There’s no end to Instagram trends. Be it Hardik Pandya’s dramatic takeover as captain of Mumbai Indians or Anant Ambani and Radhika Merchant’s star-studded wedding in Jamnagar, netizens usually never fall short of entertaining content in the form of reels and memes.
But with the general elections in India knocking on the door, a dip in the quantum of political content on everyone’s feed has made Instagrammers put their thinking cap on.
The primary reason behind the tectonic shift is Meta bringing about a change that no longer recommends political content to its users by default.
In a little-noticed blog post on February 9, Meta announced that it is “extending” its “existing approach” on how it treats political content and would “proactively” stop recommending content on politics on Instagram and Threads. But the social media giant clarified that users will continue to see political content from the accounts they already follow.
The update applies to “public accounts” which means users will not be able to access political content that shows up on their feeds from accounts they don't follow. The restriction is imposed on reels, page exploration and in-feed recommendation. The change in policy will also impact the suggested users that Instagram recommends to others. But, as an alternative measure, the photo and video networking service has introduced an “opt-in” setting for users who want political content recommendations on their feeds.
Meta says it wanted to make its platforms “a great experience for everyone”, further adding that it will also roll out a similar update for Facebook in time to come.
Why political content is being choked
Meta has continued to reduce political content recommendations on Facebook since 2021, particularly after the January 6 Capital riots in the United States. Following the incident, there have been various allegations levelled against the platform – such as amplification of hate speech, disinformation and misinformation. As a result of the backlash, Meta started implementing drastic changes to regulate political content on all its platforms.
“We have been working for years to show people less political content based on what they told us they want, and what posts they told us are political,” a spokesperson for Meta, Dani Lever, told TIME magazine.
What does Meta mean by “political content”?
On social media, a lot can be potentially defined as “political”. Following the February 9 announcement, Meta has been tasked with answering questions regarding what is and what isn’t “political content” but the Mark Zuckerberg-led organisation has conveniently dodged questions on the matter.
In an interview with CNN, a Meta spokesperson said: “Informed by research, 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 as we continue to engage with the people and communities who use our platforms and external experts to refine our approach.”
Hence, it will be safe to assume that Meta’s definition of political content is vague and ambiguous. Meta’s head of content, Adam Mosseri, said in a series of Thread posts that the new political content filtering feature will only apply to public accounts. He further added that Meta’s “goal is to preserve the ability for people to choose to interact with political content while respecting each person’s appetite for it.” According to Meta’s February blog post, Instagram accounts are considered political if “they recently posted political content”.
However, Threads has introduced a new trending section called ‘Topic’, through which political content can be accessed without much ado.
Past criticism about censoring pro-Palestinian content
In the day and age of new media, most people rely on social media to source news. Political campaigning during elections enjoys a wider reach on social media platforms such as Facebook and Instagram. However, the advent of new media has given rise to an information boom, fake news, misinformation and disinformation.
In December 2023, Meta came under fire from the Human Rights Watch for censoring pro-Palestinian content on Instagram amid the ongoing war in Gaza. The report says, “Meta’s content moderation policies and systems have increasingly silenced voices in support of Palestine on Instagram and Facebook.”
Effect on content creators
Meta’s new feature will have an adverse impact on content creators on Instagram. They are aware that as per the changes, their accounts may not be recommended if they post political content. Creators largely depend on the platform's recommendations. Meta’s announcement means political content will prevent audience growth. Hence, the clear implication is to avoid politics. Meta’s new content-filtering feature will have far-reaching consequences for the public discourse. The absence of political content on Instagram is most likely to stifle political discussions and ultimately democracy.
Saptarsi Karan, a digital marketing professional, said, “Content creators who promote political content are facing problems due to Instagram’s new feature. This is hampering a lot of youth and people who are less educated about political happenings in the country. A lot of chaos happens when people do not know what they are supporting or what they are disliking or liking. They don’t have the news knowledge so that creates big chaos.”
Explaining the risk Meta can face from political parties, he added, “Social media is the biggest platform where we can promote our choices. It is the only place where you can express and see what’s happening. Political parties are using the platform to promote false advertisements. In this regard, Meta’s goal is not to create chaos. Meta has to sustain itself without jeopardizing its reputation and that too caused by some political parties. That’s why Meta has reduced political content on Facebook.”
‘Why is Meta attempting to censor the democratic process?’ Internet fumes
Many people took to X to express shock over Instagram’s new feature, accusing the platform of actively censoring political discussion.
One user wrote, “Instagram quietly introducing a ‘political content’ preference and turning on ‘limit’ by default is insane?”
“This is pretty wild,” wrote another user.
Social-media users also expressed concern over Meta’s decision to limit political content recommendations on Instagram ahead of the upcoming US Presidential election.
“Election Interference,” an user wrote on X.
“This Instagram ‘political content’ filter being silently added and set to limit by default might be the scariest and most evil thing we’ve seen from these social media companies yet,” wrote another user.