A new kind of feudal order is taking shape online. U.S. tech giants Google, Amazon, Facebook/Meta, Apple, and Microsoft, commonly known as GAMAMs, control the digital “land” where global commerce and communication happen. In effect, a handful of corporate “lords” own the platforms, infrastructure, and data we depend on. As García (2024) observes, “This new reality has led to a monopolization of cyberspace and a progressive increase in the dominance of big technological companies over modern societies, which has resulted in a new form of economic and political tyranny that degrades and oppresses governments, markets, and society itself ” Today’s digital platforms are like medieval castles: users and businesses are forced to build within their walls (cloud servers, app ecosystems, search engines) or be shut out. Emerging technologies, from Artificial Intelligence to 5G to global cloud networks, risk cementing or upending this digital hierarchy.
By Jefferson T. Koijee, contributing writer
In the digital feudalism system, Big Tech companies act as modern-day lords, and citizens act as their serfs. We rely on their platforms for shopping, socializing, news, and work; they control every step. For example, Google controls over 90 per cent of global search queries; Android powers more than 70 per cent of smartphones worldwide; Amazon Web Services and Microsoft Azure together host over half of all cloud workloads, making governments and firms dependent on a duopoly for critical infrastructure and Facebook’s networks hold the social graph of billions. By owning these “digital fiefdoms,” the giants can dictate terms, shape markets, and penalize rivals (García, 2024).
This new order changes the rules of the global political economy. Tech giants have acquired a status akin to states: researchers describe them as a “digital empire” largely independent of any government, built on monopoly control of technology and data (Gu, 2023). Governments increasingly rely on Big Tech’s services and data analytics to run everything from smart cities to economic policy. In effect, democratic states cede authority to unelected digital “barons.” This dynamic has grown under neoliberal deregulation policies and “move fast” innovation: U.S. antitrust authorities have long encouraged tech giants to expand, only now belatedly trying to claw back power. For decades, Silicon Valley was allowed to amass dominance in everything from online searches to smartphone app stores, a concentration reminiscent of the monopolies that once drew the populist fury of medieval peasants.
Some governments are finally pushing back, but progress is uneven. The European Union has taken bold steps: its 2024 Digital Markets Act (DMA) forces so-called “gatekeeper” platforms to treat rivals fairly and avoid self-preferencing, while the Data Act and GDPR set rules on data sharing and privacy (García, 2024).
These laws aimed to weaken the digital lords much as kings once curtailed rogue feudal nobles. By contrast, U.S. regulators have only recently filed antitrust suits against Amazon, Google, and Apple. Even positive moves like antitrust cases still leave Silicon Valley controlling vital infrastructure worldwide. In 2023, delegates from the Global South at the UN demanded global collaboration and technology transfer to “close the digital divide” and stop data from being a one-way street to the North (United Nations, 2023). Internationally, developing countries argue that the era of digital feudalism calls for something radical: treating data and digital networks as a global public good.
For the average person or country, breaking free of digital feudalism will require bold policies. We need alternatives such as open-source platforms, interoperable networks, and decentralised data storage to give users and smaller nations meaningful choices. Some data should be treated as a public good, with investment in local data centres, digital education, and global rules for governance.
The EU’s model is promising, but global cooperation is essential in this shared digital ecosystem. Governments must fund public digital infrastructure to reduce dependence on tech giants and build a fairer tech landscape. Makanadar (2024) proposes that greater transparency in algorithms, especially for content moderation and recommendations, is key to protecting democracy. Together, these measures provide a roadmap for reclaiming control in an era increasingly dominated by corporate digital powers.
Technology advances in the digital age were meant to distribute information, boost individual rights, and balance the world economy. Conversely, a small number of tech giants have gained near-total control over the web, extracting value and influence from users who do not really have different options and usually end up accepting their circumstances. When big tech firms become more influential, governments face new challenges in protecting their citizens. Attempts by state officials and policymakers to rein in tech companies will play an important role in directing the international political economy’s path.
References
García, S. C. (2024). Datafeudalism: The Domination of Modern Societies by Big Tech Companies. Philosophy & Technology, 37(3). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-024-00777-1
Gu, H. (2023). Data, Big Tech, and the New Concept of Sovereignty. Journal of Chinese Political Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11366-023-09855-1
Makanadar. A. (2024). Digital surveillance capitalism and cities: data, democracy and activism. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03941-2
