Content creators ask Meta to withdraw from Instagram and limit political threads

The decision raised concerns for users who post about social issues such as LGBTQ rights, women’s rights, racial inequality, and disability. Independent journalists and content creators have also said they have struggled to reach audiences in recent weeks since the changes were introduced. They say the restrictions disproportionately impact Black, women, disabled and LGBTQ creators.

The letter suggests that rather than changing default settings on all accounts to limit political content, Meta should offer users the opportunity to opt-in to such restrictions.

“As users of Meta’s platform, we did not choose to automatically opt out of receiving suggested political content about civic engagement and breaking news,” the letter said. “Removing political recommendations as a default setting, and thus preventing people from seeing suggested political content, poses a serious threat to political engagement, education, and activism.”

Under the new restrictions, political content includes any content that touches on politics, or, in Mehta’s words, “topics that affect groups of people or society as a whole.” These topics include posts about racism and ableism, as well as content about LGBTQ and women’s rights. Many creators also report that the filter restricts content on other seemingly unrelated topics.

Kai Polanco, co-founder of @Feminist, an Instagram news page dedicated to women and abortion rights, said the change is devastating. The week Meta enacted the limits, she saw the number of users on her account plummet from her 10 million to her 800,000. Polanco said she has also received reports from other accounts that have posted similar issues that they have seen a significant drop in viewership.

“This negatively impacts people’s access to information and their ability to find accurate information,” she says.

The letter was sponsored by Accountable Tech, a nonprofit whose mission is to “curtail the social harm caused by Big Tech’s harmful business practices,” and LGBTQ rights organization GLAAD. LGBTQ creators are particularly concerned about the restrictions, as they come as some states place restrictions on medical care for transgender youth.

“Categorizing ‘social topics that affect groups of people or society as a whole’ as ‘political content’ is an appalling practice,” GLAAD said in a statement. “The lives of LGBTQ people are just that: our lives. Our lives are not ‘political content’ or political fodder. This is a dangerous practice that not only suppresses LGBTQ voices, but also drastically reduces the opportunities for LGBTQ people to connect with each other and allies as our content is filtered out from algorithms. ”

“In the year of the largest global election in history, hundreds of millions of users remain without access to important news content, while restricting the reach of creators without notice or definition of what constitutes ‘political content.’ , threatening their identities and livelihoods,” said Nicole Gill. Co-founder and executive director of Accountable Tech. “As a result of today’s fragmented media environment, which Meta helped create, social media platforms have tremendous influence over how information is presented and disseminated, and this decision has negative implications for both those on and off the platforms. It will have an impact.”

Measuring the impact of policy changes is difficult. Meta does not provide details on how many posts were affected by its political policies, and it is impossible to know how many times an account was recommended under the previous policy.

Meta spokesperson Andy Stone said the changes affect only the recommendation system and “expand on our long-standing work on how we approach and treat political content based on what people want.” ”. And from now on, people will be able to control whether or not these types of posts are recommended. ”

Some news organizations, including the Washington Post, posted instructions on how their followers can opt out of the restrictions. But at least some users who opted out still reported seeing less content about political and social issues in their feeds.

George Lee, a Texas native who has more than 470,000 followers on Instagram, posts about laws and issues that affect race, class and gender, and says he has seen his own changes since the policy went into effect. He said the number of comments, likes and video impressions on his posts have decreased by about 50 percent. It takes effect. “Black, brown, transgender and gender non-conforming people will be pushed further into the margins of social media,” said Lee, who was nominated for an NAACP Image Award last year. “It’s going to impact the visibility of these creators, and it’s going to impact what kind of brand deals they can get.”

Critics of the ban say it restricts content that challenges the status quo. Lee cited a theoretical post about Thanksgiving as an example. Under Meta’s current restrictions, posts celebrating Thanksgiving and its history are not considered political content. But he said posts that challenge the premise of the holiday or talk about its connection to discrimination against Native Americans could be considered political.

“I didn’t politicize it because I’m black. Someone else did,” Lee said. “When I talked about being an ally to the LGBTQ community and women, I didn’t politicize it, someone else politicized it. I think it will leave a terrible impact.”

This isn’t the first time Meta has tried to restrict content related to political topics. When the company introduced Threads last year, it blocked dozens of words from search, including all terms related to the coronavirus, vaccines, and long-term COVID-19 infections, during a major virus surge, and helped protect public health. It received harsh criticism from experts. The company has since allowed searches for terms related to the pandemic, but other terms such as “porn” are still blocked from search. This limits the reach of news articles on topics such as the dangers of revenge porn, those affected say.

Polanco said Mehta had previously restricted the @Feminist account. After the account raised $100,000 for abortion rights in 2021, Meta disabled its fundraising features and is no longer able to solicit donations after a Supreme Court reversal. Roe vs. Wade Polanco said functionality was restored after several months of back and forth with Meta, but Meta did not explain why it was restricted.