The Stage-by-Stage Descent into Platform Inshitification
The concept of inshitification vividly describes the gradual decline of social media platforms and other digital ecosystems as they prioritize their own profits and power over user experience and societal well-being. This process unfolds in several stages, each characterized by increasingly problematic behaviors that entrap users, amplify corporate interests, and ultimately lead to dystopian outcomes.
In the initial phase, a platform appears to serve its end users well, creating a sense of community and utility. Facebook exemplifies this early stage. When Facebook sought to expand beyond American college students in 2006, its primary hurdle was existing competition—MySpace. To attract users, Facebook launched a strategic campaign framing itself as a preferable alternative by casting MySpace as an evil, spying, and exploitative entity owned by the nefarious Rupert Murdoch. Such a narrative cleverly positioned Facebook as trustworthy and user-friendly.
Once users joined, they became effectively “locked in.” They might be part of a specific support group, have customers or an audience on the platform, or simply use it as a way to coordinate with peers—like parents coordinating a carpool. Transitioning away is difficult, and the friction ensures continued engagement.
Stage Two: Making Things Worse for Users but Better for Business
As users become established and dependent, the platform shifts focus. The platform's core strategy becomes more aggressive: it begins to serve business interests by monetizing user data through targeted advertising. Facebook, and similar platforms, exaggerate claims of respecting user privacy, when in reality they exploit user data relentlessly.
Advertisers are offered startlingly precise ad targeting with minimal cost, convincing many that this is the best way to reach their audiences. To assure quality, they invest heavily in engineers combating ad fraud. Despite these efforts, the system becomes increasingly invasive—further entrenching users and businesses alike into the platform’s ecosystem.
Stage Three: Prioritizing Shareholder Profit Over User and Market Integrity
The progression continues as the platform makes decisions that harm the wider ecosystem to maximize shareholder returns. For instance, advertising spendings evaporate into fraud or other malicious practices; companies like Procter & Gamble shifted from spending hundreds of millions on targeted ads to nothing—yet sales remained static, exposing the inefficiencies and the cost-inflating tactics employed.
Prices increase, targeting becomes less reliable, and an already fragile balance is maintained only by the platform’s ability to keep users and advertisers tethered. But this balance is precarious; it can shatter with a single scandal—a mass shooting livestream or a major privacy breach—that triggers mass defection. Panic selling by shareholders and investors ensues, prompting what's known in tech circles as pivoting—a strategic shift or rebranding to stem decline.
The Final Dystopian Vision: The Metaverse and Total Control
Leading into the final stage, the narrative takes a dystopian turn. Mark Zuckerberg and other platform titans supposedly emerge from their metaphorical sarcophagi, announcing a radical new vision grounded in the metaverse. Originally, these platforms were built for straightforward interactions—text, images, videos—allowing users to argue with relatives or showcase their lives.
However, the plan now involves transforming users into virtual, surveilled, low-polygon cartoon avatars—a heavily monitored and manipulated digital version of reality. This is an extension of the platform’s existing surveillance capitalism, but taken to an extreme: immersing individuals in a dystopian virtual environment, harkening back to cyberpunk fiction, where every movement is tracked and controlled.
This represents the ultimate stage of inshittification: the complete corporatization, commodification, and surveillance of human existence, leading to a state of the “giant pile of [stuff],” utterly detached from the original purpose of social platforms and human connection. It signifies the descent into a high-tech dystopia—controlled by a handful of powerful corporations wielding technology not for societal benefit, but for profit, surveillance, and control.
The trajectory of platforms like Facebook showcases a disturbing cycle. It begins with an ostensibly user-centric approach, morphs into exploitation for profit, worsens systemic issues, and eventually culminates in dystopian control. Understanding these stages underscores the importance of critical scrutiny and resistance against systemic tendencies that prioritize corporate interests over societal well-being and individual autonomy.
🎉 Thank you for holding LSTR tokens!
Your post has been automatically voted with 10.09% weight.
Part 1/9:
The Stage-by-Stage Descent into Platform Inshitification
The concept of inshitification vividly describes the gradual decline of social media platforms and other digital ecosystems as they prioritize their own profits and power over user experience and societal well-being. This process unfolds in several stages, each characterized by increasingly problematic behaviors that entrap users, amplify corporate interests, and ultimately lead to dystopian outcomes.
Stage One: Lock-In Through Benevolent Facades
Part 2/9:
In the initial phase, a platform appears to serve its end users well, creating a sense of community and utility. Facebook exemplifies this early stage. When Facebook sought to expand beyond American college students in 2006, its primary hurdle was existing competition—MySpace. To attract users, Facebook launched a strategic campaign framing itself as a preferable alternative by casting MySpace as an evil, spying, and exploitative entity owned by the nefarious Rupert Murdoch. Such a narrative cleverly positioned Facebook as trustworthy and user-friendly.
Part 3/9:
Once users joined, they became effectively “locked in.” They might be part of a specific support group, have customers or an audience on the platform, or simply use it as a way to coordinate with peers—like parents coordinating a carpool. Transitioning away is difficult, and the friction ensures continued engagement.
Stage Two: Making Things Worse for Users but Better for Business
As users become established and dependent, the platform shifts focus. The platform's core strategy becomes more aggressive: it begins to serve business interests by monetizing user data through targeted advertising. Facebook, and similar platforms, exaggerate claims of respecting user privacy, when in reality they exploit user data relentlessly.
Part 4/9:
Advertisers are offered startlingly precise ad targeting with minimal cost, convincing many that this is the best way to reach their audiences. To assure quality, they invest heavily in engineers combating ad fraud. Despite these efforts, the system becomes increasingly invasive—further entrenching users and businesses alike into the platform’s ecosystem.
Stage Three: Prioritizing Shareholder Profit Over User and Market Integrity
Part 5/9:
The progression continues as the platform makes decisions that harm the wider ecosystem to maximize shareholder returns. For instance, advertising spendings evaporate into fraud or other malicious practices; companies like Procter & Gamble shifted from spending hundreds of millions on targeted ads to nothing—yet sales remained static, exposing the inefficiencies and the cost-inflating tactics employed.
Part 6/9:
Prices increase, targeting becomes less reliable, and an already fragile balance is maintained only by the platform’s ability to keep users and advertisers tethered. But this balance is precarious; it can shatter with a single scandal—a mass shooting livestream or a major privacy breach—that triggers mass defection. Panic selling by shareholders and investors ensues, prompting what's known in tech circles as pivoting—a strategic shift or rebranding to stem decline.
The Final Dystopian Vision: The Metaverse and Total Control
Part 7/9:
Leading into the final stage, the narrative takes a dystopian turn. Mark Zuckerberg and other platform titans supposedly emerge from their metaphorical sarcophagi, announcing a radical new vision grounded in the metaverse. Originally, these platforms were built for straightforward interactions—text, images, videos—allowing users to argue with relatives or showcase their lives.
However, the plan now involves transforming users into virtual, surveilled, low-polygon cartoon avatars—a heavily monitored and manipulated digital version of reality. This is an extension of the platform’s existing surveillance capitalism, but taken to an extreme: immersing individuals in a dystopian virtual environment, harkening back to cyberpunk fiction, where every movement is tracked and controlled.
Part 8/9:
This represents the ultimate stage of inshittification: the complete corporatization, commodification, and surveillance of human existence, leading to a state of the “giant pile of [stuff],” utterly detached from the original purpose of social platforms and human connection. It signifies the descent into a high-tech dystopia—controlled by a handful of powerful corporations wielding technology not for societal benefit, but for profit, surveillance, and control.
In Summary
Part 9/9:
The trajectory of platforms like Facebook showcases a disturbing cycle. It begins with an ostensibly user-centric approach, morphs into exploitation for profit, worsens systemic issues, and eventually culminates in dystopian control. Understanding these stages underscores the importance of critical scrutiny and resistance against systemic tendencies that prioritize corporate interests over societal well-being and individual autonomy.