The Nobel Prize-winning economist, Simon Johnson, has sparked debate by suggesting that users may eventually need to pay for access to social media platforms like TikTok or Instagram. The idea, while not a formal policy proposal, stems from growing concerns about the power of tech giants and the societal costs of ad-driven digital ecosystems.
Although no specific payment model has been yet outlined the economist argues that shifting away from a free ad-based system, could help curb the influence of social media companies, reduce data exploitation and promote healthier online environments. The suggestion reflects a broader push for reforms aimed at reining in big tech’s dominance and reimagining how we engage with digital platforms.
The big question is how viable this suggestion really is and how many users would be willing to pay to use social media platforms like TikTok or Instagram. This, despite the undeniable fact that today’s tech giants like Meta, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Alphabet (Google), and Open AI-are amassing increasing power, making it even more difficult to place meaningful limits on the unchecked growth of technology.
The power of today’s big tech companies and the influence of AI
During an interview with the BBC, Johnson discusses several topics, including the power of technology and artificial intelligence (AI) in our daily lives. He brings up a very interesting point related to their reach in society. Johnson points out that “big tech companies directly affect many businesses and activities and influence how we receive and process information, which is fundamental to democracy. The fact is that these technologies are deeply embedded in our lives, and we can’t live without them–like search engines or social media,” he stated.
This is where Johnson emphasizes that our dependance on these technologies–especially the “addictive behavior” to certain platforms of social media particularly among younger generations–has made it necessary to rethink how we use them. Johnson even suggests that subscription models could be a reasonable solution to foster a healthier relationship and environment with these technologies.
Johnson supports his idea by citing the tech ethics expert Tristan Harris, who once said, “if you’re not paying for the product, you are the product.” For Johnson, paying to use massively popular social media platforms like TikTok or Instagram is essentially about preventing big tech companies from continuing to exploit users to maintain their dominant position in the market.
The question then rises of how they are exploiting and manipulating users for their own benefit? according to Johnson, digital advertising has become extremely effective to achieve this goal. They manipulate people so much that it keeps users constantly drawn to a particular product and as stated by the Nobel prize winner, this situation has only been amplified by the use of smartphones. Johnson puts it bluntly and states that at this growing pace of technology, its practically impossible to imagine life without technology.
Are subscriptions the answer to the growing power of advertising on social media?
Although for Johnson subscription models are often proposed as a solution to the increasing manipulation driven by digital advertising, the question is, are they the real answer to solve the problem?
The core idea that Johnson tries to express in the BBC interview relies on the fact that if users pay directly for a service, then the business model no longer relies on capturing and monetizing users’ attention through targeted ads.
In a way, Johnson has a very valuable point. How many times have we heard people say things like, “Every time I open Instagram, it’s like its listening to me”–products they were just thinking about, or recently talked about, suddenly show up in their feed. This isn’t just a coincidence, it’s a reality of how these platforms operate today. We’ve handed over so much power and personal data to social media companies that, as Tristan Harris put it, we’ve become their main product.
If subscription-based models are to be considered a viable alternative to curb to dominance of tech over individuals, the question becomes: who would actually pay to use services like WhatsApp, TikTok, or Instagram?
And more importantly–how do we address the challenge that, by shifting to paid access, many people who can’t afford to subscribe could be left out of technologies that were once free and widely accessible?
Johnson’s proposal certainly raises tough questions about equity in the digital age. While subscriptions may reduce manipulation and data exploitation, they could also turn essential digital tools into privileges–widening the gap between those who can afford a “healthier” online experience and those who can’t.
Despite this ongoing debate, Johnson highlights that “free services come at a cost, and that cost is digital advertising. These ads aren’t just harmless promotions, they’re designed to be addictive, manipulative, and deeply problematic from a democratic standpoint.” According to Johnson, social media is fueling societal polarization-and there’s an urgent need to find better solutions to address it.