On Bluesky, posts regularly suggest that people who wear “pervert glasses” be punched in the face. The criticism of eye-worn gadgets capable of surveillance isn’t new, though the online discourse — “Meta Glasses” repeatedly trended on Meta’s own Threads app last week, for the wrong reasons — seems to have intensified following the release of Meta’s latest cheaper lineup, as well as reports about an unreleased facial recognition feature for the product. For whatever reason, this time the backlash seems to be having a real effect.
Engadget spoke with five creators, photographers and others who were once enthusiastic about Meta’s smart glasses about how public perception has changed their habits.
“A lot of men and their behaviors have ruined this product,” Danielle, a Florida-based creator and travel host who asked to be identified by first name only, told Engadget. Initially she enjoyed using her smart glasses for capturing travel content from the international trips she hosts. Then she read a story about how contractors working for Meta said they had been tasked with reviewing intimate images and other sensitive details captured by glasses owners.
Further reporting of men using Meta-branded glasses to film videos of themselves harassing women in public sealed the deal. She says she hasn’t used them since. “I wouldn’t feel comfortable around somebody wearing them, so I wouldn’t expect anybody to be comfortable around me wearing them, no matter where I am.
“At this point, they’re like a fancy paper weight,” she says.
Other creators who have previously purchased the frames now say they are using the product less often due to fears that people around them will assume they’re doing something “creepy.”
Christian Eisenbarth is a Los Angeles-based videographer who was gifted a pair of Ray-Ban Meta glasses by his girlfriend. He says that while he had previously been eyeing a pair for use on his video shoots, he has yet to use them outside of his home “mainly due to being afraid of being labeled as a creep.” That fear has so far outweighed his personal enthusiasm for the product. “It’s awesome to have a true POV perspective, and you can record without having to mess with a rig on your camera, or something strapped to your chest,” he said.
Everyone who spoke with Engadget reported feeling somewhat conflicted about Meta’s smart glasses. They all believed they had used the product responsibly and that the product, which starts at $224 for the first-gen model, is well-designed. They also all expressed some level of discomfort with Meta’s privacy practices and people who have misused the tech.
Martino Wong is a creator and self-described tech enthusiast who was an early adopter of Ray-Ban Meta glasses. Wong, who says he primarily uses his sunglasses for phone calls and for recording product videos, says the privacy backlash seems to be more prominent in English-speaking spaces on the internet, but that it has still had an effect on him.
“I’ve been a little bit more mindful of them, especially in more crowded environments,” he said. “There have been times in which I basically fold them up and hang them on my shirt, so as to show more clearly that I’m not actively using them.”
Will Kujawa, a freelance video producer, said that he has been thinking about buying a pair of Meta glasses with prescription lenses to film behind the scenes content during his shoots, but the online backlash has given him second thoughts. He says he was “blown away by how mean some of the people were” in response to his social media posts about considering buying a pair.
“I saw all these comments about if you wear those glasses you’re basically a predator or a creep, and I was like, ‘oh, maybe it’s not a good idea to have those,'” he told Engadget. But he says he understands why people have concerns. “I didn’t really think that through all the way … there are a lot of times where it’s not appropriate to wear cameras on your face. And even though I would have no intention of do[ing] anything creepy with them, it didn’t even occur to me [that] other people just assume that automatically.”
Kujawa said he still thinks he might buy a pair to use on his video shoots, but that he would plan on carrying a backup pair of regular prescription glasses just in case. “It does make me more cautious,” he said. “I don’t think I would wear them everywhere or all the time.”
No one who spoke with Engadget reported experiencing unwanted comments or interactions related to their smart glasses in real life, though they were all acutely aware of the negative online discourse. Many said they would welcome more enhanced privacy features, like a more prominent LED when the camera is in use.
Jeremy, a professional photographer who also owns a brand consultancy, told Engadget his usage habits haven’t changed despite negative associations — he mainly listens to music or records family videos with them. But Jeremy, who also asked to be referred to by first name only, said he has turned off cloud uploads and tried to use the most restrictive privacy settings possible. “Facebook hasn’t done a lot of good in the world,” he said. “I totally understand the backlash.”
At the same time, he believes that conversations about privacy and surveillance go beyond one company and one product. “It’s easy to have outrage over a thing that you can point to really clearly, but I think it’s a lot harder to come to terms with the fact that we’re all being recorded all the time.”
Meta sold more than 7 million pairs of co-branded glasses in 2025. It just added a new lineup without Ray-Ban branding and will likely show off additional frames before the end of the year. A sustained privacy backlash could damage that momentum.
This week, Meta announced that it was issuing a mandatory software update to all of its smart glasses that would disable the device’s camera if the LED light is physically tampered with. The company also said it would take legal action against people who promote LED-tampering services. The update follows several reports about the cottage industry that’s sprung up around Meta glasses “hacks.” Many of these services, which use simple tools like drills and dental probes to disable the recording light, have been advertised on Meta’s own platforms. There are also dozens of videos on YouTube offering DIY tutorials.
The change, which was announced in an privacy-focused FAQ, is the clearest acknowledgement by the company of the privacy-related backlash; at the same time, it has made few other concessions. In a privacy FAQ published this week, Meta was non-committal about specific new features. In a section headlined “will more privacy features be coming to glasses?” the company gave only vague assurances:
“As our glasses become more capable and common, our teams continue to work on ways to make them even safer and more trustworthy,” it said. “We set a high standard for our AI glasses because we believe it’s an essential component of any good technology.”
