In the ever-evolving landscape of Gen Z digital behavior, Fizz has rapidly emerged as a standout player among anonymous social media platforms tailored for college students. Initially developed by Stanford dropouts to cater specifically to campus-specific conversations, Fizz’s anonymous structure and school-verified communities quickly gained traction. As of mid-2025, the app is present on over 240 college campuses and 60 high schools, backed by $41.5 million in venture capital. Most recently, the app has introduced a marketplace feature, allowing students to buy and sell goods like textbooks, bikes, and clothes. While this expansion into peer-to-peer commerce appears innovative, it also reignites the debate around the implications of anonymous social platforms in sensitive and complex collegiate environments.
The Rise of Fizz: A Platform for Gen Z Expression
Fizz’s initial appeal lay in its hyper-localized and anonymous format. By requiring verification through school email accounts, Fizz created digital spaces where students could engage with peers within their own institutions, all while remaining untraceable to others. Unlike Reddit, which has broader subreddits, or Facebook groups, which require identifiable profiles, Fizz offered something new: the ability to voice unfiltered opinions about campus life, gossip, or grievances without risking social consequence.
From light-hearted posts about dorm food to more serious discussions on mental health or discrimination, the platform quickly integrated itself into campus culture. But with anonymity came the expected drawbacks: misinformation, harassment, and trolling.
The Marketplace: Convenience Meets Risk
The introduction of the marketplace function between March and May of 2025 marks a significant evolution in Fizz’s offering. The idea isn’t new—college students have always found informal ways to exchange goods, from Craigslist to Facebook Marketplace to community bulletin boards. But Fizz’s marketplace aims to combine that utility with the trust of shared student affiliation and the convenience of a built-in user base already hooked on the app.
According to co-founder Teddy Solomon, the motivation was straightforward: college students are always on the move, shifting dorms, offloading old furniture, or looking for budget-friendly essentials. Fizz’s early success—50,000 listings and over 150,000 DMs exchanged in the span of a few months—suggests this idea is resonating.
Yet, Fizz’s marketplace is not without limitations. It currently lacks integrated payments, forcing users to arrange transactions independently. Moreover, while user anonymity remains a cornerstone of the platform, it also complicates the trustworthiness and accountability of these marketplace exchanges. Unlike traditional platforms that offer ratings, verified identities, and buyer/seller protections, Fizz has none of these—at least not yet.
Anonymous Platforms and Accountability
Fizz’s structure invites a core dilemma: how can a platform that thrives on anonymity also maintain safety, trust, and civility? Even before the marketplace was launched, Fizz struggled to walk this tightrope. While student moderators attempt to regulate content, they are often overwhelmed. As the app scaled, it attracted not only constructive conversations but also posts laced with bullying, sexism, racism, and worse.
One user experience detailed by a student revealed alarming content, including a post joking about rape. Although the post was swiftly removed, its very presence illustrates the challenge of moderation at scale. The voluntary moderator model—4,000 across all campuses—is clearly insufficient for dealing with rapid-fire harmful content.
Moreover, Fizz has faced past allegations regarding its cybersecurity practices. A report by The Stanford Daily once claimed that the app’s lack of proper security protocols made sensitive data vulnerable. Although the company claimed to have patched the issue, it raises ongoing questions about the actual integrity of user anonymity.
The Illusion of Safety
One of the biggest selling points of the Fizz marketplace is that all users are from the same school. The logic is simple: it feels safer to meet up with a fellow student than a total stranger. However, the risks persist. Anonymity does not preclude someone from being a bad actor, and the lack of any reputation system means students often interact with others without any vetting.
On Craigslist or Facebook Marketplace, a user can check out a seller’s profile, see past reviews, or even mutual friends. On Fizz, users only know that the other party has a school email address. This can be enough to instill a false sense of security. And without in-app payments or buyer protections, there is little recourse if something goes wrong.
Mental Health and Digital Toxicity
The platform’s structure also exacerbates mental health issues, particularly among vulnerable students. The addictive nature of anonymous apps—fueled by constant engagement and the thrill of gossip—can mirror that of gambling or drug use. For students suffering from anxiety, body dysmorphia, or depression, the environment can quickly become toxic.
Insensitive posts targeting appearance, weight, or social status are common. Because users post without identification, they often push boundaries further than they would on identifiable platforms. Even with moderation, harmful content slips through.
Studies have shown strong correlations between increased social media usage and psychiatric symptoms, particularly in platforms that do not enforce identity. Fizz’s format encourages emotional detachment and deters accountability, further inflaming this issue.
Privacy and Data Protection
Fizz’s claim of full anonymity should be approached with caution. While the front-facing user experience is anonymous, the back-end systems have raised privacy concerns. The earlier security lapse at Fizz exposed just how fragile digital anonymity can be if not supported by strong technical infrastructure.
Although the platform claims to have addressed the vulnerabilities, critics argue that data breaches—even momentary ones—can have long-lasting implications. An app that hosts vulnerable conversations about trauma, sexuality, and mental health needs to be airtight when it comes to data security. Anything less is unacceptable.
Monetization and Future Direction
Despite its viral growth, Fizz has yet to monetize its platform. Solomon stated that he’s not concerned about monetization at this stage, a classic Silicon Valley stance. But in a more skeptical and fiscally cautious post-pandemic tech world, this stance may soon become outdated.
If Fizz introduces payment integrations or advertising in the marketplace, it will need to revisit its identity. Does anonymous commerce work at scale? Will users tolerate ads on a platform that prides itself on freedom and expression? These are difficult questions that Fizz will have to answer as it matures.
Community, Culture, and Responsibility
Fizz is more than just a social app—it is a reflection of campus culture. It shows what students are thinking, worrying about, joking about. But it also reveals darker undercurrents: misogyny, racism, ableism, and a fixation on appearance and popularity.
The responsibility of platforms like Fizz extends beyond technological innovation. They must foster healthy online ecosystems. This means investing more in content moderation, user education, and ethical development. If left unchecked, platforms like Fizz risk becoming digital echo chambers that reinforce toxic behaviors.
Final Thoughts: A Fork in the Road
Fizz stands at a pivotal moment. The marketplace feature could revolutionize how college students exchange goods and services. But it could also become a hub for scams, mistrust, and conflict if not managed responsibly. Similarly, the app’s core feature—anonymity—is both its superpower and its greatest liability.
The future of Fizz depends on its willingness to confront these contradictions head-on. That means designing with empathy, prioritizing safety, and listening to the real concerns of the student communities it serves. If it can strike this balance, Fizz may not only survive the scrutiny—it might just thrive as a defining platform of the Gen Z era.
But if it continues to place growth over ethics, engagement over responsibility, and anonymity over accountability, the very user base it champions may one day outgrow it.
Tahir Manoka 
Awais Shamsi 
Khizar