Haugen gave additional proof about Fb’s failure to behave on dangerous content material in testimony to US senators on 5 October, during which she accused the corporate of placing “astronomical earnings earlier than folks”. She additionally testified to MPs and friends within the UK on Monday, as a recent wave of tales primarily based on the paperwork was revealed by a consortium of reports organisations.

Fb’s merchandise – the eponymous platform, the Instagram photo-sharing app, Fb Messenger and the WhatsApp messaging service – are utilized by 2.8 billion folks a day and the corporate generated a web revenue – a US measure of revenue – of $29bn (£21bn) final yr.

Here’s what we have now realized from the paperwork, and Haugen, because the revelations first broke final month.

Teen psychological well being

Probably the most damaging revelations centered on Instagram’s affect on the psychological well being and wellbeing of teenage ladies. One piece of inner analysis confirmed that for teenage ladies already having “exhausting moments”, one in three discovered Instagram made physique points worse. An extra slide reveals that one in three individuals who have been discovering social media use problematic discovered Instagram made it worse, with one in 4 saying it made points with social comparability worse.

Fb described reviews on the analysis, by the WSJ in September, as a “mischaracterisation” of its inner work. Nonetheless, the Instagram analysis has galvanised politicians on either side of the Atlantic in search of to rein in Fb.

Violence in creating nations

Haugen has warned that Fb is fanning ethnic violence in nations together with Ethiopia and isn’t doing sufficient to cease it. She mentioned that 87% of the spending on combating misinformation at Fb is spent on English content material when solely 9% of customers are English audio system. In response to the information web site Politico on Monday, simply 6% of Arabic-language hate content material was detected on Instagram earlier than it made its means on to the platform.

Haugen instructed Congress on 5 October that Fb’s use of engagement-based rating – the place the platform ranks a bit of content material, and whether or not to place it in entrance of customers, on the quantity of interactions it will get off folks – was endangering lives. “Fb … is aware of, they’ve admitted in public, that engagement-based rating is harmful with out integrity and safety techniques, however then not rolled out these integrity and safety techniques to a lot of the languages on the planet. And that’s what’s inflicting issues like ethnic violence in Ethiopia,” she mentioned.

Divisive algorithm modifications

In 2018 Fb modified the way in which it tailor-made content material for customers of its information feed function, a key a part of folks’s expertise of the platform. The emphasis on boosting “significant social interactions” between family and friends meant that the feed leant in the direction of reshared materials, which was typically misinformed and poisonous. “Misinformation, toxicity and violent content material are inordinately prevalent amongst reshares,” mentioned inner analysis. Fb mentioned it had an integrity workforce that was tackling the problematic content material “as effectively as doable”.

Tackling falsehoods in regards to the US presidential election

The New York Occasions reported that inner analysis confirmed how, at one level after the US presidential election final yr, 10% of all US views of political materials on Fb – a really excessive proportion for the platform – have been of posts alleging that Joe Biden’s victory was fraudulent. One inner assessment criticised makes an attempt to deal with “Cease the Steal” teams spreading claims that the election was rigged. “Enforcement was piecemeal,” mentioned the analysis. The revelations have reignited considerations about Fb’s position within the 6 January riots.

Fb mentioned: “The duty for the violence that occurred … lies with those that attacked our Capitol and those that inspired them.” Nevertheless, the WSJ has additionally reported that Fb’s automated techniques have been taking down posts producing solely an estimated 3-5% of whole views of hate speech.

Disgruntled Fb workers

Inside the recordsdata disclosed by Haugen are testimonies from dozens of Fb workers pissed off by the corporate’s failure to both acknowledge the harms it generates, or to correctly help efforts to mitigate or forestall these harms. “We’re FB, not some naive startup. With the unprecedented assets we have now, we must always do higher,” wrote one worker quoted by Politico within the wake of the 6 January assault on the US capitol.

“Always remember the day Trump rode down the escalator in 2015, referred to as for a ban on Muslims getting into the US, we decided that it violated our insurance policies, and but we explicitly overrode the coverage and didn’t take the video down,” wrote one other. “There’s a straight line that may be drawn from that day to immediately, one of many darkest days within the historical past of democracy … Historical past won’t decide us kindly.”

Fb is struggling to recruit younger customers

A bit of a grievance filed by Haugen’s legal professionals with the US monetary watchdog refers to younger customers in “extra developed economies” utilizing Fb much less. This can be a downside for an organization that depends on promoting for its revenue as a result of younger customers, with unformed spending habits, may be profitable to entrepreneurs. The grievance quotes an inner doc stating that Fb’s each day teenage and younger grownup (18-24) customers have “been in decline since 2012-13” and “solely customers 25 and above are growing their use of Fb”. Additional analysis reveals “engagement is declining for teenagers in most western, and several other non-western, nations”.

Haugen mentioned that engagement is a key metric for Fb, as a result of it means customers spend longer on the platform, which in flip appeals to advertisers who goal customers with adverts that account for $84bn (£62bn) of the corporate’s $86bn annual income. On Monday, Bloomberg added that “time spent” for US youngsters on Fb was down 16% year-on-year, and that younger adults within the US have been additionally spending 5% much less time on the platform.

Fb is constructed for divisive content material

On Monday the NYT reported an inner memo warning that Fb’s “core product mechanics”, or its fundamental workings, had let hate speech and misinformation develop on the platform. The memo added that the fundamental capabilities of Fb have been “not impartial”. “We even have compelling proof that our core product mechanics, resembling vitality, suggestions and optimising for engagement, are a major a part of why a majority of these speech flourish on the platform,” mentioned the 2019 memo.

A Fb spokesperson mentioned: “On the coronary heart of those tales is a premise which is fake. Sure, we’re a enterprise and we make revenue, however the concept we accomplish that on the expense of individuals’s security or wellbeing misunderstands the place our personal business pursuits lie. The reality is we have now invested $13bn and have over 40,000 folks to do one job: hold folks secure on Fb.”

Fb avoids confrontations with US politicians and rightwing information organisations

A doc seen by the Financial Times confirmed a Fb worker claiming Fb’s public coverage workforce blocked choices to take down posts “after they see that they may hurt highly effective political actors”. The doc mentioned: “In a number of instances the ultimate judgment about whether or not a outstanding publish violates a sure written coverage are made by senior executives, typically Mark Zuckerberg.” The memo mentioned strikes to take down content material by repeat offenders towards Fb’s pointers, resembling rightwing publishers, have been typically reversed as a result of the publishers may retaliate.

The wave of tales on Monday have been primarily based on disclosures made to the Securities and Trade Fee – the US monetary watchdog – and offered to Congress in redacted type by Haugen’s authorized counsel. The redacted variations have been obtained by a consortium of reports organisations together with the NYT, Politico and Bloomberg.