08/20/2026
This article by Jon Loomer focuses primarily on optimization controls, but I see a creative-production burden.
If Meta forces us as advertisers to use more placements, we will need to provide creative that works across those placements.
At minimum, that could mean creating:
A square or 4:5 version for Facebook and Instagram feeds
A vertical 9:16 version for Stories and Reels
Ideally, a short vertical video for Reels rather than simply stretching a static image
But that creates more work and potentially more expense for a small local business. Instead of designing one good ad, the business may need several versions of it.
And there is also cost. I feel like if the creative is poorly suited to some placements, the indirect cost can increase.
For example:
Meta tests your static image in Reels.
People scroll past because it doesn’t look natural in that environment.
Meta spends part of your budget gathering enough data to learn that.
You receive weak engagement or low-quality clicks during that testing.
Your limited local-business budget is being used less efficiently.
Meta might eventually shift delivery to a better-performing placement. But a local business spending $10 or $20 per day does not have unlimited money for Meta to test weak creative combinations.
This is a concern, especially for small businesses with low budgets.
My take on this...Meta is removing our ability to avoid placements that don’t fit our creative. We now need to create multiple versions of the same ad so it looks natural everywhere Meta chooses to show it.
Meta is removing placement controls from ad sets, including exclusions by placement, platform, device, and operating system.
