Meta says working to thwart WhatsApp scammers
Often run by organized gangs, the scams range from bogus cryptocurrency investments to get-rich-quick pyramid schemes, WhatsApp executives said in a briefing.
"There is always a catch and it should be a red flag for everyone: you have to pay upfront to get promised returns or earnings," Meta-owned WhatsApp said in a blog post.
WhatsApp detected and banned more than 6.8 million accounts linked to scam centers, most of them in Southeast Asia, according to Meta.
WhatsApp and Meta worked with OpenAI to disrupt a scam traced to Cambodia that used ChatGPT to generate text messages containing a link to a WhatsApp chat to hook victims, according to the tech firms.
Meta on Tuesday began prompting WhatsApp users to be wary when added to unfamiliar chat groups by people they don't know.
New "safety overviews" provide information about the group and tips on spotting scams, along with the option of making a quick exit.
"We've all been there: someone you don't know attempting to message you, or add you to a group chat, promising low-risk investment opportunities or easy money, or saying you have an unpaid bill that's overdue," Meta said in a blog post.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euronews
13 hours ago
- Euronews
Why are social media sites betting on crowdsourced fact-checking?
TikTok is the latest social media platform to launch a crowdsourced fact-checking feature. The short-form video app is rolling out the feature, called Footnotes, first in the United States. It lets users write a note with more context on a video and vote on whether other comments should appear under a video. A footnote could share a researcher's view on a 'complex STEM-related topic' or highlight new statistics to give a fuller picture on an ongoing event, the company said. The new feature is similar to other community-based fact-checking features on social media platforms such as X and Meta's Facebook or Instagram. But why are social media giants moving towards this new system to fact-check online claims? What is community fact-checking? Scott Hale, an associate professor at the Oxford Internet Institute, said that Twitter, now X, started the charge to community notes in 2021 with a feature called Birdwatch. The experiment carried on after Elon Musk took control of the company in 2022. Otavio Vinhas, a researcher at the National Institute of Science and Technology in Informational Disputes and Sovereignties in Brazil, said that Meta's introduction of a community notes programme earlier this year is in line with a trend led by US President Donald Trump to move towards a more libertarian view of free speech on social media. 'The demand is that platforms should commit to this [libertarian view],' Vinhas told Euronews Next. 'For them, fair moderation would be moderation that prioritises free speech without much concern to the potential harm or the potential false claims it can push up'. Hale told Euronews Next there is some scientific proof behind crowdsourcing, with studies showing that crowds could often arrive at the right verdict when evaluating whether information was well fact-checked or not. They often agreed with professionals, he said. But TikTok's Footnotes is slightly different than other crowdsourcing initiatives on Meta or X, Vinhas said. That's because the programme still asks users to add the source of information for their note, which Vinhas says is not mandatory on X. Most notes don't end up on the platforms Where the challenge lies for all social media companies is getting the right people to see the notes, Hale said. All three community programmes use a bridge-based ranking system that ranks how similar you are to another user based on the content that a user consumes, based either on the other accounts they follow or the videos they watch, Hale said. The algorithm shows the content to users that are considered 'dissimilar' to each other to see if they both find the note helpful, Hale said. Notes that pass the test will then be visible on the platform. What tends to happen, though, is that the vast majority of the notes that are written on the platform are actually never seen, Vinhas said. A June study from the Digital Democracy Institute of the Americas (DDIA) of English and Spanish community notes on X found that over 90 per cent of the 1.7 million notes available on a public database never made it online. Notes that did make it to the platform took an average of 14 days to be published, down from 100 days in 2022, even though there are still delays to how quickly X responds to these notes, the DDIA report continued. 'I don't think these platforms can achieve the promise of bringing consensus and make the internet this marketplace of ideas in which the best information and the best ideas end up winning the argument,' Vinhas said. Hale said it can be difficult for users to come across notes that might contradict their point of view because of 'echo chambers' on social media, where content is shown that reinforces the beliefs that users already have. 'It's very easy to get ourselves into parts of networks that are similar to us,' he said. One way to improve the efficiency of community notes would be to gamify them, Hale continued. He suggested the platforms could follow Wikipedia's example, where contributing users have their own page with their edits. The platform also offers a host of service awards to editors based on the value of their contributions and the length of their service, and lets them take part in contests and fundraisers. What else do social media sites do to moderate content on their platforms? Community fact-checking is not the only method that social media companies use to limit the spread of mis- or disinformation on their platforms, Hale and Vinhas said. Meta, X, and TikTok all use some degree of automated moderation to distinguish potentially harmful or violent content. Over at Meta, the company said it relies on artificial intelligence (AI) systems to scan content proactively and immediately remove it if it matches known violations of its community standards or code of conduct. When that content is flagged, human moderators review individual posts to see if the content actually breaches the code or if some context is missing. Hale said that it can be difficult for automated systems to flag new problematic content because it recognises the repeated claims of misinformation that it has been trained on, meaning new lies can slip through the cracks. Users themselves can also report to the platforms when there is a piece of content that may violate community standards, Hale said. However, Meta said that community notes would replace relationships with conventional fact-checkers, who flagged and labeled misinformation for almost a decade in the United States. So far, there are no signs that the platform will end these partnerships in the United Kingdom and the European Union, media reports suggest. Hale and Vinhas said professional fact-checking and community notes can actually complement one another if done properly. In that case, platforms would have an engaged community of people adding context in notes as well as the rigor of professional fact-checkers who can take additional steps, such as calling experts or going straight to a source to verify whether something is true or not, Hale added. Professional fact-checkers often have context as well to the political, social, and economic pulse of the countries where disinformation campaigns may be playing out, Vinhas said. 'Fact-checkers will be actively monitoring [a] political crisis on a 24-7 basis almost, while users may not be as much committed to information integrity,' he said. For now, Vinhas said TikTok's model is encouraging because it is being used to contribute to a 'global fact-checking programme,' but he said there's no indication whether this will continue to be the case.
France 24
a day ago
- France 24
New Instagram location sharing feature sparks privacy fears
The Meta-owned image sharing platform added an option on Wednesday which shares locations using an Instagram map, similar to a feature rival Snapchat has offered since 2017. Some users have since been shocked to discover that their location was being shared, viral posts have shown. "Mine was turned on and my home address was showing for all of my followers to see," Instagram user Lindsey Bell wrote in reply to a warning posted by "Bachelor" reality television personality Kelley Flanagan to her 300,000 TikTok followers. "Turned it off immediately once I knew but had me feeling absolutely sick about it." In a TikTok video, Flanagan called Instagram's new location sharing feature "dangerous" and gave step-by-step instructions on how to make sure it is turned off. Instagram chief Adam Mosseri fired off a post on Meta-owned Threads stressing that Instagram location sharing is off by default, meaning users need to opt in for it to be active. "Quick Friend Map clarification, your location will only be shared if you decide to share it, and if you do, it can only be shared with a limited group of people you choose," Mosseri wrote. "To start, location sharing is completely off." The feature was added as a way for friends to better connect with one another, sharing posts from "cool spots," Instagram said in a blog post. Users can be selective regarding who they share locations with, and can turn it off whenever they wish, according to Instagram. Wariness regarding whether Instagram is watching out for user privacy comes just a week after a federal jury in San Francisco sided with women who accused Meta of exploiting health data gathered by the Flo app, which tracks menstruation and efforts to get pregnant. A jury concluded that Meta used women's sensitive health data to better target money-making ads, according to law firm Labaton Keller Sucharow, which represented the plaintiffs. Evidence at trial showed Meta was aware it was getting confidential health data from the third-party app, and that some employees appeared to mock the nature of the information, the law firm contended. "This case was about more than just data -- it was about dignity, trust, and accountability," lead attorney Carol Villegas said in a blog post.
France 24
a day ago
- France 24
Why is the US discreetly easing pressure on Myanmar's junta?
The US Treasury said in a brief statement on July 24 that several individuals and companies allied to the ruling military junta in Myanmar had been removed from the US sanctions list imposed since the 2021 coup. Specifically, sanctions were lifted against three companies and four individuals. Among them were KT Services and Logistics and its chief executive, Jonathan Myo Kyaw Thaung, whose affiliated companies have long been under scrutiny for having close links to the junta. Also removed from the US sanctions list were Myanmar Chemical and Machinery Company and Suntac Technologies – companies that manufacture weapons – and their owners. A third Myanmar national, Tin Latt Min, whom the US had described as the owner of 'various companies closely linked to the regime', was also taken off the sanctions list. 'Shocking' to ease sanctions "It's a shame," says Anna Roberts, executive director of the NGO Burma Campaign UK, which has been compiling a blacklist of companies accused of collaborating with the Tatmadaw – the armed forces of Myanmar – since 2018. "Sanctions should be strengthened against the junta and its supporters as long as it continues to commit atrocities against the population,' Roberts says. 'It's even more shocking that sanctions would be lifted on companies that facilitate the supply of weapons to the military." The military junta led by General Min Aung Hlaing seized power in Myanmar in February 2021, overthrowing the elected government of Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi. Since the coup, the country has been embroiled in a civil war between the military and a pro-democracy movement made up of several ethnic minority groups. As fighting rages in several parts of the country, NGOs regularly report human rights violations. In its latest report on Myanmar, Amnesty International notes that the internal armed conflict has escalated. 'The frequency of military air strikes increased, as did military attacks on schools, hospitals and civilian infrastructure,' the NGO notes, adding that the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) has applied for an arrest warrant against Min Aung Hlaing for the deportation and persecution of the minority Rohingya population. 'The action suggests a major shift is underway in US policy, which had centred on punitive action against Myanmar's military regime,' says John Sifton, Asia advocacy director at Human Rights Watch. 'The decision will cause deep concern among victims of the Myanmar military and everyone who has been fighting and advocating for a return to democratic rule in Myanmar,' he adds. Exchange of letters Since the shift on sanctions was announced, speculation has been rife as to what motivated the US decision. For some analysts, the answer is mainly economic, but it may also just have been a question of playing to the ego of US President Donald Trump. In early July, Trump sent a letter to Min Aung Hlaing notifying him that as part of his new trade policy, a 40 percent tariff on Myanmar's exports to the US would take effect on August 1. The junta leader responded in a letter on July 11 that included a proposal to negotiate a trade deal with the US and added a flattering appraisal of Trump. As Myanmar state media said at the time, "The senior general (Min Aung Hlaing) acknowledged the president's strong leadership in guiding his country towards national prosperity with the spirit of a true patriot." But despite the junta leader's words of praise, this exchange of letters is probably not the dawn a new relationship, Roberts says. "This letter from Donald Trump is just a copy/paste – like the ones he sends to other countries. There is no evidence of a desire to build closer ties with the junta," she says. "But for the junta, this would have raised hopes of normalising relations with the United States." The allure of rare earths Myanmar is a leading source of rare earth minerals, a major focus for the Trump administration in its strategic competition with China, responsible for 90 percent of global rare earth processing capacity. The metals are used in a wide variety of everyday and high-tech products, from electric car batteries to guided missiles. Since 2021, Myanmar has doubled its exports of rare earths to neighbouring China, according to a 2024 study by Global Witness, an NGO specialising in combating the plunder of natural resources in developing countries. The mines extracting rare earths are located in Kachin State, on the China-Myanmar border, where they have proliferated, increasing to more than 300 last year from 180 in 2021. Did the US lift sanctions as part of a strategy to gain access to these minerals? "If so, it seems highly risky,' says Roberts. 'Firstly, because China has always been the junta's biggest supporter and wields considerable influence in Myanmar.' 'And even if the United States manages to take control of these mines, there is a strong possibility that it will not be able to do much with them,' she adds. 'The logistical challenge would be immense. Some mines are located in areas currently under the control of the Kachin Independence Army, one of the ethnic groups fighting against the junta.' It is unlikely that US companies would jeopardise their reputations or 'risk exposing themselves to legal action by participating in such a project in a war zone', she adds. Denying that the US had an agenda in lifting the sanctions, US deputy secretary of the Treasury Michael Faulkender said in a statement: 'Anyone suggesting these sanctions were lifted for an ulterior motive is uninformed and peddling a conspiracy theory driven by hatred for President Trump,' adding that individuals 'are regularly added and removed' from the list of those sanctioned 'in the ordinary course of business'. A junta in search of legitimacy In any case, "the message sent by Donald Trump is catastrophic,' Roberts says. 'His policies have already been terrible for the Burmese people, principally because of the USAID budget cuts' which have deprived many people of vital aid. 'He is playing into the hands of the junta at a time when it has embarked on a major quest for legitimacy and international recognition.' The military junta on July 31 announced the lifting of the state of emergency, which had been in place since the coup. Their stated objective is to hold general elections in December 2025 or January 2026. The military hopes to consolidate its power and give itself an appearance of legitimacy, even though large parts of the country are still controlled by the pro-democracy movement. For their part, opposition groups have already announced their intention to boycott the elections. 'The military had done the same thing during a previous coup in 2010. They organised elections and released prisoners to try to give the appearance of stability. That was enough to ease the pressure from the international community,' says Roberts. 'We must learn from the past and not fall into the same trap again. Now is not the time to scale back international action. This means maintaining – or even tightening – sanctions."
