home.social

#marketpower — Public Fediverse posts

Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #marketpower, aggregated by home.social.

  1. Anti-Competition by Design

    By Cliff Potts, CSO, and Editor-in-Chief of WPS News

    Baybay City, Leyte, Philippines — May 6, 2026

    Competition is what keeps markets honest. When users can move freely, platforms must earn loyalty through better service. On X, that freedom has narrowed. The system increasingly rewards staying inside one ecosystem and quietly punishes anyone who tries to operate outside it.

    This essay explains how that design works and why it harms Filipino creators, journalists, and small businesses.

    How Lock-In Replaces Competition

    Healthy platforms compete for users by improving tools, reliability, and trust. Unhealthy ones compete by making exit costly.

    On X, creators who post links to outside sites often see reduced reach. Accounts that encourage audiences to follow them elsewhere grow more slowly. Over time, users learn an unspoken rule: keep everything inside the platform or accept penalties.

    This is not open competition. It is enforced dependence.

    Why This Matters More in the Philippines

    Filipino creators rarely rely on a single income source. Many combine writing, freelancing, donations, and small online sales. That requires moving audiences between platforms.

    When one platform blocks that movement, it blocks income. A creator may have followers, but no way to convert that attention into support elsewhere. The platform keeps the audience. The creator carries the risk.

    This imbalance is especially damaging in lower-income markets.

    Small Businesses Face the Same Wall

    Local businesses use social media to reach customers, then send them to websites, booking pages, or messaging apps. When those links are suppressed, business slows.

    Owners often do not know why traffic drops. They blame themselves, not the platform. Meanwhile, the platform keeps users scrolling instead of buying.

    Anti-competitive design is most effective when it is quiet.

    Choice Without Real Freedom

    Supporters often argue that users can leave at any time. In theory, that is true. In practice, audiences are locked in.

    Years of work, followers, and reputation are tied to one system. Leaving means starting over. Staying means accepting rules that favor the platform over the user.

    That is not free choice. It is constrained choice.

    Why This Is a Business Failure

    Markets grow when value flows in many directions. Platforms that block movement limit growth for everyone except themselves.

    For Filipino users, this means fewer options, lower income, and higher risk. For the platform, it means declining trust and long-term instability.

    Anti-competition may protect control in the short term, but it weakens the ecosystem over time.

    Looking Ahead

    The next essay will examine how these same design choices affect advertisers and why many brands avoid platforms with unpredictable and restrictive behavior.

    When competition is designed out of the system, users always pay the price.

    For more social commentary, please see Occupy 2.5 at https://Occupy25.com

    This essay will be archived in the WPS News Archives at Amazon.

    References (APA)

    European Commission. (2023). Digital Markets Act and platform competition. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu

    Electronic Frontier Foundation. (2023). Competition and platform lock-in. https://www.eff.org

    Reuters. (2024). Brands rethink spending on X amid policy changes. https://www.reuters.com

    #anticompetition #creatorEconomy #digitalMarkets #internetPlatforms #marketPower #onlineIncome #Philippines #platformEconomics #smallBusinesses #socialMediaPlatforms #Twitter #XPlatform
  2. Anti-Competition by Design

    By Cliff Potts, CSO, and Editor-in-Chief of WPS News

    Baybay City, Leyte, Philippines — May 6, 2026

    Competition is what keeps markets honest. When users can move freely, platforms must earn loyalty through better service. On X, that freedom has narrowed. The system increasingly rewards staying inside one ecosystem and quietly punishes anyone who tries to operate outside it.

    This essay explains how that design works and why it harms Filipino creators, journalists, and small businesses.

    How Lock-In Replaces Competition

    Healthy platforms compete for users by improving tools, reliability, and trust. Unhealthy ones compete by making exit costly.

    On X, creators who post links to outside sites often see reduced reach. Accounts that encourage audiences to follow them elsewhere grow more slowly. Over time, users learn an unspoken rule: keep everything inside the platform or accept penalties.

    This is not open competition. It is enforced dependence.

    Why This Matters More in the Philippines

    Filipino creators rarely rely on a single income source. Many combine writing, freelancing, donations, and small online sales. That requires moving audiences between platforms.

    When one platform blocks that movement, it blocks income. A creator may have followers, but no way to convert that attention into support elsewhere. The platform keeps the audience. The creator carries the risk.

    This imbalance is especially damaging in lower-income markets.

    Small Businesses Face the Same Wall

    Local businesses use social media to reach customers, then send them to websites, booking pages, or messaging apps. When those links are suppressed, business slows.

    Owners often do not know why traffic drops. They blame themselves, not the platform. Meanwhile, the platform keeps users scrolling instead of buying.

    Anti-competitive design is most effective when it is quiet.

    Choice Without Real Freedom

    Supporters often argue that users can leave at any time. In theory, that is true. In practice, audiences are locked in.

    Years of work, followers, and reputation are tied to one system. Leaving means starting over. Staying means accepting rules that favor the platform over the user.

    That is not free choice. It is constrained choice.

    Why This Is a Business Failure

    Markets grow when value flows in many directions. Platforms that block movement limit growth for everyone except themselves.

    For Filipino users, this means fewer options, lower income, and higher risk. For the platform, it means declining trust and long-term instability.

    Anti-competition may protect control in the short term, but it weakens the ecosystem over time.

    Looking Ahead

    The next essay will examine how these same design choices affect advertisers and why many brands avoid platforms with unpredictable and restrictive behavior.

    When competition is designed out of the system, users always pay the price.

    For more social commentary, please see Occupy 2.5 at https://Occupy25.com

    This essay will be archived in the WPS News Archives at Amazon.

    References (APA)

    European Commission. (2023). Digital Markets Act and platform competition. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu

    Electronic Frontier Foundation. (2023). Competition and platform lock-in. https://www.eff.org

    Reuters. (2024). Brands rethink spending on X amid policy changes. https://www.reuters.com

    #anticompetition #creatorEconomy #digitalMarkets #internetPlatforms #marketPower #onlineIncome #Philippines #platformEconomics #smallBusinesses #socialMediaPlatforms #Twitter #XPlatform
  3. Anti-Competition by Design

    By Cliff Potts, CSO, and Editor-in-Chief of WPS News

    Baybay City, Leyte, Philippines — May 6, 2026

    Competition is what keeps markets honest. When users can move freely, platforms must earn loyalty through better service. On X, that freedom has narrowed. The system increasingly rewards staying inside one ecosystem and quietly punishes anyone who tries to operate outside it.

    This essay explains how that design works and why it harms Filipino creators, journalists, and small businesses.

    How Lock-In Replaces Competition

    Healthy platforms compete for users by improving tools, reliability, and trust. Unhealthy ones compete by making exit costly.

    On X, creators who post links to outside sites often see reduced reach. Accounts that encourage audiences to follow them elsewhere grow more slowly. Over time, users learn an unspoken rule: keep everything inside the platform or accept penalties.

    This is not open competition. It is enforced dependence.

    Why This Matters More in the Philippines

    Filipino creators rarely rely on a single income source. Many combine writing, freelancing, donations, and small online sales. That requires moving audiences between platforms.

    When one platform blocks that movement, it blocks income. A creator may have followers, but no way to convert that attention into support elsewhere. The platform keeps the audience. The creator carries the risk.

    This imbalance is especially damaging in lower-income markets.

    Small Businesses Face the Same Wall

    Local businesses use social media to reach customers, then send them to websites, booking pages, or messaging apps. When those links are suppressed, business slows.

    Owners often do not know why traffic drops. They blame themselves, not the platform. Meanwhile, the platform keeps users scrolling instead of buying.

    Anti-competitive design is most effective when it is quiet.

    Choice Without Real Freedom

    Supporters often argue that users can leave at any time. In theory, that is true. In practice, audiences are locked in.

    Years of work, followers, and reputation are tied to one system. Leaving means starting over. Staying means accepting rules that favor the platform over the user.

    That is not free choice. It is constrained choice.

    Why This Is a Business Failure

    Markets grow when value flows in many directions. Platforms that block movement limit growth for everyone except themselves.

    For Filipino users, this means fewer options, lower income, and higher risk. For the platform, it means declining trust and long-term instability.

    Anti-competition may protect control in the short term, but it weakens the ecosystem over time.

    Looking Ahead

    The next essay will examine how these same design choices affect advertisers and why many brands avoid platforms with unpredictable and restrictive behavior.

    When competition is designed out of the system, users always pay the price.

    For more social commentary, please see Occupy 2.5 at https://Occupy25.com

    This essay will be archived in the WPS News Archives at Amazon.

    References (APA)

    European Commission. (2023). Digital Markets Act and platform competition. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu

    Electronic Frontier Foundation. (2023). Competition and platform lock-in. https://www.eff.org

    Reuters. (2024). Brands rethink spending on X amid policy changes. https://www.reuters.com

    #anticompetition #creatorEconomy #digitalMarkets #internetPlatforms #marketPower #onlineIncome #Philippines #platformEconomics #smallBusinesses #socialMediaPlatforms #Twitter #XPlatform
  4. Anti-Competition by Design

    By Cliff Potts, CSO, and Editor-in-Chief of WPS News

    Baybay City, Leyte, Philippines — May 6, 2026

    Competition is what keeps markets honest. When users can move freely, platforms must earn loyalty through better service. On X, that freedom has narrowed. The system increasingly rewards staying inside one ecosystem and quietly punishes anyone who tries to operate outside it.

    This essay explains how that design works and why it harms Filipino creators, journalists, and small businesses.

    How Lock-In Replaces Competition

    Healthy platforms compete for users by improving tools, reliability, and trust. Unhealthy ones compete by making exit costly.

    On X, creators who post links to outside sites often see reduced reach. Accounts that encourage audiences to follow them elsewhere grow more slowly. Over time, users learn an unspoken rule: keep everything inside the platform or accept penalties.

    This is not open competition. It is enforced dependence.

    Why This Matters More in the Philippines

    Filipino creators rarely rely on a single income source. Many combine writing, freelancing, donations, and small online sales. That requires moving audiences between platforms.

    When one platform blocks that movement, it blocks income. A creator may have followers, but no way to convert that attention into support elsewhere. The platform keeps the audience. The creator carries the risk.

    This imbalance is especially damaging in lower-income markets.

    Small Businesses Face the Same Wall

    Local businesses use social media to reach customers, then send them to websites, booking pages, or messaging apps. When those links are suppressed, business slows.

    Owners often do not know why traffic drops. They blame themselves, not the platform. Meanwhile, the platform keeps users scrolling instead of buying.

    Anti-competitive design is most effective when it is quiet.

    Choice Without Real Freedom

    Supporters often argue that users can leave at any time. In theory, that is true. In practice, audiences are locked in.

    Years of work, followers, and reputation are tied to one system. Leaving means starting over. Staying means accepting rules that favor the platform over the user.

    That is not free choice. It is constrained choice.

    Why This Is a Business Failure

    Markets grow when value flows in many directions. Platforms that block movement limit growth for everyone except themselves.

    For Filipino users, this means fewer options, lower income, and higher risk. For the platform, it means declining trust and long-term instability.

    Anti-competition may protect control in the short term, but it weakens the ecosystem over time.

    Looking Ahead

    The next essay will examine how these same design choices affect advertisers and why many brands avoid platforms with unpredictable and restrictive behavior.

    When competition is designed out of the system, users always pay the price.

    For more social commentary, please see Occupy 2.5 at https://Occupy25.com

    This essay will be archived in the WPS News Archives at Amazon.

    References (APA)

    European Commission. (2023). Digital Markets Act and platform competition. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu

    Electronic Frontier Foundation. (2023). Competition and platform lock-in. https://www.eff.org

    Reuters. (2024). Brands rethink spending on X amid policy changes. https://www.reuters.com

    #anticompetition #creatorEconomy #digitalMarkets #internetPlatforms #marketPower #onlineIncome #Philippines #platformEconomics #smallBusinesses #socialMediaPlatforms #Twitter #XPlatform
  5. Anti-Competition by Design

    By Cliff Potts, CSO, and Editor-in-Chief of WPS News

    Baybay City, Leyte, Philippines — May 6, 2026

    Competition is what keeps markets honest. When users can move freely, platforms must earn loyalty through better service. On X, that freedom has narrowed. The system increasingly rewards staying inside one ecosystem and quietly punishes anyone who tries to operate outside it.

    This essay explains how that design works and why it harms Filipino creators, journalists, and small businesses.

    How Lock-In Replaces Competition

    Healthy platforms compete for users by improving tools, reliability, and trust. Unhealthy ones compete by making exit costly.

    On X, creators who post links to outside sites often see reduced reach. Accounts that encourage audiences to follow them elsewhere grow more slowly. Over time, users learn an unspoken rule: keep everything inside the platform or accept penalties.

    This is not open competition. It is enforced dependence.

    Why This Matters More in the Philippines

    Filipino creators rarely rely on a single income source. Many combine writing, freelancing, donations, and small online sales. That requires moving audiences between platforms.

    When one platform blocks that movement, it blocks income. A creator may have followers, but no way to convert that attention into support elsewhere. The platform keeps the audience. The creator carries the risk.

    This imbalance is especially damaging in lower-income markets.

    Small Businesses Face the Same Wall

    Local businesses use social media to reach customers, then send them to websites, booking pages, or messaging apps. When those links are suppressed, business slows.

    Owners often do not know why traffic drops. They blame themselves, not the platform. Meanwhile, the platform keeps users scrolling instead of buying.

    Anti-competitive design is most effective when it is quiet.

    Choice Without Real Freedom

    Supporters often argue that users can leave at any time. In theory, that is true. In practice, audiences are locked in.

    Years of work, followers, and reputation are tied to one system. Leaving means starting over. Staying means accepting rules that favor the platform over the user.

    That is not free choice. It is constrained choice.

    Why This Is a Business Failure

    Markets grow when value flows in many directions. Platforms that block movement limit growth for everyone except themselves.

    For Filipino users, this means fewer options, lower income, and higher risk. For the platform, it means declining trust and long-term instability.

    Anti-competition may protect control in the short term, but it weakens the ecosystem over time.

    Looking Ahead

    The next essay will examine how these same design choices affect advertisers and why many brands avoid platforms with unpredictable and restrictive behavior.

    When competition is designed out of the system, users always pay the price.

    For more social commentary, please see Occupy 2.5 at https://Occupy25.com

    This essay will be archived in the WPS News Archives at Amazon.

    References (APA)

    European Commission. (2023). Digital Markets Act and platform competition. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu

    Electronic Frontier Foundation. (2023). Competition and platform lock-in. https://www.eff.org

    Reuters. (2024). Brands rethink spending on X amid policy changes. https://www.reuters.com

    #anticompetition #creatorEconomy #digitalMarkets #internetPlatforms #marketPower #onlineIncome #Philippines #platformEconomics #smallBusinesses #socialMediaPlatforms #Twitter #XPlatform
  6. The #UK’s #CMA has designated #Apple and #Google as having “strategic market status” (#SMS), requiring stricter regulatory oversight. The CMA aims to address concerns about the companies’ substantial #marketpower and potential #bottlenecks, potentially including changes to #appstore practises and #userchoice. theguardian.com/technology/202 #tech #media #news

  7. The US FTC is set to investigate Microsoft over allegations of using market power in productivity software to lock customers into Azure. 🕵️‍♂️💼 #FTC #Microsoft #Azure #Antitrust #TechRegulation #MarketPower #CloudComputing #TechNews #CompetitionLaw

  8. @verge Yes, because #Amazon subsidises the #Kindle so you lock yourself in and are forced to buy your #ebooks from them for the rest of your life.

    #marketpower #marketdominance #bigtech

  9. Since I'm already #UK bashing:

    The British Transport #Police #BTP has a "Leave This Site" #emergency button and it leads toooooo... #Google. 🤷‍♂️

    #bigtech #marketpower #monopoly

  10. #SouthAfrica 's competition authority is taking strong measures against #Google, #Apple, #Uber Eats, #booking.com, their local version of #Amazon.com called #Takealot, and other leading platforms to stop abuse of market power, support #competition , and to strengthen historically disadvantage business people (mostly #black).

    What's odd: Most of the measures taken will entrench the #MarketPower of the large digital #platforms. Read my summary at @heiseonline in German:

    heise.de/news/Wettbewerb-ander

  11. No doubt there is huge demand for a well run discourse based social network. But the link on a 2 billion strong #Instagram is worth a lot, as is the following your contacts feature.

    The end result might well turn out to be that 3 of the 4 largest global social networks are owned by the same company.

    This is the kind of thing that the #DSA self-preferencing rules tried to stop. I bet that's why Meta did not launch in the EU.

    #threads #techpolicy #marketpower

  12. Shaping #Sustainable Global #SupplyChains: In a new podcast episode, Pamela Mondliwaa looks at the role of #MarketPower in #GlobalValueChains: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLYD
    Produced by research network Sustainable Global Supply Chains, a joint endeavour @IDOS_research @SWPBerlin @kielinstitute & #GIGA

  13. CW: Long thread/14

    Which is to say that because interest rates increase the costs for businesses who enjoy #monopolistic #MarketPower, interest rate increases also cause *price* increases. And not to put too fine a point on it, the economists' term of art for "a sustained rise in the price level" is...*inflation*.

    Fix says that at best, monetary policy - raising interest rates - simply fails to cause inflation. But at worst, it actually *increases* inflation.

    14/

  14. CW: Musk Twitter Mastodon Antitrust Law

    In general, #companies aren’t obligated to do #business with each other and can freely choose their business partners. But a dominant firm that’s said to have “#MarketPower” can potentially violate #AntitrustLaw if they refuse to deal with other parties. #Twitter #Mastodon #Musk #SocialMedia
    cnn.com/2022/12/16/tech/mastod

  15. CW: Long thread/11

    The high merger scrutiny threshold means that only a very few mergers are regulated: in 2021, out of 21,994 mergers, only 4,130 (<20%) were reported to the FTC. 2020 saw 16,723 mergers, with only 1.637 (>10%) being reported to the FTC.

    Serial acquirers claim that the massive profits they extract by buying up and merging hundreds of businesses are the result of "efficiency" but a closer look at their marketplace conduct shows that most of those profits come from #MarketPower.

    11/