The Verge38%

Meta turns off the Instagram feature that let users make AI deepfakes of public accounts 21%

By Jay Peters44%

7/10/2026, 11:49:50 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 1 faulty reasoning type, including Quote-first Misdirection, with Quote-first Misdirection as the most egregious example at 4.7% saturation with 23 hits. Analysis detected 23 faulty-reasoning hits from 489 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 36.2% and a BS Rank of 21% (10,995 of 13,821 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 79.60% of the article peer group.

Meta turns off the Instagram feature that let users make AI deepfakes of public accounts 
The feature, announced on Tuesday, received significant backlash. 
Jul 10, 2026, 11:49 PM UTC 
Jay Peters is a senior reporter covering technology, gaming, and more. 
He joined The Verge in 2019 after nearly two years at Techmeme. 
Following significant backlash, Meta is turning off the feature it announced this week that let users generate AI images based on content from public Instagram accounts just by tagging them. 
The feature, as originally set up, meant that content from any public Instagram account could be used in AI creations without the account owner’s permission. 
“Earlier this week, we announced that one way for people to generate images in Meta AI is by @-mentioning public Instagram accounts that they want to reference,” Meta says in an update to a blog post about its new Muse Image AI model. 
“Our intent was to provide a useful creative tool and to give people control over whether their public content could be referenced in this way. 
We’ve heard the feedback that this feature missed the mark, so it’s no longer available.” 
Meta did let you opt out by digging through settings before turning off the feature entirely, but the feature still drew major criticism. 
“Not only does this obviously erode our rights to our own likeness… but it is an obvious tool for #sextortion and other scammers!” 
Haley McNamara, executive director and chief strategy officer of the National Center on Sexual Exploitation, said earlier on Friday . 
“Pursuing high-risk design & then putting the onus on individuals to jump through hoops to opt out is unacceptable.” 
The Screen Actors Guild recommended that its members opt out of the feature and spelled out instructions on how to do so . 
Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates. 
I spent a week using the Trump phone  it sucks 
Polestar owners left ‘holding the bag’ after EV brand pulls out of the US 
The ChatGPT browser is already dead 
Netflix reportedly considers adding always-on channels 
Xreal’s new AR glasses are way cheaper and almost just right 
Advertiser Content From 
This is the title for the native ad 
Nvidia’s biggest RAM supplier just had a trillion-dollar debut on Wall Street 
Spotify will let you fine-tune your weekly Release Radar playlist 
Netflix is turning into YouTube 
Anker’s 3-in-1 Qi2.2 charging station is $95 off 
I’m filling in at The Verge for 6 weeks. 
Ask me anything! 
Terrence O'Brien Jul 10 
Sheena Vasani Jul 10 
Dominic Preston Jul 10 
Apple sues OpenAI for allegedly stealing hardware secrets 
The FCC is cracking down on DJI tech that dodged the foreign drone ban 
Empathy for the optimizers 
ICE is threatening to deport witnesses of its latest shooting 
Confirmation Bias
0%
Anchoring Bias
0%
Availability Heuristic
0%
Representativeness Heuristic
0%
Hindsight Bias
0%
Overconfidence Bias
0%
Framing Effect
0%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
0%
Pessimism Bias
0%
Negativity Bias
0%
Self-Serving Bias
0%
Fundamental Attribution Error
0%
Actor-Observer Bias
0%
In-Group Bias
0%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Halo Effect
0%
Horn Effect
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Recency Bias
0%
Primacy Effect
0%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
0%
Straw Man
0%
Appeal to Authority
0%
False Dilemma
0%
Slippery Slope
0%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
0%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
0%
Appeal to Emotion
0%
Begging the Question
0%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
0%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
0%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
0%
No True Scotsman
0%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
0%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
0%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
0%
Quote-first Misdirection
4.7%
Biased Writer Voice
0%
Indoctrination
0%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
0%

489 words analyzed.

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.