Today the MIT tech review published a new profile of biometric company CLEAR that offers a private alternative to the TSA pre-check system for breezing through airport security. In exchange for the service of getting you to your gate, we are giving a private company control over our most sensitive personal information and consenting to its use of that data.
This loss of control over ourselves is precisely what’s gone wrong with the Internet, says Project Liberty founder and author of Our Biggest Fight: Reclaiming Liberty, Humanity, and Dignity in the Digital Age Frank McCourt.
McCourt was our guest in the Rebooting Democracy in the Age of AI Lecture Series this week where he talked about what’s wrong with Big Tech and his hope to acquire TikTok and begin to fix the challenges.
WATCH MY FULL INTERVIEW WITH FRANK MCCOURT
WATCH THE NOVEMBER 21-22 PROJECT LIBERTY LIVESTREAM
The Problem & Why Now
McCourt frames our current moment as a critical inflection point in human history. He argues that while we're advancing technologically, we're regressing socially into what he calls a "feudal Internet" where corporate powers have become modern-day monarchs. As he powerfully puts it: "Yes, the autocrats and centralized power people are not in robes with crowns, but they are every bit as powerful, maybe more so. Our digital being, our personhood, is now within the control of these large platforms." For McCourt, this control over our data is what is leading to the ability and desire of ad-driven companies targeting our teens, in particular, with insidious content that maximizes engagement but destroys lives.
How We Got Here
The story of how we lost control of our digital lives unfolds in three acts:
-
First came the Internet's creation as a decentralized government project during the Cold War
-
Then the development of protocols like TCP/IP and HTTP to connect devices and data
-
Finally, about 20 years ago, the "app era" began, where platforms discovered the value of personal data and began centralizing control
Now he wants us to build the New Net.
The Core Solution
McCourt's proposed solution centers on a fundamental redesign of Internet architecture. Rather than trying to regulate our way out of the problem, he advocates for a new approach: "Imagine an Internet where you don't have 50 passwords. You log in with a single identity that you own. Apps are built to click on your terms and conditions, and your data is portable and interoperable."
The TikTok Opportunity
McCourt sees his potential TikTok acquisition as a catalyst for this new Internet vision. With 170 million users, it could demonstrate how:
-
Users can own their social graph information
-
Data can be portable between platforms
-
People can have real choice in their digital lives
Business and Economic Impact
The transition McCourt envisions would shift us from an "attention economy" to an "intention economy.” Instead of companies bombarding us with ads for stuff we don’t want, we’ll “hang out a shingle,” indicating our interest in purchasing. In his vision:
-
Advertising continues but operates differently
-
Users signal purchase intent anonymously
-
Companies compete based on value rather than surveillance
-
Privacy becomes a feature rather than a bug
Social and Democratic Implications
The stakes go beyond business and technology. McCourt argues this transformation could help address:
-
Youth mental health issues
-
Social media addiction
-
Democratic erosion
-
Societal polarization
-
Misinformation spread
Making It Happen
Implementation would require a multi-pronged approach. As McCourt explains: "It's a chicken-and-egg situation. In the U.S., we have advanced Internet technology but insufficient regulatory frameworks. Europe, on the other hand, has robust regulations but weak technology to enforce them. We need both."
The Path Forward
For individuals wanting to support this vision, McCourt emphasizes that this is a collective project bigger than any single person or organization. He sees bipartisan support emerging, with different constituencies (liberals concerned about privacy, conservatives about censorship) finding common ground in the need to address Big Tech's power.
This restructuring of the Internet isn't just about technology—it's about restoring human agency in the digital age and ensuring that technology serves humanity rather than the other way around. As McCourt reminds us in his closing statement: "This work is bigger than any one person or project—it's about creating a better future for everyone."
Critical Questions and Challenges
While McCourt's vision is compelling, several challenging questions emerged during the discussion that warrant further exploration. Lee Rainie, formerly of Pew Research, asked about collective action, noting that McCourt's focus on individual rights might overlook how people actually create change together.
As I asked McCourt: "Your solution focuses on individuals, but collective action is often where real power lies—whether it's as workers or as citizens." For example, deciding who will make decisions about shared data like social graphs, which inherently contain information about multiple people, will require democratic governance. We will not have time to explore opportunities for collective deliberation and decision-making.
Internet governance and cyberlaw pioneer David Johnson probed the complex question of property rights around algorithms and data, highlighting the challenge of defining what data truly "belongs" to individuals versus what is collectively generated or shared.
Some participants also questioned the feasibility of building such a platform without having all the technical and governance details worked out in advance.
These questions underscore a fundamental tension in McCourt's vision: while personal data sovereignty is crucial, many of our most pressing digital challenges—from content moderation to algorithmic bias—require collective solutions and democratic governance structures that go beyond individual control. As one participant noted in the chat, "The hard work isn't just in giving individuals control over their data, but in creating the democratic institutions and processes that will help us make decisions together about our shared digital future."
