Smooshification

As with Cory Doctorow’s enshittification it’s useful to attach specific names to specific aspects of what’s probably late stage capitalism. It just helps identify that aspect, and its characteristics.

So what is smooshification?

Smooshification is the drive for anything to have the features of everything in its “class”.

Now “class” is a vague concept here, so without going into a discussion around taxonomies I’m unqualified to have, I’m using “class” in a vague way. To use the definition from wherever Microsoft Bing gets its definitions from: “a set or category of things having some property or attribute in common and differentiated from others by kind, type, or quality”.

For example - online platforms - rather than a platform doing one thing well, and integrating with other platforms, any online platform must have all of the properties of anything similar to it. So a video call platform is now also a messaging platform and a networking platform and a games platform and so on. I think an indicator is that, hopefully, you’re not quite sure what platform I was thinking of when I wrote that last sentence. I think it would be much better, both as a user experience and as a commercial proposition, for a platform to do one thing really well, and then integrate with similar exemplars of other online functions.

But no, the things must be smooshed together, the smooshification of each platform must be increased.

This “rhymes” with enshittification, but it’s not the same… this blog is just my first step in figuring out quite what I mean. It was a half-finished post I’ve been meaning to publish for a while, I expect to update it with examples as and when they occur to me.

This is most striking, right now, in terms of media properties. This first crystalised for me after watching this excellent Extra Credits video on Fortnite. And I was reminded to finally finish this blog and get it posted after seeing the news that Critical Role is going to be in Among Us.

As I received a couple of thoughtful replies to this I’d keep a little list of striking examples of where this is or isn’t happening. This will be updated when I feel like it, based on whatever criteria are in my head at the time, so don’t regard this as authoritative for anyone but me.

Does this sound familiar?

It was kindly pointed out to me, appropriately enough on Mastodon, that this looks/sounds an awful like Zawinski’s Law, which arguably asserts that software must expand to become the piece of software you use rather than a piece of software you use, in order to survive. Interpretations of the point being made seem to vary online, but yes, I might have just finally written up an idea that’s been around for quite some time. Do follow the link and then use your favourite online search engine to find more references.

Other examples of where this is happening:

• TBD

Notable examples of where it isn’t happening:

• Fediverse - “a decentralized social network of independent servers that can connect and communicate with each other.”
• Ravelry - “a free website for knitters, crocheters, and fiber artists.”