The Unshittification of Marketing

Cory Doctorow coined a term for this process: “enshittification.” He used it to describe how tech platforms systematically get worse: first they’re great for users, then for business customers, and in the end for no one (except the platforms themselves).

Platform enshittification led directly to marketing enshittification:

Phase 1: The platforms lure us in. Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn—all promised the same thing at the beginning: “Post organically, reach your community, build relationships.” Organic reach was real. Content marketing worked. Brands could actually talk to people.

Phase 2: The platforms tweak the algorithm. Organic reach? From 10–15% down to 1–2%. Suddenly your followers no longer see your content—even though they follow you. The platforms’ solution: “Post more! Be more consistent! Three posts a day!” Or, even better: “Buy ads.” Organic marketing turned into paid media with an organic veneer.

Phase 3: Marketing switches to hamster-wheel mode. You’re now producing ten times the content—not because you have something to say, but because the algorithm demands it. At the same time, ad costs are rising. The budget stays flat. So: more output, lower quality. More mass, less class.

Phase 4: Everybody loses. The platforms are flooded with generic stuff no one wants to see. Users are annoyed and scroll faster. Brands waste resources on content that does nothing. And in the middle: you—trying to use spreadsheets and KPIs to somehow prove that this madness makes sense.

This isn’t a marketing crisis. It’s a structural trap.

In WARC’s report “Creative Impact Unpacked” for Cannes Lions 2025 there’s a whole chapter on “unshittification.” The industry has recognized: it can’t go on like this. The chapter focuses primarily on the customer‑experience side—how brands can close the gap between marketing promises and actual experience. But the diagnosis is the same: when marketing is made for algorithms instead of for people, both communication and experience get worse.

Research in the report shows that mediocre creativity in poor advertising environments costs the industry $198 billion—43 cents lost per dollar spent. At the same time, the most creative companies at Cannes Lions perform measurably better: 2.7% higher EBIT and a 4.7% higher market capitalization. If even the effectiveness crowd can prove with hard numbers that volume doesn’t work and quality is the only way, then we should stop hiding behind algorithms.

1) Quality as a reach strategy
The platforms conditioned us to believe: more = better. Reality shows: more = invisible.

What works: brands like Liquid Death or Duolingo show that 12 truly great moves a year have more impact than 300 mediocre posts. Not because they have bigger budgets, but because they understand: people share the extraordinary, not the expected.

What that means: produce less. But better. More memorable. More share‑worthy—even without a media budget.

2) Language that actually sounds like something
The good news: we no longer have to sound like press releases. The bad news: many still do.

Instead of: “We are pleased to inform you that our new product range addresses the needs of discerning consumers.”

You could say: “We made this because the old one was boring.”

People write for people. Not brands for target groups. The difference is palpable—and measurable.

3) Creative courage as a competitive advantage
The best ideas don’t emerge from the consensus of eight stakeholders. They happen when someone has the courage to say, “Trust me,” and the organization has the courage to do it.

What must change: not every approval step makes the work better. Some only make it safer. But in 2026, “safe” is the biggest risk—because “safe” is invisible.

4) AI as a tool, not an excuse
AI can do a lot. Write text. Generate images. Speed up research. What AI can’t do: develop a point of view. Understand what truly moves people. Have the courage to do something controversial.

The opportunity: use AI for repetitive work that eats time but moves little. Invest the time you win in what really counts: thinking. Strategy. Creativity. The things that have real impact.

The role of agencies is changing fundamentally. The question is: from service provider to partner—or from replaceable to relevant?

Partners do this:
• Say “no” to briefs that won’t deliver.
• Sell ideas, not hours.
• Assemble teams that can disagree.
• Earn their money with impact, not output.

The opportunity: clients need exactly that—more than ever. They need someone to say, “The brief is wrong,” or “This campaign won’t work,” or “Let’s do less—but do it right.”

For brands: the first step is to define what “good” is—not what’s “good enough.” Give your agency room for independent thinking. Ask of every project: “Would we want to consume this ourselves?” And if the answer is “no,” then remove one approval step. Then another. The best ideas don’t die for lack of quality—they die from too many safety loops.

For agencies: stop selling content bundles that exist only because “the algorithm wants it.” Present one strong idea, not six to choose from. Make the business case for quality over quantity—the numbers are on your side. And hire the people who ask questions, not the ones who nod. Uncomfortable truths are awkward, but they’re also what clients actually pay you for.

For everyone: look beyond the marketing bubble. Learn from brands that do it differently—and succeed. Experiment. Test. Fail sometimes—that’s cheaper than irrelevance. And document what works and why. Not for the next award, but because real learning only happens through reflection.

The enshittification of the platforms is complete. They broke their promises: no more organic reach, algorithms dictate visibility, ad costs rise. The platforms themselves are the only winners.
But that’s exactly the opportunity: the old rules no longer apply. We can write new ones.

What becomes possible:
• Brands can have a voice again, not just a posting frequency.
• Real creative ideas matter more than the sheer volume of produced content.
• Small teams with good ideas can move more than big budgets with mediocre ones.
• Long‑term brand building becomes more important than short‑term performance metrics.

Not everyone will get it. Not everyone will come along. Many will keep doing in 2026 what they did in 2025—and in 2027 wonder why others are more successful.

But some—the right ones—will internalize it. They will do less. Do better. Do bolder.

And in two years, they’ll be writing the case studies others want to copy.

That’s the opportunity of unshittification: be early. Be different.

P.S. This isn’t a call for revolution. It’s an invitation to evolution. Marketing can be good again. Relevant. Effective. It just takes the courage to break old patterns—and the willingness to try new ones.