Recipient

Meta Platforms Ireland Limited

First report 13 Oct 2022•Latest report 13 Oct 2022

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Private and voluntary organisations · Company. This page brings together reports naming this recipient and response statements clearly connected to concerns raised in those reports.

Reports: 1
Published responses: 100%
Concerns addressed: 3
Stated actions: 19

Reports over time

Reports naming this recipient by issue year.

Evidence profile

Report topics

Share of this recipient’s reports compared with all other recipients.

100%published responses found

19stated actions described

Topic comparisons are not available in the current evidence snapshot.

Concerns and recipient responses

Statements from Meta Platforms Ireland Limited linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

13 Oct2022
North London
Concerns raised7
1. Lack of separation between adult and child platform areas
2. Use of algorithms to provide content together with adverts
3. Lack of parental, guardian or carer access to material viewed by a child
1. Lack of age verification at online platform sign-up
2. Lack of parental, guardian or carer control over material viewed by a child
3. Failure to control online content so that it is age specific
4. Failure to separately link a child's account to a parent, guardian or carer's account for monitoring
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response 8
1. Action
  Explore expanding age-verification tools to additional use cases.
  Stated in progress
2. Action
  Implement Recommendation Guidelines to avoid recommending sensitive or inappropriate content to younger users.
  Stated completed
3. Action
  Test new online age-verification methods and work with relevant stakeholders to develop equitable age-assurance solutions.
  Stated in progress
1. Action
  Expand age-gating to restrict teenagers’ access to additional categories of content.
  Stated in progress
2. Action
  Improve age-estimation technology and deploy it in additional use cases to tailor teenagers’ experiences and restrict suspicious adult interactions.
  Stated in progress
3. Action
  Introduce Sensitive Content Control with more restrictive default settings and limited options for teenagers.
  Stated completed
4. Action
  Launch and expand Family Centre parental supervision tools, including account, connection, privacy, time-limit, and scheduled-break controls.
  Stated completed
5. Action
  Require additional age verification using video selfies or identification documents when users change their stated age from under 18 to over 18.
  Stated completed
AI-generated summary

Molly Rose Russell · Prevention of Future Deaths report

This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

Report summary

Molly Rose Russell, aged 14, was found having hanged herself on 21 November 2017. The report describes her depression and exposure to online content involving self-harm, suicide and other negative material, which was likely to have negatively affected her mental health and contributed to her death. Principal concerns included the lack of age verification, separation between adult and child users, age-specific content controls, algorithmic content provision and parental access or monitoring.

Read the report on judiciary.uk
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Meta Platforms Ireland Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Lack of separation between adult and child platform areas
Wider context from the report
“1. There was no separation between adult and child parts of the platforms or separate platforms for children and adults. ”
Open source report
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Meta Platforms Ireland Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Use of algorithms to provide content together with adverts
Wider context from the report
“4. That algorithms were used to provide content together with adverts. ”
Open source report
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Meta Platforms Ireland Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Lack of parental, guardian or carer access to material viewed by a child
Wider context from the report
“5. That the parent, guardian or carer did not have access, to the material being viewed or any control over that material. ”
Open source report
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Meta Platforms Ireland Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Lack of age verification at online platform sign-up
Wider context from the report
“2. There was no age verification when signing up to the on-line platform. ”
Open source report
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Meta Platforms Ireland Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Lack of parental, guardian or carer control over material viewed by a child
Wider context from the report
“5. That the parent, guardian or carer did not have access, to the material being viewed or any control over that material. ”
Open source report
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Meta Platforms Ireland Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Failure to control online content so that it is age specific
Wider context from the report
“3. That the content was not controlled so as to be age specific. ”
Open source report
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Meta Platforms Ireland Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Failure to separately link a child's account to a parent, guardian or carer's account for monitoring
Wider context from the report
“6. That the child's account was not capable of being separately linked to the parent, guardian or carer's account for monitoring. ”
Open source report
Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
Explore expanding age-verification tools to additional use cases.

Verbatim wording from the response
“d. Meta continues to work to develop accessible, privacy-protective and technology-driven age assurance solutions. This year, we began partnering with online age-verification specialist Yoti to bring new age verification tools to Instagram. Now, when someone attempts to edit their date of birth from under the age of 18 to over, we require them to verify their age by selecting either to: (i) provide a video “selfie”, with Yoti’s face-based age prediction technology then predicting their age; or (ii) upload their identification documents. We are continuing to explore expanding these tools to new use cases.”

Source location
Response from META
Page 6 · response
Published 14 October 2022
Open published response
Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
Implement Recommendation Guidelines to avoid recommending sensitive or inappropriate content to younger users.

Verbatim wording from the response
“5. Providing a safe, positive and inclusive environment for all of the people who use our apps is of paramount importance. We design our policies and services, including our Community Standards and Community Guidelines (hereafter our “Content Policies”) which define what content is and is not permitted on our platforms, with our youngest users in mind. These policies seek to balance freedom of expression alongside other important values, such as safety, privacy and dignity. We work hard to enforce our Content Policies and use a combination of ever-advancing technology, user reports and human reviewers to detect and remove content that violates them.”

Source location
Response from META
Page 2 · response
Published 14 October 2022
Open published response
Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
Test new online age-verification methods and work with relevant stakeholders to develop equitable age-assurance solutions.

Verbatim wording from the response
“9. Understanding people's age online remains a complex, industry-wide challenge that requires thoughtful solutions to appropriately balance privacy, effectiveness, and fairness. Many people, particularly teenagers and people from underserved communities, do not have access to formal identification. As an industry, we have to explore novel and equitable ways to approach the dilemma of verifying age online that are not reliant on a form of identification. We have recently been testing new methods to verify age online and we are committed to continuing to work with governments, regulators, experts and others in our industry to develop clear and equitable solutions and guidance for age assurance online.”

Source location
Response from META
Page 5 · response
Published 14 October 2022
Open published response
Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
Expand age-gating to restrict teenagers’ access to additional categories of content.

Verbatim wording from the response
“c. We already work to limit the ability for users under the age of 18 to view certain categories of content, for example diet products, alcohol, and tobacco (this is called “age-gating”), and we are currently looking at expanding the types of content that we are able to age-gate.”

Source location
Response from META
Page 3 · response
Published 14 October 2022
Open published response
Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
Improve age-estimation technology and deploy it in additional use cases to tailor teenagers’ experiences and restrict suspicious adult interactions.

Verbatim wording from the response
“c. We have invested heavily in artificial intelligence models to help us estimate age. We use this technology to help us identify whether someone is an adult or a teenager and work to tailor their experience accordingly, for example, by restricting teenagers' interaction with potentially suspicious adults (as explained above). We are working to improve the accuracy of this technology and to deploy it in additional use cases as part of our ongoing efforts to provide our users with an age appropriate experience.”

Source location
Response from META
Page 6 · response
Published 14 October 2022
Open published response
Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
Introduce Sensitive Content Control with more restrictive default settings and limited options for teenagers.

Verbatim wording from the response
“b. We have introduced the “Sensitive Content Control”, which applies to all surfaces on Instagram where content or accounts are recommended.³ As set out in our Recommendation Guidelines, we work to avoid recommending certain types of content to people. As part of this, the Sensitive Content Control seeks to provide users with some degree of choice over how much non-violating (i.e. does not violate our Content Policies) but potentially sensitive content is displayed to them on these surfaces. The Sensitive Content Control has only two options for teenagers: “Standard” and “Less”. Whereas users aged 18 and over can select to see “More”, we do not allow teenagers to access the less restrictive sensitivity settings. Additionally, teenagers under the age of 16 are defaulted into the “Less” option when signing up to Instagram.”

Source location
Response from META
Page 3 · response
Published 14 October 2022
Open published response
Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
Launch and expand Family Centre parental supervision tools, including account, connection, privacy, time-limit, and scheduled-break controls.

Verbatim wording from the response
“18. Meta has accordingly implemented wide-ranging parental tools and resources, including tools which allow parents and guardians to supervise their teenager’s use of Instagram in-app, in addition to monitoring in person or at a device level. In 2022, Meta launched the Family Centre, a centralised place where parents can access supervision tools and information resources from leading experts. Through the Family Centre, once both the parent and teenager have accepted the supervision tools, parents can view the accounts that their teenager follows and the accounts that follow their teenager on Instagram, see the amount of time that their teenager spends on Instagram, set daily time limits on their teenager’s Instagram use, and schedule breaks for specific times of day or night when they do not want their teenager to use Instagram.”

Source location
Response from META
Page 8 · response
Published 14 October 2022
Open published response
Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
Require additional age verification using video selfies or identification documents when users change their stated age from under 18 to over 18.

Verbatim wording from the response
“d. Meta continues to work to develop accessible, privacy-protective and technology-driven age assurance solutions. This year, we began partnering with online age-verification specialist Yoti to bring new age verification tools to Instagram. Now, when someone attempts to edit their date of birth from under the age of 18 to over, we require them to verify their age by selecting either to: (i) provide a video “selfie”, with Yoti’s face-based age prediction technology then predicting their age; or (ii) upload their identification documents. We are continuing to explore expanding these tools to new use cases.”

Source location
Response from META
Page 6 · response
Published 14 October 2022
Open published response

Information checked against published PFD reports and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Data last updated 7 September 2026

Reports, concerns and published responses

Reports over time

Concerns raised7

Lack of separation between adult and child platform areas

Use of algorithms to provide content together with adverts

Lack of parental, guardian or carer access to material viewed by a child

Lack of age verification at online platform sign-up

Lack of parental, guardian or carer control over material viewed by a child

Failure to control online content so that it is age specific

Failure to separately link a child's account to a parent, guardian or carer's account for monitoring

Actions described in response An action is something this recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.8

Actions described in response 8