Saying it does not want to promote negative body comparisons, TikTok is cracking down on posts about disordered eating, dangerous weight loss habits and potentially harmful weight management products.

The wildly popular social media app updated its community guidelines last week, introducing a slate of rules that it hopes will make the platform a safer place for its roughly 1 billion users worldwide.

The initiative comes at a time when TikTok, which is owned by Beijing technology firm ByteDance, is facing increased scrutiny over its operations and content as it fights a potential ban in the U.S.

Weight loss videos make up a huge category on TikTok, with influencers extensively detailing and demonstrating how they slimmed down. Such videos have proliferated in the last few years with the rise of injectable prescription drugs such as Ozempic, Wegovy and Mounjaro, which many people are using to shed weight quickly.

Critics say the skyrocketing demand for the drugs has exposed the cracks in the body positivity movement, showing that there is still immense pressure to look thin at whatever cost. They say TikTok and Instagram, anti-aging filters, selfie culture and relentless celebrity and influencer self-promotion have all contributed to the problem.

TikTok already had policies around body image and disordered eating, but the updated guidelines explicitly break down such content into four categories: allowed; not allowed; restricted to users 18 and older; and ineligible for the “For You Feed,” TikTok’s personalized recommendation algorithm. They go into effect May 17.

The guidelines are intended to “improve understanding and bring greater transparency about our rules and how we enforce them,” Adam Presser, TikTok’s head of operations as well as the company’s trust and safety unit, said in a statement.

In the past, TikTok creators said they would sometimes see posts restricted or removed without understanding why they were flagged.

TikTok now clearly states that it bans videos “showing, describing, promoting, or offering or requesting coaching for disordered eating or dangerous weight-loss behaviors.”

The company defines those behaviors as extreme low-calorie diets, binging and intentional vomiting, misusing medication or supplements for weight loss and exercising through serious injuries or illness.

TikTok specifically called out content that shows or promotes unhealthy body measurements and “body checking” trends, such as comparing the size of body parts to household objects, as not allowed. Facilitating the trade or marketing of weight loss or muscle gain products is also on its way out.

Content that will be restricted to users 18 and older — and which will also be ineligible for the For You Feed — includes showing or promoting “potentially harmful weight-management behaviors” such as restrictive low-calorie diets; using medication or supplements for weight loss or muscle gain; and exercises designed for rapid and significant weight loss, such as “cardio routines that promise to help you lose a waist size in a week,” the company said.

TikTok also said it would restrict before-and-after transformation photos promoting weight loss and muscle gain products, as well as videos that promote body types as “ideal or perfect” when associated with potentially harmful weight management behaviors.

“We want TikTok to be a place that encourages self-esteem,” the company said.

Creators who have documented their weight loss journeys using the new class of trendy medications said they were disappointed by the crackdown. TikTok, they said, has become an important resource and close-knit community for people who have struggled for years to shed pounds and get healthy.

“I think countless amounts of lives have been saved by the ability to communicate about these medications,” said Kelsey Martinez, 32, who began posting about using Mounjaro, a medication intended to treat Type 2 diabetes, to lose weight in September 2022. She weighed 232 pounds when she started using the weekly injectable; by last fall, she was down to 153.

“It’s giving people who are obese access and that’s something we don’t always have,” said Martinez, who lives in Los Angeles and has 296,000 TikTok followers. “So I think it’s going to be very harmful. You’re just shutting down and secluding a group of people that is already so used to being shamed and put in a corner.”

A spokesperson for TikTok said content about medically necessary health interventions under the guidance of a medical or health professional is allowed, including discussions about glucagon-like peptide 1 medications, which includes the diabetes drug Ozempic. The spokesperson added that content about using GLP-1 medications for weight loss could still be discovered in other ways, such as through search tools or by following an account, even if it is ineligible for the For You Feed.

Showing or describing competitive eating contests; fitness routines, sports and nutrition that are not primarily focused on extreme weight loss, marathon training or bodybuilding competitions; and religious diet behavior and fasting will still be allowed.

TikTok users will be permitted to condemn disordered eating, dangerous weight loss behaviors or potentially harmful weight management “as long as it does not show or describe a diet or behavior,” the company said.

Michelle York, a full-time content creator from Moorpark, said she understood that the app is in a “really tough spot” right now as it faces a divest-or-ban bill in the U.S., where it has 170 million users.

“TikTok is under a big microscope, and they need to go out of their way to make sure it’s a safe space,” York, 40, said. But “I think they’re overcompensating by making these new guidelines.”

Even though she believes her content is beneficial and far from promoting “get-thin-quick supplements,” and despite her follower base of 203,000 people imploring her to keep the weight loss content coming, she has already turned some of her old Mounjaro videos private and will focus even more on lifestyle and beauty content going forward.

“It’s really disheartening to be told I can’t share that here anymore, and now it’s at risk of my platform, which I worked so hard to build,” York said. “The problem is, this is now my job — I rely on this as my income and I can’t post things to jeopardize that.”

TikTok’s latest community guidelines also include new and updated definitions on the company’s policies around hate speech and health misinformation.

In announcing the updated rules, TikTok said it would introduce a “warning strike” when a creator violates the platform’s community guidelines for the first time.

“The warning strike does not count toward an account’s strike tally, but any future violations will,” Presser said. “We notify creators about which rule they’ve broken and how they can appeal if they believe a mistake has been made. Zero-tolerance policies (for example, incitement to violence) aren’t eligible for these reminders; accounts will immediately be banned.”

Harvey Weinstein’s accusers and opponents of sexual violence in Hollywood and beyond are speaking out against the reversal of the disgraced movie mogul’s rape conviction in New York.

Ashley Judd, Mira Sorvino and others who have accused the former Hollywood producer of sexual misconduct condemned a New York court of appeals’ decision on Thursday to overturn the verdict.

Weinstein has been serving a 23-year sentence since he was convicted in 2020 of rape and a felony sex crime after allegedly assaulting former production assistant Mimi Haley and once-aspiring actor Jessica Mann.

“This today is an act of institutional betrayal. And our institutions betray survivors of male sexual violence,” Judd said during a news conference at the Millennium Hilton hotel in New York . “I stand shoulder to shoulder with women who have bloody knees because male sexual violence may knock us down, but we get right back up. And together we are in the struggle for freedom from male entitlement to our bodies.”

“This is unfair to survivors,” Judd added on her Instagram story. “We live in our truth. We know what happened.”

Tarana Burke, founder of the #MeToo movement, remarked during the news conference that “moments like this underscore why movements are necessary and … why we keep going.”

“We are devastated for the survivors who are connected to this case and the survivors who have found some solace and catharsis in the original verdict,” Burke said. “We will always stand with resolve and resilience. … This is not a blow to the movement. It is a clarion call, and we are prepared to answer that call.”

The New York appeals court found, in a 4-3 decision, that the judge who presided over Weinstein’s trial prejudiced the case by allowing four women who said Weinstein had assaulted them to serve as witnesses, even though their allegations were not part of the case.

The trial judge also made a mistake, the court determined, in permitting prosecutors to question Weinstein about uncharged and decades-old allegations if he decided to testify.

Weinstein was also convicted of rape in California and the New York ruling will have no practical effect on his imprisonment.

Sorvino wrote on X that she was “horrified” by the news, which surfaced during Sexual Assault Awareness Month.

“Since when don’t courts allow evidence of pattern of prior bad acts to be admitted?” Sorvino said. “He’s a prolific serial predator who raped/harmed 200+women! Disgusted w/justice system [skew toward] predators not victims.”

Weinstein has denied all allegations of sexual assault.

The Silence Breakers — a coalition of 23 women who have accused Weinstein of sexual misconduct that includes actors Judd, Rose McGowan and Rosanna Arquette — issued a statement calling the reversal “disheartening” and “profoundly unjust.”

“This ruling does not diminish the validity of our experiences or our truth; it’s merely a setback,” the Silence Breakers said.

“The man found guilty continues to serve time in a California prison. When survivors everywhere broke their silence in 2017, the world changed. We continue to stand strong and advocate for that change. We will continue to fight for justice for survivors everywhere.”

Anita Hill, chair and president of the Hollywood Commission, said in a statement that Thursday’s reversal evinces “a lack of progress in addressing the power imbalances that allow abuse to occur” and proves that “sexual assault continues to be a pervasive problem.”

“Many survivors do not pursue justice because they believe nothing will be done,” Hill added.

“Today’s decision underscores the urgent need for systemic changes in our institutions — and redoubles our commitment to survivors to push for the policies and systems that will ensure accountability and bring about workplaces free from the behavior that drives the need for these systems in the first place.”

Attorney Douglas Wigdor — who has represented eight Weinstein accusers, including two of the witnesses at the New York criminal trial — denounced Thursday’s decision as “a major step back in holding those accountable for acts of sexual violence.”

“Courts routinely admit evidence of other uncharged acts where they assist juries in understanding issues concerning the intent, modus operandi or scheme of the defendant,” Wigdor said in a statement.

“The jury was instructed on the relevance of this testimony and overturning the verdict is tragic in that it will require the victims to endure yet another trial.”

In a statement provided to The Times, a spokesperson for the Manhattan district attorney’s office said, “We will do everything in our power to retry this case, and remain steadfast in our commitment to survivors of sexual assault.”

Times staff writer Jenny Jarvie contributed to this report.

Detergent and deodorant, toothpaste, the entire shampoo aisle.

“It’s all locked up,” Corey Potter sighed, describing shelves encased behind security glass at a Target near her Echo Park home. “I hate it.”

Potter recalled once waiting 15 minutes for an employee to unlock a case at another Target location. These days, if she sees several other shoppers waiting for too few frenzied workers, the 30-year-old video editor typically skips items on her list and later does something she doesn’t feel great about: buys more home essentials on Amazon.

“Rather than go to Target and wait,” she said, shrugging, “I’ll just give Daddy Bezos my hard-earned cash.”

Shoplifting is as old as shopping itself. And retailers have long played a game of cat and mouse with thieves, searching for ways to thwart them while still giving paying customers easy access to merchandise.

The true severity and scope of the problem remain an enduring mystery of the free market, as national chains eagerly point to retail theft as a key drag on profits, but are reticent to publicly discuss internal numbers on shrink — the industry term for theft and other types of loss — or specifics of new anti-theft measures. Adding to the murkiness, the issue has become more politicized in recent years as some voters and elected officials in Los Angeles, San Francisco and other city centers clamor for a response to what they see as a worsening problem.

But what is clear to anyone who has shopped at a drug, grocery or home improvement store in L.A. in recent years is that retailers are increasingly resorting to the drastic step of barricading entire swaths of their stores behind lock and key.

Using a tactic once reserved for a few pricey, high-demand items — cold medication, electronics, baby formula and razors to name a few — big chains now routinely lock up almost every type of merchandise. A shopper looking to grab a box of condoms or a $1.99 set of crayons, ointment to remove calluses or a container of instant coffee, now often has no choice but to hit a button to summon a store employee with a key and wait.

Executives focused on their companies’ bottom lines are no happier about taking the drastic step to deter shoplifters. Although they’re in the business of selling as much as possible, they’ve been left to make the seemingly backward calculation that thefts require them to make it harder for paying customers to buy things.

“Locking a product,” a spokesperson for CVS said in an email, “is a measure of last resort.”

Retail theft has become a priority for California leaders in recent years.

In September, Gov. Gavin Newsom sent $267 million to cities and counties to increase arrests and prosecutions of organized retail crimes. A few weeks earlier, L.A. Mayor Karen Bass announced a task force focused on such crimes, following a string of robberies at high-end stores such as Gucci and Yves Saint Laurent that garnered a flurry of media attention and helped further cement a new phrase into the zeitgeist: A smash-and-grab.

In February, California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta filed criminal charges against a woman he called the ringleader of a retail theft group prosecutors say stole nearly $8 million in beauty products to resell on her Amazon storefront. And last week, the coalition behind a tough-on-crime ballot initiative that would roll back the landmark Proposition 47 by stiffening penalties for some retail thefts in California submitted enough signatures that it appears the measure will go before voters in November.

The initiative was bankrolled largely by big chains, including Walmart, Target and Home Depot.

While the companies work publicly to change California law, they are taciturn about discussing their efforts to stop shoplifters, making it hard to quantify how much more merchandise is now locked up and which stores have embraced the strategy.

Representatives for several of the region’s largest retailers — Target, Vons, Rite Aid and CVS — either didn’t respond to requests to discuss internal deliberations on stemming theft or sent brief statements about their anti-theft measures.

David Johnston, vice president of asset protection and retail operations at the National Retail Federation, said that locking up more merchandise is “an unfortunate necessity” to combat theft and what he characterized as a rise in organized retail crime and violent incidents in stores.

Retailers know that the additional supplies and labor needed to lock up more merchandise cut into their bottom line and frustrate customers, Johnston said, but some have decided it’s a necessary trade-off to keep shelves stocked with often-stolen items such as baby formula and medications.

“Right now, the best approach in many instances is putting it behind lock and key,” Johnston said. “These measures are last-ditch efforts.”

Joe Budano, the chief executive of Indyme, a San Diego-based company that makes buttons to beckon sales associates to specific aisles, estimated that frustration over waiting for locked merchandise leads to a 10% to 25% reduction in sales, calling the cages “the bane of retail.”

His company also has developed technology — the Freedom Case, they call it — that allows shoppers to open cases themselves using personal information such as their cellphone number or by scanning their face.

The Freedom Case, technology developed by a San Diego-based company called Indyme, allows shoppers to open locked merchandise themselves using personal information such as their cellphone number.

(Joseph Budano)

Advertisement

More than 40 retailers are testing the Freedom Case in stores, Budano said, including a national chain he declined to name.

To combat theft, Budano said, companies often scrutinize missing merchandise using individual SKUs, the most granular data possible.

“They know all the way down to which flavor of Oil of Olay is most stolen,” he said. “The pace at which things have gotten locked up tells you the magnitude of the problem.”

But that magnitude — which retail industry groups say has reached “unprecedented” and “epidemic” levels, despite data showing such characterizations are overblown — varies by city.

The Council on Criminal Justice, a nonpartisan research organization, tracked shoplifting trends in 24 cities from 2019 to the middle of 2023 and found that rates were down in more than two-thirds of the cities. New York City and L.A. were the two biggest exceptions, logging increases of 64% and 61%, respectively.

Even in light of the recent surge in L.A., the rate of reported shoplifting incidents in L.A. County in late 2022 was slightly lower than it had been 2014, according to a report from the Public Policy Institute of California, a nonpartisan think tank that analyzed state Department of Justice statistics. During that eight-year period, only three of the state’s 15 most populous counties — all in the San Francisco Bay Area — saw increased rates of shoplifting, a misdemeanor crime defined as stealing goods valued at less than $950.

The report’s author, Magnus Lofstrom, said that rates of reported shoplifting dropped in much of the state, including L.A. County, when stores emptied out during the 2020 shutdowns. But the region saw a steady rise in the summer of 2021, he said, and by late 2022, the most recent data at the time of his report, the rate was at least 10% above the pre-pandemic level.

In recent months, several companies, including the 99 Cents Only chain and Target, have cited theft or shrink as a reason that factored into their decisions to shutter locations.

Charis Kubrin, a professor of criminology at UC Irvine who studies retail theft, said that although some stores lock up lots of merchandise, others cage almost nothing.

“It’s kind of an uneven distribution,” she said. “A mixed bag.”

A Times analysis from 2022 found that stores in higher-income areas locked up fewer items even in places where property crime rates were higher, creating an additional burden for shoppers in certain neighborhoods. And inconsistencies in how locked merchandise is released to customers — sometimes workers hand you items to put in your cart, other times they escort merchandise to the register — raise the same questions of racial profiling that have long plagued retail establishments.

“The owners and employees have wide-scale discretion,” Kubrin noted.

Security devices at Walgreens are designed to slow down shoplifters.

(Hugo Martin / Los Angeles Times)

Advertisement

The scale of merchandise theft, Kubrin added, is sometimes overblown by a retail industry happy to pin its problems, which include market forces such as inflation and a shift to online shopping, on stolen merchandise.

Crime, she acknowledged, is part of the equation. As a consumer, Kubrin distilled her frustration with locked merchandise down to the same word many other shoppers used: “Annoying.”

A man posted on TikTok recently that CVS was treating a bag of Werther’s Original caramel candies like a controlled substance and on Reddit someone said the anti-theft measures should force an entire genre of retailer to rebrand themselves:

“Inconvenience store.”

In interviews with five employees at retail locations across the Southland, workers said rushing to unlock merchandise for often-peeved customers has made their slammed shifts more hectic.

“I apologize a lot and I get yelled at a lot,” said a supervisor at a Vons in Pasadena.

But several workers said they understood their employers’ decisions, noting that around late 2021 or early 2022, they’d noticed an uptick in people putting multiples of a single piece of merchandise into big bags and walking out — boosters, as they call shoplifters they suspect will resell the merchandise.

The criminal complaint filed by Bonta’s office this year included text messages suggesting that the defendants, who prosecutors say targeted beauty retailers Ulta and Sephora, used that method.

“I’m not stealing regular I’m going to start filling up my bag quick,” one defendant wrote. “I want to know stuff I can grab.”

Rogelio Madrigal, a shift supervisor at a CVS in San Pedro, started 16 years ago and has noticed changes through the years.

There was a time, he said, when the main thing they locked up was Sudafed. Eventually, items such as Plan B and razors got added and then, a couple years ago, he noticed more people swiping Tide Pods. Now, he mainly sees people walk out with boxes of diapers and cosmetics.

Laundry detergent items are stored in the Freedom Case.

(Joseph Budano)

“It was happening before,” he said, “but not as bad as now.”

On a recent morning at a Rite Aid in East Hollywood, the lone cashier greeted customers who walked through a doorway lined with security alarm panels.

“Welcome in,” he said.

Many of the aisles were lined with anti-theft mechanisms, including red magnets at the end of metal prongs holding items like eyelash curlers and an individual plastic cage around a $22 box of lice treatment. Some sections, including all the toothpaste and most of the detergent, were locked behind long, clear cages.

A customer steadying himself with a cane peeked through a cage at a bottle of Tide and shrugged, settling instead on a small container of Persil, one of the few non-caged detergents, before walking to the register.

At a nearby Vons, the greeting cards and candy were out on shelves, but an assortment of school supplies, including a ruler for $1.47, was locked up.

In the medication aisle, a woman with a full cart sighed when she realized that one of the last items she needed — a small bottle of Claritin, an allergy medication — was locked up. She pressed the button and an automated refrain that, during busy hours, rings out like the store’s soundtrack played: “Thank you, someone will be with you shortly.”

Less than a minute later, when a worker with a key ring rounded the corner, her eyes widened in surprise.

“That was fast!” she told him.

“We try,” he said.