Reels did not do it, but Instagram finally made me cringe
Meta's announcement about its new payment model is downright absurd: pay to prove your identity while continuing to churn out content for us.
Over the weekend, Meta announced that it would start testing a subscription service for Facebook and Instagram, charging users US$12 (about Php660) a month per platform for the following perks:
A verified badge
Protection against impersonation
Access to a “real person” customer-support
Increased visibility and reach
It will launch in Australia and New Zealand this week before hitting the rest of the world “soon.” I don’t want to be dramatic, but it does sound like the end of an era. Vox wrote it best: Social media used to be free. Not anymore. As the article makes it clear, “free” refers to how users do not pay for these apps but do so in other ways: advertisements and providing data. But this latest news, coming on the heels of Twitter’s launch of its own subscription model, signals a shift in how these platforms are more upfront about profiting from their users.
No one has to pay to keep using these apps. But what the premium does is provide a layer of security, an idea that was once obligatory, democratic, and a right, not a privilege; on top of that, it increases visibility for these users. That sounds like systemic social stratification to me—Indians may even have the term for it. But even without the philosophic reading into this tiered system, reducing the announcement to its basic messaging sounds even more absurd: we’ll charge you to prove that you are who are creating content for us.
As Vox wrote, “… it’s clear that, moving forward, if you want to be fully seen, trusted, and taken care of on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and other platforms engaging in a premium model, you’ll need to pay up.”
On a pragmatic note, this is downright capitalism at work. No one is forcing me to continue using Instagram. But I do feel… betrayed because this is the remaining social media app I embrace. It’s ridiculous, I know, since it is owned by Facebook, the first of the major social media apps that I shunned (Twitter being the other one). But it’s my remaining virtual link to my network of family and friends. I had been in denial, thinking their company culture would remain separate and different (Facebook bought it in 2012) as I ignored the increasing integration between the two platforms’ services, content, and ads. The impact of the changes makes me question Instagram’s priorities (notwithstanding Reels 😒) in highlighting community, organic content, and good vibes.
Trolls no longer hide behind anonymity: I’ve learned this as far back as 2016, the year of the national elections that elected Duterte, and Facebook was rife with disinformation propagators, influencers who were (and still are) continuously rewarded with high visibility, reach, and engagement, lasting throughout his administration and beyond. By bypassing editorial judgment on its verification system in favor of paid subscribers (and thus gaming the algorithm in their favor), Meta would not only amplify but also legitimize these bad actors. In the context of state-sponsored ($$$) propaganda, this is dangerous.
This is also a good segue into this Substack post on why it’s a good idea to have our own private social network. Its main focus is Twitter as this was published four months ago when Elon Musk bought the company, but substitute it with Instagram and it could very well be relevant today. It’s also my wish to see more of my friends writing here. ✍️
If you’re into writing and reading, few games on the internet are more fun than Twitter at its best. The witty one-liners, the quick retorts, the spectacular insults—it’s a heady cocktail for wordcels. But while we may be convincing ourselves that we’re participating in discourse in the public square, we’re actually in a cage, making a spectacle of ourselves for little more than weak dopamine hits and a few pretend friends. The real prizes go to Twitter itself, now under the control of Elon Musk.
When you publish your thoughts on Twitter, you are doing labor for that company. Yes, you get followers, but you can’t take them with you. Unless you count Super Follows (do you?), they can’t pay to support you, either. You’re the product, not the customer. Twitter needs your mind so it can satisfy its real customers: advertisers.
