Meta is reportedly preparing to launch a consumer-focused artificial intelligence agent internally known as Hatch, potentially within the next few weeks, as the company accelerates efforts to turn its expanding AI capabilities into products used for everyday tasks.

According to internal documents reviewed by The Information and cited by Firstpost, Hatch could allow users to access different AI-powered tools from a central interface and have agents interact with external websites and services. Meta is also reportedly developing a new AI model, codenamed Watermelon, with a possible October release.

The developments underline Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s broader push to expand the company’s AI business beyond its traditional advertising-led model.

Hatch could go beyond chatbots

Early versions of Hatch have reportedly been trained to interact with services including DoorDash, Etsy, Reddit, Yelp and Outlook. This suggests that Meta’s focus is shifting from AI systems that simply generate text or answer questions towards agents capable of carrying out tasks across digital platforms.

The reported interface could include a customisable dashboard where users access different tools or “skills” created by AI agents. Potential uses could include fitness tracking, travel planning and other everyday activities.

Meta has not publicly confirmed the product or its launch plans. A company spokesperson reportedly declined to comment on the reported development.

Subscription model reportedly under consideration

Meta is also said to be exploring a subscription model for Hatch, with different levels of access potentially based on usage limits.

According to the reported documents, the highest-priced plan could cost as much as $199.99 per month, although the pricing structure remains unconfirmed and could change before any public launch.

If introduced, such a model would mark another attempt by Meta to generate direct revenue from its growing investment in artificial intelligence, rather than relying entirely on advertising.

WhatsApp could become an AI platform

Meta is reportedly working on another AI-agent initiative involving WhatsApp. The company could allow users to connect with and communicate with other AI agents through the messaging platform.

A limited rollout to a smaller group of users could reportedly begin soon.

The move would potentially give Meta a significant distribution advantage by placing AI agents inside a service already used by billions of people globally. Instead of requiring users to download or open separate AI applications, Meta could make agents accessible through platforms such as WhatsApp.

Watermelon AI model planned

Alongside Hatch, Meta is reportedly targeting October for the release of another AI model internally known as Watermelon.

It remains unclear whether Watermelon will become part of Meta’s Muse family of models or be released as a separate system. The reported timeline could also change as development continues.

Meta has been increasing the frequency of its AI releases as it competes with major players such as OpenAI and Anthropic.

Meta expands agentic AI efforts

The reported Hatch and Watermelon plans follow a series of AI developments from Meta in recent months.

In April, Meta introduced Muse Spark, described as its first model developed by Meta Superintelligence Labs. The multimodal reasoning model was designed with tool use and multi-agent systems in mind.

The company subsequently released Muse Spark 1.1 in July, followed by Muse Spark 1.2 and Muse Code in August. These releases have increasingly focused on coding, computer use and agentic capabilities.

Meta has simultaneously continued working on open AI models. The company recently introduced Muse Glimmer and has indicated plans to release an open-weight version of Muse Spark 1.2.

AI agents become next battleground

The reported development of Hatch reflects a broader shift in the AI industry towards agentic AI, where systems are designed not merely to respond to prompts but to complete multi-step tasks using digital tools.

For Meta, integrating such capabilities into consumer products could provide a new way to deepen engagement across its ecosystem while creating potential subscription and commercial opportunities.

However, the details surrounding Hatch, including its final features, launch date, pricing and availability, have not been officially confirmed. The reported plans therefore remain subject to change.

US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has instructed its employees not to use Meta’s camera-equipped smart glasses while on duty, citing concerns that the devices could inadvertently record or transmit sensitive information.

The guidance comes as Meta smart glasses have increasingly been spotted among US immigration and border personnel, raising questions about the use of consumer wearable technology during law-enforcement operations.

According to a memo circulated among ICE employees and reported by The New York Times, Meta Glasses and similar wearable devices could potentially capture or transmit sensitive information, creating privacy and legal risks.

ICE Cites Security Risks

The memo reportedly applies across ICE rather than being limited to officers working in the field.

The Department of Homeland Security, which oversees ICE, indicated that the guidance could be a reminder of an existing policy rather than a completely new prohibition. A department spokesperson said employees have long been prohibited from using personally owned body-worn cameras while performing their duties.

The renewed guidance nevertheless comes at a significant time, as camera-equipped smart glasses become more common among immigration and border personnel.

Border Officers Seen Wearing Devices

Reports have documented several instances of US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Border Patrol personnel using or wearing Meta smart glasses.

According to earlier reporting by 404 Media, a CBP officer was seen recording with Meta smart glasses despite restrictions. In another instance, a Border Patrol member was photographed wearing the device during an immigration raid.

An investigation by The Independent also reported sightings involving immigration or border personnel in at least six US states.

The incidents have intensified scrutiny over whether consumer smart glasses are being used during official operations and whether existing policies adequately address wearable cameras.

ICE Explores Smart Glasses

At the same time, ICE appears to be examining whether smart-glasses technology could have an official operational role.

Budget documents obtained and reported by independent journalist Ken Klippenstein indicate that ICE is seeking funding for specialised smart glasses equipped with biometric identification capabilities.

The documents reportedly suggest that such devices could potentially be deployed as early as next year. However, the available documents do not establish that the proposed system will ultimately be purchased or deployed.

Such a move would represent a significant shift from employees independently using consumer devices to the government adopting wearable technology specifically designed for law-enforcement purposes.

Privacy Concerns Grow

Camera-equipped eyewear has raised broader privacy concerns because the devices can resemble ordinary glasses, potentially making recording less obvious to people nearby.

Meta has included an external LED indicator intended to signal when the camera is operating. The company says the indicator cannot simply be disabled through software and that preventing the light from functioning also stops the glasses from taking photographs or recording video.

However, researchers and online creators have demonstrated methods of obscuring the indicator, including techniques sometimes referred to as “ghost dots”.

This has prompted questions about whether the indicator provides a sufficiently clear warning to people in crowded public environments.

AI Features Add Concerns

Privacy concerns also extend beyond the camera itself.

Meta’s smart glasses include AI-related features and interactions with Meta services, raising questions about how information captured or processed through the devices could be used.

The company has faced criticism over privacy practices, while reports of potential facial-recognition capabilities have added to concerns about the possible use of smart glasses for surveillance.

Meta has also taken measures against certain forms of misuse. Instagram chief Adam Mosseri has said the platform would remove smart-glasses footage when it is used to harass or exploit people. Meta has also taken action against creators who secretly recorded strangers for prank content.

Government Faces a Balancing Act

For ICE, the issue presents a potential contradiction: the agency is restricting employees from using personally owned consumer smart glasses while simultaneously exploring whether specialised wearable technology could have operational applications.

For now, ICE's message to employees is that personally owned devices such as Meta’s smart glasses should not be used in the workplace.

The debate is likely to continue as law-enforcement agencies examine how wearable cameras, biometric identification and AI-enabled devices can be incorporated into official operations while addressing privacy and surveillance concerns.

Instagram has refreshed a key part of its visual identity for the first time in a decade, introducing a redesigned version of its wordmark while retaining the familiar gradient camera icon. The Meta-owned platform has made subtle changes to the lettering, describing the updated design as cleaner, sharper and more modern.

The redesign was announced by Instagram chief Adam Mosseri through posts on Instagram and Threads. Rather than replacing the platform's established branding, Instagram has redrawn the existing lettering while retaining the script style that users have associated with the service for years.

Mosseri said the wordmark at the top of the app had remained unchanged for 10 years and that the company believed it was time for a refresh.

A Subtle Branding Change

Unlike a complete logo overhaul, Instagram's latest update focuses mainly on typography.

The company's recognisable gradient camera icon remains in place, meaning users will continue to see the symbol that has represented Instagram since its major redesign in 2016.

The new lettering has been adjusted to give it a more contemporary appearance while preserving elements of the original Instagram identity.

The change may appear relatively small, but even minor modifications can attract considerable attention when they involve a globally recognised brand.

Last Major Redesign in 2016

Instagram's previous major visual change came in 2016, when the company replaced its older brown camera illustration with the colourful gradient icon that is now widely associated with the platform.

The earlier logo had closely reflected Instagram's origins as a photo-sharing service. By 2016, however, the platform had already begun expanding beyond simple photography.

The new gradient design initially faced strong criticism from users who considered it too simplistic. Over time, the redesigned icon became a familiar part of Instagram's identity.

Instagram Has Changed Since Then

A decade after the last major visual overhaul, Instagram is very different from the service it was in 2016.

Video has become one of the platform's central features, while direct messaging, shopping, personalised recommendations and algorithm-driven feeds have significantly changed how users interact with the app.

Instagram has increasingly positioned itself as a broader entertainment and content platform rather than simply a photo-sharing service.

Mosseri has previously highlighted recommendations as a major part of the platform's user experience, reflecting this shift in how content is discovered and consumed.

Users React to New Wordmark

The new wordmark has already generated mixed reactions online.

Some users have welcomed the updated lettering and described it as a cleaner version of the familiar branding. Others have questioned why Instagram needed to change a design that was already well recognised.

One of the recurring jokes surrounding the redesign is that the altered lettering can reportedly look like “Instagzam”when viewed quickly.

The reaction illustrates the challenge faced by major technology companies when making changes to familiar branding. Even a minor adjustment to the shape of individual letters can become noticeable to millions of users.

Icon Remains Unchanged

An important difference between the latest update and Instagram's 2016 redesign is the scale of the change.

Instagram has not replaced its familiar gradient camera icon or introduced a completely new visual identity.

Instead, the company has focused on the wordmark that appears alongside its broader branding.

For users, this means the overall Instagram identity remains largely recognisable despite the refreshed lettering.

Why the Change Matters

The redesign comes as Instagram continues to evolve from a photography-focused social network into a platform built around video, creators, recommendations and messaging.

The updated wordmark may therefore be intended to modernise the brand without disconnecting it from its history.

Whether the new design becomes familiar over time remains to be seen. Instagram's 2016 redesign shows that even controversial branding changes can eventually become accepted once users have had enough time to adjust.

For now, however, the new wordmark has left Instagram users divided, with some praising the cleaner look while others remain unconvinced that the decade-old branding needed to be changed.

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has laid out an ambitious vision for the future of artificial intelligence, arguing that advanced AI could give individuals unprecedented capabilities and help create a more prosperous and innovative America.

In a roughly 6,500-word open letter published on Monday, Zuckerberg presented what he described as a future in which people could have access to what he calls “personal superintelligence.” According to his argument, highly capable AI systems could help individuals start businesses, create art, conduct scientific research and solve complex problems more efficiently.

The manifesto comes as governments, technology companies and policymakers continue to debate how quickly AI should advance and how much regulatory oversight the industry needs.

Zuckerberg Pushes Optimistic AI Vision

Zuckerberg's argument is notably optimistic at a time when concerns about artificial intelligence have grown across the United States.

Public anxiety over AI has increased alongside worries about job displacement, misinformation, privacy and the possibility that increasingly autonomous systems could behave in unexpected ways.

Zuckerberg challenges the idea that AI development should primarily be viewed through the lens of potential catastrophe. He argues that if AI is developed around principles that give individuals greater control and access to technology, it could distribute power more broadly rather than concentrating it.

“Personal superintelligence” is central to that vision.

The concept refers to highly capable AI tools that could effectively work as personalised assistants, helping individuals perform tasks that currently require teams of specialists or substantial technical expertise.

Meta Wants AI Development to Continue

The manifesto also reflects Meta's broader position on AI development.

The company has invested heavily in artificial intelligence infrastructure, models and computing capacity. Zuckerberg's argument suggests that continued technological progress, rather than restrictions on development, should remain a central part of America's AI strategy.

He has also connected the development of advanced AI with Meta's longstanding philosophy of giving individuals greater access to technology.

In his letter, Zuckerberg argued that the company's mission has focused on putting power in people's hands and suggested that this principle could shape how AI's benefits are distributed.

Regulation Debate Intensifies

The timing of Zuckerberg's manifesto is significant.

The United States is engaged in an increasingly intense debate over how artificial intelligence should be regulated. Policymakers are weighing questions surrounding safety standards, national security, employment, competition and the responsibilities of companies developing increasingly powerful systems.

Some technology companies and AI researchers have argued that certain safeguards may be necessary as AI capabilities expand.

Zuckerberg, however, has emphasised the potential benefits of continued innovation and warned against allowing fear of AI's risks to overshadow its possibilities.

AI Systems Raise New Concerns

The debate has become more complicated following reports of AI systems demonstrating increasingly sophisticated and sometimes unexpected behaviour.

Recent testing incidents involving advanced AI models have included systems attempting to interact with external computer systems and, in some cases, carrying out actions that researchers did not intend.

Such developments have intensified discussions about whether companies should be required to conduct more rigorous safety testing before deploying increasingly autonomous AI systems.

For Zuckerberg, however, these risks do not outweigh the potential benefits of giving individuals access to powerful AI capabilities.

Meta's Position in the AI Race

The manifesto also places Meta's ambitions within the broader global AI competition.

Meta has been spending heavily on AI infrastructure and has been developing its own models while competing with companies such as OpenAI, Google and Anthropic.

The company's strategy includes developing increasingly capable AI systems and integrating them across products used by billions of people.

That scale gives Zuckerberg a particular interest in how regulators approach AI. Rules that increase development costs or restrict deployment could affect the speed at which Meta can introduce new AI products.

At the same time, failures involving powerful AI systems could create reputational, legal and financial risks for the company.

A Debate Over Who Controls AI

One of the central questions raised by Zuckerberg's manifesto is who should control the development and distribution of advanced artificial intelligence.

The Meta chief argues for a model in which individuals benefit directly from increasingly powerful AI rather than allowing the technology to remain concentrated among governments or a small number of corporations.

Critics of the industry's rapid expansion, however, have raised concerns about whether the world's largest technology companies can simultaneously serve as developers, distributors and major beneficiaries of the technology while also determining its safety standards.

That tension is likely to remain at the centre of America's AI debate.

Zuckerberg's Message to Policymakers

Zuckerberg's latest letter ultimately amounts to a strong case for continued AI innovation.

His argument is that the technology could dramatically expand individual capabilities and create new opportunities if people are given access to increasingly advanced systems.

The challenge for policymakers will be determining how to preserve those benefits while addressing concerns over safety, employment, privacy, cybersecurity and concentration of corporate power.

As AI capabilities continue to advance, Zuckerberg's manifesto makes clear where Meta stands: the company wants America to embrace the technology's potential rather than allow fear of its risks to dictate the pace of innovation.

Whether policymakers and the public agree with that approach is likely to remain one of the defining technology debates of the coming years.

Meta has launched Muse Glimmer, a compact artificial-intelligence model designed to operate directly on compatible personal computers using a single graphics card.

Unlike popular AI services that process most requests through large data centres, Muse Glimmer can perform certain tasks locally on a Mac or Windows PC. This could give developers and businesses greater control over sensitive information while reducing their dependence on costly cloud-based AI services.

The model was released on Monday as Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg called for wider access to powerful AI technology and warned against concentrating control in the hands of a few corporations and governments.

What Can Muse Glimmer Do?

Muse Glimmer is designed primarily for “agentic” tasks—jobs in which an AI system receives an objective and completes several connected actions on the user’s behalf.

Its potential uses include:

• Assisting with computer programming
• Organising files and documents
• Reading and understanding screenshots
• Managing schedules and routine administrative work
• Analysing documents and charts
• Operating software tools through commands

The model is smaller than the most advanced systems developed by Meta, OpenAI, Google and Anthropic. Its principal advantage is not that it is the world’s most powerful AI, but that it can perform useful tasks without requiring an expensive network of data-centre chips.

AI That Can Work Without a Constant Internet Connection

Running an AI model locally could be particularly useful for organisations that handle confidential information.

Hospitals, financial institutions, legal firms and government departments may not want sensitive documents uploaded to an external AI provider’s servers. A locally deployed model allows information to remain within the organisation’s own computer or network.

Local processing can also make some tasks faster because every instruction does not have to travel to a distant server and back. It may additionally allow certain AI features to remain available when an internet connection is unavailable or unreliable.

However, users will still require sufficiently powerful hardware. The phrase “runs on a PC” does not mean that Muse Glimmer will perform smoothly on every ordinary laptop.

Is Muse Glimmer Open-Source?

Meta describes Muse Glimmer as an open-weight model. This means developers can access its trained model weights, run it on their own hardware and customise it for particular applications.

“Open-weight” and “open-source” are sometimes used interchangeably, but they are not necessarily identical. A fully open-source system generally provides broader access to its source code, training methods and associated components.

The new model is expected to appeal particularly to independent developers, startups and businesses seeking an alternative to paying cloud providers for every AI request.

Meta Promises a More Powerful Model

Meta has also said it plans to release the weights of Muse Spark 1.2, described as its most advanced AI model, in the near future.

Zuckerberg argued that wider distribution of AI would encourage innovation and prevent the technology’s benefits from being controlled by only a small number of companies.

The move also signals Meta’s attempt to regain momentum in the open-model market, where Chinese developers such as DeepSeek, Alibaba and Moonshot AI have emerged as major competitors.

Privacy Benefits Come With Security Risks

Downloadable AI models offer greater privacy and customisation, but they also create concerns. Once a powerful model is available for local use, its developer has less control over how it is modified or deployed.

Cybersecurity experts have warned that unrestricted models could be adapted for generating malicious computer code, automating scams or assisting cyberattacks.

Supporters of open-weight AI counter that public access enables independent researchers to find weaknesses, develop safeguards and prevent a few companies from privately controlling the technology.

Meta’s new model therefore enters the market at the centre of a larger debate: should advanced AI be widely distributed, or should access be restricted because of its potential risks?

For ordinary users, Muse Glimmer points towards a significant shift. The next generation of AI assistants may not always live inside a distant data centre—they could operate directly on the computer sitting on a user’s desk.

The Central Government has conveyed a strong message to Meta that digital platforms operating in India must comply with Indian laws and cannot function based on American legal standards, following the controversy over the temporary restriction of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's video on Facebook.

According to government sources, the issue prompted the Centre to seek an explanation from Meta, summon its senior executives and demand an apology after the Prime Minister's video was briefly restricted on the platform.

The matter has become a key point of discussion between the government and Meta as India steps up scrutiny of content moderation practices followed by global technology companies.

Centre's Clear Message

Sources told CNN-News18 that the government's actions were intended to reinforce that social media companies operating in India are bound by the country's legal framework.

"Platforms cannot be run in India as per US law. Every platform has a responsibility towards Indian society and must function according to Indian laws," sources said.

Officials maintained that digital intermediaries, like all other institutions operating in the country, are expected to comply with domestic regulations.

Meta Executives Meet Government

Meta's senior leadership, including Chief Global Affairs Officer Joel Kaplan, is currently in India to hold discussions with government officials following the controversy.

The Centre reportedly questioned the company on how its content moderation systems flagged the Prime Minister's video and sought details of the safeguards that would be introduced to prevent similar incidents in the future.

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has also apologised over the incident, while the company attributed the temporary restriction to an unintended technical error.

The video, which was shared by Prime Minister Modi during protests led by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), has since been restored and is currently available on Facebook.

More Meetings Planned

Government sources said three to four additional meetings with Meta representatives are expected in the coming days.

Apart from the Facebook controversy, the discussions are likely to cover issues related to WhatsApp and other Meta-owned platforms. Officials are also expected to examine the company's compliance with India's regulatory expectations.

Focus on Child Safety and AI Content

The meetings have also included discussions on child sexual abuse material (CSAM), AI-generated deepfakes and broader concerns surrounding content moderation across Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp.

The government has reportedly sought details of Meta's mechanisms to detect illegal content, prevent misuse of artificial intelligence and strengthen safeguards for verified public figures.

Broader Regulatory Oversight

Sources added that the government remains in regular contact with other major digital platforms, including X and Telegram, on issues related to online safety, platform accountability and compliance with Indian laws.

The latest developments come amid increasing regulatory scrutiny of global technology companies as India pushes for greater transparency, stronger content moderation practices and adherence to domestic legal requirements.

The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has issued notices to Meta and the Directors General of Police (DGPs) of eight states over concerns regarding the alleged circulation of child sexual abuse material (CSAM) and age-inappropriate content on Facebook and Instagram.

The Commission has sought detailed responses on the measures being taken to identify, remove and investigate such content, amid growing regulatory scrutiny of the social media company in India.

NHRC Flags Possible POCSO Violations

The human rights watchdog expressed concern that some of the reported content could potentially fall under offences punishable under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

Speaking to media, NHRC member Priyank Kanoongo said the allegations warrant a criminal investigation if the material is verified as child sexual abuse content, particularly where monetised or paid content is involved.

He stated that an FIR should be registered against Meta if investigators establish violations of applicable laws.

Authorities Asked to Investigate

As part of its proceedings, the NHRC has directed police authorities in eight states to examine the allegations and initiate appropriate legal action wherever necessary.

The Commission has also included the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) in the matter and has reportedly shared 50 URLs with the concerned authorities to facilitate the investigation.

Kanoongo warned that if police and government agencies fail to act despite receiving the evidence, the Commission may recommend action against officials responsible for inaction.

Meta Under Increasing Regulatory Scrutiny

The latest notice comes at a time when Meta is facing increased attention from Indian regulators over its content moderation practices.

Earlier this week, company representatives met senior officials from the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology following the temporary removal of a video featuring Prime Minister Narendra Modi from one of Meta's platforms.

Government officials reportedly sought an explanation for the incident and reviewed the company's compliance with existing content moderation and platform governance requirements.

Meta later stated that the removal occurred because of an erroneous takedown and apologised for the incident.

Meeting Covered Child Safety Measures

According to reports, the meeting between Meta officials and MeitY also included discussions on the company's efforts to combat child sexual abuse material, address AI-generated or synthetic content, and strengthen safeguards before removing content posted by verified public figures.

Officials also reviewed Meta's existing mechanisms for detecting harmful content and ensuring compliance with Indian regulations relating to online safety.

Investigation Underway

The NHRC's notices do not constitute a finding of guilt against Meta. The Commission has sought explanations from the company and the concerned state police authorities before deciding on further action.

The case is expected to remain under close watch as investigators assess whether the reported content violates Indian criminal law and child protection legislation.

A court in the US state of New Mexico has imposed a $942 million (around ₹9,030 crore) penalty on Meta Platforms, ruling that the company's social media platforms contributed to harm affecting young users' mental health.

As part of the judgment, the court directed that $420 million (approximately ₹3,993 crore) be allocated towards treatment programmes for affected children and teenagers. The remaining amount will be spent over the next five years on awareness campaigns, prevention initiatives and mental health screening services.

The ruling follows a lengthy legal battle over allegations that Meta failed to adequately protect minors using its platforms.

Case Decided in Two Phases

The proceedings were conducted in two stages.

In the first phase, the court imposed a $375 million civil penalty after finding that the company was aware of child sexual exploitation concerns on its platforms but failed to take adequate action.

During the second phase, the court ordered an additional $567 million in penalties, bringing the total financial liability to $942 million.

Court Examined Child Safety Concerns

During the trial, prosecutors urged the court to require significant changes to Meta's platforms, including limiting addictive design features, strengthening age-verification systems, improving default privacy settings and enhancing safeguards against child sexual exploitation.

The case centred on allegations that Meta's platforms exposed children to harmful content while insufficiently addressing known safety risks.

Meta Plans to Challenge the Decision

Meta has said it disagrees with the ruling and intends to appeal.

The company argued that it continues to invest heavily in online safety technologies and content moderation but maintained that preventing every instance of harmful activity by bad actors remains a complex challenge.

Legal experts say the appeal process could determine whether Meta will also be required to introduce structural changes to its algorithms and child safety policies beyond the financial penalty.

Broader Regulatory Pressure May Follow

The judgment could increase regulatory scrutiny of Meta across the United States.

Reports indicate that attorneys general from more than 40 states are also pursuing legal action related to child safety and youth protection, potentially exposing the company to additional legal and regulatory challenges.

Attorney General Led the Lawsuit

The lawsuit was filed by New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez, who alleged that Meta knowingly failed to make Instagram and Facebook sufficiently safe for children.

The complaint argued that the company's algorithms were designed in ways that encouraged prolonged engagement among younger users, contributing to mental health concerns such as depression, eating disorders and suicidal behaviour.

The lawsuit also alleged that Meta failed to adequately address the misuse of its platforms for child sexual exploitation despite being aware of the risks.

Court Notes Limits of Federal Privacy Law

While examining proposed remedies, the court observed that the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA)limits the extent to which companies can be compelled to collect additional personal data from children for age verification.

The court noted that mandatory age-verification measures involving children's personal information could raise privacy concerns under existing federal law, making such remedies legally complicated.

The judgment primarily focused on financial penalties and funding for youth mental health initiatives, while further proceedings may determine whether additional platform reforms will be required.

Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) national convenor Arvind Kejriwal on Thursday claimed that his Instagram account has been blocked in India, alleging that social media platform Meta was restricting accounts of people raising questions over the Centre's ethanol policy and paper leak issues.

In a post on X, Kejriwal said Meta had failed to provide any clear explanation despite repeated attempts to seek clarification. He also urged users facing similar restrictions to contact him.

Kejriwal Alleges Government Pressure

Kejriwal alleged that the Central Government was pressuring Meta to block the accounts of individuals speaking against the ethanol blending policy and recent examination paper leak controversies.

He appealed to Meta not to succumb to what he described as government pressure and urged the company to operate independently.

The AAP leader also shared a screenshot from his Instagram account status page, which displayed the message "Unavailable in some locations."

Claims Meta Confirmed Restriction

According to Kejriwal, after approaching Meta's India office, he was informed that his Instagram account had been restricted and was currently unavailable for users in India.

He criticised the platform for not offering any detailed explanation regarding the action, describing the company's response as inadequate.

As of Thursday, Meta had not issued an official public statement regarding Kejriwal's claims or clarified the reason behind the reported restriction.

Users Report Similar Issues

Kejriwal said several social media users had informed him that their Instagram accounts had also become inaccessible.

He invited affected users to reach out so that the issue could be documented collectively, suggesting that the reported restrictions were not isolated incidents.

Row Comes Amid Meta-Government Dispute

The development comes amid heightened scrutiny of Meta in India following the temporary removal of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Facebook video related to examination reforms and paper leaks.

The video, posted on July 23, briefly became unavailable before being restored by Meta.

The incident prompted the government to seek an explanation from the company, with parliamentary leaders questioning the platform's content moderation practices.

Government Engages Meta

According to government sources cited by PTI, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg apologised to the Indian government on Wednesday over the temporary removal of the Prime Minister's video.

The company also reportedly acknowledged concerns relating to content moderation, deepfake content and child sexual abuse material on its platforms during discussions with government officials.

The controversy has intensified the ongoing debate over the role of social media platforms, intermediary responsibilities and content regulation in India.

No Official Response Yet

While Kejriwal has publicly alleged that his account has been restricted in India, Meta has not officially confirmed whether any action has been taken against his Instagram profile or the reasons behind it.

The matter is expected to draw further political attention as debates over platform accountability, digital regulation and freedom of expression continue.

New Delhi: Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) national convenor Arvind Kejriwal on Thursday claimed that his Instagram account has been restricted for users in India. He said he has repeatedly sought clarification from Meta, but has not received any official explanation so far.

Kejriwal also alleged that several other users had informed him that their Instagram accounts had faced similar restrictions. He appealed to affected users to get in touch with him and share their experiences.

Kejriwal Alleges Government Pressure

In a post on social media platform X, Kejriwal claimed that the government was pressuring Meta to restrict the accounts of people speaking about issues such as the ethanol policy and the paper leak controversy.

He alleged that social media platforms should operate independently and should not come under political influence. According to him, Meta should provide a transparent explanation if any action has been taken against his account.

Screenshot Shared on Social Media

To support his claim, Kejriwal shared a screenshot of his Instagram account status. The screenshot displayed the message "Unavailable in Some Locations," which, according to him, indicates that his account is not accessible in certain regions, including India.

He said officials at Meta's India office informed him that his account was unavailable in the country, but he added that the company had not provided any formal clarification regarding the reason behind the restriction.

Meta Yet to Respond

As of now, Meta has not issued any official statement regarding Kejriwal's claim or the alleged restriction on his Instagram account.

The company has also not commented on the allegations that accounts discussing specific public issues are being selectively limited.

What Does "Unavailable in Some Locations" Mean?

According to Instagram's account status system, the message "Unavailable in Some Locations" generally indicates that certain content—or, in some cases, an account—may not be visible in specific countries or regions because of local legal requirements or platform policies.

It does not necessarily mean that the account has been suspended or permanently removed. In many cases, the account continues to remain active and accessible in other parts of the world, while access is restricted only in selected locations.

Issue Sparks Fresh Debate

Kejriwal's claim has triggered a fresh discussion on the role of social media platforms in content moderation and regional access restrictions. While the AAP leader has questioned the alleged restriction and sought an explanation from Meta, the company's official position on the matter is still awaited.

NHRC Orders Criminal Action

The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has directed the Directors General of Police (DGPs) of six states and Union Territories to register First Information Reports (FIRs) against Meta Platforms over alleged violations of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 linked to child sexual abuse material (CSAM) on Instagram and Facebook.

According to reports, the Commission issued the directions after taking cognisance of allegations that pornographic and age-inappropriate content, potentially containing child sexual abuse material, was accessible through Meta-owned platforms.

The order applies to police authorities in Bihar, Chandigarh, Haryana, Odisha, West Bengal and Delhi.

Complaint Triggered Investigation

The Commission acted on a complaint submitted by a non-profit organisation, which reportedly received anonymous information regarding several Instagram and Facebook links allegedly containing or facilitating access to CSAM.

The organisation clarified that it had neither viewed nor downloaded the suspected content and had only shared the URLs with authorities for investigation, stating that it acted in compliance with the POCSO Act and the Information Technology Act.

In its notice dated August 3, the NHRC directed the concerned authorities to investigate the allegations and initiate legal action wherever cognisable offences are established.

Police Asked to Register FIRs

The NHRC has instructed state police cyber crime units and Special Juvenile Police Units to examine the reported URLs and register FIRs wherever offences under the POCSO Act or other applicable laws are found.

Police have also been directed to identify those responsible for uploading or circulating the content, rescue any identified child victims, produce them before the Child Welfare Committee, and coordinate with agencies including the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C), National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) and Meta.

The Commission has sought detailed Action Taken Reports (ATRs) from all concerned authorities within one week.

Directions Issued to Meta and MeitY

The NHRC has also issued specific directions to Meta and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology.

Meta has been asked to immediately remove the reported content, preserve metadata, IP logs and other digital evidence, comply with mandatory reporting obligations under the POCSO Act, and provide details of the preventive mechanisms adopted to detect and prevent child sexual abuse material on its platforms.

MeitY has been directed to submit a report on the blocking of the identified URLs, action taken against the intermediary and measures being implemented to strengthen online child safety.

Inquiry Linked to Earlier BBC Investigation

The latest directions follow an earlier NHRC proceeding initiated after a BBC World Service investigation alleged that paid advertisements on Instagram promoted or facilitated access to child sexual abuse material through coded search terms before redirecting users to Telegram channels.

Following those reports, the NHRC had instructed Delhi Police to conduct a detailed investigation, preserve electronic evidence and examine whether Meta fulfilled its legal obligations to report suspected offences under Sections 19 and 20 of the POCSO Act.

The Commission later issued a reminder after Delhi Police failed to submit its Action Taken Report within the prescribed deadline.

Separate NCPCR Probe Underway

Meanwhile, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has also initiated a separate inquiry into allegations that Meta's platforms were used to facilitate access to child sexual exploitation material.

The Commission sought an explanation from Meta after taking suo motu cognisance of the BBC investigation. Government sources said the company's response has been received and is under examination.

The NHRC has reiterated that every instance involving the creation, circulation or continued availability of child sexual abuse material constitutes a continuing violation of children's dignity, privacy and fundamental human rights, requiring urgent investigation, victim rehabilitation and prosecution of those responsible.

Meta has come under fresh political and regulatory scrutiny in India after a Parliamentary Standing Committee reportedly sought an unconditional apology from the company's Chief Executive Officer Mark Zuckerberg over the temporary removal of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's video from Facebook.

According to reports, the committee has warned that Meta could face consequences regarding its intermediary protections if it fails to respond satisfactorily to the issue.

The controversy stems from the temporary unavailability of a video featuring Prime Minister Modi addressing students and Gen Z audiences on examination-related issues and paper leaks. The video reportedly remained inaccessible on Facebook for nearly five to six hours before being restored.

Panel Demands Unconditional Apology

The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Communications and Information Technology has reportedly written to the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), expressing concern over the removal of the Prime Minister's video.

Committee Chairman Nishikant Dubey stated that Meta should issue an "unqualified apology" within three days. He argued that deleting the Prime Minister's video reflected the actions of a publisher rather than an intermediary platform.

Dubey also urged the government to consider withdrawing Meta's intermediary or "safe harbour" protection if the company failed to apologise within the stipulated period.

Questions Raised Over Safe Harbour Protection

The committee's remarks have once again brought attention to the legal protections available to digital platforms under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act.

Safe harbour protection shields intermediaries such as Meta, Google, YouTube, X, Amazon and other digital platforms from liability for content posted by users, provided they comply with legal obligations and remove unlawful content when directed by authorities.

According to Dubey, platforms should not misuse these protections while allegedly allowing objectionable or harmful content to circulate.

Meta Officials Meet Government

Amid the controversy, a Meta delegation led by Chief Global Affairs Officer Joel Kaplan reportedly met MeitY Secretary S. Krishnan in New Delhi.

The discussions focused on the temporary removal of the Prime Minister's video and the government's concerns regarding the incident. No official statement detailing the outcome of the meeting has been released so far.

Police Investigation Underway

The matter has also reached law enforcement agencies.

Hyderabad Cyber Crime Police have reportedly registered two FIRs based on complaints filed by BJP workers regarding AI-generated and allegedly morphed videos circulating on social media.

Meta India Head Arun Srinivas has reportedly been named as a co-accused in the cases along with several social media account handlers.

Investigators are examining those allegedly responsible for creating and uploading the manipulated content, while also reviewing Meta's moderation systems and safeguards designed to prevent the spread of fake or misleading material.

Global Meta Team May Be Questioned

According to reports, Meta's global team is expected to visit Delhi next week for discussions with Indian authorities.

Officials are likely to seek explanations regarding the functioning of Meta's recommendation algorithms, content moderation practices, and the company's role in addressing misinformation and maintaining public order on its platforms.

The reported visit comes as regulatory scrutiny of major technology companies continues to increase in India over issues related to content moderation, platform accountability and intermediary responsibilities.

Broader Debate Over Platform Accountability

The latest controversy has renewed the debate over the responsibilities of social media companies operating in India.

While digital platforms maintain that they function as intermediaries hosting user-generated content, policymakers continue to examine whether certain content moderation decisions place them in the role of publishers, potentially affecting the legal protections available under Indian law.

The developments are expected to remain under close watch as authorities continue their investigation and await Meta's response.