DIGITAL COLONIALISM: HOW BIG TECHS MARGINALIZE INDIGENOUS RIGHTS
Written by Aakash Varma & Prasi Jain students at Gujarat National Law University, Silvassa Campus Indigenous knowledge is not only the foundation of modern science; it is also what could be described as the reference and referral centre- by Suman Suhaiu Indigenous knowledge systems were preserved through narrative, song, Aboriginal Rock Art, Paintings, and sacred spaces in recent times. Now, such knowledge is being digitized and commodified without one’s consent, silently learned by cloud servers ruled by Big Tech terms and conditions rather than Indigenous treaties or tribal law. The Big Tech corporations are not just providing platforms; they are redefining ownership, their identity, and governance in digital spaces at the cost of Indigenous rights. This has been termed as digital colonialism, in which Global North Big Techs control the Global South’s data and their virtual space. Unlike traditional colonialism, in which colonizers took control over the land and labour, this new world takes data, including the cultural heritage, knowledge systems, and languages of Indigenous peoples. This blog attempts to illustrate how Big Techs of the global north practice exclusion and marginalization of Indigenous peoples. We examine how digital infrastructure and data governance systems reiterate colonial hierarchies in the name of progress and inclusion of all. Because in a more networked and coded world, Indigenous sovereignty must extend beyond land, into data, algorithms, and the digital future itself. A single decree rearranged the world in 1493. The Papal Bull “Inter Caetera” by Pope Alexander VI granted Spain the divine right to take over, convert, and colonize the new lands, known as terra nullius (vacant lands), so-called “discovered” by Columbus, which Indigenous Peoples already inhabited and nowadays known as the “Doctrine of Discovery”. Today, the same pattern is repeated via digital colonialism, as Big Tech corporations of the Global North dominate data, infrastructure, and digital ecosystems. Just as the Papal Bull rendered Indigenous nations invisible to the law, platform governance today disenfranchises Indigenous peoples from the ownership of their data, their representation, and their access to digital means. There is hidden consent in legal “terms and conditions.” Data are pulled out, commodified, and centralised, sometimes even without consultation or benefit to the very same people who create it. As with imperial monopolies, tech monopolies design algorithms and data silos that solidify control. And where colonialism had its “civilization” excuse, Big Tech is now using “innovation” and “connectivity” as a moral rationale for digital extractivism.The legal instrument may differ from that time, from papal bulls to policies, but the rationale behind it is similar; some will dominate and define the world, while others are expected to accept it and adapt. This blog focuses on Adivasi communities dwelling in the Niyamgiri Hills, such as the Dongria Kondh of Odisha. Each stream, each forest, each animal has deep meaning for them, and the territory is ecological as well as spiritual for them. They went out against mining ventures because they feared that destruction of the habitat, water contamination as well as deforestation would compromise the environment and their way of life. Māori Tribe of New Zealand, who are considered the original settlers of two large islands known as New Zealand, protested against the government as they misused census data collected for the 2023 census. How Digital Platforms affect Indigenous community? For indigenous people, digital platforms are a double-edged sword. They provide voice and visibility, but they also carry the potential of cultural dilution, exploitation, and commodification. Negative impacts of Digital Platforms on Indigenous community: With 76.9% of the top 10 most spoken languages in the world, these languages dominate digital content. The lack of support for indigenous scripts restricts participation and the sharing of the information. Native language loss and cultural deterioration are further accelerated by language simplification by digital platforms. Digital media interactions have an effect on indigenous people’s mental health especially when these platforms facilitate online harassment and their community is subject to mockery. Indigenous digital sovereignty means the right of the indigenous community to exercise control over their digital assets, data, and infrastructure that supports the community. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDPA) 2023 introduced by Indian government sidelines collective data rights needed for indigenous peoples in favour of individual rights of consent, correction, and erasure. It contains no special protections for data from AI, digital mapping, surveillance systems, or health systems. Indigenous digital sovereignty is exposed as processes of consent are at cross purposes and out of reach due to language, culture, and technological barriers. UNDRIP affirms individual rights over cultural heritage and it supports data sovereignty, but it is nonbinding in nature, and this affects countries like India. The principle of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) is for indigenous communities, but it is hard to enforce digitally. India’s DPDP Act is not well-suited to the demands of Indigenous peoples because it emphasizes individual consent and lacks community-based methods. The execution of FPIC is further undermined by digital illiteracy, power disparities, and disregard for collective rights, which exposes Indigenous digital data to abuse. In the tribal areas of Andhra Pradesh, India, a new pattern of colonization is unfolding, yet not through violence, but through data and control of the digital realm. Through the Andhra Pradesh Rural Inclusive Growth Project (APRIGP), digital platforms were created to track and monitor Adivasi (Indigenous) farmers, purportedly facilitating agribusiness inclusion. Instead of empowerment, these technologies have undercut customary governance and disrespected Free, Prior, and Informed Consent following the colonial trends. Village councils were excluded as the corporate actors adopted top-down digital systems without local involvement. In this case, data governance is a space of dispossession, where technology shapes land, labor, and identity that communities are not able to shape. Big Tech Platforms and the Mental Health Crisis Among Indigenous Youth Native American tribes in the U.S. have sued Big Tech for claiming that platform algorithms damage Indigenous youth and exacerbate mental health emergencies. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Native American teenagers have a statistically higher rate of suicide in their communities, which is up