How Do AI Companies "Fine-Tune" Policy? Examining Regulatory Capture in AI Governance

Industry influence operates through multiple channels: The research identified six primary ways AI companies shape policy—agenda-setting, advocacy, academic capture, information management, cultural capture through status, and media capture—with agenda-setting and advocacy being the most common (cited in 15 and 13 of 17 expert interviews respectively).

Regulatory capture could undermine AI safety and fairness goals: Policy experts expressed concern that industry influence could result in insufficient regulation, weak enforcement, or policies that prioritize certain objectives (like innovation) over others such as safety, fairness, transparency, and beneficence.

Academic institutions are a key vulnerability: Ten of 17 experts identified "academic capture" as a channel for industry influence, suggesting that AI companies' funding and partnerships with universities may shape the research and expertise that informs policy decisions.

Government lacks independent technical expertise: The paper recommends systemic changes to develop technical expertise within government agencies, implying that policymakers currently depend heavily on industry actors for understanding complex AI systems—creating an imbalance in regulatory negotiations.

The problem extends beyond direct lobbying: Rather than just traditional advocacy, industry influence operates subtly through controlling which issues get attention, managing what information reaches policymakers, and leveraging the prestige of AI leaders to shape cultural narratives around regulation.