Instagram has quietly rolled out new restrictions on its Live streaming feature, blocking accounts with fewer than 1,000 followers and private accounts from broadcasting.
The change, implemented without any formal announcement from the social media platform, has left small creators and casual users frustrated and confused, raising concerns about the platform’s commitment to accessibility and inclusivity.
Users with fewer than 1,000 followers or private accounts now see a message when attempting to go live: “Your account is no longer eligible for Live. We changed requirements to use this feature. Only public accounts with 1,000 followers or more will be able to create live videos.” This sudden shift has blindsided small creators who relied on Live to connect with their audiences, whether for showcasing products, sharing creative work, or engaging in real-time conversations. For those still building their following, the restriction feels like a major setback to their growth.
The lack of transparency from Instagram has fueled frustration. Meta, Instagram’s parent company, has not provided an official explanation for the change, leaving users to speculate on the reasons. Some believe it’s a cost-cutting move, as live streaming demands significant server resources and bandwidth. Limiting access to accounts with larger audiences could reduce the strain of supporting streams with low viewership. Others suggest the policy aims to curb misuse, such as inappropriate content from throwaway accounts, by setting a higher follower threshold.
Also read:
- AI Agents Revolutionize Venture Funding with Lightning-Fast Growth
- Japan: The World’s Must-Visit Destination in 2025
- First Teaser for Avatar 3 Finally Drops: A Dark Journey Awaits
The change also aligns Instagram with industry trends. For example, TikTok requires 1,000 followers to go live, while YouTube sets a lower bar at 50 subscribers. By adopting a similar model, Instagram may be prioritizing established creators over casual users. However, this shift risks alienating the grassroots community that helped make the platform a cultural phenomenon.
The impact is especially felt by small creators in regions like India, where Instagram Live has been a vital tool for connecting with local audiences. From home chefs to independent artists, many used Live to foster tight-knit communities without relying on paid promotion. For them, the restriction feels like a betrayal, forcing them to either chase followers or turn to less discoverable alternatives like video calls.
On social media, users have expressed their disappointment, with some calling for Instagram to reconsider. “This is a slap in the face to small creators,” one user wrote. “Instagram was supposed to be about connection, not just clout.” Others argue the change favors influencers and brands, widening the gap in the creator economy.
Critics see this as part of a broader pattern under Mark Zuckerberg’s leadership at Meta, where accessibility is sacrificed for efficiency and control. By prioritizing polished, monetizable content over authentic interactions, Instagram is drifting from its roots as a platform for everyone.
The Live streaming restriction is just the latest move — alongside stricter content moderation and algorithm changes — that seems to favor scale over spontaneity.
As Instagram evolves into a curated space for influencers and advertisers, small creators are left with tough choices: grind for followers, pivot to other platforms, or abandon Live altogether. The question remains: will this change enhance the Live experience, as Meta claims, or simply deepen the divide between the platform’s haves and have-nots? For now, in Zuckerberg’s Instagram, only the popular get a stage.
