Meta is limiting political content - how does it affect us?
You might have read the news - Meta has announced that they are limiting political content from suggested accounts in your feeds on Instagram and Threads.
This is not just about political posts but it will affect the account of someone posting “political” content.
It does not affect those you already follow but it’s making it harder to discover new political content.
From now on, in order to access new accounts with political content, you'll need to confirm it in your Content Preferences as it will be deactivated by default.
Define political content
Here is how they define (sort of) political content:
“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.”
What about Facebook?
There are already restrictions for ads, for example, with political content:
“Advertisers can run ads about social issues, elections or politics, provided the advertiser complies with all applicable laws and the authorisation process required by Meta. Meta may restrict issue, electoral or political ads. In addition, certain content related to elections may be prohibited by local law or removed in specific regions ahead of voting;”
What do all these mean?
There are pros and cons to this decision (and a lot of backlash)
First of all, we need to split the list between social media users and marketers.
Pros and cons for marketers and fundraisers
+ Reduced noise (and spam?) - If you are focusing on non-political content, there will be less competition and clutter in users’ feeds to compete with
+ Improved brand safety - It can feel safer for your audience to spend time on social channels, while there may be fewer risks for your brand’s reputation
+ Opportunities for alternative platforms - this is a good reminder to diversify your channels and not overly on one channel (or Meta as an umbrella of social channels)
- Decreased reach in political campaigns - If you are working on political campaigns or social issues, you may see your reach decreasing and the growth may become more challenging
- Risk of getting your content marked as ‘political’ - There are several instances with FB content being marked as political without knowing more about it. The definition is not clear enough to help you know how to approach this change
- Potential drop in engagement - If it becomes harder to grow your account, you may also notice a drop in your engagement (TBC)
Pros and cons for social media users
+ Reduced exposure to misinformation - Limiting political content can help reduce the spread of misinformation and disinformation on Meta's platforms, creating a more trustworthy and reliable environment for users.
+ Less polarisation - By decreasing the prominence of political content, Meta may contribute to reducing polarisation among its user base - at least this is what we hope
+ Enhanced user experience - With fewer political debates and arguments, users may experience a more personal and enjoyable browsing experience (which is probably appreciated by a number of people)
- Limited access to political information - Need to say more? Users who rely on social media for political news and updates (quite a lot!) may feel restricted or not informed enough to have a better idea of what’s happening during an important year around the world.
- Censorship concerns: Some users may view Meta's decision as censorship and express concerns about freedom of speech and expression on the platform. If we are not even sure what ‘political content’ is, how confident do we feel to use social media as our primary source of news?
- Potential for Echo Chambers: For many people, this decision is the perfect opportunity to create a filter bubble that could impact democracy (the next step of Cambridge Analytica?) Limiting political content could inadvertently create echo chambers, where users are exposed only to viewpoints that align with their own beliefs, leading to a lack of diverse perspectives.
It’s an interesting year for the state of the world and we should be aware of how we use our digital channels both personally and professionally.
If you work for an organisation or charity involved in political campaigns or messages, it’s important to reflect on how such decisions affect your strategy for the next months.
This is an even stronger reminder that all social activities should be part of the top or middle funnel where the ultimate goal is to guide people to your own channels (website, email, etc)
T