The platform cannot, cannot shirk its responsibility
In the vast and largely invisible architecture of digital commerce, a BBC investigation has uncovered something that forces a reckoning: Instagram's paid advertising system was actively promoting child sexual abuse material in India, directing users to Telegram channels where such content could be purchased for less than a dollar. The platform's own moderation — the very system designed to stand between harm and audience — reviewed these ads and found no violation. What emerges is not merely a technical failure, but a question about what a platform truly values when revenue and responsibility are placed on the same scale.
- Instagram's ad approval system — built on automation and supplemented by human review — allowed approximately 30 explicit ads promoting child sexual abuse to reach users in India, some depicting children as young as 12.
- When the BBC reported the ads directly to Instagram, the platform responded within 24 hours that the content did not violate community standards — a determination that held until the BBC escalated directly to Meta's parent-level communications team.
- A former Facebook vice president who helped build the advertising business described the algorithm as engineered for escalating engagement, warning that the company's pursuit of revenue over responsibility will predictably produce these outcomes.
- Meta has since disabled the flagged ads and suspended the accounts, but critics — including a retired Indian Supreme Court justice — argue the platform cannot claim passive ignorance when it profits directly from the ad placements.
- Legal experts in India are calling for Supreme Court intervention, while child protection organizations warn that the Instagram-to-Telegram pipeline is deliberately designed by criminal networks to outpace moderation and repeatedly resurface removed content.
A BBC investigation set up an account on Instagram in India and, within days of following accounts that posted suggestive content, began receiving paid advertisements promoting child sexual abuse material. Over the course of the investigation, roughly 30 unique ads appeared — some depicting children who appeared to be around 12 years old, some showing explicit text referencing rape and assault, and all directing users to Telegram channels where material could be purchased for as little as 99 rupees, approximately one dollar.
When the BBC reported these ads to Instagram directly, the platform's moderation system reviewed them and responded within 24 hours: no violation found. Only after the BBC escalated its findings to Meta, Instagram's parent company, did the platform disable the ads and suspend the accounts. Meta acknowledged that "no system is perfect" and said it reports apparent child exploitation to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children as required by law. The company, which earns nearly all of its $200 billion in annual revenue from advertising, announced earlier this year that it was reducing human moderation in favor of artificial intelligence systems.
Brian Boland, a former Facebook vice president who helped construct the platform's advertising business, said he was "horrified and unsurprised." He described the algorithm as designed to serve users progressively more extreme content to sustain engagement, and said the company's failure to responsibly govern that system — in the service of revenue — will reliably produce these outcomes. Boland left Meta believing the company "didn't care about users anywhere" and testified against it in a New Mexico trial earlier this year; the court ordered Meta to pay $375 million.
Telegram, where the material was being sold, removed one of two channels reported by the BBC but allowed the other to continue operating. The platform claims to have "virtually eliminated" the public spread of child sexual abuse material and removed more than 274,000 groups and channels in 2026 — yet it remains outside both major international organizations that coordinate content removal efforts.
In India, retired Supreme Court Justice Madan Lokur said Instagram was "making money by participating in a criminal activity" and called the matter serious enough for the court to initiate proceedings on its own authority. Child protection organizations note that the majority of abuse material reports they receive originate from Meta platforms, and that criminal networks deliberately exploit the path from Instagram to Telegram to evade detection and repeatedly reupload removed content. Experts emphasize that dismantling these networks will require international cooperation — because the chain of demand and supply does not stop at any single border.
A BBC investigation has documented Instagram running paid advertisements that promote child sexual abuse material in India, with the platform's own moderation systems failing to catch or remove the content even after being directly reported.
The ads use explicit language—"rape video," "child video"—and direct users to Telegram channels where they can purchase material for as little as 99 rupees, roughly one dollar. The BBC set up an investigative account on Instagram in India and, within days of following accounts that posted suggestive content, began seeing advertisements featuring explicit material involving children. Over the course of the investigation, approximately 30 unique ads promoting child sexual abuse appeared in the feed, some depicting children who appeared to be around 12 years old. One ad showed a man identified as 52 alongside a girl identified as 12, with a link to a Telegram channel. Another featured a very young girl in tears with text indicating sexual assault. When the BBC reported these ads directly to Instagram, the platform responded within 24 hours saying the content did not violate its community guidelines. Only after the BBC escalated the findings to Meta, Instagram's parent company, did the platform disable the ads and suspend the accounts posting them.
Meta's advertising system is designed to review every ad before publication, relying primarily on automated technology supplemented by human review when the system is uncertain. The company processes roughly $200 billion in annual revenue, with nearly 98 percent coming from advertising. Instagram alone generates more than 90 percent of its revenue from ads. In March of this year, Meta announced it was reducing reliance on human moderators and increasing investment in artificial intelligence systems. When asked about the BBC's findings, Meta stated that "no system is perfect" and that its review process may not detect all violations. The company said it reports apparent child exploitation to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children in compliance with law.
Telegram, the messaging platform where the material was being sold, removed one of two channels reported by the BBC but allowed the other to continue posting new videos for sale. The company told the BBC it uses both automated and human moderation and claims to have "virtually eliminated" the public spread of child sexual abuse material from its platform. Telegram removed more than 274,000 groups and channels related to such material in 2026 but is not a member of either the NCMEC or the Internet Watch Foundation, the two major organizations that work with platforms to find and remove such content.
Brian Boland, a former vice president of Facebook who worked at the company between 2009 and 2020 and helped build its advertising business, said he was "horrified and unsurprised" by the findings. He described Instagram's algorithm as designed to keep users engaged by showing them "something more extreme, more tantalising," and said that while the algorithm is not intentionally creating predators, the company's failure to responsibly control it in pursuit of revenue and engagement will produce these outcomes. Boland left Meta because he believed the company "didn't care about users anywhere." He testified against Meta in a New Mexico trial earlier this year in which the company was accused of misleading users about platform safety for children; the court ordered Meta to pay $375 million. Boland deleted his Instagram account in 2025.
Madan Lokur, a retired justice of India's Supreme Court, expressed concern that Instagram was "making money by participating in a criminal activity." He said the issue was serious enough for India's Supreme Court to take suo moto cognisance—initiating legal proceedings without waiting for a case to be brought—and that despite Indian law protecting social media companies from liability for user-uploaded content, "the platform cannot, cannot shirk its responsibility." The distribution of both child sexual abuse material and adult pornography are criminal offences in India.
The Rati Foundation, a Mumbai-based NGO that runs a helpline for children facing online harms, said the vast majority of reports it receives about child sexual abuse material come from Meta platforms. Its co-founder, Siddharth Pillai, noted that criminals exploit the seamless navigation from Instagram to Telegram to evade moderation and repeatedly reupload content that has been removed. Experts say child sexual abuse material in India is typically created by organized criminal groups, including human traffickers, though family and community members are sometimes responsible. Bhuwan Ribhu, founder of Just Rights for Children, a network of more than 250 organizations working to prevent violence against children in India, said the crime is underreported and police are still developing the technical skills to address it. He emphasized that international cooperation and intelligence sharing across borders is vital to track the full chain of demand and supply in these criminal networks.
Notable Quotes
Making money by participating in a criminal activity— Madan Lokur, retired justice of India's Supreme Court, on Instagram's role
The algorithm will create these outcomes if people aren't being truly, aggressively protective over these systems— Brian Boland, former Meta vice president, on how engagement-focused algorithms enable abuse
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
How does an ad promoting child abuse material even get approved in the first place?
Instagram's system is supposed to review every ad before it goes live, using automated technology that checks images, video, text, and where links lead. But the BBC found that when they reported ads directly, Instagram's moderation team said they didn't violate community standards. Only after escalating to Meta's leadership did the company act.
So the automated system missed it, and then the human reviewers also missed it?
Or didn't catch it, or didn't flag it as serious enough. Meta later said no system is perfect. But what's striking is that when the BBC set up a test account and followed suggestive content, Instagram's own algorithm started pushing explicit ads within days—the platform was actively serving this material.
Why would Instagram's algorithm do that?
A former Meta executive explained it this way: the algorithm is designed to keep people engaged by showing them increasingly extreme content. It's not that Meta is trying to create predators, but that the company optimizes for engagement and revenue without responsibly controlling what that engagement looks like.
What about Telegram, where people are actually buying this material?
Telegram removed one of the two channels the BBC reported, but the other kept posting. The company claims it's virtually eliminated public spread of this material, but it's not part of the major organizations that work with platforms to find and remove such content. There's a gap.
Is there any legal pressure on Meta in India?
A retired Supreme Court justice said the issue is serious enough for India's highest court to intervene on its own, without waiting for a case to be filed. He pointed out that even though Indian law protects platforms from liability for user uploads, they can't escape responsibility for their own systems—like their ad network.
What would actually change this?
A former Meta vice president who left the company said if people en masse deleted their accounts, the company would pay attention. He also noted that years ago, he was allowed to remove massive amounts of ad revenue to protect users from scams. Over time, he said, that trade-off between revenue and safety shifted.