Creators to Meta: Adjust your political content policy!
Creators call on Meta to adjust its new political content limitation policy on Instagram and Threads, and more youth vote in the news.
Statistics and anecdotal evidence have shown the power of Instagram as a primary source of news and information for Generation Z. So in February, political content creators, activists, and operatives behind civic news accounts (especially those with an eye toward younger audiences) grew frustrated when they learned Meta had started to limit political-related content on Instagram and Threads — just as the 2024 cycle heats up.
Instead of allowing users to opt into a feature that would “limit political content from people you don’t follow,” Meta automatically turned this feature on for all accounts, restricting the reach of posts about politics and civics beyond the gaze of those who already followed those types of accounts.
In turn, more than 200 creators signed onto a letter — organized by Accountable Tech, a nonprofit big tech reform advocacy organization, and GLAAD, a nonprofit LGBTQ advocacy organization — sent to Meta that called on the tech giant to adjust its policy.
“Meta’s platforms have a responsibility to be an open and safe space for dialogue, conversation, and discussion,” the creators wrote in their “open letter,” addressed to Adam Mosseri, the heads of Instagram.
“Rather than unilaterally changing the default settings of accounts to limit political content without transparency to users across platforms, Meta should instead empower users to opt-out of seeing suggested political content. As users of Meta’s platforms, we did not choose to automatically opt-out of receiving suggested political content on civic activism and news updates. Removing political recommendations as a default setting, and consequently stopping people from seeing suggested political content poses a serious threat to political engagement, education, and activism.”
As Taylor Lorenz, who covers tech and online culture at The Washington Post and the author of Extremely Online: The Untold Story of Fame, Influence, and Power, wrote: “[Meta’s] decision has alarmed users who post about social issues, including LGBTQ rights, women’s rights, racial inequality and disability. And independent journalists and content creators say they’ve struggled to reach their audiences in recent weeks since the change was rolled out. The limits, they say, have significantly affected creators who are Black, female, disabled and LGBTQ.”
According to Lorenz’s reporting: “Meta spokesman Andy Stone said the change affects only the recommendation systems and ‘expands on years of work on how we approach and treat political content based on what people have told us they wanted. And now, people are going to be able to control whether they would like to have these types of posts recommended to them.’”
To learn more about how they’re feeling about Meta’s political content limitations, I checked in with three political and civic news creators (by text and via phone) who have a wide reach with young people. All three signed onto Accountable Tech and GLAAD’s open letter.
Here’s some of what they had to say:
V Spehar, @underthedesknews, 397K followers on Instagram
📲 “My thoughts on Meta are this: prior to the change in auto opting folks out of ‘political content’ I was gaining tens of thousands of followers and genuinely considering reels and Meta as a priority platform. That all came to a full stop. Meta is in fact being political, by allowing the status quo and their singular version of what’s worthy to talk about reign. It’s authoritarian and not in the spirit of a ‘social media’ platform,” Spehar said in a text message.
“My rise in followers tells me folks are seeking info about politics especially right now in an election year and with all the abortion and trans bans.”
Sam Weinberg, founder of @path2progress, 227K followers on Instagram
📲 “Even before Meta’s official policy was announced and even before users had the option to toggle between seeing more or less political content, we saw significantly less engagement on Instagram, especially with non-followers. Content that we posted used to regularly reach hundreds of thousands, sometimes millions of people who didn’t follow us. Now Instagram Insights shows us that we’re lucky if we get more than a few thousand non-follower impressions per post. We wish our reach went further and that Meta didn’t suppress political content but we’re fortunate to have an engaged follower base which has allowed us to cut our losses,” Weinberg said in a text message.
“One thing that’s really struck me is how Meta defines (or doesn’t define) ‘political content.’ In my view, pretty much everything is political. In a world where everything from people’s bodies to our choice of words to democracy itself are all politicized, how can Meta even attempt to distinguish between the political and the non-political?”
Aidan Kohn-Murphy, founder of @genzforchange, 83.4K followers on Instagram (Aidan himself has 10.6K followers on Instagram)
📞 “I’m still kind of shocked about this limitation. If it were just a matter of you can opt out, I would still be weary of it, because I think it gets really complicated when you’re trying to define what is political and what is not political. People are using instagram to get news and information and they are able to follow people who they want to hear from, so I don’t understand what the point of adding another limitation is,” Kohn-Murphy said during a phone call.
“The biggest shock is that you have to automatically opt out of it,” Kohn-Murphy said, adding, “Most people, they’re not even aware that it happened. From my perspective, I think most people don’t really know what this means yet.”
More youth vote in the news
Touching on a Biden HQ TikTok (and joint Instagram) with Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and President Joe Biden last week, Moore explores the relationship between the two octogenarian politicians, as well as how Biden relies on Sanders to appeal to progressive young voters who are currently frustrated with him — most specifically for his administration’s handling of Israel’s war in Gaza. Moore recalls how Biden relied on Sanders to attract those same types of voters in 2020, but, notably, quotes Sanders’ chief political advisor, Faiz Shakir, who says the difference in 2024 is that, “Biden has to answer to his own record.”
In a well-reported piece analyzing the way young progressives have shifted over the course of the past four years, Moore quotes Shana Gallagher, who served as Sanders' national student organizing director in 2020, as well as Florida Rep. Maxwell Frost, who initially supported Sanders in 2020 and is now a key surrogate for President Biden. “We're already part of a coalition," Frost told Moore. "So we don't have to fight our way in. We just have to continue making our voices heard. And the president is still listening to us."
College Towns Usually Lift Democrats. Is the Picture More Complicated in 2024?, Jess Bidgood for The New York Times, 4/08
In a colorful dispatch from Madison, Wisconsin, Bidgood (who just recently took over the Times’ On Politics newsletter) depicts how, “amid signs of an enthusiasm gap among young voters and widespread anger on college campuses over the administration’s handling of Israel’s war in Gaza, college towns are emerging as a more complex battleground for Democrats.”
Bidgood speaks with College Democrats in the state who describe feeling “nervous” about youth voter excitement around President Biden as well as members of Listen to Wisconsin — the group that organized an “uninstructed” vote in the state’s Democratic primary to show their disapproval for Biden’s handling of the war in Gaza, much like the “uncommitted” vote in Michigan — and other students, including one who said she feels frustrated by a lack of “really cool candidates.”