I'm feeling a nascent but large shift against centralisation of 'social'. What, in my niche, was a large blogging community, died between 2010 and 2012 but is

I'm feeling a nascent but large shift against centralisation of 'social'. What, in my niche, was a large blogging community, died between 2010 and 2012 but is showing sprouts of growth. The shift to centralised platforms was immediately clear after Google killed Reader and took a few years to work out. For some this meant relocating to centralised platforms for 'community', for some just quitting, for many new to the niche things seeming too much effort and on the other side of that spectrum tiresome long YouTube videos which could be tl;dr'd within a couple of paragraphs. I do think a shift towards greater federation is back. Centralised platforms will seek to monetise whatever they can, but there's only so far a pendulum can swing and that's not to yet another centralised platform (perhaps a few, something radically different like AR, but what is mentioned in the article is already highly captured and many find this tiresome). Perhaps this is consistent with social+ mentioned in the article. Perhaps this depends on market or sector. Social+Fitness - that's going to a gym or just having a couple of buddies to share a hobby. Social+Food, I love YouTube videos on cooking, well, 3% of them, with the rest being garbage, monetised garbage, peak monetisation - of the ones I like most chefs don't seek monetisation just sharing their love for what they do. Social+Real Estate - interesting extremes on both sides of the coin, I quite like knowing some neighbours and quite like not knowing others. Social+Money, is every Social+ is in it for the money? Social+Education, why does 'Social' really exist as a tag?