Government must tame surveillance capitalism to preserve democratic order and promote a flourishing digital society
By B Sambamurthy
A few decades ago, past data was considered data exhaust to be dumped into a dustbin to save high electronic storage costs. We have travelled a long way since then. Owing to the advances in data science and increasing computational power and declining costs, Gold Dust (powerful insights on users) is discovered from data exhaust. Amit Patel’s work at Google is credited to have led to this discovery of data gold. Actionable and profitable insights are gleaned from digital footprints. As they say, the rest is history.
Google, Meta, Twitter, WhatsApp, Instagram, Apps, IoT, and gadgets etc, have been at the forefront of this digital revolution. Hundreds of thousands of data points, data logs, digital footprints of every individual and groups are spewed into powerful computational factories to build ‘predictive’ products and sell to other companies/organisations for profit in what is called human futures market. This has both brighter and darker implications.
Brighter Side of Big Data
First the brighter side of data sciences. New business and operating models are innovated on the back of data sciences and new computational tools. It has begun well with the noble purpose of improving the quality of service and products. Customer experience took wings with big data analytics aided by ML and AI.
Delivery of services in healthcare, financial services, hospitality, e-commerce etc, has improved significantly. Customer services have become convenient, frictionless, faster, cheaper and somewhat secure. Online and real-time is the mantra. So far so good.
Predictive maintenance, self-healing systems, smart management of resources have improved productivity and efficiency. A perfect describe-predict-prescribe value chain is created.
Dystopian World
Let us now look at the darker side of their operating and business models. When we search Google for information, Google also searches us for information on us – our interests, habits, likes, thoughts, preferences, etc. When we interact with friends and relations on Meta, it extracts information on our likes, dislikes, social and political views of not only ourselves but also others in the group. The same is the case with Twitter and other social media platforms.
When we download an app, we give limited or unlimited access to our contacts, message box, call records and their trackers and cookies follow us relentlessly. These operating models demonstrate that data extraction goes beyond the need to improve service and this is the epicentre of problem and opportunity. This leads to surveillance (done without the awareness of the user) capitalism.
Surveillance Capitalism
Industrial capitalism is appropriation of land, labour, capital and other resources to produce products/services and sell them for profit. Surveillance capitalism is appropriation of user/citizen data and conversion to prediction product without awareness and informed consent of the user, and sell them for profit. This business model is pursued by Big Tech/fintech. They have started selling this data to digital advertisers and it has now extended to other sectors including political campaigns.
Prof Shoshana Zuboff in her International bestseller on Surveillance Capitalism sheds light on their hidden (some call it dark) business models. She detests bringing private experiences into the market for selling and demands regulation of this new sinister form of capitalism. Regulators need to insist on robust and transparent governance models to manage behavioural surplus – the source of potential mischief and misuse.
Anthropological Surveillance
Cambridge Analytica (CA) had taken the surveillance to new depths. It extracted data from multiple sources and segmented people according to personality traits by deploying the OCEAN model (Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism). This model helped them predict what voters might do in an election and then manipulate their sentiments to disfavour or favour a particular party. This model was reportedly used in the 2016 US presidential election with success. Though CA was shut, many countries are deploying this model to manipulate the sentiments of voters. This coupled with fake news and misinformation is known to fracture societies. This is dystopia at its worst.
Also, gadgets and apps are voracious data collectors and artificial intelligence (AI) links them all to build a personal, psychological, social, health, and financial profile both at personal and group levels. Most of it is beyond users’ awareness and is beset with the espionage dimension.
Taming Surveillance Capitalism
Surveillance Capitalism and Data Colonialism if left unchecked can undermine democracy and social stability with consequences for economic progress. The task goes beyond the scope of technologists. We need to blend computational and social and political sciences, particularly several branches of Anthropology like social psychology, philosophy, ethics, citizen rights, behavioural science, linguistics and geography. Tech ethics cannot be different from societal, political and economic ethics.
We need data privacy and protection laws to tame surveillance capitalism without killing innovation. Both the government (state surveillance) and Big Tech need to be governed by the same laws except in matters of national security, while signalling our preference for a market economy.
Information Capitalism
‘If service is free, you are the product’ is a cliché referring to the alleged free service by social media platforms. This is not correct. User data is the raw material for these companies which accumulate this as behavioural surplus and build predictive product and sell the same in ‘human futures market’. This is a barter trade. Gillian Tett in ‘Anthro Vision’ argues that barter is the pillar of the modern tech economy. Economists and antitrust policymakers need to tackle it.
Monopsony
Competition laws based on Bork Principle, ie, price fixing and price manipulation, will not work in a tech barter economy wherein prices are not visible. Laws need to protect all stakeholders. They need to combat the new avatar of monopoly, ie, monopsony (a market with only one buyer). India’s soft launch of protocols-driven ONDC (Open Network for Digital Commerce) is designed to mitigate this risk.
Samaj, Sarkar and Bazar
India has successfully digitised its welfare system at a billion scale. Public good and interoperability underpin India’s public policy model. This policy is powered by technology and not the other way round as in other countries. It helped India’s runaway success of Aadhaar, UPI, CoWIN, DBT, etc, and hopefully ONDC. We need to enhance this model for a secure and flourishing digital society. Our private sector missed 10X product bus, but it is never too late to innovate products.
Politicians need to appreciate that DBT is not a substitute for building social infrastructure in education, healthcare, agriculture, etc. We need laws, regulations and governance models to tame behavioural surplus and surveillance of all kinds. What is at stake is not just the privacy of some odd transaction or meta data, but of personal beliefs, conversations, social, religious and political beliefs and preferences, etc. Purpose limitation, time limitation, consent, etc – an independent authority in the proposed legislation needs to address these issues.
Freedom of expression, open innovation, social and democratic order, national security and consumer/citizen protection must be the guiding principles. Legislation is late but not too late yet.
(The author is former Director and CEO of IDRBT, who has helped set up Data Science Labs in the financial sector, sans surveillance models. bsmurthy123@hotmail.com)