Is the Attention Economy Reaching Its Saturation Point?

“Brain rot” as 2024’s word of the year is just the tip of the iceberg.

There are countless reports of people struggling to focus, read longer or more complex texts, or even sit through movies. In Brazil, we’re reading less—recent research shows that the proportion of readers last year was the lowest since 2007, when the survey began. In classrooms, these concerns are echoed with even greater frequency.

As it becomes increasingly difficult to capture and retain attention, we are resorting to ever more desperate measures to achieve it—whether through an escalating intensity of simultaneous stimuli (the origin of the term brain rot in the digital context), triggering strong emotions, or appealing to our basest instincts. Clickbait, ragebait, and the ever-classic overblown promises of empowerment and wealth dominate, to the point that even the most analog purveyors of such promises are feeling the heat.

On the other hand, the quest for algorithmic success has grown so pervasive that it is speculated to be a significant factor in a widespread aesthetic and creative homogenization across interior design, retail, and music (which is becoming more formulaic, repetitive, and increasingly relegated to ambient soundtracks). From blanding to even physical appearances, some are painting this as a creativity crisis.

Unlike past moral panics surrounding video games, disco music, or heavy metal—comparisons often made by those dismissing concerns about the collective harm caused by social media—there is a growing body of evidence linking today’s environment to worsening mental health, misinformation, focus, learning ability, and other severe issues.

It’s not just children and young people suffering. The BBC recently discussed how problematic screen and media usage is also affecting older adults, intersecting with issues like loneliness and ageism.

The attention economy—a hallmark of our times—is showing clear signs of the human toll it exacts.

The expectation that improvements and adjustments will occur voluntarily is, at best, naive. The intentional degradation of platforms to serve their own interests—often contrary to user preferences and encapsulated in the concept of ensh*ttification (our most-read article last year)—is simply the status quo today.

I’ve Got the Poison, I’ve Got the Remedy

In the midst of all this, what was Meta’s latest “brilliant” idea? Developing a tool for creating “virtual users”—people who don’t actually exist but populate the company’s platforms and post autonomously. When this tool was reported on in a recent Financial Times article, the profiles went viral (predictably sparking concerns about spam and impersonation), and public backlash was so severe that they pulled the experiments almost immediately.

The Masses Are Increasingly Aware

It’s not just societal transformation scholars who are casting a critical eye on what’s happening. A few signs:

• The Anxious Generation became a bestseller in multiple countries, including Brazil. It even made Bill Gates’ reading list, complete with a review. Jonathan Haidt was interviewed on Roda Viva. The speed at which schools worldwide changed their cell phone policies and governments joined the conversation was striking.

• 47% of American Gen Zers wish TikTok had never been invented.

• A 2024 study across 30 countries, including Brazil, found that 65% of respondents aged 18+ supported banning social media for those under 14.

• Another global study revealed that between a quarter and a third of people, depending on age group, experience negative aspects on their mental health due to social media, with higher daily usage correlating to increased negative perceptions.

Communication and Marketing Are Still in Denial

Parts of the communication and marketing industries remain in denial, partially by emphasizing the positive aspects of social media (which undoubtedly exist and are significant!) as though they somehow negate or erase the negatives.

There are still many clinging to clichéd deflections.

The tired line, “It’s not about technology; it’s about people,” doesn’t hold up. For comparison, any physical product causing problems for its consumers—even a small segment—ends up altered or withdrawn from the market. Remember the IKEA dressers? Keeping people scrolling as long as possible is a well-known key metric for platforms that benefits only them.

Holding individuals solely responsible for their use has its limits, especially when not everyone has the same maturity or judgment, and when problematic relationships with platforms are demonstrably possible.

No Growth Lasts Forever

It's a given that media won't keep growing indefinitely. Looking at not only global growth data but also penetration rates, it's clear that the bulk of this growth is being driven by developing countries. Numbers are already quite high in developed nations, and we might be nearing the ceiling, assuming that anyone who wants to use these platforms is probably already using them—this doesn’t seem to be an issue of financial or technical access.

Even the much-praised creator economy will hit a ceiling eventually. We’ve previously discussed how transformative it has been for today’s youth to have lucrative and glamorous career paths that are far more accessible than sports or professional music, aspirational fields for past generations.

The issue is that access to these opportunities, contrary to what the cheerleaders of this economy proclaim, is a zero-sum game: if everyone wants to become a creator (and in Brazil and the US, a lot of people do), there won’t be enough audience or money to sustain viable careers for everyone chasing this path. What happens to gold rush towns when the veins run dry? Could the sheer number of shovel sellers (in this case, those teaching how to produce content/engage/etc.) already be a clue?

Are we heading toward a situation comparable to day trading, where it’s well known that most individuals lose money or make very little, yet the belief in being above average (hello, Dunning-Kruger!) and the allure of “easy money” continues to draw more and more people in?

In physical markets, it’s easier to spot saturation as it happens. In digital spaces, it’s trickier, but some subtle signs are emerging:

• Usage time is (slowly) declining globally.

• Organic engagement is dropping, while CPMs keep rising. The past decade’s increases have crippled or heavily altered business models like those of direct-to-consumer brands. In the US, sensitivity to cost (and ROI!) has already shifted dynamics—there, spending on social media was the lowest in seven years, and HBR explores some of the reasons here.

The Rebels Strike Back

A countercurrent is consolidating. Various initiatives are emerging in favor of more offline time, a rediscovery or reimagining of analog approaches, encouraging people to be more present in the moment and less focused on documenting it, and even explicitly anti-social media movements rejecting the dynamics these platforms foster. Examples include:

• The dating app burnout (also experiencing ensh*ttification!) and a search for alternative ways to meet people and nurture romantic lives.

• Services like Timeleft, which organizes curated dinners for strangers using algorithmic matchmaking, and others creating physical-world experiences or entirely disconnected spaces like Amsterdam’s Offline Club, which has expanded globally.

• Anti-camera nightlife policies: spreading beyond initial hotspots.

• The print magazine comeback, seen with titles like Life, Elle, and NME in the U.S., and Capricho in Brazil.

• Growing interest in non-connected devices: early 2000s digital cameras, vinyl, dumbphones, etc.

• In response to opportunists and charlatans spreading misinformation, more scientists and subject-matter experts are stepping into content creation to reclaim control of the narrative.

If today’s dominant culture is digital and heavily shaped by social media, could we be witnessing the birth of a counterculture rooted in opposing values?

Signals of Future Directions and Potential Outcomes: Broad Impacts

Politics and Legislation

The movement to by protect children and teenagers by restricting social media usage is surprisingly bipartisan, even in these polarized times. Issues such as individual identification, age verification, and criminal accountability are also under discussion. Many regions worldwide have already reached critical legislative mass. The ripple effects of regulations in one country influencing others are clear—GDPR's influence on Brazil's LGPD is a prime example.

• In November last year, Australia banned social media participation for minors under 16.

• That same month, France restricted usage for those under 15 and is urging the EU to extend the rule across the bloc.

• Ireland increased fines and penalties for platforms that fail to comply with local laws, especially regarding age verification and harmful content like bullying. Penalties can reach up to 10% of company revenue. While Ireland is a small country, it wields influence due to its role as a tax haven for many tech companies, making it difficult for them to threaten exit strategies, unlike in other markets.

• In California, a federal judge upheld the state’s law banning “addictive feeds” for minors.

• In Romania, the first round of elections was annulled over suspected Russian social media interference, particularly through TikTok. The situation is still unfolding and serves as the first real test of the Digital Services Act, the EU’s new digital platform legislation.

• In India, where TikTok is already banned, the government has implemented rules for content creator registration and platform accountability for defamatory content.

Economy and business environment

• An opportunity exists for platforms offering alternatives to today’s models. Bluesky has already gained traction by promoting decentralization, customizable algorithms, and chronological feeds. In the U.S., Frank McCourt, a potential buyer for TikTok’s local operations, is involved in Project Liberty, which aims to decentralize social networks, giving users more control over shared data and consumed content. McCourt’s plan for TikTok involves keeping the users and infrastructure but discarding the original algorithm, shifting the focus from attention to intention—a change that could benefit both users and brands. While the network effect poses a challenge, the rapid adoption of platforms like TikTok suggests it may not be insurmountable. Even Reddit’s growth, which relies on anonymous profiles and text-based discussions in niche groups, highlights space for alternatives to infinite algorithm-driven video feeds.

• Media and communication strategies not solely or mostly reliant on social media are likely to grow in importance. The increasing presence of digital-native brands like Airbnb, Google, and Netflix on TV and outdoor media—channels once declared "dead"—illustrates this shift. With digital media costs rising and older, wealthier audiences less active on social platforms, achieving broad coverage will require diversification. Are we witnessing the revival of true cross-media strategies, updated for today’s landscape?

• The newsletter economy and other formats bypassing opaque algorithmic tolls, often more in-depth and community-driven than typical Reels, are expected to gain traction. These formats foster connections around specific interests, offering both depth and engagement.

Culture and society

Public opinion on platforms is growing increasingly critical, according to various studies, even as most people acknowledge their benefits. With a broad awareness of the negatives, we can anticipate a shift toward more intentional, pragmatic, and moderated usage.

When reevaluating our relationship with anything we recognize as both pleasurable and harmful (e.g., sweets, alcohol, caffeine, or psychoactives), common strategies emerge. Similar approaches could reshape social media consumption:

• Harm reduction: Continue usage but adopt strategies to minimize negative impacts, such as unfollowing accounts that provoke harmful emotions.

• "A bit of salad, a bit of chocolate": Balance hedonistic, less healthy behaviors with (over)compensatory efforts in other areas, like consuming more constructive content or engaging in productive, healthy activities.

• Less quantity, more quality, a 30-somethings favorite: Shift consumption to a ritual, reducing or eliminating perceived harmful content and replacing it with higher-value, quality material.

• Complete abstinence: An extreme choice often driven by ideology or by individuals unable to maintain a balanced relationship with the habit.

Technology

• The "AI Slop" problem and the real risk of a dramatic decline in content quality: Removing barriers to producing low-effort content—like virtual avatars, AI clones, or mass messaging without recipient limits—creates incentives to flood digital spaces with low effort content. To glimpse the near future, look at Spotify, a pioneer in cutting out intermediaries: well-known artists are being replaced by “AI covers” so the company can avoid paying royalties, and the platform is actively promoting these “AIrtists” in playlists. If junk content overwhelms the quality content that draws us in, what do we tend to do?

What Now?

Especially after Zuck’s latest announcement, both the level of uncertainty and the risks to brand safety are alarmingly high. Betting on the status quo, amid rapid transformations and a deteriorating context, seems like a poor strategy.

It’s time to balance the pursuit of attention at all costs with greater care for how that attention is rewarded. These challenges also offer an opportunity: to build a healthier digital landscape for everyone. Let’s seize it.