New York — Instagram users, including high-profile celebrities such as singers Demi Lovato and Gracie Abrams, have voiced frustration over what they describe as Meta’s inability—or refusal—to allow them to unfollow official accounts tied to President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance, and First Lady Melania Trump. The issue has sparked widespread discussion and skepticism about the platform’s operations and its handling of political content, fueling concerns over transparency and impartiality at Meta.
Gracie Abrams took to her Instagram story to detail her struggle, stating she was compelled to unfollow the accounts for @vp and @potus multiple times, only for the platform to seemingly refollow the accounts automatically. Sharing her discontent, she remarked, “How curious!” and explained that she eventually resorted to blocking the accounts altogether to ensure she would not be re-associated with them.
Similarly, Demi Lovato expressed her frustration through her own Instagram story, revealing her failed attempts to disengage from Trump’s account. “I have unfollowed this guy twice today,” she stated, mirroring the confusion and irritation of many users.
Amid this outcry, social media users began issuing warnings to their followers, urging those who oppose the Trump administration to double-check their followed accounts and ensure they are not inadvertently supporting the president and vice president on Instagram. Alongside these complaints, additional concerns emerged regarding allegations of Instagram’s hashtag censorship. The hashtag #Democrat was reportedly blocked for some users earlier this week, further fueling debates about potential partisan bias on Meta’s platforms.
Responding to these claims, Meta spokesperson Andy Stone addressed the situation, denying allegations that users were forced to follow Trump, Vance, or other official accounts. According to Stone, the transition of official Instagram and Facebook accounts between administrations is a routine procedure that occurs during presidential transitions. He reiterated that this process was implemented during the shift from the Obama administration to Trump’s in 2017 and again in 2020 when President Biden assumed office.
In a post on X (formerly Twitter), Stone clarified, “People were not made to automatically follow any of the official Facebook or Instagram accounts for the President, Vice President, or First Lady. This is the same procedure we followed during the last presidential transition.” He further explained that delays in processing follow and unfollow requests might occur as these accounts are handed over to the new administration.
Despite these assurances, the controversy has amplified scrutiny of Meta’s recent policy changes, which some argue reflect a pronounced shift toward conservative priorities. This perceived shift became more apparent in the weeks leading up to Trump’s inauguration. Notably, Meta replaced its chief policy officer with a prominent Republican, appointed Trump ally and UFC president Dana White to its board of directors, and announced the termination of its third-party fact-checking program in the United States. The company also made contentious revisions to its hateful conduct policies, allowing certain types of previously restricted content. Critics highlighted that these changes included permitting language that objectifies women, sparking backlash from advocates for digital safety and gender equality.
Adding to the controversy, Meta recently discontinued its diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, a decision that many saw as another indicator of its shifting priorities. On the same day, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg appeared on Joe Rogan’s podcast, where he defended the company’s direction, stating that efforts to enforce rigorous content moderation and fact-checking had “destroyed trust” among users. Zuckerberg characterized the recent changes as part of a broader effort to restore faith in Meta’s platforms.
Zuckerberg’s attendance at Trump’s inauguration, alongside several other tech billionaires, further fueled speculation about the company’s alignment with right-wing ideologies. The ongoing incidents have amplified liberal skepticism toward Meta, placing the company at the center of debates over the role of technology giants in shaping public discourse and navigating political transitions. While Meta insists its processes are impartial and consistent, the growing wave of criticism suggests the company faces significant challenges in rebuilding trust across a politically divided audience.
