Today, and together with organisations from the broad LGBTQIA+ community, we sent a demand letter to Meta. In it, we demand that Meta stops blocking accounts without offering proper reasoning and without offering the opportunity to challenge those decisions. By neglecting to do so, Meta is in breach of the law.

Why this action?

In recent months, numerous Instagram accounts, including those of organizations within the LGBTQIA+ community, have been deleted. Many accounts disappeared without explanation. Others were told that they had violated rules around 'human exploitation' or 'account integrity'. However, Meta never made clear which specific content allegdedly broke which particular rule. In many cases, the take-down of one account led to the take-down of related or personal accounts from the same administrator, again without a proper explanation. Moreover, users were not given an effective opportunity to challenge these decisions. This is not in compliance with the law, which requires platforms to provide "clear and specific statement of reasons" and allow users an easy way to appeal their decisions.

Our demands

That's why today law firm Brandeis sent a demand letter to Meta on behalf of us and a dozen directly affected organizations. Our demands are clear:

• Meta is not allowed to block accounts unless they can offer a very good reason for doing so. This can only be done after a person has established that the content an account was posting is not allowed on Meta's platforms. For each decision, the user must receive a proper explanation.

• Meta must also explain exactly why these organizations' accounts were blocked. What rule was violated? And was the decision made by a person or a machine?

• Meta must designate a contact person to enable direct communication, so that users are not reliant on fully automated processes.

For this action, we've joined forces with BUTT Magazine, Repro Uncensored, Club Church, The Queer Agenda, Queer Gallery, COC Nederland, Tillatec, Sauna Nieuwezijds, Free Willie Amsterdam, Striptopia and No Limits! Art Castle.

Part of a larger problem

Under the Digital Services Act (DSA) Meta is required to explain comprehensively, fairly and transparently why it blocks accounts and give users the opportunity to challenge its decisions. With this and other obligations, the DSA aims to shift power from dominant social media platforms to the users of these platforms.

This violation of the DSA is not an isolated incident. At the end of 2025, we also saw the deletion of LGBTQIA+ accounts without proper explanation or redress options. And the LGBTQIA+ community isn't the only one facing these issues. For example, we also see that the reach is limited of posts about the genocide in Gaza.

We are committed to effective compliance and enforcement of the DSA. We call on regulators to act decisively. Where they fall short, we intervene with legal action. Like this one.