Cyberstalking doesn’t happen one post at a time. It happens as a pattern.

After months of online harassment across multiple accounts on Instagram, Threads and Facebook, I learned how hard it is to get that pattern recognized when every post, account or incident has to be reported and reviewed separately.

One message might not look threatening on its own. One new account might seem insignificant on its own. A single post may not violate a platform’s rules.

But when someone repeatedly creates, reuses or moves between accounts to contact, monitor, intimidate or harass the same person, those incidents add up to something far more serious than any single report captures.

I learned this firsthand.

I blocked accounts. New accounts appeared. I documented usernames, posts, messages, videos, dates and communications. I reported conduct to social media platforms. I went to law enforcement. I pursued legal remedies.

And that is where I discovered that the same fragmentation that exists on social media can follow a victim into the legal system.

A victim may be able to show dozens of incidents that clearly form a pattern from their perspective, but if every burner account cannot be conclusively connected to the same person, individual pieces of that pattern can become evidentiary dead ends.

Law enforcement may be able to document a threat, a phone call, an impersonation account or another individual incident, while still lacking the information necessary to connect every anonymous account participating in the broader harassment.

The court system presents a similar challenge. A victim seeking protection may have screenshots showing that the harassment repeatedly targets the same person, discusses the same private information and continues immediately after previous accounts are blocked. But anonymous accounts and usernames still have to be connected to an identifiable person with evidence.

That creates an enormous gap.

The victim experiences one continuous campaign.

The platform sees individual posts and accounts.

Law enforcement may see separate incidents.

The court may see evidence that cannot always be attributed to a particular person.

And the person being targeted is left trying to prove, over and over again, that all of these individual pieces are part of the same pattern.

That is why Meta’s reporting system matters far beyond whether one offensive post gets removed.

Meta already possesses information victims and local law enforcement often do not have access to: account histories, technical identifiers, connections between accounts and other internal data that may help identify patterns of coordinated or repeated abuse.

Victims should not have to personally prove who is behind every burner account before Meta’s safety systems recognize that the same person is being repeatedly targeted.

The broader safety concerns surrounding these platforms are already well documented. GLAAD’s 2026 Social Media Safety Index found that Instagram’s safety score fell to 41 and Facebook’s fell to 40. And in August 2026, former Meta engineering director Arturo Béjar testified in a landmark multi-state trial that Meta took a “don’t ask, don’t tell” approach to children under 13 on its platforms and described a company culture that prioritized engagement and growth over safety.

These issues are not identical to cyberstalking, but they point to a larger problem: safety systems that too often respond to individual pieces of harm instead of recognizing the conditions that allow harm to continue.

I’m calling on Meta to create a Cyberstalking Safety Protocol for Instagram, Threads and Facebook.

The protocol should create a clear way for someone experiencing repeated harassment to open one connected safety case and document:

• Related accounts and suspected burner accounts
• Messages, comments and posts
• Previous reports and Meta case numbers
• Impersonation accounts
• Accounts created or used after blocking
• Harassment occurring across Instagram, Threads and Facebook
• Escalating behavior or threats
• Relevant police reports or protective-order documentation, when a victim chooses to provide it

Most importantly, victims should be able to add new incidents to an existing cyberstalking case instead of starting over every time another account appears.

Meta should review the history as a whole and use the information available within its own systems to determine whether accounts or conduct may be connected.

Cyberstalking laws and safety systems cannot function effectively if technology allows someone to reset the clock simply by creating another username.

Cyberstalking is a pattern.

Safety systems should recognize the pattern.

Sign this petition to demand that Meta create a Cyberstalking Safety Protocol for Instagram, Threads and Facebook.