Instagram and Threads users will see less of what their parent company Meta defines as “political content” in their recommendations and feed suggestions unless they opt into it.
The social media giant announced that the topic of politics will be automatically limited from people’s suggested posts in Explore, Reels, Feed Recommendations, and Suggested Users.
Although the change won’t affect the content from accounts that someone follows, the “extraordinary move” will still have “far-reaching and significant consequences for the public discourse”, said CNN.
What has Meta done?
“If you decide to follow accounts that post political content, we don’t want to get between you and their posts,” Meta said in a blog post, “but we also don’t want to proactively recommend political content from accounts you don’t follow.” So the company “won’t proactively recommend content about politics on recommendation surfaces across Instagram and Threads”.
So, to “clarify”, said Teen Vogue: “This policy specifically impacts content from accounts you don’t follow, meaning those you might stumble upon in ‘recommended’ posts or on your Explore page, or are recommended as an IG Reel”.
Why has it done this?
As far back as 2021, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg said during a financial results conference call that “one of the top pieces of feedback we’re hearing from our community” was that “people don’t want politics and fighting to take over their experience on our services”.
In 2023, The Wall Street Journal reported that, following the 6 January Capitol insurrection in Washington, Meta wanted to “scale back how much political content it showed users”. It came in the wake of widespread criticism that its platforms spread disinformation and hate speech.
In a conversation on Threads with The Verge‘s Alex Heath last year, Instagram boss Adam Mosseri admitted that although “politics and hard news are important”, any “incremental engagement or revenue they might drive is not at all worth the scrutiny, negativity (let’s be honest), or integrity risks that come along with them”.
Political content on social media has indeed been the subject of some scrutiny. Last year, X, formerly Twitter, was labelled the “worst major platform for disinformation in Europe” by regulators after it disabled a tool for reporting fake political news, reported The Times.
What is ‘political content’?
The definition of political content is “vague”, said Time. “No one knows what they define as ‘political’,” said CNN. A spokesman for Meta said that “our definition of political content is content likely to be about topics related to government or elections; for example, posts about laws, elections, or social topics. These global issues are complex and dynamic, which means this definition will evolve.”
What has the reaction been?
The move has “quickly raised alarm among many who questioned the scope and rationale in the run-up to a high-stakes election”, said CNN. TechCrunch questioned whether the new system could even work. Politics was still “dominating” Threads after President Joe Biden’s state of the union address, it said. If users have “a real-time platform”, where they can “dash off quick reactions as short, text posts, they’re likely going to use that platform to talk about whatever the news of the day happens to be”.
Some users believe that Meta is “actively muzzling civic action”, with “widespread allegations of a particular crackdown on pro-Palestinian voices” amid the “ongoing war in Gaza”, said Time.
But “on balance”, said Social Media Today, “removing politics entirely makes sense”. Since implementing content recommendations, Facebook and Instagram usage has “increased”, with “up to 40%” of the content that users are shown in the app now coming through that route, which suggests that people are “responding well to entertainment-based content”, while “politics brings more headaches”.
Critics say Meta’s ‘extraordinary move’ to have less politics in users’ feeds could be ‘actively muzzling civic action’
