Meta Fights 'Pervert Glasses' Backlash as Apple Reportedly Delays Smart Glasses to 2027

Meta Confronts Its Ray-Ban Glasses' Reputation Crisis

Meta is responding to a wave of public criticism over its Ray-Ban smart glasses with platform moderation bans, updated hardware safeguards and new efforts to curb viral harassment trends. The measures follow weeks of social-media clips in which strangers were recorded in public without their knowledge, a practice that has earned the product the nickname 'pervert glasses' online.

An activist group called Everyone Hates Elon has taken the fight beyond social media. After using a lenticular overlay to transform a Meta AI glasses ad featuring Kylie Jenner at a London bus stop, the group unveiled another ad showing the late Jeffrey Epstein wearing the glasses while being photographed for New York's sex offender registry. The caption reads: 'Glasses for people who don't do consent.'

Instagram, where many of the clips circulated, is also cracking down. Instagram head Adam Mosseri said videos shot on Meta glasses that feature harassment of strangers in public places are now banned on the platform, targeting the prank format that turned discreet recording into entertainment.

The controversy is already shaping competitor plans. According to Mashable, Apple is likely to wait until 2027 before unveiling its own smart glasses, partly because of extra work on privacy features and other product safeguards while Meta's glasses come under fire. Bloomberg reports that Apple views privacy as its top priority, with engineers and marketers seeking to distinguish its approach from Meta's. CNET's analysis goes further, arguing that Meta has now faced two waves of wearable backlash and has not learned the lessons from its VR era.

Why the 'Pervert Glasses' Backlash Is a Deeper Product Problem

The 'Pervert Glasses' Label Is a Behavior Problem, Not a Spec Problem

Names matter in consumer hardware, and 'pervert glasses' is more than a viral insult. It attaches a discreet camera to a real pattern: strangers filmed in public without consent and the clips converted into prank content. That is why the label has spread quickly and why Meta's response cannot stop at blocking individual videos. CNET's observation that Meta has absorbed two waves of wearable backlash points to a structural failure — the earlier VR era raised similar questions about safety and social acceptability, and the company is now confronting them again with a product worn openly on the face.

Everyone Hates Elon Puts the Fight on the Street

The group's two stunts show how product criticism can escape the platform where the problem started. The Kylie Jenner bus-stop ad made the controversy visible to people who do not follow tech news, and the Epstein ad escalated it with a deliberately provocative image. By pairing the glasses with a notorious sex offender and the line 'Glasses for people who don't do consent,' the campaign turns a hardware feature — recording — into a consent issue. For a consumer product that has to be worn in public, that association is a direct threat to adoption.

Apple's 2027 Timeline Gives It Both Cover and an Opening

If Apple's reported timeline is accurate, the delay lets Apple avoid the current controversy and complete the privacy work Bloomberg says is underway. It also means Apple can enter the market after Meta has absorbed much of the reputational damage. But the flip side is that a 2027 launch leaves the category exposed: if 'pervert glasses' remains the defining image of wearable cameras, slower consumer adoption will hit every player. Apple's privacy-first positioning could become a real differentiator if the company demonstrates safeguards that are measurably stricter than what Meta offers today.

Instagram's Ban Cuts Distribution, Not the Root Cause

Banning harassment videos on Instagram reduces the incentive to film strangers for laughs. The harm, however, happens at the moment of recording, not when the clip is uploaded. Meta's promised hardware safeguards are therefore the more meaningful response — but the reporting gives no specifics. Without visible, verifiable changes, the moderation rule may look like cleaning up after the fact while the product remains a device that can record people without their knowledge. Whether the fix is real will depend on what the glasses actually do differently, such as making recording more conspicuous or restricting it in sensitive settings.

What the Smart Glasses Backlash Means for Meta, Apple and Advertisers

• Meta: Publish specific details of the updated hardware safeguards and moderation rules. Vague promises will do little to counter an activist campaign that has already branded the product 'pervert glasses.'
• Apple: Use the reported 2027 runway to build and publicly demonstrate privacy features that are measurably different from Meta's current approach; a privacy message only works if consumers can see the difference.
• Brand partners and advertisers: The Kylie Jenner ad hijacking shows that out-of-home and influencer campaigns can be recontextualized by activists. Approval processes should include a wearable-camera scenario that tests how imagery could be turned against the product.
• Investors: Meta has not disclosed how the backlash is affecting Ray-Ban glasses sales. Its next quarterly earnings call is the scheduled moment to ask about smart-glasses demand, moderation outcomes and the status of hardware safeguards.