The Invisible Hand of Big Tech: Influencing Policy and Society in Latin America

This article is part of the project “The Invisible Hand of Big Tech,” led by Agência Pública and El Centro Latinoamericano de Investigación Periodística (CLIP), alongside 15 other organizations from 13 countries. Read more about the project and find other articles in the series here.

The Digital Dialogues in Latin America

In a striking exchange captured on social media, Colombian congressman Diego Caicedo asks his colleague Pablo Nieto, “What should we, as members of Congress, be doing about artificial intelligence?” Nieto’s response emphasizes creating frameworks that promote AI and listening to all stakeholders.

This interaction, seemingly casual, illustrates a much deeper and orchestrated effort by Big Tech firms like Google, Amazon, Meta, and Microsoft to shape the regulatory landscape of Latin America. This web of influence extends beyond lawmakers to lobbyists, advocacy groups, industry associations, and even experts or former officials who frame corporate interests as matters of public good.

Big Tech often avoids direct lobbying, opting for intermediaries such as law firms and policy groups, which organize international conferences, engage in stakeholder dialogue, and provide “thought leadership” to government ministries. Their strategy is succinctly described by Andrés Hernández of Transparencia por Colombia: they seek access to decision-makers to influence critical political and regulatory decisions.

A Framework of Influence

Many Latin American nations find their policymaking processes significantly shaped by Big Tech’s tactics. Unlike industries such as mining or pharmaceuticals that traditionally lobby within their confines, tech companies penetrate virtually every aspect of modern life. They’re integral to communication, navigation, information sharing, and more, making their influence not just pervasive but also crucial, especially as AI continues embedding itself into daily routines.

The parent company of Google, Alphabet, defines its mission as “to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful,” reflecting its growing integration into everyday life. Similarly, Meta’s platforms like WhatsApp and Instagram collect vast amounts of user data, turning them into detailed profiles that can be used for targeted advertising, affecting political campaigning and public opinion.

Regulatory Responses and Challenges

Given their unprecedented influence over critical issues like human rights, social welfare, and public health, regulating Big Tech’s activities is essential. However, this investigative series dubbed “The Invisible Hand of Big Tech” suggests that such regulatory efforts face myriad challenges. The companies possess substantial resources to contest regulations, often framing themselves as innovators while hiding behind complex algorithms that shield their operations from scrutiny.

The data compiled by the journalistic alliance highlights that since 2019, governments in 11 countries and the EU have introduced at least 801 bills aimed at mitigating the adverse effects of Big Tech. These initiatives vary from creating online safety measures to enforcing data protection laws. Despite this, powerful lobbying against stricter regulations often stymies any substantive progress.

For instance, a comprehensive database revealed nearly 3,000 distinct influence actions across 10 countries from 2019 to mid-2025, involving over 1,500 tech representatives interacting with thousands of public officials. It demonstrates the highly orchestrated efforts to ensure laws remain favorable to tech giants.

Digiecon 2025: A Convergence of Interests

A notable event in this web of influence was Digiecon 2025, held in Mexico City, where 15 lawmakers from across Latin America convened with executives from tech giants like TikTok, Meta, and Google to discuss the implications of the digital economy on socio-economic development. The Latin American Internet Association (ALAI) organized this meeting—a group that represents the collective interests of these tech companies.

Many attendees from the event have emerged as prominent voices in their respective legislatures, either advocating for or stalling tech-friendly legislation. The implications of this event resonate across regulatory frameworks, indicating a concerning pattern of alignment between legislative interests and corporate agendas.

Lobbying Efforts Revealed

The minutiae of tech lobbying reveal many layers of access and influence. For example, Colombian congressman Caicedo introduced a commission to explore pending AI bills, but critics argue it was a strategic move to undermine legislative efforts aimed at stricter regulations.

Into this mix enters Nieto, a significant figure within ALAI, who has maintained regular contact and influence over Colombian lawmakers while organizing both public and private discussions to advocate tech interests. This pattern of lobbying, marked by frequent visits and personal interactions, illustrates how closely entwined corporate interests are with political decision-making.

In Ecuador, Nieto also played an instrumental role in shaping regulations following the introduction of a Data Protection Law, indicative of how interests can subtly navigate policy-making environments with minimal transparency.

The Role of Informal Networks

ALAI isn’t alone in the lobbying landscape; more international associations like the Information Technology Industry Council (ITI) have been making waves in Brazil. ITI recently convened meetings with government bodies to advocate for tech-centric regulations while emphasizing their mission to promote industry growth—often at the expense of local regulations.

This interplay of lobbying interests shows a well-oiled machine at work, where tech representatives craft messages that resonate with policymakers while only ever revealing their position as a collective industry benefit, pushing back against more equitable regulatory proposals.

Legal Battles: A Complex Interplay

Legal battles intertwined with lobbying efforts highlight the multifaceted approach of Big Tech in Latin America. For example, in Brazil, the law firm Bialer Falsetti Associados represents Meta in data protection disputes while simultaneously participating in discussions with lawmakers.

This dual role raises ethical questions about conflict of interest, as their presence in legal frameworks often aligns with lobbying activities aimed at shaping legislative outcomes favorable to tech interests. Similar patterns have emerged in Colombia, where lawyers representing Big Tech also engage in legislative debates, further entrenching corporate positions within the legal system.

Navigating a Complex Regulatory Landscape

The revolving door between government and tech firms allows influential lobbyists who once held public office to navigate regulatory landscapes more freely. In Brazil, about 68% of tracked lobbyists for tech companies have a background in public service, which raises eyebrows about the fairness of legislative processes.

Notably, the example of Colombia’s attempted response to Worldcoin’s iris-scanning technology demonstrates how rapidly the regulatory landscape can shift under corporate influence. When faced with potential pushback from regulators, companies often employ strategies that cocoon their interests within friendly narratives while marginalizing local concerns.

The Technology Divide: An Unequal Landscape

For Latin American users, reliance on platforms like TikTok, WhatsApp, and YouTube underscores their indispensable role in daily life. However, regulatory oversight remains weak, and users struggle to understand how to lodge complaints or assert their rights. Local support often dissipates, particularly when tech companies operate without dedicated offices in the region.

Research suggests that a significant number of families in Latin America lack effective digital tools to safeguard their children online. Regulatory protections for data usage or online content filtering remain lacking and are often ineffectively implemented. Citizens find themselves at a distinct disadvantage when trying to engage with entities wielding immense influence over their online experiences.

Conclusion: Navigating the Future

Efforts to regulate Big Tech in Latin America are still growing amidst a range of societal disparities and uneven historical development of digital rights and user protections. As user demands for safety, privacy, and accountability increase, the extent of corporate influence on public policy remains a critical area for ongoing discourse, illustrating the need for balance between innovation and regulatory oversight.

For a thriving digital landscape, it’s essential that citizens, lawmakers, and civil society organizations work together to create robust frameworks that prioritize user rights and foster a healthier relationship between technology and society.