Act now, tweet later: To be seen as more than virtue signalers, social media chiefs need to start doing the basics against racism

Observing that Instagram seems to allow racism is "deliberately misleading and sensational", according to its boss. But what else are we supposed to think when obvious hate speech goes unchecked under posts calling it inevitable?

Another week, another round of dispiriting, predictable abuse on social media for footballers. It goes without saying that, after a month in which England had exceeded expectations from the moment they beat Germany in the round of 16 weeks ago, Bakayo Saka, Marcus Rashford and Jadon Sancho do not owe anyone an apology. Social media bosses, on the other hand, owe all three – at 19, 21 and 23, barely old enough to have left full-time education in a normal life, let alone be expected to deal with a torrent of racist hatred – that courtesy.

Alas, Adam Mosseri, the Instagram leader who clearly wants to appear accountable by responding to questions about the saddening saga on Twitter, seems to find that word as difficult as he does elusive. You would have assumed that a simple sorry would be the first checkpoint on the list for any executive with a modicum of self-awareness addressing a clear failure of care that has enabled hate speech to be fired at another three high-profile figures from all angles of the planet.

There has been talk from Mosseri of quarterly reports showing improvement, as well as assurances that “no-one is passing the buck”, “it’s on me”, there are “no excuses” and an acknowledgement of the speed with which racist abuse needs to be dealt with online, snuffed out before impressionable, sensitive eyes can see it, not to mention for the protection and comfort of its recipients. His phrasing reads suspiciously like boardroom speak, but that would be entirely forgivable had it led to noticeable positive action.

And guess what? A cursory five-minute glance at Saka’s eloquent Instagram post on the topic, speaking of the hate that the teenager says he “instantly” knew he would receive, reveals clear racist abuse left untouched by Instagram.

While Mosseri might not have been able to locate an apology in his repertoire, he did manage to find an unconvincing explanation that Instagram’s filtering system, which many creators report is impressively effective at removing anything resembling copyright infringement or nudity, had been befuddled and bypassed by emojis such as monkeys and bananas.

Given that these choices of insult are as old as time in social media terms – the most readily and quickly-available form of keyboard attack, they have been a ubiquitous feature whenever this sort of story has veered into unwanted view – Mosseri’s suggestion is so flimsy as to be laughable were the subject not so grimly serious.

Instagram’s owners at Facebook have trumpeted loudly their devotion to stamping out racism, so the idea that a racist could outwit the platform with a monkey emoji comes across as the equivalent of a police force being nonplussed by a thief stealing possessions while insisting they adopt a rigorous approach to robberies.

Even if the plea that a banana icon is beyond their detection was plausible, not all of the venom visible on Saka’s post contains emojis – there are written references to jungles and monkeys aplenty. If only anyone from Instagram could take the onerous and bold responsibility of spending a few minutes clearing it out.

Still, that minimal effort aside, Mosseri says they “do a lot to take down racism”, all of which can be seen in those quarterly reports. No doubt that will be a great consolation to Saka, who will have to track down a copy in between remembering to turn his Instagram notifications off, lest anyone be daring enough to transcend the platform’s filters with an avatar of an orangutan.

Perhaps most bafflingly, Mosseri seems to have gone on the offensive at the insinuation that Instagram is accommodating racism by appearing not to do anything about racism on its pages.

“It is absolutely not OK to send racist emojis, or any kind of hate speech, on Instagram,” he said, sounding as if he takes umbrage that anyone could possibly infer that conclusion from reading the responses that have been allowed to fester under Saka’s post. “To imply otherwise is to be deliberately misleading and sensational.” Pray tell, then, what anyone is supposed to conclude when, a day after Saka made the post, the abuse towards him is still there, looking every inch of the screen like it is deemed OK?

According to Imran Ahmed, the chief executive of the Center for Countering Hate quoted by the BBC, 88 of the 105 accounts identified as having racially abused England footballers are still up. Without wishing to feign knowledge of the kind of tech expertise Instagram appears to claim it specializes in, you again wonder how long it would take to capture the activity of those accounts and remove them.

Presuming each one took five minutes and one employee was delegated to the task, you could perhaps make a case for the job taking more than a day – but you would hope that Instagram would have the speed, agility and resources to work more quickly than that, especially in the context of their purported dedication to removing hate speech.

If that is too much to ask, maybe the time has come to admit defeat. Then again, if we suspend judgement of effectiveness in favor of a more naively hopeful outlook, maybe we can applaud any sign of social media bosses making attempts to communicate directly rather than, say, only surfacing when they are dragged into public inquiries.

The risk is that, without any discernible improvement to a predicament they have the power to change, all of the earnest sentiments can only come across as public relations nonsense, a powderpuff distraction serving to make people all the more bewildered and angry.

Let the actions and results come first, then worry about the insistent tweets later, when they can resound with evidence rather than emptiness. Defend your decisions in public and ask for feedback when the most blatant of racism is being routinely removed, not while anyone with a device can take aim whenever they choose without fear of as much as a deletion.

Until then, no amount of posturing and promises can turn Instagram’s supposed aspirations into meaningful change. A semblance of outright contrition, too, would not hurt.

By Ben Miller