What if social media users controlled their own newsfeed?
A court case against Meta says that Section 230 intended for users have the right to unfollow friends
If you were doubting how important recommender systems are to social media companies, a lawsuit filed last week against Meta makes it crystal clear. At the heart of this legal battle is a fundamental question: Shouldn't users have the power to decide what they do and don't see online?
The lawsuit filed by Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University on behalf of Professor Ethan Zuckerman directly challenges how social media feeds are curated. Professor Zuckerman's proposed browser extension, 'Unfollow Everything 2.0,' would enable Facebook users to disengage from the algorithmically driven content that dominates their feeds, by allowing them to unfollow friends, pages and groups en masse, thus resetting their digital interactions on their terms.
Section 230 of the United States’ Communications Decency Act, often spotlighted for shielding social media companies from liability for user-posted content, is central to the argument. Zuckerman's suit argues that Section 230 (c) (2) (b) grants users the right to tailor their internet access and usage. “Congress intended to promote the development of filtering tools that enable users to curate their online experiences and avoid content they would rather not see,” the case states.
“The same statute that immunizes Meta from liability for the speech of its users gives users the right to decide what they see on the platform,” argues the Knight Institute.
Ramya Krishnan, a senior staff attorney at the Knight Institute, told the Washington Post, "Social media companies can design their products as they want to, but users have the right to control their experience on social media platforms, including by blocking content they consider to be harmful. Users don’t have to accept Facebook as it’s given to them. The same statute that immunizes Meta from liability for the speech of its users gives users the right to decide what they see on the platform.”
User autonomy and researcher access
Beyond the aspect of enabling greater user autonomy, the case is also key for the ongoing drive for more access and transparency for researchers to the platform - including the use of add-ons that explore how social platform algorithms affect user behavior. This matters given most platforms’ move against third-party tools which boost user’s ability to tailor their online experiences. For example, in 2023 X (formerly Twitter) banned app makers from creating their own “clients” like Twitterrific and Tweetbot.
Professor Zuckerman plans to test four research hypotheses, according to the court documents: (1) that users who access Facebook without the newsfeed will spend less time on Facebook, (2) that they will report a subjective feeling of increased control over their Facebook usage, (3) that they will not report a subjective feeling of decreased satisfaction in using Facebook, and (4) that they will be exposed to content from fewer friends in a browsing session and fewer friends overall.
If Unfollow 2.0 were to be deployed and used for research, participants would also be asked questions like, “Do you prefer Facebook’s user experience after unfollowing everything?” “Do you think you are spending less time on Facebook after unfollowing everything?” and “Would you like to encounter Facebook posts from more or fewer people?”
Previously, Meta targeted and banned 'Unfollow Everything,' a tool that allowed users to mass-unfollow content, significantly altering their news feed engagement. The creator of the original Unfollow app, Louis Barclay, faced legal threats that led him to discontinue the tool, fearing severe repercussions from Meta, including a lifetime ban from Facebook. Writing in Slate in 2021, Barclay explained why he created Unfollow Everything in the first place: “I realized you don’t actually need to have a News Feed. If you unfollow everything—all of your friends, groups, and pages—your News Feed ends up empty. This leaves you free to use Facebook without the feed, or to more actively curate it by refollowing only those friends and groups whose posts you really want to see.”
“I had gained a staggering amount of control. I was no longer tempted to scroll down an infinite feed of content,” recalls the creator of the first Unfollow Everything app, Louis Barclay.
He described the first time he unfollowed everything as “near-miraculous. I had lost nothing, since I could still see my favorite friends and groups by going to them directly. But I had gained a staggering amount of control. I was no longer tempted to scroll down an infinite feed of content. The time I spent on Facebook decreased dramatically. Overnight, my Facebook addiction became manageable.”
The fear of inevitable legal challenges by Meta to “Unfollow Everything 2.0' prompted Zuckerman to proactively seek judicial clarification on the legality of his tool under Section 230.
This legal battle could be a landmark in asserting user rights over digital spaces, challenging the very algorithms that shape our digital lives. If successful, it could pave the way for a new era of digital autonomy and greater understanding of how key design shifts can deliver a safer and healthier digital experience.