Meta has identified about 18 or 19 categories of harmful activity on social media and built AI systems to detect them.
Unresolvable The public record could not settle it.
Factual: Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?
The second judge would not resolve this claim; the verdict shown is the first judge's.
The evidence is the person's or their organisation's own records.
Said for an organisation they lead or work for; it counts on both records.
What would count as true or false
Judge as of 2024-04-18. True: Meta's own records (Community Standards, transparency/Community Standards Enforcement Reports, or official newsroom posts) or credible reporting from around that date show that Meta had defined roughly 18–19 categories of harmful content or behaviour (17–20 is close enough, given the claim's 'like 18 or 19') and used AI/automated systems to detect content in those categories. Mostly true: the categories and AI detection are confirmed but the count is somewhat off (about 15–16 or 21–23), or AI detection covers most but not all of the categories. Mixed: one part holds (the category count or the AI detection) but the other cannot be confirmed or clearly fails. Mostly false: the count is far off (for example under 12 or over 30), or the categories exist but Meta did not use AI detection for them as a set, so the claim overstates a real practice. False: the evidence shows Meta had no such categorised framework, or did not use AI to detect harmful content.
Set before the research began.
Evidence (4)
-
E1 Integrity Reports, First Quarter 2024 | Transparency Center Meta (Transparency Center) · 4 December 2024 Own record
“An increase in actioned content for Violence and Incitement on Instagram due to updates to our detection technology that improved identification of hostile speech.”
-
E2 Integrity Reports, First Quarter 2024 | Transparency Center Meta (Transparency Center) · 4 December 2024 Own record
“An increase in actioned content for Suicide and Self Injury on Instagram due to accuracy improvements in our detection technology.”
-
E3 Integrity Reports, First Quarter 2024 | Transparency Center Meta (Transparency Center) · 4 December 2024 Own record
“Prevalence of violating content remained relatively consistent across a wide range of violation areas.”
-
E4 Integrity and Transparency Reports, First Quarter 2023 Meta (about.fb.com newsroom) · 17 May 2023 Own record
“For example, we’ve added more metrics like data for appeals and restores as well as data for more policy areas over time.”
Reasoning
The evidence shows Meta updated its "detection technology" in two harm areas on Instagram [E1][E2]. It does not say this technology is AI or automated, or that it covers the categories as a set. None of the evidence gives a number of harm categories [E1-E4], so neither part of the claim is clearly confirmed.
Cite this claim
Mark Zuckerberg, “Meta has identified about 18 or 19 categories of harmful activity on social media and built AI systems to detect them.” (said 18 April 2024). Verdict: unresolvable. Reliability API, claim c_f3d7997d10d7, method 0.1.0+3f84d14d, dataset release v1.1.2. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_f3d7997d10d7
This claim is in dataset release v1.1.2, with the same verdict.
Reply to this claim
More factual claims by Mark Zuckerberg
-
Mostly false
“So anytime it is recording, it’s flashing a very visible light.”
Meta's glasses flash a very visible light whenever they are recording.
-
Mostly true
“I think what you’re starting to see are some of the labs are building, training more advanced models, and then not even releasing them”
-
Resolved true
“It is bigger than avocado.”
-
Resolved true
“So we’re building out many, many gigawatts of compute.”
-
Mostly true
“Most of that is due to higher component costs, particularly memory pricing.”
Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts are made.