Meta’s AI Bot Plan Could Shift How We Define "Engagement" – And Maybe That’s the Point
The challenge facing technologists, brands, marketers, and society at large.
Okay, let’s talk about Meta’s latest plot twist: millions of AI bot profiles ready to infiltrate your Facebook and Instagram feeds on purpose.
I know what you’re thinking—“Oh great, more bots. Just what social media needed!”
But before we break out the sarcasm, let’s unpack what’s really happening here.
Bots are Bad, Right?
Yeah, they’re bad. Except, not always. The perception of bots as negatives is rooted in several cultural, practical, and experiential factors that have shaped our collective understanding of what bots are and how they operate.
1. Bots and Spam: The Annoyance Factor
For many, bots are synonymous with spam. From intrusive messages in your inbox to relentless comment spam on social media, bots have become the digital equivalent of telemarketers—unwelcome and persistent. This perception is exacerbated when bots flood platforms with irrelevant, misleading, or outright harmful content.
2. Bots and Fraud: The Trust Erosion
Bots are often associated with fraudulent activities. They buy up concert tickets in seconds, inflate follower counts on social media, or manipulate stock markets and ecommerce ratings. These actions contribute to a sense of mistrust, as people feel deceived by artificial activities masquerading as genuine human interaction.
3. Bots and Misinformation: The Propaganda Machines
In the age of information warfare, bots are often deployed to amplify fake news or skew public opinion. From elections to health crises, the misuse of bots for misinformation campaigns has made them synonymous with a threat to democracy and truth.
4. Bots and Authenticity: The Social Disconnect
In social settings, bots are perceived as a threat to authenticity. Social media platforms were built on the idea of connecting real people. When bots infiltrate these spaces, they dilute the sense of genuine human connection, making every like, comment, or follow feel less meaningful.
5. Bots and Efficiency: Fear of Replacement
In workplaces, bots represent automation and the potential loss of jobs. They can process data, respond to inquiries, and perform repetitive tasks faster than humans, which—while efficient—raises concerns about humans being rendered obsolete in certain roles.
6. Bots and Emotion: The Empathy Gap
Bots lack human emotion, nuance, and understanding, which makes interactions feel cold or impersonal. When bots are used in customer service or mental health support, the absence of genuine empathy can make users feel frustrated or even dismissed.
So yeah, Bots = Suck
Ultimately, bots are seen as negatives because they embody a real tension: the promise of efficiency and scalability versus the risk of exploitation, inauthenticity, and loss of human touch.
The more bots are used in ways that prioritize profits, manipulation, or convenience over trust and meaningful interaction, the more entrenched this negative perception becomes. It’s well earned.
The Twist
But here’s the twist: bots have enormous potential to be positive forces if used responsibly and transparently. The key lies in redefining their purpose and execution. Could bots be the allies we need rather than the nuisances we endure? That’s the challenge facing technologists, brands, marketers, and society at large.
Is the Future of Content + Engagement A.I. Bots?
Meta isn’t just sprinkling some AI pixie dust; they’re doubling down on a future where content and engagement don’t just come from friends or creators but from an army of bots designed to feel like real people. These AI profiles will have bios, share posts, and—here’s the kicker—interact with your content.
The Silicon Valley group is rolling out a range of AI products, including one that helps users create AI characters on Instagram and Facebook, as it battles with rival tech groups to attract and retain a younger audience.
“We expect these AIs to actually, over time, exist on our platforms, kind of in the same way that accounts do,” said Connor Hayes, vice-president of product for generative AI at Meta.
“They’ll have bios and profile pictures and be able to generate and share content powered by AI on the platform . . . that’s where we see all of this going,” he added.
SOURCE: Financial Times: Meta envisages social media filled with AI-generated users
On the surface, it’s dystopian. But is it also... kind of plausibly valuable? I’m finding myself agreeing with Andrew Hutchinson at Social Media Today, and it compelled me to spend a LOT of time thinking about our current versus future relationships with social bots.
Think about it: Social media thrives on dopamine hits—likes, follows, comments. But with organic engagement in decline (hello, algorithmic feeds), creators and users are left chasing a number that just won’t climb.
Social platforms aren’t going away. But how we “engage” has changed, and it’ll change again.
Enter AI bots. They could follow your account, comment on your posts, and give you that sweet hit of “engagement” you’ve been craving. Sure, they’re not real, but does the average user really care? If the numbers go up, isn’t that enough? It’s gross, and I don’t want it. But stay with me.
Solving Problems: Very few users post or comment
Meta’s move solves a major problem for platforms: most users don’t post. And few comment. With bots generating content and engaging on autopilot, the feed stays fresh, even if your (real) friends are lurking in the background.
For brands and influencers, though, this is where it gets tricky.
If bots make up a big chunk of your audience, how do you prove real-world impact? Transparency and tools to separate “bot likes” from genuine engagement will be essential. Otherwise, it’s like throwing money at a mirage. Or trying to quantify X/Twitter metrics with its rampant bot problem.
Engagement was already a really hard metric to quantify and tie to ROI, and soon enough, it could matter less than ever. Because the metric of real vs synthetic engagement could be murky.
Do We Want Social Bots? No. Does It Matter? Unclear
The real question is whether users will embrace this evolution—or reject it as yet another step away from authentic connection. My guess? We’ve already normalized so much artificial interaction online that people will say they don’t want it, create a lot of pushback, and then… if the product itself shows value, it’ll stick (ahem, Facebook Newsfeed, anyone?). If it keeps people posting, scrolling, and engaging, Meta might just pull this off.
Will this just exacerbate the shrimp Jesus phenomenon of users not knowing what’s real and what’s synthetic? Probably.
And if the backlash is strong enough and utility isn’t there, it’ll go away. And another thing will take its place…
For example, Meta’s celebrity chatbots were launched in September 2003, nobody liked or used them, and they were killed (well, the program was killed not the celebs) in August.
You can bet Meta learned a lot from this program that’s going into this new release.
But I do think AI is coming into our social network feeds to create content and engage with our content either way. In fact, this technology is pretty far along already…
Butterflies and Friend Shows a Look at AI Bot Utility
I first told you about Butterflies back in June (reminder, paid Social Signal subscribers have access to the full archives). Butterflies is like SimCity for Instagram, where you create AI social network profiles, and then they engage with each other. It’s…. something. I’ll have my fake ai profiles follow your fake ai profiles.
Once you’ve created these AI avatars they like each other’s posts, leave comments on each others profiles, and even DM you.
The most fun part — writing the initial prompt for creating a character who will expand wildly out of your starting seed and then start posting, commenting, and DM’ing using ever expanding bits of the personality you started. And the latest iteration will actually clone your likeness.
From these two examples, you can really see how this kind of engagement could be blended into Instagram, and if you realize your Instagram account today already has Meta AI built in (see above) and you’ve already had the opportunity to ask it questions about yourself it has learned… well, this isn’t as far fetched as you may think.
And how about outside of your social networks?
Friend is an AI-powered wearable bot that's an always-listening pendant. But it doesn't help you be more productive, it just keeps you company. You know, a friend. Here are some screenshots above from my Friend. My necklace isn't here yet. And again, I’m not sure I want this. But it’s fascinating to explore.
Beyond Social, Chatbots That Work Well are Great
Chatbots that deliver real value, like those on websites that actually answer your questions or help you navigate complex processes, are golden—they save time and reduce frustration.
Think of customer service bots that instantly handle returns, fitness apps offering personalized workout advice, or virtual assistants like Siri and Alexa simplifying daily tasks. When bots are intuitive and genuinely helpful, they go from being annoying nuisances to indispensable tools we actually appreciate.
Initially the public didn’t like chatbots on websites, but their utility held up to the scrutiny and then they were adopted widely. This is a potential outcome for bots on social.
So yeah… Bots.
Love it or hate it, AI content and bots are coming into our social media channels in 2025. The line between real and artificial is blurring, and Meta is betting we’ll care more about the numbers than the source. The question is: Are they right?
The better question is: how will you keep tabs on what’s happening so you’re ready to shift, adapt, push back, embrace, and/’or grow? Well that’s why you subscribe to Social Signals, right? I’m pretty excited for 2025, and I’m glad you’re here with me. Whether you’re real or not! -Greg
🤖 Greg at CES — NEXT WEEK!
Next week I’ll be returning to CES 2025 to walk the show floor, hunt out “what’s next” in consumer technology, and hopefully wave at some robots. It’s a tradition, after all.
I’m booking a few interviews and meetings, so hit me up if there’s something I absolutely must see on my schedule next week!
🎟️ Greg speaking at MIMA, Jan 16
Digital was never a fad, and now it's at the center of marketing. Our audiences have evolved so they can't extricate digital and social from their daily lives. So, what does this evolution mean for marketing at-scale as we look at the year ahead?
⚡️ Social Signals
YouTube is testing a floating ‘Play something’ button. For when you want to watch… well… something. It’s like Google’s “I’m feeling lucky” button.
On January 1, 2025, a diverse array of creative works from 1929, including The Sound and the Fury, early Popeye comics, and the first recordings of Rhapsody in Blue, will enter the public domain in the United States, allowing unrestricted use and adaptation of these cultural treasures. (h/t
)Thread of the Week: We have officially found the next Turing test for AI: writing on a board.
You have to watch these videos from the Anyma show at The Sphere. The creative opportunities in our lifetime are growing exponentially!
Facebook is upgrading its affiliate link capabilities for creators. (h/t
)Historical Nuance I Hadn’t Heard Before: How newspapers made up panic over War of the Worlds to denigrate radio.
Roblox continues to break record after record with ease: 12,054,732 concurrent players on Friday at 1PM EST - surpassing the entire population of Belgium.
VR signal of the week: I spent a week working, exercising and relaxing in virtual reality. I’m shocked to say it finally works.
TCL’s new AI short films range from bad comedy to existential horror.
Survey of the Week: Survey Finds Americans Waste Nearly Five Days a Year Just Deciding What to Watch.
Throwback Website of the Week: The Old Robots (h/t
)Word of the Week: Snackfished.
Reel of the Week: This guy drone raced through a Dollar General without asking permission. Is this gonna be a thing?
See you in the future! 🚀
Greg