Meta is facing a fresh privacy crisis after an investigation revealed its AI-powered smart glasses are reportedly sending highly sensitive footage - including bathroom visits and intimate moments - to human reviewers in Nairobi, Kenya. The bombshell report from Swedish outlets Svenska Dagbladet and Göteborgs-Posten has already triggered at least one class action lawsuit, accusing the company of violating privacy and false advertising laws while marketing the Ray-Ban Meta glasses as privacy-focused devices.
Meta just walked into a privacy nightmare. The company's Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses, marketed as the future of AI-powered wearables, are reportedly routing some of the most intimate moments users capture straight to contract workers in Nairobi, Kenya.
According to an investigation published last week by Swedish newspapers Svenska Dagbladet and Göteborgs-Posten, Meta contractors have viewed footage showing "bathroom visits, sex and other intimate moments" recorded through the AI glasses. The workers told investigators they've seen essentially everything users capture, raising serious questions about what happens to footage when people ask Meta's AI assistant for help.
The timing couldn't be worse for Meta. The company has spent millions positioning its Ray-Ban collaboration as a privacy-conscious alternative to earlier failed attempts at smart glasses. But the Swedish investigation suggests that when users engage with the AI features, their footage may be sent to human reviewers for training and quality control purposes without clear disclosure.
"We see everything," one worker told the Swedish outlets, describing the scope of footage flowing through their review queues. The revelation directly contradicts Meta's public messaging around the product, which emphasizes built-in privacy features like a visible LED light that activates during recording.
The backlash arrived swiftly. At least one proposed class action lawsuit has already been filed, accusing Meta of violating false advertising and privacy laws. The complaint specifically cites Meta's marketing claims that the glasses are "designed for privacy" - language that now looks problematic given the Swedish findings.
