There’s a reason why you haven’t been seeing much political content on Instagram lately. Starting in March, Instagram and Threads have implemented a new default setting that restricts the amount of political content you come across from users you don’t follow.
A large group of creators, brought together by GLAAD and Accountable Tech, have signed an open letter requesting that Instagram change the default setting for political content to an opt-in feature.
“Instagram’s decision to restrict our reach online hampers our efforts to promote inclusive democracy and civic engagement during this crucial time for our country,” states the letter. 
A diverse group of people, including comedian Alok Vaid-Menon, Glee actor Kevin McHale, news account So Informed, activist Carlos Eduardo Espina, Under the Desk News, and several other meme accounts, political organizers, and entertainers, signed the letter.
Instagram’s definition of political content is open to interpretation, which raises additional concerns among these creators. The description defines political content as anything that pertains to subjects like laws, elections, or social topics.
The letter highlights the concern that this poses a threat to the ability of marginalized individuals to share their personal experiences on Meta’s platforms. It also restricts the discussion on important subjects such as climate change, gun control, and reproductive rights.
Political creators may find these limits challenging as they strive to expand their audience and maintain their livelihood. While Instagram may not be a significant source of income, building a strong following on the platform can lead to various financial opportunities, including brand sponsorships.
Given the upcoming election season in the United States, it’s interesting to note that Instagram is taking a step back from politics. Given Meta’s past involvement in elections, this move could potentially address concerns. However, Meta may inadvertently exacerbate issues by segregating its users into political echo chambers, limiting their exposure to diverse perspectives and information from individuals outside their current social circles.
The letter argues that by removing political recommendations as a default setting, it could potentially hinder political engagement, education, and activism.
