Algorithms play a key role in governing the digital public sphere, moderating user-generated content, shaping users’ incentives about civic behavior, and determining which content will be more visible. Some argue that the inherent moral trade-offs between competing conceptions of fair algorithmic design warrant democratic control over algorithms, while others investigate discursive features of a democratic culture that can effectively hold algorithms accountable. This paper takes a different tack. First, I argue that the concentration of power among Big Tech corporations provides a distinctive set of reasons for democratizing algorithms in the digital public sphere, e.g., sorting and recommendation algorithms in major social media platforms and search engines. The basic idea is that corporate elites’ control over such important algorithms is incompatible with the democratic functions of the public sphere. Second, I argue that instituting Citizen Boards of Governance (CBGs) is a plausible strategy to democratically contain Big Tech’s concentrated algorithmic powers over the digital public sphere. CBGs are randomly selected citizen bodies that are authorized to supervise and govern the algorithmic infrastructure of Big Tech platforms. The main advantage of CBGs is to tackle the concentrated powers of private tech corporations without giving too much power to governments. I show why this is a better approach to address the problems with Big Tech’s algorithmic powers than ordinary state regulation or relying on market mechanisms to disperse power.
Keywords: democratic innovations, Big Tech, algorithms, the digital public sphere.
