The internet has grown rapidly from what it used to be. There are around 5.56 billion users worldwide, ranging from young to elderly users. This increase, though a testament to how the world has come to accept technology, also raises important questions about who manages and regulates what goes on in the digital information space. These concerns are especially relevant today, as artificial intelligence and other new technologies become part of the online experience. Moving from being just a small technical group, Violetta Khayrullina, a graduate of Global Political Economy, City University of London, reckoned that the internet space had acquired deep political status, raising the question in her article “Who controls the internet?” Internet governance refers to the rules, policies, standards, and practices that coordinate and shape global cyberspace.
Globally, the multi-stakeholder model of global Internet governance has been popularised to address complex issues such as information disorder, cybercrime, phishing, hacking, etc. This governance process involves various stakeholders such as the government, private companies, and civil society. Traditionally, governments and international organizations dominated this process; however, the access to massive amounts of data of users on these internet platforms and other resources and the rapid popularization of AI, especially generative AI, can be said to have somewhat skewed the power to influence internet policies and regulations more toward private technology companies that own these technologies.
The multi-stakeholder model of global Internet governance
Big tech and AI companies like X (formerly Twitter), Facebook, Microsoft, Google, Chatgpt, etc., are becoming more dominant. According to Statista, the most popular social networks worldwide, including Facebook, YouTube, and Instagram, as of February 2025, have about 3.1, 2.5 and 2.0 billion users each in order. While generative AI like Chatgpt have garnered worldwide attention, from its 1 million users attained within the first five days of inception, OpenAI CEO, Sam Altman, disclosed 500 million weekly activities.
Big Data Power
Hongfei Gu, an assistant professor specialising in international political economy at the School of International Relations at Xian International Studies University, explains that data power is the new concept of sovereignty that governments must accept in this big data era. Resources from these platforms exert online and offline influence, touching every aspect of society, including offline communication, commerce, and even culture. He further highlighted that because governments lag in data gathering, algorithm research, and development, the widespread adoption of data governance in national governance systems would make governments and other stakeholders involved in the Internet governance process depend largely on big tech and AI companies that control it.
Gu, buttressed this with three key points: First, as data governance becomes more prevalent, governments increasingly depend on data and the Big Tech companies that control it. Second, this dependence amplifies the digital power granted to Big Tech, enhancing their ability to operate. Third, with greater operational capacity, Big Tech can acquire more data, process it faster, and provide a wider range of services to the government. This leads to increased efficiency, ultimately strengthening their influence over the government.
Areas in Which Big Tech Companies Exert Influence
These big data organisations influence a wide range of activities, including online and offline.
- Content moderation and popularisation: These companies can shape public discourse through the invisible hands of algorithms on social network platforms, and content most likely to appeal to users and gain engagement is being promoted. On the other hand, content is moderated either by being reported by users or being automatically flagged by their system when it violates their policies, irrespective of the user’s social status.
For example, on June 2, 2021, X (previously known as Twitter) deleted the tweet of the then-President of Nigeria, Muhammadu Buhari, due to its violation of the platform’s rules regarding abusive behaviour. The tweet referenced the Nigerian Civil War and threatened to punish those he deemed misbehaving.
- Control Information: With the power of content moderation and popularisation, major technology companies control information on digital platforms, enabling them to manage content visibility selectively. In 2021, Australia passed a law to make Facebook and Google pay for news content supporting journalism. While Google struck deals with the local publishers, Facebook restricted news sharing in Australia, preventing users from sharing or viewing news content. However, they later negotiated and agreed. Gu viewed this conflict as a power struggle between Australia as a sovereign nation and large tech firms over digital media regulation, showing Facebook’s evolution into a significant political actor capable of negotiating with governments.
- Policy Advocacy and Decision-Making: These companies’ access to a large amount of data and the technologies to process it have put them in a position to provide data-driven opinions to business owners and even policymakers, shaping rules and regulations as well as political processes. For instance, most small, medium, and large-scale businesses consider these platforms’ algorithms and data analysis when making decisions and running promotions.
- Global Reach: The internet is not restricted by geographical boundaries, allowing it to impact different regulatory environments and public opinions. This contrasts with governments, whose authority is confined to their specific jurisdictions. Due to their extensive reach and technological advancements, internet entities have emerged as significant political players, often collaborating across state governments.
- Enact Sanctions: Big tech companies can sanction users for breaching their rules through various measures, from warnings and temporary suspensions to permanent bans and legal action. These sanctions are typically outlined in their terms of service and community guidelines, which users agree to when registering or using the service.
Following the January 6th Capitol attack in 2021, social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook suspended Donald Trump’s accounts. According to reports, this action was prompted by concerns about the potential for further violence and misinformation related to the election results.
Concerns
Certain concerns about Big Tech companies’ influence have been highlighted, some of which include the issue of confirmation bias, misinformation, and the suppression of free speech because of their ability to influence information flow. As these companies are ultimately business entities, their decisions are likely to align with their own interests, which can compromise the integrity of public discourse.
Furthermore, the power these companies hold over public discussions and policy advocacy can substantially impact citizens’ political and voting behaviour. A particularly contentious issue is deplatformization, which involves denying certain users access to platforms. The 2021 case involving Donald Trump has sparked widespread debates about the appropriateness of such practices, further fueling concerns regarding freedom of speech and censorship.
Another rising concern is data feudalism. Just as feudal lords controlled land, companies like Google, Facebook, and Amazon dominate vast amounts of personal and commercial data, which is a critical asset in the present digital age. This creates a power imbalance, with individuals often providing their data unknowingly and without a full understanding of the implications in exchange for services or connectivity.
