Is Tech Hurting American Soft Power?

The Evolving Relationship Between Technology and Global Politics

The TechCrunch Global Affairs Project investigates the increasingly complex connection between the technology industry and international political dynamics.

The Concept of Soft Power

Approximately three decades ago, political scientist Joseph Nye introduced the concept of “soft power,” challenging conventional understandings of national influence. He proposed that nations wield not only “hard” power – encompassing military strength – but also the ability to attract others to their values and ideals.

Soft power, as Nye defined it, is the capacity to achieve desired outcomes through attraction rather than coercion. Nations possessing significant cultural, economic, scientific, and moral influence can leverage these assets to amplify their impact and secure advantages. This encompasses all aspects beyond military force, including cultural exports and influential figures.

American Soft Power and the Rise of Tech

Throughout history, elements like Broadway shows, the achievements of Michael Jordan, prestigious institutions such as Harvard, and popular brands like Starbucks have contributed to America’s standing as a global superpower and a source of soft power. However, in recent times, a substantial portion of American soft power can be directly attributed to its technological innovation.

Leading technology companies – including Amazon, Facebook, and Google – are predominantly American. The widespread adoption of iPhones globally and the reliance of businesses on Microsoft Windows demonstrate this dominance. Furthermore, prominent world leaders, from Narendra Modi to the Pope, utilize platforms like Twitter and Instagram to connect with their audiences.

Essentially, the world’s operating system is largely American. Consequently, a significant portion of the global population interacts with technology rooted in American principles such as free expression, data privacy, respect for diversity, and decentralized systems.

Silicon Valley as a Global Magnet

Silicon Valley serves as a major draw for international talent, with immigrants comprising as much as 40% of the software workforce. Many successful technology companies, including Google, Tesla, and Stripe, were founded by immigrants. During my time at Stanford University, I observed a consistent stream of international delegations eager to understand the factors behind Silicon Valley’s success.

American politicians have rightly highlighted the technology sector as a valuable export. However, a critical question arises: what happens when this sector ceases to be a positive force? Is it possible for soft power to diminish a nation’s influence?

The Dark Side of Technological Influence

The negative consequences of technology are well-documented, including the spread of misinformation in India, the incitement of genocide in Myanmar, and the dissemination of propaganda by ISIS in Britain. European authorities have targeted tech giants like Apple and Google for tax avoidance and privacy violations, while Amazon has faced criticism in Britain for labor practices.

The detrimental effects of technology on children and adolescents are also receiving increased attention. As technology becomes increasingly intertwined with hard power and American dominance relies more heavily on Big Tech, Washington faces a challenge: can it separate the problematic actions of its tech companies from the overall image of the United States?

A Parallel to Climate Change

This situation is reminiscent of the COP26 climate change negotiations. Shouldn’t countries be held accountable for the actions of their energy companies? While a contentious issue, it’s clear that companies like Exxon Mobil no longer enhance America’s reputation and may even be a liability due to the economic costs of climate change.

Unlike oil companies, America’s tech industry isn’t causing a civilizational crisis. Their products are generally considered useful, generate substantial economic activity, and offer positive benefits. For example, iPhones are used to document human rights abuses, which are then shared on YouTube and Facebook.

Responsibility and Accountability

However, when American tech firms contribute to hatred or violence abroad, it reflects negatively on the U.S. If the U.S. intends to benefit from the positive aspects of these companies, it must also accept responsibility for their shortcomings, primarily to protect its own reputation.

The Biden administration is actively collaborating with allies on regulatory measures, and Congress and agencies like the FCC and FTC are preparing to take significant antitrust action. These efforts, along with broader reforms like the global corporate tax agreement, address corporate abuses.

Expanding the Scope of Regulation

While regulatory efforts rightly prioritize protecting American consumers, they should also consider the harm inflicted on individuals abroad. Antitrust investigations could examine tech firms’ monopolies in foreign markets. Regulators might encourage American tech firms to apply the same level of care to serving less affluent foreign markets as they do domestically, starting with enhanced content moderation in multiple languages.

Furthermore, governments should collaborate with tech companies to share intelligence regarding the use – and misuse – of their products. American diplomats could regularly inform tech executives about the real-world impact of their products and encourage policies that minimize harm. Experimentation with external oversight, like Facebook’s Oversight Board, should also be considered.

Proactive Steps and Corporate Responsibility

Tech companies themselves can take proactive steps. LinkedIn, for example, ceased operations in China due to increasing censorship, prioritizing its values over market access. Yahoo also withdrew from China after years of providing user data to authorities. Tech employees should also voice their concerns regarding collaborations with the Pentagon or authoritarian governments.

Tech firms possess considerable power. By allowing undemocratic governments to censor content, spy on dissidents, and restrict access to technology, they risk undermining the very qualities that make American tech so appealing. The self-censorship already practiced by American firms is detrimental, and exporting such technology would be even more damaging.

Tech executives often defend their companies on patriotic grounds. However, the consequences of technological missteps are far more significant than those of an offensive film. Policymakers must emphasize that if American tech firms seek support from Washington, they must demonstrate a commitment to upholding American interests and values. The reputation of the tech industry is inextricably linked to the reputation of the United States.