Enshittification: Cory Doctorow’s 2022 Term Explaining How Tech Companies Have Deteriorated Our Lives

Enshifted
Cory Doctorow (MCD Books)

“Enshittification,” much like “shrinkflation” and “greenwashing,” is a newly coined term that feels familiar, perfectly expressing a widespread yet subtle issue.

We’re acutely aware that websites and apps often deteriorate or become worse over time as their owners exploit users for profit. This is visible everywhere, from Instagram swapping your chronological feed for a mashup of influencer content to Apple compelling users to upgrade by limiting repair options.

Cory Doctorow introduced the term in 2022 and elaborated on it in his recent book. More information: Why everything suddenly went bad and what to do about it serves as both an analysis and a call to action.

The strategy behind enshittification is for platforms like Facebook to establish and provide excellent services. Users flock to them for convenience and enjoyment. The company then waits until we are deeply connected—friends, local groups, schools, etc.—making it cumbersome to leave.

Once the user base becomes substantial, advertisers get locked in as well. The company then shifts focus to profits, inundating services with ads and algorithms, leading to a decline in user experience. This creates pressure on advertisers. The platform then becomes toxic, primarily benefitting shareholders, and users find it difficult to quit. As Doctorow states, we are trapped in a decaying entity.

In the past, poor businesses would have faced market consequences. If a café serves bad coffee, we’d simply find another. Today, however, tech companies have formed monopolies, making substantial profits that allow them to sustain their dominance. They purchase competitors merely to shut them down, lobby for lenient regulations, and secure exclusive contracts. (For instance, Google pays Apple $20 billion annually to remain the default search engine in Apple’s Safari browser.)

Enshifted Companies that seemingly harvest excessive personal data expose industry secrets, knowing they’ll charge more for goods during paydays since consumers are less likely to negotiate. Or companies deploy algorithms to suppress gig economy wages or implement keystroke monitoring systems that alert supervisors when we pause typing.

Although these negative aspects aren’t entirely new to readers, consuming them in large quantities can leave a sour taste. They can even lead intelligent individuals to resent themselves for being misunderstood in various ways.

Indeed, the goal is simply to do what the company was designed to do: maximize profit. However, with advances in computers, algorithms, and the Internet, things have spiraled out of control, allowing for techniques far more sophisticated than those available just a decade ago.

Doctorow cautions that regulators meant to protect us are often outmatched by the companies they monitor. Yet, he firmly believes they are part of the solution.

While there have been favorable developments in the European Union and under President Joe Biden in the U.S., substantial work remains to be done, as tech companies may innovate ways to harm us more quickly than can be counteracted. We can demand more accountability from politicians, and well-crafted legislation supported by effective regulators can help.

However, the potential power of boycotts remains largely unaddressed—tech companies need us more than we need them. It’s feasible to abandon social media, favor local businesses, and utilize ethical search engines. The more individuals take such actions, the likelier others will follow.

Whether it pertains to travel, clothing, or food, many of us attempt to “vote” with our wallets. Perhaps it’s time we extend this practice to our online choices.