Kylie Jenner and Meta Deserve Each Other

Two figures with fading cultural influence can’t make AI cool. Just ask Timmy.

Photo collage featuring Mark Zuckerburg wearing Meta Ray-Ban sunglasses and Kylie Jenner smiling and leaning on his shoulder, inside of a heart shape on a gradient background.

Mother Jones illustration; Andrej Sokolow/dpa/Zuma, Starmax/Newscom/Zuma

Get your news from a source that’s not owned and controlled by oligarchs. Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily.

Long before today’s tech giants forced their way into co-chairing the Met Gala, Google co-founder Sergey Brin positioned himself in the front row of Diane von Furstenberg’s 2013 spring show, sporting an early prototype of what would be known as Google Glass. Von Furstenberg herself donned a pair of the wearable smartglasses as she directed models, some also wearing Google Glass, down the runway. It seemed like a promising partnership between a powerful tech company and the woman who popularized the iconic wrap dress.

Yet despite the celebrity-packed promotions, generous Vogue spreads, and proclamations of one of the “Best Inventions of the Year,” Google Glass infamously flopped. It turns out there wasn’t much clamoring for clunky lenses that did little more than take photos and send alerts of incoming text messages. Which is to say nothing about the intense privacy concerns the technology appeared to present.

In pushing AI technology, the Meta-Jenner partnership reads like a poor misreading of our cultural moment, as well as a willful disregard of just how badly Google Glass pissed off people a decade prior.

It was around this time that the public was introduced to King Kylie, the internet persona fans bestowed upon the youngest of the Kardashian-Jenner machine as a testament to her cultural clout. In fact, Kylie Jenner was seemingly everywhere in the mid-2010’s, with a social media dominance that in 2018 commanded $1 million per sponsored Instagram post and an immensely popular cosmetics line.

So it makes sense, in a way, that Meta, which owns Instagram, is now turning to a veteran of the platform to sell its new line of AI glasses. “Cutest night with @metaglasses! My meta glasses are out now,” Jenner posted in a carousel from a party in New York, where she celebrated this week with Mark Zuckerberg. One can only imagine the regret felt by Snapchat, which Jenner also gamely used to fuel her rise and is now in the AI glasses business, upon seeing Jenner palling around with Zuck.

Mark Zuckerberg wearing Meta sunglasses.
At the Meta Connect developer conference, Mark Zuckerberg, head of the Facebook group Meta, shows the prototype of computer glasses that can display digital objects in transparent lenses. Andrej Sokolow/dpa/Zuma

But outside Meta’s monied party on Tuesday, the reception has been scornful. “Meta glasses are cybertrucks for the face,” read a comment that has since gone viral. In fact, much of the negative feedback felt ripped straight from the criticism once aimed at Google Glass: “Mass surveillance predator glasses yesssss,” one user wrote on Jenner’s Instagram. “Legit people are putting others in danger with this technology.”

To be sure, Meta Glasses appear to avoid some of Google Glass’s pitfalls. For one, Meta’s glasses, designed in partnership with Ray-Ban parent company EssilorLuxottica, are more aesthetically pleasing than their Google forebearer. They’re also significantly cheaper, starting at $299. (Jenner’s limited Starfire edition is slightly more at $399.)

But in pushing AI technology, the Meta-Jenner partnership reads like a poor misreading of our cultural moment, as well as a willful disregard of just how badly Google Glass pissed off people a decade prior. After all, is there a bigger unifying force than our current animosity for AI? Just look at all the college graduates, perennially the demographic of cool in any given era, roasting AI en masse. When they’re forced to use it, Gen Z absolutely loathes it.

But the hostility runs far deeper than young people. People on both sides of the aisle are actively rejecting the data centers popping up in their backyards; we have near-universal agreement that the aesthetics of AI suck; and there’s outright antipathy for the billionaire overlords, Zuckerberg included, hoping to shove AI into every inch of the public sphere. It feels appropriate, then, that a company that has been stuck in cultural freefall is trying to make AI glasses happen, when the same, decade-old question—who even wants them?—still looms large.

As for Jenner, the influencer remains relevant, and a willingness to cozy up to the worst people in any given room appears to run in the family. But it’s Jenner’s ability to sell things—which is ostensibly the root goal of the Meta-Jenner partnership—that is far shakier in 2026: Kylie Cosmetics is nowhere near as popular as it once was, and Jenner’s clothing line, KHY, has yet to make an impact since launching in 2023. As for Jenner’s boyfriend, Timothée Chalamet, the actor was also at Tuesday’s event, though apparently not wanting to be seen and, perhaps even more notably, not wearing a pair of Meta Glasses.

Owned by no one—except you.

We just keep seeing it happen: Newsrooms owned by billionaires and corporations are spinning their own narratives, overwriting the truth, following only stories that keep them in the pocket of those with even more power.

Not here. We’re not owned by anyone. We’re not part of any cult that demands our allegiance to a bottom line. We’ve spoken up and spoken out while other newsrooms changed their stories—or cut them altogether—to keep the C suite happy.

Our mission is to find the truth and amplify it. That’s why we’re independent, nonprofit, and, crucially, funded by readers. The investigations on our website will always be free to read, watch, and listen to, but our newsroom is powered by readers who pitch in what they can so we can keep asking the hard questions.

Can you chip in today?

Owned by no one—except you.

We just keep seeing it happen: Newsrooms owned by billionaires and corporations are spinning their own narratives, overwriting the truth, following only stories that keep them in the pocket of those with even more power.

Not here. We’re not owned by anyone. We’re not part of any cult that demands our allegiance to a bottom line. We’ve spoken up and spoken out while other newsrooms changed their stories—or cut them altogether—to keep the C suite happy.

Our mission is to find the truth and amplify it. That’s why we’re independent, nonprofit, and, crucially, funded by readers. The investigations on our website will always be free to read, watch, and listen to, but our newsroom is powered by readers who pitch in what they can so we can keep asking the hard questions.

Can you chip in today?

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

INDEPENDENT. BECAUSE OF YOU.

Mother Jones has no billionaires calling the shots—just readers like you making fearless reporting possible

Donate