Meta’s AI policy ignites privacy backlash

Meta’s plan to expand artificial intelligence across private messaging on Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp has triggered a wave of privacy concerns, as users, civil society groups and regulators question how conversational data will be used and protected under the company’s 2026 policy framework. The update, disclosed as part of Meta’s broader AI roadmap, allows automated systems to analyse interactions in private chats to refine content recommendations and advertising profiles, intensifying scrutiny of the company’s data practices.

The policy signals a deeper integration of AI assistants and predictive tools into messaging services used by billions of people. Meta says the systems are designed to improve relevance, safety and user experience by understanding conversational context, detecting harmful behaviour and tailoring content more precisely. Company executives have argued that the approach relies on aggregated signals and technical safeguards rather than indiscriminate reading of personal messages, insisting that end-to-end encryption remains intact on WhatsApp.

Critics counter that the distinction between metadata, contextual signals and message content has become increasingly blurred. Privacy advocates warn that AI models trained on conversational patterns can infer sensitive details about users’ beliefs, health concerns, relationships and financial status even without storing full message transcripts. The concern is amplified by Meta’s dominant position across social networking and messaging, giving it an unparalleled view of social behaviour at scale.

Within hours of the announcement, digital rights groups in Europe and North America accused the company of normalising surveillance-like practices in spaces long perceived as private. Legal experts say the policy raises questions under data protection regimes such as the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation, particularly around consent, purpose limitation and data minimisation. Several regulators confirmed they are examining whether users are given meaningful choices to opt out without degrading core service functionality.

Meta maintains that users will retain controls over AI features, including settings to limit data use for personalised advertising. However, consumer groups argue that the opt-out mechanisms described so far are complex and fragmented across platforms, creating what they describe as consent fatigue. They also warn that default-on settings risk undermining informed consent, especially for younger users and those less familiar with privacy controls.

The backlash comes against a backdrop of growing public unease about how generative AI systems are trained and deployed. Tech companies have accelerated the integration of large language models into consumer products, often ahead of clear regulatory standards. Analysts note that conversational data is particularly valuable for refining AI performance, making messaging platforms a strategic asset in the intensifying competition among technology firms.

Security specialists have also flagged the heightened stakes for data protection. While Meta points to encryption and internal access controls, experts warn that any expansion of data processing increases the potential impact of breaches or misuse. They cite past incidents across the industry to argue that assurances alone are insufficient without transparent audits and enforceable accountability mechanisms.

Within Meta, the policy reflects a strategic bet that AI-driven personalisation will sustain user engagement and advertising growth as competition intensifies from rivals offering privacy-focused alternatives. Advertising remains the company’s primary revenue engine, and more granular insights into user behaviour promise higher-value targeting. Investors have broadly welcomed Meta’s aggressive AI investment, even as reputational risks loom.

Lawmakers in several jurisdictions have signalled that messaging privacy could become a focal point for updated digital regulation. Parliamentary committees in Europe are preparing hearings on AI use in private communications, while consumer protection agencies in the United States have sought briefings on how conversational data is categorised and retained. The policy debate is expected to feed into broader discussions on AI governance, including limits on behavioural profiling.