Instagram is incorporating users' photos in ads for Meta Glasses

https://twitter.com/i/status/2071277885646868536

by notRobot • 23 days ago

357 131 23 days ago

Cthulhu_• 23 days ago

Didn't Facebook do this years and years ago?

Yes, 2013: https://mashable.com/archive/facebook-ads-photo#ggcKnNfAUaqy

According to Facebook's Statement of Rights and Responsibilities:
You give us permission to use your name, profile picture, content, and information in connection with commercial, sponsored, or related content (such as a brand you like) served or enhanced by us. This means, for example, that you permit a business or other entity to pay us to display your name and/or profile picture with your content or information, without any compensation to you. If you have selected a specific audience for your content or information, we will respect your choice when we use it.

So it's not new. If you don't want this, delete your facebook account: https://www.facebook.com/privacy/dialog/delete-your-informat...

pavel_lishin2• 23 days ago

If you don't want this, delete your facebook account

What? I thought I could just paste a paragraph of all-caps legalese to my profile, and it would solve this!

steve1977• 23 days ago

This made me laugh and cry at the same time...

pbhjpbhj• 23 days ago

To be fair it seems like it should be equally valid in contract law.

realusername• 23 days ago

Both sounds kind of the same thing to me, a wall of text that nobody will read and each essentially saying "I have the right to do whatever I want"

hmry• 23 days ago

I can confirm it works exactly as well as putting "everything belongs to its original owners, no copyright intended" in your youtube video description

smalltorch• 23 days ago

Those are incredible terms that no one read.

acdha• 23 days ago

I cancelled my Instagram account when they added those terms in the early 2010s. At the time it was mostly photographers reading them and closing accounts but it wasn’t exactly a secret.

Groxx• 23 days ago

Almost literally every single social media site in the past ~15+ years has had those exact terms in it.

Everything you upload, almost everywhere, can be used by the site owners to do whatever they like for their own purposes (reselling is somewhat often excluded / non-transferrable). There are a handful of exceptions, but they're very much exceptions, not the normal rule.

rootusrootus• 23 days ago

If you have selected a specific audience for your content or information, we will respect your choice when we use it.

To be fair, if they actually honor this promise, and if it means what it sounds like in plain English -- i.e. that if you only posted your photo for friends, only friends can ever see it even if FB uses it for advertising -- that is a halfway decent mitigation of the issue. Not ideal, but then again, you're not paying for FB, so what did you really expect?

microgpt3• 23 days ago

"respect your choice" sounds like it means something but doesn't mean something.

fweimer• 23 days ago

I think you got it backwards. Wouldn't it be way worse if they used your likeness for advertising to your friends? Compared to random people who don't know you?

vee-kay• 23 days ago

FYI, Meta earns billions by showing scam ads.

https://qz.com/consumer-federation-america-sues-meta-scam-ad...

https://www.reuters.com/investigations/meta-is-earning-fortu...

It is unlikely that Meta will suddenly gain morals scruples to avoid profiting from user content, with or without user consent.

This is the same company that invasively spies on its own employees, to train AI models.

https://www.wired.com/story/meta-accidentally-let-employees-...

Meta — the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp — has a long history of abusing user trust. It has been fined billions for illegal activities like unauthorised data harvesting (Cambridge Analytica), illegal facial recognition, and mishandling children’s private information. Beyond what’s illegal, Meta is ethically notorious for emotional manipulation experiments, addictive design targeted at teenagers, rampant surveillance (even of non-users), promoting misinformation, and ignoring research that shows its products harm mental health.

https://leehopkins.com/meta-data-abuse-revealed/

jubilee33• 23 days ago

Yes, like immediately after they were beta on unsuspecting university students. Anyone with a Facebook in 2026, ...well we can't just say they deserve it because that is definitely (no sarcasm intended) blaming the victim. But sometimes it feels like, why does the Nigerian Prince scam keep working after 30 plus years? Do we have to sacrifice the weak and vulnerable to have any sense of freedom and creativity? I don't know honestly ...perhaps?

bryanrasmussen3• 23 days ago

I wonder if terms and conditions vary between jurisdictions. I would guess so.

Xunjin• 23 days ago

They can definitely be questioned in courts.

like_any_other• 23 days ago

If you don't want this, delete your facebook account

All that will happen is this term or similar will appear in some other "contract" of adhesion. Your bank? Your motherboard's EULA? Paypal or LLM vendor terms? Your phone OS/ISP? Your car? Anywhere and everywhere where some necessity of modern life is provided by a faceless multinational corporation.

If you don't want this, organize and lobby against it politically. That's what corporations do when they want to screw us over, and it's working great for them. Is the act-as-an-isolated-mere-consumer approach working great for us?

PakG1• 23 days ago

I understand that I give them permission. That's partly why I'm not a producer of content on those platforms, though I'll consume now and then. But I'll rarely produce text (other than usually a happy birthday now and then), and I'll never produce photos.

But what about the people in my photographs, whether on purpose or not? Did they give permission? That's the part that Meta doesn't really want to address.

slumberlust• 23 days ago

If car mfgs can engross passengers in ToS they may never see; I'd guess yes. At least until someone challenges it.

rrgok• 23 days ago

I give you the permission, but license cost for using my things is 30% of the revenue.

cwillu• 23 days ago

Funny, because I got a payout last year from facebook settling a class action suit about their use of my and others' likeness in their fucking sponsored stories.

ThePowerOfFuet• 23 days ago

https://xcancel.com/venturetwins/status/2071277885646868536

kuschkufan2• 23 days ago

i edited it to the same url before opening as i usually do for twitter urls so that i can see the full conversation without being logged into twitter.

for some reason the url rewrote iteself to this: https://themenspiegel.click/c/de/52_merzchrupalla/?method=po...

which is a german language scam site. i have no explanation how this happened, whether it is xcancel.com doing this or something loaded from twitter that caused xcancel to do this. never seen anythin like it before, would like to know more.

btw any further reloads of the xcancel url to that tweet totally work as expected.

pavel_lishin2• 23 days ago

Throwing an additional anecdote into the bucket, this did not happen for me. Any chance you have a dodgy extension installed?

jadamson• 23 days ago

Sure you didn't just make a typo and hit a squatted domain?

jijijijij2• 23 days ago

Doubt. xcancel.com does not even seem to have any advertisements at all, when I disable ublock. Site seems remarkable clean, no thirdparty connections apart from a cdn. Sure you didn't type cancelx.com? Cause there something shady is going on. Otherwise, I would strongly suggest checking your extensions or system for malware.

hsuduebc2• 23 days ago

I mean, what would you expect from company with morality of tobacco and slot machines producer? This is the least evil they are doing.

This thing resurface from time to time. It's the small text you never read. In this case, small part in ridiculously and intentionally big eula.

avgDev• 23 days ago

I am surprised with the downvotes. Meta is the new tobacco corp.

fullshark3• 23 days ago

Ten years ago maybe this causes outrage, but I'm not sure anyone cares in 2026 including potential customers.

quadrature3• 23 days ago

Is there actual proof that they are doing this. Theres not much to go on in the tweet.

tantalor3• 23 days ago

Besides the proof in the screenshot? What more do you want?

Do you think this user is faking it?

quadrature3• 23 days ago

Yes people frequently fake screenshots on social media. I'd want either a screenshot from a credible person, reporting from a journalist, trusted blogger, company statement etc.

ryan42• 23 days ago

yes, it happened to me recently.

The photo wasn't mine, but showed a profile photo of one of my facebook friends, and it had the glasses and said "On my way!"

edoceo• 23 days ago

And they have a history of doing this. And their privacy/ToS allows it.

tantalor3• 23 days ago

Comment on that thread:

This seems entirely counter-productive and creepy.

Apt description of Instagram in general.

penr0se• 23 days ago

This shouldn't really be surprising. It's very similar to what they did ~1.5 year ago when they started to use users' photos to promote Meta AI

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42615538

Zhyl• 23 days ago

The XKCD for this exact scenario is 14 years old.

https://xkcd.com/1150/

doublerabbit• 23 days ago

Some reason that strip doesn't load for me.

nicce2• 23 days ago

It is just saying that if you don't pay for something, you are the product. I think it still fits well here.

fullshark3• 23 days ago

Kind of a stretch, these days can't imagine anyone that views instagram as a place to store their cherished photos also.

jijijijij2• 23 days ago

Yeah, and then the charging businesses start selling your stuff anyway. So really, it's the comic creator, who is naive.

RattlesnakeJake4• 23 days ago

Many years ago (back when Facebook still had sidebar ads), my sister was presented with a dating ad for "Hot Christian Singles" accompanied by a photo of our brother.

It was hilarious, but also mind-boggling. In what scenario would pulling in a friend's profile photo create a useful ad?

dewey4• 23 days ago

In what scenario would pulling in a friend's profile photo create a useful ad?

Exactly in the scenario you just described. You still remember it and you are actively talking about it years after the fact.

fumblebee• 23 days ago

wouldn't "useful ad" imply either 1) clicking through and buying the product or service, or else 2) building up a positive brand association to help increase sales later?

remembering an advert correlates but is different to it being valuable.

RattlesnakeJake4• 23 days ago

But it didn't bring clicks to the website nor goodwill toward the company.

No one remembers who ran the ad. Even if we did, it would only be in a negative light due to a weird and off-putting advertising approach.

not_a_bot_4sho• 23 days ago

Sounds like the viewers were highly unlikely to have clicked through. Cost the advertiser a view but lost the conversion.

Useful ad for Facebook. They made money on it. The advertiser didn't.

boelboel• 23 days ago

Many people want to date their own friends? Seeing your friend is on the site would show it's okay to use?

dwa3592• 23 days ago

This is a ridiculous argument that just because someone still remembers something means it was a good advertising strategy. This is partly why advertising sucks. The correct metric in this case would be did the user actually go on the date with the said person or at least initiated the conversation. In this person's case, very likely not. So the strategy is dumb, ridiculous and laughable but not useful or good in any sense.

hbn• 23 days ago

Zero people in the process of creating that ad said "we'll suggest people date their siblings, it'll be so memorable"

That is absolutely not a success story when trying to market a Christian dating platform.

RIMR• 23 days ago

They're married now, too.

PyWoody• 23 days ago

Roll tide.

themaninthedark• 23 days ago

I could see people clicking through to see if their friend had a dating profile, if not for the romantic interest the gossip interest.

RattlesnakeJake4• 23 days ago

Okay, this may actually explain it XD

invalidusernam3• 23 days ago

"I'm uncomfortable"

Should have read the terms and conditions

onemoresoop• 23 days ago

What percentage of people read those? They’re even unitelligible to the layman.

hurfdurf• 23 days ago

And that's how the HUMANCENTiPAD keeps growing.

dylan604• 23 days ago

Hey Siri, find the gotchas in this EULA being presented /s

srmatto3• 23 days ago

Is Meta abusing its users a problem? Yes. Does the TOS allow for it? Yes. Can people decide to just create a shell account and not actually participate? Sure.

One of the real insidious problems with Instagram and to some extent Facebook is that they provide a free, low friction way for business to communicate with current or potential customers. As a result many small businesses use Instagram as replacement for a public facing website and perhaps a blog or email newsletter. Many small business in my region depend on Instagram for this purpose, its nearly universal. It helps keep you stuck in Instagram so that you can see a business' hours, menu, or special events. I guess a shell account is the answer but you're still going to have to navigate the skinner box feed.

haliskerbas• 23 days ago

Every time I try to create a shell account, it gets banned with no reason given. Even if it's just to follow a few influencer accounts.

srmatto3• 23 days ago

Well there you go, there is no reasonable way to be a non-participant while also staying up to date on businesses that choose to use the platform.

cute_boi• 23 days ago

You can't create shell account on fb/meta anymore. They will ask to turn on camera and rotate your head.

ed_elliott_asc• 23 days ago

Print out a face of someone on Facebook and use that?

catlikesshrimp2• 23 days ago

U a manequin head. Add hair and moles. It mightbtake more than one try but it works. Eventually, people who make shell accounts will be declared creepy child predators, but that isn't the case, yet.

plagiarist• 23 days ago

If the only way to interact with a business is via Facebook or Instagram, I don't interact with the business.

Unfortunately this is more of a problem for me than it is for them. I hope my position on this becomes more popular over time so that everyone can stop using spy- and adware.

srmatto3• 23 days ago

Small businesses are pretty important for a number of reasons and I think if people adopted this stance it would hurt them a lot more than it would hurt Meta.

microgpt3• 23 days ago

We need a Nitter for Instagram.

burkaman• 23 days ago

https://imginn.com/ or https://codeberg.org/irelephant/kittygram

hmokiguess2• 23 days ago

you also add `kk` in front of it and it renders just the embedded content

ricardofranco• 23 days ago

Something similar happened to me a few years ago. my photo was used in an ad, making it look like I was selling stuff and promoting a page I’d never even clicked on... absolutely mind-blowing....

encomiast• 23 days ago

I feel like having an account on a Meta site is today’s equivalent of being a smoker.

nicce2• 23 days ago

There isn't better analogy. I hope it spreads and we will see the same effect and social pressure as smokers faced.

catlikesshrimp2• 23 days ago

Vaping is the new smoking. Except you knew what was inside a cigar, while vape liquid is a generic term for anything inside a bottle.

breezybottom2• 23 days ago

Being a smoker in the 1950s maybe.

anon_shill• 23 days ago

After years off of it I got back on it because living in NYC it’s a lot easier to find and get invited to events in the arts if you’re on it. I wish it weren’t so. I hate every part of it that isn’t a utility.

jimt1234• 23 days ago

I don't know what's worse - this, or all the ads/commercials for Meta Glasses featuring Kylie Jenner, like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yYQO8exxaU

ThouYS• 23 days ago

why are people using these products exactly?

signing away their rights to their photos? making psychopaths filthy rich?

if the surveillance glasses are coming, these people will also have signed away the commons, which are not theirs to give away

literalAardvark• 23 days ago

The surveillance glasses are nearing 3rd gen.

You'd know that if you used social media /s

remywang• 23 days ago

Just stop using that cursed website

fourside• 23 days ago

It really is that simple. “Users of company with a long track record of unethical behavior surprised at the company’s latest unethical business decision.”

I know it’s not easy for some to stop using their platform for some reason or another. That’s the point. When you use their product not because they are the best choice in a free market with options, but when you use it because you have to. Just don’t surprised when FB keeps pushing the limits.

frollogaston• 23 days ago

Maybe they're not surprised, they just don't care

cryo32• 23 days ago

Yeah just done that. Hosed my Instagram account.

rchaud• 23 days ago

Even if you don't use FB, pictures of you tagged by your friends are fair game.

AuthAuth• 23 days ago

Dont have friends, simple as

microgpt3• 23 days ago

https://xcancel.com/venturetwins/status/2071277885646868536

bcraven• 23 days ago

"Damn, this is creepy level though & generally I’m all for ads knowing everything about me. Putting my wife’s profile pic in an ad is too much"

Presumably this reply is a joke?

glimshe• 23 days ago

When you don't pay for the product... YOU are the product.

VortexLain• 23 days ago

Sometimes it seems like Black Mirror screenwriters work at Meta as a side hustle.

halflife• 23 days ago

I actually find this incredible, since this highlights how desperate they are to advertise these glasses

jmorenoamor• 23 days ago

Why? Because they can, and they will.

Leaving these services looks difficult or impossible, until you do it, and the world just keeps spinning.

wartywhoa23• 23 days ago

IG users were the proverbial product on this free-to-partake vanity fair since its inception.

subygan• 23 days ago

As horrible as it sounds.

For the median user, It really is impossible to have an alternative to instagram / whatsapp / facebook. It is so easy to live in a bubble and say I'll host my own things. but a totally different thing to have a functioning network effects machine.

giancarlostoro• 23 days ago

Amazing we live in an age where making a fake image of someone that looks realistic enough (and for a tiny thumbnail resolution to boot) with a company that makes arguably lesser used but somewhat frontier AI models, not using said models to make these ads less intrusive, whilst still making them feel slightly personalized.

red_admiral• 23 days ago

As if Meta glasses weren't creepy enough already.

mcmcmc• 23 days ago

Always amusing when people discover they’re paying for free services with something other than money.

ornornor• 23 days ago

Company owned by a sociopath and which has proven time and time and time again that they have no regard for your privacy does it again. It’s good to keep talking about it so that there is still some friction attached to pulling this off for Meta, but if you’re surprised at this I don’t know what to tell you.

Delete your social media and join the rest of us living free!

croes• 23 days ago

How much abuse are the users willing to take before the take action?

fullshark3• 23 days ago

Possibly unlimited so long as the hot and cool people are on the platform.

hmokiguess2• 23 days ago

"The era of ultra personalized ads has begun"

I think that's maybe a decade old by now if not more, a little late to the party I'd say

blaqq2• 23 days ago

Well, that took a dark turn. At this point, no one should be surprised. They've churned out a lot of movies with this plot; it was always going to happen.

renegade-otter• 23 days ago

The news here is that people are still using instagram.

dewey4• 23 days ago

They have two billion monthly active users worldwide. There's many parts of this world that run on Meta (WhatsApp / Instagram) for things from government communication to every business only having IG pages or doing business through it.

zombot• 23 days ago

Important reminder that you don't belong to yourself anymore when using these "services".

Instagram is incorporating users' photos in ads for Meta Glasses

Related Stories