Meta has reportedly exempted some of its top advertisers from its usual content moderation process in order to protect its multibillion-dollar business. Internal documents from 2023 reveal that the company introduced „guardrails“ to shield high spenders from automated content moderation systems that were mistakenly penalizing these top brands.
The memos stated that Meta would suppress detections based on how much an advertiser spent on the platform, with some top advertisers being reviewed by humans instead. This practice, known as „P95 spenders“, exempted those spending more than $1,500 per day from advertising restrictions, but they would still undergo manual human review.
The documents predate CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s recent announcement that Meta was ending its third-party fact-checking program and reducing automated content moderation. This move comes as the company prepares for the return of Donald Trump as president.
Meta acknowledged that its automated systems had incorrectly flagged some top-spending accounts for rule violations. The company stated that higher-spending accounts were disproportionately affected by erroneous notifications of possible breaches.
A Meta spokesperson refuted the claims of preferential treatment for high-spending advertisers, stating that the effort was aimed at preventing mistakes in enforcement. Advertising constitutes the majority of Meta’s annual revenues, which were nearly $135 billion in 2023.
The company typically uses a combination of artificial intelligence and human moderators to screen adverts for violations of its standards. In a document titled „high spender mistake prevention“, Meta outlined guardrails that protect accounts bringing in more than $1,200 in revenue over a 56-day period.
These guardrails help Meta decide if a detection should proceed to enforcement and are designed to suppress detections based on characteristics such as the level of advertising spend. The company explained that higher spend is used as a guardrail because ads from these accounts have greater reach, leading to potentially graver consequences if they are mistakenly removed.
While Meta admitted to preventing some high-spending accounts from being disabled by automated systems, it emphasized that all businesses were subject to the same advertising standards. The documents did not disclose the names of high spenders subject to the guardrails, but the spending thresholds suggested thousands of advertisers may have been exempted from the typical moderation process.
Market intelligence firm Sensor Tower estimates that the top 10 US spenders on Facebook and Instagram include companies like Amazon, Procter & Gamble, Walmart, and Google. Despite facing threats from competitors like TikTok, Meta has seen record revenues and its stock is trading at an all-time high.
Critics argue that Meta is prioritizing revenue over user integrity and health by circumventing the standard moderation process for top advertisers. The company’s internal documents also revealed discussions about offering additional protections to platinum and gold spenders to prevent over-moderation that could impact revenue.
In the past, Meta has faced scrutiny for granting exemptions to important users, such as politicians and celebrities. The company’s oversight board has demanded changes to internal systems that shield certain users from enforcement, highlighting the need for a balance between revenue considerations and content moderation standards.
Dann übersetzen Sie in B1 Deutsch und geben Sie nur den deutschen Text zurück. Behalten Sie die HTML-Tags bei. Geben Sie mir nicht die englische Version zurück. Geben Sie mir nicht den gesendeten Text zurück. Geben Sie nur den deutschen Text zurück.