Will Instagram's plan of hiding our like counters make it a better place than Facebook?

Instagram is currently testing how users react to posts whose like counter has been hidden. Users included in the test are unable to see the number of likes their posts receive (check below how a post with hidden likes looks).

If your first reaction is “Ok, and how's that a big deal?” then let me familiarise you with the emotions and expectations that such a move has awoken in people. Many seem to believe that a hidden like counter would almost magically transform Instagram, from a platform where influencers and brands succeed, based on bloated like counters, into a wonderful virtual space, where you and I and everyone else would post authentic and captivating content. That’s a nice thought, but can a like counter really change the way likes impact the content we share and like?

The most hopeful opinions to the hidden counter--as far as I have been able to read can be summed up as: “I think removing the ability to see likes removes the pressure to only post what performs best. You can post what you want without feeling like people can see the drop in engagement and judge you for it”. This is btw exactly what the Head of Instagram Adam Mosseri suggested during the F8 conference a couple of months ago: â€œWe want people to worry a little bit less about how many likes they’re getting on Instagram and spend a bit more time connecting with the people that they care about.”

The Head of Instagram Adam Mosseri argued: â€œWe want people to worry a little bit less about how many likes they’re getting on Instagram and spend a bit more time connecting with the people that they care about.”

Before you judge his motivations ask yourself: does he have a point then? Are we missing out on being better people, who create authentic content because of that damn like counter? Don’t dismiss the idea just yet. Like Mosseri, I am old enough to remember how social posting worked at the dawn of Facebook and Twitter, so let's go waaaay back... all the way to the beginning of time, just after the big bang, to 2005.

What dark times these were. Smartphones were still 2 years away, no one outside of comicon knew who the Avengers were and Nokia was the most successful mobile phone brand in the world. Facebook had begun to take its first steps outside of university campuses and twitter was a year away from its launch. Just mentioning the words “Social Media” to anyone would be received by a blank stare and with reason; Facebook was on its early adoption stage. We know thanks to Netflix’s Amercian Meme that Paris Hilton was the biggest influencer in 2005, and she was mainly creating TV and print rather than online content. YouTube was an obscure video platform, where videos over five minutes would take several minutes to load, and a couple of thousand views would firmly place you within the popular videos of the platform

Way back then, making your first posts on Facebook or Twitter felt like stepping into the dance floor and showing off the moves that you had patiently practiced a week earlier: you had no idea how people were going to react and escaping embarrassment was already a mild success. What we today feel are social media clichés (posting a photo of your breakfast or a bathroom selfie) were actually avant garde behaviors at that time. I can still remember the countless posts on twitter that sounded like an almost clinical diary of everyday activities: “Woke up early for an exam”, “Feeling hungry after a run”, “Today was a good day, getting ready for bed”. Way back then the overwhelming pressure to get likes was nonexistent. A couple of likes here and there would suffice, so beginning the tit-for-tat culture that characterises the social media behavior of many groups of friends today: I like your post, if you like mine.

Way back (in 2005) the overwhelming pressure to get likes was nonexistent. A couple of likes here and there would suffice, and so beginning the tit-for-tat culture that characterises the social media behavior of many groups of friends today: I like your post, if you like mine.

But, jumping back to Mosseri’s argument, did those early days, where likes mattered less, result in more genuine, relevant or authentic content?

Well not really… but a bit of nuance is deserved. Did people feel less concerned about getting likes when they posted? Yes! No real argument there. Did having less pressure to get likes meant also that content was better? Sadly, or rather expectedly depending on your level of cynicism) it didn't, and this is where the real problem faced by Facebook lies: you can’t be a platform meant to connect family and friends and at the same time be a platform full of great quality content. And of course you also can't be a platform that posts anything and everything and be full of awesome content.

We’ve come a long way since 2005 and the reality that Facebook faces today, by trying to be both is kinda the worst of both worlds: it is neither a platform meant to mainly connect family and friends and it is also not a platform replete with high quality content.

By choosing not to limit the content published to family and friends Facebook unwillingly (but surely) became a media channel and it is this fate, I think, what Instagram fears will be its own.

Connecting friends and family is a noble goal. Yet, given that brands, celebrities, influencers and other media publishers are, for the most part, not our friends or part of our family, then it is easy to see that their content is simply irrelevant to the platform’s mission in the best of cases. In the worst --and we have already seen it happen--their content even runs against that mission, encouraging people to abandon the idea of having real personal relationships through the social platform entirely.

Now, let’s imagine for a second that a hidden counter means, as Mosseri suggests, that people will now spend their time on social media connecting with the people they care about.

Sounds great, right? This would mean that most users will pay more attention to the content of friends and family and much less to brands, celebrities, influencers and other third parties. In other words this would mean the end of organic branded content on Instagram. And if Mosseri would be really serious about it then it could mean RIP branded content in all its forms.

We’ve seen how Facebook thwarted organic content from brands out of most people’s newsfeeds, so no surprise there. Very few people however believe that the reason behind Facebook’s move was fulfilling its brand mission--I can almost see eyes rolling at the thought of me trying to convince you to take that statement seriously. We are all cynical and not without reason; we know that pushing brands to focus on sponsored content only is probably the real reason behind the move.

So, does this all mean that the relatively healthy organic reach that brands and influencers enjoy on instagram is about to disappear? 

Given the precedent from Facebook that is indeed a real possibility. There is of course still the possibility that Instagram’s autonomy will count for something, but it's hard to say.

Very recently I attended Facebook's FMS conference in Rotterdam, where Instragram presented its mission as "connecting people with the content they love". This is a broad enough statement to fit in much more than family and friends... so, you make your own conclusions.