Some news creators and journalists, who moved from X to Threads, criticize Meta for planning to stop recommending political content on Instagram and Threads

Washington Post 2024-02-12

Context & Ripple Effects

Meta’s Threads policy was presented as an extension of its existing approach on Facebook and Instagram: it would not proactively surface political posts from accounts a user does not follow. The immediate backlash came from publishers and journalists who had treated Threads as an alternative distribution channel after moving away from X, as reflected in the earlier creator criticism of the Threads policy.

The dispute did not end with the announcement. Related coverage shows hundreds of political and news creators seeking a reversal and, later, a reported settings error that repeatedly enabled political-content limits, underscoring how product defaults can determine news reach.

First-order effects

If Meta applies the policy as described, political and news creators will have less recommendation-driven discovery among nonfollowers on Instagram and Threads, while followers can still receive their posts.
Meta’s recommendation systems, rather than a blanket removal of political posts, become the immediate control point for how broadly this content travels.

Second-order effects

Creators that depend on algorithmic reach will have stronger incentives to build direct follower relationships and distribute across other platforms, reducing the value of Threads as a replacement audience channel.
Pressure on Meta will shift from the existence of political content to the design of defaults and opt-out controls, as later creator objections and the reported political-content setting error illustrate.

Third-order effects

If major social platforms continue separating political material from recommendation surfaces, journalism distribution may become more dependent on established audiences than on open discovery.
The policy points toward a more segmented social-feed model in which platform recommendation rules—not just publisher output—set the practical boundary of public-news reach.

The trend: Social platforms are increasingly treating political-news recommendations as a distinct, tightly controlled category rather than a default source of feed discovery.

Discussion

Newsmax Mark Swanson on x
Instagram, Threads to End Political Recommendations
@moskov Dustin Moskovitz on threads
Taking off my troll hat for a minute to do some serious posting on the feed politics debate. I apologize for being a bit flippant - I don't think there's a *right* answer here and reasonable people can have pretty different opinions. That said, my personal take as a heavy user …
@mmasnick Michael Masnick on threads
People keep telling me that “Threads won” the fight for becoming the go to Twitter replacement, and then Threads says (for like the sixth time) “WE WILL NOT BE USEFUL FOR NEWS!” One reason I like Bluesky is that *you* get to choose, rather than leave it up to the company what sh…
@moskov Dustin Moskovitz on threads
What I've seen on Twitter and Reddit and to a surprising degree even Bluesky, is that policies that lean more free speech/all content is equal lead to harassment and swarming. I understand a lot of people are focused on the progressive part of the speech/the *defense* to the att…
@moskov Dustin Moskovitz on threads
It will never be perfect, so maybe we should think about what trade-offs are most beneficial? And how to reject false trade-offs and build systems that might really get at what people want (safe, trusted environments where anyone can have a voice)? Can we have a debate about th…
@woo_factor Atara M Watkins on threads
...I think you nailed it. I also believe we as a society need to be more tech literate, so that when a tech company makes changes, we are adept enough to click “opt in/out”. I'm seeing folks say users won't know what to do. this to me is the bigger problem and a huge hole to f…
@jonasd Jonas Downey on threads
I'm exhausted with actual politics (elections and candidates running for office) but I'm also strongly opposed to tech companies that restrict discussions or visibility of “politics” in a vague sense. No one ever spells out what counts as “politics,” because they can't—almost ev…
@aaronhuertas_de Aaron Huertas on threads
Watching @mosseri answer dozens of questions except for how Meta actually defines “political content”
@goldman Jason Goldman on threads
The Meta policy decision around what to do with the amplification of politics is—like most content decisions—nuanced. But this koan keeps getting floated and is pure sophistry. The issue is that social media, as it is now pervasive in the life of a global audience, will always …
@moskov Dustin Moskovitz on threads
They don't want Meta to have too much influence, but also insist they be the arbiters of truth. I'm sure they can get better at this and they have been. They can invest more and they have been. But these issues are not merely an issue of twice or even a hundred times as much m…
@moskov Dustin Moskovitz on threads
Threads seems different *in a really good way* so far. That seems related to the policy, rather than a coincidence. Reasonable people say they want it all: free speech, but heavily moderated to remove the hate and the bullies and the untrue facts. But these same people are *en…
@taylorlorenz Taylor Lorenz on threads
I'm actually very sympathetic to Facebook's position, bc for years a lot of media and high profile people incl lawmakers have begged FB to crack down on “disinformation” and lambasted the platform for playing a role in politics. I think a lot of that criticism has been unfair, b…
@taylorlorenz Taylor Lorenz on threads
Restricting the reach of “social commentary” and political content does NOT mean FB plays a “smaller role in that part of society”. It simply means Meta will continue to influence the political landscape but in a very harmful way to marginalized groups. Also, please actually us…
@moskov Dustin Moskovitz on threads
Meta: we will be showing less political content in order to play a smaller role in that part of society Xitter: actually, we will be showing *more* political content, and it will be explicitly conservative and explicitly anti-liberal content TikTok: hey hey, we are apartisan! we …
@karissabe Karissa on threads
A Meta spokesperson on its definition of “political” content: 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. …
@taylorlorenz Taylor Lorenz on threads
This is the big issue I have w Meta's overbearing and blunt moderation policies and the way they restrict content. What counts as a “political” post is almost always any sort of news about people who have had their whole identities politicized, such as POC, LGBTQ people, disable…
@dead.place Flynn on bluesky
oh no! if only there was a competitor to both sites that could solve that problem... [embedded post]
@notjessewalker Jesse Walker on x
Some people still use Threads, huh? Weird. https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ...
@cbouzy Christopher Bouzy on x
Last year, I warned most of you not to migrate to Threads if your main focus was politics. Many of you flocked to Threads and told your followers to follow you there. Now Meta is making it clear it doesn't want your political content. https://spoutible.com/...
@carnage4life Dare Obasanjo on x
Social media companies saying that instead of recommending news or political content people should seek out original sources sounds like exactly what the “social media is destroying democracy” crowd would want. Why aren't they happy? [image]
@gergelyorosz Gergely Orosz on x
@Carnage4Life Exactly. The last election or two, these platforms were accused of potentially interfering with elections by recommending more of one side or the other. You'd think it's fair to agree the best way to have no interference is to tone down anything politics: which is w…
@hashtagcpt Christopher Patrick Taylor on x
2016 critic, “Company control your algorithm, it is destroying democracy!” 2024 company, “We're tired of tuning our algorithm. If you want politics, just search for it or follow creators.” 2024 critic, “But your algorithm is essential for democracy!” https://www.washingtonpost.co…
@ashtonpittman Ashton Pittman on x
I shared my thoughts with @washingtonpost on Meta's decision to throttle “political” content. Who gets to define what is political? Bad actors will politicize anything. (See: Taylor Swift) Everything isn't partisan, but everything can be political. https://www.washingtonpost.com/…
@laurencaguirre Lauren Aguirre on x
I'm glad there has been more thought in preventing the spread of misinformation but decisions like these can also end up preventing legitimate fact-based news sources from reaching people at the same time.
r/politics r on reddit
Meta turns its back on politics again, angering some news creators

Chronicles