The Tech Policy Press Podcast

Episode: The Open Internet is Dead. What Comes Next?
Date: October 12, 2025
Host: Justin Hendricks
Guests: Mallory Knodle (Executive Director, Social Web Foundation; Editor, Internet Exchange), Bertrade Kalut (Senior Fellow, CG)

Episode Overview

This episode explores the provocative claim that the “open Internet” as we knew it no longer exists. Host Justin Hendricks interviews Mallory Knodle and Bertrade Kalut, co-authors of the widely discussed essay "Big Tech Redefined the Open Internet to Serve Its Own Interests." Together, they dissect how policy choices, corporate consolidation, and power struggles—fueled by the rise of AI—have led to the demise of a truly open and interoperable Internet. The discussion covers decades of tech policy, the co-option of "openness," problematic regulation, and what can be done at this pivotal moment.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The State of the Open Internet

[00:46 - 07:32]

• Simplified Mental Model vs. Reality:
  Most people imagine the Internet as open and interoperable—think standard protocols like TCP/IP and HTTP. In reality, services are highly consolidated, and major networks rely on proprietary implementations.

  “It’s the oversimplified model... we’re not even using exactly those same protocols anymore. The major services that are on the Internet are highly consolidated... We have to be careful about our advocacy when we’re advocating for open and interoperable systems so that it doesn’t reinforce some of these dynamics.”
  — Mallory Knodle [05:30]

• Symptom of Centralization:
  Fragmentation, once a hot topic in governance circles, has been untangled as a result of massive centralization, both in networks and services.

2. How Big Tech Killed the Open Internet

[08:01 - 13:00]

• Historical Choices & Surveillance Capitalism:
  The Clinton administration’s “do nothing” approach in the 1990s let industry self-regulate, setting the stage for Silicon Valley dominance.

  "When [Clinton] came back, you know, Clinton asked him so what are we going to do about the Internet? And his response was nothing. We are not going to do anything because we will let the industry regulate itself."
  — Bertrade Kalut [08:01]

• Corporate Capture of “Openness”:
  Companies invoked "openness" to resist regulation, evade accountability, and consolidate control over both infrastructure and data, all under the guise of innovation.

3. The Co-option and Evolution of “Openness”

[16:52 - 18:49]

• What Was “Open,” and When Did That Change?
  • The concept of “open” once meant decentralization, permissionless innovation, and true interoperability.
  • Now, "open" is often just branding—see OpenAI—while tech companies leverage the rhetoric of openness to legitimize walled gardens and vendor lock-in.

  “It’s been really easy for... these large companies to sort of flip that meaning.”
  — Mallory Knodle [17:19]

4. Regulatory and Policy Failures

[18:49 - 26:09]

• Regulation as a Double-Edged Sword:
  Data protection laws like the GDPR have not only been under-enforced, but also co-opted by Big Tech to strengthen their market dominance (hurting SMEs, stifling alternatives).

• Trade Deals and Global Power Politics:
  U.S. trade policy, often conducted out of public sight, empowered Big Tech abroad and made regulation daunting for other countries:

  “The ecosystem... is protected by the broader trade rules and the trade agreements... Tech companies were very, very invested in trade agreements and making sure that this system that they created is reinforced, is protected.”
  — Bertrade Kalut [22:05]

• Policy Distraction and Layers of Power:
  Most advocates focused on consumer-facing tech regulation, missing the deeper layers of power (trade agreements, infrastructure) that cemented Big Tech’s dominance.

  “We think of this as a layer cake... Bridget [Bertrade] is talking about the very top. We were... paying attention to the middle... there was something even lower... the tech layer...”
  — Mallory Knodle [26:09]

5. AI: The Ultimate Concentration of Power

[28:29 - 36:56]

• Centralization Intensified:
  The rise of AI reinforces and accelerates these patterns. There is no market incentive for interoperability in AI—massive, proprietary data becomes the new moat.

  “There is no incentive to interoperate when it comes to AI. None. In fact, it is the product of this centralization…”
  — Mallory Knodle [29:03]

• Historic Parallels:
  Today’s “AI moment” mirrors the early Internet: claims of uniqueness and complexity justify self-regulation, innovation beat regulation, and dependencies quickly form.

  “It’s almost like 30 years later we are at the same point... They keep telling us that AI is so special... let us self-regulate.”
  — Bertrade Kalut [31:35]

• Warnings of Repeating Past Mistakes:
  Unchecked, this cycle will likely entrench dependencies on a few firms, with technical and governance power shifting out of public reach.

6. The Global Policy Shift & What Comes Next

[36:56 - 43:27]

• U.S. Policy: From Freedom Agenda to Naked Protectionism:
  The Trump administration made explicit what was always implicit in U.S. Internet policy—using “freedom” and “openness” to mask commercial interests.

  “The Trump administration has really taken it... in that direction, very baldly... they’re out there selling American AI and working on behalf of American big tech firms.”
  — Justin Hendricks [36:56]

• Diplomatic Realities:
  Even as the U.S. withdraws from soft-power diplomacy, it remains dominant in technical standards bodies, where power struggles play out via standards—not values.

  “Technocracy is not a great alternative to whatever we’re dealing with now... Russia and China are super active in these places, because as authoritarians, like a technocracy is a dream.”
  — Mallory Knodle [38:10]

• Greater Transparency about Power:
  At least the debates are no longer clandestine—other countries and the public can now see how deeply tech, trade, and policy are entwined.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the End of Openness:
  “There’s no open Internet. There’s nothing like open web. This is Google’s web.”
  — Quoting Microsoft CEO in 2023, as relayed by Bertrade Kalut [10:55]

• On Data Monopolies:
  “Now... big five tech companies, maybe now OpenAI the new edition, they own the infrastructure... they control all the data. So... we came to the realization that, oh gosh, we missed that.”
  — Bertrade Kalut [23:30]

• On Tech Regulation Distraction:
  “Privacy became the business model... but it didn’t stop the data collection and it didn’t stop the centralization of the data.”
  — Mallory Knodle [26:09]

• On the Need for Alternatives:
  “What we need now is not just the criticism, but a coordination. Not just opposition, but alternatives... If you are going to replace the surveillance capitalism, we need to build something better than, better than, you know, what we have now.”
  — Bertrade Kalut [46:10]

• Call to Action:
  “That’s the lesson to the listener. Go out and build. I like that. Perhaps a positive place to end our conversation.”
  — Justin Hendricks [48:33]

Timestamps for Key Segments

| Timestamp | Segment | |-----------|-----------------------------------------------------------------| | 00:46 | Guest introductions, context on Internet Exchange & research | | 05:30 | What is (and is not) the open Internet? | | 08:01 | How & why Big Tech killed the wide/open Internet | | 13:00 | Differentiating company regulation vs. Internet regulation | | 16:52 | How "open" was emptied of meaning | | 20:05 | Why regulation like GDPR failed to change dynamics | | 26:09 | Layers of power & how attention drifted from political economy | | 29:03 | AI’s role as turbo-charging centralization | | 31:35 | Policy déjà vu: repeating early Internet mistakes with AI | | 36:56 | Policy and diplomacy: trade, standards, and global consequences | | 43:27 | Building alternatives, expanding public infrastructure | | 44:30 | What should listeners do? (Action steps, alternatives) |

What Can Be Done? Policy Directions & Personal Actions

• Structural Policy Reform:

  • Move past symbolic gestures to enforce anti-monopoly (antitrust) regulations.
  • Invest in public digital infrastructure (Internet exchange points, alternative AIs).
  • Expand truly decentralized and interoperable protocols and civic tech spaces.

• Community & Individual Action:

  • Support and use alternative tech providers (e.g., move your organization’s email or documents to non-Big Tech collectives).
  • Civil society should start migration and support business models for resilience.

• Coordination over Critique:

  • Build and collaborate on genuine alternatives, not just criticize existing systems.

  “We can start small... there is still a possibility to build some alternatives and come up with a governance model that serves the people and the environment.”
  — Bertrade Kalut [46:10]

Tone & Language

The episode is candid, critical, occasionally urgent, but ultimately hopeful—encouraging listeners and civil-society actors to recognize structural realities and begin building concrete alternatives. Both guests bring a nuanced, historical perspective, using clear language and weaving in policy, tech, and governance insights.

Conclusion

The episode delivers a sobering analysis: the ideology of an open Internet has been hollowed out through decades of policy drift and corporate consolidation. Today’s AI paradigm threatens even greater power concentration. The call is clear: critique isn’t enough; policymakers, technologists, and the public must deliberately build real alternatives. The time for action is now.

For further reading:
Read the article discussed in this episode: "Big Tech Redefined the Open Internet to Serve Its Own Interests" (Linked in show notes, or search Internet Exchange).