Can we secede from Silicon Valley?

The internet, and social media platforms on it, have had an enormously liberating effect on the opinion power of individuals. This has had many positive effects on democracy. However, it also has the ability to influence the process of public opinion formation (opinion power). It uses knowledge (data) and algorithms to command and organize online attention for persuasion. A platform that knows more about voters’ personal preferences, political engagement and psychographic trigger more points than many governments in this world. This can be translated in political power, whether it is that of their users or politicians, or their ability to influence public discourse for their own purposes.

Ways in which platforms use their opinion power :

The power to decide whom to show which political message (political microtargeting): platforms often sell their power to persuade to the highest bidder, whether advertisers, governments and/or political parties, which have come to rely on the infrastructure of platforms to communicate with their customers, citizens and/or voters;

The power to turn users into voters, such as the way Uber and Airbnb mobilize their users to protest against new government laws aiming to regulate these platforms;

The power to change the structure and balance of the media market (the distribution infrastructure of media, the conditions of access to content, etc). In fact, the media is tasked with a watchdog function – to observe and scrutinize the way political power is exercised, be that public or private power. There is a long tradition in media law and policy to disperse opinion power, aiming for a diversity of independent media and preventing the dominance of a few sources. As a result of the shifting power conditions, media risks increasingly being unable to act independently from platforms, posing a danger to a pluralistic media landscape and ultimately democracy.

The power of governing online speech: Currently, in Europe, there are some regulatory initiatives to make platforms more accountable for reining in the power of individuals to communicate ideas and opinions, but also, for example, “hate speech”, “fake news”, “harmful content”, false advertising, political demagogy and cyberbullying. In so doing, by formalizing and reinforcing the role of platforms as governors of online speech, however, the current initiatives also further reinforce the opinion power of these platforms and thereby their political power.

Danger: The increasing dependence of the media and government on these platforms and the lack of regulations. The European Union and its Member States seem to have accepted by and large that the Internet is now governed by certain platforms, and much of the current policy proposals on the table are simply what seem to be desperate attempts by national or regional governments to maintain the illusion of control and a foot in the door. The Covid-19 crisis reveals how deep the dependence has become – not only that of the media and political parties but also governments –in relying on platforms to manage a national crisis.

Challenge: Dispersing concentrations of opinion power and creating countervailing powers is essential to preventing certain social media platforms from becoming quasi-governments of online speech, while also ensuring that they each remain one of many platforms that allow us to engage in public debate.