How tech giants Musk, Zuckerberg and Bezos influence our thinking and our democracy
Major communication platforms like X and Meta are in the hands of a small number of powerful people, who, under the pretence of freedom of speech, are increasingly making their mark on democracy and our thinking. How are we affected by this?
The growing influence of tech giants such as Elon Musk (X), Mark Zuckerberg (Meta) and Jeff Bezos (Amazon) has become increasingly apparent recently. There was already the close relationship between Musk and Donald Trump and the role as ‘shadow president’ that Musk looks set to play in Trump's second term, but now the owner of X has also set his eyes on Europe. In Germany, for instance, Musk is emphatically voicing his support for the controversial radical-right party AFD and last week he engaged in a conversation with the party leader in a livestream on X.
Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Meta, which includes Instagram, Facebook, Threads and Whatsapp, also seems to be joining the right-wing political momentum. He decided to stop cooperating with external fact checkers, which Trump denounced. This puts tackling disinformation on social media on the back burner. But even traditional media do not seem immune to the growing power of the wealthiest. At The Washington Post, owned by Amazon boss Jeff Bezos, there was a recent uproar after its regular cartoonist saw a satirical image of Bezos bowing to Donald Trump rejected.
How are our democracy and thinking affected by the growing power of these people? UvA lecturer in political communication and journalism Tom Dobber explains.
Extremely rich tech giants seem to be drawing more and more power to themselves via traditional and social media. Should we be worried?
‘‘Yes, I think so. In any case, it is worrying when one man controls such a huge communication channel, as Musk has with X. Furthermore, it is worrying that Dutch society and government are increasingly dependent on US tech companies in everything we do. For political campaigns, we use Facebook, Google and YouTube, and in addition, the government uses all kinds of Microsoft products that run on Amazon's servers. Those companies are run by very rich autocrats like Musk, who are showing increasingly obvious political aspirations.’’
Do these people influence our thinking?
‘‘In theory, we are quite resilient, and we often get our information from different sources. But it is true that the owners of such communication channels are in a position to raise topics that we then come to think are important. If Musk finds a topic like migration important, and frequently mentions it on X, he makes the topic more prominent. Dutch journalists then start writing about it too, and so more and more people start thinking about the topic. So they definitely have the ability to put themes on the agenda.’’
With their influence, do they pose a threat to free democracy?
‘‘Not in a direct sense. It is part of a democracy that different issues are considered and discussed. It does become problematic because someone like Musk really has an enormous amount of money and therefore gets more and more influence. X is a huge communication channel with millions of users, that one man has so much influence within that is worrying. In an ideal democracy, you don't want individuals to have so much influence on opinion formation. So they do pose an indirect risk.’’
What is the interest of these tech giants in aligning themselves with the radical right?
‘‘The interest is making money. I think we have to look at America in particular, where a right-wing wind has started to blow with Trump's victory. Perhaps Musk is a sincere supporter of the right, but there is also clearly a business element for him. By aligning himself with Trump, he hopes to avoid certain legislation and win big government jobs. The same is true for Zuckerberg. He is trying to ingratiate himself with Trump to avoid getting unfavourable legislation, which is why he is now donating money with Meta for the inauguration.’’
‘‘At the same time, in Italy, you see Musk striking a deal with Starlink with Prime Minister Georgia Meloni, to add satellites to the communications network there. It's convenient for him to keep the lines of communication short within his right-wing network, so he manages to win these kinds of contracts.’’
Can we guard against these influences on an individual level?
‘‘We certainly can, but it is difficult because we receive a lot of information. A good way to guard against this influence is, for example, to read the newspaper or watch the news. It does not matter whether that is the Telegraph or NRC. It is best to spread your media intake a bit and not depend on one platform for news.’’
‘‘Secondly, it is better not to spend too much time on social media, but that too is challenging. Flipping your media diet and media routines is possible, but difficult. What we could do in theory is not what we put into practice.’’
Would it be better to stop using X, Meta or Amazon altogether?
‘‘It would be going too far to say that people should stop using them altogether, it depends on how you use social media. Besides having an important news value, apps like Instagram have a social element above all else. For many users, Meta social media is not primarily a news source, but mainly a way to be socially active while some news comes at them from time to time. So quitting is not necessary, but either way it is good not to spend too much time on social media.’’
Can the power of such companies be countered with policies?
‘‘Certainly, but that too is very difficult. Governments can try at local or European level to boost the tech industry and keep journalism powerful. For example, by not introducing a tax increase, but keeping journalism affordable, or by not cutting back on the public broadcaster and thus making the barriers and costs for journalism as low as possible. The finest counterpart to bad information is good, reliable information created through the journalistic method. That way, people can make the choice to get their information not from X, but from the public broadcaster.’’
