Tests show Threads' new search function blocks words like “sex”, “gore”, and “vaccines”; Meta admits “covid” is a blocked term but declines to disclose others
https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ... Bluesky: Jessica Harvey / @jessiscah23.bsky.social : never seen a social media platform try so hard not to be fun [embedded post] @chathamharrison.bsky.social : From a “avoiding controversy on our app” perspective this kind of cowardly both-sides nonsense is plainly in Meta's interest. Meta isn't here to build a vibrant public square & they're better off not pretending [embedded post] Ian Boudreau / @iboudreau.bsky.social : It really is a social media platform that's just for the commercials [embedded post] @darthbluesky.bsky.social : wat [embedded post] X: Adam Mosseri / @mosseri : @TaylorLorenz ... I hear you, and we're working to support more searches quickly. We're trying to learn from last mistakes and believe it's better to bias towards being careful as we roll out search. Nu Wexler / @wexler : Pinterest blocked search results related to vaccines in 2018, and got credit for addressing health misinfo. IG has also restricted certain problematic search terms in the past. The lesson here may be to lean into the change with a public announcement. https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ... Nu Wexler / @wexler : Search was always going to dial up the volume on Threads — it allows culture warriors to find their enemies and helps reporters find controversial content. But it's a necessary tool and allows normie users to find content they like. Steven Sinofsky / @stevesi : i'm confused. old enough to remember when the goal was to prevent people from finding [certain] posts on covid AND the networks should not be in the position to determine what we read. this harkens back to the appointment of the minister of misinformation. haven't we learned? [image] @taylorlorenz : @digiphile ... I also totally disagree about whitelisting accounts. I don't think Meta is in a position to judge scientific info in real time. What they should do, is simply ban bad actors and build features in like Twitter's community notes, which can fact check in real time @taylorlorenz : @digiphile ... Either way, wholesale blocking searches to things like long covid is extremely irresponsible imo. @taylorlorenz : @digiphile ... the govt is not a trustworthy source on many things!! That's why it's crucial not to censor searches or link to generic govt websites which contain out of date or factually wrong info. We need scientists, experts, doctors and journalists to be able to disseminate reliable info Alex Howard / @digiphile : Please invest in public health, @finkd & @mosseri: instead of @meta creating an info void to fester, convert public interest into public knowledge with search results that link to https://coronavirus.gov/ & https://vaccines.gov/ + a whitelist of trustworthy verified accounts. [image] @taylorlorenz : Instagram/Threads wholesale blocking searches for Covid, vaccines, and long covid, especially in the midst of another surge, is so incredibly dangerous and harmful. This type of blunt moderation endangers people's lives, public health experts told me https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ... Charlos / @loscharlos : “When users went to Threads to search for content related to ‘covid’ and ‘#LongCovid’, they were met with a blank screen that showed no search results” “A Meta spokesperson acknowledged that Threads was intentionally blocking the search terms” https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ... Forums: r/technology : Threads blocks searches related to covid and vaccines as cases rise | Public health experts denounced the platform's moderation policies … Beehaw : Threads blocks searches related to covid and vaccines as cases rise See also Mediagazer
Washington PostTaylor Lorenz
Context & Ripple Effects
Threads launched search with undisclosed restrictions on sensitive terms, making discoverability a moderation decision rather than simply an index-quality feature. The lack of a disclosed list leaves users and publishers unable to tell whether a failed search reflects absent content or a platform rule.
People seeking information on health, sexual content, or graphic material cannot use Threads search reliably for those topics; public-health queries are especially affected because “covid” and vaccine-related searches are among the tested terms.
Meta gains a blunt safety and controversy-control mechanism, but its refusal to identify the full blocked-term list makes the boundaries of search unavailable to users and publishers.
Second-order effects
Publishers and creators covering affected subjects lose an in-app discovery path and may need to rely on direct follows or external links, reducing the value of Threads search for timely informational content.
The gap between what remains on Threads and what can be found through search can create trust and support costs: users cannot readily distinguish a moderation block from an empty result set.
Third-order effects
If search blocking becomes a durable distribution tool, social platforms will increasingly govern public visibility through recommendation and retrieval rules, not only through post-level enforcement.
The pattern makes transparency a core part of platform trust: undisclosed controls may reduce controversy in the short term but weaken confidence in search as a neutral navigation layer.
The trend: Threads is part of a broader shift toward platforms managing sensitive-content exposure through opaque discovery controls rather than relying solely on content removals.
This seems bad until you realise the Threads team is only blocking search terms until they're sure the quality of the results is good enough. This is another example of how table stakes for setting up a new social platform are *way* higher than they used to be. …
👏👏👏👏 honestly @zuck @mosseri this is a step in the right direction and a reminder not to use social media as a news source let alone your primary news source
I'm failing to see a controversy here. Meta is redirecting to the CDC website instead of allowing internet “doctors” from sharing their “facts”. Great move @zuck and @mosseri!
Am I alone in thinking this is good? Threads isn't a health information website. If you're earnestly searching for info about COVID here, I'd rather have you directed to the CDC then to someone's Uncle Frank who thinks vaccines have gps tracking chips inside.
Censorship doesn't work. Misinformation still gets distributed anyway through code words or alternative platforms. So then you are left with the huge net negative of preventing users from finding multiple sources of reliable information and getting up to date information in rea…
This is bad. As someone who works in public health I can say that no, redirecting searches for COVID, Long COVID, & vaccines to a static CDC page is not sufficient, & will restrict getting reliable health information out to the public. 1. Info on emergency situations changes qu…
Thanks @taylorlorenz.bsky.social for covering Threads' censoring of Covid, Long Covid & vaccine searches. Censorship doesn't work. Misinfo still gets circulated by code names & other platforms. Tech companies should invest in real solutions like moderation/education. https://w…
Filtering and then redirecting to a fact-based site? That's an excellent solution. You freaking people will complain about anything. kudos to whoever made that call @zuck
That vaccines and vaccinations are blocked terms is insane. From a historical perspective vaccines are among the single most important inventions in human history.
Building a network like Threads at warp speed is a bizarre task. You're trying to jumpstart an organic-ish community in record time while the platform is lacking functionality that prior communities have relied upon for over a decade. For it to work, both the platform and the c…
Threads continues to improve. And engagement here is generally better than the bird app. But there's so many reporters, news orgs and gov officials that have yet to migrate or at least use both platforms. We need to continue to encourage folks to use threads.
From a “avoiding controversy on our app” perspective this kind of cowardly both-sides nonsense is plainly in Meta's interest. Meta isn't here to build a vibrant public square & they're better off not pretending [embedded post]
@TaylorLorenz ... I hear you, and we're working to support more searches quickly. We're trying to learn from last mistakes and believe it's better to bias towards being careful as we roll out search.
Pinterest blocked search results related to vaccines in 2018, and got credit for addressing health misinfo. IG has also restricted certain problematic search terms in the past. The lesson here may be to lean into the change with a public announcement. https://www.washingtonpost.c…
Please invest in public health, @finkd & @mosseri: instead of @meta creating an info void to fester, convert public interest into public knowledge with search results that link to https://coronavirus.gov/ & https://vaccines.gov/ + a whitelist of trustworthy verified accounts. [im…
Instagram/Threads wholesale blocking searches for Covid, vaccines, and long covid, especially in the midst of another surge, is so incredibly dangerous and harmful. This type of blunt moderation endangers people's lives, public health experts told me https://www.washingtonpost.co…
Search was always going to dial up the volume on Threads — it allows culture warriors to find their enemies and helps reporters find controversial content. But it's a necessary tool and allows normie users to find content they like.
@digiphile ... I also totally disagree about whitelisting accounts. I don't think Meta is in a position to judge scientific info in real time. What they should do, is simply ban bad actors and build features in like Twitter's community notes, which can fact check in real time
i'm confused. old enough to remember when the goal was to prevent people from finding [certain] posts on covid AND the networks should not be in the position to determine what we read. this harkens back to the appointment of the minister of misinformation. haven't we learned? [im…
@digiphile ... the govt is not a trustworthy source on many things!! That's why it's crucial not to censor searches or link to generic govt websites which contain out of date or factually wrong info. We need scientists, experts, doctors and journalists to be able to disseminate r…
“When users went to Threads to search for content related to ‘covid’ and ‘#LongCovid’, they were met with a blank screen that showed no search results” “A Meta spokesperson acknowledged that Threads was intentionally blocking the search terms” https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ...