In his dissertation, Beijnon focuses on the platform infrastructures behind major technology companies. Every search query, click, swipe and purchase generates data that are analysed to predict future behaviour. Those predictions then determine what people encounter online, ranging from recommended videos and news articles to advertisements, notifications and purchase suggestions. Beijnon argues that through this process people increasingly come to see themselves as a “data subject”: someone who voluntarily translates their own life into data in response to platform stimuli, while still experiencing themselves as being in control of their own behaviour and choices.

A central argument in the research is that the power of platforms often operates invisibly. Smart technologies, such as phones, speakers and watches, steer behaviour through design choices that feel convenient or self-evident. Beijnon describes this as a shift in how power functions in digital societies: rather than directing behaviour through rules and restrictions, platforms increasingly do so by continuously adjusting the digital environments in which decisions are made. “The most effective forms of influence are not experienced as coercion; they are seen as helpful suggestions. Power nowadays therefore often works through convenience,” Beijnon states.

For his research, Beijnon examined two specific communities: a Dutch community of conspiracy thinkers and a community developing alternatives to mainstream social media through the Fediverse, a network of interconnected but independently operated social media platforms. His findings show that personalised information environments can have profound consequences for how people perceive reality. Algorithmically curated content can reinforce existing beliefs and contribute to a fragmented understanding of the world. At the same time, Beijnon observed alternative approaches within Fediverse communities that prioritise transparency, collective governance and public values over data extraction and advertising revenue.

Beijnon argues that the debate about technology needs to extend beyond privacy concerns. In his view, questions about technology are also questions about democracy, autonomy and power. Platforms influence public debate, social relationships, political participation and everyday decision-making, and therefore merit a broader societal discussion.