Instagram is limiting political posts for users by default, a move that could affect get-out-the-vote efforts.
Meta, the parent company of Instagram, has enabled a setting for users that keeps political posts from being recommended in places such as Explore, Reels, and your feed. However, you will still see posts from accounts that you follow.
“We won’t proactively recommend content about politics on recommendation surfaces across Instagram and Threads,” the app’s parent company, Meta, wrote last month. “If you still want these posts recommended to you, you will have a control to see them.”
Users noticed last week that the control had been enabled.
To check your settings, open Instagram and click on your profile. Tap on the three horizontal lines in the upper right-hand corner and select “Settings.” From there, scroll down to “Content Preferences.” Then click on “Political content” and select “Don’t limit political content from people you don’t follow.”
It also applies to Threads, the Twitter-like text app Meta launched last summer.
It’s not clear what Meta considers “political.” The company says it could include content “potentially related to things like laws, elections or social topics.”
Voter education groups are concerned about the lack of specifics.
“This is dangerous because of how broad this definition is. How much content can be considered limited, right?” Mi Familia Vota spokeswoman Jessica Chavarria said. “We believe that limitations during elections are dangerous for our community as they hinder our ability to access information from credible sources within this platform.”
FULL COVERAGE: America Votes: 2024 Election
Chavarria also said companies like Meta have the responsibility to inform all users of any such changes, saying that non-English-speaking communities are often left out of the conversation.
Diane Brown, executive director of the Arizona PIRG Education Fund, echoed the call for transparency.
“I think what's important is that as any social media platform proceeds with any types of perceived or real limits on speech, that what they are doing is clearly defined, it is being applied consistently, and there is the ability for an individual to determine whether or not they want to get that information.”
Jamie Kirtz, an Arizona State University professor who studies digital media technology, said people should remember that while social media platforms present themselves as public forums, they are private corporations.
“We need to constantly be asking again and again for greater transparency, as well as greater dialogue, particularly with those communities that are affected,” she said.
Kirtz said policies like Meta’s can restrict posts by members of communities that get deemed as a “social issue,” such as LGBTQ people, people of color, and women.
“This is a constant issue that happens across pretty much all social media platforms, that what is defined is always left incredibly vague... This can have far-reaching impacts that can deeply harm certain communities, particularly vulnerable communities,” she said.
Despite their concern about how Meta’s decision will play out this election year, Chavarria noted that social media is just one tool.
“We're looking into doing at least 500,000 door knocks, one million text messages, and 170,000 phone calls in Pima and Maricopa (counties),” Chavarria said.
