Centre for Internet and Society

𝗥𝗲𝗰𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝗺𝗮𝗱𝗲 𝗯𝘆 𝗠𝗿. Piyush Goyal, 𝗜𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗮'𝘀 𝗠𝗶𝗻𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗼𝗳 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗲𝗿𝗰𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗜𝗻𝗱𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗿𝘆, 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝘀𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝗱 𝗮𝗻 𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗰𝘂𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘁𝘂𝗽 𝗲𝗰𝗼𝘀𝘆𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗺! However, a critical feature of our digital economy often overlooked in these conversations is that a large proportion of Indian startups depend on only a handful of private players for much of their value creation process. By controlling key production, marketing and distribution infrastructure, these Big Tech entities have leveraged network effects to make themselves indispensable to innovators. App-based startups, for example, have come to rely heavily on the terms set by app store providers, which, in India’s context, amounts to Google alone. At the same time, turbocharged by corporate investments, AI has emerged as the most popular ‘innovation’ of our times, best seen in the rapid adoption of LLMs such as ChatGPT and Llama. Even though AI was initially touted to disrupt Big Tech dominance, it is almost impossible to imagine the current arc of AI innovation – which requires significant data and compute capacities – without Big Tech, especially with the latter’s overwhelming use of anti-competitive conduct. In their recent analysis of Shark Tank India, Abhineet Nayyar and Isha Suri (with research assistance from Girish Chandra and Ayush Menon) 𝗶𝗻𝘃𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗴𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗿𝗲𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽 𝗼𝗳 “𝗮𝘀𝘆𝗺𝗺𝗲𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗱𝗲𝗽𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲” 𝗯𝗲𝘁𝘄𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝗜𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗮𝗻 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘁𝘂𝗽𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗴𝗹𝗼𝗯𝗮𝗹 𝗕𝗶𝗴 𝗧𝗲𝗰𝗵. What do they find?   • 𝗢𝘃𝗲𝗿 𝟴𝟳% 𝗼𝗳 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘁𝘂𝗽𝘀 depend on at least one Big Tech entity for value creation   • Only 5% qualify as multi-sided platforms, whereas 𝗺𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗶𝗱𝗲 𝗼𝗻𝗲-𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗱 𝗗𝟮𝗕/𝗗𝟮𝗖 𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗶𝗰𝗲𝘀   • 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘁𝘂𝗽𝘀 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗼𝘂𝘀 𝗳𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘄𝗲𝗿𝗲 ~𝟲𝟬% 𝗹𝗶𝗸𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗲𝗿 than their counterparts to secure another round of funding These findings were subsequently discussed in a roundtable conversation with entrepreneurs, investors, and market researchers working in the digital economy. Among other lines of inquiry, the authors collected the room’s feedback on the following set of questions:   1. What are the implications of this “asymmetrical dependence” on i) how entrepreneurs think about innovation & ii) how investors think about funding?   2. How can we explain the absence of any direct challenge to the Big Tech’s dominance?   3. Since ‘innovativeness’ remains a subjective concept, what kinds of metrics does the startup ecosystem usually rely on to identify innovative ideas? Check out the round table’s answers to these questions at https://lnkd.in/guCz-w_G #StartupIndia #DigitalIndia #BigTech #Monopoly #Innovation #Startups #DCB #Competition #SharkTank #CCI #MeiTY #MCA

Join Us for an Exclusive Webinar! Dive into "The Intersection of Policy and Technology: Challenges and Opportunities in the Digital Age", hosted by the Indian School of Public Policy. Our panellists include Omir Kumar and Abhineet Nayyar, with the session moderated by Shivam Tandon. 🗓 Date: 30th April 2025 ⏰ Time: 7:30 PM - 8:30 PM IST 💻 Format: Online Explore how technology is reshaping policy frameworks and uncover innovative solutions for impactful governance with expert insights. Don’t miss out- register now! https://lnkd.in/g-HPrQ9Y Parth Shah | Luis Miranda | Binali Suhandani | Ram J V | Dhruva Mathur | Padmini kannan | Imran Amin | Rekha Vashist | Urvashi Shahi | Siddhartha Warwade | Kuhoo Chauhan #WebinarAlert #PolicyAndTech #ISPP #PublicPolicy #Technology #Innovation

𝗥𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗰𝗵 𝘂𝗽𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗲! In their new paper, 𝗘𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗴𝗶𝗼𝗻: 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗥𝗼𝗹𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗔𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝗖𝗢𝗩𝗜𝗗-𝟭𝟵 𝗜𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗗𝗶𝘀𝗼𝗿𝗱𝗲𝗿, Yesha Tshering Paul and Amrita Sengupta (she/her) explore the role of affect by analysing the emotional dimensions of information processing, with a focus on COVID-19 related misinformation and vaccine hesitancy in India. While a majority of information disorder studies focus on measuring impacts, platform mechanics and dissemination tactics, less attention has been paid to the psychological and sociological phenomena influencing information trust and reception, i.e. how we receive information, the emotions they evoke, and why. This study seeks to address this gap in research, particularly in the Indian context. Through an interdisciplinary analysis (incorporating various theoretical frameworks such as affect-as-information, dual-process model, agenda-setting theory and others), their research identifies negative emotions - fear, in particular - as powerful emotional drivers behind the creation and consumption of misinformation. These negative emotional responses tend to override rational cognitive processes and increase individual and societal vulnerability to false or misleading content, especially in times of stress or crisis. The authors conclude with recommendations for future interventions that recognise and are more responsive to the affective dimensions of misinformation. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗳𝘂𝗹𝗹 𝗽𝗮𝗽𝗲𝗿 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗯𝗲 𝗮𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲: https://lnkd.in/gkavcjvA #covid19 #misinformation #disinformation #fakenews #infodisorder #psychology #vaccines #trust #publichealth

As an engineering grad who is also deeply fascinated by historical analyses, I have found myself repeatedly question the current arc of our digital innovation. For one reason or another, most of my recent work has forced me to confront the realisation that today's digital technologies - like many technological advancements of the past - are merely tools for political and economic change. Although this insight may seem intuitive to many of us, I think its ramifications for the country's exploited masses are often ignored. Consider the fact that those of us in 'tech policy' who often engage in the rhetoric of "state regulation v/s market innovation" hardly acknowledge the underlying incentives that drive this digital revolution. For starters, what does it even mean to advocate for regulation when the government is as devoted to unbridled data monetisation as the industry (if not more)? Or, what even counts as innovation? With large swathes of private capital incentivising short-term returns over long-term productivity, how do we differentiate between innovations that improve our standards of living, and schemes that merely act as upward transfers of wealth? More importantly, who gets to make this decision? Is it the same state whose own priorities remain unclear? Or should it be those whose lives are disrupted by these elaborate schemes under today's monopoly capitalism? These are only some of the questions that I pose and probe in my recent essay, titled "𝗪𝗵𝗼𝘀𝗲 𝗧𝗲𝗰𝗵𝗻𝗼𝗹𝗼𝗴𝘆 𝗜𝘀 𝗜𝘁 𝗔𝗻𝘆𝘄𝗮𝘆?". Building on an already rich history of evidence, I compare the experiences of Britain's industrial revolution and Punjab's green revolution, with our ongoing era of digital growth. Largely written in an exploratory fashion, I argue that the presumed benefits of technology are not, and have never quite been, inevitable consequences of progress. Instead, if we truly wish to liberate our digital aspirations from their inequality-widening outcomes, we must begin by recognising, and dismantling, the incentives currently fuelling this journey. Doing so would enable us to not just develop more accountable and collective modes of decision-making, but also provide us with the knowledge to create alternative futures for our digital growth! 𝗬𝗼𝘂 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗮𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗳𝘂𝗹𝗹 𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗮𝘆 𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲: https://lnkd.in/ghzwBUXC As always, any and all feedback to the piece is quite welcome. #digitalinnovation #tech4good #techpolicy #bigtech #platforms #platformeconomy #adtech #workers #consumers #SMEs #startupeconomy #digitalindia #development #socialimpact

🔊 𝗡𝗲𝘄 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁: 𝗡𝗮𝘃𝗶𝗴𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗗𝗶𝗴𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘀𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝗙𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲: 𝗨𝘀𝗲𝗿 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗸𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗺𝘀 The last couple of decades have seen significant changes in the financial ecosystem in India, both within the fintech sector and with respect to digital financial inclusion. As digital financial services become progressively important in users’ everyday financial lives, it is critical to assess potential risks and harms that may concurrently emerge, particularly for marginalised users. In this report, Amrita Sengupta (she/her), Chiara Furtado, Garima A., Nishkala S., Sneha PP, and Vipul Kharbanda unpack experiences of marginalised users navigating the digitalisation of finance. Through a survey of 𝟯,𝟳𝟴𝟰 𝘂𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘀, 𝟭𝟴 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗶𝗲𝘄𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝟳 𝗳𝗼𝗰𝘂𝘀 𝗴𝗿𝗼𝘂𝗽 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗰𝘂𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀, their findings highlight user experiences of risks and harms while accessing digital financial services, foregrounding experiences of persons with disabilities, transgender persons, gender and sexual minorities, elderly persons, women, regional language-first users, and persons facing digital and economic vulnerabilities. Their work highlights gaps in i) access and accessibility for marginalised users, ii) users’ experiences with exclusions, inadequate platform design, opacity, and iii) a slow redressal processes when using digital financial services and accessing social protection. They also discuss users’ experiences of digital financial frauds, in the context of increasingly complex mechanisms used to defraud users, as well as practical challenges users face with redressal systems. 📖 Read the full report here: https://lnkd.in/dh2cRveb #DigitalFinancialServices #FinTech #DigitalFinancialHarms #OnlineHarms #Frauds #OnlineScams

Research update! Abhineet Nayyar and Isha Suri recently presented findings from two upcoming papers on antitrust law and the platform economy - at the 10th National Conference on Economics of Competition Law, hosted by the Competition Commission Of India. In 𝗔𝘀𝘆𝗺𝗺𝗲𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗣𝗼𝘄𝗲𝗿 𝗗𝘆𝗻𝗮𝗺𝗶𝗰𝘀: 𝗔𝗻 𝗔𝗻𝘁𝗶𝘁𝗿𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗔𝗻𝗮𝗹𝘆𝘀𝗶𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗢𝗻-𝗱𝗲𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗟𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗣𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝘀, authors Abhineet, Chetna V., Chiara Furtado, and Isha Suri explore the intersection between market competition and labour rights in India's beauty and wellness sector. Their paper traces the evolution of Urban Company – a leading on-demand labour platform in the industry – and discusses how its exploitation of a highly precarious workforce not just allows it to dominate the market, but also sustain its dominance in a cycle of anti-competitive conduct. Their findings contribute to the growing body of research on how digital platforms exploit their asymmetrical power dynamic with their workforce, to extract higher margins, offload costs, and exclude competitors. To this end, their paper suggests conducting deeper reviews of similar market structures, building adequate state capacity, and considering changes to the country’s digital competition law. In 𝗨𝗻𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗱 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲𝘀: 𝗪𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗔𝗹𝗴𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗺𝘀 𝗖𝗼𝗹𝗹𝘂𝗱𝗲, Isha and Prof. Rajat Kathuria study algorithmic pricing in India's aviation industry, and investigate the effects of such 'intelligent' systems on market competition. They examine correlations in airline pricing data using third party APIs, and study patterns of potential collusion, tacit or otherwise, due to the use of pricing algorithms. Among other things, their findings indicate price parallelism between the two largest players in the domestic airline market along the busiest routes. These two carriers mirror each other’s low as well as high prices but, on the whole, their fares lie consistently in the higher end of the spectrum - thereby leading a majority of consumers to pay higher travel prices. The study recommends collection of additional data and regular monitoring of price fluctuations by regulators, to verify this pattern over time. Additionally, they suggest that regulators invest in reviewing and monitoring tools, articulate specific information-gathering powers vis-à-vis algorithms, and build capacity to conduct audits. The rapidly growing use of digital and platform technologies has uncovered a range of novel concerns for antitrust authorities across the world. With their focus on platform labour (in the first case) and algorithmic pricing (in the second), these papers address two such challenges and provide important insights for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers. Follow this space for reading these papers soon! #competition #antitrust #platform #labour #algorithms #digitaleconomy #CCI #monopolies #oligopolies #collusion #cartel

Shiva Kanwar and Isha Suri presented their research on 𝗔𝘂𝗱𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗔𝗜: 𝗥𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗚𝗹𝗼𝗯𝗮𝗹 𝗡𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗵 𝗔𝗜 𝗣𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗲𝘀 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗚𝗹𝗼𝗯𝗮𝗹 𝗦𝗼𝘂𝘁𝗵 𝗗𝗶𝗴𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗹 𝗥𝗲𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗲𝘀 at the "Global Southing Internet, Data and AI Studies Workshop" hosted by the Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford. They argue that while AI audits are vital tools for accountability, they often rely on Global North frameworks, which are ill-equipped to address Global South contexts. These frameworks overlook cultural, infrastructural, and socio-political realities, risking inequitable AI governance in rapidly digitising societies. Among other things, their work highlights the need for inclusive auditing models and proposes actionable policy recommendations, advocating for tailored auditing approaches that reflect the realities of the Global South. Thank you to Jonas CL Valente for curating this workshop for cross-regional knowledge exchange, and to fellow presenters for sharing their work! #ArtificialIntelligence #AI #AIAudits #GlobalMajority #TechPolicy

Last month Centre for Internet and Society provided comments and recommendations to two major policy documents: 1. Digital Personal Data Protection Rules 2025: https://lnkd.in/gYgDsmtH 2. Report on AI Governance Guidelines Development: https://lnkd.in/g5vbezbw I hope that there are more open consultations and discussions on these two important topics in the future.  Amrita Sengupta (she/her)Anubha Sinha,pallavi bedi, Vipul KharbandaIsha Suri

Research update! We are excited to share our new work "𝗘𝗱𝘂𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻, 𝗘𝗽𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗺𝗼𝗹𝗼𝗴𝗶𝗲𝘀, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗔𝗜: 𝗨𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗥𝗼𝗹𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗚𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗔𝗜 𝗶𝗻 𝗘𝗱𝘂𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻" - by Aparna Bhatnagar and Amrita Sengupta (she/her). This framing essay explores how Gen-AI disrupts conventional notions of epistemic trust, reliability, and knowledge production in education. Drawing on key theoretical frameworks in education and trust, it examines how higher education institutions are responding to these shifts, addressing ethical dilemmas, and the subsequent policy considerations. Aparna and Amrita conclude their essay with 𝗮𝗻 𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗿𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗔𝗜 𝗴𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗳𝗿𝗮𝗺𝗲𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸𝘀 at both institutional and national levels - evaluating their effectiveness and proposing strategies for future responses to the use of AI in education. The full essay is available here: https://lnkd.in/gdNRCn_U