A cohort of whistleblowers from within Meta has lifted the lid on a corporate culture described as ethically bankrupt, where the relentless pursuit of metaverse dominance came at a devastating human cost. Internal documents and firsthand accounts reveal a stark disregard for the psychological wellbeing of both users and employees.
The most alarming allegations centre on the testing phases for the company's virtual reality products. Whistleblowers have detailed how user testers, including employees, were subjected to experiences so intensely disturbing that they reportedly suffered lasting psychological trauma, with one internal memo starkly classifying the incidents as 'psychological torture'.
A Culture of 'Moving Fast and Breaking People'
Insiders claim that Meta's infamous 'move fast and break things' ethos was applied recklessly to human psychology. Protections were allegedly sidelined in the frantic race to outpace competitors like Apple. Testers were pushed into hyper-realistic VR simulations without adequate safeguards, leading to severe adverse effects that were systematically downplayed by the company.
One whistleblower stated, "We observed incidents that resulted in significant psychological harm, including psychosis, paranoia, and a complete dissociation from reality. The company's primary concern was mitigating legal risk, not supporting the victims."
Profit Over Protection: The Data Exploitation
Beyond the harrowing test conditions, the whistleblowers accuse Meta of exploiting a legal grey area to harvest and utilise highly sensitive user data. This information, which includes biometric data like eye-tracking and facial expressions, is being used to fuel advertising algorithms and train AI systems.
This practice raises profound questions about privacy and user consent in the nascent metaverse, an unregulated digital frontier where Meta operates as both the pioneer and the de facto ruler.
Systemic Suppression and Silencing
Those who raised red flags internally describe a culture of suppression. Concerns about user safety and ethical breaches were met with resistance, dismissal, or reassignment. The whistleblowers' decision to come forward publicly, represented by the legal firm Whistleblower Aid, underscores their belief that internal channels were彻底失效 (completely ineffective).
Their testimony paints a picture of a tech giant operating with impunity, prioritising growth and data acquisition above all else. This case is likely to intensify the growing global call for stricter regulation of the tech industry and its exploration of immersive technologies.
