Mapping Discourse Networks on the Politics of the Digital Transition: Hegemony, Leadership, Resistance.

This paper is part of a broader research project that examines alternative ideologies and imaginaries surrounding the digital transition to platform societies, as articulated by partisan and non-partisan political (or politically relevant) actors in the Global North. Grounded in critical digital studies and building on the author’s prior research (Guglielmo, 2024), the paper starts from the premise that three primary types of discourse have emerged to shape alternative models of the digital transition. First, platform neoliberalism has established digital commodification as the governing principle of platform societies (Fuchs, 2019). Second, a "digital centre," referred to as social liberalism 4.0, advocates for viewing the digital transition as a phenomenon to be regulated, aiming to forge new social consensus while advancing political and social rights. Third, platform socialism promotes the idea of the digital commons—emphasising the shared production, distribution, and consumption of digital goods as a means to disrupt capitalist social orders (Kioupkiolis, 2022). More recently, a variant of platform neoliberalism along nativist lines has emerged, exemplified by the alt-right and supported by tech tycoons such as Elon Musk. While the contours of these discourses on the digital transition are relatively well-established, less is known about how they connect across positions or, crucially, about the processes, contexts, and actors through which new hegemonic discourses emerge. This paper addresses this critical gap, offering significant contributions to our understanding of the politics of digital transition. To achieve this, I employ the Discourse Network Analysis (DNA) method to identify affiliation, actor congruence, conflict, concept congruence, and dynamic discourse networks. The data collection process, still ongoing, spans 30 countries (EU27, the UK, the US, and Canada) and involves approximately 300 actors. These include leaders of major political parties, key policymakers at both national and EU levels, and principal stakeholders in the digital transition, such as big-tech companies (e.g., Alphabet-Google, Amazon, Apple, Meta, Microsoft) and alternative platforms (e.g., Fair Crowd Work). Preliminary analysis reveals three key findings: 1. Discourse networks reflect the tripartite model identified by critical digital scholars, with affiliation and conflict relations aligning along the axes of platform neoliberals, social liberals 4.0, and platform socialists. 2. Platform neoliberals and social liberals 4.0 form a discursive alliance, constituting a hegemonic bloc that shapes the prevailing discourse on the digital transition. 3. Across all networks, non-partisan stakeholders emerge as discourse leaders, significantly shaping key imaginaries of the digital transition. For platform neoliberals, this includes "tech-giant" leaders who simultaneously occupy roles as political leaders. For opponents, the "digital commons" movement plays a similar discursive leadership role. An additional finding is that, since 2015, there has been an evolution of the platform neoliberal pole into a "network of networks" characterised by intra-hegemonic tensions. These tensions are marked by nativist affiliations opposing techno-libertarian ones, leading to a significant fragmentation within the hegemonic discourse of the Global North. Ultimately, this paper provides an innovative comparative analysis of the discursive divides and leadership of platform societies, offering a foundation for further research on policymaking on the digital transition and artificial intelligence.