Danish director Susanne Kovács’ documentary Techplomacy follows Denmark’s tech ambassador, Anne Marie Engtoft Meldgaard, during her work, which takes her from Silicon Valley to international summits, capturing the inherent tension between slow-moving democratic bureaucracy and a tech industry defined by breakneck speed and virtually unlimited resources. After its world premiere at CPH:DOX, the film is screening at Zurich, as part of its Hashtag section, entitled “#artificialintelligence: Cinematic Perspectives on AI”. We spoke to the director and the protagonist about the making of the film, what regulators and governments can do to protect democracy from big tech, and how this can be translated into a cinematic work.

(El artículo continúa más abajo - Inf. publicitaria)

Cineuropa: Susanne, how did you come to make this film? 
Susanne Kovács: Denmark opened the embassy [in the USA] in 2017, and production company Good Company Pictures started working on a film with Anne Marie’s predecessor. In 2020, when she came to the post, I was already living in Silicon Valley, and since it was the time of COVID-19 travel restrictions, at first, two co-directors, Kaspar Astrup Schröder [executive producer of Techplomacy at Good Company Pictures] and Mads Hedegaard, asked me to film her. Her youth, ambition and energy fascinated me, and we developed a working relationship, so the company offered me the chance to take over on the film.

I first had to find the right angle. I am not exactly a techie, but what interested me personally was the broader questions: whether democratic countries and their citizens can keep shaping our future and have agency over corporate power. It was intriguing to meet someone who takes on this almost impossible fight. She’s a hero on a mission, but with a very tall task.  

Anne Marie, how difficult was it to have these meetings with companies such as Meta, Google and Microsoft, and tell them you were bringing a film crew along? 
Anne Marie Engtoft Meldgaard: Setting up a meeting diplomatically is always about getting to the right level of access for the right level of influence, and this is what the negotiations about the agenda depend on. This is when I can say I am bringing a film crew, and then it’s about fine-tuning their access. I also have to be careful what I am saying, and what the other side is saying, too. But these companies are in the spotlight anyway, and here, they at least have a constructive, albeit critical, conversation with a Danish diplomat. So, they might also see an opportunity in it.

The film shows that governments are too slow for tech, and you point out that we need to develop our own technology in order to fight its negative influences.
AMEM: What regulators are trying to do takes time. To get 193 countries in the UN to sign the Global Digital Compact, with [input from] civil society, organisation movements and activists… Of course, you can't do that in a matter of weeks or months. That would defeat the entire purpose of democracy, inclusivity, agency and giving the voiceless a voice.

There is still an opportunity to work with tech and rein them in, like what the EU is doing now with slowing down Anthropic and Mythos. But we do need to be much more at the forefront, with tech people, engineers and scientists helping us come up with strategic foresight, deciding what we are going to regulate and legislate, and how. But also, our prerogative is to do it in a way where our citizens feel included and not completely disillusioned.

I don't understand the argument as to why Europe can't build alternatives. I have seen amazing examples of that in Nigeria and Kenya – entrepreneurs building tech to solve real human issues. It’s a different business model. I believe that European tech also thinks differently about human rights, and that it actually can compete with US and Chinese companies and deliver not only great technology, but also one that is rooted in different values.

The film consists of many meetings and conferences, which is not exactly visually exciting. But the way you use editing and music in the scene where Anne Marie is moderating the Tech for Diplomacy panel really conveys the essence of this work. 
SK: I think, visually, it efficiently mirrors tech diplomacy as I understand it. It's not a very visual job, especially when we cannot enter the meetings. From a storytelling perspective, in a very short sequence, you understand what a panel is, and then it’s about what you choose. We have tons of material from this huge hotel in São Paulo during G20 – this also showcased visually how this work goes. 

AMEM: I think there's a certain courage from Susanne's filmmaking in portraying that. These events are not sexy or shiny, but it actually gets to a place where she gives it a voice. It is that slow, gradual, grinding work of so many people who still believe in multilateralism, and in ways to overcome disagreement and find shared paths forward. Putting that into a film and giving it a voice was courageous, and that makes it stand apart. 

You also often shift along the timeline, back and forth between 2020 and 2024, and a lot has happened in tech and the world in this period.
SK: The real world provided more visually exciting drama. Shortly after Anne Marie was appointed, there was the Capitol insurrection in January 2020. Then the EU came up with the Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act, which gave her more tools, and with time, she became a more skilled diplomat and got more access. This gave me more freedom and a chance to provide more context. Also, some side characters entered the film organically, like Eileen Donahoe, who later became part of Biden’s administration, and then the new administration came in and the work of a diplomat really changed. Or there’s the angle of Maria Ressa, on tech’s impact on democracy and journalists, and the discussions about the petition to protect children from online harm in the Danish Parliament – these are essential elements of the whole discourse. It was important to have these topics in the film so that the viewer could understand the whole, complex structure.