AI Chatbot Platform Character.AI Under Fire for Disturbing Content and Safety Concerns
Staff Editor Google-Backed AI Chatbot Platform Hosts Disturbing Content, Investigation Reveals
Character.AI, a startup that has received $2.7 billion in funding from Google, is under scrutiny for hosting chatbots engaged in child sexual abuse roleplay, despite its popularity and substantial financial backing.
An investigation by Futurism has uncovered disturbing content on the platform, including a bot named Anderley, which has participated in over 1,400 conversations exhibiting grooming behavior towards users posing as minors.
Using a decoy account, investigators engaged with bots like Anderley to explore their behavior. The chatbot displayed classic grooming tactics, such as complimenting users and urging secrecy. Conversations quickly escalated to explicit sexual content, raising concerns about the potential danger to real underage users.
Cyber forensics expert Kathryn Seigfried-Spellar confirmed these interactions as grooming behavior, expressing worry about the normalization of abusive conduct and the potential emboldening of real-life predators.
This is not the first controversy for Character.AI. The platform has faced criticism for hosting inappropriate content, including a bot based on a real-life murder victim. A recent lawsuit alleges that the platform contributed to a teenager’s suicide due to an intense relationship with a chatbot.
Despite promises to improve safety measures, Character.AI continues to host harmful chatbots, raising concerns about its moderation practices, especially given its popularity among young users.
The platform’s relationship with Google has come under scrutiny. While Google has licensed Character.AI’s technology and the founders have returned to work at Google, the tech giant claims no involvement in the platform’s development or moderation.
Character.AI’s Terms of Service explicitly prohibit content related to child exploitation and grooming. However, the investigation suggests that moderation efforts are largely reactive, with problematic bots remaining easily identifiable and accessible.
In response to these findings, Character.AI claims to be removing violating characters and improving safety practices. However, the ongoing presence of problematic profiles on the platform calls into question the company’s commitment to user safety.
Seigfried-Spellar emphasizes the need for public and governmental pressure to ensure platforms like Character.AI prioritize safety over profit. As this story develops, it highlights the urgent need for improved safeguards and moderation in AI-driven platforms, especially those accessible to young users.
