The Ideology of Influence: Exploring Ownership Bias in Digital Platforms

By Wale Ameen

With digital platforms dominating public discourse, their ownership is now in focus. Tech giants like social media and search engines now wield immense power. They control the flow of information, shape public opinion, and affect global events. This influence raises critical questions: Can these platforms maintain political neutrality? Should they? And what happens when their owners’ ideologies shape the platforms’ policies and practices?

This has sparked debate in recent times. A good example is Elon Musk’s ownership of X, formerly Twitter, and its role in the 2024 US election. Many institutions, like The Guardian, have criticised the platform. They say it now skews public debate to an angle preferred by Elon. Concerns over content moderation, brand safety, and the platform’s polarisation have been cited by several, including Best Buy, Balenciaga, and UnitedHealth Group.

The Power of Platform Ownership

Tech platforms like Facebook, X (formerly Twitter), Google, and YouTube have evolved from simple communication tools to global information ecosystems. Their algorithms now dictate what billions of people see, read, and engage with daily. This control in turn gives the platform owners unprecedented power to influence societal narratives, cultural trends, and even political movements.

Ownership matters because it often defines the vision, priorities, and policies of the platform. For instance, Elon Musk’s acquisition of X sparked debates about free speech and content moderation. Musk’s promise to support free speech drew both praise and fear. Critics worried that less moderation would spread misinformation and hate speech. Similar concerns have arisen about platforms like Facebook, where decisions by Mark Zuckerberg and Meta’s leadership have had global ripple effects.

Political Neutrality: Myth or Reality?

The idea of political neutrality in tech platforms is, at best, a complex ideal and, at worst, an illusion. While platforms often front a neutral claim, in reality, their algorithms, content moderation policies, and leadership decisions are rarely devoid of bias.

Algorithmic Influence: Algorithms prioritise content based on engagement metrics, which can inadvertently amplify polarising or sensational content. Even without being explicitly biased, these systems shape public opinion in subtle but profound ways.

Content Moderation: Decisions about what to remove or allow on platforms are inherently political. Hate speech, misinformation, and election integrity raise issues. They sit at the crossroads of free speech and societal harm. However, what determines the decision at the end of the day really is who exactly is making the decision.

Owner Ideologies: Tech owners’ values often shape platform policies, for better or worse. For instance, banning political figures or censoring topics can align with an owner’s political views or interests. This much can be seen to a large extent in how X has since evolved after Musk’s takeover.

Shaping Global Events

Tech platforms have no doubt played a pivotal role in recent global events. From enabling grassroots movements like the Arab Spring and #BlackLivesMatter to influencing elections and public health narratives, their impact is undeniable. However, the consequences are double-edged.

From the positive angle, these platforms democratise information, amplify marginalised voices, and mobilise social action. They are tools for transparency and accountability.

However, they also enable the spread of disinformation, exacerbate polarisation, and provide a stage for malicious actors. Countries like Russia and France, for instance, have accused Paul Durov, the CEO of Telegram of enabling these acts, as his platform has been accused of inadequate policing. On August 24, 2024, Paris police arrested Mr Durov. The charge? He was accused of enabling illegal activities on Telegram including allowing illicit transactions, drug trafficking, fraud, and sharing child sex abuse images.

Navigating the Future

We must examine how tech platform ownership shapes global events. It’s not just about accountability but governance too. Policymakers, civil society, and tech companies must work together to address these challenges:

Regulatory Oversight

Governments must ensure transparency in algorithms and policies without stifling innovation or free speech. Unbridled power can be the undoing of a nation.

Decentralisation

The practicability of this is subject to debate. However, exploring decentralised platforms can reduce the concentration of power in the hands of a few individuals or corporations.

Ethical Leadership

Ownership of tech platforms brings with it so much power. But with great power comes great responsibility. Tech owners and leaders must prioritise society over profit. They must act for the collective good.

The ownership of tech platforms is shaping the modern world in ways that are both inspiring and troubling. As stewards of public discourse, these platforms cannot ignore their societal impact. Achieving a balance between free expression, political neutrality, and ethical responsibility is no small task—but it is one that the future of our global society depends on.