Big Tech’s Negative Impact on Democracy

The internet had great promise: the free and open flow of information (for those with internet access — another issue to address for another time). This free information was delivered by publishers and funded by advertising.

Steadily, Big Tech companies like Google and Meta staged a quiet takeover of the online advertising ecosystem, capitalizing on publishers’ freely-provided content to gain data on their readership and, in turn, use that data to help advertisers find those visitors on other sites instead of the publishers’. Big tech today continues to cash in on this traffic via their advertising walled gardens and networks — and does not provide fair share of those profits with the news organizations whose content made this possible.

Big Tech platforms, while providing unparalleled reach and distribution of news content, have also damaged the financial foundations of news media. The advertising model, once the lifeblood of journalism, has been disrupted with a substantial portion of ad revenues now flowing through tech behemoths. Now, the journalism industry crippled, facing existential challenges, and weakening the industry necessary for a healthy and well-functioning society.

Problem(s)

According to the American Society of Newspaper Editors, in 1990, there was one journalist for every 5,000 Americans; by 2019, this ratio had plummeted to one journalist per 15,000 Americans – a staggering 70% reduction in journalistic coverage. This has created news deserts – communities that are no longer covered by daily or nondaily newspapers. A 2018 study estimated that there are more than 1,000 communities in the U.S. that are considered news deserts. And many more are being covered by newspapers operating with minimal staff.

This drastic shift has left many news organizations scrambling to develop sustainable business models in the digital age.

Furthermore, the algorithms driving Big Tech platforms tend to favor sensational content created quickly, often at the expense of nuanced, in-depth journalism. This leads to an environment where misinformation proliferates rapidly, challenging the public's ability to distinguish between truth and falsehood. Here’s the irony: tech platforms were built on the backs of journalists providing them with content for their users to discover, share and discuss. Yet, as smart as their systems can be, I don’t believe they adequately distinguish and promote professional journalism over misinformation and propaganda.

Note UNC’s data showing the 50% reduction in journalism readers and professionals; aided by Big Tech platforms spreading and extending algorithmic-driven promotion (intended or not) of misinformation, clickbait, propaganda, and falsehoods.

However, the evolving digital landscape, especially the move away from third-party cookies, gives hope for journalism. Media outlets now have the opportunity to forge direct relationships with their audiences, leveraging their content to develop sustainable revenue models. Publishers can better control the data of their users so that advertisers have to engage with them more directly to find customers.

One Approach

The ad industry needs to honor the intent of the regulation and respect the privacy of users, as well as publishers and marketers. The cookie, from the moment it was created, was an ill-equipped mechanism to facilitate a healthy and engaged relationship between two parties. It was never intended to be used as the surveillance mechanism for all internet users.

The right method would be for an independent system -- (possibly open source) governed by a not-for-profit entity that collaborates with publisher associations -- that allow for users to easily and simply engage in the sharing of their private data if they choose to form a relationship with a publisher or choose to consume content from it. The publisher and consumer would retain the right and capability to easily revoke data sharing or permissions at any time should they choose to end the relationship.

There could be multiple levels to which a publisher can gain access to a user’s information, on the user’s own accord. If the first time a user reaches the next level of content consumption via any participating site in this system, they need to share more data.

For example, a user can be on the first level reading a couple of articles for free with no data shared. Then, on the next level, to view five additional pages of content for free, the consumer needs to authenticate that they’re not a bot. Then, to access five more articles, they need give an email address through an ID service. The more content is consumed, the more data a user provides. If the user enters data one time, it should be available to other participating publishers in this system without the need for the user to re-enter information when they visit those sites.

Why Now

Let’s acknowledge the challenges and embrace the opportunities to ensure journalism's continued role as a cornerstone of democracy. The future of journalism hinges largely on its ability to adapt and innovate amidst technological titans, reaffirming its status as the beacon of truth and vehicle of accountability in an increasingly digital world. It will require a commitment from leaders across media, marketing, and civic sectors to collaborate on a sustainable model that ensures open access to quality journalism, news and information for all.

Posted at MediaVillage through the Thought Leadership self-publishing platform.

Click the social buttons to share this story with colleagues and friends.
The opinions expressed here are the author's views and do not necessarily represent the views of MediaVillage.org/MyersBizNet.