Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 68

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Augmenting digital monopolies: A corporate financialization perspective on the rise of Big Tech

Klinge, Tobias J, Hendrikse, Reijer, Fernandez, Rodrigo, Adriaans, Ilke·2023·Competition & Change
DOI 10.1177/10245294221105573
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Building on the notion of corporate financialization, this article analyzes the financial dynamics of the world’s largest digital platforms over the period 2000–2020: Alibaba, Alphabet (Google), Amazon, Apple, Meta (Facebook), Microsoft, and Tencent. These “Big Tech” corporations jointly form the infrastructural core of the digital economy. Taking cues from critical media studies and political economy, we probe their financial statements according to three stylized indicators of corporate financialization: (i) expanding financial assets and debt; (ii) augmenting asset structures, with intangible assets in the form of goodwill ballooning alongside tangible capital; and (iii) maximizing shareholder value. Our findings point to commonalities among the ‘avantgarde of digital capitalism’, where feedback loops between mounting market dominance, data extraction, and above-average profits have been successfully leveraged with key tools of corporate financialization to accelerate Big Tech’s infrastructural dominance across economy and society.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/10245294221105573

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 87

  1. Alizila. 2012. Alibaba closes $7.6 billion share repurchase and restructuring of Yahoo! relationship. Alizila (blog). September 18, 2012. https://www.alizila.com/alibaba-closes-7-6-billion-share-repurchase-and-restructuring-of-yahoo-relationship/
  2. 10.1016/j.cpa.2010.06.006 · DOI
  3. Aramonte S (2020) Mind the buybacks, beware of the leverage. BIS Quarterly Review September 2020: 49–59.
  4. 10.1080/13563467.2020.1865900 · DOI
  5. 10.1080/09538259.2020.1869400 · DOI
  6. Bartlett J (2018) The People vs Tech: How the Internet Is Killing Democracy. London, UK: Penguin.
  7. 10.1177/0309132514558441 · DOI
  8. 10.1093/ser/mwr016 · DOI
  9. 10.1016/j.jacceco.2003.10.006 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.1177/0162243919829567 · DOI
  11. 10.1177/20539517211017308 · DOI · Paper page
  12. 10.1177/2056305120971632 · DOI
  13. 10.1080/09692290.2016.1262446 · DOI
  14. 10.1111/j.1467-954X.1984.tb00113.x · DOI · Paper page
  15. 10.1007/978-3-319-28225-1_6 · DOI
  16. Christophers B (2020) Rentier Capitalism. Who Owns the Economy and Who Pays for it? London, UK: Verso.
  17. 10.1080/13563467.2022.2027355 · DOI
  18. 10.1177/14614440222226316 · DOI
  19. 10.1080/01603477.2015.1116370 · DOI
  20. 10.1111/meca.12179 · DOI
  21. 10.1007/978-3-319-78414-4_5 · DOI
  22. 10.1007/s11614-019-00353-4 · DOI
  23. 10.1080/00213624.2019.1646609 · DOI
  24. 10.4324/9781315142876-4 · DOI
  25. 10.1093/rfs/hhz003 · DOI
  26. Feldman M Guy F Iammarino S et al. (2021) Gathering round Big Tech: how the market for acquisitions reinforces regional inequalities in the US. LSE Department of Geography and Environment Discussion Paper Series 28. https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/110718/1/Paper_28_gathering_round_big_tech.pdf · DOI
  27. 10.1080/09538259.2016.1147734 · DOI
  28. 10.1177/0486613413487154 · DOI
  29. Foroohar R (2019) Don’t Be Evil. How Big Tech Betrayed its Founding Principles - and All of Us. New York, NY: Currency.
  30. 10.1080/030851400360578 · DOI · Paper page
  31. 10.4324/9780203414941 · DOI · Paper page
  32. 10.1016/j.cpa.2012.07.007 · DOI
  33. 10.4018/978-1-60960-071-6.ch007 · DOI
  34. Harrity. 2021. Patent 300® List. Harrity & Harrity, LLP (blog). 2021. https://harrityllp.com/patent300/
  35. 10.1177/2056305115603080 · DOI · Paper page
  36. 10.2218/finsoc.v4i2.2870 · DOI
  37. 10.1080/09505431.2021.1984423 · DOI
  38. Hong Yu (2008) Distinctive characteristics of China’s path of ICT development: a critical analysis of Chinese developmental strategies in light of the Eastern Asian model. International Journal of Communication 2: 456–471.
  39. 10.1080/23812346.2021.1877446 · DOI
  40. 10.16997/wpcc.280 · DOI
  41. 10.1177/1748048517742783 · DOI
  42. 10.1080/13563467.2019.1664446 · DOI
  43. Kenney M, Zysman J (2016) The rise of the platform economy. Issues in Science and Technology 32(3): 61–69.
  44. 10.1017/mor.2020.48 · DOI
  45. Khan LM (2018) Sources of tech platform power. Georgetown Law Technology Review 2(2): 325–334.
  46. 10.3989/ris.2020.78.4.m20.006 · DOI
  47. 10.1111/gec3.12588 · DOI
  48. 10.1080/09692290.2019.1649293 · DOI
  49. 10.1093/SER/mwi008 · DOI · Paper page
  50. Lapavitsas C (2013) Profiting without Producing. How Finance Exploits Us All. London; New York: Verso.
  51. 10.36687/inetwp127 · DOI
  52. 10.1016/j.accfor.2013.07.002 · DOI
  53. 10.1016/B978-0-7506-7799-8.50008-5 · DOI
  54. Mazzucato M (2018) The Value of Everything: Making and Taking in the Global Economy. London, UK: Penguin.
  55. Mouré C (2021) A capital-as-power analysis of Google’s differential power trajectory. Review of Capital as Power 2(1): 71–90.
  56. 10.1016/j.cpa.2013.08.006 · DOI
  57. Murphy BM (2002) A critical history of the internet. In: Elmer G (ed) Critical Perspectives on the Internet. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 27–45.
  58. Nachtwey O, Staab P (2015) Die Avantgarde des digitalen Kapitalismus. (Dezember 2015/Januar 2016). Mittelweg 36(6): 59–84.
  59. 10.1177/0163443718818384 · DOI
  60. 10.1093/cje/ben009 · DOI · Paper page
  61. 10.1093/cje/bey046 · DOI
  62. 10.1093/ct/qtx009 · DOI
  63. Peck J, Phillips R (2021) The platform conjuncture. Sociologica 14(3): 73–99.
  64. 10.4337/9781781005323 · DOI
  65. 10.1016/j.jfineco.2016.03.011 · DOI · Paper page
  66. 10.1177/1461444816661553 · DOI · Paper page
  67. 10.1111/meca.12251 · DOI
  68. 10.1177/1024529420932418 · DOI
  69. 10.4324/9780429341489 · DOI
  70. 10.1080/2157930X.2020.1855825 · DOI
  71. 10.1111/anti.12595 · DOI · Paper page
  72. 10.1177/0003603X20934212 · DOI
  73. 10.1177/2F1024529420968221 · DOI
  74. 10.3917/jie.002.0035 · DOI
  75. Sholle D (2002) Disorganizing the ‘New Economy’. In: Elmer G (ed) Critical Perspectives on the Internet. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 3–26.
  76. 10.1080/13563467.2020.1858775 · DOI
  77. Srnicek N (2017) Platform Capitalism. Cambridge; Malden: Polity Press.
  78. Staab P (2019) Digitaler Kapitalismus. Markt und Herrschaft in der Ökonomie der Unknappheit. Berlin, Germany: Suhrkamp.
  79. 10.1080/17544750.2019.1657474 · DOI
  80. Tooze A (2021) Shutdown. How Covid Shook the World’s Economy. London, UK: Allen Lane.
  81. 10.1093/cje/bex085 · DOI · Paper page
  82. UNCTAD (2019) Digital Economy Report 2019. Value Creating and Capture: Implications for Developing Countries. Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations.
  83. 10.1177/1461444820940293 · DOI · Paper page
  84. 10.2307/1883967 · DOI
  85. 10.1177/1035304618810987 · DOI
  86. 10.1257/jep.31.3.113 · DOI · Paper page
  87. Zuboff S (2019) The Age of Surveillance Capitalism. The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. London, UK: Profile.

Cited by

See all 68

Metadata

Authors
Klinge, T. J., Hendrikse, R., Fernandez, R., & Adriaans, I.
Affiliations
  • KU Leuven
  • Vrije Universiteit Brussel
  • Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations (SOMO)
ORCID
Klinge, Tobias J
Venue
Competition & Change
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2022-06-20
Volume
27
Issue
2
Pages
332-353
ISSN
  • 1024-5294
  • 1477-2221
DOI
10.1177/10245294221105573
Cited by
68
References
9
Language
en
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Funders
  • Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (G004920N, G079718N)
  • H2020 European Research Council (683197)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.