Have you also noticed that over time, user-friendly platforms evolved into ones that exploit humans for their personal data and therefore essentially turn them into products? Journalist Cory Doctorow describes this process as the ‘enshittification’ of social media.
Originally, social media giants became big by creating valuable experiences for people, offering them unique opportunities to communicate over distance with loved ones. Facebook’s initial purpose, for example, was to conveniently and genuinely connect students around Harvard University. However, through natural networking effects it attracted more users, who in turn invited others, which eventually made it a rapidly growing social media platform.
As Facebook and other social networks evolved, they started to shift their added value to advertisers and publishers instead of prioritising the needs of people. People’s feeds began to fill up with unwanted ads and many businesses became dependent on social media for visibility and revenue generation. Social networks then capitalised on this dependency and seized almost all the value they created, thus ‘enshittifying’ their platforms further. This resulted in an even heavier advertising load for users and greatly increased costs for businesses.
While many people are left with just enough value to stay attached to the platforms, others start turning their backs on them, looking for what Facebook initially was made for. Chand Rajendra-Nicolucci, who researches digital public infrastructure at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, said that social media’s future might be ‘more private and more fragmented. ‘He and his colleagues envisioned a ‘pluriverse’ consisting of existing platforms and an ecosystem of ‘very small online platforms’ — private communities and niche services for more intimate and interest-specific conversations. What would this shift in how we use social media mean for brands and organizations? What valuable role can they play in setting up smaller groups based on people’s shared interests?
