What does it actually take for alternatives to big tech offerings to prevail – and remain different? Aline Blankertz and Svea Windwehr have investigated this question in the TechREG Chronicle of Competition Policy International. They look at alternatives that are characterised by different governance approaches, such as being non-profit and/or open, free, decentralized and community-based. They note that strengthening alternatives, and in particular alternative governance models, must take into account the dynamic effects in a digital ecosystem characterised by powerful ad-funded platforms. This means that strengthening alternatives alone is not enough to break the dominance of big tech governance models, but this dominance must be contained at the same time to make room for real alternatives.
The article shows in detail:
1) how interoperability between microblogging platforms Threads (by Meta) and Mastodon (a non-profit service running on a federated open-source protocol) can foster competition, but also carries the risk of converging governance, e.g. in terms of content moderation and privacy practices;
2) how the openness of the online encyclopedia Wikipedia allows Google Search to appropriate most of the value created by its vertical interaction, and how the Wikimedia Foundation is trying to reduce this imbalance;
3) what types of interventions might be appropriate to support alternatives without motivating them to emulate big tech models, such as asymmetric interoperability, digital taxes and stronger regulatory restrictions on commercial platforms.
The article (English) on Competition Policy International – TechREG Chronicle April 2025
Photo by Chaozzy Lin on Unsplash
