Is Big Tech A Threat To Democracy? The 17th Edition of Godrej Literature Live! The Mumbai LitFest Settles The Claim In The Great Debate
India : The Great Debate was one of the most interesting sessions on the first day of Godrej Literature Live! The Mumbai LitFest 2026 at the National Centre for Performing Arts (NCPA). The motion was: Big Tech is a danger to democracy. Jaspreet Bindra (AI Expert & Thought Leader) and Vandana Vasudevan (Urban Development Scholar & Author) were for the motion. Natasha Joshi (Development Sector Professional) and Rahul Matthan (Senior Lawyer & Technology Expert) were against the motion. Media entrepreneur Govindraj Ethiraj chaired the debate. After the preliminary voting, both sides presented their arguments. Some excerpts:
FOR THE MOTION
In their opening remarks, Jaspreet Bindra and Vandana Vasudevan cautioned that Big Tech is already a threat to democracy, wielding too much power over people and governments. It is doing little to curb misinformation. They warned against handing over hard-earned democracies to the “new-age colonisers.”
Pointing to how some tech leaders view democracy, Jaspreet Bindra said, “The key word in this motion is the word ‘Big’. Tech in itself is very enabling and not a danger. But a few Big players controlling tech is the danger. And democracy is, by design, an inconvenience to unlimited wealth and power.”
Vandana Vasudevan added, “There was an outage in 2024 that crashed millions of computers running on Microsoft Windows. Thousands of flights were grounded, and banks shut down. It epitomised the world’s dependence on a few tech products controlled by big tech.” She added: “Commercial power can become political power when private companies gain control over the resources and make themselves indispensable.”
AGAINST THE MOTION
In the opening remarks, Natasha Joshi cited Indian examples of how technology amplified otherwise unheard voices. Whereas, Rahul Matthan noted that democracy in the past stood the test of time every century and came out unscathed and will continue to do so.
Talking about a new dawn for democracy, Natasha Joshi. put forward the idea of Democracy 2.0, “The experience of decentralised, diffused good actors on the field is one of empowerment, diversity. What we are seeing now is throwing a challenge to existing public institutions, saying that you need to come into the new era where we need ‘Democracy 2.0’. She continued, “We might actually arrive at a more enlightened form of democracy, where voices are being represented, and there is a much better
renegotiation of the older social contract and renegotiation with the public. If it does come to Big Tech vs people, my money is on people.”
While talking about the anxieties around new technologies, Rahul Matthan said: “This is an age old debate. Any new technology feels threatening “ He also addressed the unease over Big Tech by saying, “Why do we feel this unease? Because, yes, something is wrong. But what we have seen as the symptom is making us look in the wrong direction. The real risk is that the technology platforms will be captured by the political powers, by governments, to entrench their power”.
After the opening remarks, the floor was open for audience questions, which were later answered during the rebuttal. The panelists then gave closing remarks to defend their cases. The final votes witnessed a winning shift, where those against the motion successfully swayed the audience with their arguments, concluding that big tech is not a threat to democracy.
****
