Meta has come under fire again, this time for failing to properly address concerns over illegal drug advertisements circulating on Facebook and Instagram. Lawmakers recently sent a letter to Meta demanding answers about these ads, but Meta’s response left many dissatisfied. With questions about how these ads were allowed on its platform, the pressure on Meta is growing.
Congressman Tim Walberg, representing Michigan, voiced his frustration with the company, criticizing its lack of transparency and failure to directly address the questions posed to it.
Are drugs being sold on Facebook and Instagram?
The issue revolves around reports from both The Wall Street Journal and the Tech Transparency Project (TTP), revealing that Facebook and Instagram have hosted advertisements promoting illegal drug sales, including prescription pills and recreational drugs like cocaine. These ads, targeting users on Meta’s platforms, were designed to guide people toward third-party sites where drugs could be purchased.
Walberg and a bipartisan group of lawmakers were particularly concerned about how these ads made it past Meta’s advertising approval process, who was viewing them, and whether minors were interacting with these dangerous promotions. Their letter included a list of 15 pointed questions, all aimed at getting concrete answers about how prevalent these ads were and what actions Meta had taken to curb them. However, when Meta responded, Walberg noted that most of these questions were “ignored” or vaguely addressed.
In a statement, Walberg said, “Meta’s response not only ignores most of the questions posed in our letter but also refuses to acknowledge that these illicit drug ads were approved and monetized by Meta.” His remarks pointed to the broader issue of corporate negligence, particularly when the ads could potentially target vulnerable users, including children and teens.
Meta’s vague response raises eyebrows
In response, Meta sent a letter signed by Rachel Lieber, the company’s Vice President of Global Legal Strategy. While acknowledging the concerns, the letter didn’t fully dive into the specifics that lawmakers were hoping for. Instead, Lieber emphasized Meta’s general commitment to public safety, stating:
“We know this problem impacts many Americans, often with tragic results, which is why fighting drug trafficking online is bigger than any single platform.”
Lieber’s letter also outlined Meta’s policies that prohibit drug-related content on its platforms. However, she stopped short of addressing how the ads slipped through in the first place or what the company had done to rectify the situation. According to Lieber, Meta has several tools and resources in place to detect and remove such content.
TTP Director Katie Paul also weighed in, arguing that Meta is deflecting responsibility. She said, “Meta tries to deflect blame and push a ‘whole of society’ approach while profiting from proving paid amplification to drug trafficking sites.” Paul’s criticism echoed those of many who believe Meta is more interested in maintaining its advertising profits than tackling the issue head-on.
The need for accountability grows
Walberg’s frustration, shared by many in Congress, is not just about a letter. It’s about Meta’s continued unwillingness to take full responsibility for the ads that appear on its platforms. This is not the first time the company has come under scrutiny, and it probably won’t be the last. Meta has a huge slice of the pie in online advertising, between 20 and 30 percent, and it depends on its platforms for its revenue-sourcing model.
Meanwhile, Meta’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg recently appeared publicly to defend his company. Speaking during a podcast recording in San Francisco, Zuckerberg said that Meta needs to respond more forcefully “when people make claims about the impact of the tech industry or our company that they believe are not based in fact.”
But with lawmakers calling for greater transparency and accountability, Meta’s position does not appear to be as solid as Zuckerberg had hoped. Concerns about illegal drug ads are real, and without a clearer response from Meta, the company’s reputation could take another hit. The full Meta letter published by Rachel Lieber:
Featured image credit: Gaspar Uhas / Unsplash
