Pinterest has acknowledged that a software glitch led to the mass deactivation of user accounts earlier this month. In posts on Instagram and X, the company stated that an internal error caused its safety filters to over-enforce content policies, resulting in some accounts being mistakenly deactivated. The company apologized for the frustration this caused and emphasized its commitment to making Pinterest a safe and positive platform.
The apology followed a wave of complaints that surfaced online last month. Users across Instagram, TikTok, and X shared screenshots showing their accounts being locked without clear explanations. Some users reported receiving emails stating they were permanently banned. Initially, Pinterest responded by asking affected users to send direct messages, suggesting the issue was limited.
Mainstream tech outlets picked up the story as well. On May 2, The Verge described “sweeping pin removals and account suspensions” that left people baffled. Some of the pins flagged for “adult content” included innocent topics like quilting magazines and Minecraft bunk beds.
Since then, all recent posts from Pinterest on Instagram have garnered numerous comments from users asking to reinstate their accounts. With so much chatter, the company eventually issued statements on Instagram and X.
It’s not clear whether human staff or an automated system triggered the over-enforcement. Earlier, speculation grew that an AI moderation algorithm might have malfunctioned. Pinterest’s apology did not address that directly. Instead, the company said it has already reinstated many of the affected accounts and promised improvements to respond faster when mistakes happen in the future.
Pinterest allows users to appeal deactivations, but throughout the ordeal, many people reported hitting dead ends. Appeal notices warned that reviews were delayed due to a higher volume of requests than usual. For some, sending a direct message was the only way to get a reply.
In its apology, the company thanked users for their patience as it worked to make things right. It did not provide a firm timeline for completing all the restorations but indicated a desire to avoid a repeat of the issue.