The 2025 presidential inauguration was historic. It was the first in 50 years to be held indoors, and only the second inauguration in America’s history for a President serving a non-consecutive second term. It’s apparent Trump has no problem with breaking tradition; since his precedent-breaking inauguration, his onslaught of executive orders have been testing the limits of the presidential power, and are already garnering lawsuits from state governments. While Trump’s willingness to bend the rules to fit his vision is apparent, what scared me most about the inauguration was not the new president. It was those sitting in the front row.
Sitting in front of the cabinet, in front of all of the supposedly most influential politicians of Capitol Hill, were all of the richest tech CEOs of our time. Elon Musk, already dubbed Trump’s “Co-President;” Mark Zuckerberg, who’s notably shifted Meta’s policies and his own rhetoric towards the right; Jeff Bezos of Amazon; and Sundar Pichai of Google were just some of the men given a front row seat. So, what’s so terrifying about these tech titans? For me, it’s not necessarily their obscene wealth, it’s the specific way these men do and continue to use it. What do X, Meta, Amazon, and Google have in common that sets them apart from any other mega-rich company? It’s that they have hands in the exchange of information, whether through social media or news outlets. And what do Musk, Zuckerberg, Bezos, and Pichai have in common? They have a shameless willingness to bend over backwards for more money and power.
When you think of tech billionaires like the ones who sat in the front row, it might be binary code or computers that come to mind. It’s certainly true that men like Musk and Zuckerberg got rich through software and tech, but the oligarch-like power they’ve amassed comes from a novel, different industry: information. Take Elon Musk and X. Yes, he was already in the top 10 wealthiest people in the world before buying X, but with its purchase, he became exponentially more powerful. In a world where 59% of X users report regularly consuming news from social media sites, the amount of influence that an algorithm can have on an electorate is immeasurable. For $44 billion dollars, Musk effectively bought a source of information for millions of people. Musk himself said he bought the platform for “civilization to have a common digital town square.” It’s clear that from that start, Musk had every intention to treat X as a tool of influence. It’s the same with Zuckerberg: his site Facebook was accused of pushing misinformation during the 2016 election cycle. This kind of information oligarchy isn’t limited to social media, either. Bezos’ takeover of the Washington Post and Pichai’s direct control of Google’s algorithm dictate which websites and information are prioritized, giving them the kind of influence that could decide presidential elections.
The press has always been run privately, so what makes these particular information titans so dangerous? The difference is, with a newspaper or news show, everyone gets the same information, and more often than not, you’re paying to receive it. Social media has the ability to show different people different things, all for free—which means their profit comes from somewhere else. While it might feel like you’re the consumer, the user is actually the product. X, TikTok, and Instagram all have adaptive feeds to hold your attention. The profit comes from selling this attention to advertisers, businesses, and whoever else could benefit from holding people’s attention. Remember that 54% of Americans say they consume news from social media, and that the average American spends over two hours online a day. That’s an average two hours of information intake a day. With this kind of time, algorithms are so tailored to you, that they’ve it’s been shown to not just align with your opinions, but shape them. According to a study conducted by Wael Jabr, an assistant professor on information systems at Pennsylvania State, social media posts can alter the way people see issues from the economy to immigration, especially among centrist voters. The experiment showed that when voters are exposed to social media, algorithms can sway even, for example, left- leaning moderates to become hardline right wingers.
That power over users can be sold too, and it’s very valuable. It’s easy to see how controlling the holders of all of this influence can be. In a hyperconnected world, there’s a surplus of information. This means that those who can capture attention get to choose which information is really consumed. When that attention is then sold for profit, there’s nothing stopping the content chosen from being false, polarizing, or hateful if it generates more user interaction and therefore more money. In fact, a study by MIT professors finds that true stories take six times longer than false news to reach 1500 people on X. It’s clear from the intense polarization and rampant spread of false news online that these billionaires are set on making as much profit as possible.
Now, go back to three months ago. With the election of Donald Trump as the next president, these billionaires were given an unprecedented opportunity. President Trump is characterized by his extreme platform, one that relies on media companies’ willingness to push extreme content. It’s clear President Trump has no problem promoting and supporting this industry, so long as it adheres to his agenda. It’s a win-win—tech billionaires gain the power of the presidency to capture even more attention, and Trump gets influence over half of America.
If you’re Elon Musk, you’ve known this is true forsince two years ago, when you helped Trump launch his presidential campaign. Since his purchase of X, and his first investment in the world of influence, Musk’s public persona has gone completely opposite from his previous self. Originally a centrist moderate, promoting Democratic candidates for US offices and denouncing Trump during his first term, Musk’s rhetoric and beliefs have grown more extreme, spewing conspiracies and ranting about the “woke mind virus.” This shift in perspective is what drew Trump to work with him, and thus what made Musk essentially the second most powerful man in America. It’s the same story with Zuckerberg. In the past he has claimed to stay out of politics, but after the election, his actions have proven otherwise: Meta has axed fact checking policies, restrictions on hate speech, and DEI programs. He even hosted the black tie post-inauguration reception; it’s clear Zuckerberg is shamelessly kissing the ring. Even Bezos’ statements regarding the President have changed from completely critical to amicable. That’s what’s terrifying about these people: they have no values. Musk cut ties with his daughter and wife, and Zuckerberg his dignity, all to appease Trump to get more money and power. Oligarchy is bad enough. But one where those in charge will drop any preexisting thought, moral, or rule for power means there’s no end to what they’re willing to do. It’s dangerous to have an easily flattered and uninformed leader as a president. It’s worse to have that leader puppeted by spineless people driven only by greed, and devastating when that influence doesn’t just extend to those in power, but potentially over half the country.
I don’t want the moral of this story to be that our country is forever beholden to the rich; in fact, it should give you a little hope. The good thing about the attention economy is that you have the final say over where you put your attention. So if you’re feeling hopeless or powerless, know that the first step of resistance is self agency. Actively choose what you consume. Pay attention to solid things, not just headlines that evoke emotion. Invest in real journalism. These billionaires shouldn’t control the country, so don’t let them control how you think.
Works Cited
https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/fact-sheet/social-media-and-news-fact-sheet/
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-63408384
https://www.the-independent.com/tech/elon-musk-twitter-x-trump-far-right-nazi-salute-b2683986.html
https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/fact-sheet/social-media-and-news-fact-sheet/
https://journalism.uoregon.edu/news/media-influence-on-politics
https://www.npr.org/2024/09/11/nx-s1-5107969/elon-musk-twitter-x-trump-audit
https://news.mit.edu/2018/study-twitter-false-news-travels-faster-true-stories-0308
