Seven Rules For Internet CEOs To Avoid Enshittification

from the a-few-basic-rules dept

It seems that we’ve had a rash of formerly loved internet services going down the enshittification curve. As coined (brilliantly) by Cory Doctorow, enshittification is the process by which a company gets gradually worse. As he puts it:

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.

And the progression down this curve is often driven by the (short term) demands of investors, but too often CEOs themselves embrace this curve. And, really, it’s not difficult to see how it happens.

In the early days, you’re an upstart. You’re building users and fans, and it’s the “don’t be evil” stage of an internet company’s life, where the focus is almost entirely on building users. And you do that by providing a great service, better than anything else out there (maybe even disrupting the business models of what’s out there). This excites everyone, including the media and investors who pour in money, subsidizing the company’s existence and rapid growth.

The second stage, then, is when you realize at some point all of this userbase and goodwill has to turn into some sort of business, so that often involves some “compromises” to make sure that you can actually make money. It may start innocently enough: you add in a few non-intrusive ads, or come up with some more creative business models, such as selling data from your users.

But, then the third stage comes, and the investors, who were so happy to give you that money to subsidize everything early on, start demanding their return. They need to see much more growth, and not just in the size of your userbase, but in how much money you’re able to make. You start learning acronyms like “ARPU” (average revenue per user) and such. And then you’re being measured on how much you’re increasing those metrics, which means you need to squeeze more out of each individual user, and you’re now deep within the enshittification stage, in which you’re trying to squeeze your users for more money each quarter (because now everything is judged in how well you did in the last 3 months to improve that number).

It’s happened to lots of platforms, but we’re seeing it happen in somewhat spectacular fashion with a few these days, mainly Twitter and Reddit, though I’d argue that Netflix could be included as well.

Doctorow has another sentence following the one I quoted above that is important here as well:

Then, they die.

That part doesn’t always happen. And some companies just linger on, dead company walking, for quite some time. But the main thing that the enshittification process does is open up new opportunities for new entrants to come in, and do so at the early stages of the curve, with a focus on delighting users, rather than squeezing them. And that’s where the opportunity is for the original companies to die.

Anyway, I’d like to posit seven basic rules for any internet CEO looking to avoid the enshittification death cycle. Think of these as the rules that Steve Huffman maybe should have learned years ago, rather than whatever the fuck he’s doing now.

  1. Tell your investors that you’re in this for the long haul and they need to be too. This was a key part of Jeff Bezos’ success with Amazon. For years he was blatantly, almost obnoxiously, transparent with investors that he was focused on the long-term sustainability of Amazon, and he would not cut off benefits to Amazon’s customers in search of profitability. Among Wall St. folks, the oft-repeated line was “will Amazon ever make money?” When I was in business school in the 90s, a decently successful entrepreneur told me that Amazon was never going to succeed because Bezos was too focused on users, rather than profits. Instead, he suggested PointCast was the internet company that would succeed. How many people actually even remember PointCast? People forget that when Bezos introduced Amazon Prime, Wall St. flipped out, because they insisted that it would cost way too much for too little benefit. But, through it all Amazon survived (and thrived) because Bezos just kept telling investors exactly what his plan was, and never backed down, no matter what Wall St. kept saying to him.
  2. Your community is everything. This is too easily forgotten, but your users are everything if you run an internet business. They’re not “the product.” They’re what makes your site useful and valuable, and often provide the best marketing you could never buy by convincing others to join and providing you with all of the best ideas on how to improve things and make your service even better for the users. The moment you’re undermining your own community, you’re beginning to spiral downward.
  3. Create more value than you capture. This one is not mine, but Tim O’Reilly’s, and it’s one that constantly sticks with me. As you’re developing a business model, the best way to make sure that you’re serving your users best, and not enshittifying everything, is to constantly make sure that you’re only capturing some of the value you’re creating, and are instead putting much more out into the world, especially for your community. Your investors will push you to capture more and more of that value, but again, when you start chasing that, you’re also spiraling down the enshittification curve.
  4. Empower your community, and then trust them. This may sound similar to rule number two, but it’s more about how you make the first rule a reality. Again, your own community is what’s making your service even more valuable, and helping to attract new users. So, make it easier for them to do that. Push the power to make your service better out from the service to the users themselves and watch what they do. Let them build. Let them improve your service. Let them make it work better for you. But, you have to have some trust here. If you’re focused on “Rule 3” you have to recognize that sometimes your users will create value that you don’t capture. Or even that someone else captures. But in the long run, it still flows back to you, as it makes your service that much more valuable.
  5. Find ways to make money that don’t undermine the community or the experience. There are ways to do this. If you’ve built a strong community, they want you to survive. But you need to make sure that you’re creating ways to capture the part of the value you’re capturing in a manner that doesn’t harm the overall experience. Google did this in the early days with its non-intrusive contextual ads, but lost the plot on enshittification when it started sucking up as much extra data as it could to target you (and then seemed to cut off competitive routes for alternative ads to work). There are ways to monetize that don’t need to overwhelm, that don’t need to suck up every bit of data, that don’t need to rely on taking away features users relied on. Focus on adding more scarce value, and figuring out ways to charge for those new things which can’t be easily replicated.
  6. Never charge for what was once free. This is a corollary to rule number five. If you’re charging for something that was once free, you’re taking away value from your community. You’re changing the nature of the bargain, and ripping away the trust that your community put in you. Instead, always look for something new that is worth paying for above and beyond what you already offered. Make it so that it’s worthwhile for people to pay, rather than acting like they need to pay you for the things they got for free until now. Give them a reason to pay gladly, don’t try to pressure them into coughing up money grudgingly.
  7. Don’t insult the intelligence of your users. All too often, this is what it comes down to. When investors get on your case about how you have to squeeze more money out of each user, bad CEOs start trying to justify the clearly “bad for users” decisions that they’re making as actually being good for the users. Some, like Reddit’s Huffman, are so far gone that he just assumes that Reddit’s userbase wants him to make more money, rather than even trying to couch the borked API plans in some “it’s better for users” language. But, either way, be upfront with the community (remember, it’s the most important part of your site). If you need to make more money, rather than acting petulant about how unfair it is that you’re not making money, explain why you’re creating new services that provide new value, and why they’re priced as such. Be up front, transparent, and honest. Don’t talk down to them, and treat them as if they owe you. They don’t. They made your service what it is, and you should act accordingly.

There’s obviously a lot more to all of this, but keeping those seven principles in mind can create a path for CEOs of internet companies to continue delighting users and avoiding extreme enshittification. Of course, no one’s perfect, and every company is going to make mistakes. But if investors are pushing you to make more money now, figure out ways to do that by adding even more value to the world, rather than trying to squeeze your existing community, ripping away the things they love, and telling them you’re doing it for their own good. And, also, tell those investors that you’re doing this for the longer term health of the service, rather than just trying to get a quick buck out of the people who made your service so successful in the first place.

Filed Under: , , ,
Companies: amazon, google, netflix, reddit, twitter

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Seven Rules For Internet CEOs To Avoid Enshittification”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
39 Comments
This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
TKnarr (profile) says:

I think there’s a Rule 0 here too:

Before you start, know how you intend to make enough money from your service to turn a profit.

You may have some way to go before you can start doing what you plan to do to turn a profit, but you should know what it’ll be up front so that you don’t do things that’ll undercut it. If for instance you intend to make your money off of subscriptions to your service, don’t start by making your service entirely free (and if you do offer part of it for free, plan on keeping that part free when you start charging subscriptions).

Plus, remember when it comes to Rule 1 that a company’s first allegiance is not to the shareholders, it’s to the corporate charter and that charter does not need to promise to maximize shareholder profits above everything else. When an “activist” shareholder sues to try to force you to do things to increase the stock price at the expense of the company’s continued survival, the best defense is to be able to point to the corporate charter and say “Plaintiff knew what our priorities were, we laid them out clearly. If they didn’t agree with those priorities, why did they buy stock in our company?”.

joe says:

Re: corporate charter

It is a good idea to write your corporate values into the charter. If you are a hardcore but consistent free speech platform, then write it into your charter. If you are a business dedicated to empowering activists, then write it into your charter. If you are a platform for Christians by Christians, then write it into your charter. If you are against gambling and porn, then write it into your charter. If you want to operate as a public good, then incorporate as a social benefit corporation, then do so in the beginning. If your internet business plants trees, then put it into the corporate charter.

This comment has been deemed funny by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

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.

I’m Martin Niemöller, and I approve this message.

ECA (profile) says:

Wow, Business 101

The top section sounds like All the corps in the USA. Screw the customer.
The Amazon section…Seems like the old days, Before they ‘Created VALUE’, of the company, they sold stocks in it to make more money, USED that money to pay the top earners, then found they had less money, so had to re-evaluate the Value of the company.(umm, netflic’s? Listening to everyone else’s idea of profit?)

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Mike, you said just about all of this way back on Feb 15th, 2007. You know, the piece you titled: “Saying that you can’t compete with free is saying that you can’t compete, period.”

Damned shame you have to repeat yourself. Almost insulting, even. Just reinforces my opinion that the IQ of the universe is a constant…. and the population is growing. 🙁

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
That One Guy (profile) says:

'Social media has no value without the social half' is not complex

It’s more than a little crazy how many of these basically boil down to ‘Know what part of your business is making you money and don’t screw with that part’, something you’d think would be an extremely basic skill to have.

Seeing CEO’s having no bloody idea what actually brings value to the table is like watching someone take charge of a lemonade business and deciding that the cups are the only important part and they can water down and use cheap alternatives for the actual lemonade all they want.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

You obviously added Rule 1 after writing everything else, as there are multiple references in the other rules to prior rules but using the wrong numbers: Rule 4 (“Empower your community, and then trust them”) saying it “may sound similar to rule number one” when it should reference rule 2, then references “Rule 2” when rule 3 was intended; Rule 6 referencing “rule number four” when it intended #5.

Boba Fatt (profile) says:

Physical stores don't do this

Think of a long-lived, successful, local business – a dry cleaner, a bakery, an auto repair shop. They provide a decent service at a reasonable price and they’ve been profitable for years. They don’t expect to continually grow profits or market share quarter after quarter, because they know that’s not how you keep customers.

So why do tech businesses think they need to?

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
TKnarr (profile) says:

Re:

Because those successful local businesses are run by businessmen. The tech companies are founded and run by MBAs. One of the crucial differences is that to an MBA the company is just a paycheck, if it goes under he’ll just find another paycheck to replace it. All he needs to worry about is making sure he has enough in the bank to tide him over between jobs. To a businessman the company is his livelihood. If it goes under, his livelihood is gone and he and his family are going to suffer for it. He needs to make sure the company not only makes money today but that it’ll still be making money several years from now.

Tom Cross says:

Re: Everything on the Internet is free.

Back in the early to mid 1990’s you could make a reasonable amount of money running a medium sized online service, BBS, ISP, or email provider. Some of these things became commodified of course, but you cannot commodify community.

What really happened is that large tech companies offered everything for free and taught end users that services on the Internet shouldn’t cost anything. People’s expectations changed.

We used to want to authenticity of a small online community run by someone we knew, and we were willing to pay for it, but now we want the slickness of a big tech product and we expect to get it free of charge.

So its really hard to charge people for anything online, and without paying customers there isn’t a “small business” framework on the Internet.

Ad supported businesses only work at large scale, because ads pull in a very small amount of money. Furthermore, all the targeting that is required to make them more effective is perceived as being evil.

I think the values Mike is proposing are helpful. I also think there is more to this.

I think we need three things – I think we need platforms with good values, I think we need technical architectures that do not create user lock-in (so that users can walk away if the deal changes), and I think we need a commitment from users to “buy local” – to be willing to pay for what they are saying they want.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re:

“So why do tech businesses think they need to?”

Because they don’t start with a proven idea that covers a limited local area with proven demand and a loan from a local bank. They try to provide massive, often global, businesses that require huge investment from venture capitalists, and those insist on increasing results. Because of the global part, they often skip the step between “starting with a single venue and expanding when that’s successful” and “now it’s a company with hundreds of outlets and the board of directors wants increasing profits”.

But, the increasing profit demand isn’t even the main issue, it’s usually the way in which they think they can get there by raising the costs of the service while cutting staff. That’s never a long term strategy.

Anonymous Coward says:

The whole business environment in the States is against the long haul

The stock market with it’s focus on quarterly returns and all other incentivizing is all for the short term. In a way the whole regulatory structure and everything pushes businesses to the quick buck.
Really the only place you can be in it for long haul is at organizations that are not public, and don’t really plan on going public any time soon.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
TFG says:

Re:

Yes … but it still became the absolute giant it is by refusing to short-term profit mindset until it became huge. In that respect alone, it is in fact a great example.

It became enshittified by starting to ignore that very basic early principle, as well as all the rest of it.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re:

They even went through several shifts in the actual business. They started as a book seller, and then their major innovations that got them to where they are today weren’t related to the good they sold, but the backend IT and warehousing innovations they gathered along the way. They make more from AWS than they do by delivering parcels now.

They’ve got worse over the years, but they didn’t just take one product and exploit it once they got big.

That One Guy (profile) says:

Re: Killing the golden goose is only smart if you don't want more eggs

Getting $100 today and then nothing afterwards is only a better option than getting $20/month for at least the following year and likely into the foreseeable future if you need that $100 right now.

For any scenario outside that going for the lower but ongoing payment over the larger but one-time is maximizing revenue.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...