Its not that complicated to define.

Lots of people have done it from Tim Wu, to Jaron Lanier to Clay Shirky to Tristan Harris. The problem definitions and solutions are almost 10 years old now.

It's just that YouTube, Facebook and Twitter didn't give a shit. Plus all kinds of side show debates about free speech, privacy, anonymity and half a dozen other things have taken focus away from the fundamental change social media introduced into the way humans as a group communicate.

That fundamental change is these systems attach a publicly visible number next to every thing anyone says.

Whether it is a like/view/upvote/click/follower/retweet count it has an effect on how people think and behave.

Whether it is the President, a Journalist or a 10 year old the numbers have an unasked for influence.

There is no good psychological/sociological reason for these numbers to be publicly visible in real time.

Engagement and Recommendation systems can still collect these numbers and continue to do their jobs without publicly displaying any of these numbers in real time or not at all.

These changes can't be rolled out instantly because a large part of the population are hooked and need to be slowly weaned off.

Silicon Valley has the same solution to every problem: more technology, or market forces. Everybody plays the game they know how to play.

I think what you say here carries a lot of meaning into how parents raise children. Kid is not doing something you like, or not doing something you want it to do? No! Don't do that, or Do this! Why? Because I said so. No TV tonight for you! But, why do we not think to negotiate, and to reason? When we apply for a job, we negotiate with our employer for a salary that benefits us both, right? Thats how it should be. What do companies want? What do users want? What is right, what is wrong. I am not sure that any situation can be found involving two or more parties that differs.