Big Tech’s foothold on the midterms was bigger than we thought

As we all know, technology plays a huge role in shaping the economy, shaping culture, and shaping government from the local to the national level. This means that tech has a huge impact on our vision of the world we want as well as on our fight to build the power to get there. Tech is an accelerant on almost every issue, although we typically see its effect in silos, such as increased surveillance capacity or as a problem of content moderation, rather than as manifestations of a privately governed infrastructure. 

If our understanding of technology is siloed, we are missing the forest for the trees. We need to understand the internet as a realm instead of as a set of digital tools. In this piece, we break down how tech set the stage for the 2022 elections and what the outcomes of the elections mean.

(In part 2, we’ll talk about how we can reorganize tech to work for us.)

Tech sets the stage 

Make no mistake: the tech giants are setting the terms for our democratic discourse because of their unfettered control over the internet. Social platforms are not reluctant to moderate content; in fact, they encourage the spread of disinformation because they profit from it. In the case of Twitter, for example, Elon Musk has fired most of the people responsible for content moderation and is committed to that stance.

Long before the 2022 candidates wrote their talking points, the electoral terrain was being influenced by the internet. While the internet isn’t the only place where political actors sow propaganda, social media platforms greatly accelerate the reach of these propaganda campaigns, setting the stage for democratic debate by defining what voters see as key issues, which is what candidates focus on.

Some of the most dangerous campaigns that voters encountered this year—the sharp increase in anti-trans legislation, sweeping bans on books discussing gender, sex education, and race—also dominated the discourse in midterms races because the current design of the internet facilitates the spread of propaganda and hate speech.

Ultimately, the influence of tech on the midterms distracted many voters and candidates from some of the real issues that affect poor and working class communities, such as dealing with the economic and mental health crises resulting from the pandemic. 

Tech companies profit from disinformation

Candidates denying the outcome of the 2020 presidential elections appeared on the ballot in 48 states in the midterm elections – totalling over 350 candidates between races for the U.S. House and Senate and for the statewide offices of governor, secretary of state, and attorney general. 

While former President Trump made “Stop the Steal” a rallying cry for his supporters, the movement was built online; the January 6th insurrection was organized on Facebook in late 2020. And while voters in competitive districts overwhelmingly rejected election denier candidates this year, the majority of those who ran in safe seats won.

It has been clear for at least a year that the competitive races in the 2022 midterms would have huge ramifications for the future of American democracy. But even though the 2020 platform strategies to stop disinformation weren’t expansive enough, as dangerous conspiracies like “Stop the Steal” and QAnon spread quickly after the 2020 elections, social media platforms made no updates to their playbooks for 2022. Despite their promises to take disinformation seriously, revenue for social media companies is almost entirely made up of ad money, meaning that their business model incentivizes disinformation, because more disinformation means more traffic and more user engagement.

Thus, the promise to take disinformation seriously was largely hollow: Facebook had already dismantled the specialty team that they had assembled for the 2020 elections, Twitter was embroiled in the Elon Musk acquisition battle, and election disinformation videos went almost entirely unmoderated by TikTok. 

The expectation that tech companies will regulate themselves is unique to this sector. While corporations in other industries are often forced to recall products or provide (additional) warning labels, tech companies big and small operate with an impunity that is reinforced by a lack of regulation and the expectation that we as consumers won’t be able to push back.

Tech’s money shows their real priorities

In response to prescient warnings about the role of social media in advancing threats to democracy, the tech platforms largely did nothing. But it’s a mistake to think they aren’t interested in influencing politics. Instead, they use their platforms and their money to attack anti-monopoly legislation.

In fact, by August the tech industry had for the first time spent more money on political ads than the pharmaceutical industry. Advocacy groups funded by major tech companies spent almost $120 million on political ads in 2022, in addition to $90 million on lobbying efforts, almost entirely focused on fighting anti-monopoly legislation like Senator Amy Klobuchar’s (D-MN) “American Innovation and Choice Act.”

These companies have enough money to make sure that they influence policy regardless of who is elected. In this way, they behave like other corporate actors with enough money to influence outcomes—except that these other companies don’t control an entire realm where information and surveillance are the drivers and where there is virtually no regulation.

We need governance to include the digital realm

Tech’s unprecedented capacity to control the landscape and lobby for influence amounts to a massive bait-and-switch: dealing with disinformation keeps us from the bigger fight for co-governance of tech and the internet. 

When voters get a say, it is clear that we see the internet as a utility critical to contemporary public life. In Alabama and New Mexico, for example, voters easily passed state constitutional amendments to allow public funds to be spent on expanding broadband infrastructure. And in Montana, voters leaped at the chance to expand protections against public surveillance: more than 80% voted to protect electronic communications and data from law enforcement seizure without a warrant. 

We only have to look at Elon Musk’s purchase and privatization of Twitter to see how urgent the need for tech governance is. Musk has used his unilateral power to gut Twitter’s staff, reinstate dangerous accounts, and support the spike in disinformation as evidence of the power of “free speech,” while at the same time shutting down accounts by journalists critical of him or his actions.

Tech is not just a tool 

Tech serves to accelerate both challenges and shifts on every issue. If we want tech to work for all, we must expand our analysis beyond needing tech regulation. What we need when we talk about governance is to recognize that it must include governance of the internet. As we fight to win on issues, we must also fight the tech companies.

Our lives are shaped by tech, but tech is not neutral. When we recognize the scope of the power that tech has, we can begin to reorganize tech to work for us.

In Part 2: What will it take to put controlling tech at the center of our country’s political conversation?