COVID-19, Big Tech, and Society: An STS Analysis of a Digital Transformation

The COVID-19 pandemic was a defining moment in the global shift towards digital technologies. From a Science and Technology Studies (STS) perspective, this transition wasn’t just a reaction to a health crisis—it was a complex socio-technical event, shaped by the interplay of technology, society, and power structures. In this article, we explore how Big Tech companies became central players in this digital shift and examine the ethical, political, and social issues it raises.

Understanding the Pandemic as a Socio-Technical System

In STS, technologies are seen as more than just neutral tools—they’re shaped by and embedded within the broader socio-political landscape. The swift adoption of digital platforms during the pandemic shows how technologies are co-produced with societal values and governance structures. Companies like Amazon, Microsoft, and Google became essential during the crisis, offering infrastructure for remote work, online learning, and health tracking. At the same time, their involvement reshaped societal norms around work, communication, and surveillance【11】【12】.

The pandemic acted as a “moment of contingency”—a crisis that exposed existing inequalities and vulnerabilities in our socio-technical systems. For instance, the growing reliance on digital systems highlighted the power imbalance between tech companies and their users. As the crisis deepened, corporations took advantage of the situation to solidify their grip on various sectors【10】【11】.

The “Great Acceleration”: A Crisis-Driven Innovation?

STS frameworks often show how crises spur technological innovation and reshape social systems. The pandemic accelerated the adoption of technologies like cloud computing, artificial intelligence, and telehealth. These technologies had been developing for years but saw widespread adoption almost overnight. A McKinsey report noted that digital transformations that were predicted to take years occurred within just a few months during the pandemic, permanently changing business and societal practices【12】.

However, this rapid adoption raised critical questions about who actually benefits from these innovations. While many people gained access to new services, the digital divide grew wider. Communities without reliable internet or digital literacy were often left behind, underscoring the deep socio-technical inequalities that were amplified by the pandemic【10】.

Big Tech and the Politics of Technological Governance

The pandemic also brought renewed attention to the governance of digital technologies. From an STS perspective, the growing power of Big Tech is a form of “technological lock-in,” where the concentration of infrastructure and data creates dependencies that are hard to break. Governments turned to tech companies to create COVID-19 tracking apps and digital health platforms, granting them unprecedented access to sensitive data【11】【12】.

At the same time, concerns about privacy and surveillance grew. The rollout of contact-tracing systems, for example, highlighted the tension between public health needs and individual rights. STS scholars argue that technologies like these are not neutral—they reflect specific values like efficiency and control, often at the cost of transparency and inclusivity【11】.

Reimagining Society: An STS Critique of the “New Normal”

The concept of the “new normal” refers to a new socio-technical landscape shaped by Big Tech’s vision of a digitally mediated world. From remote work to virtual education, the pandemic led to significant changes in how society functions. Yet, these shifts often reinforced tech-centric solutions while marginalizing alternative approaches. For example, the rise of remote learning benefited EdTech companies but did little to address deep-rooted inequalities in access to education【10】【11】.

STS scholars emphasize the importance of participatory approaches to technological development. Rather than simply accepting a future dictated by Big Tech, we need to engage in broader, inclusive conversations about the values guiding these changes. This means questioning the power of Big Tech and exploring alternative models of governance and technological innovation【11】.

Conclusion

From an STS standpoint, the pandemic’s digital transformation illustrates the co-production of technology and society. Big Tech’s pivotal role in this transformation highlights the need for critical engagement with the ethical and social implications of rapid technological change. As society navigates this new era, we must confront the challenges posed by digital inequality, ensuring that technology benefits everyone, not just the powerful few.

The COVID-19 crisis, then, is not just a story of technological progress—it’s an opportunity to rethink the values and structures that shape our future. In doing so, we can ensure that the future of technology is one that works for all, rather than just for those in charge.

References

1. McKinsey & Company. (2020). The COVID-19 Digital Transformation: How the Pandemic is Accelerating Innovation. McKinsey & Company.
2. Zuboff, Shoshana. (2019). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. PublicAffairs.
3. Srnicek, Nick. (2017). Platform Capitalism. Polity Press.
4. Fuchs, Christian. (2020). Digital Surveillance and the COVID-19 Crisis: New Opportunities for Big Tech. Springer.
5. Jasanoff, Sheila. (2004). States of Knowledge: The Co-Production of Science and Social Order. Routledge.
6. Star, Susan Leigh. (1999). The Ethnography of Infrastructure. American Behavioral Scientist, 43(3), 377-391.
7. Graham, Mark, & Shalizi, Sharif. (2021). COVID-19 and the Digital Divide: Understanding the Pandemic’s Impact on Digital Inequalities. Journal of Digital Culture & Society, 7(1), 15-27.