Instagram's leader seems to be overlooking a critical aspect of AI's role on the platform.
Just a few weeks ago, Adam Mosseri shared a post on his Instagram grid (https://www.instagram.com/p/DS7pz7-DuZG/?utmsource=igwebcopylink&igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==). In this series of updates, the head of Instagram expressed his worries about how AI will shape the platform in the upcoming year. His message was a mix of introspection, urgent alerts, and an encouragement to creators: AI is poised to permeate Instagram, and the most effective way for content creators to differentiate themselves from "inauthentic" material is by showcasing genuine and original voices.
He stated, "Everything that made creators matter — the ability to be real, to connect, to have a voice that couldn’t be faked — is now accessible to anyone with the right tools." He argues that audiences crave raw authenticity rather than the polished artificiality that AI can easily produce. While this perspective holds some truth, I believe Mosseri may be missing a crucial element: Instagram is already flooded with content that looks robotic and homogeneous, and not all of it is generated by AI. Many human creators are also churning out posts that conform to similar patterns, designed specifically to keep users engaged, liking, and sharing.
Throughout his communication, there are several points made by Mosseri that resonate with me. He notes that as AI technology advances and becomes easier to use, distinguishing what is real from AI-generated content will become increasingly challenging. This is exemplified by Google's Pixel 10 phones, which embed content credentials in every photo taken with their cameras, regardless of whether the images are AI-generated or not. Furthermore, Mosseri mentions that AI will soon be more adept at replicating the low-quality phone camera aesthetic that typically conveys authenticity. However, I would argue that we are already witnessing this phenomenon today (https://www.theverge.com/report/837971/google-nano-banana-pro-realistic-phone-photos), rather than sometime later. There is undeniably a looming threat to Instagram's business model, even if our timelines differ.
However, my main concern with Mosseri's argument lies in his repeated emphasis on "authentic" content, presenting it as something inherently human-made, and contrasting it with the inauthentic output produced by AI. He refers to this as a "major shift: authenticity is becoming infinitely reproducible." While it’s true that many talented creators share remarkably valuable work on Instagram, a significant portion of human-generated content is also lacking in authenticity. This trend is a fundamental characteristic of algorithm-driven social media, rather than an anomaly.
Creators quickly learn what type of content the algorithm favors, leading them to replicate successful formulas. As a result, we often find numerous influencers producing similar-looking posts. How else can you explain instances where two influencers appear so alike (https://www.theverge.com/2024/11/26/24303161/amazon-influencers-lawsuit-copyright-clean-aesthetic-girl-sydney-nicole-gifford-alyssa-sheil) that it's nearly impossible to determine if one is merely copying the other or if their similarities are coincidental? The algorithm prioritizes content that keeps viewers engaged, not necessarily the most insightful or original. In this sense, the algorithm itself has transformed us into robotic creators. Consequently, the first type of content that AI will likely supersede is this inauthentic, predictable human output. Mosseri is right to express concern about this.
Recently, I came across an Instagram video featuring a mother repeatedly counting her children (https://www.instagram.com/reel/DTguEYuAQEx/?utmsource=igwebcopylink&igsh=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ==) while watching them in a public space. "One, two, three," she nodded as she accounted for them, then began the count anew. The caption read, "Who else does this too? It’s not at all exhausting." Personally, I don’t relate, as I only have one child to keep an eye on. Nevertheless, the memory of that video stuck with me, as I had seen it when she first posted it in 2024 (https://www.instagram.com/reel/C3tcF9avtUB/?utmsource=igwebcopylink&igsh=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ==). This strategy of reposting serves as a direct response to the algorithm, aiming to attract new followers or test if that specific video resonates better in a different context. I've noticed similar behavior on Threads, where a comedian I follow retreads the same joke weeks or months later to capture a different algorithmic momentum. Even those sharing ostensibly "authentic" content often find themselves adopting robotic behaviors to succeed within the algorithm’s constraints.
I suspect that none of this comes as a surprise to Mosseri. His post suggests he is aware of this reality: "Flattering imagery is cheap to produce and boring to consume," he states. And while that's true, Instagram's primary function is to present fresh content upon opening the app and to keep users engaged during their time there; hence, quantity tends to outweigh quality. What takes significant time and resources to create? Content that genuinely feels real, which is the least sustainable form of production when every influencer is pressured to operate as a solo small business. Unless Instagram can devise a clever new method to incentivize authentic creators, I believe Mosseri should prepare for an increase in that kind of inauthentic content — regardless of whether it originates from a human or an AI.
