Recoding the system: how we can counter the Big Tech Lobby Playbook

Big Tech’s lobbying, which has gone largely unchecked for more than a decade, has resulted in a handful of companies having enormous market power. Their monopolisation of key communication infrastructure has made them a fundamental part of the everyday life of billions of people, giving them leverage over political processes. The success of their lobby playbook allows these companies to rewrite the democratic rulebook so that the public interest always comes second to corporate profit.

Yet we also see a few important instances where governments and civil society have succeeded in pushing back, and the corporate giants were – at least temporarily – defeated. Such examples can offer important lessons for those seeking to make technology giants democratically accountable.

Taking power back from these corporate giants will not be easy. Disrupting their global lobby playbook is vital to begin resetting the system. The cases in this series point to some of the ways in which civil society and public interest groups can fight back. By learning from each other’s experiences, we can turn scattered fights into a shared, transnational struggle to reclaim democratic control over our digital future.

Drawing on the lessons from the six case studies, we propose an initial set of counter-strategies. They are “initial” because the antidote to Big Tech influence must be a dynamic and creative set of strategies. A static approach will not work. Actions that confront its narrative and amplification power must be accompanied by bolder and more far-reaching initiatives.

Counter-strategy #1:
Expose the influence machine

Lobbying works best when it flies under the radar. That is why it has always been a secretive activity. Politicians know they risk the ire of voters if they are seen to be co-opted or captured by big business interests. Exposing the lobbying tactics of Big Tech, not just in general, but specifically, helps to neutralise their power.

Lobbying is a game of call and response. It only works if those who make laws and policies listen. We need to pay more attention to this side of the equation because, as the case studies show, many, many lawmakers are listening to the Big Tech lobby machine. Policymakers need to be far more aware and far more critical, knowing they will be called out if they act on the deluge of self-interested Big Tech propaganda. By clearly exposing Big Tech’s tactics and strategies, we can put policymakers on notice and demand they are accountable for what they listen to, what they allow to influence them, and whose dais they sit on.

Civil society across Kenya, India, Brazil, Australia, the EU, and the US is already connecting the dots by documenting Big Tech’s lobbying activities. In Brazil, researchers exposed(opens in new window) Big Tech’s weaponisation of its platforms as it was happening. In Europe, civil society investigations(opens in new window) traced the money behind studies from economic consultancies, exposing them as paid extensions of Big Tech’s lobbying. These investigations put a spotlight on how Big Tech lobbying really works.

Exposing how companies influence our politicians and officials is powerful because it is something most people know is harmful for the majority. Being clear on how the Big Tech lobby machine works and who is falling for its self-servicing tactics can help reclaim some democratic spaces.

Counter-strategy #2:
Reveal hidden ties

Funding from Big Tech to third parties like non-governmental organisations, think-tanks, and research bodies should be socially and politically rejected, not normalised. The practice of astroturfing is especially toxic to policymaking, and Big Tech firms need to be forced to stop using it through public pressure and transparency and integrity regulations. At the EU level, for instance, following media and civil society exposés, members of the European Parliament lodged official complaints(opens in new window) against Amazon, Google, and Meta and entities they funded for astroturfing and shady lobbying.

Softer forms of influence must at the very least be made transparent. Individuals and organisations – including business and trade associations, consultancies, research bodies – must disclose their funding, affiliations, and conflicts of interest when publishing studies or research and when participating in policy discussions. Such disclosure must be proactive, specific, and accessible. Separately, Big Tech firms must also proactively disclose all entities they fund across the world – not just in the US and the EU. These disclosures must be sufficient to allow policymakers, journalists and members of the public to clearly identify and challenge Big Tech influence.

Counter-strategy #3:
Reclaim the narrative

Civil society has become more strategic in countering the public narrative of Big Tech. Connecting the negative impacts of Big Tech’s products – privacy violations, disinformation, automatic discrimination, child endangerment, worker precarity, small business exploitation – to the companies’ business model and market domination strategy. It has also been crucial to be clear that this small number of billionaires and companies are guided by self-interest, which is often at odds with the best interests of the wider public.

In Brazil, for instance, the Digital Child Protection Law advanced quickly once the debate focused on platforms profiting from content that sexualised children, rather than on abstract debate over online speech. In Kenya, workers partnered with journalists to document the real-life impacts of Big Tech business models. And then made sure they were heard by organising national strikes.

Powerful communication is vital. Evidence must reach people in compelling ways, and it must keep coming. Big Tech’s communications power means its story is told all the time. We must do the same.

Counter-strategy #4:
Strike back in courtrooms

Across many of the case studies, Big Tech used the law to obstruct the implementation of regulations. Still, the law and courts were also a bulwark, holding Big Tech back, challenging its excesses, and giving the voices of resistance a platform that was not controlled by algorithms.

An important lesson comes from Kenya, where tech workers and their lawyers have filed a constitutional challenge to the political process that led to a law tailored to corporate interests.

Strategic litigation can be a powerful tool to counter the Big Tech Lobby Playbook. It is more effective when coordinated. Lawsuits across dozens of jurisdictions confront the same issues over and over, but too often the victories (and losses) are isolated. Jurists and activists can leverage the cumulative legal battles to tell a David and Goliath story.

Counter-strategy #5:
Rally the many to resist the few

The power of Big Tech is huge, but it is concentrated in just a handful of companies and billionaires. We need to counter this power by working in broad coalitions with old and new allies. We do not have their money, but we have a potentially global network of activists who can fight back with conviction. Big Tech’s lobbying harms communities and causes as varied as climate, children’s rights, access to healthcare, mining, labour rights, small businesses, and creative livelihoods, to name just a few. Their products amplify discrimination, provoke racism, misogyny, and hate speech. They poison politics. Do the activist constituencies working on all of these and many other issues unite to confront what threatens us all? Not yet, but civil society can build those alliances, tell a shared story and match their wealth with waves of activism.

Coalitions need time and energy to build, as well as flexibility. We do not need to agree on all the details; only that Big Tech lobbying is a serious obstacle to protecting the things we care about.

Counter-strategy #6:
Connect policymakers under siege

Lobbying works on lawmakers. And while some are capitulating, others are simply overwhelmed by the avalanche of data and pressure. Do the policymakers in Australia who faced Meta’s big shutdown talk to the authorities in Brazil who confronted Google over its weaponisation of the platform in an effort to derail the Fake News Law? As US trade pressure is simultaneously being levelled against digital regulations in Brazil, South Korea, India, Canada, and the EU, it is especially crucial to develop a coordinated response. Parliamentarians and policy officials whose efforts to shape law in the public interest are frustrated by Big Tech’s ceaseless lobbying. They need to find one another and build solidarity. They can share ideas and experiences. Once politicians and policymakers see that they are subjected to the same attacks, there is potential for collaborative pushback.

Of course, not all politicians and policymakers see Big Tech lobbying as a problem, but some do. We need to find them and work with them. For the rest, Counter-strategy #1 is designed to force those whose job it is to act in the public interest to take responsibility for what they allow themselves to be swayed by.

Counter-strategy #7:
Make it unlawful to weaponise their own platforms

Big Tech companies should never be able to weaponise their massive communication platform to manipulate the public. The weaponisation of their platforms to stop a law or regulation is a simple choice, and one they make.

The action of Brazil’s(opens in new window) National Consumer Secretariat, which set a fine of BRL 1 million (EUR 159,000) per hour, if Google did not remove misleading lobbying messages attacking PL 2630 (the so-called “Fake News Bill”) should be an inspiration to lawmakers everywhere. Google was not happy, and denied wrongdoing, but the company complied. Brazil’s Supreme Court(opens in new window) also ordered Google, Meta, and Spotify to remove coordinated ads and content attacking the law, under threat of fines.

Perhaps the most significant lesson from the Brazil case is that Big Tech’s control of dominant information platforms grants it special political power. Following the intense corporate campaign against the Fake News Bill, civil society lodged complaints with the competition authority against Google and Meta for abusing market power, recasting the tech giants’ behaviour as unlawful manipulation, not just political lobbying.

Civil society needs to build on this experience to ensure that market regulators (including competition, digital services, consumer and data protection) are pressured to act boldly to unwind this power. Learning from Brazil’s experience and ensuring it is widely shared can help catalyse cross-jurisdictional action and campaigns to counter one of Big Tech’s most coercive and damaging lobbying tactics.

Counter-strategy #8:
Seize the moment

The pushback against Big Tech lobbying must be agile and responsive (but not always reactive). When opportunities arise, we must be able and willing to seize the moment. We must not allow ourselves to be distracted or to lose popular or political momentum.

The Digital Child Protection Law in Brazil is a good example of how a moment was seized quickly, giving the tech giants no time to spin the discussion. In August 2025, a viral video(opens in new window) exposed how Big Tech platforms were hosting, amplifying, and monetising content that sexualised and endangered children. A draft law that had been slowly making its way through the process for years came to the fore. Although the lobbying machinery went into immediate action, the ability of a broad range of civil society groups to sustain momentum ensured that it passed within a month.

Seizing moments and not allowing the Big Tech Lobby Machine time to work can be a critical tactic.