What Is The “Splinternet” And How Will It Affect Global Tech Companies?

For most of its short history, the internet has been sold to us as borderless – a single global network where ideas, information and innovation could flow freely, regardless of geography.

But, that version of the internet is starting to fracture.

Increasingly, policymakers, regulators and governments are pulling it in different directions. The result is what many have started calling the “splinternet” – a fragmented internet shaped by politics, power and national interests.

It’s not just a buzzword, and for global tech companies, it could change almost everything.

What Actually Is the Splinternet?

The splinternet refers to the growing divide between national or regional versions of the internet. Instead of having one unified digital ecosystem, we’re starting to see the emergence of multiple different internets, each governed by its own rules, regulations and ideological priorities.

Now, China’s tightly controlled internet is often cited as the most obvious example of this, with its Great Firewall, homegrown platforms and heavy censorship. But, what’s starting to change is that the trend is no longer confined to authoritarian regimes.

In fact, the European Union is building a highly regulated digital environment through laws like the Digital Services Act and the AI Act. The US is starting to frame technology through a national security lens, particularly around AI, semiconductors and data flows. And, countries like India, Brazil, Turkey and Russia are all starting to assert more control over how platforms operate within their borders.

Of course, this isn’t necessarily about shutting down access entirely. Rather, it’s about control – control over data, over infrastructure, over narratives and over economic power.

So, Why Now?

We’re in this position because there are a few forces converging at once.

First, data has become strategic. These days, governments are viewing data the same way that they view oil, energy or critical minerals – as a national asset. That means they want to control where it’s stored, how it’s processed and who can access it. Control, control, control.

Second, technology is now deeply entangled with geopolitics. Although at this point, there’s not much that isn’t.

AI leadership, chip manufacturing, cloud infrastructure and platform dominance aren’t just commercial advantages – they’re seen as levers of global power. You can see this in export controls on semiconductors, restrictions on foreign apps and growing scrutiny of cross-border acquisitions.

Third, public pressure is rising. Concerns around privacy, misinformation, election interference and harm caused by algorithms are forcing governments to intervene. Even well-intentioned regulation, however, contributes to divergence when different regions adopt different standards.

And as we very well know, different regions around the world are very much adopting very different standards.

The outcome is predictable. Companies are being asked to operate by radically different rulebooks depending on where they do business.

What Does the Splinternet Mean for Global Tech Companies?

For companies that once built one product for the whole world, the splinternet creates a structural challenge, and because of this, compliance becomes significantly more complex.

A platform that operates across the US, EU and Asia now needs to navigate conflicting expectations on data privacy, content moderation, AI transparency, encryption and user protection. What’s legally required in one region may be restricted in another.

That forces companies to either fragment their products or make difficult choices about where they can realistically operate. Everything becomes a whole lot more complicated than ever before.

Infrastructure decisions become geopolitical decisions, because where you host your data, which cloud providers you use, which chips power your systems and which partners you work with all carry political implications. This is especially true for AI companies whose access to compute and data increasingly sits at the centre of global competition.

Expansion will also become slower and riskier, and it many cases, it already is. Launching into new markets isn’t just about localisation and marketing anymore. Now, it requires deep legal, political and regulatory understanding. Startups, in particular, may find that global scaling, what was once the default ambition, becomes far more complicated and capital-intensive than it used to be.

Of course, there’s also the reputational risk we can’t forget about.

Companies are increasingly pressured to “pick a side” in geopolitical disputes, whether they want to or not. Refusing to comply with one government can mean being banned, but at the same time, complying too willingly can spark backlash elsewhere.

Needless to say, it’s a tightrope to walk, a double-edged sword and just about every other metaphor you can think of.

The Rise of Regional Tech Ecosystems

One of the most significant long-term effects of the splinternet may be the acceleration of regional tech ecosystems.

Europe is trying to assert digital sovereignty, China continues to build parallel technology stacks and the US is reinforcing its dominance in core infrastructure like cloud and AI models. Meanwhile, other regions are attempting to reduce dependence on foreign platforms altogether.

This could lead to more innovation locally, but less global cooperation. So, instead of one open ecosystem, we may see several competing technology spheres, each with its own platforms, standards and values.

For developers, founders and investors, that changes strategy completely. Building for a global market is different to what it’s ever been before. It might mean building multiple versions of the same product, or possibly choosing, early on, which markets you’re willing to prioritise and which ones you’re willing to sacrifice.

Is the Splinternet Inevitable?

Probably not in its most extreme form.

The internet is too interconnected and global commerce is too dependent on it for total fragmentation to be practical or a realistic outcome. But, it definitely seems like a more fragmented, more politicised digital world seems likely.

The question here actually isn’t whether the splinternet will exist, but rather, how severe it’s going to become.

For tech companies, the challenge here will be learning how to operate in a world where neutrality is harder to maintain, regulatory complexity is the norm and global scale is no longer guaranteed by default. Strategy’s going to matter more than everm and so will adaptability.

The age of “build once, ship everywhere” is fading and it’s fading quickly. The age of geopolitical tech is here.