More than one in five attendees at EU events on regulating big tech companies did not disclose ties to the industry when they applied to take part, according to transparency campaigners who say shadow networks are distorting public debate.
Researchers from three NGOs analyzed almost 4,000 records at European Commission workshops organized earlier this year to test companies’ compliance with the Digital Markets Act (DMA), a law to curb anti-competitive behavior.
The DMA, which went into effect in March, designated Google’s parent company, Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, ByteDance, which owns TikTok, Meta and Microsoft, as “gatekeepers,” meaning they must comply with the DMA’s rules. EU to ensure fair competition. These large companies, for example, cannot treat their own products and services more favorably than their competitors, nor prevent users from uninstalling pre-installed software.
Apple, Alphabet and Meta are already being investigated for possible DSA violations and face hefty fines if found guilty. Apple and Meta have said they comply with the law, while Google said it had made changes and would defend its approach.
To check compliance, the commission organized six workshops last March, one per company. All attendees were asked to describe any affiliation with the company on the agenda. However, the researchers found that 21% of attendees (who worked at law firms, lobbying firms, trade associations and think tanks) made no reference in their applications to their ties to the companies under discussion.
Margarida Silva, one of the report’s authors who works at the Amsterdam-based NGO Somo, said: “Public workshops can be a great way to test Big Tech’s compliance with the new rules. However, unless strict disclosure and conflict of interest safeguards are implemented, they can also be easily distorted and taken over by lawyers, lobbyists and experts hired or funded by Big Tech companies.”
The report, co-authored by the European Corporate Observatory in Brussels and Germany’s LobbyControl, comes after a former EU official wrote in The Guardian in 2022 that Brussels’ political community was “insidiously” in the clutches of class big technology business.
The report was based on analysis of online registration forms where participants were invited, but not required, to register any ties to the company being discussed that day. The researchers then compared the responses to public information, including company websites and the European Commission. transparency registera database of organizations seeking to influence EU decision-making.
The researchers counted representatives from 53 lobbying and public affairs firms at the workshops. Among them were FleishmanHillard, who has represented Meta and Amazon, as well as Flint Europe, who has worked for Amazon, Apple, Alphabet, Meta and Microsoft. Neither company (nor any of its competitors) disclosed these links, according to the report.
A Fleishman-Hillard spokesperson confirmed that “we followed the publicly broadcast DMA workshops online earlier in the year” and sent a link to the entrance of the company in the transparency record that reveals its clients from 2023.
Representatives of trade associations, including DigitalEurope and the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA), also participated in the workshops, but did not declare their ties to the gatekeepers, the researchers said.
DigitalEurope declined to comment, while a CCIA spokesperson rejected the claim. “My two colleagues who attended made it explicitly clear during their presentations that CCIA Europe represents both gatekeepers and gatekeepers,” the person said, referring to smaller tech companies. The spokesperson added that the CCIA was “very open about its membership; We constantly provide an update overview of all members on our website”no hidden affiliations.
NGOs also focused attention on the International Center for Law and Economics (ICLE), which describes itself as a privately funded research organization. The ICLE was represented by a “prominent academic” at the Amazon event, who asked a question, without ever stating that his organization was funded by Amazon and Meta, according to the report.
An ICLE spokesperson said: “Out of respect for the privacy of our donors, we do not disclose or discuss their contributions, which come in the form of general unrestricted support.” ICLE had decided to register on the EU transparency register and would make disclosures there “out of an abundance of caution,” the person said. The ICLE appeared in the transparency registry on October 29after being contacted by The Guardian regarding the NGO report.
after newsletter promotion
Following questions from The Guardian to ICLE, an Amazon spokesperson offered an unsolicited comment, without confirming whether the company funds that organization. “We work with organizations such as trade associations and think tanks, and communicate with officials from the European institutions. We update our entry in the EU transparency register in accordance with the guidelines.”
More than 1,000 registrations came from lawyers, but about a third of delegates did not disclose that their firms were working or had until recently worked for guardians, according to the report. NGOs reported that the magic circle law firm Freshfields, which supposedly represents Apple and Meta, had the highest number of registrations with 81. Ten Freshfields employees signed up for the Apple and Meta workshop, but only one revealed that they worked for Apple. Similarly, 10 Skadden lawyers attended the ByteDance event without disclosing that their firm had acted on behalf of the TikTok owner in an ultimately unsuccessful challenge against the appointment of guardian.
Activists highlighted “the immense asymmetry of resources” between technology companies and the commission. They counted 80 dedicated employees in the commission’s DMA unit, compared to 106 employees working for gatekeepers, supported by 282 lawyers and lobbyists.
LobbyControl campaigner Max Bank described the situation as “a classic David versus Goliath scenario”, adding: “Unless the EU strengthens its law enforcement capabilities, the DMA’s promise to limit the power of the big technologies run the risk of falling short.”
Tommaso Valletti, an economics professor and former chief economist at the European Commission’s competition department, said he was “very concerned” about the lobbying activities of Big Tech and other powerful corporations. “Resources are incredibly asymmetrical and it’s very, very difficult to hear other opinions.”
Valletti was not involved in the investigation, but provided a statement to NGOs that said: “Conflicts of interest and a lack of transparency have contributed to a breakdown in the distinction between expertise and advocacy in competition policy and regulation. “These need to be sorted out beforehand to be able to have a proper debate on Europe’s digital future.”
Flint Europe, Skadden and Freshfields did not immediately respond to requests for comment.