In the beginning, Facebook was irresistible. People poured into the platform to stay connected to friends and family, no matter the distance or the gaps between visits. For many, it quickly turned into the place to be. Its (Facebook) concept was simple yet effective: a one-stop shop for everything important to us, our neighbour’s cat to that friend’s grainy breakfast photo, and a sprinkle of news. As New Yorker writer, Kyle Chayka explains in his article, “at the time it felt novel […] In a way, the breakfast photo represented the utopian dream of social media: billions of average people could throw fragments of their lives onto the internet with little mediation—their meals, their pets, their shower thoughts—and it would turn into something not only engaging but vital, a dynamic record of reality from the ground level.” Then, as the ground level started to shake, corporations began to infiltrate this space, and the echo chamber effect began to take hold.
Echo chambers eventually mutated into algorithms. Feeds are now tailored to what the algorithm wants you to see, alongside influencers either telling you what’s going on in the world or trying to sell you products that, let’s be honest, you don’t really need. Ironically, the ‘social’ part is now missing from social media. Last year, the Financial Times cited a GWI analysis (a digital audience insights company) that noted social media usage peaked in 2022 and has been in steady decline ever since. In October last year, German newspaper Die Zeit published data showing that time spent on social media in Germany is decreasing.
But why is usage descending? As the aforementioned New Yorker article pointed out, platforms are largely filled with ‘a sea of influencers and creators’, as well as AI-generated content and unchecked claims about everything under the sun – more on this in another discussion. The ‘normal’ user, to whom I can relate, might feel hopeless and decide not to post anything anymore.
In a separate BBC interview last year, writer Kyle Chayka described social media usage nowadays as being about highly commodified content and lifestyle aspirations rather than simply connecting with peers. This commodity-like quality is also reflected in Die Zeit analyses: “They use of social media now increased to check sports results, be inspired or to follow celebrities and influencers. There seems to be some kind of television effect: users today consume social media more like TV programs or newspapers – as an entertainment or news source.”
The latest weirdness taking place on X, Musk’s social media platform, where his AI companion Grok has been sharing images of partially clothed women, just goes to show the state we’re in. At the time of writing, X had responded by limiting Grok to paying users, while Musk had dismissed concerns as censorship.
This brings us to the question of where we are heading. Moving to a new platform doesn’t guarantee success. In his New Yorker article, Kyle Chayka quotes a user who says they don’t have the patience to learn a new platform. As he stated, the design of present-day social media discourages casual posting.
It remains to be seen what these shifts will mean for the future and how they will affect policy communications. Although we are at a technological crossroads, it might be better to take a step back from social media feeds to connect with family and friends, forge new connections, and avoid endless scrolling — it’s like a never-ending slot machine and the odds of winning are non-existent.
Josef Cutajar, Communications Consultant