Journalists, researchers, and politicians are upset about Meta’s decision to shut down CrowdTangle, a tool used to monitor disinformation on Facebook and Instagram. Meta replaced it with the Content Library, limiting access to only select academic and nonprofit institutions. Many users find the Content Library less transparent and user-friendly compared to CrowdTangle.
Tech and VC heavyweights have joined the Disrupt 2025 agenda, supporting Meta’s decision to prioritize the Content Library over CrowdTangle. However, some researchers argue that CrowdTangle provided more comprehensive and useful data, especially regarding influential accounts and engagement levels. They point out that the Content Library lacks many of the features that made CrowdTangle valuable, such as tracking follower growth over time and creating interactive charts and public dashboards.
Despite Meta’s claims that the Content Library offers more detailed insights into user experiences on Facebook and Instagram, critics like Cameron Hickey argue that it falls short in functionality and usability compared to CrowdTangle. The debate continues as users question Meta’s motives and the impact of replacing a widely-used tool with a less effective alternative.
Users can only download posts for accounts that have greater than 25,000 followers, but many politicians fall short. Researchers are left with limited options, resorting to scraping data directly. Meta is not granting access to watchdogs that previously used CrowdTangle to track misinformation. Right-leaning pages had more engagement than non-aligned or left-leaning pages. Civil society groups are hindered in monitoring Facebook and Instagram during elections. Musk limited access to Twitter API after buying Twitter, now charging $42,000/month for limited access.
