Big Tech Research Articles

The Illusion of Power: Unpacking the Vulnerabilities of Big Tech in the Face of Sovereign States

The Illusion of Power: Unpacking the Vulnerabilities of Big Tech in the Face of Sovereign States

Putting Big Tech in its place: A view of the virtual from Los Angeles

Putting Big Tech in its place: A view of the virtual from Los Angeles

The metaverse-industrial complex

ABSTRACT This paper explores the role that Nvidia is playing in shaping the Metaverse for industrial applications in simulation and automation. As the world's largest manufacturer of Graphics Processing Units for computationally intensive tasks and one of the largest corporations by market capitalization, Nvidia has remained relatively overlooked within critical discussions of ‘Big Tech', the Metaverse, and Artificial Intelligence. This paper draws on news media reports and publicly accessible Nvidia publications such as developer documentation and press releases to understand the role of Nvidia in shaping the Metaverse for industrial enterprises. It conceptualises the ‘Metaverse-Industrial Complex' to theorise the processes of market capture, territorialization, and platform expansionism occurring within the convergence of the Metaverse and Artificial Intelligence that is reconfiguring the governance of public and private assets and infrastructure. Through an examination of Nvidia's ‘Omniverse' platform and network of industrial partnerships, the paper examines the Metaverse-Industrial Complex as an assemblage of developer tools, platforms, data standards, and industry partnerships that converge machine learning and 3D graphics into photo-realistic ‘digital twin’ simulations of physical objects and environments.

Civil society coalitions in the EU media regulation: when field theory meets network analysis

ABSTRACT The field of Eurocracy has increasingly been shaped by the emergence of actors lobbying on the area of digital regulation, which has heavily increased during the Von der Leyen Commission. We study the extra-institutional actor networks that have been involved in the EU digital policy formulation, and hypothesise that beyond clearly visible networks of opposition, the subjacent social structure of discourse networks was dominated by Big Tech. We do so by analysing the role of actor coalitions that have emerged to channel specific demands and pressures in relation to the ongoing regulatory struggle, as well as the dominant discourse coalitions. Specifically, we use Social Network Analysis to examine the cooperation and competition patterns among the actors involved. Our work is relevant for the study of EU personnel in two ways. First, digital regulation is a pertinent example of dynamics in emerging fields, where dominating policy entrepreneurs establish discursive dominance over a long time. Second, our innovative methodological approach indicates why analysing organisational discourses are relevant to understand the networks that contribute to the structure of the EU field.

Dark patterns: Can criminal law remedy the shortcomings of antitrust law?

Antitrust laws' remedies to address Big Tech's anticompetitive business models have often been questionable. Since the fundamental design choices of business models pose significant challenges, due to dark patterns, Austrian criminal law may compensate for antitrust laws' enforcement limits. It is argued that Amazon's Prime and BuyBox, Google's Search and its AI Bard, Activision Blizzard's lootboxes, and Engagement Optimised Matchmaking (EOMM) algorithms contain dark patterns that may constitute (commercial) fraud within the meaning of §§ 146, 148 StGB. This is because these business models are designed to deceive consumers to unlawfully enrich Big Tech and video game publishers.

Where Technology Leads, the Problems Follow. Technosolutionism and the Dutch Contact Tracing App

In April 2020, in the midst of its first pandemic lockdown, the Dutch government announced plans to develop a contact tracing app to help contain the spread of the coronavirus – the Coronamelder. Originally intended to address the problem of the overburdening of manual contract tracers, by the time the app was released six months later, the problem it sought to solve had drastically changed, without the solution undergoing any modification, making it a prime example of technosolutionism. While numerous critics have mobilised the concept of technosolutionism, the questions of how technosolutionism works in practice and which specific harms it can provoke have been understudied. In this paper we advance a thick conception of technosolutionism which, drawing on Evgeny Morozov, distinguishes it from the notion of technological fix, and, drawing on constructivism, emphasizes its constructivist dimension. Using this concept, we closely follow the problem that the Coronamelder aimed to solve and how it shifted over time to fit the Coronamelder solution, rather than the other way around. We argue that, although problems are always constructed, technosolutionist problems are badly constructed, insofar as the careful and cautious deliberation which should accompany problem construction in public policy is absent in the case of technosolutionism. This can lead to three harms: a subversion of democratic decision-making; the presence of powerful new actors in the public policy context – here Big Tech; and the creation of “orphan problems”, whereby the initial problems that triggered the need to develop a (techno)solution are left behind. We question whether the most popular form of technology ethics today, which focuses predominantly on the design of technology, is well-equipped to address these technosolutionist harms, insofar as such a focus may preclude critical thinking about whether or not technology should be the solution in the first place.

Video Generative AI in Digital Marketing: A SWOT Analysis on E-Commerce

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is reshaping the way various business processes are performed, most rapidly in digital marketing, due to its advanced computational capabilities. ECommerce companies are in advantageous position to adopt and reap the benefits of AI for many reasons including the readily available computational infrastructure and big data related to their users and processes. Meanwhile, big tech companies and startups are competing to create and improve generative AI models, that create high-definition videos based on inputs in the form of text, image or videos. The current research specifically aims to analyse the video outputs of various video generating AI models available for digital marketing purposes in ecommerce businesses and to rationally analyse how those video generative AI models benefit or affect e-commerce companies. To meet the research objectives, mixed methodologies of experimentation and content analysis were deployed. It was observed that the video outputs from the tested models were not yet suitable for digital marketing and appeared underdeveloped. Additionally, the SWOT analysis revealed advantages like low costs, alongside concerns such as intellectual property issues.

Big Tech Platforms: What Are the Limits to “Big Brother” Surveillance and Influence?

Big Tech Platforms: What Are the Limits to “Big Brother” Surveillance and Influence?

Ergonomics & Human factors: fade of a discipline

In this commentary, we argue that the field of Ergonomics and Human Factors (EHF) has the tendency to present itself as a thriving and impactful science, while in reality, it is losing credibility. We assert that EHF science (1) has introduced terminology that is internally inconsistent and hardly predictive-valid, (2) has virtually no impact on industrial practice, which operates within frameworks of regulatory compliance and profit generation, (3) repeatedly employs the same approach of conducting lab experiments within unrealistic paradigms in order to complete deliverables, (4) suggests it is a cumulative science, but is neither a leader nor even an adopter of open-science initiatives that are characteristic of scientific progress and (5) is being assimilated by other disciplines as well as Big Tech. Recommendations are provided to reverse this trend, although we also express a certain resignation as our scientific discipline loses significance. Practitioner Summary: This paper offers criticism of the field of Ergonomics. There are issues such as unclear terminology, unrealistic experiments, insufficient impact and lack of open data. We provide recommendations to reverse the trend. This article concerns a critique of EHF as a science, and is not a critique of EHF practitioners.

Attributing Responsibility to Big Tech for Mass Atrocity: Social Media and Transitional Justice

Big Tech companies such as Meta, the owner of Facebook, are increasingly accused of enabling human rights violations. The proliferation of toxic speech in their digital platforms has been in the background of recent episodes of mass atrocity, the most salient of which recently transpired in Myanmar and Ethiopia. The involvement of Big Tech companies in mass atrocity raises multiple normative and conceptual challenges. One is to properly conceptualize Meta’s responsibility for the circulation of toxic speech. On one view, endorsed by the corporation itself, Meta can be absolved from any significant share of responsibility for these atrocities because toxic speech is the speech of some (rogue) users, hosted but neither created nor endorsed by the company; if anything, Meta is responsible for failing to anticipate and swiftly remove that speech. I will argue that this view is misleading, as it misses the underlying forces crafting toxic speech. Meta’s business model relies on what one might call the algorithmic capture of attention, which it achieves by manipulating its users and by creating an environment in which manipulative practices of some users thrive over others. This fact alone turns the company into a co-creator of toxic speech rather than a mere conduit of the toxic speech of others. As a result, it is safe to claim that Meta bears significant causal responsibility and sufficient moral responsibility for the dissemination of toxic speech, such that it justifies its inclusion in transitional justice processes and grounds its moral obligation to act in ways that advance these processes.

Digital Actors and Digital Platforms in the System of International Relations: Between Complex Interdependence and Online Sovereignty

The article analyzes deep changes in international relations that are taking place in the context of the increasing role of digital actors and platforms in shaping the global agenda. The emergence of the Internet was a turning point in the development of the entire system of global communications. The Internet changed the way information is spread and public opinion is shaped, while digital platforms became a new factor of globalization. At the same time, as the authors demonstrate, the original nature of the Internet, which was viewed by the United States and the West as an integral part and technology of the liberal order, in the end started to reflect the increasing confrontation between states, and became a space for the spread of political conflicts, stereotypes and information wars. In addition, new digital oligopolies began to shape the digital space based on their corporate interests, prioritizing their market share rather than the quality of online discussions and the strengthening of the civic democratic culture. The weaponization and securitization of the Internet is a logical continuation of the crisis of the global liberal order. The complex interdependence, which was strengthened by digital actors and digital platforms, is increasingly being replaced by the idea of digital sovereignty. States aim to decouple from a single communicative space and to create norms protecting them and their citizens from the excessive influence of the Big Tech. The authors conclude that we are experiencing the sunset of the era of information openness. Depoliticization of the Internet is impossible without reducing international tension and reviving the spirit of rationalism in world politics. Only through getting back to reason can we return to the Internet the role of a creative, rather than destructive technology.

From Institutions to the Platform Society: An Interdisciplinary Reading of Recent Works by Roberto Esposito

In recent years, reflection on institutions has assumed great prominence in Italian Theory. Roberto Esposito especially, in his three most recent books, has provided a genealogy of institutions, aimed at challenging the prevailing way in which they have been thematized in Western thought. As he sees it, a repressive conception of institutions has dominated in philosophy as well as in sociology and legal studies, which views them as apparatuses that limit the free expansion of individual instincts and life itself. Following an original hermeneutic path, the Italian philosopher seeks to pull through strands of thought that understand the concepts of institution and life to be mutually implicated rather than opposed to each other. This article starts from Roberto Esposito’s work on institutions, clarifying its meaning and perspective. It then draws connections between Esposito’s instituent thought and a few focal points of contemporary sociological thought on institutions. Specifically, it analyzes how Esposito’s post-normative perspective presents similarities with the ‘cognitive turn’ in the institutional thought of new institutionalism, among other sociological schools. The article concludes by showing that Esposito’s work and its connections with sociological thought enable one to reflect critically on a number of practices spawned in the ‘platform society’ by new institutional actors such as Big Tech.

Digital sovereignty and artificial intelligence: a normative approach

Digital sovereignty is a term increasingly used by academics and policymakers to describe efforts by states, private companies, and citizen groups to assert control over digital technologies. This descriptive conception of digital sovereignty is normatively deficient as it centres discussion on how power is being asserted rather than evaluating whether actions are legitimate. In this article, I argue that digital sovereignty should be understood as a normative concept that centres on authority (i.e., legitimate control). A normative approach to digital sovereignty is beneficial as it supports critical discourse about the desirability of actors’ assertions of control. It is also more closely aligned with traditional definitions of sovereignty that are grounded in ideas of sovereign authority. To operationalise this normative approach to digital sovereignty and demonstrate the deficiencies of a descriptive approach, the role that “Big Tech” companies are playing in controlling artificial intelligence is considered from both perspectives. Through this case study, it is highlighted that Big Tech companies assert a high degree of control (i.e., descriptive digital sovereignty), but that they lack strong input legitimacy and have a questionable amount of output legitimacy. For this reason, it is argued that Big Tech companies should only be considered quasi-sovereigns over AI.

“Platform Schooling” Through “Platform Tutoring”? Unpacking the Relationship Between FJP Trainings and Journalistic Skills

ABSTRACT Big tech companies are increasingly suggesting tools and trainings to journalists, extending their well-documented influence in journalism. The discussion around journalistic skills have persisted for over a century and still today this topic remains vital attracting significant scholarship. Therein, the platformization of journalism is seen as a major challenge within the field, with an impact on the foundations of journalism challenging journalistic skills and work processes in newsrooms. This study entangles, to understand through the lens of visual-text centric approach the ways FJP through its trainings and e-courses suggested to journalists are encouraging certain journalistic skills to emerge. After the selection of three journalist-oriented tools provided by FJP, I collected 124 trainings, and 28 self-paced courses offered by the tools in their website to unpack the suggested skills. Findings suggest that FJP trainings and e-courses are promoting a set of platform-centric skills, which are deeply intertwined with platform-specific algorithms and business models. This can be viewed as a form of platform schooling which, in addition to journalism schools and work environments, mediates understanding of what are and what are not successful skills when practicing journalism.

#SponsoredByBigTobacco: How the tobacco industry and big tech are addicting youth

#SponsoredByBigTobacco: How the tobacco industry and big tech are addicting youth

In Defense of ‘Surveillance Capitalism’

Critics of Big Tech often describe ‘surveillance capitalism’ in grim terms, blaming it for all kinds of political and social ills. This article counters this pessimistic narrative, offering a more favorable take on companies like Google, YouTube, and Twitter/X. It argues that the downsides of surveillance capitalism are overstated, while the benefits are largely overlooked. Specifically, the article examines six critical areas: i) targeted advertising, ii) the influence of surveillance capitalism on politics, iii) its impact on mental health, iv) its connection with government surveillance, v) its effects on the rule of law and social trust, and vi) privacy concerns. For each area, it will be argued that concerns about surveillance capitalism are unfounded or exaggerated. The article also explores some benefits of the services provided by these technology companies and concludes with a discussion of the practical implications. Throughout, the article draws on empirical evidence relating to the societal and political impact of digital technologies.

Who Gets Paid (for) What? The Cultural Political Economy of News Content in Generative AI

One of the key controversies that generative artificial intelligence (AI) has recently stirred was whether compensation is due for the copyrighted materials used to train AI models. This article explores the logic, trajectories, and dynamics of content generation, including news, through generative AI in two distinctive yet intertwined domains. Guided by a cultural political economy approach, it examines how both the political context (validation/legitimation of AI-generated news content by established news media) and the economic context (use of unpaid and underpaid labor in the forms of freely scraped data and data annotation work) shape the deployment of news content on AI models. It further untangles how the space for serious, independent journalism may shrink, as big tech companies’ algorithmic technologies emerge as a solution to contemporary problems in journalism. A clear danger here is that AI companies’ proprietary algorithms, language training models, and value-laden parameters are incompatible with journalism's democratic obligations and responsibilities.

Google news initiative innovation challenge in Latin America: business models between path dependence and power relations

ABSTRACT In response to growing regulatory pressures, tech companies have partnered with media organizations to support news production through programs, grants, and financial aid for journalism. Notably, the Google News Initiative (GNI) Innovation Challenge has invested millions in Latin American news projects. This study explores the characteristics of these projects and their impact on the business models of Latin American media organizations. By examining project descriptions, a typology clarifies the connection between these initiatives and their effects on publishers’ business models. This analysis is complemented by 20 semi-structured interviews conducted from January 2020 to March 2023 with key regional informants. Results show three types of projects emerging through the GNI Innovation Challenge: audience-building, revenue generation, and technological innovation. It becomes evident that these media organizations are trapped in a dependent cycle, significantly contributing to their challenges in establishing sustainable business models. Furthermore, the study suggests that media organizations perceive these grants as a temporary financial resource, enabling them to hire additional staff and implement technological advancements within their newsrooms for a short time. Meanwhile, Google exerts its influence across the media industry by promoting cutting-edge technologies, which increases media dependence on its infrastructure. Ultimately, this research highlights the complex dynamics between big tech firms and the news industry, raising questions about the journalism sustainability and the potential consequences of its path dependence and capture by platforms.

Big Tech and Big Pharma Have Entered the Sleep Field and are Here to Stay…

Big Tech and Big Pharma Have Entered the Sleep Field and are Here to Stay…

Exploring the landscape of automated species identification apps: Development, promise, and user appraisal

Abstract Two decades ago, Gaston and O'Neill (2004) deliberated on why automated species identification had not become widely employed. We no longer have to wonder: This AI-based technology is here, embedded in numerous web and mobile apps used by large audiences interested in nature. Now that automated species identification tools are available, popular, and efficient, it is time to look at how the apps are developed, what they promise, and how users appraise them. Delving into the automated species identification apps landscape, we found that free and paid apps differ fundamentally in presentation, experience, and the use of biodiversity and personal data. However, these two business models are deeply intertwined. Going forward, although big tech companies will eventually take over the landscape, citizen science programs will likely continue to have their own identification tools because of their specific purpose and their ability to create a strong sense of belonging among naturalist communities.