[flagged]
Is this post Advertising a product? Yes, it is advertising a MetaAI product. Just because it's not an external ad, doesn't mean it's not an ad. Hulu shows me adds for other Hulu shows. This is an ad despite me not leaving that streaming site.
What is an advertisement to you?
Still semi-sensational but more direct to your posit.
> Advertising is the practice and techniques employed to bring attention to a product or service. Advertising aims to present a product or service in terms of utility, advantages and qualities of interest to consumers.
Nobody ever said that advertising must involve a third party.
I feel the very same from the OP reddit submission. OP used Meta AI, and then Meta AI used it for more Meta AI. I'm sorry but this is a far cry from "Instagram is using my face on ads targeted at me". The implications of this title, and the situation it describes differ greatly. For example, if the user used Meta AI, and then got an ad of themselves driving a car, drinking a coffee, wearing some clothing, and the ad would be about that product itself, then I would have not made the original comment at all.
So if Instagram shows you ads about Meta AI, it doesn't count as ads because both are owned by Meta?
If the Nike catalog includes a full page promo for nike.com, isn’t that an ad?
My point is, and I even edited the original comment so that it comes across better: "ads on instagram" implies third party ads much more, than fist party upsells. Another example is "Ads in Windows". The popup for OneDrive is much less egregious than Candy Crush, or tabloid news in the Start Menu. This is because, while the user asked for neither, some consent was already given for the first party, while no consent was given to the third party.
Your point was that this wasn’t an ad. Your point now is that you personally feel “ad” doesn’t typically mean first party ads.
The former is wrong, the latter an opinion.
You're probably thinking about this as not a problem from a privacy perspective, and you may be right that this is not technically a privacy issue. But it's still a huge problem from a psychological influence perspective. Ads are already extremely good at manipulating your psyche, adding the ability to show you personally in some wonderful situations that their product would apparently put you in is a whole other level in manipulation.
Plus, if this gets normalized, the next step is absolutely going to be to sell this as a new type of ad to other brands (assuming people end up interacting with such ads more).
Edit to say: thinking about it, I actually think it's a privacy violation even for a Meta ad. Giving them permission to use an image of my face to generate a better selfie doesn't give them permission to use it to serve me ads. The GDPR is pretty specific about this: when you opt into sharing personal data for a specific purpose, that has to be interpreted in a narrow sense, you can't arbitrarily broaden the scope.
They just need to tweaking the marketing and release it as a filter, but then include weasel words text that says anything used by the filter allows for them to selectively choose images to use as marketing. Essentially reversing the flow with sneaky consent
I, too, have "used Meta AI", and have not had this happen to me. But I did not use Meta AI to generate pictures of me, so I did not check the box that led to this. That is one of the number of ways the way this post is titled in a way that is misleading. Simply "using Meta AI" in any capacity did not lead to this outcome.
Additionally, the title suggests that the user gave his photos to Meta AI, and then a separate service, Instagram, is using his photos. That's not what is happening, he gave his photos to Meta AI (likely inside Instagram) and then Meta AI is using them (inside Instagram). There's no need to pretend two different services are sharing their photos around, but the post title is more engaging if there's the suggestion otherwise.
In any case I think it's more analogous to ads for tv shows while you're trying to watch a tv show. The media you want to consume (news feed) has ads interjected in it, in order to get you to spend more time consuming more content.
When your post comes up in the explore page of another user, is that an advert?
what about those stupid "Here is a post from your friends on threads" with most of the stuff cropped off, as soon as you try and click it, its loads the fucking app store?
Meta have done some terrible shit, but this isn't up there. Its not even a mili-cambridge analyitica. (or a pico-myanmar) its just a shitty app in their shitty social network.
It seems like we are just hipster-hate yak shaving on something pointless, and missing the much wider point that the US needs decent data protections laws, and a functioning legislature.
no.
Isn't threads a separate "business"?
The actual good that this thing has is some feedback for people, to think about whether they want to use these platforms, or not. Being conscious about stuff like these is what I think does good to the world, and the well-being of people.