With the risk of sounding like I'm brushing off what you're saying (I am not) and breaking one or two rules on this forum, please read the article because it addresses your question to some degree.For example (my emphasis in the quoted texts):
> Together they urged policymakers in 14 countries that straddle the Atlantic to take action against enshittification, arguing that it was not an inevitable process but rather the result of policy decisions.
> Policymakers were urged to double down on the enforcement of existing laws, such as those designed to protect consumers and their data, as well as work to foster greater competition in digital markets, for example through the use of public procurement processes to favour alternatives to big tech.
From the report (my emphasis in the quoted texts):
> The path we are on can be challenged and reversed – we can have a better digital world. This requires rebalancing the power between consumers, big tech companies and alternative service providers.
> The fight to disenshittify the internet is also a fight for innovation: Big Tech is able to enshittify their services after they have become dominant and restricted competition. By pruning back the excesses of big tech, alternative services can get the nourishment they need to grow and flourish. However, this requires active policy choices and vigorous enforcement of existing laws.
As you can see, it's not merely a case of building better alternatives, although that plays a role. The biggest issues stem from market dominance, preventing the emergence of new players and innovators, using existing (huge) leverage to pass preferential laws etc. This is a systemic problem, not one that "the market" should solve.