Public Data Access

KGI focuses on expanding access to public platform data so that researchers, policymakers, and the public can better understand how platforms affect individuals, communities, and societies. By leveraging the research community’s experience with different forms of data access, KGI works to drive practical and policy changes that strengthen transparency and accountability.

Access to public data about online discourse – the reach of viral posts, the spread of information, and so much more – is essential for accountability and informed public conversations.  Public data access enables independent research and investigation, informs evidence-based policymaking, and advances collective understanding about the role of online platforms in our lives. 

For over a decade, stakeholders both inside and outside platform companies have debated forms of transparency from digital platforms. Thanks to transparency advocates, we have seen various transparency regimes take hold – voluntary, self-regulatory, and regulatory – requiring platforms to share information about their activities, algorithms, and processes with vetted entities including researchers, regulators, or business competitors, and sometimes with the broader public. At the same time, some organizations and individuals have extensive experience independently collecting and analyzing public platform data.

Yet the tools that once allowed researchers, journalists, and civil society to study these platforms are disappearing, undermining transparency and accountability. Platforms restrict researcher access while public data is monetized for advertisers, data brokers, and AI training. This imbalance – where companies profit but independent researchers are left in the dark – undermines transparency and weakens oversight.

KGI is focused on public access to public platform data as a means to enable any interested party to understand the relationships between online platforms and individuals, communities, and societies. Our work on public data access advances practical and policy changes that expand our ability to understand the online information ecosystem. Learn more about the Expert Working Group on Public Platform Data.

Key outputs include:

  • Better Access: Data for the Common Good, a roadmap published in 2025 that provides a baseline framework for expanding access to high-influence public platform data – the narrow slice of public platform data that has the greatest impact on civic life due to its reach, source, or role in shaping what people see online.

 

Latest Work

Measuring Risk II: What EU Risk Assessments and US Litigation Reveal About Snap and YouTube

Report /

Measuring Risk II: What EU Risk Assessments and US Litigation Reveal About Snap and YouTube

KGI’s latest report in the Measuring Risk series examines what EU risk assessments and US litigation reveal about Snap and YouTube’s approaches to risks on their platforms, with a particular focus on risks to minors. The report explores the gap between what these platforms publicly disclose about risk mitigation and what has emerged through discovery in US litigation, including their own internal research, product development, and risk evaluation.

Pay for Half: A Better Remedy for Google Search

Commentary /

Pay for Half: A Better Remedy for Google Search

The appeals of the United States v. Google search antitrust case turn in part on whether the remedies ordered address Google’s illegal monopoly in search – or whether, by declining to ban the payments Google makes for search defaults, the District Court has left the conduct at the heart of the case largely intact. In Pay for Half, KGI’s Alissa Cooper joins leading economists and competition experts in showing how the court can reasonably cap those payments rather than ban them, opening at least half of the market to rivals, including emerging AI-powered entrants, while preserving revenue for distribution partners.

Designing Europe’s Search Data Sharing Rules for Competition in the AI Era

Commentary /

Designing Europe’s Search Data Sharing Rules for Competition in the AI Era

As the European Commission advances efforts under the Digital Markets Act to require Google to share its search data with competitors, lessons from historic antitrust remedies underscore how data access could be transformational in the AI-powered search market. While the Commission’s proposals represent a novel and comprehensive approach, key improvements to data scope and sharing frequency, privacy protections, and dispute resolution are needed. US courts and enforcers charged with implementing similar provisions should take note.

Tracking Tech-Related Litigation

Commentary /

Tracking Tech-Related Litigation

As lawsuits involving AI, social media, privacy, competition, and platform accountability expand worldwide, courts are emerging as central actors shaping technology governance. A new tech litigation tracker developed by the Knight-Georgetown Institute, Tech Justice Law, and Georgetown University’s Communication, Culture & Technology program centralizes and tracks technology-related litigation and regulatory actions across jurisdictions and issue areas.

Designing Technology Remedies: Lessons for Social Media and Generative AI Chatbot Litigation

Report /

Designing Technology Remedies: Lessons for Social Media and Generative AI Chatbot Litigation

As social media and generative AI chatbot lawsuits in the United States proceed to discovery and trial, courts are emerging as central actors in shaping technology governance, platform accountability, and online safety. A new report by the Knight-Georgetown Institute, Tech Justice Law, and the USC Marshall School Neely Center provides a practical, evidence-based framework to help courts, litigators, and policymakers craft effective and enforceable remedies for harms associated with social media platforms and AI chatbots.

Designing the Technical Committee for the United States v. Google Search Antitrust Remedy

Report /

Designing the Technical Committee for the United States v. Google Search Antitrust Remedy

The Technical Committee is a key component of the remedies ordered in the US v. Google search antitrust case, intended to ensure effective implementation of court-ordered obligations and technical measures to promote competition in online search. KGI’s latest report provides a practical blueprint for the formation, structure, and operation of this independent body of experts.

See All Work

Close