Instagram removing likes is about money, not mental health
Instagram has said that making likes private will help make the social media platform feel less like a "competition", thereby improving users' mental health. However, Murmur's Dave Levett thinks that's "bullshit". It's not a mental health initiative, he says, it's about getting small businesses to spend more on ads.
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist. Just like the detectives in The Usual Suspects when Kevin Spacey tells his elaborate and over-the-top ruse about Keyser Söze, we’re currently being sold another elaborate and over the top ruse: the reason behind Instagram’s recent removal of likes.
Let’s stop the bullshit. This recent change isn’t about improving the mental health of Instagram users.
It’s about raising ad revenue for the platform, and making Instagram more appealing for small businesses.
Sure, at this stage, it’s just a ‘test’, and if it proves unsuccessful, and ad revenues decline, likes will be back quicker than Kylie Jenner can get a hashtag trending.
However, what is going to happen is that Instagram ad revenue will increase, and you’ll never see your likes again.
The mental health focus is pretence
Firstly, many publications are misquoting the ‘Status of Mind’ research from the Royal Society for Public Health, which highlights Instagram as the platform most likely to negatively impact people’s wellbeing and health.
However, in the report, there is no correlation made between Instagram likes and mental health. In fact, in their seven recommendations, there is not a single mention of Instagram likes, let alone the suggestion that removing them will positively impact mental health.
If Instagram really was serious about mental health, it would take on board some of the report’s recommendations – namely, the introduction of a pop-up heavy usage warning. Or, highlight when photos of people have been digitally manipulated.
In April, Instagram’s Adam Mosseri announced the platform would be rolling out private like counts.
However, he spent zero time talking about the impact this would have on mental health. In fact, Mosseri spent less than 20 seconds talking about private like counts before moving onto more substantial changes the platform is making to counter cyber bullying (none of which are related to private like counts).
Big win for small businesses
There are 25m Instagram business profiles globally, but only 2m monthly advertisers.
Even though ad spend on the platform has increased by 177% over Facebook year on year, the gap between the businesses that pay and the businesses that use is a massive problem.
Small businesses account for 97.4% of all businesses operating in Australia, so trying to get small businesses to advertise is a key strategic goal for Instagram.
But, it hasn’t been easy if you’re a small business trying to make some sales on Instagram.
We know that businesses with a high level of social proof will receive a higher number of sales.
Who wants to eat in an empty restaurant?
Who wants to line up for an empty nightclub?
Who wants to click on an ad that has zero likes?
Well – now more people will.
By removing the ability for people to see how many likes an ad has received, Instagram has allowed small businesses to advertise without the fear that their ads will have little engagement.
Those advertisers will now likely see an increase in engagement, an increase in click-through rate, an increase in sales, and, therefore, an increase in the dollars they pump into the platform.
This change to Instagram isn’t about improving mental health. It’s about money.
And rather than improving the transparency between influencers and their audiences, Instagram has shrouded one of its metrics in more secrecy, in order to help the people that really matter to the platform – businesses – paying for ads.
Dave Levett is the managing director of Murmur
Hi Dave,
I am a heavy Instagram user (~1hr+ per day) and would argue against this change not impacting mental health. I have struggled in the past with image and self-esteem, and was caught up in the number of likes I was getting on my posts or views on my Instagram Stories. I clung on to the external validation of digital hearts for a while, as it provided me with a sense of worth in my life – “people think I am interesting”, “people like what I’m doing”, etc.
Whilst I am less of a slave to the gram these days, I can only empathise with the younger generations who are/have been swept up in the validation they receive on social media.
I have noticed a shift in my mindset since the changes were made to the platform a few days ago – in that I am enjoying the content on my feed more, and not pressured to think that I have to like the content just because another 5,000 people have. I am also seeing people (and by people I mean friends of mine, not brands, or meme accounts) posting more – this is a sign to me that the changes made have had a positive impact on the way people are interacting with the platform and are less worried about the “likes” they might get on a photo. I would hope others are feeling the same as I am.
The other thing I would like to comment on is that there IS a tool to track activity usage, which does send a pop-up notification when you have reached the daily limit you have set for yourself. Please refer to the “Your Activity” tab when navigating towards your account preferences.
I understand your skepticism to Facebook/Instagram in that everything they do is designed to make more ad revenue dollars or gather even more data (i.e. Libra), but I hope this encourages you to be more receptive and open to how this can (and is, in my case) help with mental health in teens, young adults and even adults in a good way.
User ID not verified.
Very well said David. Of course it is about money. Be interesting to see if Instagram engagement goes down as a result of the change.
User ID not verified.
Spot on, from the opening quote to the conclusion. I suspect if and when ‘time on site’ plummets, likes will either be back or some new insidious social collateral measurement feature will take its place.
As the first comment above attests, it would be a damn good thing if the change, whatever it’s motivation, resulted in positive consequences. But I’m deeply sceptical people’s mental health, societies discourse or thriving real world communities are metrics these organisations give a flying click about.
User ID not verified.
Good info. I laugh everytime I see an article regarding Insta hiding Likes. No, they are still dangling the dope in front of those chasing the dope (red hearts)
You are correct. This move is all to benefit Zuck and crew. They will never remove the red heart bc this is how Social Memememedia stays alive. Why people waste their days, hours and time on these useless platforms is always a mystery…
#GrowYourOwnPlatform
User ID not verified.
Thanks for the feedback ‘Avid User’, I’m glad that the changes have had a positive impact for yourself – I just don’t believe that Instagram have done it for that purpose, as many pieces are having us believe.
1) They’ve adopted this across Instagram Business Accounts. If it were a mental health initiative, there’s no reason to apply the change to Business Accounts.
2) All indications are that this is a ‘test’, and as we all know, when you run a test, you have set parameters, and hypotheses that you set out to prove. None of these parameters or metrics have been forthcoming from Instagram.
User ID not verified.
Great to see so many privileged middle aged white men know so much about how this is effecting teenagers self esteem & mental health. Im sure you know how they operate so well.
User ID not verified.
Yes, it’s called research
User ID not verified.
Isnt that called research?
User ID not verified.
Good article Dave and interesting take on the fact that hiding likes has now removed the pressure of SMB’s to advertise. Thanks for sharing!
User ID not verified.
Wow! That’s a long bow to draw! Are you talking about the MAWM’s at Facebook (agree with you, if so) or the intelligent man who wrote the article?
User ID not verified.
Thanks Andrew, I think if engagement does go down, or more specifically – if ad revenue doesn’t increase – then Public Like Counts will be back online
User ID not verified.
Thanks “Exactly”, appreciate the feedback – I think the stats and figures speak for themselves!
User ID not verified.
Not that my age or ethnicity should come into how the argument I present is valuable, but, I just presented the facts and stats as I see them.
I’m also not saying I know how mental health affects people – I don’t.
I’m just saying that it’s not the reason Instagram have made Public Like Counts private.
User ID not verified.
No worries Mathew, glad you enjoyed the read!
User ID not verified.
Thanks for the feedback Brian!
User ID not verified.
So if the exact same article was posted by a non-white, non-middle-aged non-male it would somehow be more factual?
User ID not verified.
It is not just about ‘middle aged white men,” Generation Z is suffering from Social media pressure a lot more than you think. Removing likes from Instagram may not have been entirely intended to better mental health however it does make a difference. If you were surrounded by younger people who you care for, you would know that likes on Instagram makes a difference to the new gen. Sure you can say just get time to delete the app however we live in a digital world, it’s easy said then done.
User ID not verified.
Pssst Mumbrella.
I’m not sure how you conclude in your precis that ‘Murmur’s Dave Leggett thinks that’s “bullshit”.’
Mind you Dave Levett’s article does a good job of that.
Or maybe Dave Leggett Dave Levett’s nom de plume on Instagram.
User ID not verified.
Hi Copywriter,
I have no witty responses for you today, so I shall just thank you for flagging the error. Our bad. It has been corrected, and we apologise for not knowing our legs from our levs.
Thanks,
Vivienne – Mumbrella
Please don’t write bullshit articles for click bait reasons. This just empowers Mumbrella website for SEO and bullshit fake news.
Perhaps actually talk with Facebook account managers before writing your bullshit opinion and talking in the third person.
User ID not verified.
Thanks for your contribution Tim
User ID not verified.
Tim…Have you spoken to a Facebook account manager lately?
You won’t get a straight answer to save your life when you push on the details!
Plus in my experience they are feed the company lines and lies when this stuff happen.
Just ask them about how less then 1sec ad views can be as effective as other media like tv or VOD….
It’s always about targets $$$
User ID not verified.
If hiding likes really is about mental health and bringing the platform back to its sole purpose of photo sharing, then follower counts would be removed too. No point hiding likes if everyone with fake followers looks successful and popular.
It’s definitely all about the money- I won’t be surprised if soon there is a paid option to show likes or a new ranking metric pops up.
Grrr
User ID not verified.
It’s absolutely about platform engagement and not mental health.
Users will be much more inclined to raise their content submissions, without fear that they will ‘fatigue’ their ‘audiences’ (ie friends) and therefore receive ’embarrassingly’ low like counts.
User engagement goes up, time on the platform goes up, ad revenues go up.
Easy!
User ID not verified.
Absolutely spot on re: follower counts!
User ID not verified.
It’s a simple formula that the platforms know all too well…
User ID not verified.
I 100% agree with your argument Dave. It’s not about mental health, it’s about revenue. Instagram is a business and they’re looking after their bottom line – it’s all about ad revenue. A positive effect on mental health is simply their PR angle. Yes, I’m sure it is good for mental health, but it’s not the core reason for their decision.
User ID not verified.
Yep, that’s it Fiona!
User ID not verified.
Interesting article Dave particularly on the skew and relevance of small business in FB’s strategic growth targets.
Out of interest were you able to find the relative revenue size of small business spend to the large guys?
From personal view point, I’d seen the change in likes largely being an audience behavior play, encouraging Instagram users to be comfortable to engage from the platform to site (i.e. if you reduce the audience member’s value of a like they would be more likely to do other things like click to site). This is turn I’d seen as more valuable to larger players, particularly in retail/e-com space where’s Instagrams content is strong so increasing spend from these partners by improving their traffic behaviour would mean more $.
User ID not verified.
Can’t it be both?
Headpace is literally for mental health and it literally makes money off it.
and that is fine.
Everyone needs to relax
User ID not verified.
I would say it is in a big part also a way to take away power from the people and give it back to Instagram. Businesses don’t advertise on Instagram only through Instagram. Huge part of it is through influencers. I think Instagram is pretty annoyed they don’t get a part of that. That is also why they constantly tweak their algorithm so less and less people see your posts/so that they control what users see in their feed… sadly IG is going down the FB path.
User ID not verified.
You can still see user’s LIKES even though it’s hidden — this can be seen through Phlanx “Instagram Likes Calculator” they have a free calculator that shows the likes count per post, just created today exclusive for brands who still need to use likes to check if the influencers suit their brands.
User ID not verified.
Well said. Can’t believe anyone buys this ‘mental health’ reason.
It’s to increase engagement from people who were become too embarrassed to engage with the platform.
Increase ad revenue.
Also – take ad revenue back from influencers.
User ID not verified.
How about this for an idea? If it affects your mental health, don’t use it, period. Don’t try changing it just because you’re a sook. Always catering for the minority, well in this case, pretending to.
User ID not verified.
Triggered
User ID not verified.
“Stories. I clung on to the external validation of digital hearts for a while, as it provided me with a sense of worth in my life – “people think I am interesting”, “people like what I’m doing”, etc. ”
isn’t it the case that you will still be able to see these likes – they just won’t be public?
User ID not verified.
this is wind up right?
no-one could be [Edited under Mumbrella’s comment moderation policy]
User ID not verified.
If you for one minute pretend Insta cares about your mental health its time to deprogram. Everything from open to close in this article is on the money. no pun
User ID not verified.
Does anyone realise the “like” count is only on mobile. The “like” count is still active on desktop.
User ID not verified.
I disagree with your article. If Instagram really did bring this in to increase cost of ads for small businesses, it would have removed likes on ads and not on individuals posts. As well as this, I don’t like the slating Instagram received in this article, even if it was to increase revenue, the overall health effects on the population would still be positive which should be celebrated by the public!
User ID not verified.
I think this is overall a good change because this is not just about big influencers but about small influencers as well. Content creation is going to be the key player here and engagement will be of the essence when the likes are totally removed.
User ID not verified.
Since they removed likes I started hiding all the adds I see. Everyone should do the same.
User ID not verified.