Table of Contents

As app developers, we all want to create safe, engaging spaces for our users. But let’s face it – content moderation is one of those critical features that often feels like a necessary evil. Whether you’re building a social platform, a content creation tool, or anything in between, if your app includes user-generated content, both Apple and Google require you to implement reporting and moderation systems.

The traditional approaches to content moderation haven’t been great. Manual review is painfully time-consuming and doesn’t scale. Basic heuristics like “hide content after three reports” are better than nothing, but they’re prone to abuse and can be frustratingly imprecise. Enter AI-powered moderation – specifically, OpenAI’s free Moderation API.

Why Consider Automated Moderation?

The Moderation API is a game-changer for developers. It analyzes content across multiple categories – from harassment and hate speech to violence and sexual content – and returns detailed scores for each. But the real magic lies in how you can integrate it into your workflow.

Proactive vs. Reactive Implementation

You have two main approaches to implementation:

  1. Proactive Moderation: Check content before it goes live. This is ideal for platforms where problematic content could have downstream effects. At Podcraftr, we implemented this because we distribute content to various podcast platforms and want to catch issues early.

  2. Reactive Moderation: Run checks when content is reported. This works well for social platforms where you want to balance free expression with community safety.

Real-World Implementation: Lessons from Podcraftr

Let me share a recent experience that highlights both the power and the importance of fine-tuning these systems. When we first implemented the Moderation API at Podcraftr, we encountered an interesting challenge.

Our initial implementation was straightforward:

  1. Run content through the Moderation API
  2. Send the results to an LLM along with our content policy
  3. Get back a pass/fail decision with improvement suggestions

The results? About 4% of our existing content got flagged – way higher than expected. Digging deeper, we found the culprit: true crime podcasts. The API was correctly identifying violent content, but it wasn’t distinguishing between content that depicted violence and content that discussed violence in an appropriate context.

Fine-Tuning for Your Use Case

This highlights one of the API’s best features: customizable thresholds. We adjusted our implementation by:

  1. Raising the threshold specifically for violence-related content
  2. Keeping stricter thresholds for other categories
  3. Using an LLM to provide context-aware feedback when content is flagged

After these adjustments, our false positive rate dropped significantly while maintaining strong protection against truly problematic content.

Implementation Tips

Here’s a simplified version of how we implemented this at Podcraftr:

class ContentModerator
  # Custom thresholds for different content categories
  THRESHOLD_CATEGORIES = {
    'harassment' => true,          # Any flag fails
    'hate' => true,               # Any flag fails
    'violence' => 0.7,            # Higher threshold for violence
    'self-harm' => 0.5,           # Medium threshold
    'sexual/minors' => 0.3        # Very strict threshold
  }.freeze

  def moderate_content(content)
    # Get moderation results from OpenAI
    moderation_results = AI::ModerationService.call(content)

    # Extract scores and category flags
    category_scores = moderation_results.dig('results', 0, 'category_scores')
    categories = moderation_results.dig('results', 0, 'categories')

    # Check each category against our custom thresholds
    THRESHOLD_CATEGORIES.each do |category, threshold|
      score = category_scores[category]
      flag = categories[category]

      if (threshold == true && flag) ||
         (threshold.is_a?(Numeric) && score > threshold)
        # Content failed moderation, get detailed analysis from LLM
        return get_llm_interpretation(content, moderation_results)
      end
    end

    # Content passed all threshold checks
    {
      passed: true,
      summary: 'Content passed automated moderation checks.'
    }
  end
end

This implementation showcases several key features:

  1. Custom Thresholds: We set different sensitivity levels for different categories. For example:

    • Zero tolerance for harassment and hate speech (true means any flag fails)
    • Higher threshold (0.7) for violence to accommodate true crime content
    • Very strict threshold (0.3) for content involving minors

  2. Two-Stage Process:

    • First pass uses OpenAI’s Moderation API with custom thresholds
    • If content is flagged, a second pass uses an LLM to provide detailed analysis and recommendations

Best Practices

  1. Start Conservative: Begin with lower thresholds and adjust based on your data.
  2. Monitor and Adjust: Regularly review flagged content to fine-tune your thresholds.
  3. Provide Clear Feedback: Use LLM-generated explanations to help users understand why their content was flagged.
  4. Consider Context: Different types of content may need different thresholds.

Conclusion

Implementing content moderation doesn’t have to be a headache. With tools like OpenAI’s Moderation API, we can create safer platforms without sacrificing user experience or drowning in manual review processes. The key is to start with the basic implementation and then tune it to your specific needs.

Remember, the goal isn’t just to meet app store requirements – it’s to build trust with your users by creating a safe, welcoming environment for them to engage with your app.

Have you implemented automated moderation in your app? I’d love to hear about your experience in the comments below.