There is an obvious contradiction in the European Union’s institutional discourse. Although it proclaims values such as digital rights, privacy protection and algorithmic responsibility, the practice reveals constant retreats, accommodations and concessions to large technology companies (big tech). This gap reveals the growing promiscuity between political bodies and private interests, which constitutes an alliance disguised as institutional dialogue, the fruits of which are reaped in the weakness of laws and regulatory permissiveness.
When drafting the regulation on artificial intelligence (AI Act), there was evidence of political-economic blackmail by the Trump administration and big tech Americans, who are increasingly putting pressure on and taking advantage of the European Union’s technological weaknesses, to reduce security obligations, exclude powerful AI models from the regulatory scope and ensure exemptions to what should be subject to strict rules.
The recent postponement of deadlines for 2027, compliance with sanctions and control of fake newswhich provided for the marking of all synthetic content, so that it was clear that it was material generated by AI. The result is a weakened legal framework, with several safeguards converted into vague clauses, diluted executions and attenuated controls, as is happening with the recent “Omnibus” legislative proposal.
The financial power of these companies also speaks louder and pays dividends. Recent data indicates that the technology industry invests around 151 million euros per year in lobby with European institutions, with increasing pressure as the digital agenda intensifies. This investment is not neutral, as it translates into privileged access, influence over commissions and committees, meetings with decision-makers and permanent presence in the legislative process.
When regulation depends on these structures, with meetings behind closed doors, consultations dominated by experts paid by companies, and voluntary codes instead of coercive obligations, democracy begins to coexist with mechanisms of parallel power. Corporations take on the role of de facto legislators, redefining limits, delaying deadlines and taming sanctions. The result is a regulatory space that protects private interests more than public rights to privacy, justice, social control and equal access.
This model of “government by proxy” (by proxy) undermines the legitimacy of institutions. What is presented as “modern”, “competitive” or “innovative” often corresponds to deliberate collusion with the concentration of economic power. Equality between companies and citizens disappears, because companies have the resources to influence rules, while citizens, dispersed, fragmented and individualized, depend on institutional good faith.
In countries like Portugal, which follow European rules, the effects are felt. The same groups of lobby that influence Brussels also end up influencing national policies, supervision and choices in the digital area. When the State, whether national or European, stops regulating firmly and starts to continually negotiate with private interests, the loser is not just the regulator, it is society as a whole.
Institutional capture by big tech It is not theoretical, it is factual, systematic and is ongoing in the European Union and in our country. That’s why more and more transparency is required, as it’s not just about improving regulations or correcting technical flaws, but about repairing the democratic fabric that makes it possible to decide who really rules in the digital world, whether those elected to defend the public interest or corporations whose only obligation is to accumulate private profits.
E-governance specialist