Enshittification and what it means for digital mental health
6 January 2026
Over the holidays I took some time to read Enshittification, the latest book by Cory Doctorow. It describes how large tech platforms have shaped the internet and digital services over the past two decades, why many of them have degraded over time, what may come next, and what citizens and regulators can do to push for a better online — and offline — world. I also enjoyed his earlier book, The Internet Con, where I first came across the term “enshittification”, which Doctorow coined. While several themes and examples return, it is still a worthwhile read, not least because of many insightful anecdotes.
Three personal takeaways
If it’s free, you’re the product — but even if you pay, you may still be the product. Paying doesn’t guarantee fair treatment.
The core problem with Big Tech is not “tech” but concentrated market power. Challenging monopolies, splitting them up, and reducing lock-in could address many current harms.
We are far from fair competition, but people and regulators can still create conditions that make it possible. The road ahead is very challenging, though.
What this means for digital mental health
If Doctorow is right, then preventing enshittification depends heavily on having credible exit strategies. That makes interoperability and data portability central: people must be able to leave a platform with their history, their records, and their care-team connections intact. In the EU this is increasingly a legal requirement, but in mental healthcare it should be treated as an ethical and architectural one long before it becomes a compliance checkbox.