Enshittification

{{Bronze}}{{Business}}{{Technav}}
'''Enshittification''' is a neologism coined in 2022 by [[journalist]] and [[science fiction]] author Cory Doctorow {{lived|1971}} describing the process by which products and services decline in quality over time.<ref>[https://doctorow.medium.com/social-quitting-1ce85b67b456 Social Quitting] by Cory Doctorow (Nov 15, 2022) ''Medium''.</ref> The concept itself was described earlier in 2018 as "crapification" by Yves Smith<ref>[https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2018/11/boeing-crapification-lion-air-crash.html Boeing, Crapification, and the Lion Air Crash] (November 13, 2018) ''Naked Capitalism''.</ref> and by Maureen Tkacik in 2019,<ref>[https://newrepublic.com/article/154944/boeing-737-max-investigation-indonesia-lion-air-ethiopian-airlines-managerial-revolution Crash Course: How Boeing's managerial revolution created the 737 MAX disaster] by Maureen Tkacik (September 18, 2019) ''The New Republic''.</ref> both regarding how the Boeing Company's "profits over safety" corporate culture caused a storied leader in the aviation industry to become associated with faulty plane design and numerous fatal crashes. Doctorow has described the process as follows:<ref name=wired>[https://www.wired.com/story/tiktok-platforms-cory-doctorow/ The ‘Enshittification’ of TikTok: Or how, exactly, platforms die.] by Cory Doctorow (Jan 23, 2023 12:44 PM) ''Wired''.</ref>
{{cquote|Here is how platforms die: first, they are good to their users; then they abuse their users to make things better for their business customers; finally, they abuse those business customers to claw back all the value for themselves. Then, they die.

I call this ''enshittification'', and it is a seemingly inevitable consequence arising from the combination of the ease of changing how a platform allocates value, combined with the nature of a "two-sided market", where a platform sits between buyers and sellers, hold each hostage to the other, raking off an ever-larger share of the value that passes between them.}}

The concept however is perhaps much older than these writers suggest. Brian Merchant wrote in describing the technological innovations of the [[Industrial Revolution]] (~1750-1850) as it impacted [[Luddites]] and the cottage industries of [[Britain]]:<ref name=merchant>''Blood in the Machine: The Origins of the Rebellion Against Big Tech'' by Brian Merchant (2023) Little, Brown and Company. {{isbn|0316487740}}.</ref>{{rp|259}}
{{cquote|…once a labor-saving technology is invented and released into a [[capitalist]] environment, it will be exploited to maximize profits&nbsp;— if it works well enough, and even sometimes when it doesn't. Modern [[economic]] history is littered with examples of entrepreneurs taking an existing technology, improving or standardizing it, and combining that technology with exploitative labor practices to turn it into a market success.}}
During the Industrial Revolution, workers in the cottage industries complained about the poor quality of factory-made textiles compared to their own, and displaced workers were forced to choose between destitution and poorly-compensated grueling factory work. Complaints about this that were sent to Parliament were dismissed out-of-hand<ref name=merchant/>{{rp|268|270}} since Parliament was not [[democratic]] until 1832 with the {{wpl|Reform Act of 1832||.}}

Doctorow, feeling optimistic in December 2023 that [[Monopoly#Antitrust|antitrust]] action against [[Google]] would proceed, and that there would finally be meaningful regulation of Big Tech, proposed two methods for reducing enshittification.<ref name=eff>[https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/04/platforms-decay-lets-put-users-first As Platforms Decay, Let’s Put Users First] by Cory Doctorow (May 9, 2023) ''Electronic Frontier Foundation''.</ref> Alas, [[cryptocurrency]] bros and Big Tech bought [[Donald Trump]] the election in 2024,<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/11/06/crypto-cash-helps-propel-trump-other-allies-2024-election-victory/ Crypto cash helps propel Trump, other allies to 2024 election victory: Many of the Democrats and Republicans backed by a trio of new crypto super PACs won their races Tuesday, illustrating the industry’s political ascendance.] by Tony Romm (November 6, 2024 at 4:45 p.m. EST) ''The Washington Post''.</ref><ref>[https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/07/technology/trump-tech-ceos.html Before the Election, Tech C.E.O.s Were Quietly Courting Trump: The executives of tech’s biggest companies largely ignored Donald Trump before the 2016 election. This time around, they’re far more friendly.] by Tripp Mickle & David McCabe (Nov. 7, 2024, 5:05 a.m. ET) ''The New York Times''.</ref> so this is likely to be moot until at least 2028. Doctorow's proposals are:<ref name=eff/>
#"End-to-End: Connecting Willing Listeners With Willing Speakers": This is essentially an expansion of the idea of [[net neutrality]], tech companies must deliver data from willing senders to willing receivers. In other words, nothing is pushed to the user that is not pre-authorized.
#"Right of Exit: Treating Bad Platforms As Damage and Routing Around Them": Creators are free to take their own content with them to a different platform, and similarly subscribers are free to take their subscription with them if the creator leaves the site. These two principles address the 'glue' that holds enshittification together: creators/[[Advertising|advertisers]]/users feel stuck on the platform before the enshittification becomes too noticeable.<ref name=eff/>

In 2024, Doctorow also coined the term 'enshittocene' (analogous to [[Geologic timeline|geologic epochs]], e.g., '[[Holocene]]') when everything turns to shit.<ref>[https://www.ft.com/content/6fb1602d-a08b-4a8c-bac0-047b7d64aba5 ‘Enshittification’ is coming for absolutely everything] by Cory Doctorow (February 7, 2024) ''Financial Times''.</ref> Some evidence exists for the approaching enshittocene in that the percentage of adults who think that the internet is good for society dropped from 2014 to 2018 (76% down to 70%).<ref>[https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2018/04/30/declining-majority-of-online-adults-say-the-internet-has-been-good-for-society/ Declining Majority of Online Adults Say the Internet Has Been Good for Society] by Aaron Smith & Kenneth Olmstead (April 30, 2018) ''Pew Research Center''.</ref> A different survey 2024 found that only 64% of adults thought that the internet is good for humanity, but with a much more negative view of [[social media]] specifically, with only 38% who thought it was good.<ref>[https://today.yougov.com/technology/articles/45345-most-say-invention-social-media-not-good-humanity Most say the invention of the internet was good for humanity; not so for social media] by Taylor Orth (March 03, 2023, 2:27 PM GMT-8) ''YouGov''.</ref>

==AI model collapse and "hallucinations"==
One of the recurring features of enshittification since 2021 is [[artificial intelligence]]-generated content that has been conceptually labelled as "AI slop" or just "slop". Slop comes in the form of low-quality text or images that are generated by AI and function as [[spam]], with many of these images often warped. These can range from variations of "[[Images of Jesus#The enshrimpification of Jesus|shrimp Jesus]]" used to sell [[advertising]] on Facebook<ref>[https://interestingengineering.com/culture/zombie-internet-shrimp-jesus-take-over-social-media ‘Zombie internet’: How ‘Shrimp Jesus’-like AI images manipulate search: An abstract idea, “Shrimp Jesus” is a weird depiction of Jesus with sea creatures like crabs and shrimps.]  by Gairika Mitra (May 20, 2024 06:56 AM EST) ''Interesting Engineering''.</ref> to non-sensical auto-reply text on [[YouTube]].<ref>[https://www.404media.co/email/530ddba1-c70c-4ab4-83b9-d31ccc185d2f/ YouTube “Enhances” Comment Section With AI Slop] by Emanuel Maiberg (Dec 12, 2024 at 9:00 AM) ''404 Media''.</ref> AI search result summaries and chatbots (despite receiving more training and data than ever before) have also experienced declines in accuracy and increased tendencies to "hallucinate", which is a industry [[euphemism]], falsely implying that the AI model has agency, for when an AI simply makes up [[bullshit]] when prompted for a user response. One particularly embarrassing example of this phenomena was in early 2024, when Google's AI search feature instructed users on how to use "non-toxic glue" for their cheese pizza and claiming that geologists recommend you should eat at least one rock per day, amongst other nonsensical and faulty suggestions.<ref>[https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd11gzejgz4o Glue pizza and eat rocks: Google AI search errors go viral] by Liv McMahon & Zoe Kleinman (24 May 2024) ''BBC''.</ref>

If you want a more visual and straight forward metaphor for this type of enshittification, think of the 2014 Adult Swim short film ''Too Many Cooks''. The film (the title and theme song of which is derived from the proverb "too many cooks will spoil the broth"; meaning that too many participants in a project will ruin the end result) starts as a light parody of the opening scenes of 1970s-1990s American sitcom TV shows of happy families and gentle humor, but with the opening credits seemingly never ending as new characters beyond the main sitcom family are constantly introduced before the sequences start to drift into different television genres (police procedural, sci-fi, Saturday morning cartoon, soap opera, etc). The film soon takes a more sinister turn, however, when a mysterious murderer (who is first seen hiding in the background and whose own name in the credits is the only one blurred out) starts killing off other characters, though it never entirely leaves the chipper sitcom music and tone of the first half of the film. Eventually, the intro then devolves into an increasingly surreal and narratively incoherent mashup of various genres.<ref>{{wpa|Too Many Cooks (short)|Too Many Cooks}}</ref><ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrGrOK8oZG8 ''Too Many Cooks'' | Adult Swim] (Nov 7, 2014) ''YouTube''.</ref>

Just like the ever expanding cast members in "Too Many Cooks", real-life AI programs have been documented to become increasingly worse over time as more recycled data (no matter how outdated or unreliable it is) is used and the models start to cannibalize themselves with other AI-generated content.<ref>[https://www.newscientist.com/article/2479545-ai-hallucinations-are-getting-worse-and-theyre-here-to-stay/ AI hallucinations are getting worse – and they're here to stay] by Jeremy Hsu (9 May 2025) ''New Scientist''.</ref>

The concept of AI slop actually predates the rise of AI-generated content. Librarians have called it "vendor slurry" in reference to low-quality material that vendors (Hoopla in particular) try to sell to libraries by forcing them to buy package deals rather than curated content.<ref>[https://www.404media.co/email/7a1109dd-e6cd-46ac-be2f-a6d6461fc2ff/?ref=daily-stories-newsletter AI-Generated Slop Is Already In Your Public Library] by Emanuel Maiberg (Feb 4, 2025 at 9:07 AM) ''</ref><ref>[https://www.libraryfutures.net/post/hooplas-content-problem?ref=404media.co Hoopla's Content Problem: Strange, Skewed Results Still Dominate Catalog] by Laura Crossett & Jennie Rose Halperin (August 12, 2024) ''Library Futures''.</ref>

==Examples==
{{cquote|Normalization in [[Czechoslovakia]] followed the end of faith in [[Marxism]] in 1968, the collapse of a certain view that technological change must bring human [[freedom]]. Like Czechoslovak [[communists]], the Silicon Valley [[libertarian]]s first promised a [[Brave New World|brave new world]], then told us that there were no alternatives, then invited us to lie inside a [[Internet|screen]]. Like communists, they passed from great certainty about [[utopia]] to total [[nihilism]] about everything, to a world which "everything is shit."<BR><BR>

And then they ask us if we are not, perhaps [[Simulated reality|living in a computer simulation]] ourselves&nbsp;— or, in older language inside [[Plato]]'s [[Allegory of the cave|cave]]. Unfortunately, wealthy and important people who speak of simulations are searching for an excuse to be irresponsible. If we decide that we are not real, that life is elsewhere, we can drop into a cave where [[morality]] has no sense and freedom is impossible.|||Timothy Snyder<ref>''On Freedom'' by Timothy Snyder (2024) Crown. ISBN 9780593728727.</ref>{{rp|70}}}}
Some of these examples started out as shit or were known by the founders that they could become shit. But the platforms were not shitty enough initially for most people to care:
*[[Facebook]]'s beginning as an espionage project<ref>[https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/09/20/the-face-of-facebook The Face of Facebook] by Jose Antonio Vargas (September 13, 2010) ''The New Yorker''.</ref>
*[[Reddit]]'s dark corners,<ref>[https://www.theverge.com/2015/7/15/8967477/doxxing-reddit-yishan-wong-ellen-pao-steve-huffman-alexis-ohanian Reddit's secrets are being leaked by the company's former CEO] by T. C. Sottek (Jul 14, 2015, 9:02 PM PDT) ''The Verge''.</ref> which lacked meaningful site-wide content moderation until 2015<ref>[https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-32749408 Reddit, under Ellen Pao, launches harassment crackdown] (15 May 2015) ''BBC''.</ref>
*[[Twitter]] has always been a toxic online shithole filled with worst trolls imaginable, long before Elon Musk turned into the world's largest neo-nazi chatroom. It doesn't help much that most of the "discourse" there was often vapid and superficial, particularly in the initial 140-character limit days ("Who cares what I ate for breakfast?" is a phrase sometimes used to characterize how mundane the site was during its early days).<ref>[https://gizmodo.com/twitter-year-in-review-x-elon-musk-enshittification-1849687943 Twitter Hasn’t Been ‘Enshittified.’ It Always Sucked.] by Lucas Ropek (December 13, 2023) ''Gizmodo''.</ref> It is unsurprising since Twitter was based on Dorsey's idea for taxi cab software.<ref>[https://www.latimes.com/archives/blogs/technology-blog/story/2009-02-18/twitter-creator-jack-dorsey-illuminates-the-sites-founding-document-part-i Twitter creator Jack Dorsey illuminates the site’s founding document. Part I] by (Feb. 18, 2009 5:04 PM PT) ''Los Angeles Times''.</ref>

===Amazon===
Founder Jeff Bezos left his high-paying Wall Street job in [[New York City]] and incorporated Amazon in 1994 in Washington State, most likely to take advantage of the fact that there is no sales [[tax]] there. Amazon began selling books online in 1995, and reincorporated in [[Delaware]] in 1996 (also no sales tax). In 1998, Amazon began to move towards selling more than books.<ref>{{wpa|History of Amazon}}</ref> Amazon paid no sales tax in any state until 2008,<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20120922141242/https://taxfoundation.org/article/california-becomes-seventh-state-adopt-amazon-tax-out-state-online-sellers California Becomes Seventh State to Adopt "Amazon" Tax on Out-of-State Online Sellers] by Joseph Henchman (July 01, 2011) ''Tax Foundation'' (archived from September 22, 2012).</ref> which likely allowed the company to outcompete on price both against other online sellers and against brick-and-mortar stores. As Amazon grew in size, the small businesses shrank. "About 40 percent of the nation’s small apparel, toy, and sporting goods makers disappeared, along with about one-third of small book publishers."<ref>[https://ilsr.org/articles/fact-sheet-how-breaking-up-amazon-can-empower-small-business/ Issue Brief: How Amazon Exploits and Undermines Small Businesses, and Why Breaking It Up Would Revive American Entrepreneurship] by Ron Knox & Stacy Mitchell (Jun 16, 2021) ''Institute for Local Self-Reliance''.</ref> Amazon had destroyed between one and three US jobs for every one created.<ref>[https://www.marketwatch.com/story/amazon-is-going-to-kill-more-american-jobs-than-china-did-2017-01-19 Amazon is going to kill more American jobs than China did: Millions of retail jobs are threatened as Amazon’s share of online purchases keeps climbing] by Rex Nutting (March 15, 2017 at 9:11 a.m. ET) ''MarketWatch''.</ref>

In a Federal Trade Commission and state Attorneys General lawsuit against Amazon that was initiated in 2023, it was alleged that:<ref>[https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/0327-20231031-REDACTEDSecondAmendedComplaint.pdf Federal Trade Commission  et al. v. Amazon.com, Inc.] (10/31/24) ''Federal Trade Commission''. Case 2:23-cv-01495-JHC Document 327.</ref>{{rp|6}}<ref>[https://www.vice.com/en/article/amazon-execs-intentionally-made-site-shittier-to-rake-in-more-profit-new-quotes-from-ftc-lawsuit-show/ Amazon Execs Intentionally Made Site Shittier to Rake in More Profit, New Quotes from FTC Lawsuit Show] by Jules Roscoe (November 2, 2023, 2:36pm) ''Vice''.</ref>
{{cquote|In addition to overcharging its customers, Amazon is degrading the services it provides them. Amazon’s online storefront once prioritized relevant, organic search results. Following directions from its founder and then-CEO Jeff Bezos, Amazon shifted gears so that it now litters its storefront with pay-to-play advertisements. Amazon executives internally acknowledge this creates "harm to consumers" by making it "almost impossible for high quality, helpful organic content to win over barely relevant sponsored content." This practice, too, harms helpful organic content to win over barely relevant sponsored content.” This practice, too, harms both sellers and shoppers alike. Most sellers must now pay for advertising to reach Amazon’s massive base of online shoppers, while shoppers consequently face less relevant search results and are steered toward more expensive products. Notably, Amazon has increased not only the number of advertisements it shows, but also the number of irrelevant junk ads, internally called "defects." Mr. Bezos instructed his executives to "[a]ccept more defects" because Amazon can extract billions of dollars through increased advertising despite worsening its services for customers.}}

Amazon laid off 100 customer support employees in 2024.<ref>[https://finance.yahoo.com/news/layoffs-abusive-calls-ai-fears-194114376.html Layoffs, abusive calls, and AI fears: Inside the front lines of Amazon’s ‘customer obsession’ promise] by Jason Del Rey (June 6, 2024) ''Yahoo!Finance''.</ref> This was preceded in 2023 by a chatbot replacement (or for now at least a first interface for support).<ref>[https://www.legal.io/articles/5454047/Amazon-Launches-Q-A-Business-Chatbot Amazon Launches Q: A Business Chatbot] (Nov 29, 2023) ''Legal.io''.</ref> [[Anecdotal evidence|Anecdotally]] (e.g., [[Reddit]]), customer and seller support on Amazon has been bad for a long time, but Amazon's solution to this seems to be people are expensive and unreliable; we can replace them with bots that are cheaper and also unreliable.

Life for Amazon warehouse workers and delivery drivers has also gotten increasingly worse over time with reliance on no-benefit positions (part-time and seasonal employment), [[union]] busting, espionage on workers (both inside and outside warehouses), and a "digital [[Taylorism]]" that increasingly treats workers like robots.<ref name=merchant/>{{rp|377-381}}<ref>[https://www.economist.com/business/2015/09/10/digital-taylorism Digital Taylorism: A modern version of “scientific management” threatens to dehumanise the workplace] by (Sep 10<sup>th</sup> 2015) ''The Economist''.</ref><ref>[https://www.vice.com/en/article/amazon-is-spying-on-its-workers-in-closed-facebook-groups-internal-reports-show/ Inside Amazon’s Secret Program to Spy On Workers’ Private Facebook Groups] by Lauren Kaori Gurley & Joseph Cox (September 1, 2020, 6:51pm) ''Vice''.</ref><ref>[https://www.vice.com/en/article/amazon-leaked-reports-expose-spying-warehouse-workers-labor-union-environmental-groups-social-movements/ Secret Amazon Reports Expose the Company’s Surveillance of Labor and Environmental Groups] by Lauren Kaori Gurley (November 23, 2020, 1:16pm) ''Vice''.</ref> Amazon company policies such as these were based on Bezos' belief that people are inherently lazy.<ref>[https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-polices-based-jeff-bezos-belief-all-workers-are-lazy-2021-6 Amazon tracks warehouse workers' every move because Jeff Bezos reportedly thinks people are inherently lazy] by Grace Kay (June 15, 2021) ''Business Insider''.</ref>

===Facebook/Instagram/Meta===
{{main|1=Facebook|3=Instagram}}
{{cquote|This used to be a great app, but these days Meta decides what you will see and how you will experience Facebook. For example, I always disable the in-app sounds because they are annoying and unnecessary, but every few days the app enables the pointless noises on its own. The newsfeed has been taken over by so-called suggested posts, which range from [[random]] local news stations I don’t care about to [[bigot]]ed [[meme]]s and there is no way to disable seeing these “suggested” posts. The “hide all from” feature is also broken&nbsp;— I hide a post from a group and I continue to see posts from that group anyway? Like, how even?
This is not supposed to be Twitter, I don’t want stuff shoved into my feed if I didn’t seek it out. I want to see my friend’s posts, not stuff from a page I don’t even follow. I don’t mind ads, Meta needs to pay the light bill somehow, but this pointless engagement baiting by Meta is really irritating.

And then there are the blatant copy and paste [[scam]]s flooding Marketplace and groups. Scams for handyman services and expensive items seem to be the most common and all of them have enough similarities to be removed by the same algorithm which automatically bans you in your swear at someone. Each time I report these posts and accounts, Facebook tells me that the posts don’t violate the rules. It’s really wild that they’d rather keep the scams up for engagement and ad placement rather than protect their users from crimes.|||The most popular review (1-star) of the Facebook app on the Apple store as of January 18, 2025<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20250118080048/https://apps.apple.com/us/app/facebook/id284882215 Facebook] ''Apple App Store''. [https://archive.is/P3VWo archived on January 18, 2025].</ref>}}
[[File:Meta Facebook enshittification.jpg|thumb|right|400px|From the prompt, "Facebook enshittified" on December 4, 2024, Meta AI has enumerated the major failures of Facebook: self-[[pwn]]ed!]]
[[File:Mega shrimp Jesus.jpg|thumb|right|154px|Jesus fucking Christ, it's for an ad on Facebook!]]
Facebook started, as most entrepreneurial projects often do, with intellectual theft.{{efn|For instance, Edmund Cartwright, inventor of the power loom and Richard Roberts, inventor of a automatic spinning machine both had their ideas stolen (patent infringement) during the [[Industrial Revolution]] and profited little during their lifetimes while [[Thomas Edison]] was infamous for taking credit for patents of emerging inventors.<ref name=merchant/><ref>[https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/regulation/2008/11/v31n4-4.pdf Of Patents and Property] by James Bessen & Michael J. Meurer (Winter 2008-2009) ''Regulation, Cato Institute''.</ref> The "look and feel" idea theft by [[Microsoft]] of [[Apple]]'s OS appearance and [[Uber]]'s theft of Lyft's technological ideas are more modern examples.<ref>{{wpa|Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp.}}</ref><ref>[https://hbr.org/2017/06/uber-cant-be-fixed-its-time-for-regulators-to-shut-it-down Uber Can’t Be Fixed — It’s Time for Regulators to Shut It Down] by Benjamin Edelman (June 21, 2017) ''Harvard Business Review''.</ref>}} While an undergraduate student at Harvard University, Zuckerberg stole the idea for Facebook from three classmates who were developing a similar idea.<ref>[https://archive.nytimes.com/bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/26/judge-ends-facebooks-feud-with-connectu/ Judge Ends Facebook’s Feud With ConnectU] by Brad Stone (June 26, 2008 8:23 am) ''The New York Times''.</ref>

Facebook initially followed a stereotypical, or perhaps prototypical, pathway of enshittification. First initially giving users what they wanted, staying in contact with friends and relatives. Then forcing feeds from media companies into users timelines, then after creating media company dependency, forcing the media companies to pay to get onto users' timelines. Then forcing ads into users' timelines for cheap, then after after the companies behind the ads were dependent on the fees, jacking up the prices. The enshittification then took a side turn with alleged collusion with Google and the Jedi Blue agreement.<ref name=wired/>

Starting in 2009, independent marketing agency Rapleaf started mining Facebook users' private data, particularly through gaming apps such as Farmville on Facebook. When caught doing this in 2010, Rapleaf claimed that [[Bullshit|they weren't doing it on purpose]]. Facebook claimed that [[Bullshit|they were taking steps to "dramatically limit" this process]].<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20141215180939/https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304772804575558484075236968 Facebook in Privacy Breach: Top-Ranked Applications Transmit Personal IDs, a Journal Investigation Finds] by Emily Steel & Geoffrey A. Fowler (Oct. 18, 2010 12:01 a.m. ET) ''The Wallstreet Journal'' (archived from December 15, 2014).</ref>

By 2017, Facebook began deemphasizing posts that had external links, resulting in a drastic reduction of links to external news sources, ultimately resulting in shifting revenue from news sites to Facebook, likely layoffs of journalists from declining revenue,<ref>[https://slate.com/technology/2018/06/facebooks-retreat-from-the-news-has-painful-for-publishers-including-slate.html The Great Facebook Crash: The social giant is retreating from the news business. It’s been a painful transition for publications that had come to depend on it—including Slate.] by Will Oremus (June 27, 20185:50 AM) ''Slate''.</ref><ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/11/27/musk-x-throttle-links-threads-bluesky/ Musk admits X throttles links as ‘news influencers’ take over] by Will Oremus (November 27, 2024 at 9:05 a.m. EST) ''The Washington Post''.</ref> and Facebook increasingly becoming an [[echo chamber]] or at best a set of echo chambers.

As bad as that all of that was already, things got decidedly worse when AI-generated 'slop' invaded Facebook in 2024, which according to Zuckerberg:<ref>[https://fortune.com/2024/10/30/mark-zuckerberg-ai-generated-content-next-big-category-social-media-feeds/?ref=404media.co Mark Zuckerberg says a lot more AI generated content is coming to fill up your Facebook and Instagram feeds] by Kali Hays (October 30, 2024 at 4:39 PM PDT) ''Fortune''.</ref><ref name=koebler1>[https://www.404media.co/zuckerberg-the-ai-slop-will-continue-until-morale-improves/?ref=daily-stories-newsletter Zuckerberg: The AI Slop Will Continue Until Morale Improves] by Jason Koebler (Oct 31, 2024 at 1:45 PM) ''404 Media''.</ref>
{{cquote|I think were going to add a whole new category of content which is AI-generated or AI-summarized content, or existing content pulled together by AI in some way. And I think that that’s gonna be very exciting for Facebook and Instagram and maybe Threads, or other kinds of feed experiences over time.}}
If Zuckerberg is to be believed, there are more than a million businesses generating 15 million AI-based ads/month.<ref name=koebler1/> Who needs real people in one's feed after all?

Examples of the awfulness of the AI-generated ads include [[clickbait]] "[[Images of Jesus#The enshrimpification of Jesus|shrimp Jesus]]",<ref>[https://www.404media.co/facebooks-algorithm-is-boosting-ai-spam-that-links-to-ai-generated-ad-laden-click-farms/ Facebook’s Algorithm Is Boosting AI Spam That Links to AI-Generated, Ad-Laden Click Farms] by Jason Koebler (Mar 19, 2024 at 9:19 AM) ''404 Media''.</ref> and clickbait ads with AI-generated [[Elon Musk]] images that coincided with Musk's endorsement of [[Donald Trump]] in the [[2024 U.S. presidential election]] that were produced in the Philippines, Vietnam, and India.<ref>[https://www.404media.co/email/ed674050-352a-4fa2-94f4-74b079733526/?ref=daily-stories-newsletter AI-Generated Elon Musk Inspiration Porn Is Viral on Facebook] by Jason Koebler (Nov 13, 2024 at 10:37 AM) ''404 Media''.</ref>

And the answer to enshittification is… definitely more enshittification, at least according to Zuckerberg. Meta is planning to unleash legions of chatbots each with their own profiles, photos and personalities. The idea with the company is that AI increases engagement, and engagement increases advertising revenue. The main problem with this plan besides the AI slop itself, is that bad actors ([[phishing]], [[scam]]s, and [[charlatanism]]) will be the first to take advantage of it.<ref>[https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/meta-plans-ai-generated-characters-user-engagement-20009295.php Mark Zuckerberg is planning on making Facebook even worse than it already is: Shrimp Jesus is just the beginning] by Ariana Bindman (Jan 2, 2025) ''SFGate''.</ref>

===Google/Alphabet===
{{main|Google}}
[[File:Enshittified Google.jpg|thumb|right|400px|Google's AI Overviews' self-pwn from the prompt "enshittified google" on October 24, 2024. "AI search chatbot: Google is developing an AI search chatbot that will show users what it thinks they should see, rather than what they ask for." The result was removed a few days later for this search.]]
Google began as a research project in 1996 by the co-founders, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, at Stanford University. By 1998, they had a prototype ready and released a white paper on the project.<ref name=whitepaper/> The search ranking methodology proved to be superior to existing search engines of the time. Google soon incorporated and started using the (now implausible) unofficial slogan of "Don't be evil", which is still used as of 2024.<ref>[https://abc.xyz/investor/google-code-of-conduct/ Google Code of Conduct] (January 17, 2024) ''Alphabet''.</ref> Despite Page and Brin maintaining controlling interest in Google after the company went public, with the specific aim of not being beholden to stock owners and short-term gains,<ref>[https://abc.xyz/investor/founders-letters/ipo-letter/ Founders' IPO Letter] (2004) ''Alphabet''.</ref> Google still managed to turn to shit.<ref>[https://doctorow.medium.com/googles-enshittification-memos-2d6d57306072 Google’s enshittification memos: Truly, Big Tech can’t stop telling on itself.] by Cory Doctorow (Oct 3, 2023) ''Medium''.</ref>

Google's founders had acknowledged in their 1998 white paper for the Google prototype that advertising degrades search results.<ref name=whitepaper>[http://infolab.stanford.edu/pub/papers/google.pdf The Anatomy of a Large-Scale Hypertextual Web Search Engine] by Sergey Brin & Lawrence Page (1998) Computer Networks and ISDN Systems. 30(1–7):107–117. Via ''Stanford University''.</ref> Nonetheless, advertising was added to Google search results in 2000 with the launch of "Google AdWords".<ref>[https://instapage.com/blog/google-adwords-infographic/ The History of Google Ads 20 Years in the Making] by Brandon Weaver (March 2018) ''Instapage''.</ref>

In the founding white paper document, Page and Brin described the importance of having the first 10 pages being relevant:<ref name=whitepaper/>
{{cquote|People are still only willing to look at the first few tens of results. Because of this, as the collection size grows, we need tools that have very high precision (number of relevant documents returned, say in the top tens of results).}}
The top 10 pages did stay relevant for several years, but with creeping ad-bloat; particularly for simple searches, it can be difficult to find a non-sponsored/non-commercial result. Worse yet, the best products/services don't come to the top, rather the companies best at gaming the system ([[search engine optimization]] or ad bidding) come to the top.

As part of a 2023 Department of Justice antitrust lawsuit, an internal Google document was released, written by VP for Finance Michael Roszak who wrote some time after 2008,<ref>[https://www.linkedin.com/in/mike-roszak-87001111 Michael Roszak]. ''Linkedin''.</ref><ref>[https://www.justice.gov/d9/2023-09/416692.pdf GOOG-DOJ-16071619] ''US Department of Justice''.</ref>
{{cquote|Search advertising is one of the world’s greatest business models ever created… illicit businesses ([[cigarette]]s or [[drugs]]) that could rival these economics, but we are fortunate to have an amazing business.<BR>

When talking about revenue, we could mostly ignore the demand side of the equation (users and queries) and only focus on supply side of advertisers, ad formats, and sales}}

In the antitrust trial, evidence was presented that Google panicking about declining ad revenue, and decided on modifying the 'semantic matching' algorithm for searches that normally might secretly (but reasonably) add synonyms, variant spellings or the like to one's search. The boardroom proposal instead was to modify the semantic matching to maximize the ad revenue, hence more ads and/or more profitable ads would be shown for each search.<ref>[https://archive.is/6a8jE#selection-625.0-625.54 How Google Alters Search Queries to Get at Your Wallet: Testimony during Google’s antitrust case revealed that the company may be altering billions of queries a day to generate results that will get you to buy more stuff.] by Megan Gray (Oct 2, 2023 8:00 AM) ''Wired'' (archived 2 Oct 2023 12:31:56 UTC).</ref> Google has claimed that they don't do this (but not in court yet),<ref>[https://archive.is/wip/jVeOX An opinion piece recently appeared stating that Google “just flat out deletes queries and replaces them with ones that monetize better.” We don’t. The piece contains serious inaccuracies about how Google Search works. The organic (IE: non-sponsored) results you see in Search are not affected by our ads systems. …] by Google @searchliaison (12:26 AM · Oct 5, 2023) ''Twitter'' (archived from 9 Nov 2024 19:42:59 UTC).</ref> and a ''Wired'' article this based on attendance of the trial pulled a few days after it was published.

In 2018, Google and [[Facebook|Facebook/Meta]] made an agreement known as {{wpl|Jedi Blue}} that allegedly included price-fixing and cross-platform ad placement. Starting in 2020, the two companies were sued in various venues for violating antitrust law. In 2022, the two companies came to a partial agreement with the Texas court, which resulted in dismissal of some of the charges. As of 2024, cases are still ongoing.

[[File:Eat rocks.jpg|thumb|right|400px|The notorious "people should eat at least one small rock a day" Google AI result from May 2024]]
In 2024, Google officially launched its generative AI called 'AI Overviews' as part of its search results,<ref>[https://searchengineland.com/google-starts-testing-ai-overviews-from-sge-in-main-google-search-interface-438680#:~:text=In%20May%202023%2C%20Google%20opened,What%20searchers%20will%20see. Google starts testing AI overviews from SGE in main Google search interface] by Barry Schwartz (March 22, 2024 at 11:43 am) ''Search Engine Land''.</ref> which is still experimental as of November 2024 appears sporadically. Doctorow has said of that AI Overviews "is a tool that won't show you what you ask for, but rather, what it thinks you should see."<ref name=wired/> Worse yet, Google's AI-powered searches have occasionally given dangerous advice, such as the notorious "people should eat at least one small rock a day" advice that was apparently based on a satirical article from ''[[The Onion]]''.<ref>[https://searchengineland.com/google-ai-overview-fails-442575 Google AI Overviews under fire for giving dangerous and wrong answers: Your Money, Your Life seems to not apply to AI Overviews. Google advises users to run with scissors, cook with glue and eat rocks.] by Danny Goodwin (May 24, 2024 at 11:35 am) ''Search Engine Land''.</ref><ref>[https://theonion.com/geologists-recommend-eating-at-least-one-small-rock-per-1846655112/ Geologists Recommend Eating At Least One Small Rock Per Day] (April 13, 2021) ''The Onion''.</ref>

In 2025, it was reported that Google AI could be prompted to give positive reviews of ''[[Mein Kampf]]'' based on an Amazon AI-based summary of customer reviews.<ref>[https://www.404media.co/google-amazon-ai-search-mein-kampf-reviews/ Google and Amazon AI Say Hitler’s Mein Kampf Is ‘a True Work of Art’] by Samantha Cole (Mar 6, 2025 at 11:57 AM) ''404 Media''.</ref>

In 2025, Google [[Dictatorship#Resisting looming tyranny|anticipated fascist threats in advance]] from [[MAGA]] by renaming the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America, thereby capitulating to a non-binding executive order by Trump.<ref>[https://www.cbsnews.com/news/google-maps-us-gulf-of-mexico-america-denali-mount-mckinley/ Google Maps users in U.S. will see Gulf of Mexico renamed Gulf of America and Denali changed to Mount McKinley] by Emily Mae Czachor (January 28, 2025 / 11:43 AM EST) ''CBS News''.</ref> Contrary to this decision, the apparently still-in-effect Google policy on this subject is: "In other words, if a ruler announced that henceforth the Pacific Ocean would be named after her mother, we would not add that placemark unless and until the name came into common usage."<ref>[https://publicpolicy.googleblog.com/2008/04/how-google-determines-names-for-bodies.html Public Policy Blog] (April 8, 2008) ''Google''.</ref>
[[File:Google Gulf of America Capitulation.png|thumb|right|400px|From a Google Maps search of "Gulf of Mexico" in May 2025]]

In 2023, Google's AI Principles stated that its AI research would not pursue the following sorts of applications:<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20231231061628/https://ai.google/responsibility/principles/ Our Principles] ''Google'' (archived from December 31, 2023).</ref>
{{cquote|
#Technologies that cause or are likely to cause overall harm. Where there is a material risk of harm, we will proceed only where we believe that the benefits substantially outweigh the risks, and will incorporate appropriate safety constraints.
#Weapons or other technologies whose principal purpose or implementation is to cause or directly facilitate injury to people.
#Technologies that gather or use information for surveillance violating internationally accepted norms.
#Technologies whose purpose contravenes widely accepted principles of international law and [[human rights]].
}}
In 2025, following the inauguration of an anti-democratic US president, Google decided to continue its war against "Don't be evil" by removing the forbidden topics from its AI principles.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20250204182451/https://ai.google/responsibility/principles/ Our Principles] ''Google'' (archived from February 4, 2025).</ref> Two of Google's senior figures explained the change by saying, "We believe democracies should lead in AI development, guided by core values like [[freedom]], [[equality]], and respect for human rights." This was despite the President at the time believing in none of those principles.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20250204182630/https://blog.google/technology/ai/responsible-ai-2024-report-ongoing-work/ Responsible AI: Our 2024 report and ongoing work] by James Manyika & Demis Hassabis (Feb 04, 2025) ''Google'' (archived from February 4, 2025).</ref>

==See also==
*[[Digital Rights Management]] — besides discouraging piracy of [[copyright]]ed material, this also binds users to the platform
*[[Echo chamber]] — a possible terminus for enshittification
*[[Oligarchic escapes]] — how billionaires deceive themselves that they can avoid enshittification
*[[Planned obsolescence]] — In the case of enshittification, the plan of extracting maximum value from the platform for shareholders until the platform dies

==External links==
*[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVYG1mu8Lg8 The Internet is starting to Break - Here's Why.] — Mrwhosetheboss
*[https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2025/02/as-internet-enshittification-marches-on-here-are-some-of-the-worst-offenders/ As Internet enshittification marches on, here are some of the worst offenders]&nbsp;— ''Ars Technica''
*[https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07566-y#citeas AI models collapse when trained on recursively generated data] — "We find that indiscriminate use of model-generated content in training causes irreversible defects in the resulting models, in which tails of the original content distribution disappear" — ''Nature''

==Notes==
{{reflist|group=note}}

==References==
{{reflist|2|80%}}

[[Category:Artificial intelligence]]
[[Category:Internet]]
[[Category:Neologisms]]
[[Category:Shit articles]]
[[Category:Technology]]

Categories: Artificial intelligence, Internet, Neologisms, Shit articles, Technology