Marietje Schaake Discusses New Book on How Big Tech is Harming Democracy

Major tech companies, once seen as disruptors, have become major players in the governance arena. That is the contention made in a new book, The Tech Coup: How to Save Democracy from Silicon Valley, by Stanford University’s Marietje Schaake. Schaake, who is the International Policy Director at Stanford University Cyber Policy Center and International Policy Fellow at Stanford’s Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence, gave a book talk to SIPA students on September 25 sponsored by the Institute of Global Politics (IGP) and moderated by Maria Ressa, who is a SIPA professor of practice and Nobel Peace Prize-winning journalist.

Image

This shift in power dynamics between the public and private sector will have far-reaching consequences, according to Schaake. A critical focus of the book is on offering solutions focused on strengthening the rule of law and strengthening democratic governance. Schaake argued that while antitrust laws in the United States and the European Union are important for ensuring fairness in the economy, they are too indirect in addressing the broader societal power of technology companies and their impact on democracy. In her book, Schaake proposes focusing on companies that hold this societal power and reducing government dependence on these tech giants, especially in areas like cloud computing, where a few companies dominate, creating security risks. The criticism in the book is directed both at the tech companies for their unchecked power, and at governments for failing to enforce adequate regulations to address the digital space effectively.

The unchecked power of tech companies can be attributed to three reasons, according to Schaake. First, she noted an overly optimistic expectation, particularly in the United States, that technological disruption would lead to a wave of democratization and liberation. Second, she pointed to the rush towards digitization, often without proper precautions, has created systemic vulnerabilities. Lastly, tech companies have gone beyond traditional lobbying and infiltrated civil society and academia, according to Schaake, in order to shape public narratives and fund research. She pointed out that tech companies exert influence through academia, funding research, and establishing patents, as well as by supporting or creating NGOs. This allows tech companies to shape ecosystems of study, criticism, and analysis in ways that align with their interests. As a result, public narratives around technology are more influenced by corporate perspectives than by society’s actual needs, reinforcing the tech sector's influence on how technology is understood and addressed.

On questions related to generative AI and the future of governance, Schaake observed that while there is strong political will to address the risks of AI, there is also a rush to embrace the technology, often without a clear understanding of its applications. This reflects a broader trend where governments, influenced by tech companies, feel pressured to rapidly adopt new technologies like AI, blockchain, or social media, often seeing them as potential solutions to governance challenges, but lacking any clear direction on how they should be adopted.

Schaake addressed the question of AI regulation enforcement, specifically in the context of the EU's AI Act. She emphasized the need for public-facing criteria that clearly define what is expected from companies from a public interest standpoint, along with meaningful sanctions for non-compliance.

Responding to a question on how realistic regulating the tech companies is, Schaake recognized that regulating these companies is challenging given their global reach and economic dominance. However, she emphasized the importance of starting somewhere to raise the bar, even if it doesn't solve all the problems immediately. Using the example of the death penalty being outlawed in Europe, Schaake explained that while Europe can't change global practices, its stance gives it credibility and the ability to say, "not here." Similarly, the United States recently banned the use of commercial spyware - a significant but overdue step. She iterated that while this move won’t dismantle the global spyware industry, it sends a strong message: "not here." By attaching consequences to spyware sales, such as sanctions, blacklists, and visa bans for human rights violators, governments can discourage the spread of anti-democratic technologies. There is a risk that tech companies may relocate to more permissive regions, the goal is to make it clear that certain practices are unacceptable in specific jurisdictions.

Underscoring the need to raise the bar, Schaake emphasized that “policy is often about taking a step in the right direction, rather than solving in one go.”