Big Tech is taking control of the media landscape, with fatal consequences for democracy. We can no longer talk about one of them without talking about the others. Granted, we haven’t been able to do that for quite a while now. What’s new is the concentration of power in the hands of a handful of super-rich people and tech companies.

Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, directly controls X/Twitter, advises the US president, and will hold an influential government office. His companies receive substantial government contracts. This unique combination of economic, political, technological, and media power probably makes him one of the most powerful individuals in history.

Jakob Fugger, who died in 1525, was similarly influential. However, he was a merchant, mining entrepreneur, and banker who didn’t control the printing press. It’s probably hard to find historical figures with influence comparable to Musk’s wealth of power. But Musk isn’t the only tech oligarch: Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon, owns the Washington Post.

In 2017, the paper introduced “Democracy Dies in Darkness” as its official slogan. In 2024, the paper refused to endorse a candidate in the US presidential election – a decision reportedly made by Bezos himself. He has since joined the procession of tech billionaires and executives meeting the new president. Now, there’s nothing fundamentally wrong with tech executives talking to politicians – quite the contrary.

Who is in charge of what?

The question here is: Who is in charge of what? The president has already been forced to declare that Elon Musk won’t be president. There are already tensions between the two, and you can be sure there will be more. Despite strong authoritarian tendencies, Trump isn’t a Putin-style dictator. But is he an ultra-libertarian? Hard to say.

His positions on technology and the media have often changed, and he does not value consistency. Therefore, there is a broad spectrum of possible outcomes for his media and technology policy in his second term of office. We can expect a power struggle, but also a grand coalition between Trump, Big Tech, and the media.

The most important branch of today’s media landscape is what, for lack of a better term, we still refer to as the “social” media — despite the changing nature of the way it is produced. The vast majority of content consumed there is produced by professionals such as influencers, but also by agencies and production companies. Consumption is driven by algorithms controlled by only a handful of tech companies – still with little to no oversight.

The question of who controls the media is crucial for any democracy. First and foremost, the question of media control today concerns technology. Thus, whoever is in charge of tech has a tremendous impact on media and democracy. In a democracy, the media form a public sphere where dissenting voices and conflicting interests come together to debate political issues.

The fourth estate

Political issues can’t be decided simply by looking at the facts and the law. They involve competing and conflicting values that need to be weighed, explicitly or implicitly. The media play an essential role, often referred to as the fourth estate, beyond the legislative, executive and judiciary. The division of power is a key concept of democracy.

This brings us back to the question of who controls the media. Most Western democracies have both public and private media. The overall aim is a degree of pluralism. This is a counter-design to dictatorships and autocracies that strive for complete control of the media.

One of the early hopes and promises of the internet was a new level of pluralism, achieved by opening up a new public sphere where everyone has a voice. This promise hasn’t been fulfilled. The old guard of media tycoons like Rupert Murdoch or Silvio Berlusconi pales in comparison to the likes of Musk, Zuckerberg, or, to a lesser extent, Bezos. Or Trump. Let’s not forget that he also owns a “social” network.

We now have a circle that could be virtuous or vicious, depending on the outcome and your point of view. The Big Tech oligarchy has aligned itself with Trump, partly to get him elected and now to influence his policies. Trump, in turn, plays the tech and media claviature, as he has always done. One can reinforce the other, but things could also fall apart.

A rough ride for democracy

Democracy will change in this new era of tech-dominated media. Zuckerberg’s Meta largely scrapped its content moderation systems. Musk is already spreading his influence to countries beyond the US, and we haven’t yet talked about Russia, or China. For now, the Big Tech oligarchy and Trump may resemble the Russian oligarchy and Putin, but fundamental differences remain.

So far, the system of checks and balances remains in place. We can expect mid-term elections in less than two years and the next presidential election in November 2028. However, there is a slight chance of a third Trump term. The next four years will be a rough ride for US democracy, influenced by the interplay of tech and media entities.

There are oligarchic tendencies in the US, and there is every reason to expect a strengthening of these tendencies. Whatever happens in the US will have a global impact through its unique combination of political, economic, technological and media dominance. Trump is poised to leverage this without much consideration for the impact on others, besides his oligarchic crew. The rules of business and the rules of democracy are blurring, with Musk as an amplifier of authoritarianism:

However, Musk’s disruptive rebellion against liberal democracy is not a barbaric brutalisation. It stems from the radicalised Californian ideology in which technology is supposed to improve the world and liberate the individual. In order to improve the world, Musk wants to destroy socially regulated democracy. The liberated individual is to be defended against the interventionist power of modern statehood.

Musk could be more dangerous than Trump. He does not have to run for election or deal with democratically elected representatives. Given a choice between democracy and tech, he will abandon the former, choose the latter and use his media platform to push his agenda.

Image by Prateek Katyal / Unsplash.