We’ve become aware recently of a quite concerning double standard across Meta owned properties, specifically Instagram, with users facing restrictions (sometimes called ‘shadow banning) on their accounts for sharing what the platform considers to be ‘sexually explicit or erotic’ content.
There’s never any clear definition of what is actually defined as ‘sexually explicit or erotic’. Many of us will have quite clear definitions in our heads but in practice it seems a lot of innocent or at least fairly tame material is getting caught in Meta’s automated systems. For example, someone showing off a new tattoo or even someone with a bald head often ends up labelled as ‘sexually explicit’ when of course they’re nothing of the sort. Scotland fans wearing kilts to Germany for the football this summer better be very careful not to let the enthusiastic reception they’ll no doubt receive overtake them! And there are lots of grey areas. In certain situations, someone showing off their newly painted toe-nails wouldn’t be ‘erotic’ at all but to a particular audience it could leaving them feeling very, erm, ‘highly charged’. None of this is new – visit a museum or art gallery and you’ll see how our view of certain situations, practices and body parts has changed over the years. Much of it, of course, is ultimately in the eye of the beholder.
Recently, we’ve seen creators build businesses on Instagram. These might be people with an interest in fashion, travel, ASMR or music. Some might recognise that their material performs better when they wear more revealing clothing or behave in a particular way. At first, the algorithm rewards this engagement, and so the creator does more of what works, with no hint of any disapproval from Instagram itself. Until one day, when the creator has acquired a substantial following and built a successful business they suddenly receive a warning that their content has been flagged and Instagram is no longer promoting their page. This makes it impossible for them to acquire new followers, only those who proactively decide to visit the creator’s page will actually see their content. The impact of this can be devastating. Meta’s warning notice is vague and ‘catch all’ and it’s clear the rules are not being consistently applied. Creators are offered the option to ‘appeal’ the content but many report getting lost in a never ending cycle with Meta’s customer service which causes frustration and rarely results in any progress.
So what can be done? You could decide to take it on yourself. Go to the media, tell your tale of woe and hope that you cause enough of a stir that Meta wakes up and starts improving its systems or at least improves its communication and response times so that content unfairly flagged gets restrictions removed quickly when you appeal. But one person on their own fighting such a mammoth company is always going to be an uphill challenge. There’s also the risk that the wider public might not support you if they realise you’ve been earning a substantial income for the last 3 years by sharing videos every day of you doing the ironing in your shorts. Or whispering. Or brushing your hair. Please note these are all hypothetical examples and not insights into my search history.
We always advise clients to join with others in the same situation. Form a collective, a movement, some sort of campaign group. ‘Creators Against Censorship’ or ‘Vlogging Is Not Vulgarity’, that sort of thing. A group is much harder to dismiss or ignore and shows that the complaint is more than just one person’s bad experience. It also spreads the burden when you are approaching the media – it’s not just one person giving the interviews and in the spotlight all the time and it also gives the media covering the story a variety of content to use as examples. If you can’t get direct media coverage, write a letter to a newspaper, try a radio station’s Facebook page or use any sort of open forum ‘agenda’ type articles which newspapers will often have available for outsider contributors. It’s absolutely worth engaging newspapers even if you don’t personally read them as they have significant influence over the rest of the media (including broadcast and online) and are read by politicians and other decision makers and people of influence. Set up a website and ask people to join a mailing list. This means you can now grow your movement to potentially thousands of people all over the world. Once the numbers are sufficient, you have a direct route to tell those people what action you would like them to take. It might be a day when they all stay off the platform. Or post a particular image in solidarity with your campaign, or write letters to Meta, or whatever. This action will likely result in more media coverage and eventually what you’re hoping for is that someone from Meta feels they have no option but to respond to you, or to take questions from journalists in order to protect their own reputation. At this point, you can push them for some sort of commitment to be more reasonable and even handed with their policing of their platform or to commit to improving their response when they get things wrong.
Be careful though because of all this invites scrutiny. So if there’s content on your page that most reasonable people would consider handful, or it emerges you haven’t been paying your taxes, or you’ve a previous issue relating to some sort of skulduggery – all of this is likely to rear its head, cause you embarrassment (or worse) and the supporters you’ve built up will quickly act as though they never knew you. So audit yourself first before you go courting attention. Assuming everything is in order, here’s a summary of our suggested approach:
In short:
– Join others in the same situation, form a collective
– Offer the wider population an easy method of registering support, and giving you the means to contact them
– When numbers are sufficient, use those means to call for some sort of action
– Be very clear what it is you want your opponent to do in response
You might also be fortunate enough to attract the attention of someone in the legal profession, or a public relations professional who is willing to work with you to support your cause. They can be very helpful and some may offer their services free of charge if your cause is something they believe in and could be considered ‘pro bono’ (for the public good).
The above is an approach you can use in all sorts of situations where you are pushing for change. And it’s easier than ever to find other people facing similar difficulties as you. In this particular case involving Instagram creators I fear the real issue lies within the 40 or so pages of terms and conditions you sign up to when joining Instagram. You are in effect, giving them complete control over how your content is displayed in the news feed. If they don’t want to, they don’t have to show it and they owe you no explanation whatsoever. Meta doesn’t really want anyone building a business at its own expense. And it highlights the issues with relying on social media platforms for business purposes. They can certainly help and are a great way to get started but beyond a certain point it would make sense to try to transition people to your website or a mailing list of someone sort which you have complete control over. Social media platforms are shared spaces, unpredictable and transient. Some of the world’s most successful music stars found this out a few months ago when Universal Music pulled its content from TikTok for several weeks and I know many journalists and news creators feared the impact should Twitter close down.
I’ve no real interest in how creators make their money on social media. I like what I like and if it’s within the law and doesn’t harm anyone it’s fine with me. What I do object to is the breathtaking double standard from a business the size of Meta. They seem to be quite happy with all sorts of content while it keeps users on the platform and gives them eyeballs they can sell advertising against. But once someone dares to build a successful business from their activities, suddenly the taste and decency police are all over it, whereas there’s someone else with another page, doing far worse and facing no restrictions whatsoever. Meta also does nothing about thousands of copyright breaches everyday. So one creator posts an image of themselves doing the ironing in their shorts (or whatever) and faces restrictions, while someone else illegally copies that image and many others, posts it to their own page and faces no action whatsoever. For that, I really think they should be held to account. Meta can police its platform however it chooses but it surely has a responsibility to be consistent and fair.
If you’ve been affected by the situations discussed in this article, we’d be interested in hearing from you.
