Instagram says it doesn’t want your tweet round ups

The internet is full of copycat, stolen, reposted, and low-effort content — and Meta, at least publicly, has said it is working to cut off some of the reach. Beginning in 2024, the company has made incremental announcements saying it would begin limiting “unoriginal” content from being recommended on Instagram. It meant that if you were downloading and reposting someone’s Reels, or spamming the same clip over and over, your content wouldn’t show up in recommendation feeds or places like the Explore tab. Similar rules were later announced for Facebook, where “unoriginal” accounts risk losing their ability to monetize content. The idea is that the original creator of the content should be the one getting distribution and views — but it’s also at odds with how a lot of social media is created and shared, especially in an era when the same content is shared over and over by different accounts. Instagram is now expanding those rules beyond video content to photos and carousels, effectively putting a whole new group of accounts on notice. In order to be eligible for recommendations, accounts must post content they “wholly created or reflects [their] unique perspective, such as photos or videos [they] took, content [they] designed, or third-party content that [they] materially edit.” That means aggregator accounts that are regularly sharing photo dumps of viral tweets or screenshots of TikTok videos without adding anything could potentially be on the chopping block. But even more curatorial accounts could be swept up in the new rule: An account that shares mood boards full of photos found on Pinterest would also potentially be swept up in the new restrictions. A meme with your own text overlaid or that you put your own spin on might be fine, but a screenshot of a meme with no original context might be deemed unoriginal. The content will still be visible on Instagram, but without being recommended to non-followers, reach would likely plummet for accounts that primarily post unoriginal content sourced from someone else. Accounts can become eligible for recommendations again if they post “original” content in a 30-day rolling window. There’s a tension between Meta’s goals and the wider social media landscape. On one hand, trying to funnel views and traction to the person who actually made something is a noble effort. It’s also true that feeds on Instagram and other platforms are clogged with duplicative photos and videos. Meta’s efforts are also coming at a time when tactics for going viral have become increasingly spammy, and when some see the key to going viral as being primarily an issue of scale. Take recent discussions of “clipping,” for example — the economy of meme and aggregation pages that cut down and repost short clips of longer podcasts, videos, streams, or events. Many of these accounts are paid to do so, and earn money based on how many views they can garner. The biggest subjects of clips might have thousands of accounts vying for reach and clipping the same moments. Here’s a recent example of some of the content on Instagram of the streamer Clavicular encountering a penguin: [Image: https://platform.theverge.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2026/04/Screenshot-2026-04-29-at-11.19.40AM.png?quality=90&strip=all] It’s the same clip over and over with slightly different text overlaid or with long, AI-sounding captions describing the streamer. (Here are two posts from two different accounts with identical captions. One of them has 855,000 views.) Clipping allows even influencers with relatively small followings to hire an army of social media content producers to try to engagement-hack their way to virality. I asked Meta whether accounts primarily clipping other streamers would be considered “unoriginal.” ”We look at a range of factors, not just whether similar content already exists on Instagram, to determine if an account is posting original content or re-uploading others’ work,” says Cullen Heaney, a Meta spokesperson. “If an account shares something it didn’t create or meaningfully edit, regardless of what app or platform it came from, that would be considered unoriginal. Creators who want to use content from others should put their own spin on it and add real creative value to stay eligible for recommendations.” Are the Clavicular penguin posts “original”? Perhaps just enough for Instagram standards. But if Meta began taking action against these accounts and deemed them “unoriginal,” the entire business model for clippers would collapse. But there’s also the inescapable reality that if people are watching one of 5,000 posts that cut down the same original material, that’s still time spent on the platform; users consuming and engaging with algo-slop is still good for Instagram’s bottom line. The endless recommendation feeds need something to serve up next.