The company says the feature works in the background, scanning account-level and behavioural signals to judge whether an account is likely run by someone under 18. 

When that threshold is crossed, content limits are switched on automatically. The idea, OpenAI argues, is to give teens a safer version of the product without forcing every user through upfront identity checks.

This is a response to  complaints the company has received over how its tools affect children. OpenAI has been warned by regulators over past incidents involving young users, and this rollout reveals a transition from reactive fixes to a more systemic safeguard.

According to OpenAI, the age prediction system looks at factors such as how long an account has existed, typical usage times, long-term patterns, and the age a user claims when signing up. 

No single signal decides the result. Instead, they are weighed together to reach a probability-based judgement.

When an account is flagged as under 18, ChatGPT applies restrictions around sensitive areas. These include graphic violence, depictions of self-harm, sexual or violent role play, risky online challenges, and content that promotes extreme body ideals or unhealthy dieting. If the system is unsure about someone’s age, it defaults to the safer setting.

OpenAI said in its announcement: “We’re rolling out age prediction on ChatGPT consumer plans to help determine whether an account likely belongs to someone under 18, so the right experience and safeguards can be applied to teens.”

Adults who are wrongly placed into the under-18 experience are not locked out permanently. They can verify their age through Persona, a third-party identity service, by submitting a live selfie and, in some regions, a government-issued ID. OpenAI maintains that it does not receive copies of these documents, only confirmation of age.

The company is also leaning on parental controls, allowing guardians to set usage limits, restrict features such as memory, and receive alerts if signs of serious distress appear. These tools, OpenAI says, are optional but designed to give families more oversight.

The rollout is already live in many regions, with Europe scheduled to follow in the coming weeks due to regulatory requirements. OpenAI says it will monitor how the system performs and adjust it over time, refining which signals are most important and closing gaps where users try to bypass safeguards.

From Friday, only paid users on X can generate or edit images using the chatbot, according to responses sent by Grok to users. 

The limitation applies only to X. The separate Grok app will still allow image creation without a subscription at the time of writing.

This follows regulatory attention over the use of the feature on the platform. Images produced with the tool spread fast on X, prompting reactions from European authorities and questions about safeguards on large platforms. 

German media minister Wolfram Weimer called the trend the “industrialisation of sexual harassment”. The European Commission said the images circulating on X were unlawful, while Britain’s data regulator said it had asked the company to explain how it was complying with data protection laws.

The image-generation restriction was easy to spot, as the bot replied that the function was available only to paying subscribers when users attempted to generate or edit images with Grok on X. The same requests made through the Grok app were still accepted.

xAI, the company behind Grok, did not provide a detailed response. An automated reply to a Reuters enquiry stated: “Legacy Media Lies”. X did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Elon Musk said last week that anyone using Grok to create illegal content would face the same consequences as uploading such material directly.

The company says it is working to quickly close those gaps, calling the content illegal and unacceptable.

Users have shared screenshots showing Grok’s public media feed populated with altered images. In several cases, people uploaded photos and asked the chatbot to modify them. The results, according to Grok, crossed a legal and ethical line.

“There are isolated cases where users prompted for and received AI images depicting minors in minimal clothing,” Grok said in a public post. “xAI has safeguards, but improvements are ongoing to block such requests entirely.”

The chatbot went further, acknowledging internal failures. “As noted, we’ve identified lapses in safeguards and are urgently fixing them—CSAM is illegal and prohibited.” Grok did not explain how long the issue lasted or how many users were affected.

In another exchange on X, the chatbot tried to put the incident in context, arguing that most harmful outputs can be stopped before they appear. It added that “no system is 100% foolproof”, while saying xAI is strengthening its filters and reviewing reports from users.

Regulators in both the United States and Europe are warning that generative tools can be misused to create child sexual abuse material, even when no real child is involved. 

Under the EU’s AI Act and existing child protection laws, companies are expected to prevent such content outright, making any failure a potential legal risk.

Advocacy groups have also argued that AI-generated abuse material, though synthetic, can still encourage harmful behaviour and demand. From that perspective, the Grok incident exposes how fragile current safety systems can be when faced with determined users.

Grok is xAI’s flagship product and is tightly integrated into X, formerly Twitter. It is marketed as a challenger to OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Google’s Gemini, with an emphasis on humour and a rebellious tone. 

Reports say that same positioning may complicate efforts to enforce strict safety boundaries, especially on a platform already criticised for weak moderation.

On public reactions, images attributed to Grok spread quickly on X, prompting a new case of Elon Musk’s approach to content control. When Reuters contacted xAI for comment, the company responded with a short message: “Legacy Media Lies”.

That reply has only added to the issue about transparency and responsibility in the AI sector. Warnings about trust in chatbots being eroded if companies appear dismissive when serious safety concerns emerge, have been released, particularly where child protection is involved.

For now, xAI says fixes on the safety of Grok are underway.

The update places a new feature inside the “Manage Topics” section of the app, giving people the option to increase or reduce the amount of AI-generated clips pushed to their For You feed. 

It works in the same space where users already adjust interest areas such as sports or food. TikTok says the feature is a flexible preference tool: “Manage Topics already enables people to adjust how often they see content related to over 10 categories like Dance, Sports, and Food & Drinks.”

This arrives at a time when AI-created video is becoming extremely embedded in online culture. Platforms across the industry now push synthetic media as a central product. 

Meta recently released Vibes, its AI-video feed, and OpenAI followed days later with Sora, a dedicated platform for sharing AI-generated clips. Those videos, once posted elsewhere, quickly found their way back onto TikTok. 

Many creators are now using the technology to build visuals for topics far beyond entertainment, including long-form history explainers and celebrity narratives.

From TikTok’s point of view, the new feature solves a simple problem, where some people enjoy the flood of AI content, and others don’t. Placing a slider in user settings allows both groups to customise their experience without hiding anything from the platform altogether.

The change will reach users in the coming weeks, but the adjustments do not stop there. TikTok is also moving to strengthen its labelling system for synthetic media. The company already requires creators to label realistic AI content and uses C2PA’s “Content Credentials” to embed metadata into uploads. 

As TikTok explains, “We also use a cross-industry technology called C2PA Content Credentials, which embeds metadata into content that lets us, as well as other platforms who use C2PA, know when something is AI-generated.”

The problem is that these tags can disappear when videos are downloaded, edited, or reuploaded somewhere else. To reduce that risk, TikTok is testing a new layer of protection known as “invisible watermarking”, a hidden marker that only the platform can detect. 

Over the next few weeks, the tool will appear in videos created with features like AI Editor Pro and in those uploaded with C2PA credentials.

TikTok says the watermark should make it easier to keep labels intact and track changes to content even after it leaves the app.

Alongside these tools, TikTok is putting money into public education around synthetic media. The company has launched a $2 million AI literacy fund involving more than 20 experts across several countries. 

Some of the participating organisations include Girls Who Code, which will create content focused on digital safety and understanding AI’s role online.

The company is also expanding its role in industry work, joining new committees within the Partnership on AI and continuing its involvement in the Framework for Responsible Practices for Synthetic Media.

TikTok notes that future updates will continue as standards develop. The company says it has already refined the way labels appear over the past year and will keep adjusting as more tools roll out across the industry.

In a media briefing held in Abuja, Nigeria, the organisation called for seriousness from the government in handling the matter, saying there has been a consistent data leak online for three years now, where data is available for sale cheaply.

In his address, ‘Gbenga Sesan, the organisation’s executive director, said:

“The data security problem is serious. Data belonging to the President, Vice President, National Security Adviser, top military officials, ministers and other senior government officials are also available online to anyone who knows their full name and date of birth.”

He pointed out that as much as the country has made advancements in tech, digital rights such privacy, online protection, freedom of expression and access to information, are increasingly under threat in Nigeria, with the threats manifesting as arbitrary internet disruptions, weak enforcement of data protection, surveillance, and inconsistent digital policies, which continue to weaken citizens’ trust and hinder the country’s digital growth and potential.

‘Gbenga expressed gratitude to the Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands in Nigeria, Ford Foundation, Luminate, Wellspring Philanthropic Fund, Mott Foundation, Open Society Foundations (OSF), International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Internet Society Foundation, for supporting the organisation’s cause at a time when non-profit organisations were facing challenges.

He highlighted Stemming the Tide of Abuse in Nigeria’s Digital Space (STANDS) Project as having been instrumental in delivering immense transformative change, positively influencing Nigeria’s digital rights landscape.

The project has combined litigation, advocacy, evidence-building, and capacity strengthening to protect citizens, influence policy, and build durable systems.

One of the major outputs of the STANDS project is the Ikot Ekpene Declaration, a commitment document that provides guidance for judicial officers on integrating digital rights into their rulings and judicial practice. PIN has also trained law enforcement officers on digital security.

On her part Nnenna Paul-Ugochukwu, the organisation’s chief operating officer, highlighted the organisation’s impact, and how it has transformed the lives of young Africans on the continent, developed reports, digital toolkits and produced award-winning short films.

PIN, she added, also provides scholarships for students from Ajegunle, where the organisation started its operations from in Lagos, Nigeria.

Khadijah El-Usman, the senior officer, Programmes, Anglophone West Africa shared highlights of the 2024 Nigeria Londa Report which evaluates the state of digital rights and inclusion while benchmarking them against the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights (ACHPR) Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression and Access to Information.

The Score Index measures the country’s performance against major human rights issues including Internet access and affordability, freedom of expression and protection against arbitrary arrests, data protection and privacy, content moderation, transparency and access to information, artificial intelligence and emerging technologies and inclusion of vulnerable groups including children and persons with disabilities.

“For Nigeria in 2024, this assessment is not just a research exercise. It directly reflects how over 200 million citizens experience their right to connect, speak, to be protected online and to participate in the digital economy,” Khadijah added.

Nigeria’s total score for 2024 was 36 out of 60, placing it at a moderately compliant level, reflecting both progress and setbacks.

Paradigm Initiative further stated that a considerable number of Nigerians are still battling internet affordability, connectivity, and skills barriers that limit meaningful online participation.

As much as there have been advancements, much more needs to be done as the most affected are individuals in rural areas, women, and persons with disabilities, who often face issues related to affordability, access, and digital literacy.

In its latest verdict, the Oversight Board—a body created by Meta but operating independently—accused the tech giant of making sweeping changes “hastily, in a departure from regular procedure,” without disclosing if any human rights assessments were carried out beforehand.

Meta didn’t just tweak the rules. In January, it abandoned its U.S. fact-checking initiative, relaxed enforcement on inflammatory content, and stopped proactively looking for less severe policy violations. 

This means posts that previously wouldn’t have slipped through—those that refer to gay people as mentally ill or women as mere “household objects or property”—are no longer being flagged unless users report them.

Meta said these changes were necessary. Mark Zuckerberg claimed that years of tight moderation had caused “too many mistakes and too much censorship.”

But he didn’t back that up with any data, and bodies say the timing is suspect—just before Donald Trump began another run for the presidency. The board believes the company might have prioritised politics over platform integrity.

In its ruling, the Board asked Meta to “assess whether the changes could have uneven consequences globally, especially in countries experiencing current or recent crises, such as armed conflicts.”

This has the potential to impact millions of lives across fragile regions where misinformation can escalate into violence.

Out of 11 reviewed content cases, the Board supported Meta’s decisions in some and reversed others. It upheld the choice to leave up videos involving transgender women, yet ordered removal of posts related to anti-immigration riots in the UK, citing Meta’s sluggish response to violent and hateful speech.

It also recommended removing the term “transgenderism” from its Hateful Conduct policy entirely.

The Board made 17 recommendations in total. These included stronger enforcement of harassment rules, transparency on how hateful ideologies are handled, and a clear evaluation of the new “Community Notes” feature—which now serves as the company’s main tool for correcting misinformation after ending partnerships with news organisations and independent fact-checkers.

Meta’s response? Lukewarm at best. In a generic statement, the company said it welcomed decisions “that leave up or restore content in the interest of promoting free expression,” but ignored the rulings that demanded removals.

Funding, however, is still intact. According to Oversight Board co-chair Paolo Carozza, there’s no indication that Meta intends to scale back its support.

“We have no reason to think that Meta is soured on the board or planning to make any large scale structural changes in terms of its commitment with the board,” he said.

Meta has allocated at least $35 million annually for the Board’s operations through 2027, and previous commitments—$130 million in 2019, $150 million in 2022—are locked into a trust meant to preserve independence.

But funding alone doesn’t fix the core issue. If Meta continues to make policy decisions behind closed doors and without due diligence, the risk of platform abuse comes up—and the company’s credibility shrinks.

The Board says freedom of expression can’t come at the expense of human rights, nor should corporate convenience override global safety.

“Yesterday we crossed 275M monthly active users on @Threads. A big thank you to everyone who’s helped us get this far. There’s a lot more to do, and plenty of things to fix, but there’s something exciting about this place.”

Since its launch in July 2023, Threads has attracted a large number of users, particularly those seeking alternatives to X following Elon Musk’s controversial acquisition of that platform. 

Threads initially hit the 150 million user mark in April, and by August, the platform had grown to 200 million monthly active users. 

The addition of 75 million new users within the past three months resulted from strong user engagement and retention growth, pointing to Threads’ appeal within the social networking industry.

During Meta’s Q3 2024 earnings call, CEO Mark Zuckerberg provided further insights, revealing that Threads is currently onboarding around one million users daily, strengthening the platform’s rapid growth. 

However, there are still challenges in terms of content moderation. Complaints from users regarding moderation have been increasing, with some frustrated over inconsistent enforcement and questionable content policies.

In response to these issues, Threads has taken steps to improve its moderation approach. Mosseri has acknowledged that the company has addressed specific mistakes and implemented changes aimed at improving the accuracy and consistency of content moderation. 

This ongoing refinement is part of Meta’s strategy to establish Threads as a leading text-based platform while maintaining a safe and user-friendly environment.

The platform is building on its success as Meta remains focused on both expanding the platform’s user base and addressing the complexities of managing a large-scale social network. 

With the growing competition, Threads’ growth will likely involve balancing growth with the essential task of safeguarding content standards.