It'll kill all independent/local media, but then that's the goal all along.
Is it desired? Probably not, but there could be silver linings. Fewer governments posting important information exclusively on social media, for example, and people being conditioned to look directly to news sources for their news.
Social media is a multi-source aggregator and then some.
I know there have been charges of social media creating echo chambers. But consider who made those charges to begin with. Typically traditional media.
And people who don't take conscious active measures to expose themselves to a broad point of view are just going to stick to their comfortable world-affirming sources anyway like they did before social media.
Something to consider is that when virtually every single person now carries around a video camera with them 24/7, with the ability to instantly upload footage to a potentially unlimited audience ... what use is there for traditional journalists in the majority of cases?
We still desperately need investigative journalism that uncovers events not widely exposed. But when there's a car accident, a fire, a weather alert? Why rely on your local NBC or Fox news outlet? What's the benefit to getting information plus spin when you can just get the raw first-hand footage from the people who were there? And not only do you get it without bias, you get it faster.
The only people I know who think getting news from fucking facebook of all places are boomers caught up in the doomscrolling dopamine treadmill who are also caught up in the milquetoast Canadian version of MAGA.
Forcing people to go outside their shitty echo chambers for news seems like an astronomical win.
I know it's imused in some places as their primary messaging service or something, but it seems likely they're not doing much unique here.
So what is this harm you speak of?