Don’t decentralise supply and then centralise attention.
FromOne interface→ToMany lenses
If one company decides who gets discovered, a network can be open underneath and closed in practice. The remedy is many discovery providers over one network, with published rules, lenses the buyer controls, and the freedom to leave without losing identity, history or reputation.
Open supply, closed attention
Imagine it all works: open identity, portable reputation, protected payments and open standards.
Then one company builds the interface everyone uses. Its ranking decides who appears. Its sponsored slots decide who is seen first.
The technology is open. The attention isn’t. Whoever controls attention still controls the market.
Great discovery interfaces are valuable, and they are how most people navigate the internet today. This shift makes sure an open network stays open at the layer that matters most to buyers and sellers: what they see.
The road and the navigation service
The network determines what’s possible. Discovery providers determine how possibilities are presented. The user chooses. The road doesn’t decide where the driver should go.
Many providers, one network. Local discovery, sustainable businesses, professional services, enterprise procurement, community recommendations and personal agents can each offer their own discovery philosophy (precision, exploration, local, trust) over the same participants.
Curation that is transparent, contestable and plural. Neutral discovery isn’t possible, because something has to decide what comes first. So the reasons are shown: 3.2 km away · specialises in custom cakes · 28 verified orders · protected payment available. illustrative
Lenses the buyer controls: nearby, new, highly trusted, small businesses, sustainable, price, fastest, expert, surprise me and “don’t show sponsored results.”
The discovery contract
Every provider publishes its rules: which signals it uses, how sponsorship works, how newcomers are introduced, how diversity is maintained, what data it uses, and how participants can challenge errors.
Explainability for sellers too. “Why am I not appearing for birthday cakes?” The answer: “You match on capability and location, but have limited verified orders. Three verified transactions would strengthen your profile.” It is actionable, and no advertisement is required.
You can pay to communicate. You can’t pay to become more relevant.
Advertising can exist: a new bakery can introduce itself to its neighbourhood. But relevant, sponsored, popular, new and emerging are always shown as separate labels, and relevance is calculated independently of payment. Providers earn from intelligence, infrastructure and services, such as subscriptions, transaction fees, business tools and enterprise discovery, never from quietly selling who gets discovered.
Go deeper
What already exists
In India. ONDC’s 2022 consultation paper proposed that gateways send a search to all relevant seller apps and return all responses, that buyer apps publish the broad parameters they use to sort results, and that boosted or sponsored results be clearly marked[1]. The consumer protection authority’s 2023 dark-patterns guidelines name “disguised advertisement” and apply to platforms, sellers and advertisers[2].
In Europe. Guidelines issued under Article 5 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 ask providers of online search engines and online intermediation services to set out the main parameters that most significantly determine ranking, and to keep that description up to date. The guidance extends to the influence of payments and ads on organic rankings[3].
Scope. The ONDC ideas were proposals in 2022, and we haven’t confirmed whether they were adopted. We relied on summaries of the dark-patterns guidelines and of the EU guidance, not on their own text.
The real test: can you leave?
Size isn’t the problem. A provider can grow because people love it. The question is: can participants and consumers leave without losing their identity, history, reputation and relationships? If yes, attention stays contestable.
Participation portable. Discovery competitive. Switching possible.
Some of the machinery for this exists. India’s Account Aggregator framework lets people share financial data between institutions only with their consent, which they can revoke at any time[4]. The data-protection rules provide for registered consent managers, who give people an interoperable platform to give, review, manage and withdraw consent, although those provisions are to come into force on a date still to be notified[5]. Whether the same approach can carry a seller’s identity and reputation, or a buyer’s preferences, is what this shift would test.
Getting it right
Common facts for every provider: identity, capability, evidence, reputation, availability and conditions, so plural discovery never fragments into separate marketplaces.
Consumers are portable too. Preferences move with the person, with consent.
Fairness measured, not promised. New-participant discovery, small-seller discovery, concentration of attention and sponsored-versus-organic exposure are tracked openly.
What could go wrong
- A new gatekeeper.Plural providers can still consolidate into one, so the test is whether people can leave.
- Pay-to-win.If sponsored and relevant blur together, visibility is for sale. Labels and a separate relevance calculation guard against it.
- Fragmentation.Providers might read the same data differently, so identity, capability and evidence follow common standards while competition stays at the experience layer.
- Too many lenses.Choice can become a chore, so sensible defaults matter.
How we’d test it
Two or three discovery providers over one shared pilot network, each with a published discovery contract.
- The test
- Plural providers
- What we would measure
- Measure whether buyers switch, whether sellers stay discoverable across all the providers, and how attention is distributed.
- What would end the idea
- Sellers are visible through only one provider, or buyers can’t move between providers without losing their history.
Sellers are visible through only one provider, or buyers cannot move between providers without losing their history.
Sources
- [1]ONDC, Building Trust in the ONDC Network: Consultation Paper (29 September 2022), section 4.1.1Checked; proposals for comment, not adopted policy
- [2]JSA, CCPA issues guidelines for prevention and regulation of dark patterns, 2023 (guidelines notified 30 November 2023)Checked via a law-firm summary; the Guidelines’ own text not read
- [3]Search Engine Land, New EU regulations compel more transparency for search rankingsChecked via a trade-press summary; the Regulation’s own text not read
- [4]Sahamati, What is an Account Aggregator?Checked
- [5]SCC Online, Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025: key highlights (26 December 2025)Checked via a legal summary; the Rules’ own text not read
Spotted a source we missed or a rule we misread? Tell us what we got wrong.
Every part of this could go wrong. The next shift looks at fourteen ways, and the design against each.