The current social media model is inherently tied to maximizing screen time. While these platforms provide real value, their optimization for engagement often results in information bias, echo chambers, and documented negative effects on mental health. Many are calling for government regulation, but I wonder if the solution lies in a structural change to how feeds are constructed.

What if we decoupled the hosting platform from the ranking algorithm?

Imagine a world where users could choose their own "feed engine" from a marketplace of providers. For example:

- An "Education First" algorithm that prioritizes long-form content and credible sources. - A "Mental Well-being" algorithm that filters out rage-bait and doom-scrolling. - A "Community-Driven" algorithm built and audited by open-source contributors using the platform's metadata.

In this scenario, the platform (Twitter/X, Meta, etc.) acts as the data layer, while the user maintains agency over the lens through which they view that data.

Is this technically and economically viable? Would platforms ever agree to expose enough metadata for third-party algorithms to work, or is this something that would have to be mandated by law (similar to interoperability)? Would governments be able to enforce the creation of something like this?

I’d love to hear your thoughts on the technical hurdles, the potential business models, and whether this would actually solve the societal issues we are seeing today.