"[A]ppearance comparison is not an active core topic prioritized in the x-Meta strategy"

"Sensitive Topic Risks. Asking users on platform about sensitive topics (like appearance comparison) come with a number of risks that must be balanced against likely benefits. These include (1) negative user experiences (i.e., users do not come to our platforms to be asked about high sensitivity topics like AC); (2) concerns about having data on such experiences retained in our systems; and (3) comms risks (e.g., screenshot risks). (4) Unclear or unknown consequences of optimizing for this type of metric (e.g., it may reduce important and healthy content too, like motivational and inspirational posts)." "Benefits may not outweigh these risks: The CWB team has concerns that the benefits of AC survey measurement do not outweigh these risks." "(Mis-) Alignment with Core Company Wellbeing Strategy. Unless anchored in Problematic Use, appearance comparison is not an active core topic prioritized in the x-Meta strategy... it does mean that expected benefits to the company are lower in the overall risk calculation." "Our discussions with policy partners around doing work of this kind strongly advise AGAINST doing work on such sensitive topics with minors UNLESS parental consent is obtained. The message has been: this type of work can be very valuable, but only if done well/ethically, and parental consent is a cornerstone of research with minors, especially if we're asking about health/well-being" "pNAC is not proposed as a metric to be used outside Instagram or to be shared externally." "In November, the NACNACNegative Appearance ComparisonThe measured harm of comparing one's appearance unfavourably with what one sees on the platform. Content is scored for it, so internal documents speak of "high-NAC" content and of NAC prevalence rising with time spent.Full entry ↗ survey at the core of the phased validation process was blocked by central survey reviewers for needing additional review given Facebook Files."