Are influential leaders such as Trump, Putin, or Jinping really all that powerful? Do governments really have as much grip on the Googles and Amazons of our time as they think they do? How relevant are national governments in this digital age, and what role will major digital actors play in future politics?
Politics are at the core of our society, playing a central role on social media and talk shows, and often leading to heated discussions between parties with differing political perspectives (e.g. democrats vs. republicans). While this is all very intriguing, the rise of digital giants should shift the attention to the very fundamentals of the political systems as we know them. Regardless of political preference, most people will agree that a country’s political system and its government are at the core of the legislative framework, which shapes our society. From an individual’s standpoint, governments seem almighty and very inattentive to a single person’s input. However, this changes when considering digital firms (Berger, 2016), such as Google or Amazon, which operate globally, have established enormous networks, and are increasingly influential by entering ever more different industries.
Now the question arises what a single government could do to set limits to the increasing integration of these firms in society. Realistically, governments are in a vulnerable position (Gavet, 2017); imposing new legislation or threatening digital giants with fines will likely be ineffective. First of all, most fines are laughable for such as firms, as their financial resources are virtually inexhaustible. Also, digital giants could respond with counter-threats; Google could simply shut down its search-engine service in a particular country, taking away most inhabitants’ way-of-access to the internet. Moreover, it would take away firms’ ability to cost-effectively reach millions of potential customers. This could lead to declining sales, increasing advertising costs, or both. In turn, this would likely result in a substantial amount of people losing their job, which creates an economic snowball effect. Furthermore, social media platforms could significantly influence people’s political perspective and voting behaviour by censoring specific information or putting more emphasis on a certain political event (Epstein, 2016). Finally, digital firms are characterized by ‘non-localization’, meaning that borders become irrelevant and local regulations are only partially applicable (Gavet, 2017). Thus, should governments really mess with the giants? Should they get their hands dirty and risk major economic consequences or should they leave the digital giants untouched? Arguably, governments lose in both scenarios. Digital giants have rapidly evolved and, in combination with governments’ lack of vigor, speed, and agility to address these firms in an earlier stage, have lead political systems and governments to be in a vulnerable position (Jarrar, 2017). The question arises; will digital firms show mercy, or will they deal governments the final blow?
Sources:
Berger, C. (2016). Power in the digital age. Retrieved 27-09-2018 from https://www.globalpolicyjournal.com/blog/27/06/2016/power-digital-age
Epstein, R. (2016). The new mind control. Retrieved 27-09-2018 from https://aeon.co/essays/how-the-internet-flips-elections-and-alters-our-thoughts
Gavet, M. (2017). The digital revolution is destroying our democracies. It doesn’t have to be that way. Retrieved 27-09-2018 from https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/02/the-digital-revolution-is-destroying-our-democracies-it-doesn-t-have-to-be-that-way
Jarrar, Y. (2017). What is the role of government in the digital age?. Retrieved 27-09-2018 from https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/02/role-of-government-digital-age-data/
