In our current moment, we find the line between the “real” and digital world becoming increasingly blurry. More and more, real, tangible societal outcomes are determined by digital parameters, with little consideration for potential repercussions. The increasing interdependence between the “real” and digital world implies a need to fundamentally question how we conceptualize the structure of our communities and institutions. Throughout history, when we have similarly found ourselves in the midst of this sort of paradigm shift, we return to human rights to anchor our commonly held beliefs. It is for this reason that we must necessarily consider the implications of the digital world on our human rights, at the risk of exploiting the most vulnerable members of our community.
As digital parameters become increasingly important in determining real societal outcomes, it is paramount that we question who and what controls those digital parameters and how that control impacts our human rights. In this document, we seek to manage this relationship, protecting the rights of users while also considering how responsible corporations can implement and support those rights. But before we can determine how corporations fit within the digital rights space, we must first generally understand how both power and corporate power is generally produced.
To systematically consider the role of corporate power in the digital sphere, we employ David Birchall’s framework for characterizing corporate power over human rights (2011). In his analytical framework, Birchall begins by defining power, using the language of Michael Barnett and Raymond Duvall:
“The production, in and through social relations, of effects that shape the capacities of actors to determine their circumstances and fate” -Barnett and Duvall, Power in International Politics
From this, Birchall derives his definition of Corporate Power as follows:
“The production, by business enterprises, in and through social relations, of effects that shape the capacities of individuals to enjoy their human rights.” -Barnett and Duvall, Power in International Politics
From this definition of corporate power, Birchall identifies 4 areas in which this corporate power is specifically produced: the power over individuals, the power over materialities, the power over institutions, and the power over knowledge.
While Birchall’s framework refers to the human rights that are already established in the “real world,” we use Birchall’s framework to consider how these categories and their implied transgressions on human rights shift and transform when transposed onto a digital context.
Birchall defines the power over individuals as: “The power that a corporation has to shape directly the human rights possibilities of individuals”. In essence, this refers to the ability of Corporations to control and affect individual rights, through means like targeting vulnerable individuals or exercising compulsory power over an individual or group. We observe this in various forms in the real world, including labor violations, criminal or tortious wrongs, and privacy violations.
Considering corporate power over individuals in the digital sphere, however, poses the unique challenge of actually defining the individual. Online, an individual person may take many forms through different profiles, accounts, digital fingerprints, and IP addresses. With this in mind, we envision the online individual as anyone who uses the internet, anyone who uses technology for employment, the account owner of a digital profile, and a digital consumer with the right to exercise free will. While this definition may be incomplete, we hope it lays the groundwork for considering the online individual.
Some examples of how the corporate power over individuals may infringe on human rights include:
We believe that each of these examples violate specific human rights either found in the UDHR (Universal Declaration of Human Rights) or proposed in the EDDR (European Declaration of Digital Rights). For example, the control of personal information without user consent, impedes on the Right to Privacy.Or the lack of protection against algorithmic biases infringes on an individual’s Right to Non-Discrimination.
Thus we determined the following set of rights would best protect against the corporate power over the individual:
While we believe these rights would best protect the individual, we believe that our ideas are best used to build a foundation for other groups. Therefore if you would like to learn more about some of the other groups ideas follow these links:
The corporate power over institutions can be defined as, “The mediated power that a corporation has to shape the human rights possibilities of individuals’ through control of or influence over a governance institution”. In essence, this refers to the power that corporations have to control and influence the entities responsible for the formation of our society. Some examples of this power include the ability of corporations to lobby for their own interests, and the ability of corporations to implement public services through the privatization of government contracts.
The power corporations have over institutions is further maintained online. In order to conceptualize institutions in the digital sphere, we consider:
Some examples of how the corporate power over individuals may infringe on human rights include:
We believe that each of these examples violate specific human rights either found in the UDHR (Universal Declaration of Human Rights) or proposed in the EDDR (European Declaration of Digital Rights). For example, privatization of government contracts may impede on the Right to Free-Will,by not allowing users to choose their providers or services to the fullest extent. Or the non-protection against algorithmic biases infringes on an individual’s Right to Non-Discrimination, as seen in our section about the online Individual.
Thus we determined the following set of rights would best protect against the corporate power over Institutions
While we believe these rights would best protect from the corporate power over institutions, we believe that our ideas are best used to build a foundation for other groups. Therefore if you would like to learn more about some of the other groups ideas follow these links:
Corporate power over materialities can be defined as, “The mediated power that a corporation has to shape the human rights possibilities of individuals through control of material conditions or resources’ through control of or influence over a governance institution”. In essence, this refers to the power that corporations have over the material goods and conditions on which human rights rely. Some real life examples of this power would be corporate control over land and finance, or the corporate impact on the environment.
However, the power corporations have over materialities is further extended once we go online. Thus it is important that we define exactly what materialities are under corporate control in the digital sphere. We believe the most significant online materialities under corporate control are:
While most of these materials may present obvious pathways for abuse, some examples of how the corporate power over materialities may infringe on human rights include:
We believe that each of these examples violate specific human rights either found in the UDHR (Universal Declaration of Human Rights) or proposed in the EDDR (European Declaration of Digital Rights). For example, the use of dark patterns may threaten the Right to a Fair Online Environment,by misleading users for corporate gain. Alternatively, Big Tech’s impact on climate change directly threatens a person's Right to a Sustainable Environment, as described in the UDHR.
Thus we determined the following set of rights would best protect against the corporate power over Materialities:
While we believe these rights would best protect from the corporate power over materialities, we believe that our ideas are best used to build a foundation for other groups. Therefore if you would like to learn more about some of the other groups ideas follow these links:
Corporate power over knowledge is defined by Birchall as: “The power that a corporation has to shape knowledge of human rights and the wider epistemic framework in which human rights exist”. In essence, this refers to the corporate control over how human rights are viewed and spoken about in broader discourse. This includes the setting of social norms, the corporate implementation of human rights, and general discourse regarding human rights.
However, the Corporate control over knowledge is even further exacerbated once we go online. We have expanded Birchall’s conception of the corporate power over knowledge to not just include discourse about human rights, but also the general production and dissemination of knowledge. Thus, we have defined knowledge in the digital world as:
Some examples of how the corporate power over knowledge can infringe on human rights include:
We believe that each of these examples violate specific human rights either found in the UDHR (Universal Declaration of Human Rights) or proposed in the EDDR (European Declaration of Digital Rights). For example, the use of bots to maintain pro-corporate values within online discourse violates the Right to a Trustworthy Online Environment, by directly manipulating and misinforming public discourse. There are other countless examples of Big Tech further impeding on the aforementioned Right to a Trustworthy online environment by continuing the flood of misinformation within online discourse.
Thus we determined the following set of rights would best protect against the corporate power over Knowledge:
While we believe these rights would best protect from the corporate power over knowledge, we believe that our ideas are best used to build a foundation for other groups. Therefore if you would like to learn more about some of the other groups ideas follow these links:
While we have outlined various specific rights within the UDHR and EDDR that we believe are relevant to the discussion of Digital Rights and Corporate Power, we further propose the following right to prevent loopholes and overstepping from corporations as we move forward. Thus we propose:
"No person on the internet shall have their digital rights infringed upon by corporate actions, inactions, or through their control over institutions, materials and knowledge."
For the reasons established above, Corporations have the profound ability to influence human rights, both positively, in the realization and implementation of those rights, and negatively, in the violation and restriction of those rights. We believe that the protections and rights afforded to individuals offline should be extended to the digital world, particularly in the context of privacy, property, ecology, education, and expression. To ensure the enjoyment of these rights, we believe that users are entitled to protection from corporate infringement on their rights, and the allocation of corporate resources to implement and support those rights.