Facebook Tests Paywalled Link Sharing, Raising Fresh Distribution Questions for Creators and Businesses

Facebook Tests Paywalled Link Sharing, Raising Fresh Distribution Questions for Creators and Businesses

Key Takeaways

• Meta is testing a cap that limits certain Facebook accounts to two link posts unless they subscribe to Meta Verified.
• The company describes the trial as a way to evaluate whether expanded link posting adds value to its paid tier.
• Creators and businesses reliant on Facebook for traffic distribution may face new friction points if the test expands.

Facebook has started experimenting with something that would have sounded unthinkable a few years ago: charging for the ability to post more than a couple of links. It’s a small test for now, but an unusually pointed one. And it lands right as new research shows how deeply Facebook remains embedded in people’s everyday online routines, even as the platform tries to reshape how content circulates inside its walls.

The test, confirmed by Meta to TechCrunch, applies to users operating in Facebook’s professional mode as well as those who manage Pages. Under the trial rules, those accounts can publish only two link posts unless they pay for Meta Verified, which starts at $11.99 per month on the web (or $14.99 on mobile). On the surface, it’s a simple limit. But for creators, small businesses, and media operators who rely on Facebook for distribution, it alters a foundational assumption: that you can share outbound links freely.

It also fits into a broader pattern. Meta has gradually reshaped incentives to keep traffic inside its ecosystem, and it’s hardly alone. Platforms like X (formerly Twitter) have downplayed link visibility in the feed, while others have moved distinct features behind subscription plans. Still, applying a paywall to basic link posting is unusually explicit.

Meta says the intention is to understand whether expanded link-posting capacity should be framed as a premium feature for subscribers. The company was careful to note that major publishers aren’t part of this test, though that distinction may matter less to the legions of creators who operate through Pages or professional mode profiles anyway. That’s where it gets tricky: “publisher” means something formal in Meta’s taxonomy, but much of the modern creator and SMB ecosystem doesn’t fit that neat label.

Social media strategist Matt Navarra, who first surfaced screenshots of the test, noted a few workarounds are still available. Links in comments appear to be unrestricted, as are affiliate links or links pointing to Meta-owned properties like Instagram and WhatsApp. It’s a small detail, but it tells you a lot about how the rollout is unfolding. Meta isn’t blocking URLs outright; it’s shaping where—and how—users can surface them.

Trying to understand the company’s logic isn’t hard. In recent transparency reports, Meta has noted that a staggering percentage of US feed views come from posts without links—often upwards of 98%. That number is striking. It suggests that outbound link content simply isn’t a major driver of algorithmic consumption, and most linked posts that do get attention originate from Pages users already follow. It raises a natural question: If the algorithm doesn’t distribute links widely anyway, does Meta see a paywall as a relatively low-risk way to monetize posting behavior without dramatically affecting feed quality?

Navarra told the BBC that the move fits Meta’s broader push to monetize content distribution by putting “the basic ability to send people to other parts of the internet” behind a subscription plan. He also noted the risk of overdependence on any single platform’s business model—advice that B2B teams who rely on social channels for distribution have heard before, but not usually in the context of link posting itself.

For creators and businesses, the impact depends entirely on how they use Facebook today. Many have already seen declining reach on link posts over the years, leading them to shift toward video, Reels, or community groups. Some treat Facebook as a secondary or tertiary distribution channel. But for others—local businesses, niche publishers, e‑commerce operators—it remains a primary traffic engine. Even a modest restriction could push them toward paid subscriptions, alternative posting tactics, or different platforms entirely.

And yet, the workaround allowance hints at something more nuanced. If links in comments remain unaffected, creators may simply adjust: post a Reel or image first, then drop the link below. That strategy already exists because link posts often underperform in the feed. Whether Meta eventually closes that loophole is another story.

For B2B marketers, especially those running performance-driven programs, the test highlights how fragile platform dependencies can be. Teams that rely on Facebook to push high volumes of articles, offers, or product launches may need to map out new operational flows. That could include adjusting the ratio of link to non-link content, rethinking funnel design, or reallocating spend across Meta’s ecosystem. There’s also the practical matter of cost. Paying roughly $15 per month per account won’t break most budgets, but scaled across multiple Pages or regional teams, it becomes a line item that didn’t exist a month ago.

There is a specific irony worth noting here: Facebook’s push toward "professional mode" was originally pitched as an easier on-ramp for creators who didn’t want to manage full Pages infrastructure. Now, those same profiles are exactly where link restrictions are being tested. It’s a reminder that platform incentives evolve quickly, and sometimes in tension with earlier messaging.

Even so, Meta calls this a limited test. There’s no guarantee it will roll out globally, or even continue past the experiment window. But Meta’s earlier experiments—like deprioritizing political content or testing AI-recommended posts from non-followed accounts—show that trials often signal strategic intent.

For businesses, the key is to watch not just the policy itself but the underlying posture: Meta is evaluating whether outbound traffic is something it wants to meter, monetize, or constrain. That’s the structural question running underneath the test, and it remains relevant even if nothing changes immediately. Creators and brands will adjust, as they always do, but the operational cost of staying visible on the platform may be rising.