn
America is set to scrap its decades old recommendation that people do not consume more than two alcoholic drinks a day. Under the current guidelines, women are told not to drink more than one alcoholic beverage a day while men are told to drink no more than two. But now, sources say this could be replaced with more generic advice to drink 'in moderation' or to limit alcohol intake due to associated health risks. Three sources — who asked not to be named — leaked the proposed update to Reuters, potentially marking the first time alcohol limits have been changed since 1990. It is set to be revealed in the updated Dietary Guidelines, published every five years to give dietary recommendations to Americans, that could be released this month. The proposal moves America's guidelines away from its neighbor Canada, which recently introduced stricter guidelines urging Canadians to limit alcohol intake to just two drinks per week. It's a U-turn on the Biden administration's proposal to investigate emulating Canada's guidelines, revealed in a interview in 2023. Even moderate drinking is linked to some health risks, studies suggest, such as higher risk of cancer and dementia. A fourth source told Reuters that the updates to the guidelines were being made because the scientific basis for the current recommendations was 'limited'. One source said the new alcohol-related recommendation will probably be limited to a sentence or two in the new report. The new guidelines are being developed by the US Department of Health and Human Services and the US Department of Agriculture. Health Secretary Robert F Kennedy Junior is a known teetotaler, but has remained largely silent on alcohol — instead emphasizing whole foods in the upcoming dietary guidelines. Donald Trump also famously does not consume alcohol after his older brother Fred — an alcoholic — died at age 50 from a heart attack. In remarks last week, the 79-year-old President said his advice on good parenting was 'no drugs, no alcohol, no cigarettes... I also say no tattoos'. Some experts had feared tighter alcohol limits would be set under the guidelines after a federal report released in January suggested just one alcoholic drink a day raises the risk of suffering from more than a dozen health conditions. These included a higher risk of colon and esophageal cancers and of liver cirrhosis. That same month, former US Surgeon General Dr Vivek Murphy warned that drinking alcohol could raise the risk of suffering from seven types of cancer. He also recommended that all alcoholic beverages include a cigarette-style warning on their packaging to highlight the link between alcohol and cancer. Major industry players including Diageo — which makes Captain Morgan's rum and Smirnoff Vodka among others — and Anheuser-Busch — which owns Bud Light — have spent millions lobbying lawmakers over the guidelines and other issues over the last two years. The guidelines are reviewed every five years and have advised drinking as no more than one drink per day for women and two per day for men since 1990. Eva Greenthal, a senior policy scientist at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a non-profit focused on nutrition, health and food safety, said the more general language expected in the guidelines was 'so vague as to be unhelpful'. Under such a change, the message that even moderate drinking can increase risks, especially for breast cancer, would get lost, she added. Two studies were produced to inform the development of the guidelines. The first found that moderate drinking was associated with increased risk of some cancers, but a decreased risk of dying from any cause and some cardiovascular problems like stroke. The evidence for some other health impacts was insufficient to draw conclusions, it found. The other report conversely found the risk of dying from alcohol use, including increased risk for seven cancers, begins at any or low levels of alcohol use and increases with higher consumption.
Reuters
18-06-2025
- Health
- Reuters
Exclusive: US to drop guidance to limit alcohol to one or two drinks per day, sources say
June 18 (Reuters) - U.S. Dietary Guidelines are expected to eliminate the long-standing recommendation that adults limit alcohol consumption to one or two drinks per day, according to three sources familiar with the matter, in what could be a major win for an industry threatened by heightened scrutiny of alcohol's health effects. The updated Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which could be released as early as this month, are expected to include a brief statement encouraging Americans to drink in moderation or limit alcohol intake due to associated health risks, the sources said. The guidelines are still under development and subject to change, two of the sources and a fourth individual familiar with the process said. Currently, the recommendations advise limiting drinking to one serving or less per day for women and two or less for men, widely seen as a moderate level. Similar guidelines exist in countries such as the United Kingdom, which advises limiting drinking to 14 units per week, while Canada, however, has adopted a more cautious stance, warning that health risks begin to increase after just two drinks per week. Even moderate drinking is linked to some health risks, such as higher risk of breast cancer, though some studies have also found an association with possible health benefits, such as a lower risk of stroke. The fourth source said that the scientific basis for recommending specific daily limits is limited, and the goal is to ensure the guidelines reflect only the most robust evidence. The new guidelines, developed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, are closely watched internationally and influence policies ranging from school lunch programs to medical advice. Neither department responded to requests for comment. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a known teetotaler, has remained largely silent on alcohol but has emphasised a focus on whole foods in the upcoming guidelines. Some alcohol executives had feared a move towards tighter recommendations on alcohol intake as authorities like the World Health Organization upped their warnings about alcohol's health risks. Former U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy said alcohol consumption increases the risk of at least seven types of cancer and called for warning labels on alcoholic drinks. Major industry players, including Diageo (DGE.L), opens new tab and Anheuser-Busch InBev ( opens new tab, have lobbied lawmakers throughout the review process. Senate records show each company spent millions on lobbying efforts related to the guidelines and a range of other issues such as tax and trade in 2024 and 2025. Both companies declined to comment. The new guidelines are set to move away from suggesting consumers limit alcohol consumption to a specific number of daily servings, according to the three sources, who asked not to be named in order to speak freely. One person said the new alcohol-related recommendation will probably be limited to a sentence or two. Another said the existing numbers tied to moderate drinking could still appear in a longer appendix. While industry representatives have lobbied lawmakers on the guidelines or how they should be decided, some officials and researchers advocated for tighter restrictions. Reports intended to inform the guidelines have meanwhile drawn different conclusions about alcohol's health effects and the science around this. The guidelines, which are reviewed every five years, have advised drinking in moderation and defined that as no more than one drink per day for women and no more than two for men since 1990. Eva Greenthal, a senior policy scientist at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a non-profit focused on nutrition, health and food safety, said the more general language expected in the guidelines was "so vague as to be unhelpful". Under such a change, the message that even moderate drinking can increase risks, especially for breast cancer, would get lost, she continued. Two studies were produced to inform the development of the guidelines. The first found that moderate drinking was associated with increased risk of some cancers, but a decreased risk of dying from any cause and some cardiovascular problems like stroke. The evidence for some other health impacts was insufficient to draw conclusions, it found. The other report conversely found the risk of dying from alcohol use, including increased risk for seven cancers, begins at any or low levels of alcohol use and increases with higher consumption.
The Verge
09-06-2025
- Politics
- The Verge
YouTube has loosened its content moderation policies
YouTube has relaxed its moderation policies and is now instructing reviewers not to remove content that might violate its rules if they're in the 'public interest,' according to a report from The New York Times. The platform reportedly adjusted its policies internally in December, offering examples that included medical misinformation and hate speech. In training material viewed by the Times, YouTube says reviewers should now leave up videos in the public interest — which includes discussions of elections, ideologies, movements, race, gender, sexuality, abortion, immigration, censorship — if no more than half of their content breaks its rules, up from one quarter. The platform said in the material that the move expands on a change made before the 2024 US election, which allows content from political candidates to stay up even if they violate its community guidelines. Additionally, the platform told moderators that they should remove content if 'freedom of expression value may outweigh harm risk,' and take borderline videos to a manager instead of removing them, the Times reports. 'Recognizing that the definition of 'public interest' is always evolving, we update our guidance for these exceptions to reflect the new types of discussion we see on the platform today,' YouTube spokesperson Nicole Bell said in a statement to the Times. 'Our goal remains the same: to protect free expression on YouTube while mitigating egregious harm.' YouTube didn't immediately respond to The Verge 's request for comment. YouTube tightened its policies against misinformation during Donald Trump's first term as US president and the covid pandemic, as it began removing videos containing false information about covid vaccines and US elections. The platform stepped back from removing election fraud lies in 2023, but this recent change goes a step further and reflects a broader trend of online platforms taking a more lax approach to moderation followingTrump's reelection. Earlier this year, Meta similarly changed its policies surrounding hate speech and ended third-party fact-checking in favor of X-style community notes. The changes follow years of attacks on tech companies from Trump, and Google in particular is in a vulnerable legal situation, facing two Department of Justice antitrust lawsuits that could see its Chrome browser and other services broken off. Trump has previously taken credit for Meta's moderation changes. As noted by the Times, YouTube showed reviewers real examples of how it has implemented the new policy. One video contained coverage of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s covid vaccine policy changes — under the title 'RFK Jr. Delivers SLEDGEHAMMER Blows to Gene-Altering JABS' — and was allowed to violate policies surrounding medical misinformation because public interest 'outweighs the harm risk,' according to the Times. (The video has since been taken off the platform, but the Times says the reasoning behind this is 'unclear.') Another example was a 43-minute video about Trump's cabinet appointees that violated YouTube's harassment rules with a slur targeting a transgender person, but was left up because it had only a single violation, the Times reports. YouTube also reportedly told reviewers to leave up a video from South Korea that mentioned putting former president Yoon Suk Yeol in a guillotine, saying that the 'wish for execution by guillotine is not feasible.'
