Instagram leader Adam Mosseri is facing one of tech’s most durable myths: that Instagram listens to your phone’s microphone in order to show you ads. But, as he explains in a new explainer (above), the platform does not listen in on your conversations for ads and offers a clearer perspective of what really fuels those strangely well-placed promotions.
What Mosseri Actually Said About Microphone Access
Mosseri’s argument begins with basic phone etiquette. Both iOS and Android show prominent indicators if an app is currently using your mic, and prompt you to authorize access to it. Sub-rosa recording, LeBeau writes, would not only be “clearly visible” but would tank battery life and expose it to rapid banishment from the app stores — an existential business threat for any major platform.
He then turns to the less mysterious explanation: modern ad systems gather signals from your in-app activities, your interactions on other websites that also use trackers such as pixels or conversions application programming interfaces, and broader interest patterns among people like you.
In other words, you might be seeing the ad because your behavior or that of people in your network indicated you’d be likely to care about it — not because your phone eavesdropped while you talked about it.
Why Those Ads Seem Spookily Well Timed and Relevant
Data sharing and memory bias are two forces that frequently fuel “they must be listening” perceptions.
On data sharing, advertisers regularly send platforms information about visits, sign-ups and purchases in order for those platforms to target people who have already expressed interest somewhere else. The Interactive Advertising Bureau describes how digital ad spending of hundreds of billions of dollars globally every year builds this ecosystem — more than enough to tip the scales from coincidental to creepy.
Then there is social and similarity information. If a product is popular among your close friends or one of these lookalike audiences, systems trained to predict relevance can show it to you. Maybe you’ve never typed a query, but the ad shows up because your graph “rhymes” with the audience that converts.
And finally, time plays tricks on us. Psychologists refer to this as illusory correlation: You remember the one instance an ad appears after discussing something and forget all the times that it doesn’t. Mosseri says that people commonly view an ad, immediately scroll past without registering it, discuss the subject in conversation later, then unwittingly notice the next ad — leading them to assume there was a causal link with their microphone.
The Technical and Regulatory Context for Ad Targeting
Smartphones also add significant friction to any secret listening. Apple indicates a green or yellow state when the camera or microphone is in use and sets clear, intended-use permissions. Android does so similarly, now providing privacy dashboards to identify recent sensor access. Both companies have pulled high-profile apps for secretive behavior in the past, setting a firm deterrent.
Policy shifts also matter. Apple’s App Tracking Transparency crushed cross-app identifiers, propelling platforms toward on-device signals, aggregated reporting and modeled conversions as an alternative to invasive tracking. In Europe, regulators have forced platforms to seek explicit consent for behavioral ads, and data protection authorities have levied fines on firms that failed. Given that backdrop, a covert program with microphones would be reputationally ruinous and easily caught.
For its part, Meta has over the years repeatedly denied microphone-based ad targeting. The company has also explained how signals from its family of apps, partner websites and advertiser uploads contribute to relevance. More recently, it added that its Meta AI virtual assistant may use interactions with users to inflect ad experiences based on settings — another type of access that, while separate from listening, contributes to the paranoia over how consumer conversations become fodder for targeting.
Evidence Versus Anecdote on the Eavesdropping Myth
Independent research supports skepticism of the eavesdropping myth. A study by Northeastern University that instrumented thousands of Android apps detected no evidence that apps were secretly switching on smartphone microphones to capture audio for ad purposes. It did, however, note other privacy concerns including unexpected screen recordings — reminders that the ad ecosystem can feel intrusive without audio surveillance.
Regulators have also zeroed in on data broker practices, location sharing and opaque cross-site tracking. The Federal Trade Commission has filed actions against companies selling sensitive geolocation data, making it clear that ad tech’s reach stems not so much from microphones, but from the arcing plumes of our data.
How to Check Your Instagram and Device Ad Settings
If you are still worried, put away the tinfoil hat — all that is required is a settings check.
- On iOS and Android, check your microphone permissions for Instagram, revoking access if you don’t use voice features.
- Control interests and see “About This Account” for connections in advertiser data with Instagram’s ad preferences.
- Visit activity and ad controls you see across the web, on Meta’s Accounts Center (and off-site activity management).
- Reset your device’s ad identifier and opt out of receiving personalized ads when possible.
The Bottom Line on Instagram Microphone Myths
Mosseri’s denial is what researchers, OS protections and regulatory scrutiny already indicate: the creepy precision of ads can often be explained by advanced modeling and data exchange — not by Instagram eavesdropping on your conversations. The myth lives on in part because coincidences are memorable. The reality is less dramatic — and more fixable — through some combination of transparency, controls and informed user decisions.
