Sources: Meta is considering paid, ad-free versions of Facebook and Instagram for users in the EU, to fend off privacy concerns and scrutiny from EU regulators
#Meta is considering paid, ad-free versions of #Facebook and #Instagram for users in the EU, to fend off privacy concerns and scrutiny from EU regulators. — https://www.nytimes.com/... #privacy Bluesky: Emil Protalinski / @epro.social : Zuck doesn't want to charge users for Facebook or Instagram, instead of targeting them with ads. — Users don't want to pay for an app they've used for free since day one, for decades. — If these paid apps ever launch, they would exist to appease regulators, and be set up to fail. [embedded post] @rlux.nyc : BAHAHAHAHAHA. oh wait, they're serious? [embedded post] X: Drew Olanoff / @yoda : facebook: we're free, please get addicted, no ads! facebook: we're free, thank you for being addicted, here's some ads to make us money! facebook: we're free, thanks for letting us addict you, please pay to remove ads! Jason Kint / @jason_kint : This whopper NYT report doesn't quite mention two important developments. (1) It wasn't GDPR that drove this decision but a ruling by the German Federal Cartel Office. It was a landmark antitrust decision leveraging privacy law abuse. See thread. 1/2 https://x.com/... [image] Jason Kint / @jason_kint : (2) facebook likes to float a subscription service when their surveillance advertising is under pressure. Sandberg did it in 2018, too. Reality is having a paid option won't solve any of their current regulatory threats for data and competition abuse. 2/2 https://www.nytimes.com/... @martinsfp : Fascinating! Some people have said they want this for years. Putting that claim to the test will be interesting. LinkedIn: Emil Protalinski : Meta is reportedly considering paid, ad-free versions of Facebook and Instagram for users in the EU. … Forums: r/europe : Meta May Allow Instagram and Facebook Users in Europe to Pay to Avoid Ads See also Mediagazer
New York Times
Context & Ripple Effects
This report marks an early regulatory-response phase in Meta’s European consumer strategy: rather than changing the free, ad-supported model outright, the company was weighing a paid alternative for people who do not want ads.
Meta would need to operate two distinct user experiences in Europe: a paid, ad-free tier and the existing free, advertising-supported service.
EU Facebook and Instagram users could face an explicit choice between paying for reduced advertising exposure and remaining in the free service.
Second-order effects
The proposal would force Meta to define how subscription status changes advertising and data practices, creating a compliance and product-design burden alongside its existing ad system.
If users select the paid tier in material numbers, Meta’s European ad inventory and audience segmentation could shift; if not, the offering may primarily function as a regulatory-response mechanism.
Third-order effects
The move points toward consent and privacy rules shaping product packaging, with access choices becoming part of how large platforms defend advertising-funded services.
If this model spreads, regulators and platforms may increasingly contest whether a paid alternative is a sufficient user choice, rather than treating privacy compliance as separate from pricing.
The trend: European regulation is pushing ad-funded platforms to turn privacy and advertising preferences into explicit product and pricing choices.
When I worked on Search, we found that as much as users say they hated ads, they liked ads in Search: very high relevance, and very likely purchase intent. IG doesn't have the advantage of the latter, but they have gotten very good at the former.
I think there are too many ads on IG...but in the end, it is like radio or TV: we all complain about them but until we leave, there aren't actually too many ads...
reposts will unfurl and expand a bit more in future at the moment original posts are what's getting genuine interaction for example: the number of times i've interacted with you and your posts here is way more than what i did on the deab birb app, it's true for other accounts als…
I suspect the idea is that when you visit a person's profile, as opposed to seeing their posts in your feed, it's because you want to see what they have said, evaluate whether you want to follow them, etc., and so making the default view just be their actual posts is conducive to…
If only I could read posts from friends on Twitter (I refuse to call it X) as well as from friends on BlueSky, Threads, and Mastodon all in one place. We could call it FriendFeed 😀
This is a fun dunk, though I think it can be misleading. As I understand it, the ranking algorithm factors in “velocity”, so an app with a sudden surge of new installs rises up the chart. It's biased to new apps. If it were a direct measure of popularity they would be getting …
Zuck doesn't want to charge users for Facebook or Instagram, instead of targeting them with ads. — Users don't want to pay for an app they've used for free since day one, for decades. — If these paid apps ever launch, they would exist to appease regulators, and be set up to f…
(2) facebook likes to float a subscription service when their surveillance advertising is under pressure. Sandberg did it in 2018, too. Reality is having a paid option won't solve any of their current regulatory threats for data and competition abuse. 2/2 https://www.nytimes.com/…
This whopper NYT report doesn't quite mention two important developments. (1) It wasn't GDPR that drove this decision but a ruling by the German Federal Cartel Office. It was a landmark antitrust decision leveraging privacy law abuse. See thread. 1/2 https://x.com/... [image]
facebook: we're free, please get addicted, no ads! facebook: we're free, thank you for being addicted, here's some ads to make us money! facebook: we're free, thanks for letting us addict you, please pay to remove ads!
news: meta-is considering a paid, ad free version of Facebook and Instagram for EU users to deal with regulatory issues w/@satariano https://www.nytimes.com/...