In a world increasingly shaped by digital networks and platforms, the boundaries between commerce, communication, and civic life are constantly being redrawn. As governments grapple with the dual imperatives of fostering competition and safeguarding rights, the digital landscape has become a focal point for legislation and debate, from antitrust lawsuits to evolving privacy protections. Amid this flux, the ways in which digital markets are governed will shape not just economic outcomes, but the very fabric of public discourse and engagement.

The California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) stands as a prime example of this dynamic. Spurred by a grassroots ballot initiative that collected thousands of signatures, the CCPA emerged as a landmark law that empowers consumers with new rights over their personal data. Its passage, driven by citizen engagement, demonstrates how public action can directly influence government policy in the digital age. The CCPA not only set a new standard for privacy protections but also underscored the vital role of civic participation in shaping digital governance.

The digital landscape encompasses the spaces and networks formed by technological developments and digital infrastructure. It’s the dynamic system of online platforms and technologies that shape how we interact, create, and consume information and products in the digital realm. This shared space benefits users through economic growth and improved quality of life. Components of the digital landscape include:

• Social media platforms where people connect, share news, and build communities;
• Online marketplaces that allow businesses to buy and sell products domestically and internationally;
• Cloud-based tools and services that enable remote work, collaboration, and data storage for organizations of all sizes;
• Streaming services that deliver entertainment and educational content over the internet;
• Government portals that provide access to public services, information, and digital forms of civic participation;
• Regulatory frameworks and policies that influence how technologies are developed, accessed, and used, such as privacy laws and net neutrality rules.

Digital infrastructure refers to the physical and software components, such as platforms, software systems, data centers, cloud services, and telecommunications networks required to maintain and operate computer networks, process e-commerce transactions, and access digital media content online. This system relies on broadband for seamless communication and delivery of digital products and services.

KEY TERMS

• Technology (Tech) Policy: Government actions, strategies, and frameworks that influence the development, deployment, and use of technology across society. This includes regulation, research and development support, infrastructure investment, innovation incentives, and measures aimed at aligning technological advancement with national goals and ethical standards while stimulating economic growth.
• Net Neutrality: The principle that all internet traffic should be treated equally by internet service providers (ISPs), without blocking, throttling, or prioritizing certain websites, applications, or services over others. For example, an internet provider could block video streams to promote other or their own services. Without net neutrality, ISPs could choose to speed up, slow down, or block access to specific online content or platforms, potentially favoring their own or partner’s services.
• Broadband: High-speed internet that enables video calls, streaming, and remote work – delivered through cables, satellites, or phone lines. It’s faster than accessing the Internet through telephone lines or dial up. Examples of broadband services are satellite, cable, DSL, and fiber. Explore the Federal Communications Commission’s National Broadband Map for a visual representation of broadband access across the United States.
• Digital Divide: The gap between those who have reliable access to high-speed internet and modern digital tools, and those who do not. This divide disproportionately affects rural areas, low-income households, and marginalized communities, limiting opportunities in education, healthcare, economic mobility, and civic participation.

Beyond these terms, understanding the role of regulation and innovation in economics is vital to interacting with tech policy, a field heavily driven by the ability to innovate. Typically, regulations are intended to protect consumers and ensure fair competition. In the context of tech policy, this looks like California’s Consumer Privacy Act. From a free market perspective, effective regulation is transparent, limited, and designed to remove barriers to entry and encourage innovation. These innovations depend on basic and applied research and thrive when policy supports entrepreneurship, ultimately driving economic growth.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

THE COMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1934

With the rapid expansion of telephone and radio technologies in the early 20th century, the federal government faced the challenge of how to regulate these new forms of communication. The Communications Act of 1934 consolidated earlier laws to create a unified framework for both common carriers (like telephone and telegraph companies) and broadcasters, aiming to ensure efficient, nationwide service and to regulate these industries in the public interest. Most importantly, the Act established the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) as an independent agency to oversee and enforce these regulations. Over time, the FCC’s authority-rooted in the Act-has shaped major policies, including the later development of the fairness doctrine, and has adapted to new technologies such as television and the internet.

THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS DECENCY ACT OF 1996

The Telecommunications Act marked a significant shift in U.S. communications policy, representing a move away from the more restrictive regulatory environment of previous decades. It aimed to foster competition and innovation by deregulating certain aspects of the telecommunications industry, such as increasing the number of channels a single station could own and reducing barriers to market entry. One of the most important distinctions established by the Act was between telecommunications services, which remained under FCC oversight through Title II, and information services, which were largely exempt from such regulation. This distinction set the stage for future debates about how new internet-based services should be governed as technology continues to evolve.

The Communications Decency Act (CDA), or Title V of the Telecommunications Act, sought to address concerns about indecent and harmful material online. The CDA made it illegal to knowingly transmit indecent materials to minors over the internet, a provision that quickly became controversial and was challenged in court on First Amendment grounds due to its phrasing. The legal battles that followed underscored the complexities of tech policy and raised important questions about the balance between protecting children and upholding free speech. Ultimately, many of the CDA’s provisions related to indecency were struck down by the courts.

The most consequential and enduring element of the CDA is Section 230, a foundational principle for the modern internet. It protects ISPs and online platforms from being treated as the publisher or speaker of content created by users, shielding them from legal liability. This protection has been widely credited with enabling the explosive growth of online platforms, allowing them to expand without the threat of lawsuits. It has been  intensely debated. Critics argue that it grants too much immunity to platforms. Proposals to amend or limit Section 230 have policymakers grappling with how to balance accountability, safety, and open exchange in the digital realm.

Bloomberg explains how Section 230 came about, why lawmakers want to change it, and what this could look like (7 min).

For more on Section 230 and the debate on free speech, see The Policy Circle’s Free Speech Brief.

ANTITRUST HISTORY

Antitrust legislation and enforcement are central to shaping competitive markets and play a pivotal role in tech policy. These laws are designed to prevent monopolies and anticompetitive practices, aiming to foster innovation, protect consumers, and ensure a level playing field while successful firms reap the rewards of their innovations. Foundational statutes like the Sherman Antitrust Act have profoundly influenced the structure and behavior of the tech sector.

As new investigations and legislative proposals continue to emerge, antitrust policy remains a dynamic force in determining how technology markets evolve. The breakup of AT&T, Microsoft antitrust suit, and ongoing litigation against tech giants like Google highlight key moments where antitrust law has intersected with technology policy and shaped the digital landscape.

To learn more about the evolution and development of antitrust policy, see The Policy Circle’s Antitrust Insight.

THE AT&T BREAKUP

The American Telephone and Telegraph Company (AT&T), originally founded in 1885 as a subsidiary of American Bell Telephone Company, grew over the following century into a dominant force in U.S. telecommunications. By the 1970s, AT&T had consolidated control over nearly all telephone service and equipment manufacturing in the country. This dominance was reinforced by high barriers to entry; telecommunications is a capital-intensive industry requiring significant infrastructure investment, which AT&T argued made it a natural monopoly.The company maintained that its monopoly allowed it to subsidize local and rural telephone service with profits from long-distance calls, thereby expanding access nationwide.

Despite these arguments, the Department of Justice filed a major antitrust suit against AT&T in 1974, charging the company with monopolizing the telecommunications industry and engaging in anticompetitive practices. After years of litigation, the case was settled in 1982: AT&T agreed to divest its local operating companies, relinquishing its control over local telephone service. While this restructuring fostered innovation and new entrants, it also led to higher local service rates as the cross-subsidies from long-distance revenues disappeared. This case broke open the industry and created the competitive dynamic that exists today. Follow up on this foundational development in tech policy.

MICROSOFT AND GOOGLE ANTITRUST LAWSUITS

The Microsoft antitrust case set an important precedent for tech policy. In the late 1990s, Microsoft was found to have monopoly power over operating systems and was accused of using this dominance to promote its own products, like Internet Explorer, while restricting competitors. Although a court initially ordered Microsoft to split its operating system and software businesses, this breakup was overturned on appeal, though the monopoly finding remained.

The current case against Google is modeled heavily after the Microsoft case. It focuses on Google’s use of its dominant position and paying major players, like Apple, to make its search engine the default on devices and browsers to stifle competition. Both cases highlight ongoing concerns about how tech giants leverage their platforms to maintain market power.

FEDERAL

Although states retain significant authority, federal policy provides the framework for uniformity and innovation across the country, balancing consumer protection and economic growth. Federal involvement in tech policy is grounded in constitutional powers granted by the Commerce Clause, the Patent Clause, and the Necessary and Proper Clause. These authorize Congress to regulate interstate commerce, promote innovation, and oversee technological infrastructure, respectively, enabling the creation of national standards for issues like privacy, competition, and digital infrastructure, while federal agencies play central roles in implementing and enforcing tech policy.

The federal government’s approach to tech policy is shaped by a range of offices and independent agencies, each with distinct responsibilities for regulating, overseeing, and advancing technology. These entities develop and implement policy on issues such as communications, digital infrastructure, privacy, competition, and emerging technologies like artificial intelligence.

Key federal offices and commissions focusing on tech policy include:

• Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): Advises the President on science and technology issues, coordinates federal R&D, and sets strategic priorities for national innovation.
• Office of Management and Budget (OMB): Oversees federal agency operations, including technology procurement, AI governance, and data management standards.
• Federal Communications Commission (FCC): An independent agency responsible for regulating interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire, satellite, and cable. The FCC promotes competition, innovation, and consumer protection in the communications sector, though it has faced criticism for regulatory complexity and economic impact.
• Federal Trade Commission (FTC): Enforces consumer protection and antitrust laws, addressing issues like data privacy, digital advertising, and competition in tech markets.
• Internet Policy Task Force (IPTF): A cross-agency group within the Department of Commerce that brings together experts from the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), and International Trade Administration (ITA) to address digital policy challenges.

Together, these offices and commissions set the agenda for federal tech policy, guide regulatory enforcement, and help ensure that the U.S. remains at the forefront of technological innovation and digital governance.

STATE AND LOCAL

State and local governments play an increasingly influential role in shaping the digital landscape through a variety of policy mechanisms. They enact legislation and ordinances on issues like net neutrality, digital privacy, and broadband access, often filling gaps left by federal policy or tailoring solutions to local needs. Regulatory agencies and administrative rules further refine how technology is deployed, while public utility commissions oversee telecommunications and broadband providers to promote competition and consumer protection. Many states and cities have launched digital transformation initiatives, leveraging technology to streamline public services, improve efficiency, and expand access to underserved communities. In Indiana, a public-private partnership between state government and local ISPs brought high-speed broadband to tens of thousands of rural households, demonstrating how targeted collaboration can efficiently bridge the digital divide and expand economic opportunity. Public-private partnerships and targeted digital literacy programs also help bridge the digital divide and foster innovation at the community level.

A critical component of effective tech policy at the state and local level is robust public engagement and oversight. Opportunities through public hearings, advisory boards, and community consultations ensure that residents have a voice in shaping technology policy, increasing transparency and accountability in areas ranging from data privacy to the adoption of emerging technologies. By prioritizing inclusive dialogue and stakeholder input, state and local governments can better align digital initiatives with community values, build public trust, and ensure that the benefits of technological progress are shared widely.

Civil society plays a crucial role in ensuring that tech policy and internet standards reflect the interests and rights of the public and corporations. Without robust civil society engagement from advocacy groups, nonprofits, and informed individuals, policy outcomes risk being shaped by a narrow set of interests, potentially overlooking broader public concerns such as privacy and free expression.

Businesses, ranging from major technology companies like Apple, Microsoft, and Meta to defense contractors such as Palantir and Anduril, are central actors in the digital landscape. Their investments, innovation, and lobbying efforts significantly shape the infrastructure and rules of the digital world. While their influence can drive technological progress and economic growth, it can also lead to policy outcomes that prioritize commercial interests over public good, underscoring the need for checks and balances.

Nonprofit organizations, such as the Pacific Legal Foundation, serve as advocates for civil liberties, including free speech, and privacy rights. They play a watchdog role, holding the government and other actors accountable, and work to ensure that tech policy is crafted in a way that upholds fundamental rights and democratic values.

Individuals, as users, voters, and members of communities, also play an essential part in civil society’s influence on tech policy. By staying informed, participating in public consultations, and supporting advocacy efforts, individuals can help ensure that technology serves the broader public interest. The collective engagement of these stakeholders is vital for a digital ecosystem that balances innovation, economic opportunity, and the protection of civil liberties.

ANTITRUST AND COMPETITION

Efforts to address and curb tech monopolies are a constant in antitrust law. Currently, there are several cases in the court system involving major players, like Google and Amazon. Keeping up with these cases as they develop are a strong indication of political priorities and the obstacles that the tech industry faces.

RIGHT TO REPAIR

The right to repair movement aims to ensure that consumers and independent repair shops have access to the parts, tools, and information needed to fix devices and products, including electronics. As technology becomes integral to daily life, restrictive manufacturer practices have made repairs more difficult and expensive, often forcing consumers to replace devices prematurely. Recent state legislation reflects growing momentum to address these challenges, with new laws requiring manufacturers to provide access to resources, help reduce electronic waste, and support consumer choice and local businesses.

DATA PRIVACY AND CYBERSECURITY

The intersection of data privacy and cybersecurity is marked by persistent tensions that reflect competing priorities and complex regulatory environments. As organizations strive to protect sensitive data from breaches and cyberattacks, they must also navigate a patchwork of evolving state, national, and international privacy regulations, each with its own compliance requirements and enforcement mechanisms. Efforts to safeguard personal information often conflict with demands for innovation and data-driven services, as robust privacy protections can limit the data available for developing new technologies or personalized experiences.

Balancing the need for transparency and user control with the need for strong security measures creates trade-offs, as the latter can sometimes reduce usability or restrict legitimate data sharing. These tensions are further complicated by the involvement of individuals, businesses, and government agencies, each with distinct interests and responsibilities. For more on what you can do as an individual, see the Move the Needle section of this Brief.

For more on data privacy, see The Policy Circle’s Data Privacy and Cyber Security Insight.

CONTENT MODERATION, SAFETY, AND FREE SPEECH

The rapid rise of social media platforms has brought content moderation to the forefront of tech policy, forcing a delicate balance between fostering innovation, protecting free speech, and ensuring user safety. Platforms rely on content policies, protected by the First Amendment, to create online spaces that reflect their own standards and community values. These same policies often draw scrutiny when they intersect with public debates over misinformation, hate speech, and the risk of silencing particular voices.

Section 230 enabled platforms to moderate content without being held liable for user posts, supporting the growth of vibrant online communities and business models built on user engagement and ad revenue. Platforms operate within a cycle where user engagement drives ad revenue, fueling further growth and development. To maximize monetization, they design environments and interfaces that capture and hold user attention, often prioritizing the most engaging content and features, even if these aren’t always the most beneficial for users or society.

This creates tension: while platforms seek to provide experiences that engage users, they must also enforce moderation policies that maintain safety and prevent harm. Striking the right balance is challenging, as the most attention-grabbing environments may not always align with long-term user or societal interests. In theory, the safest online environment would require every piece of content to be thoroughly reviewed by human moderators. While this could significantly reduce harmful material, it would also raise concerns about free speech, over-censorship, and increased compliance costs—burdens that smaller platforms may struggle to meet. There is also the risk of overreach or selective enforcement, which can undermine public trust in both platforms and regulators. Companies could turn to AI to expedite moderation, but this introduces concerns about transparency and bias. As platforms navigate these complex trade-offs internally, their expanding influence on society at large has sparked broader debates about their power, responsibility, and the potential need for government intervention.

Mounting concerns over social media platform’s ability to shape public discourse, the transparency of their moderation practices, and the potential for regulatory intervention to inadequately protect users from harm. The ongoing challenge is to cultivate healthy, inclusive digital communities where users have meaningful control over their experiences, while respecting the constitutional protections that underpin both platform and individual expression. While the private sector has largely borne the responsibility of striking this balance, the federal government is considering a more active role.

BROADBAND DEPLOYMENT AND ACCESS

Broadband deployment faces several persistent challenges that widen the digital divide–the gap in reliable internet access–particularly in rural and underserved areas. Complex permitting processes at the federal and state levels can delay projects by months, making it difficult for providers to meet aggressive deployment deadlines. High costs of building infrastructure in remote regions, where low population density and difficult terrain reduce returns on investment, further discourage private sector involvement.

The Wall Street Journal explains why many rural Americans still lack broadband access (7 min).

Compounding these issues, funding uncertainties, including shifting federal priorities and concerns about overbuilding in areas already served by unreliable providers, add another layer of complexity. Policies that strongly favor fiber-optic technology over alternatives like fixed wireless can limit competition and stifle innovative, cost-effective solutions, making it even harder to achieve universal, affordable broadband.

NET NEUTRALITY

Net neutrality remains a developing issue in tech policy, reflecting broader tensions over how digital infrastructure should be regulated. At its core, the debate centers on whether internet service providers (ISPs) should be required to treat all online traffic equally, or whether they should have the flexibility to prioritize certain content or services, potentially for a fee. 

Supporters of net neutrality argue that equal treatment is essential to preserve competition, prevent “fast lanes” for established companies, and ensure open access for all users and content creators. Opponents, meanwhile, contend that strict regulation could stifle innovation, increase costs, and that existing consumer protections and antitrust enforcement are sufficient to address potential abuses. The ongoing debate highlights the challenge of balancing consumer protection, market competition, and innovation as technology and digital markets continue to evolve.

EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

Artificial intelligence and tech policy are increasingly intertwined, especially around  innovation, regulation, data privacy, and accountability. Policymakers are working to encourage AI-driven innovation, streamline regulatory barriers, and encourage investment in AI, while simultaneously addressing misinformation, security, and ethical data uses. The federal government has repeatedly emphasized the need for responsible development, calling for transparency, integrity, and strong data protection as AI becomes more embedded in everyday life and government. The evolving policy landscape reflects a push to ensure that AI systems are developed and deployed in ways that protect consumer rights and public trust, even as the technology rapidly advances.

At the same time, AI presents unique challenges that traditional tech policy frameworks have not fully anticipated. Unlike earlier digital technologies, AI systems can automate consequential decisions and introduce new risks to civil rights and privacy that existing laws may not adequately address. Concerns about algorithmic bias, lack of transparency in high-impact AI systems, and the difficulty of auditing or explaining AI-driven outcomes have prompted calls for new standards and oversight mechanisms. As AI becomes more deeply integrated into sensitive sectors, leaders face the urgent task of crafting targeted regulations and governance structures that address these distinct risks while continuing to foster innovation and economic growth.

CRYPTOCURRENCY

Cryptocurrency has emerged as a powerful force for innovation in the digital economy, offering new opportunities for financial inclusion, privacy, and individual empowerment. Decentralized technologies like Bitcoin and blockchain-based platforms challenge traditional financial systems by enabling peer-to-peer transactions without centralized intermediaries, reducing risks of fraud and censorship. However, the current regulatory environment is often fragmented and unclear, with overlapping agency jurisdictions and legacy rules that do not always fit the unique nature of decentralized networks. This uncertainty can impose significant compliance burdens on innovators and risks pushing valuable technological development overseas, potentially undermining the nation’s leadership in digital finance.

At the same time, cryptocurrency presents distinct risks that require thoughtful policy responses. Market volatility, the potential for fraud or misuse on centralized exchanges, and challenges around privacy and security all demand attention. Even stablecoins can be volatile since they depend on the value of an underlying asset like a currency or commodity. Effective tech policy in this space seeks to balance the need for consumer protection and market integrity with the freedom to innovate. A risk-based, tailored regulatory approach—one that distinguishes between centralized and decentralized models and focuses on actual rather than hypothetical risks—can help foster responsible growth. By removing unnecessary barriers and providing clear guidance, policymakers can support a vibrant, competitive crypto ecosystem while addressing the unique challenges these technologies present.

The digital landscape and tech policy face multifaceted challenges. While these issues are complex and evolving, they are not insurmountable. By embracing free market values and encouraging competition, innovation, and individual initiative, economic growth and new ideas can increase and thrive. At the same time, robust civic engagement ensures that technological progress aligns with democratic values and the broader public interest, empowering communities to shape the digital landscape in ways that reflect their needs and goals.

The path forward requires a thoughtful balance: leveraging the dynamic markets while actively participating in civic life to advocate for fair and effective policies. By combining these strengths, we can navigate the uncertainties of the digital age, address emerging risks, and build a future that is prosperous and transparent. Ultimately, it is through the partnership of entrepreneurial spirit and engaged citizenship that we will meet the challenges ahead and create lasting opportunities.

DRIVING AWARENESS AND EDUCATION

• Keep exploring tech policy:
  • Learn more about tech policy across all levels of government from the Cato Institute, the Mercatus Center, the R Street Institute, and the American Consumer Institute. The Mountain States Policy Center is a regional group that reports on tech policy. The Electronic Frontier Foundation examined state government tech policy priorities.
  • The International City/Council Management Association (ICMA) technology section tracks and talks about local policy developments.
  • Explore the Federal Communications Commission’s National Broadband Map. Does your town have full access? Do other areas in your community have the same access?
  • Leverage Citizen Portal to stay current on developments in tech policy or any topics you’re interested in. This AI will allow you to quickly learn about state and local government meetings and stay informed.
  • Questions to consider asking  yourself and your community: What is the state of digital infrastructure in your town? Do you know the state of broadband access in your community? How is your state or local government leveraging technology? Do you have multiple providers to choose from and, if not, why? Have you been affected by social media community standards or policies? Review your data settings for the platforms you use – do you have control over how your data is used?

• Be an active participant in the conversation.
  • Host a Circle Conversation: Organize a small group discussion using this Insight as the foundation. Pair it with The Policy Circle’s Data Privacy and Cybersecurity Insight to dive deeper into this crucial area of tech policy.
  • Note your findings from your conversations and research, and take them with you to a meeting with your city council or state representative to discuss. What is your local or state government doing to address data privacy concerns, broadband access, right to repair, and/or net neutrality?
  • Share Your Thoughts: Where has your research and discussions led you? Do you have a strong opinion or want to report on your findings to your community? Consider writing an op-ed or a social media post. If you need help starting, use your preferred AI model to start a draft.

• Make new connections with focused groups, both within and outside of government.
  • Apply for The Policy Circle’s CLER program to learn how to become a civic leader in your community and receive one-on-one coaching to make your desired impact.
  • Get involved with groups like the Digital Right to Repair Coalition that is working to advance legislation to address manufacturer repair prohibitions.
  • Brainstorm ways that you can contribute to efforts you believe in. Volunteering, guest writing, and event engagement are all valuable contributions.

IMPACTING LEGISLATION

• Get connected with stakeholders.
  • State Broadband Office Visit: Find your state broadband office and schedule a visit to talk about issues that are important to you and your community. Make a new connection and advocate for your community’s needs.
  • Talk to Your Community: How are businesses leveraging new technology in their operations? What barriers did they encounter from public policy? How are they managing privacy concerns?
  • Talk with Officials: Is your city or state emerging as a hub for technology and innovation? How does being designated a tech hub or having strong technology sectors shape local priorities? What kinds of engagement do officials have with other states, countries, or global tech companies? What challenges have they faced in balancing global competition, attracting investment, and supporting the growth of local tech businesses and workforce?

• Take these conversations to your representatives and policymakers.
  • Testify before your city council, county commissioners, or state government about trade policy’s effects on you and your community. Bring in what other representatives and local business owners have said. Become a catalyst for their stories to inform policy.
  • Write to or call your representatives in the state government and Congress. These elected officials are the ones that can pass legislation, set policy, and either limit or empower the executive branch. Ask them their stance to create dialogue and give your opinion on this topic.

REACHING POSITIONS OF INFLUENCE

• Public Positions: Consider running for an elected position or putting forth your name for an appointed position where you can affect tech policy. Many states have some kind of tech policy office or positions responsible for broadband programs. These are great opportunities to become directly and consistently involved in policymaking.
  • At the state level, technology policy is shaped by a range of executive offices, agencies, and dedicated programs. For example, nearly every state has a broadband office or program that works on expanding internet access, digital equality, and related tech initiatives. These offices often welcome public engagement, provide information about state tech policy efforts, and sometimes host events or public meetings.
  • At the local level, technology and innovation hubs often bring together a range of organizations focused on advancing tech policy and economic growth. You can get involved by joining local boards and commissions. Use AI to help identify what your town has in place.
    • Many cities and regions also have public utility commissions, technology task forces, or advisory councils that shape policy on issues like broadband, AI, and data centers.
    • Alternatively, you can make a difference by participating in your city or county’s economic development agency, which increasingly prioritizes technology-driven initiatives and supports the growth of local tech ecosystems.

• Advocacy Work: Get involved consistently by teaming up with advocacy groups to create change. Take ownership and lead a project to generate the impact you want. Start your own if you can’t find an organization to partner with! Gather your friends and stakeholders to address a problem that you have seen.
  • Consider the Electronic Frontier Foundation or the Consumer Technology Association as potential partners. Use AI to investigate these and other organizations.