 Welcome again, everyone. Let's talk about politics and governance. Let's look today at the relationship between publicness and big tech companies. To talk about this topic, I have invited Tobias Liebetrau to explain to us how big tech companies are increasingly playing a role in mediating disputes over societal problems, delivering social goods, rearticulating public-profit relationships, etc. And so what Tobias will show in our conversation is how big tech companies are playing this important role in public life and that we need as a society to develop new ways to understand, to regulate their activities. So we'll be looking at how should we ensure that these companies are accountable to the public and that they do not abuse their power. And now we can create spaces where people can debate, discuss important issues, even when these issues are complex and technical. So let's jump into it. Tobias, welcome to our episode. Thank you, Rodrigo, and thank you for inviting me. Sure. Tobias, big tech companies, as I said, are becoming more and more powerful in the world and this is having a big impact on how we are governed as a whole. So I assume this is why you found the topic relevant to be studied. Yes, that was definitely the major reason. And I mean, I think that there are perhaps three reasons for why this is important. And the first actually is taking a step back even from the big tech companies and saying publics outside the state or global international publics. What does that even entail? What does it mean? And I think to me that's important because publics, they are fundamental in terms of democracy, in terms of authority, in terms of responsibility and legitimacy. So sort of the concept in itself is at the foundation of society and the way we have organized our societies. So second, as you said, there's also something to the big tech and the nexus between publicness and big tech companies. And that is increasingly important because big tech companies, too, as you said, mediate disputes over societal problems. They increasingly deliver societal goods. One is security, as we examine in this particular piece, and they rearticulate public private relations. And thirdly, as I said, in the context of our specific study, it's a study on Microsoft and cyber security. So identifying relevant publics, in this case, is pivotal to delineate both authority, legitimacy and responsibility in relation to security. So it spurs us to engage with questions of who is responsible for what and to whom when it comes to security politics. Sure. And you mentioned, let's follow up on this. So you mentioned in your article with your co-author, Linda Monzis, you write that you are drawing on, but also extending insights from this literature to examine, as you said, the nexus between publics and private companies in international politics. What can you tell us about previous research and how does yours fit here? Well, I would say that in general, the research on publics has been tied to the nation state, first of all, perhaps naturally, and then to international organizations as a way to sort of expand the field of research. And we wanted to add private companies to sort of a third angle to the study of the public and to explore what role private companies play in creating publicness. And in doing so, I think we draw on it and speak to research in international politics and the role of private companies. And their role has been studied in terms of global governance more broadly, in terms of security, and of course also in terms of corporate power of big tech. So the article also speaks to work that has been done in related fields where we have seen concepts such as surveillance capitalism, data capitalism, internet industry complex, to sort of conceptualize and specify the role of big tech and I see our piece as building on that, but for advancing the particular literature on publics. You have fed us some curiosity, so let us know about the key findings and conclusions of your article. Well, I think one of the major findings is actually that we need to conceptualize and we need new ways to think about the political and democratic role of the public because of this new role of big tech companies, because big tech companies deliver societal goods to an extent that we have rarely seen private companies do, and they in many ways are the drivers of also articulating what are public problems. And the related problem is that big tech companies and their practices do not necessarily align with our traditional idea of thinking national politics, democracy, security. So this forces us to pay more attention to the diverse role in which publics are enacted and the way they matter today. And again, in our case, we demonstrate how Microsoft problematize and counter malevolent state-led cyber activities. Microsoft is questioning the state as a protector of the citizen and proposing new governance measures. So in general, sort of saying, well, we have this idea as the guarantor of security, but perhaps it's increasingly becoming the private sector. So there's a rearticulation of public-private relations and we thereby see the emergence of a new subject for whom security is not solely the right of the citizen secured by the state, but also a customer service provided by a service agreement by a private company. And from a democratic perspective, this can be problematic since the erosion of the role of the state as the provider of security somehow clashes with the right of the citizen to claim protection against outside threats. So this is not sort of an easy possible to be solved. There is something paradoxical in big tech companies, in our case Microsoft, doing something to enhance the security of at least their customers and being the first responders, being actually the ones that counter malevolent state-led cyber activities. But on the other hand, this might undermine some of our democratic rights that comes with it being a citizen. So you mentioned empowering the different publics, this activity of Microsoft. Makes me wonder about potential policy implications. What can you tell us about that? Well, I think that there are quite a few policy implications in terms of how we structure this public-private relationship in terms of the degree to which we need more public regulation or the extent to which we can build some kind of partnerships that functions mainly through the government of the state facilitating collaboration, through priming self-regulation in the private sector. So that's sort of on the broader policy side. On a more day-to-day basis, I think that the study can sort of transit into our reliance on big tech and how they act with authority, legitimacy and responsibility or not vis-a-vis our individual lives and sort of the impact they have on our everyday lives, being it when we are on our phones or using software or whatever, that we are increasing the dependent on big tech companies and thereby they do govern somehow to some extent, but perhaps without enough sort of oversight and regulation. Of course. So we have looking at the core of the research, the what, the so what, the value, the contribution of your research. Let's look at the now what. So can you indicate the researchers out there what comes next? Maybe analyzing more companies, which is this third agent after national states and international organizations. So what's what's now ahead of us? Well, I think that that sort of study can be sort of expanded empirically by by looking at other ways big tech rearticulate private relations and provide other forms of societal goods than security because security is particular because that is the result of the state. I mean, that is sort of the foundation or the core of the way we have structured society and the state. But I also think that a valuable case to explore this further that would align more with our study and to keep the security angle would be the one Ukraine and to study the role of big tech there and see how they have played a role in supporting Ukraine. I mean, they have been key players. Microsoft, Amazon, migrated the clouds in Ukraine, the public crowd. And they did that without being told to do so. I mean, they did it. So out of free will and out of virtue. And we have seen also styling, playing a role in providing internet, but also in Elon Musk, sometimes threatening, taking it away and talents here providing some kind of data analysis. So we see a bunch of these companies playing a pivotal role in the one Ukraine. And of course, that might be a very good thing. And we might be happy that they support the country that we at least in the West also support. But again, it also comes with some implications and some caveats in terms of the future and in terms of democracy. And can we always better these companies sort of doing what we in the West think is the best and acting morally, ethically in the way that we might benefit from and that we find is the right one? Of course, yeah. Is there to complement these that you said, are there any materials that you'd like to share with us to explore this relation between publicness and big tech companies? Well, I think that one place to start is, of course, to take a look at the special issue that this article is a part of to explore sort of brought up how public shape international and global politics and shape by it. And then I would say that I don't want to point to one specific publication, but I want to sort of recommend listeners to orient themselves broadly when it comes to the role of big tech companies. Because I think that political science and international relations offer many greats and quite diverse perspectives. But I think we also need to look into media studies, communication studies, science and technology studies to sort of get an overview or actually understand what like how broader role these companies play and what sort of role they play and how they do it to actually get to their actual power and how we might in the future sort of rein that in a better way. A recommendation of more than specific materials. Yes. Let's wrap this episode up. You've been very strict to the point. But I would like to close this episode with a punchline. So if there is anything you want our audience to remember about this talk, what would it be? Well, that would be that the increasing impact of big tech companies to mediate disputes over societal problems, deliver societal goods and rearticulate public-private relations really forces us to revisit and re-problematize both the practices of big tech, but also the vocabulary that we deploy to grasp what big tech is doing. Straight to the point Tobias, it was a pleasure. Thank you. To our viewers and listeners, if you are on YouTube, you can find all the resources, all the materials of this conversation, not only the article that this conversation was based on, but also the thematic issue that Tobias mentioned. You can find everything on the Let's Talk About Politics and Governance website. And you can also listen to this episode alternatively wherever you get your podcast. There's also a newsletter you can subscribe and follow us on Twitter at Kojitatiu LTA.