Artificial intelligence (AI) companies influence policy and regulation using similar techniques to Big Tobacco, Big Pharma and Big Oil, according to a new study.
The influence methods that Big AI - companies that have developed and deployed large-scale AI technologies - have been mapped based on news articles around large global AI-focused events.
Researchers from the University of Edinburgh, Trinity College Dublin, TU Delft and Carnegie Mellon University, analysed news articles for evidence of methods used to control the narrative and influence policy measures related to AI.
They identified 27 established patterns of 'corporate capture' - a process by which regulation and public bodies come to act in the interest of corporations rather than people.
The researchers analysed 100 news stories published around four global AI events between 2023 and 2025 - the EU AI Act trilogues and the global AI summits in the UK, South Korea and France - and found 249 cases fitting capture patterns.
Of the mechanisms deployed, one of the most prevalent was 'narrative capture', which the team describe as attempts to influence the position or decisions of public officials and regulations.
The dominant narratives were around how "regulation stifles innovation" and "red tape", whereby regulation is first portrayed as unnecessary, excessive or obsolete, setting the stage for later calls explicitly advocating for 'deregulation'.
One of the other prevalent capture mechanisms used is what the team refers to as 'elusion of law', which relates to violations and contentious interpretations of antitrust, privacy, copyright and labour laws.
The research suggests that Big AI has undermined and resisted regulation, oversight and enforcement in a variety of ways, such as lobbying and retaliation against whistleblowers, researchers and lawmakers.
It was also found that in some cases the AI industry has benefited from a 'revolving door' model where former policymakers go on to advise or take employment with major AI companies.
There are also many examples of Big AI making significant donations to political parties and public officials owning equity in regulated companies, experts say.
The team highlight lessons to be learned from adjacent movements in similar industries such as Big Tobacco, Pharma and Oil on some of the tactics used to prevent capture.
These include calls for separation between public and private interests and binding rules for government-industry interactions to manage conflicts of interest.
The findings have been peer reviewed and will be presented at the ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency in June 2026.
Dr Zeerak Talat, Chancellor's Fellow at University of Edinburgh's School of Informatics, said: "It's remarkable how the findings relate to common experiences of companies having greater influence over democratic processes than people," they further continue "While we cannot draw a causal relationship between attempts at corporate capture and the disenfranchisement of citizens, the former certainly seems to hint at the latter."
Dr Abeba Birhane, Director of Trinity College Dublin's AI Accountability Lab, said "In addition to 'narrative capture' and the violations and contentious interpretations of antitrust, privacy, copyright and labour laws that were most recurrent, we also found that Big AI frequently uses the notion that 'regulation stifles innovation' and that 'red tape can stymy national interest' to rationalise their control of the overall narrative."
