Comment Built it on the "Fediverse" (Score 1) 110
Its obvious that for-profit, data-sucking centralized social media is a big problem with our current discourse. Thankfully, we're already well on our way to having real, beneficial tools to provide something akin to the experience of the "big names" but in an overall more healthful way - the "Fediverse". The "Fediverse" is an association of F/LOSS projects relating to social media / communication that are are not just open but also federated (and to a greater or lesser extent, compatible with each other thanks to underlying protocols such as ActivityPub). Users can run their own servers on sign up upon one that takes their interest, while also being able to communicate from one instance to another.
Mastodon (the most famous of the projects thus far), Pleroma, and GNUSocial are all "Twitter-like" microblogging platforms, Diaspora* and Friendica are macrosocial setups more "Facebook-like", Pixelfed is an "Instagram" style media blog, while PeerTube is a really interesting "Youtube-style" media hosting alternative, and the famous Matrix (often known by its most famous client, Riot) is an excellent rich messenger akin to Discord or Slack. All of the above are designed with improvements in mind for privacy, security, and other features that benefit the user as opposed to a centralized ad-revenue mining machine. There are also a whole host of other Fediverse projects (aka WriteFreely is an alternative to Medium etc) as well. For those interested in an overview, check out https://fediverse.party/ for info on some of the major projects and links to their homepages, as well as indexes of popular servers and the like.
The use of these "Fediverse" alternatives can be the technical solution to pair with a legal / regulatory solution to create open, public funded social networking. Like it or not, a huge amount of discourse , including official public outreach from governments, NGOs and the like, is taking place on social media. Debates over if you can block the US President on Twitter etc... are symptoms of the major social behemoths who have attempted to play both sides when it suits them to profit. People shouldn't have to use Facebook, WhatsApp, Twitter, or Instagram in order to interact with public figures or agencies at anything aside from a snail's pace and such official communications should not be on private platforms such as the aforementioned. The Fediverse makes the solution clear - governments can run their own instances of Fediverse projects which are considered public funded and owned by the people, for official communication; server maintenance and the like will be public funded. Ideally, it should be required that government / public figures and agencies, acting in their official capacity, would have to make use of these public servers. This alone would help herald a switch from the walled gardens of Facebook et al, and users could easily choose whatever Fediverse instance they preferred for their own account, while still being able to interact with those on other - especially the public - instances.
While this wouldn't fix all the problems with social networking or the damage done by social media's cultural shift (ie prior to Facebook, parents told their kids to never reveal their meatspace identity online and to be skeptical of everyone an everything on the Internet. These days, such advice is laughable as social media has sadly become an extension of real world presence, often for the worse), but it will help to minimize the harm. Even with the same behavior, taking place on multiple open source and federated servers is a benefit to allowing a couple of quasi-monopolies manipulate the network effect and always have a new scheme to profit from our data, attention and whatnot.