In a world where those in power hunger for more, the European Union has decided that the tech superpowers have had enough, and they must be limited before they can gain too much of a hold over the consumer, but is it too late? Is there truly anything that can be done now? Furthermore, is it a worthy cause? Must we focus on taking the power from the already powerful when people continue to go hungry, when wars wage, when some can\u2019t keep the lights on? Are tech monopolies truly relevant to a world in turmoil?
\nWhat must first be understood is not whether it is necessary to change but whether it is possible to change. How can one restrict a tech monopoly when it already lays claim over the population? In an interview, Famke Jongstra claimed that there are lots of routes that can be used to \u2018minimalize the influence tech monopolies have\u2019. In her workplace, the Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Production, there is work towards protecting the consumers and small companies from tech monopolies, and Jongstra believes that \u201cthey\u2019ve come up with a great number of good ideas\u201d.
\nThe reference to \u2018a great number of good ideas\u2019 brings hope to the possibility of combating big tech companies, however, it must be brought to light whether there is a legal route, for the idea is at risk of breeching free market law. This law simply suggests that the market responds to supply and demand with little to no government intervention. By implementing restrictions, the government therefore is involved and breaking the concept of the free market. Jongstra, when addressing this, admitted \u201cit\u2019s a very complicated issue, and something we struggle with a lot but we look at every rule we have and try to work around it or find loopholes so we can still implement our (ideas)\u201d This suggests that, not only is the free market not entirely free, but governments are capable of restricting them, if the need comes to pass.
\nHowever, even if these restrictions were to be put in place, who can ensure that they would be effective? In a society where tech companies hold the most power in the market, with a history of unethical and not entirely legal practices, can we be ensured that they would follow such regulations? Can we be ensured that the regulations would affect them? Jongstra rightfully observed that \u201cit\u2019s always difficult to know that beforehand, but I think because we are changing legislation on the way that these tech monopolies can behave in the European Union that it will be much more difficult to form a tech monopoly and of course we can\u2019t forbid monopoly, but we can have a lot of influence\u201d. On the delegate\u2019s word we can only hope that this influence is strong enough to regulate a power that seems only to be growing.
\nOn another note, would regulating these tech monopolies even affect the consumer, let alone positively? For, if there is no affect, it is worthless to put the effort and energy into this restriction. According to Jongstra, to restrict the power of the tech monopolies would be to give wider choice and more control into the hands of the consumer. Furthermore, this tech will constantly impact the consumer as their lives revolve around it, and it around them. On the other hand, many consumers may argue they feel no need to change their form of consumption, that this monopoly is more practical because there is no internal debate over this technology. Similarly, many may not want this change simply because they are accustomed to it.
\nFinally, we must question whether, in a time of political turmoil, should our government truly be focussing on the power in tech. Is it relevant to a world in which suffering is constant, not at the hand of power-hungry tech giants, but power-hungry governments and disregarded poverty and pain. Jongstra addressed this question, referencing an early answer: \u201cyes, (it is necessary) because tech monopolies have such a big impact as the average EU citizen, from day to day, is in contact with this technology every moment of their lives.\u201d This suggests that the priority is the masses, the many who interact with technology constantly, and though we do address the suffering, we must also address the issues that all face, to make a fully functional and fair society.
\nOverall, tech monopolies dominate the lives of the population and cannot be allowed to do so anymore as they threaten the freedom of choice of the consumer while enforcing an impact upon them. Therefore, it must be considered that if it is possible to regulate tech monopolies (as has been previously argued) that they must be regulated<\/p>\n
Salma Nassar \u2013 EUobserver<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
In a world where those in power hunger for more, the European Union has decided that the tech superpowers have had enough, and they must be limited before they can gain too much of a hold over the consumer, but is it too late? Is there truly anything that can be done now? Furthermore, is […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6087","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"\n