Suspicious Organizations: Democracy and the Power of Big Tech

What the paper says

Organizations are surrounded by systematic suspicion and exposed to disclosure by activists, journalists, whistleblowers, etc. This reflects an ambiguity in contemporary democracies: that we are profoundly dependent on organizations, yet do not fully trust them. Every day, consequential decisions are made by organizations that operate outside the visibility of lawmakers and administrators. Our suspicion mirrors that condition: The more power organizations have, and the less we think that they are under democratic control, the more suspicious we become of them. This is an old story with deep roots in the modern experience. There are, however, strong reasons to rethink it in the present context of Big Tech and their algorithm-based production. Algorithms have potentially negative democratic implications because they combine a distinct set of characteristics: (a) They increasingly shape sociality and communicative infrastructures; (b) this impact is driven by profit logics, where considerations such as relevance, ethics, balance, and tone become secondary; (c) their effects and operations are surrounded by considerable opacity, secrecy, and inaccessibility and therefore difficult to regulate politically. The article offers a historical-sociological reading of this condition by situating Big Tech in a wider democratic history of suspicion and organizational wrongdoing. To achieve this, it engages sociological thinkers such as Niklas Luhmann, Ulrich Beck, Anthony Giddens, and Jeffrey Alexander. The aim of these discussions is to foster a sensitivity to change and continuity. Such an approach is necessary if we want to capture the full range and depth of Big Tech's democratic implications.