Why the United States Needs to Regulate—and Potentially Break Up—Big Tech Companies

The United States has entered a new phase of national security risk, one that does not originate solely from foreign governments or traditional military threats. Instead, some of the most serious vulnerabilities now sit at the intersection of technology platforms, data concentration, intelligence-grade software, and a lack of effective oversight.

Big Tech companies control unprecedented amounts of personal data, communication infrastructure, and digital influence. When these systems are misused, weaponized, or left unregulated, the consequences extend far beyond consumer privacy. They affect democracy, national security, public safety, and human rights.

The question is no longer whether Big Tech should be regulated. The question is whether the current structure of these companies is compatible with democratic governance and national security at all.

I. Pegasus Zero-Click Exploits and the National Security Implications of Device Compromise

One of the most alarming developments in recent years has been the documented use of zero-click spyware, most notably Pegasus software developed by the Israeli firm NSO Group. Pegasus has been widely reported by major international media outlets and human rights organizations as capable of compromising mobile devices without any user interaction. Investigations have linked its deployment to the targeting of journalists, activists, lawyers, government officials, and private citizens across multiple countries.

Reports have also indicated that high-profile individuals, including corporate executives, have had their devices compromised. The fact that such software can penetrate consumer devices produced by major technology companies raises profound national security concerns. When personal devices used by civilians, journalists, witnesses, or government-affiliated individuals can be silently accessed, the integrity of communications, evidence, and even intelligence operations is placed at risk.

This is no longer a consumer security issue. It is a counterintelligence and national defense issue. When platforms centralize communications for billions of people, vulnerabilities are not isolated failures—they become systemic threats.

II. The Domestic Weaponization of Influence Technology During a National Crisis

In 2020, reporting revealed that technology originally developed for counterterrorism and information warfare abroad had been repurposed for domestic political objectives. A Democratic-aligned political action committee advised by retired General Stanley McChrystal reportedly used techniques designed to combat extremist propaganda overseas to influence online narratives within the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Regardless of political affiliation, this episode revealed a dangerous precedent. Tools designed for foreign battlefields were redeployed in domestic information spaces during an election year and a national emergency. That convergence of military-grade influence technology, political objectives, and social media platforms exposed a regulatory vacuum.

Democratic societies cannot function if the same systems designed to fight insurgencies are quietly repurposed to shape domestic political discourse. Whether intended or not, such actions undermine public trust and raise serious constitutional questions about free speech, consent, and civilian oversight.

III. Criminal Networks Leveraging Digital Platforms to Recruit U.S. Minors

Another critical failure of platform governance has emerged in the realm of organized crime. Law enforcement agencies and investigative journalists have documented cases in which Mexican drug cartels used social media platforms and messaging apps to recruit U.S. minors. These minors were allegedly coerced or manipulated into acting as couriers, traffickers, or facilitators for criminal organizations.

This is not hypothetical. It is a documented pattern of exploitation that thrives in environments where platforms prioritize engagement metrics over safeguarding. When algorithms amplify reach without accountability, criminal organizations gain direct access to vulnerable populations.

The inability or unwillingness of platforms to fully prevent this activity represents a failure of duty of care. At scale, such failures enable transnational crime and directly endanger American children.

IV. Cult Recruitment and the Algorithmic Amplification of Coercive Groups

Cults are not a relic of the past. They have adapted to the digital age. Groups such as NXIVM and SNCTM demonstrated how social media platforms and influencer ecosystems can be used to recruit, indoctrinate, and exploit individuals, including minors. These organizations leveraged digital branding, lifestyle marketing, and influencer endorsements to normalize coercive control under the guise of wellness, self-improvement, or spirituality.

Social media platforms did not create these groups, but they provided the infrastructure that allowed them to scale rapidly. Algorithms designed to reward engagement cannot distinguish between healthy communities and manipulative ones unless oversight is built into the system.

When platforms amplify harmful groups without accountability, they become unwitting enablers of psychological harm and abuse.

V. Allegations of Coordinated Harassment and Digital Gang Stalking

There have been increasing reports from journalists, whistleblowers, and witnesses who claim to have been subjected to coordinated harassment campaigns conducted through social media platforms. These campaigns often involve mass reporting, targeted disinformation, reputational attacks, and sustained psychological pressure.

While each case must be evaluated carefully, the broader issue is structural. Platforms possess the data and visibility necessary to identify coordinated harassment patterns, yet enforcement remains inconsistent. When witnesses or vulnerable individuals are targeted at scale, digital platforms can become instruments of intimidation rather than protection.

This undermines justice systems, discourages whistleblowing, and erodes civil society.

VI. Emerging Allegations of Electronic Harassment and Health Impacts

Finally, there are ongoing investigations and unresolved questions surrounding reported cases of Havana Syndrome and other unexplained neurological injuries. Some individuals have alleged that electronic or directed-energy technologies may be involved, potentially delivered or coordinated through proximity to personal devices.

While the scientific and intelligence communities continue to investigate these claims, the existence of such allegations alone underscores the need for transparency, oversight, and regulation. When personal devices become potential vectors for harm, national governments must take the threat seriously, regardless of final attribution.

The convergence of advanced technology, opaque platforms, and insufficient oversight creates risk even when definitive conclusions are not yet reached.

Conclusion: Big Tech Has Become Critical Infrastructure Without Democratic Oversight

Big Tech companies are no longer just private enterprises. They are custodians of communications, data, influence, and behavioral infrastructure at a national and global scale. When failures occur, the consequences are not limited to shareholders or consumers. They affect elections, national security, child safety, public health, and civil liberties.

Regulation is no longer optional. Structural reform, including antitrust action and potential breakups, must be seriously considered. Concentrated power without accountability creates systemic risk. Democratic societies cannot outsource governance to algorithms optimized for profit.

The United States has regulated railroads, banks, utilities, and telecommunications when they became too powerful to operate without oversight. Big Tech has reached that threshold.

Hunting Maguire Signature Perspective

Technology must serve society—not dominate it. When platforms become tools of exploitation, coercion, or national vulnerability, government has a responsibility to act. The future of democracy, security, and civil liberty depends on restoring accountability, transparency, and governance to the digital infrastructure that now shapes modern life.