Europe: put the social back in social media
A connected Europe (image generated with Midjourney)
A blueprint for a real social media network
Europe stands at a critical moment in its history. Transatlantic relations are at an all-time low while a war is waging on our soil. Meanwhile, the old continent itself becomes ever more divided. Extreme right-wing and left-wing parties gain traction. Russian hackers exploit social media to undermine democracy. American algorithms prioritize outrage over understanding, and the private interests of a few dictate the public discourse for many. The very fabric of European democracy is at risk. That is why, as much as Europe needs a strong army under a unified command, Europe needs its own Facebook. It just might help save democracy.
The Atlantic deepened overnight.
Europe is slowly coming to terms with a new reality. All of a sudden, it seems we’ve woken up to a world where globalism seems a naive idea from the past. Continents and countries are folding back on themselves and old alliances are under pressure. The Atlantic Ocean has become deeper overnight.
Silicon Valley also lost its aura of innocence. Some of its most prominent actors make strong political statements. But relations between Europe and the Magnificent Seven had already soured, mainly because of a cultural difference. On one hand, you have the “move fast and break things” mantra dominating the tech scene in the US. On the other hand, there’s the tendency to mistrust and regulate innovation before it is well understood in Brussels.
When social media became a contradiction in terms.
In the meantime, social media have changed too. Right after the 2024 elections, Zuckerberg announced Meta would get rid of its content moderators, in the name of ‘free speech'. X, formerly known as Twitter, had already shown its true colours. Elon Musk, the owner, made two Nazi salutes in public. He also publicly supports the extreme right-wing party AFD in Germany. That in itself wouldn’t have been a problem for X if Musk had not interfered with the algorithms of X to promote his own political views.
But the worrisome evolution of Social Media didn’t happen overnight. Rather than unite and democratise, they have been polarising and reinforcing existing biases for years now. Instead of McLuhan’s Global Village, social media became more like Orwell’s Telescreens in 1984. Screens that spread propaganda and control the masses. Much like Tolkien’s fictional Wormtongue, the algorithms feed on our fears. They spread hate and lies and influence election results worldwide. No, social media weren’t that social after all.
A good idea gone wrong
Back in the day when we still called it Web 2.0, we believed social media would change markets and marketing for good. The Berlin Wall had fallen a good decade ago and it seemed like East and West were growing closer to each other. “Don’t be evil” was still Google’s motto and they were going to scan every book in the world. People had attention spans that lasted the length of a blog post. Flickr was the Instagram of its day before Amazon bought it: a place where you shared beautiful pictures. In Belgium, there was a Facebook before TheFacebook. It was called Redbox. Later, it became Netlog and peaked at nearly 100 million users.
Also, bandwidth and storage cost a lot, and no one had figured out how to make money from these platforms.
Where is the money, Lebowski?
Today, the platforms have figured it out. There are basically three models for making money with social media platforms.
The first are paid subscriptions. Some platforms like Strava today may manage to cover most of their costs with it, but they are rare and niche. It clearly doesn’t work for the big boys. In 2024 Instagram reported 0,14% of its users used the paid subscription.
Another model of monetizing social media is selling the data they gather. Studies show that Facebook knows you better than your mum (or your significant other). It doesn't require much of a stretch of the imagination to see the commercial potential here. Today, a majority of the platforms use this in some way or another. Hence the saying: “If you’re not paying for the product, you are the product.”
Finally, the third way to monetize social media is advertising. Because these platforms know and understand you better than your mum, they are an advertiser’s dream. Facebook understands what and who you like. They can accurately predict which image or word will trigger you to click. They can also target young people who are likely to vote conservative, live in suburban areas, listen to German metal and have a lower than average income. Or any other combination of that kind.
Most platforms use a combination of all three models to make a profit. Some rely on just one. But whatever the model, they have one thing in common. The more you interact with it, the more money these platforms make.
Designing for dopamine
To keep you engaged with the platform, Facebook and the likes have studied behavioural psychology. A simple ‘like’ or ‘heart’ can make people feel good, because it releases small doses of dopamine in our system.
Social media platforms create user experiences to trigger dopamine release, so you become addicted. Because the more you engage with the platform, the more time you spend on it. The more ads they can show you and the better they get to know you. And the better they get to know you, the more valuable and accurate their data becomes. And the more data they have, the more they can sell – and the better their ads become.
You get the picture.
A distorted timeline
Designing for ever more user engagement, Facebook made an important decision in 2009. The effects of that decision are still seen today on all major social media platforms. You could argue it has changed how we see reality. In 2009, Facebook changed its timeline. It replaced the chronological order with an algorithm named Edgerank.
Before this introduction, people saw content in the order it was published. Facebook would show all posts from your friends, ordered by publication date. Now Facebook would show you the post it thought you would interact with most, first. And it would squeeze in ads as well: so Facebook gained twice.
This may sound like a little UX-tweak, but it proved to be a game changer. This change, more than any other, created the echo-chambers on Facebook. Facebook wanted likes, so it showed you content you enjoyed. It pushed everything else down your timeline. It became very unlikely that you would see content you disagreed with.
On Twitter, a similar algorithm was used for the opposite reason. It shows you tweets you might disagree with first. Because their algorithm was designed to trigger animated discussions rather than likes. But the principle stays the same: you are no longer in control over what you see.
Those are the facts! If you don’t like them, I have others.
This change to the timeline might have started as a simple hack to boost engagement, but it opened a Pandora's box. Users used to know why they saw certain posts. They viewed the latest updates from friends and family on Facebook. They trusted it and they could control it.
Now, ads began to pop up between the photos of your friend’s bachelor party and your granny’s cats. Facebook algorithms started recommending groups and pages to you. Often, for products or topics you liked. Every once in a while, for a political party. Now and then for a crypto-scam. Edgerank simply showed what it suspected you would click on. Whether the information was true or not, didn’t matter.
What’s more: Facebook literally sold the timeline to the highest bidder. As an advertiser, you could show whatever ad you wanted to whoever you wanted. That was great news for advertisers who wanted to sell their backpacks or sporting shoes to specific demographics. It was awesome news for marketers who used Facebook ads with fake news to support the Leave campaign in the Brexit referendum. And it was wholeheartedly embraced by the Trump campaign team to promote fake ads in the race to the Oval Office.
On X, things weren’t much better. Musk had the algorithm tweaked so his own tweets got boosted by a factor of 1000. Later on, the algorithm would promote right wing content in 2024 during the American election.
Make social media great again
In short, social media as we know it is broken. It’s time to reinvent it. The goal: build a global village where it’s good to be. Where the user’s data is not for sale. Where the timeline is a timeline: chronological. Where people, not algorithms, decide what they see. Where AI's power is used like Spotify uses it. To help users discover new things, not just to keep them in their rabbit holes.
A social platform should be a place where it’s crystal clear what is an ad and what is not. Where advertisers are held accountable and posts can be verified by humans for humans. With a user interface that is designed around the most human user experience, not the most addictive one. With content that may be a 15 second video loop, but might as well be a Dostojewski novel or an Almodovar movie. A platform that triggers conversation rather than debate.
An opportunity for Europe
Sure, Europe must rethink its military strategy. It needs to consider its reliance on foreign technology just as much. That includes information technology. Especially the kind that has a massive impact on both our daily lives and our political behaviour. Europe needs its own social network. And while we’re at it, why not build one that’s really social?
We have the brains to build it, as my fellow countrymen Toon Coppens and Lorenz Bogaert showed over than 20 years ago. We have the talent and ambition to scale software fast: the founders of Mistral, a European AI startup from 2023, prove this. Mistral is now valued at €2 billion and gives OpenAI and Meta a run for their money. We have 10 billion in funds and the structures in place to make it happen. And above all: if we want to keep what’s good in Europe, we need to act. Now rather than tomorrow.
Only this time, let’s not regulate what exists. Let’s build something truly magnificent. Let's build a platform where all men are like brothers under Europe’s protective wing.
This article was originally published on Linkedin.