Comparing the Ownership of Information by Facebook and Google with the Rise of Feudal Nations

The last post was about the power of the information giants, and to elaborate more on the subject, I want to compare these big companies with the birth of nations. This comparison between how tech giants like Facebook and Google own and control information and the rise of feudal nations provides a thought-provoking perspective on power dynamics across different historical contexts.

1. Concentration of Power:
   
   In feudal societies, power was concentrated in a few - the monarchs and feudal lords. They controlled the land, which was the primary means of production and source of wealth.
   
   Similarly, Facebook and Google control vast amounts of information, which, in the digital age, is akin to the land in feudal times. This concentration of control over a critical resource (news) places immense power in the hands of these corporations.
   
   
2. Dependence and Control:
   
   Feudal serfs depended on the lords to cultivate the land, which bound them to the ground and subjected them to the lords' control.
   
   In the modern digital landscape, users and businesses find themselves in a dependent relationship with platforms like Facebook and Google. Users rely on these platforms for information, communication, and social networking, while enterprises depend on them for digital visibility and advertising.
   
   
3. Governance and Autonomy:
   
   Feudal lords had significant autonomy and governed their lands and serfs, often with little interference from higher authorities.
   
   Tech giants govern their platforms and set the rules for their use. They have the autonomy to decide algorithmic outcomes, data usage policies, and the nature of promoted or demoted content.
   
   
4. Economic System:
   
   Feudalism was characterised by an economic system where the wealth was generated primarily through agriculture and controlled by the land-owning elite.
   
   In the digital economy, wealth is generated through controlling and monetising information. Facebook and Google, through their advertising models, demonstrate how control over data can be directly translated into economic power.
   
   
5. Societal Impact:
   
   Feudal societies were stratified, and mobility was limited. The power dynamics reinforced the status quo and often inhibited significant social change.
   
   The dominance of Facebook and Google can lead to a form of digital stratification, where a few control access to information and digital visibility. This could reinforce existing social and economic disparities.
   
   
6. Challenge to Sovereignty:
   
   Feudal lords sometimes challenged the king's authority, creating fragmented sovereignties within a nation.
   
   The immense power of tech giants can challenge governmental control and regulation, leading to a scenario where these corporations can operate with a high degree of independence from state governance.

In conclusion, the comparison reveals that just as the control of land defined power structures in feudal times, the rule of information describes them in the digital age. While the contexts are vastly different, the underlying principle of power concentration and its implications for society and governance bear striking similarities. This analogy underscores the need to carefully consider how information, as a modern means of production, is controlled and regulated to ensure fair and equitable societal outcomes.