Data vs Democracy: Why Governments Should be on the Frontline
A collaborative project by Jessie Huang and Charmian Molina
The word “Democracy” comes from the ancient Greek dēmos (“people”) and kratos (“rule”), which translates to “rule by the people.” In 2018, Cambridge Analytica harvested data of 87 million users’ data from Facebook without consent, which allowed political parties to generate targeted ads to direct voter behaviors (Hu, 2020). The scandal raises the important question of “who are the ‘people’ that rule in the age of internet and data”? According to the recently released US Congress Report on the Investigation of Competition in Digital Markets, the Big Tech companies (Amazon, Facebook, Apple, and Google) have been controlling access to markets, extracting valuable data from businesses and individuals, controlling data infrastructure, and exploiting power to assert market dominance. Big Tech has been steadily consolidating monopoly power and, in essence, has turned into a technocracy given their considerable control. The report concludes that “forceful agency action is critical,” suggesting that governments should be more proactive in its regulation and enforcement (Nadler & Cicilline, 2020). There are three underlying issues that explain why government intervention is necessary to promote users’ rights and prevent data abuse by technology (“tech”) companies in order to safeguard democracy.
Lack of clear property rights in the internet space
Thanks to anonymity, an internet troll can quickly get off the hook after making a malicious comment and an interest group can weaponize disinformation without real-life consequences. In this “digital commons,” we do not entirely own our actions due to the inherent difficulty in defining digital proprietary. Private data are not attached to clear pecuniary value without clear property rights, encouraging internet companies to capitalize on this loophole by turning personal data into a club good that is rivalrous and exclusive in nature. The rivalry reflects the companies’ focus on business growth. With weak regulation, the companies are prone to abuse the available internet data to acquire private information that feeds the business growth, securing more control of information over the mass population. The disproportionate access to power by the technology giants undermines democracy, where all the members should maintain similar rights in their interactions with the state to make decisions that reflect people’s will (Tilly, 2007).
Sorting and selective information
Meanwhile, because the power of massive data collection and processing is in the hands of a few technology giants, they are able to use algorithms to recommend highly personalized news content. That is, if extremists create disinformation that undermines the government’s legitimacy, those skeptical about political institutions are more likely to read about them. Several studies have supported the “internet fragmentation thesis”, showing that exposure to ideologically homogeneous media environments will cause attitudes to polarize and political extremism to result (Bimber & Davis 2004; Selnow, 1998; Sunstein, 2007; Warner, 2007).
Unrecognized social cost and externalities in the market of information
The internet is a market where data and information are being traded. The supply comes from users wanting to access a particular service, and the demand comes from companies that can use this data for their business needs to conduct consumer profiling and market analysis, and more. However, the social cost is not figured into this transaction. This social cost, an externality, is a security threat to your data privacy. This could lead to adverse consequences such as hacking of financial information, identity theft, among others. Therefore, data collectors must give additional compensation to data providers. An essential part of a well-functioning democracy is the right to privacy, which has also been included in the UN Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR, 1948).
Policy Recommendations
While it is hard to address all of these concerns mentioned all at once, the government should step in while it still can to preserve democracy by putting in place policies from both supply and demand sides.
Supply-side: Make the internet a true public good
The “digital commons” should be a public good. However, the lack of access to the internet for some communities and data monopolization by tech companies prevent society from benefiting from the shared good. In places where the internet is out of reach, governments should provide the necessary infrastructure to ensure digital inclusion. Meanwhile, to prevent data monopolization, governments must make it non-rival and non-excludable. To do that, it is crucial to incentivize tech companies to embrace license innovation and create open source communities where users could contribute and use data. Finally, considering the lack of shared understanding of technology, governments must take initiatives to strengthen the capacity to better understand and proactively mitigate the impact of information technologies.
Demand-side: Establish intellectual property rights, enforce data protection laws, and improve education and technological proficiency
The government should establish intellectual property rights in the internet space, especially regarding data collection and distribution. For data collection, it is necessary to require the tech company’s privacy terms and conditions to be clear and digestible before seeking user consent. As for data distribution, the government should clearly define how companies can use private data, and require any further use to be documented and compensated appropriately. On the user side, the school curriculum should also be updated to include data privacy, user rights, and responsible internet usage. The challenge would be the implementation and monitoring of these initiatives. This ties in with the need to do capacity building not just for government agencies but also for educational institutions.
The information revolution has led us to great leaps in productivity and connectivity. However, it has also caused marginalization, divisiveness, and a power shift to technocracy. There is a saying that you have to fight fire with fire. In this case, we must fight technology with technology by making the internet widely beneficial, regulating data collection and use, and enhancing technological proficiency among citizens and public agencies. At the end of the day, although the government cannot limit the development of information technology, they still play a major role in steering this development towards bringing back the power to the people.
References
[1] Hu, M. (2020). Cambridge Analytica’s black box. Big Data & Society, July-December 2020, 6. doi:10.1177/2053951720938091
[2] Nadler, J., & Cicilline, D. (2020). Investigation of Competition in Digital Markets (p. 451) [Majority Staff Report and Recommendations]. Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial, and Administrative law of the Committee on the Judiciary. https://judiciary.house.gov/uploadedfiles/competition_in_digital_markets.pdf
[3] Tilly, Charles. (2007). “What Is Democracy?” Chapter. In Democracy, 1–24. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511804922.002.
[4] Warner, B. R. (2010). Segmenting the Electorate: The Effects of Exposure to Political Extremism Online. Communication Studies, 61(4), 430–444. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2010.497069
[5] Manville, B. (2019, September 8). Will Technology Kill Democracy — Or Reinvent It? Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/brookmanville/2019/09/08/will-technology-kill-democracyor--reinvent-it/?sh=81f9ad06a1bf
[6] Anderson, J., & Rainie, L. (2020, February 21). Concerns about democracy in the digital age. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2020/02/21/concerns-about-democracy-in-the-digital-age/
[7] Anderson, J., & Rainie, L. (2020, February 21). Many Tech Experts Say Digital Disruption Will Hurt Democracy. Pew Research Center.https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2020/02/21/many-tech-experts-say-digital-disruption-will-hurt-democracy/
[8] Mazzucato, M. (2018, June 27). Let’s make private data into a public good. MIT Technology Review. https://www.technologyreview.com/2018/06/27/141776/lets-make-private-data-into-a-public-good/