How’s the fediverse doing? There’s growing attention toward the communities that adopt this system — but big tech companies are also stepping in

In recent years, starting from relatively small but increasingly influential online communities, an alternative to traditional social networks has begun to emerge. This perspective finds its most concrete expression in the so-called “fediverse”, a digital ecosystem based on a specific protocol called ActivityPub. Adopting this common standard allows users, among other things, to create, share, and comment on various types of content (such as text, photos, and videos), or manage their networks of contacts without being tied to a single platform. ActivityPub, launched in 2018 and developed by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) – an international NGO promoting the sustainable growth of the web – is the protocol behind platforms such as Mastodon, which has attracted considerable attention in recent years – especially after a significant portion of X users started leaving the platform due to the controversial management by Elon Musk. In contrast, the fediverse gives users greater freedom and control compared to closed platforms (such as X itself, as well as Instagram or TikTok), where the owning companies set and enforce the rules of use – with all the consequences that entails. Furthermore, anyone joining a digital space based on ActivityPub can interact with users on another platform, provided it also adopts the same protocol: for example, an ActivityPub-enabled Mastodon user can interact with someone on Friendica (a social network designed as an alternative to Instagram) without ever leaving their own environment.

The fact that social networks based on ActivityPub are not controlled by a single organization, but can be run by anyone, represents a significant departure from traditional platforms. It is in this context that the very concept of “federation” has spread, describing a system made up of many autonomous entities capable of communicating with each other when necessary. According to this approach, moreover, the goal of a platform is not to generate profit, but to help make the Internet less “inhuman”, thanks to social networks free from invasive advertising and unfair practices, among other things. As Rivista Studio notes, we now “believe that the Internet is social networks.” For a long time, “the web has been perceived almost solely as a sequence of feeds.” “If social networks are the Internet – continues Rivista Studio – then it is the Internet that is responsible for the negative feelings these feeds provoke: social pressure, failure, anxiety, rush, helplessness,” and so on. In this context, the so-called “Indie Web” (or “Small Web”) emerged, a movement aiming to decentralize digital spaces, taking control away from large corporations and returning it to individuals, and which finds one of its most concrete expressions in the fediverse. The underlying idea, however, is simpler: return to designing and visiting autonomous websites instead of relying on platforms designed to “trap” users. The goal, according to Rivista Studio, is to escape the “attention capitalism” in favor of digital spaces that are “more authentic” and capable of stimulating curiosity, “rather than dulling it.”

“Before 2007, the year Facebook arrived in Italy,” notes Rivista Studio, “the Internet was an infinite, creative, anarchic, and chaotic space. ‘Browsing’ described it perfectly: you knew where the journey started, but not where you would end up. That Internet is mostly remembered fondly, but there are people who want to bring it back. And maybe they are succeeding.” Yet, within a broader reflection on the future of social networks, some mainstream tech companies have also begun showing interest in open protocols like ActivityPub. Among them is Meta, which has chosen to base Threads on this system. But Mark Zuckerberg’s company has long been at the center of controversies and scandals: it is therefore unsurprising that the decision to integrate Threads into the fediverse has raised considerable resistance within the sector. The main concern is that Meta may apply the strategy known as “Embrace, Extend, Extinguish”, adopting an open protocol (such as ActivityPub) only to promote its widespread adoption, attract more and more users, and once its position is consolidated, reduce or withdraw investment, risking the distortion and weakening of the entire ecosystem.