Did Meta use auto-follow to inflate Trump’s social media presence?

President Donald Trump officially returned to the White House this week, setting off political ripples across the US and the world with a raft of executive orders to kickstart his second stint at the White House.

But even as his administration took over, many Instagram and Facebook users noticed something unusual: they were suddenly following his official accounts along with Melania Trump and Vice President JD Vance, even after unfollowing them manually.

Reports of this automatic follow pattern quickly sparked outrage, with some accusing Meta of tampering with user preferences to inflate Trump’s follower count.

The situation became even more contentious when public figures like Demi Lovato and Gracie Abrams who endorsed Harris’ 2024 voiced their frustrations, claiming they had to repeatedly unfollow Trump’s accounts, but it made no difference.

Meta, the company behind Facebook and Instagram, insists this is standard practice during presidential transitions, where official accounts, such as President of the United States(@POTUS), and Vice President (@VP), are automatically handed over to the new administration.

“People were not made to automatically follow any of the official Facebook or Instagram accounts for the President, Vice President, or First Lady,” Meta spokesperson Andy Stone clarified in a post on Threads.

“Those accounts are managed by the White House so with a new administration, the content on those pages changes.”

But if this is a common practice, why are users being compelled to follow accounts they have actively unfollowed? Was this a technical glitch, or could it be a deliberate attempt to boost Trump’s social media presence?

‘Error’ or ‘deliberate’?

Natasha Tusikov, an associate professor at York University who specialises in tech regulation, critiques the implications of such practices.

“Auto-following practices have to balance several considerations,” she tells TRT World.

While platforms must ensure operational continuity during political transitions, they must also respect user autonomy.

Tusikov raises concerns over the allegations that Meta may have deliberately transferred accounts, even from users who manually unfollowed Trump.

“If it’s an error, Meta needs to explain that and fix it. If this was a deliberate policy to transfer accounts, including ‘unfollowers,’ seemingly to artificially boost account numbers, that’s a more serious problem,” she warns.

As a company serving 600 million monthly users, Meta now faces growing scrutiny over its political affiliations.

The company recently ended third-party fact-checking, appointed Trump ally Dana White to its board, and eliminated key diversity programmes.

Mark Zuckerberg, Meta’s CEO, also attended Trump’s inauguration and donated $1 million to his inaugural fund. Such actions have fueled perceptions of Meta’s alignment with Trump’s agenda and ideology, bringing further doubts about its neutrality.

“I think having a culture that celebrates aggression a bit more has its own merits,” Zuckerberg said on a Joe Rogan podcast.

Declining trust in social media

The auto-following controversy reflects a growing mistrust of social media platforms, with many users feeling their choices are being overridden in favour of political or corporate agendas.

American singer Abrams shared her discontent on Instagram, saying she had to unfollow and block the @vp and @potus accounts multiple times, while Lovato stating, “I have unfollowed this guy twice today”, only to see them refollowed automatically.

The issue isn’t confined to public figures. Ordinary users have also voiced their concerns, calling Meta’s actions a disregard for personal autonomy.

“I have now gone and unfollowed him twice and they keep switching it back to ‘following’. I guess maybe if I block him that would work. That’ll be my next step,” one user commented.

Another added: “How am I automatically following….Mark! What do you have going on?”

"I, like others, repeatedly unfollowed Trump and Vance on Monday, only to discover that I was following them again," said Facebook user Anna Springer on Threads, which is also owned by Meta. "Not sure if it was just a glitch or something intentional, but it definitely happened."

The so-called “glitch” also reflects a controversial difference in how social media giants are handling this transition, especially when Joe Biden assumed office in 2021, Twitter’s @POTUS account started with zero followers, unlike Donald Trump in 2017, who inherited Barack Obama’s 13 million followers.

A call for accountability

Meta’s response to this controversy will have long-term implications for how social media platforms balance operational efficiency, ethical responsibility, and user trust.

To restore confidence, experts say that Meta must clarify whether these incidents were unintentional errors or deliberate policies.

Without transparency, the public may increasingly view social media as a vehicle for political manipulation rather than a neutral space for communication.

The debate goes beyond the political figures like Trump or the technicalities of account transitions. It challenges how much control social media companies should have over user interactions and raises critical questions about the ethical responsibilities of platforms that shape public discourse.

“People want control over what accounts they follow, and this control will become increasingly valuable and necessary as Meta, YouTube and others cut back on content moderation policies to please the White House,” says Tusikov.