Regulating Big Tech expansionism? Sphere transgressions and the limits of Europe’s digital regulatory strategy

Tamar Sharon, R. Gellert
{"title":"Regulating Big Tech expansionism? Sphere transgressions and the limits of Europe’s digital regulatory strategy","authors":"Tamar Sharon, R. Gellert","doi":"10.1080/1369118x.2023.2246526","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The increasing power of Big Tech is a growing concern for regulators globally. The European Union has positioned itself as a leader in the stride to contain this expansionism; fi rst with the GDPR and recently with a series of proposals including the DMA, the DSA, the AI Act, and others. In this paper we analyse if these instruments su ffi ciently address the risks raised by Big Tech expansionism. We argue that when this phenomenon is understood in terms of ‘ sphere transgressions ’ – i.e., conversions of advantages based on digital expertise into advantages in other spheres of society – Europe ’ s digital regulatory strategy falls short. In particular, seen through the lens of sphere transgressions, Big Tech expansionism raises three risks in addition to well-known privacy and data protection risks, which this regulatory strategy does not properly address. These are: non-equitable returns to the public sector; the reshaping of sectors in line with the interests of technology fi rms; and new dependencies on technology fi rms for the provision of basic goods. Our analysis shows that this mismatch may be inherent to Europe ’ s digital strategy, insofar as it focusses on data protection – while data is not always at stake in sphere transgressions; on political and civil rights – while socio-economic rights may be more at risk; and on fair markets – while the sectors being transgressed into by Big Tech, such as health and education, are not markets that require fairer competition, but societal spheres which need protection from market (and digital) logics.","PeriodicalId":350827,"journal":{"name":"Information, Communication & Society","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Information, Communication & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118x.2023.2246526","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The increasing power of Big Tech is a growing concern for regulators globally. The European Union has positioned itself as a leader in the stride to contain this expansionism; fi rst with the GDPR and recently with a series of proposals including the DMA, the DSA, the AI Act, and others. In this paper we analyse if these instruments su ffi ciently address the risks raised by Big Tech expansionism. We argue that when this phenomenon is understood in terms of ‘ sphere transgressions ’ – i.e., conversions of advantages based on digital expertise into advantages in other spheres of society – Europe ’ s digital regulatory strategy falls short. In particular, seen through the lens of sphere transgressions, Big Tech expansionism raises three risks in addition to well-known privacy and data protection risks, which this regulatory strategy does not properly address. These are: non-equitable returns to the public sector; the reshaping of sectors in line with the interests of technology fi rms; and new dependencies on technology fi rms for the provision of basic goods. Our analysis shows that this mismatch may be inherent to Europe ’ s digital strategy, insofar as it focusses on data protection – while data is not always at stake in sphere transgressions; on political and civil rights – while socio-economic rights may be more at risk; and on fair markets – while the sectors being transgressed into by Big Tech, such as health and education, are not markets that require fairer competition, but societal spheres which need protection from market (and digital) logics.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
监管大型科技公司的扩张?球体违规和欧洲数字监管战略的局限性
大型科技公司日益增强的实力是全球监管机构日益关注的问题。欧盟已将自己定位为遏制这种扩张主义的领导者;首先是GDPR,最近还有一系列提案,包括DMA、DSA、人工智能法案等。在本文中,我们分析了这些工具是否足以解决大科技扩张主义带来的风险。我们认为,当这种现象被理解为“领域越界”时——即,将基于数字专业知识的优势转化为社会其他领域的优势——欧洲的数字监管战略就不足了。特别是,从领域越界的角度来看,除了众所周知的隐私和数据保护风险外,大科技公司的扩张还带来了三大风险,而这一监管战略并没有妥善解决这些风险。它们是:对公共部门的不公平回报;根据科技公司的利益重塑行业;在提供基本商品方面对技术的新依赖。我们的分析表明,这种不匹配可能是欧洲数字战略所固有的,因为它关注的是数据保护——而数据并不总是在领域越界中受到威胁;政治和公民权利——虽然社会经济权利可能面临更大风险;在公平市场上——尽管医疗和教育等被大型科技公司侵占的行业不是需要更公平竞争的市场,而是需要免受市场(和数字)逻辑影响的社会领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Understanding algorithmic recommendations. A qualitative study on children’s algorithm literacy in Switzerland Muslims and social media: A scoping review Second-level agenda-setting effects of news media and public policy on social media discourse across platforms: immigration during the COVID-19 pandemic in the U.S. Automation scenarios: citizen attitudes towards automated decision-making in the public sector Desiloization and its discontents: the politics of data storage in the age of platformization
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1