A replay of this conversation is here.
Our expert panel shared their viewpoints about Internet business models and ideas of fair and equitable growth.
Lili Gangas set context for this critical conversation about new models and new governance for the tech sector because of its importance to the overall economy. Employing millions of workers, this sector pays well and is creating a large part of the wealth and economic engine in the US and in other countries.
Yet we also see downsides, including the under investment in capital deployment l to under-repesented entrepreneurs, facial recognition bias and the impact that has on policing surveillance, and a lot of the mis- and disinformation that we continue to see in our everyday conversations through some of these platforms. Many of these issues are systemic and their harms are felt very disproportionately, depending on who you are. Especially when we look at the impacts of technology from a racial justice perspective.
We need to question how we move forward and the key problems that we need to tackle. How did we get here? Where do we go forward? Especially what are the key problems that we need to tackle?
Siavash Alamouti: Engineers decided to pay for services like search and social media with ads. The byproduct is that data brokers take our data, resell it in the market and push more ads, or rely on a two-sided business model where they become a connector between people who want to buy and those who want to sell. The data selling models have been disastrous because they focus on getting eyeballs by showing information that will keep people on the site. This leads to the extreme getting more extreme. This drives teen suicides, polarization, attraction to ISIS other negative outcomes. The two-sided models are replacing efficient industries, such as taxis, with unprofitable monopoly businesses. In fact, ride costs have risen by 92% and labor issues abound in the taxi market. We need to consider business what the business model is for any new technology before we get engaged.
Fran Berman: We have not necessarily gone wrong, but we have not gone right. Innovation lives in the private sector and business models are built around making profits. A lot of the digital technologies that started out as private sector business models are now critical infrastructure. During the pandemic, we did everything on zoom, for example. That infrastructure is not supported or protected as public infrastructure is. It is the public sector’s job to support the public interest. Public infrastructure should be safe and non-exploitive, even to the exclusion of being innovative. When public infrastructure lives in the private sector, it is subject to profit motive. We need other public infrastructure models like public broadcasting, but we do not have those analogs in social media or other parts of the digital world. To think differently, higher ed needs to teach tech literacy, social responsibility and soft skills to help make the world a better place.
Dawn Song: We have huge problems in this area. Data is a key driver for the modern economy and its importance will only increase. A lot of this data is very sensitive. Users have lost control of their data and how it is used. Even if data has been anonymized, that is not sufficient to protect user privacy. Businesses are building very detailed profiles about consumers and monetizing them. Businesses are also having a difficult time. They are grappling with scale data breaches and a lot of valuable data is lost in data silos due to privacy concerns. These issues will only get worse over time. It is not too late to fix the issue, but we really need to act now. We have an urgent need for a framework to build a responsible data economy. This framework has three key principles 1) establish and enforce data rights, 2) enable fair distribution of value from data and 3) ensure efficient data use to maximize social welfare and economic efficiency. We need three key components for this framework: 1) technical solutions 2) business incentives 3) legal frameworks – GDPR is just a start.
Ian Veidenheimer: I focus on the business models and physical infrastructure of the network, such as broadband. There is simply not enough broadband in the US. The business model relies on making money from selling services to end users and end users have different margins. Costs are prohibitive in rural areas and public housing. Until recently, the federal government was not willing to subsidize broadband infrastructure. There is also a lack of market competition among providers. This leads us to estimates that 20-120M people do not have access to broadband. Fortunately the government is investing $65B in broadband infrastructure though the true cost to bridge the digital divide is estimated to be $200B. We’ll need public / private partnerships with help from philanthropies to build the new public infrastructure.
Madisen Obiedo: At Welcome Tech, we serve the latinx immigrant community with a focus on people of Mexican descent. The digital divide is very real among our 4M users, who are calling to get access to broadband for their kids to attend school. About 60% of our user base is Spanish dominant and 30% do not have connectivity. We provide a concierge and wrap around services to support this community that has been purposely excluded from the connected world. For example, we have a program called ACP Para Me to help customers get home wifi. Welcome Tech needs to be good stewards of our customers’ data and make services usable for them.
Panelists went on to discuss strategies and models that are working and that we need more of, how to bring missing voices into the room and calls to action for investors. Click here for a replay of this fascinating conversation.
