It's Time to Reclassify Social Media Platforms as Public Utilities

It's Time to Reclassify Social Media Platforms as Public Utilities

In the digital age, social media platforms like X, Meta, and TikTok have become integral to how we communicate, share information, and engage with the world. These platforms are no longer just tech startups or private enterprises; they are the digital equivalent of public squares, shaping discourse, influencing elections, and serving as primary channels for news and social interaction.

Given their outsized role in society, it’s time to reframe social media platforms as public utilities rather than solely private companies. This shift in perspective is critical to ensuring accountability, accessibility, and fairness in the digital ecosystem.

Social media platforms have transcended their original purpose as entertainment or networking tools. Today, they function as essential infrastructure for communication. According to a 2023 Pew Research Center study, 70% of Americans get news from social media, and platforms like X have become primary sources for real-time information during crises, elections, and public debates. Globally, billions rely on these platforms to connect with communities, access services, and participate in civic life.

This level of dependence mirrors the role of traditional utilities like electricity, water, or telecommunications. Just as society deems access to clean water or reliable phone lines a public necessity, access to digital platforms that facilitate speech, commerce, and information exchange has become equally indispensable. When a platform like X experiences an outage, the ripple effects—disrupted communication, halted activism, and stalled businesses—underscore its utility-like importance.

As private entities, social media companies operate with significant autonomy, prioritizing profit and shareholder interests over public welfare. This model has led to a host of issues, including inconsistent content moderation, unchecked misinformation, and opaque algorithms that amplify divisive content. For example, internal leaks from Meta in 2021 revealed that the company was aware of its role in spreading harmful content but prioritized engagement over reform. Private companies are incentivized to maximize user time and ad revenue, often at the expense of societal well-being.

Moreover, the monopolistic nature of these platforms limits competition and user choice. A handful of companies control the digital public square, with X, Meta, and Alphabet (YouTube’s parent) dominating global markets. Unlike traditional businesses, where consumers can easily switch providers, the network effects of social media—where value lies in widespread adoption—make alternatives less viable. This lack of competition entrenches their power, allowing them to set rules without public input or oversight.

Classifying social media platforms as public utilities would align their regulation with their societal impact. Utilities are subject to oversight that ensures equitable access, transparency, and accountability—principles sorely needed in the digital realm.

Critics of the utility model argue that social media platforms are private enterprises that innovate through market competition, and heavy regulation could stifle creativity or impose bureaucratic inefficiencies. They also contend that government oversight risks censorship or politicization, especially in countries with authoritarian regimes. These concerns are valid but not insurmountable.

To address innovation, regulation could be tailored to encourage competition while ensuring accountability, such as requiring open APIs for third-party developers. To mitigate government overreach, independent regulatory bodies—similar to the Federal Communications Commission for telecommunications—could oversee platforms, balancing free speech with public safety. Models like the European Union’s Digital Services Act, which imposes strict transparency and content moderation rules, offer a blueprint for regulation without nationalization.

Reclassifying social media as utilities doesn’t mean stripping companies of their private status or nationalizing them. Instead, it involves recognizing their role as critical infrastructure and subjecting them to proportionate oversight.

Social media platforms have become the backbone of modern communication, wielding influence that rivals traditional utilities. Treating them as private companies alone ignores their profound societal impact and allows unchecked power to persist. By reclassifying them as public utilities, we can ensure they serve the public interest, foster equitable access, and operate transparently. The digital public square deserves the same accountability we demand of other essential services—because in today’s world, connectivity is as vital as electricity.