We Deserve Better: A New Social Media Bill of Rights

from the we-can-do-better dept

Earlier this year, I was a part of a CNN documentary, Twitter: Breaking the Bird, which gave me much pause for reflection about the state of social media and how we got here. This year alone we’ve witnessed an unprecedented wave of disruption across these platforms.

Government workers, locked out of their jobs, struggled to organize securely. Protestors, seeking to plan No Kings marches, wondered which app could be the most trusted. Inbound international travelers have been deleting their social apps for fear that immigration officers will search their phones. And during major disasters, like the tragic Texas floods and the LA fires, emergency responders and volunteers find their critical updates buried by algorithms that prioritize engagement over urgency. On a daily basis, countless online communities face arbitrary deplatforming, surveillance, and loss of their digital spaces without recourse or explanation.

These aren’t isolated incidents: they’re symptoms of a fundamental crisis in how we’ve allowed our digital communities to be governed. We’ve unwittingly accepted a system where massive corporations control the public sphere; algorithms optimize for advertising revenue rather than human connection, and we the people have no real agency over our digital existence.

We’ve Lost Our Way

I’ve spent decades building social technologies, including working at Odeo, the company that ultimately pivoted to become Twitter. There I was the social app’s first employee and de facto CTO until late 2006; and have since built numerous other community organizing platforms. I’ve watched with growing concern as our digital spaces have become increasingly toxic and hostile to genuine community needs. The promise of social media as we defined it in the early days—to connect and empower communities of people—has been subverted by a business model that treats human connection as a commodity to be monetized.

Today, if you run a Facebook Group with thousands of members, you have no real authority – your community exists at the whim of corporate policies you cannot influence. This is fundamentally at odds with how real-world communities have always operated. Your local gardening club, bowling league, or neighborhood association has democratic processes for leadership and decision-making. Why should our digital communities be any different?

It’s Time For a New Social Media Bill Of Digital Rights

I believe that the time has come for a new Social Media Bill of Digital Rights. Just as the original Bill of Rights protected individual freedoms from government overreach, we need fundamental protections for our digital communities from corporate control and surveillance capitalism.

So what could such a Social Media Bill of Rights include?

  1. The right to privacy & security: The ability to communicate and organize without fear of surveillance or exploitation.
  2. The right to own and control your identity: People and their communities must own their digital identities, connections and data. And, as the owner of an account, you can exercise the right to be forgotten.
  3. The right to choose and understand algorithms (transparency): Choosing the algorithms that shape your interactions: no more black box systems optimizing for engagement at the expense of community well-being.
  4. The right to community self-governance: Crucially, communities of users need the right to self govern, setting their own rules for behavior which are contextually relevant to their community. (Note: this does not preclude developer governance.)
  5. The right to full portability – the right to exit: The freedom to port your community in its entirety, to another app without losing your connections and content.

To determine whether these are the appropriate “Rights,” I’ve just launched a new podcast, Revolution.Social where I invite my guests, including the likes of Jack Dorsey, Cory Doctorow, Yoel Roth, Kara Swisher and Renee DiResta, to share their feedback and debate where we need to head next.

Architecting For A Better Future

The good news is that the technical foundations for a better future already exist through open protocols that work like the web itself – interconnected and controlled by no single entity.

  • The Fediverse, powered by ActivityPub, enables platforms like Mastodon to create interconnected communities free from corporate control.
  • Nostr provides a foundation for decentralized, encrypted communication that no one can shut down.
  • BlueSky is pioneering user choice in algorithms.
  • Signal demonstrates that private, secure communication is possible at scale.

Unlike the walled gardens of Meta, TikTok, and Twitter (now X), these open protocols allow communities to connect across platforms while maintaining control of their spaces. When you use email or browse the web, you don’t worry about which email provider or browser your friends use – it just works. Our social spaces should function the same way.

What’s missing is the bridge between these technical capabilities and the tools communities actually need to thrive. We need to move from closed, corporate platforms to open protocols that communities can shape and control. This isn’t just a technical challenge – it needs to become a social movement. We need to build systems that are co-designed with communities, that respect their autonomy, and that enable their authentic purposes.

Evan Henshaw-Plath, known as “rabble,” is an activist and technologist passionate about building commons-based social media apps that prioritize equity and sustainability.

Filed Under: , , , , , , , , , ,

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 “We Deserve Better: A New Social Media Bill of Rights”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
18 Comments
Rich Kulawiec says:

“When you use email or browse the web, you don’t worry about which email provider or browser your
friends use – it just works.”

That was true. It’s not true any more, and yes, you should worry about these things because at an ever-increasing pace, email providers, web browsers, and even operating systems are vacuuming up every piece of data and metadata that they possibly can. Example 1: Gmail now — by default — feeds everything to their AI project. Example 2: Firefox collects data and sends it to Mozilla. Example 3: Windows 11 Recall.

It might be tempting to think that this is innocuous — but it’s not. And it might be tempting to believe the posturing by Google, Mozilla, Microsoft, et.al., but that’s all it is: posturing. If they at all serious about privacy and security they wouldn’t even consider doing these things.

So while I would like to agree with this statement, and many years ago I would have agreed with this statement: that was then. This is now. And now, sadly, it’s completely wrong.

Strawb (profile) says:

Re:

That was true. It’s not true any more, and yes, you should worry about these things because at an ever-increasing pace, email providers, web browsers, and even operating systems are vacuuming up every piece of data and metadata that they possibly can.

You’re making an argument against something that isn’t being argued. The point is that there are no artificial walls around things like email or browsers, because they’re based on protocols.

Rich Kulawiec says:

Re: Re:

Thanks, I’m fairly sure I know how Internet protocols such as SMTP and HTTP work (at least some of the time). But go back to this part of the sentence that I quoted: “[…] it just works.”

That isn’t true any more, and I only enumerated some of the ways in which it’s not working — there are a lot more, unfortunately. To give you a few scattered examples: a lot of web sites are under siege from AI crawlers, so they don’t “just work” any more; some web sites are hosted by Cloudflare, which has apparently found it expedient to block some less popular browsers outright, so those sites don’t “just work” anymore; the combination of SPF/DKIM/DMARC has made forwarding email a gymnastic trick even for people for who know what they’re doing, so that doesn’t “just work” any more. And so on. A lot of things that were working pretty darn well 5 or 10 or 20 years ago are now being broken at an increasing pace due to [a long list of contributing factors].

Strawb (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

a lot of web sites are under siege from AI crawlers, so they don’t “just work” any more

The protocols still do, which is the point, and AI crawlers can be stopped through the robots.txt file.

some web sites are hosted by Cloudflare, which has apparently found it expedient to block some less popular browsers outright, so those sites don’t “just work” anymore

The protocols still do and owners can freely move their domains to another provider, which is the point.

the combination of SPF/DKIM/DMARC has made forwarding email a gymnastic trick even for people for who know what they’re doing, so that doesn’t “just work” any more

The protocols still do, which is the point, and I’ve never experienced any shenanigans because of SPF/DKIM/DMARC in my private life or any job I’ve had.

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

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
n00bdragon (profile) says:

The Bill of Rights is a list of constitutional changes which limit the powers of the United States federal government, which is notably a government created of, by, (and ostensibly for) the people. It is a self limitation in a sense because it is the limitation of the people (in the form of government) to rule themselves in certain ways. Additionally, as we’ve seen in particular in recent times, its protections don’t mean all that much when the government simply ignores it.

Governments are different from marketplaces. You cannot simply log out of governmental control. You can physically move yourself to a new country, but barring that you’re stuck. By comparison, anyone can stop using Twitter or Facebook or TikTok at any time. Mastodon, Bluesky, et al are even listed in the article as viable alternatives. Just go there. It’s really that simple.

It sounds like Mr. Henshaw-Plath is not actually upset that there aren’t better services out there. He’s mad that more people aren’t using them, and for the record that’s entirely valid. There’s lots of things in life where I firmly believe the world would be a better place if more people used the things I like. But approaching it like a government in need of limitations is silly at best and counterproductive at worst. You don’t need to make Twitter more like Bluesky. You need to move people from Twitter to Bluesky. In fact, in this understanding, fixing Twitter/Facebook/TikTok/etc actually harms your goal, because it keeps people on the broken locked-in platforms.

That’s the funny thing about regulation. You never regulate bad things out of existence. You only mandate a permanent “acceptable” level of shittiness.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

But approaching it like a government in need of limitations is silly at best and counterproductive at worst. You don’t need to make Twitter more like Bluesky. You need to move people from Twitter to Bluesky. In fact, in this understanding, fixing Twitter/Facebook/TikTok/etc actually harms your goal

You and I seem to have read the article somewhat differently. The author wrote “We need to move from closed, corporate platforms to open protocols that communities can shape and control”—which is basically what you said.

But why Bluesky specifically? Just because it’s trendy? The way I read it, the author is giving us a tool by which we can decide whether some system, such as Bluesky, should be considered acceptable. It’s not about “limiting” existing platforms; we’re just saying we’re gonna leave platforms that don’t respect this “bill of rights”.

Facebook can change or not, and I don’t see any statement by the author that they should. As long as “we” are a small enough group, they’re probably gonna dismiss it—just as the British were dismissive of “the U.S.A.” from 1776 through 1783. But social networking services have, historically, sometimes had very quick downfalls, so that could be risky.

It should also be noted that your opening statement, “The Bill of Rights is a list of constitutional changes which limit the powers of the United States federal government”, illustrates exactly why some of the country’s founders were against the Bill of Rights. The government is supposed to have only the specific powers granted to it by the people, and they were worried that people would view it as a list of limitations: the only things the government was not allowed to do. The Tenth Amendment was added as a compromise.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

And I meant that as a rhetorical question, which obviously wasn’t as obvious as I expected.

The point is, it’s better to say “look for a service that provides the following” than to name a specific service. Because people should be thinking more about the “why” than the “which”.

Don’t just jump to whatever’s popular now, which is how we got to the current situation. There are principles that can be considered.

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

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get all our posts in your inbox with the Techdirt Daily Newsletter!

We don’t spam. Read our privacy policy for more info.

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...