In recent years, a new term has entered the digital vocabulary: enshittification. The word describes a common pattern in the evolution of online platforms—especially large social media networks—where a service begins as a valuable, user-friendly space but gradually declines as companies prioritize growth, advertising revenue, and data extraction over the user experience. While the term is blunt, it captures a reality many users have felt for years. Facebook is often cited as a prime example of how this process unfolds.

When Facebook first emerged in the mid-2000s, it offered something revolutionary: a clean, simple way to stay connected with friends and family. Posts appeared in chronological order, there were minimal ads, and the platform largely served the interests of the people using it. In its early years, Facebook created genuine digital communities where users could easily share updates, photos, and ideas without the constant pressure of algorithms competing for attention.

Over time, however, Facebook’s priorities shifted. As the platform grew into a global advertising powerhouse, the experience for users began to change. Algorithms replaced chronological feeds, meaning users no longer saw posts simply in the order they were shared. Instead, content was prioritized based on engagement metrics designed to keep users scrolling longer. Advertisements increased dramatically, often appearing every few posts. Businesses, creators, and community leaders who once reached their audiences organically found their posts buried unless they paid for advertising.

This transformation reflects the classic pattern of enshittification. First, platforms attract users by offering a high-quality service. Then they begin to favor advertisers and corporate partners. Eventually, the system becomes optimized primarily for revenue generation, often at the expense of both users and content creators.

For many people, the result has been a noticeable shift in the tone and usefulness of the platform. Meaningful conversations are often drowned out by viral content, outrage-driven posts, or sensational material that triggers engagement. Instead of encouraging thoughtful discussion and connection, the algorithm tends to reward emotional reactions—especially anger or controversy—because those responses keep people clicking, commenting, and sharing.

For individuals or organizations trying to build positive communities, this environment can be frustrating. Important or uplifting content may struggle to reach an audience, while divisive posts spread rapidly. Community leaders also have limited control over how their content appears, who sees it, or how discussions unfold. In essence, Facebook owns the environment, and everyone else is simply operating within its rules.

This reality has led many creators and organizations to explore alternatives—particularly private community platforms that offer greater control over culture, content, and engagement.

That is where a model like West Egg Living combined with Estage’s Hubcentric Community platform offers a different path forward. Instead of relying entirely on a massive public platform governed by algorithms and advertising priorities, a private community allows leaders to shape the environment intentionally.

A private platform has several advantages that directly counter the problems associated with enshittification.

First, control over content visibility remains in the hands of the community leaders rather than a corporate algorithm. When you share something valuable—whether it’s a wellness infographic, an educational article, or a discussion prompt—it reaches the members who chose to join the community. Posts are not hidden simply because they don’t generate immediate engagement.

Second, private communities make it easier to cultivate a positive culture. Public social media platforms are open environments where anyone can comment, argue, or disrupt discussions. In contrast, private communities allow moderators to establish clear guidelines and expectations. Members join with a shared interest or purpose, which naturally fosters more respectful and constructive interaction.

Third, a private community helps shift the focus away from attention economics and back toward meaningful connection. Large social platforms are designed to maximize time on the platform because time translates into advertising revenue. Private communities, on the other hand, can prioritize education, support, and genuine conversation instead of endless scrolling.

For a project like West Egg Living, this model aligns perfectly with the broader mission of promoting healthy living, thoughtful discussion, and positive personal development. The goal is not simply to accumulate followers or generate clicks, but to build a space where people can learn, share ideas, and support one another in living healthier and more balanced lives.

By combining Facebook posts with a central private hub on Estage’s Hubcentric platform, West Egg Living can use the best aspects of both worlds. Facebook still serves as a discovery tool—a place where people first encounter the content. But the deeper conversations, resources, and community interaction can take place in a space designed specifically for that purpose.

In many ways, this approach reflects a broader shift happening across the internet. As large platforms become increasingly commercialized and algorithm-driven, more people are rediscovering the value of smaller, intentional communities.

The lesson of enshittification is not that technology itself is the problem. Rather, it reminds us that the structure of a platform shapes the quality of the community it produces. When incentives prioritize advertising and engagement above everything else, the experience inevitably declines.

But when the goal is learning, connection, and positive growth, a carefully designed private community can provide something the big platforms often cannot: a digital space that genuinely serves the people who gather there.