On Thursday, 8 Dec 2024, three non-governmental organizations (NGOs) thoroughly examined the data, examining around 4,000 registrations for workshops organized by the European Commission. Earlier this year, sessions were held to assess how effectively big tech businesses were adhering to the Digital Markets Act (DMA), a law designed to stop anti-competitive behavior. Giants like Google’s parent firm Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, ByteDance (which owns TikTok), Meta, and Microsoft are referred to as “gatekeepers” under the DMA, which went into force in March. This implies that businesses must follow guidelines intended to encourage fair competition, such as avoiding giving their items an undue preference within their selection or preventing customers from removing installed programs. It turns out that openness may not be as straightforward as it first appears when it comes to EU-run events that focus on big tech regulation. More than one in five participants in seminars on industry regulation had unreported connections to businesses that may be regulated, according to a new analysis by transparency activists.
Big Tech’s dominance in policy shaping
There is more going on behind the scenes, even if several major giants are being investigated for perhaps breaking these regulations. Apple and Meta have claimed compliance, while Google has made adjustments and is standing by its position. The EU held six workshops, one for each firm, in March to make sure ?businesses complied with the regulations. Researchers discovered that 21% of attendees did not reveal any affiliations to the firms under discussion. Members of the organization came from trade associations, legal firms, lobbying groups, and think tanks, which are frequently for-profit businesses supported by agenda-driven interested parties. The report’s co-author, Margarida Silva, a researcher with the Amsterdam-based NGO Somo, noted the possibility of misuse:
“Public workshops can be a powerful tool to test compliance.”
However, in the absence of stringent guidelines for disclosure and conflict of interest protections, attorneys, lobbyists, and specialists with unreported industry ties might readily appropriate these programs.
Industry efforts to sway EU regulations
The research, which was supported by Germany’s LobbyControl and Brussels’ Corporate Europe Observatory, was released a year after a former EU official pointed out that the tech sector was “insidiously” influencing Brussels’ policy circles. Data from online registration forms, where individuals may voluntarily declare any affiliations, was used by the researchers. They then compared these to open records, business websites, and the transparency registry maintained by the European Commission. The results were shocking. These trainings included representatives from 53 public relations and lobbying businesses. Among them were well-known firms like Flint Europe, which has worked with Amazon, Apple, Alphabet, Meta, and Microsoft, and FleishmanHillard, which is associated with Meta and Amazon.
National vs. EU-level challenges
According to the research, none of the companies separately told participants about their affiliations. In response to researchers, FleishmanHillard mentioned its inclusion on the transparency registry and stated that the firm had participated in the workshops through publicly accessible streams. Although they did not disclose any affiliations, DigitalEurope and the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) were also engaged. A CCIA representative said that its team had made it clear that they represented both “gatekeepers and access seekers,” adding that it maintained transparency about its members in its online publications. DigitalEurope declined to comment. The privately sponsored International Center for Law and Economics (ICLE) was another area of interest. The ICLE’s financial backing from Amazon and Meta was not disclosed by the ICLE official who attended the Amazon session. Later, the ICLE claimed to have just joined the EU’s transparency registry but said it doesn’t provide donor information out of respect for their privacy. A representative for Amazon responded to questions by confirming the company’s involvement with trade groups and think tanks and highlighting how it maintains its entries in the transparency register in compliance with the rules.
Technical barriers to oversight
LobbyControl’s Max Bank compared the situation to “a classic David versus Goliath scenario,” cautioning that the DMA’s anticipated benefits might not materialize in the absence of more robust enforcement.
“Resources are incredibly asymmetric, and it’s very difficult to hear other perspectives,”
expressed Tommaso Valletti, a former head economist at the European Commission. Conflicts of interest and a lack of openness make it difficult to distinguish between advocacy and true expertise, according to Valletti, who was not involved in the study but provided a comment to the researchers.
“If we want a real debate about Europe’s digital future, we need to fix this upfront,”
he stated.
