The narrative about automation is used to justify Big Tech monopolies. I.e. there are huge tech monopolies nowadays because big tech is automating everything and driving all local brick-and-mortar shops out of business and people are going out of work because of automation.

The narrative about big data is used to justify Big Tech's (e.g. Facebook) high profits. I.e. Advertising wasn't lucrative before but now thanks to big data (targeted advertising), it's very lucrative.

What if an alternative explanation to the first narrative is not that Big Tech is automating everything, but instead, that their monopolies are simply a result of them having preferential access to large amounts of newly created capital (e.g. at lower interest rates or via shell company revenue laundering schemes); their access to the money printers creates an asymmetric playing field which allows them to beat all the competition in spite of their inefficiencies.

What if an alternative explanation to the second narrative is that the real reason why advertising has become so profitable is not because of Big Data, but simply because businesses are desperate to protect their wealth from inflation and for lack of a better alternative, they decide that consumer mindshare is the most valuable asset... So companies which monopolize consumer attention/mindshare (social media companies) end up flooded with money from all sectors of the economy.

If most of the Big Tech growth we've seen is artificial, then what will happen to inflation when large numbers of investors start selling shares and spending their money to buy real productive businesses instead (I.e. if they all give up on the false automation and big data narratives)?