- Concerns such as data protection, privacy, and competition are at the core of a growing tug-of-war on regulation of social media platforms
TAIPEI, Taiwan
Around the world, big tech companies are playing greater roles in people’s daily lives, with platforms such as Google, X, Facebook, and TikTok becoming indispensable for access to information and keeping in touch with family, friends, and colleagues across borders.
For years, governments have been scrambling to keep up pace with the exponential growth of technology to ensure that innovation does not come at the cost of people’s privacy or welfare.
However, as tighter regulations around access to data and competition materialize, tech companies have grown increasingly wary about how certain legislation could limit the growth of potential technologies, especially artificial intelligence.
These concerns are at the core of the growing tug-of-war between big tech and governments on how internet platforms should be regulated.
Multiple elections around the world have been influenced by discourse on social media, with the problem of misinformation, hate speech, and spread of violent content worsening by the day.
Both politicians and civil society have sounded the alarm on data privacy and outside influence on local affairs. In response, various governments have taken multiple measures to rein in online platforms and tech companies.
Data control
Governments have sought to protect private data under national laws, with tech companies pushing back against the decentralization of their data operations.
As early as 2018, the EU passed the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which gives individuals the right to access, rectify, or erase their data, while mandating companies to get explicit consent when retrieving a user’s information.
However, other government data controls were more explicitly targeted at companies seen as tied with certain foreign powers.
In 2018, Australia became the first to ban Huawei from participating in its 5G development, following security warnings from the US about potential espionage operations by China.
The UK, New Zealand, Japan and Canada followed suit in the years after.
The US additionally spearheaded operations to regulate TikTok, with the state of Montana banning it completely, citing security risks as well.
TikTok, in response, not only launched a campaign proving that they had no connection with China, but also started an initiative to relocate all US user data to be managed by Oracle, an American company.
Iceland, meanwhile, has taken data privacy of citizens a step further, and has one of the strictest data control policies in the world.
While users elsewhere normally have to decline to have their information collected, those in Iceland have to explicitly give their consent for tech companies to be able to collect their information.
Content regulation
Various countries have also introduced policies aimed at curtailing and monitoring hate speech, fake news, and political content, often clashing with tech companies over free speech policies.
Just weeks ago, X was banned in Brazil after its owner Elon Musk refused to ban accounts that the country’s Supreme Court said were spreading “election misinformation.”
Australia also recently introduced a bill that could lead to fines on social media companies of up to 5% of their global revenue if they fail to address “harmful misinformation.”
In response, Musk labeled Brazil’s Supreme Court “dictatorial” and the Australian government “fascist,” and even pleaded for the US government to intervene in the Brazilian case.
Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese hit back at the comment, saying that X has a social responsibility to manage harmful content.
Brazil froze the local bank accounts of X and Starlink, another company owned by Musk, until it collected around $3 million in fines for breaking local laws.
On the other hand, Malaysia accused Meta of stifling free expression and blocking pro-Palestine content, after it removed a post by Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim on the assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh.
Meta had cited its policy against the “promotion of dangerous organizations,” but later apologized and reinstated the photos. However, it still put a notice that it was restored due to its “newsworthy nature.”
Meta was previously embroiled in a major controversy regarding its complicity in the Cambridge Analytica scandal, where data of tens of thousands of people was stolen to influence elections and referendums in countries including the US, Philippines, Kenya, India, and the UK.
Market dominance
Multiple regions across the world have also implemented market controls to curb companies' monopolistic practices.
Tech giants have lobbied intensely and argued for adjustments to ensure restrictions on operations are neither too strict nor stifle the company’s ability to offer free services or develop new technologies efficiently.
The EU’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) passed in 2022 aimed to stop any company from “gatekeeping” competition and consumer choice, targeting firms such as Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, and Microsoft.
This policy ensured that tech companies not only allowed interoperation of services of third-party platforms, but also ensured data transparency, as well as banned unfairly prioritizing one’s own product or services in their respective domains.
An example was when Apple was forced to allow its NFC technology on their phones to be operable with other payment applications and not just Apple Pay.
Google was also compelled by the European Commission to allow third-party engines to operate with Android’s core services, allowing competitors to offer alternatives rather than its own in-house applications.
Both companies also had to open up their app store ecosystems to allow other alternative third-party app stores to operate on their devices.
Another piece of legislation regulating tech competition was South Korea’s “Anti-Google Law.” It coerced both Google and Apple to allow alternative payment systems and not force developers to utilize their own in-house payment systems.
Prior to the law, both companies had charged developers a commission fee of up to 30% for purchases. South Korea was the first country to take such a step, setting a precedent for other regions and countries.
Cross-border governance
A great challenge for governments is pushing companies to comply with differing local laws.
Various countries have either mirrored existing legislation in other nations or worked in coordination with like-minded governments to ensure that policies remain consistent.
On the other hand, firms like Meta and Google have created their own policies to manage hate speech and harmful information, and are developing more accessible ways for users to opt out of certain data collection that apply to all areas where they are active.
Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) has inspired other non-EU countries such as the UK, South Korea, Japan, Argentina, India, and New Zealand to take similar measures to protect data privacy.
Other countries in the European Economic Area, such as Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway, have completely adopted the GDPR.
Another emerging example of cross-border governance regarding data management is the EU-US Data Privacy Framework.
It requires US companies to follow European data protection standards when handling the personal information of EU citizens.
Jointly developed by the US Department of Commerce and the European Commission, it was eventually extended to cover the UK and Switzerland.
An earlier version of the framework existed as the EU-US Privacy Shield, but it was struck down by the Court of Justice of the European Union as it found it provided insufficient personal data protection in the US, and that American authorities accessed and utilized EU citizens’ personal data.
The newer framework includes a Data Protection Review Court which will allow EU citizens to challenge US data practices and potentially have binding rulings for companies.
As tech companies continue breaking boundaries, especially in the field of artificial intelligence, friction between tech companies and governmental agencies will only grow further.
More countries have expressed their intent or are currently working to implement laws following the European GDPR framework to tackle issues of data sovereignty, data flows, personal data protection, and content moderation.
Nations such as China, India, Russia, and the US have also begun implementing regulations mandating data localization or to store data within national borders, especially with increasing geopolitical tensions and concerns over national security.
