Big Tech

Big Tech, also known as the Tech Giants, Big Four, or Big Five, is a name given to the four or five largest, most dominant, and most prestigious companies in the information technology industry of the United States—namely Amazon, Apple, Google (Alphabet), Facebook, and Microsoft.[1][2][3][4][5][6]

The logos of the 'Big Five' tech companies: Apple, Facebook, Google, Amazon, and Microsoft.
The "Big Tech" companies. From left: Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon, and Microsoft.

The tech giants are seen as the dominant players in their respective sub-verticals of the tech industry namely: e-commerce, online advertising, consumer electronics, cloud computing, computer software, media streaming, artificial intelligence, self-driving cars, and social networking. They have been among the most valuable public companies globally,[7] each having had a maximum market capitalization ranging from around $1 trillion to around $2 trillion USD.[8] They are additionally considered to be among the most prestigious and selective employers in the world.[9][10]

Concerns over monopolistic practices have led to antitrust investigations from the Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission in the United States,[11][12][13] and the European Commission.[14] Commentators have questioned the impact of these companies on privacy, market power, free speech and censorship, and national security and law enforcement.[15] It has been speculated that it may not be possible to live in the digital world day-to-day outside of the ecosystem created by the companies.[16]

The tech giants have drawn comparisons to other groupings of dominant and prestigious companies including China's BATX, the Big Three management consulting firms, and the Big Oil companies.

Membership and definitionsEdit

The term Big Tech is often broken down into more specific sub-groupings, often referred to by the following names or acronyms.[17] Alphabet Inc., the parent company of Google, is represented as a "G" in these acronyms.

Big FourEdit

Alphabet Inc. (Google), Amazon, Facebook, and Apple are commonly referred to as "Big Four" or "GAFA".[18] They have also been referred to as "The Four" or as the "Four Horsemen", a literary reference to the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse in the New Testament.[19][20][21][22][23][24]

Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, author Phil Simon, and NYU professor Scott Galloway have each grouped the GAFA companies together, on the basis that those companies have driven major societal change via their dominance and role in online activities. This is unlike other large tech companies such as Microsoft and IBM, according to Simon and Galloway.[23][25] Eric Schmidt has excluded Microsoft from the grouping: "Microsoft is not driving the consumer revolution in the minds of the consumers."[26]

Big FiveEdit

A more inclusive grouping, referred to as "Big Five" or "GAFAM" defines Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple, and Microsoft as the tech giants.[27][28][29][30]

Besides Saudi Aramco, the GAFAM companies were the five most valuable public corporations in the world in January 2020 as measured by market capitalization.[7] Nikos Smyrnaios justified the GAFAM grouping as an oligopoly that appears to take control of the Internet by concentrating market and financial power and using patent rights and copyright within a context of capitalism.[31]


"FAANG" refers to five prominent American technology companies: Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix, and Google.[32][33]

The term was coined by Jim Cramer, the television host of CNBC's Mad Money in 2013, calling these companies "totally dominant in their markets".[34] Until 2017, FANG was limited to Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, and Google. Another variant of this acronym is "FANGAM", which includes Microsoft.[35]

Other companiesEdit

The Chinese firms Baidu, Alibaba, Tencent, and Xiaomi, collectively referred to as BATX, are often seen as the competitor companies of Big Tech. Although smaller in market capitalization, Twitter has sometimes been considered a member of "Big Tech" due to major social and political influence of the platform.[36][37] This characterization has featured in political debates and economic commentary.[36][38][39]

Market dominanceEdit

The 10 largest corporations by market capitalization

The tech giants have replaced the energy giants such as ExxonMobil, BP, Gazprom, PetroChina and Royal Dutch Shell ("Big Oil") from the first decade of the 21st century at the top of the NASDAQ stock index. They have also outpaced the traditional big media companies such as Disney, AT&T, and Comcast by a factor of 10.[40] In 2017, the five biggest American IT companies had a combined valuation of over $3.3 trillion, and made up more than 40 percent of the value of the Nasdaq 100.[41] It has been observed that the companies remain popular by providing their services to consumers for free.[42]


By 2017, Amazon was the dominant market leader in e-commerce with 50% of all online sales going through the platform; cloud computing, with nearly 32% market share, and live-streaming with Twitch owning 75.6% market share. With Amazon Alexa and Echo, Amazon is additionally the market leader in the area of artificial Intelligence-based personal digital assistants and smart speakers (Amazon Echo) with 69% market share followed by Google (Google Nest) at 25% market share.


Apple sells high-margin smartphones and other consumer electronics devices, sharing a duopoly with Google in the field of mobile operating systems: 27% of the market share belonging to Apple (iOS) and 72% to Google (Android).[41][43]


Google, Facebook and Amazon have been referred to as the "Big Three" of digital advertising.[44] Google is the leader in online search (Google Search), online video sharing (YouTube) and online mapping-based navigation (Google Maps). Waymo, Alphabet's self-driving car subsidiary, is considered to be the leader in autonomous vehicle technology.


In addition to social networking, Facebook dominates the functions of online image sharing (Instagram) and online messaging (WhatsApp).


Microsoft continues to dominate in desktop operating system market share (Microsoft Windows)[45] and in office productivity software (Microsoft Office). Microsoft is also the second biggest company in the cloud computing industry (Microsoft Azure),[46] after Amazon, and is also one of the biggest players in the video game industry (Xbox).


Smyrnaios argued in 2016 that four characteristics were key in the emergence of GAFA: the theory of media and information technology convergence, financialization, economic deregulation and globalization.[31] He argued that the promotion of technology convergence by people such as Nicholas Negroponte made it appear credible and desirable for the Internet to evolve into an oligopoly. Autoregulation and the difficulty of politicians to understand software issues made governmental intervention against monopolies ineffective. Financial deregulation led to GAFA's big profit margins (all four except for Amazon had about 20–25 percent profit margins in 2014 according to Smyrnaios).


"For decades, whole regions, nations even, have tried to model themselves on a particular ideal of innovation, the lifeblood of the modern economy. From Apple to Facebook, Silicon Valley’s freewheeling ecosystem of new, nimble corporations created massive wealth and retilted the world’s economic axis." The tech giants began as small engineering-focused firms building new products when their larger competitors were less innovative (such as Xerox when Apple was founded in 1976). The companies engaged in timely investment in rising technologies of the personal computer era, dotcom era, e-commerce, rise of mobile devices, social media, and cloud computing. The characteristics of these technologies allowed the companies to expand quickly with market adoption. According to Alexis Madrigal, the style of innovation that initially drove Silicon Valley firms to grow is being lost, shifting to a form of growing through acquisitions. Additionally, large companies tend to focus on process improvements rather than new products.[47] However, the Big Tech firms all rank near the top on the list of companies by research and development spending.[48]

Among those who believe that acquisitions will weaken an original innovative atmosphere is scholar Tim Wu, Wu pointed out that when Facebook acquired Instagram, it simply eliminated a competitive threat that may have presented a fresher competitor had it remained independent. He also states however that when Microsoft first emerged, with its innovations in personal computing and operating systems, it created platforms for new innovations by others.[49] Wu formulated the idea of oligopoly "kill zones" created by acquiring competitors that approach their market.[50][51] Big Tech operating in digital markets and being inherently focused on technology mean that Big Tech is more likely to focus on innovation than other groups of large industry dominating corporations before them. According to a report by the think tank ITIF, acquisitions being possible supports innovation, arguing the larger firm is less likely to simply copy the process of the smaller firm.[51]


According to Smyrnaios, globalization has allowed GAFAM to minimize its global taxation load and pay international workers much lower wages than would be required in the United States.[31]

Oligopoly maintenanceEdit

Smyrnaios argued in 2016 that GAFA combines six vertical levels of power, data centers, internet connectivity, computer hardware including smartphones, operating systems, Web browsers and other user-level software, and online services. He also discussed horizontal concentration of power, in which diverse services such as email, instant messaging, online searching, downloading and streaming are combined internally within any of the GAFA members.[31] For example Google and Microsoft pay to have their web search engines appear as first and second in Apple's iPhone.[52]

According to The Economist, "Network and scale effects mean that size begets size, while data can act as a barrier to entry."[53]

Antitrust investigationsEdit

United StatesEdit

In the United States antitrust scrutiny and investigations of members of Big Tech began in the late 1990s and early 2000s leading to the first major American antitrust law case against a member of Big Tech (Microsoft) in 2001 in which the U.S. government accused Microsoft of illegally maintaining its monopoly position in the personal computer (PC) market primarily through the legal and technical restrictions it put on the abilities of PC manufacturers (OEMs) and users to uninstall Internet Explorer and use other programs such as Netscape and Java. At trial, the district court ruled that Microsoft's actions constituted unlawful monopolization under Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit affirmed most of the district court's judgments. The DOJ later announced on September 6, 2001 that it was no longer seeking to break up Microsoft and would instead seek a lesser antitrust penalty in exchange for a settlement by Microsoft in which Microsoft agreed to share its application programming interfaces with third-party companies and appoint a panel of three people who would have full access to Microsoft's systems, records, and source code for five years in order to ensure compliance. On November 1, 2002, Judge Kollar-Kotelly released a judgment accepting most of the proposed DOJ settlement and on June 30, 2004, the U.S. appeals court unanimously approved the settlement with the Justice Department.

In the late 2010s and early 2020s the Big Tech industry again became the center of antitrust attention from the United States Department of Justice and the United States Federal Trade Commission that included requests to provide information about prior acquisitions and potentially anticompetitive practices. Some Democratic candidates running for president proposed plans to break up Big Tech companies and regulate them as utilities. "The role of technology in the economy and in our lives grows more important every day," said FTC Chairman Joseph Simons. "As I’ve noted in the past, it makes sense for us to closely examine technology markets to ensure consumers benefit from free and fair competition."[54][55]

The United States House Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial and Administrative Law began investigating Big Tech on an antitrust basis in June 2020, and published a report in January 2021 concluding that Apple, Amazon, Facebook, and Google each operating in antitrust manners that requires some type of corrective action that either could be implemented through Congressional action or through legal actions taken by the Department of Justice, including the option of splitting up these companies.[56][57]

On June 24, 2021 the United States House Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial and Administrative Law held hearings on earlier introduced bills which would limit the scope of Big Tech as we know it. Among those bills was HR 3825, Ending Platform Monopolies Act introduced by Representative Pramila Jayapal which passed through the Committee. [58] The specific purpose of the bill is to prohibit platform holders to also compete in those same platforms. For example, Amazon attempted to purchase and when they resisted and refused to sell, Amazon started selling diaper related products at a loss which could not sustain. Amazon being the platform owner as well a player in the platform could easily sustain continued loss. The point came when could not sustain and they eventually, without any other choice ended up selling to Amazon out of fear even though Walmart was willing to pay more. [59]

The issue of consumer welfare arose in the subcommittee but was voted down and rejected as the majority held the opinion that the reason we have these monopolies today is mainly because of the consumer welfare standard. This doctrine was introduced over 100 years ago and the committee would not adopt the consumer welfare standard in HR 3825.

The consumer welfare doctrine is an ideology which states that if the consumer enjoys lower pricing as a result of corporate mergers or decision making then those actions are not generally antitrust, no matter if there has been any damage done to the market or society. The newly appointed chair to the FTC, Lina Khan has held different views as outlined in her publication Amazon's Antitrust Paradox.

The recently introduced bills show that we will eventually drop or diminish the consumer welfare standard and move towards a marketplace welfare standard which promotes competition and levels the playing field for startups and businesses which have not fully grown.

There has been opposition from Big Tech regarding these bills and any legislation to trim them. Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook implied that his company's success is important to the national security of the United States. Tim Cook, CEO of Apple spoke to House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi in an attempt to slow down the bills.

The spirit of the antitrust law is to protect consumers from the anticompetitive behavior of businesses that have either monopoly power in their market or companies that have banded together to exert cartel market behavior. Monopoly or cartel collusion creates market disadvantages for consumers. However, the antitrust law clearly distinguishes between purposeful monopolies and businesses that found themselves in a monopoly position purely as the result of business success. The purpose of the antitrust law is to stop businesses from deliberately creating monopoly power.[60]

Consumer welfare, not assumptions that large firms are automatically harmful to competition, should be the core consideration of any antitrust action. The consumer welfare standard serves as the "good reason" in antitrust enforcement as it appropriately looks at the impact on consumers and economic efficiency.[61] So far, it is not apparent that there has been a harm to consumer welfare and many technology companies continue to innovate and are bringing real benefits to consumers.[62]

On July 9, 2021, President Joe Biden signed Executive Order 14036, "Promoting Competition in the American Economy", a sweeping array of initiatives across the executive branch. Related to Big Tech, the order established a executive branch-wide policy to more thoroughly scrutinize mergers involving Big Tech companies, with focus on the acquisition of new, potentially disruptive technology from smaller firms by the larger companies. The order also instructed the FTC to establish rules related to data collection and its use by Big Tech companies in promoting their own service.[63][64]

European UnionEdit

The European Commission, which has imposed sanctions on several of the high tech giants.

In June 2020, the European Union opened two new antitrust investigations into practices by Apple. The first investigation focuses on issues including whether Apple is using its dominant position in the market to stifle competition using its music and book streaming services. The second investigation focuses on Apple Pay, which allows payment by Apple devices to brick and mortar vendors. Apple limits the ability of banks and other financial institutions to use the iPhones' near field radio frequency technology.[65][66]

Fines are insufficient to deter anti-competitive practices by high tech giants, according to European Commissioner for Competition Margrethe Vestager. Commissioner Vestager explained, "fines are not doing the trick. And fines are not enough because fines are a punishment for illegal behaviour in the past. What is also in our decision is that you have to change for the future. You have to stop what you're doing."[67]

In September 2021, the United States and European Union began discussions of a joint approach to Big Tech regulation.[68]


Scott Galloway has criticized the companies for "avoid[ing] taxes, invad[ing] privacy, and destroy[ing] jobs",[69] while Smyrnaios has described the group as an oligopoly, coming to dominate the online market through anti-competitive practices, ever-increasing financial power, and intellectual property law.[31] He has argued that the current situation is the result of economic deregulation, globalization, and the failure of politicians to understand and respond to developments in technology.

Smyrnaios recommended developing academic analysis of the political economy of the Internet in order to understand the methods of domination and to criticize these methods in order to encourage opposition to that domination.[31]

Use of externally generated contentEdit

On May 9, 2019, the Parliament of France passed a law intended to force GAFA to pay for related rights (the reuse of substantial amounts of text, photos or videos), to the publishers and news agencies of the original materials. The law is aimed at implementing Article 15 of the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market of the European Union.[70]

Political debatesEdit

Accusations of inaction towards misinformationEdit

Following Russian interference in the 2016 US election, Facebook was criticized for not doing enough to curb misinformation, and accused of downplaying its role in allowing misinformation to spread.[71] Part of the controversy involved the Cambridge Analytica scandal and political data collection.[72] In 2019, a Senate Intelligence Committee report criticized tech giants more generally for not responding strongly enough to misinformation, most Senate Intelligence reports regarding the subject focused on Facebook and Twitter's role.[73] 'Big tech' social media networks improved their response to fake accounts and influence operation trolls, and these initiatives received some praise compared to 2016.[74][75]

In 2020 and 2021, social media giants have been frequently criticized for allowing COVID-19 misinformation to spread.[76][77] According to Representatives Frank Pallone, Mike Doyle, and Jan Schakowsky, "Industry self-regulation has failed. We must begin the work of changing incentives driving social media companies to allow and even promote misinformation and disinformation."[78][79] President Joe Biden criticized Facebook for allowing anti-vaccine propaganda to spread.[80][81] Multiple social media platforms introduced more stringent moderation of health-related misinformation.[82]

Human Rights Watch criticized Big Tech, primarily Facebook, for capturing the information market in developing countries where misinformation would rapidly spread to new internet users. HRW also stated that excessive content removals meant the loss of important information such as the documentation of human rights abuses needed as evidence to serve justice.[83]

Accusations of censorship and election interferenceEdit

The practice of banning of what is known as "hate speech" has also received public criticism as many of the targets tend to be conservatives.[84] In July 2020, United States House Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial and Administrative Law held a congressional hearing of CEOs of Alphabet, Amazon, Apple and Facebook, where some members of the subcommittee raised concerns about alleged bias against conservatives on social media.[85] U.S. Representative for Florida's 1st congressional district Matt Gaetz suggested that the CEO of Amazon Jeff Bezos should "divorce from the SPLC," due to the practice of forbidding donations to organizations which are designated as hate groups by the SPLC.[86]

On November 5, 2020, U. S. President Donald Trump claimed "historic election interference from big money, big media and big tech" and labeled the Democratic Party as "party of the big donors, the big media, the big tech". Conservative paper Washington Times criticized Trump's claim of election fraud as without evidence.[87] On January 6, 2021, during his speech before the crowd of protesters stormed the United States Capitol, Trump accused "Big Tech" of rigging elections and shadow banning conservatives, while promising to hold them accountable and work to "get rid of" Section 230.[88] On January 11, after Trump's Twitter account was suspended, German Chancellor Angela Merkel's chief spokesman Steffen Seibert noted that Merkel found Twitter's halt of Trump's account "problematic", adding that legislators, not private companies, should decide on any necessary curbs to free expression if speech incites to violence.[89][90]

According to a New York University report in February 2021, conservative claims of social media censorship could be a form of disinformation, and an analysis of available data indicated that the claims that right-wing views were censored were false. Nonetheless, the same report also recommended that social media platforms could be more transparent to assuage concerns of ideological censorship, even if those concerns are overblown.[91][92]

Russian opposition figure Alexei Navalny criticized tech giants (specifically Apple and Google) for cooperating with a Russian government order to ban the Smart Voting app.[93]

Censorship against tech giantsEdit

The largest tech platforms have faced censorship themselves. Google have been banned in China since 2010, when they decided to leave the country after the Communist Party demanded censorship of search results.[93][94] although an attempt at establishing Google China was made.[94] Facebook and Twitter have been banned in China since 2009.[94] Microsoft's LinkedIn has been blocked in Russia since 2016.[95]


Alt-tech is a group of websites, social media platforms, and Internet service providers that consider themselves alternatives to more mainstream offerings. In the 2020s, some conservatives who were banned from other social media platforms, and their supporters, began to move toward alt-tech platforms.[96][97][98][99]

Top companies globallyEdit

There were also two Chinese technology companies in the top ten most valuable publicly traded companies globally at the end of the 2010s – Alibaba and Tencent. Smyrnaios argued in 2016 that the Asian giant corporations Samsung Electronics, Alibaba, Baidu and Tencent could or should be included in the definition.[31] China's ByteDance has also been considered Big Tech.[100] Together, this has been referred to as "G-MAFIA + BAT",[101] also including IBM. While a dominant presence in the mobile telephony marketplace, Samsung Electronics is presently dependent on the Android ecosystem, in which Google has major influence, hence Samsung is not included in the BAT formulation, though Samsung is based in Korea.

Other big technology companies on a global scale include Samsung Electronics, Intel, IBM, Cisco Systems, and Oracle. Along with Apple, Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and Tencent they completed the list of top ten technology companies in the world at the end of the 2010s, according to the Forbes Global 2000 list published in 2019, an evaluation based on annual sales, profit, assets, market capitalization, and overall market valuation.[102]


See alsoEdit


  1. ^ "The Economics of Big Tech". Financial Times. March 29, 2018. Retrieved June 6, 2019.
  2. ^ "How much power does tech 'big four' have?". BBC News. Retrieved September 20, 2021.
  3. ^ "Do the U.S.'s Big Four Tech Companies Have a Vision for the Future?". Harvard Business Review. July 24, 2020. ISSN 0017-8012. Retrieved September 20, 2021.
  4. ^ Alcantara, Chris; Schaul, Kevin; Vynck, Gerrit De; Albergotti, Reed. "How Big Tech got so big: Hundreds of acquisitions". Washington Post. Retrieved September 20, 2021.
  5. ^ "We're Stuck With the Tech Giants. But They're Stuck With Each Other". New York Times. November 13, 2019. Retrieved April 22, 2020.
  6. ^ "The 'Big Five' Could Destroy the Tech Ecosystem". November 15, 2017. Retrieved August 28, 2020.
  7. ^ a b "Most Valuable Companies in the World - 2020". FXSSI - Forex Sentiment Board. Archived from the original on January 27, 2020. Retrieved January 27, 2020.
  8. ^ Bursztynsky, Jessica (August 19, 2020). "Apple becomes first U.S. company to reach a $2 trillion market cap". CNBC. Retrieved October 15, 2020.
  9. ^ "Top Companies 2021: The 50 best workplaces to grow your career in the U.S." Retrieved October 5, 2021.
  10. ^ Bariso, Justin (May 30, 2021). "Life at Google vs. Life at Amazon: From Hiring to Firing (and Everything in Between)". Retrieved October 5, 2021.
  11. ^ Rey, Jason Del (February 6, 2020). "Why Congress's antitrust investigation should make Big Tech nervous". Vox. Retrieved February 21, 2020.
  12. ^ PYMNTS (December 11, 2019). "DOJ To Wrap Up Probe Into Big Tech In 2020". Retrieved February 21, 2020.
  13. ^ GmbH, finanzen net. "The DOJ's latest probe erased $33 billion from Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google | Markets Insider". Retrieved February 21, 2020.
  14. ^ "Is Margrethe Vestager championing consumers or her political career?". The Economist. September 14, 2017. Retrieved June 26, 2020.
  15. ^ Privacy, power and censorship: how to regulate big tech, April 29, 2019
  16. ^ "It's almost impossible to function without the big five tech giants | John Naughton". the Guardian. February 17, 2019. Retrieved April 23, 2021.
  17. ^ "What are the Four Big Tech Companies in the US?". WorldAtlas. Retrieved January 27, 2020.
  18. ^ "GAFA Approach to Digital Banking Transformation - Accenture".
  19. ^ Swisher, Kara (July 1, 2020). "Opinion | Here Come the 4 Horsemen of the Techopolypse". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved August 28, 2020.
  20. ^ Galloway, Scott (2017). The Four: The Hidden DNA of Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google. ISBN 978-0525501220.
  21. ^ Johnson, Mark W. (July 24, 2020). "Do the U.S.'s Big Four Tech Companies Have a Vision for the Future?". Harvard Business Review. ISSN 0017-8012. Retrieved September 20, 2020.
  22. ^ ""The Four Horsemen" – An Interview with Scott Galloway". Retrieved October 15, 2020.
  23. ^ a b Simon, Phil (October 22, 2011). The Age of the Platform: How Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google Have Redefined Business (1 ed.). Motion Publishing. p. 312. ISBN 9780982930250.
  24. ^ Schonfeld, Erick (May 31, 2011). "Eric Schmidt's Gang Of Four: Google, Apple, Amazon, And Facebook – TechCrunch". Archived from the original on May 25, 2019. Retrieved May 25, 2019.
  25. ^ Galloway, Scott (2017). The Four: The Hidden DNA of Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google. Random House. ISBN 9781473542105.
  26. ^ "Eric Schmidt's "Gang Of Four" Doesn't Have Room for Microsoft". AllThingsD.
  27. ^ Waters, Richard (July 27, 2018). "Move over Faangs, make way for Maga". Financial Times. Retrieved November 18, 2018.
  28. ^ Stevens, Pippa (April 26, 2019). "Four 'MAGA' stocks are worth a combined $4 trillion. Here's the one to own, say two experts". CNBC. Archived from the original on January 1, 2020. Retrieved January 27, 2020.
  29. ^ "Move over FAANG, here comes MAGA - The tech giants are still in rude health". The Economist. August 4, 2018. Retrieved January 27, 2020.
  30. ^ 김제림 (Kim Je-rim) (May 29, 2019). "'FAANG' 지고 'MAGA' 시대 온다 ("FAANG" is losing and "MAGA" is coming)". 매일경제 (in Korean). Retrieved January 27, 2020.
  31. ^ a b c d e f g Smyrnaios, Nikos (2016). "L'effet GAFAM : stratégies et logiques de l'oligopole de l'internet" [The GAFAM effect: Strategies and logics of the internet oligopoly]. Communication et Langages (in French). NecPlus. 2016 (188): 61–83. doi:10.4074/S0336150016012047. ISSN 0003-5033. Archived from the original on July 13, 2019. Retrieved July 13, 2019.
  32. ^ Grant, Kinsey (September 26, 2017). "FANG Stocks Are Getting Their Own Index". The Street.
  33. ^ Frankel, Matthew (September 29, 2017). "What Are the FANG Stocks?". Motley Fool. Retrieved August 11, 2018.
  34. ^ "FAANG". Retrieved on 2020-10-27 from
  35. ^ Damodaran, Aswath (August 21, 2020). "The Strong (FANGAM Stocks) Get Stronger!". ValueWalk. Retrieved August 23, 2020.
  36. ^ a b Alexandra S. Levine. "Is Twitter angling to become Big Tech?". POLITICO. Retrieved August 8, 2021.
  37. ^ "Big Tech Is Gearing Up for a Massive Fight With Modi's India". Retrieved August 8, 2021.
  38. ^ "From Facebook to Twitter, Big Tech sees social commerce driving sales growth". Reuters. July 29, 2021. Retrieved August 8, 2021.
  39. ^ Fischer, Sara. "Trump sues Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg, Twitter's Jack Dorsey, Google's Sundar Pichai". Axios. Retrieved August 8, 2021.
  40. ^ Jason Paul Whittaker (February 11, 2019), "Introduction", Tech Giants, Artificial Intelligence, and the Future of Journalism (Open Access), Routledge
  41. ^ a b The 'Big Five' Could Destroy the Tech Ecosystem
  42. ^ Yglesias, Matthew (May 3, 2019), The push to break up Big Tech, explained
  43. ^ How 5 Tech Giants Have Become More Like Governments Than Companies, October 26, 2017
  44. ^ Clifford, Tyler (May 6, 2020). "Facebook, Alphabet and Amazon are in a 'three-horse race' in advertising, Jim Cramer says". CNBC.
  45. ^ "Desktop Operating System Market Share Worldwide, Jan 2020". StatCounter GlobalStats. Archived from the original on January 27, 2020. Retrieved January 27, 2020.
  46. ^ Vargas, Cristina (October 25, 2019). "Cloud Market Share 2019: AWS vs Azure vs Google – Who's Winning?". Skyhigh Networks (McAfee). Retrieved January 27, 2020.
  47. ^ Madrigal, Alexis C. (January 15, 2020). "Silicon Valley Abandons the Culture That Made It the Envy of the World". The Atlantic. Retrieved September 29, 2021.
  48. ^ Molla, Rani (April 9, 2018). "Amazon spent nearly $23 billion on R&D last year — more than any other U.S. company". Vox. Retrieved September 29, 2021.
  49. ^ Wu, Tim (July 16, 2019). "Where New Industries Get Their Start: Rebooting the Startup Economy" (PDF). House of Representatives.
  50. ^ "Why tech industry monopolies could be a 'curse' for society". PBS NewsHour. January 17, 2019. Retrieved September 29, 2021.
  51. ^ a b Kennedy, Joe (November 9, 2020). "Monopoly Myths: Is Big Tech Creating "Kill Zones"?". Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  52. ^ Apple, Google and a Deal That Controls the Internet The New York Times, 2020
  53. ^ "The rules of the tech game are changing". The Economist. February 27, 2021. ISSN 0013-0613. Retrieved September 29, 2021.
  54. ^ "FTC to Examine Past Acquisitions by Large Technology Companies". Federal Trade Commission. February 11, 2020.
  55. ^ "FTC's Bureau of Competition Launches Task Force to Monitor Technology Markets". Federal Trade Commission. February 26, 2019.
  56. ^ Cox, Kate (January 9, 2021). "House: Amazon, Facebook, Apple, Google have "monopoly power," should be split". Ars Technica. Retrieved January 9, 2021.
  57. ^ Investigation of Competition in Digital Markets (PDF) (Report). United States House of Representatives. January 2021.
  58. ^ Chairman Nadler's Statement for the markup of H.R.3825 (Report). United States House of Representatives. June 2021.
  59. ^ How lower pricing could make for an Antitrust case against Amazon (Report). May 2019.
  60. ^ Dieterle, David (October 14, 2014). Government and the Economy. ISBN 978-1-4408-2903-1.
  61. ^ "Why the Consumer Welfare Standard Should Remain the Bedrock of Antitrust Policy" (PDF). Information Technology & Innovation Foundation. October 5, 2018.
  62. ^ "Investment Heroes 2019: Boosting U.S. Growth". Progressive Policy. December 12, 2019.
  63. ^ Breuninger, Kevin; Feiner, Lauren (July 9, 2021). "Biden signs order to crack down on Big Tech, boost competition 'across the board'". CNBC. Retrieved July 9, 2021.
  64. ^ Sullivan, Kate; Fung, Brian; Klein, Betsy (July 9, 2021). "Biden signs sweeping executive order that targets Big Tech and aims to push competition in US economy". CNN. Retrieved July 9, 2021.
  65. ^ The Verge, June 16, 2020 EU Opens Apple Antitrust Investigations into App Store and Apple Pay practices
  66. ^ Open Markets Institute, The Corner Newsletter, June 25, 2020, Open Markets Examines the European Commission's Newly Announced Investigation into Potentially Anti-competitive Practices by Apple
  67. ^ Parliament of the European Union, Hearing of Margrethe Vestager 8 Oct. 2019 p. 28
  68. ^ Bose, Nandita (September 23, 2021). "EXCLUSIVE Big Tech targeted by U.S. and EU in draft memo ahead of tech and trade meeting". Reuters. Retrieved September 29, 2021.
  69. ^ Pisani, Bob (October 3, 2017). "We are letting Amazon and Apple 'avoid taxes, invade privacy, and destroy jobs,' says NYU professor". CNBC.
  70. ^ Bougon, François (May 21, 2019). "Face aux Gafam, les députés adoptent le droit voisin" [Members of Parliament pass a related rights law against GAFAM] (in French). Le Monde. Archived from the original on May 25, 2019. Retrieved May 26, 2019.
  71. ^ Seetharaman, Deepa (November 15, 2018). "Facebook Says Criticism of Its Russia Response Is 'Unfair'". Wall Street Journal. ISSN 0099-9660. Retrieved August 6, 2021.
  72. ^ Illing, Sean (October 16, 2017). "Cambridge Analytica, the shady data firm that might be a key Trump-Russia link, explained". Vox. Retrieved August 6, 2021.
  73. ^ Volz, Georgia Wells, Robert McMillan and Dustin (October 8, 2019). "Senate Faults Google, Other Tech Giants for Role in Russian Election Meddling". Wall Street Journal. ISSN 0099-9660. Retrieved August 6, 2021.
  74. ^ Roose, Kevin; Frenkel, Sheera; Perlroth, Nicole (March 29, 2020). "Tech Giants Prepared for 2016-Style Meddling. But the Threat Has Changed". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved August 6, 2021.
  75. ^ "YouTube says it's getting better at taking down videos that break its rules. They still number in the millions". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved August 6, 2021.
  76. ^ "'Ya Basta Facebook' Says Company Must Curb Misinformation In Spanish". Retrieved August 6, 2021.
  77. ^ "Just 12 People Are Behind Most Vaccine Hoaxes On Social Media, Research Shows". Retrieved August 6, 2021.
  78. ^ "E&C Committee Announces Hearing with Tech CEOs on the Misinformation and Disinformation Plaguing Online Platforms". Democrats, Energy and Commerce Committee. February 18, 2021. Retrieved August 6, 2021.
  79. ^ "Google, Facebook Twitter grilled in US on fake news". BBC News. March 25, 2021. Retrieved August 6, 2021.
  80. ^ "Biden softens criticism of Facebook after accusing company of 'killing people'". NBC News. Retrieved August 6, 2021.
  81. ^ Silverman, Jacob; Noah, Timothy; Noah, Timothy; Ford, Matt; Ford, Matt; Segers, Grace; Segers, Grace; Konczal, Mike; Sterling, Steph (July 19, 2021). "Facebook Is Designed to Spread Covid Misinformation". The New Republic. ISSN 0028-6583. Retrieved August 6, 2021.
  82. ^ "Defying rules, anti-vaccine accounts thrive on social media". AP NEWS. April 20, 2021. Retrieved August 6, 2021.
  83. ^ "Big Tech's Heavy Hand Around the Globe". Human Rights Watch. September 8, 2020. Retrieved September 29, 2021.
  84. ^ McCullagh, Declan (February 2019). "Deplatforming Is a Dangerous Game". Reason. Archived from the original on March 31, 2019.
  85. ^ "Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google grilled on Capitol Hill over their market power". Washington Post. July 29, 2020. Retrieved August 28, 2021.
  86. ^ Breland, Ali. "In attacking Amazon, Matt Gaetz boosts a terrorist organization". Mother Jones. Retrieved August 28, 2021.
  87. ^ "Trump Blames 'Big Media, Big Tech' as he Rails Against Election 'Fraud' Without Evidence". Washington Times. November 5, 2020. Retrieved January 12, 2021.
  88. ^ "This is what Trump told supporters before many stormed Capitol Hill". ABC News. Retrieved January 10, 2021. The fake news and the big tech, big tech, is now coming into their own. We beat them four years ago, we surprised them. We took him by surprise and this year they rigged an election, they rigged it like they have never rigged an election before, and by the way, last night, they didn't do a bad job either, if you notice. I am honest, and I just again, I want to thank you. It's just a great honor to have this kind of crowd and to be before you and hundreds of thousands of American patriots who are committed to the honesty of our elections and the integrity of our glorious Republic.
  89. ^ France-Presse, Agence (January 11, 2021). "Angela Merkel finds Twitter's block on Trump's account 'problematic'". Telegraph. Retrieved January 12, 2021.
  90. ^ "'Problematic': Germany's Angela Merkel calls out Twitter over Trump ban". Global News. January 11, 2021. Retrieved January 12, 2021.
  91. ^ "Analysis | The Technology 202: New report calls conservative claims of social media censorship 'a form of disinformation'". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved August 28, 2021.
  92. ^ "Tech - Bias Report 2021". NYU Stern Center for Business and Human Rights. Retrieved August 28, 2021.
  93. ^ a b "Apple, Google raise new concerns by yanking Russian app". AP NEWS. September 22, 2021. Retrieved September 29, 2021.
  94. ^ a b c Leskin, Paige. "Here are all the major US tech companies blocked behind China's 'Great Firewall'". Business Insider. Retrieved September 29, 2021.
  95. ^ "Facebook, Google others face higher fines in Russia as Kremlin cracks down". South China Morning Post. September 21, 2021. Retrieved September 29, 2021.
  96. ^ Roose, Kevin (December 11, 2017). "The Alt-Right Created a Parallel Internet. It's an Unholy Mess". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved September 4, 2020.
  97. ^ Cogley, Michael (July 6, 2020). "'Alt-tech' attracts growing number of extremists in Britain". The Daily Telegraph. ISSN 0307-1235. Retrieved September 4, 2020.
  98. ^ Ellis, Emma Grey (September 27, 2017). "Red Pilled: My Bizarre Week Using the Alt-Right's Vision of the Internet". Wired. ISSN 1059-1028. Retrieved September 4, 2020.
  99. ^ Malter, Jordan (November 10, 2017). "Alt-Tech platforms: A haven for fringe views online". CNN Money. Retrieved September 4, 2020.
  100. ^ Nast, Condé. "Why China crushed its tech giants". Wired UK. ISSN 1357-0978. Retrieved September 29, 2021.
  101. ^ Sterling, Bruce (March 15, 2019). "The Big Nine G-MAFIA BAT". Wired. Retrieved August 10, 2019.
  102. ^ Ponciano, Jonathan (May 15, 2019), "The Largest Technology Companies In 2019: Apple Reigns As Smartphones Slip And Cloud Services Thrive", Forbes

External linksEdit