In an era where social media platforms claim to champion free speech, the story of Parler stands as a stark reminder of how elusive that ideal can be. Launched in 2018 as an alternative to mainstream networks like Twitter (now X), Parler positioned itself as the original bastion of unrestricted expression, attracting users frustrated with content moderation policies elsewhere. Yet, despite amassing over 214,000 followers on X, Parler’s account continues to languish under what appears to be a persistent shadowban—a subtle algorithmic throttling that limits visibility without outright suspension. This shadowban, first imposed in the turbulent days of 2022 amid broader deplatforming efforts, shows no signs of lifting, even under Elon Musk’s purportedly free-speech-friendly stewardship of X.
Recent analytics from Parler’s X account paint a damning picture. Averaging just 50,000 impressions per day with a meager 2% engagement rate, and a paltry 1,200 impressions per post, these figures scream suppression. For context, accounts of similar size in the social media niche typically enjoy impressions reaching 1-5% of their follower base per post—translating to 2,000-10,000 impressions or more for Parler. Instead, its content reaches a fraction of that, resulting in stagnant growth and negative net followers over the past year. This isn’t organic decline; it’s indicative of deliberate throttling, where algorithms bury posts, hide them from searches, and prevent organic discovery.
To further substantiate these claims, Grok, the AI developed by xAI, conducted a detailed analysis of Parler’s X analytics over the last 12 months, spanning from August 2024 to August 2025. By examining daily metrics such as impressions, engagements, likes, reposts, and follower growth provided in a comprehensive CSV dataset, Grok calculated averages revealing persistently low reach—approximately 50,000 impressions per day and 1,200 per post—far below expected benchmarks for an account with over 214,000 followers. Cross-referencing this with real-time searches on X, Grok observed that recent posts from @getparlerapp garner minimal views (e.g., a post from August 5, 2025, with only 1,453 views despite timely content), and user complaints about shadowbanning align with the data. This analysis, combined with Parler’s own posts decrying ongoing censorship on platforms like X, unequivocally confirms that shadowbanning persists, throttling visibility and engagement.
Parler: The Pioneer of Free Speech Platforms
Parler emerged during a time when conservatives and free-speech advocates felt increasingly censored on legacy platforms. Founded by John Matze and Jared Thomson, it quickly gained traction by promising minimal moderation—only removing content that violated laws, not opinions. By 2020, it had millions of users, including high-profile figures like then-President Donald Trump, who joined after facing restrictions on Twitter. Parler’s ethos was simple: a space for unfiltered dialogue, free from the “bias” plaguing Silicon Valley giants.
But this commitment to openness made Parler a target. In the aftermath of the January 6, 2021, Capitol events, Big Tech orchestrated a swift takedown. Apple and Google removed Parler from their app stores, citing inadequate moderation, while Amazon Web Services (AWS) pulled the plug on hosting, effectively erasing the platform from the internet. Parler sued AWS, alleging violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act through collusion with competitors like Twitter, but a federal judge rejected their bid for reinstatement, highlighting the uphill battle against tech monopolies. The shutdown wasn’t just a business decision; it was a coordinated effort that smacked of anticompetitive behavior, as Parler’s lawsuit claimed AWS breached contracts and engaged in illegal blacklisting.
Parler eventually clawed its way back online in 2021, but the damage was done. Its user base dwindled, and the shadowbans began. By 2022, reports surfaced of Twitter (pre-Musk) limiting Parler’s visibility, a tactic that persisted post-rebranding to X. Shadowbanning, often denied by platforms but evidenced by reduced reach and search invisibility, became Parler’s new reality. Even today, in 2025, searching for Parler’s posts on X yields sparse results, and its content fails to trend despite timely, relevant topics.
The Metrics Don’t Lie: Clear Signs of Throttling
Diving deeper into Parler’s X analytics from the past year (up to August 8, 2025), the suppression is undeniable. With 214,000 followers, one would expect robust engagement—yet daily impressions hover around 50,000, equating to less than 25% of the audience seeing content. Engagement sits at 2%, driven by likes (average 138/day), replies (17/day), and reposts (36/day), but these numbers are inflated by sporadic spikes tied to external events, like the 2024 election. On average days, impressions per post drop to 1,200, far below benchmarks for similar accounts.
Compare this to healthy metrics: Political or niche accounts with 200k+ followers often see 3-5% engagement rates and thousands of impressions per post. Parler’s net follower loss of 265 over the year, coupled with zero video views and minimal profile visits (33/day), points to algorithmic demotion. Posts don’t appear in recommendations, replies are hidden, and the account is effectively invisible to non-followers—a textbook shadowban. This isn’t user disinterest; it’s engineered obscurity.
Competitors Thrive on X—Why Not Parler?
The disparity becomes glaring when compared to other social media platforms’ X accounts. Rivals like Rumble (@rumblevideo, ~150k followers), Reddit (@reddit, millions), Twitch (@Twitch, millions), Gettr (@gettr, ~100k), Snapchat (@snapchat, millions), and even Meta (@Meta, millions) post freely without apparent throttling. Searches for “Rumble shadowban on X” or similar yield no credible complaints— their impressions and engagements align with follower sizes, often reaching tens of thousands per post. Rumble, another free-speech-oriented platform, boasts high-visibility posts on X, with no reports of suppression. Reddit and Twitch, despite occasional controversies, maintain strong reach.
This selective treatment begs the question: Is Parler being shadowbanned because it’s a direct competitor to X, or because X, like its predecessor Twitter, doesn’t truly believe in free speech? Musk’s acquisition promised an end to such practices, yet Parler’s plight suggests otherwise. If competitors like Gettr (a Parler-like app) face no barriers, why does Parler? The answer may lie in Parler’s unapologetic conservatism, which clashed with pre-Musk Twitter’s biases and lingers in X’s algorithms.
Parler faces similar shadowbans on Facebook and Instagram, where Meta has historically censored conservative voices. But that’s expected from Mark Zuckerberg’s empire, which only recently “bent the knee” to President Trump. In January 2025, Meta announced sweeping changes: ending third-party fact-checking, reducing content restrictions, and settling a $25 million lawsuit with Trump over past suspensions. Zuckerberg labeled previous policies “censorship” and vowed more speech, including political content. This pivot came amid Trump’s return to power, signaling Meta’s adaptation. Yet X, under Musk, hasn’t followed suit for Parler—highlighting a hypocrisy where “free speech” applies selectively.
Vindication and the Dark Underbelly of Deplatforming
Parler’s critics often invoke January 6 as justification for its treatment, but facts tell a different story. The FBI’s investigation found “scant evidence” of an organized attack, and Parler was never mentioned as an instigator. In fact, Parler proactively warned the FBI over 50 times about potential violence, sending specific posts for review. A Senate report later criticized the FBI for ignoring “massive” intelligence, including from Parler. Far from complicit, Parler cooperated fully, vindicating its role.
Behind the shutdown was a more insidious plot: a federally funded Stanford Internet Observatory (SIO) study. The U.S. government, via the National Science Foundation, granted SIO $750,000 in 2021 to research “misinformation” on platforms like Parler. This involved monitoring users for a year, effectively spying on conversations. Findings were shared with Apple, Google, and AWS, providing “evidence” to justify deplatforming—a clear Sherman Antitrust violation through collusion and blacklisting. Parler’s lawsuit highlighted this as anticompetitive, yet justice eluded them.
The Hypocrisy of X and Broader Implications for Conservatives
X’s failure to lift Parler’s shadowban exposes a deep hypocrisy. Musk decries censorship, yet allows algorithms to throttle a platform that embodies his stated values. If Parler—vindicated, cooperative, and pro-free speech—remains suppressed, how many other conservative organizations, creators, commentators, and users suffer the same fate? Shadowbans aren’t just about one account; they’re a tool for quiet control, affecting millions. Reports from 2022 onward show conservatives disproportionately impacted, with visibility limits persisting post-Musk.
This isn’t abstract: Content creators lose livelihoods, organizations struggle to mobilize, and discourse skews leftward. If X shadowbans competitors like Parler while letting Meta and Reddit flourish, it undermines Musk’s “town square” vision. And with Meta reforming under pressure, X risks becoming the new censor-in-chief.
Parler’s story isn’t over, it’s a warning. Free speech dies in the shadows; it’s time to bring it into the light.
About the Author
