Centrality and power. The struggle over the techno‐political configuration of the Internet and the global digital order

Abstract

In recent years, various governments have been trying to subordinate the Internet to the system of the Westphalian state order. This article seeks to add a new layer to the analysis of this conflict over state sovereignty and the global digital order. It draws on network theory as an alternative analytical lens to study the reconfiguration of power relations that define the Internet as a technical, social and economic network, and its governance. We review key conflicts and developments that shaped the Internet's history, from the Internet exceptionalists' visions in the 1990s to states' recent pursuits of digital sovereignty and trace how states, as well as private companies, seek to fundamentally reconfigure the dominant logic of the Internet and its sub‐networks to expand and institutionalise their power position. We thus highlight a deeper layer of conflict: the current struggles over the techno‐political configuration of the Internet are not only influenced by the conflict between liberal and authoritarian visions of the Internet; they are also the result of continuous tensions between processes of centralisation and decentralisation of the Internet's technical foundations and its governance. As an effect of these dynamics, we currently witness a pluralisation of power while, at the same time, new points of centralised control emerge.

Global rural health disparities in Alzheimer's disease and related dementias: State of the science

“…Approximately 3.7 billion of the world's population have no access to the internet, particularly those in LMICs 146 . The cost to build digital infrastructure can be prohibitive 147 . The COVID‐19–associated lockdowns in many countries forced the ADRD research field to confront many of the isolation challenges that also plague the approach of rural areas to ADRD diagnosis, treatment and care, and engagement in research 148 .…”

“…146 The cost to build digital infrastructure can be prohibitive. 147 The COVID-19-associated lockdowns in many countries forced the ADRD research field to confront many of the isolation challenges that also plague the approach of rural areas to ADRD diagnosis, treatment and care, and engagement in research. 148 To address the need for remote clinical assessment, virtual visits, and remote data collection, the field is investing in the development of remote tools and assessments that will generate clinical and neuropsychological data from the participant's home.…”

Crowdfunding platforms as conduits for ideological struggle and extremism: On the need for greater regulation and digital constitutionalism

“…By building alternative infrastructures the overarching aim is to resist any future interference, leaving the state with no recourse to intervene. Broadly, such aims reflect techno-political struggles not between 'liberal' and 'authoritarian' visions, but rather centralization v. decentralization of the Internet's infrastructural foundations and governance (Pohle & Voelsen, 2022).…”

Support for misinformation regulation on social media: It is the perceived harm of misinformation that matters, not the perceived amount

“…Even though this can be very difficult in practice, governmental regulation can theoretically break up the black boxes of social media platforms. Governmental regulation can, for example, better ensure that platforms are not continuing to spread a claim determined as false than self-regulation might, because it might be more in line with platforms' business model of selling attention to content to show the false claim than showing people fact-checks (Pohle & Voelsen, 2022). Toward that end, Germany implemented its Network Enforcement Law in 2017.…”