The Internet Is Broken. Here’s How to Fix It.
▼ Summary
– Wikipedia’s structural defenses against platform decay provide a template for community-run projects by transferring control to volunteers.
– Social media platforms can resist decay through interoperability and federation, which reduces user switching costs and limits harmful management decisions.
– Interoperability creates internal dynamics where bad but profitable ideas become unviable, protecting both short and long-term business interests.
– Companies need structural safeguards to prevent investor pressure from leading to rationalizations that harm user interests for perceived greater good.
– Ethical leaders should implement binding commitments like Ulysses pacts to protect against future rationalizations of harmful decisions.
The structural safeguards that protect Wikipedia from a decline in quality offer a potential blueprint for other online platforms. While these defenses may have emerged somewhat fortuitously, they demonstrate a viable method for managing large-scale collaborative projects. A central challenge involves cultivating a dedicated community, but once a volunteer base is established, this model shows how control can be successfully transferred to its users.
When examining the deterioration of major social networks like Facebook and the platform formerly called Twitter, a critical question arises: how can emerging social media sites avoid this same downward trajectory? The answer lies in reducing the switching costs for users. When platforms are designed to be interoperable and federated, it becomes significantly more difficult for company leadership to enact changes that harm the user base. If such decisions are made, people have a genuine escape route. This reality creates an internal dynamic where proposals that are user-friendly can compete on equal footing with those that are merely profitable, as detrimental ideas become financially risky in both the short and long term.
A robust structural framework is necessary to prevent investors from pushing companies toward harmful practices and to stop executives from justifying compliance. A common pattern emerges where founders, often ethical individuals, find themselves rationalizing destructive choices. They might believe that sacrificing a small percentage of their user base is a necessary evil to preserve the company, protect employees’ jobs, and maintain their position to “fight another day.” This isn’t necessarily a character flaw but a predictable human response to immense pressure.
This is precisely why proactive measures are essential. Just as someone on a diet removes temptation by discarding junk food, companies need to establish binding commitments in advance. These “Ulysses pacts,” a concept from behavioral economics, involve making a decisive choice while you are strong to protect yourself from future weakness. For a social media platform, this means building systems that inherently resist enshittification, ensuring that the platform remains accountable to its users rather than being steered toward inevitable decay by internal or external pressures.
(Source: Ars Technica)