The Public Option

D. Coyle
{"title":"The Public Option","authors":"D. Coyle","doi":"10.1017/S1358246121000394","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract People value highly the digital technologies that are so pervasive in everyday life and work, certainly as measured by economists. Yet there are also evident harms associated with them, including the likelihood that they are affecting political discourse and choices. The features of digital markets mean they tend toward monopoly, so great economic and political power lies in the hands of a small number of giant companies. While tougher regulation may be one way to tackle the harms they create, it does not get at the structural problem, which is their advertising-driven business model. The hunt for people's attention drives algorithmic promotion of viral content to get ever-more clicks. An alternative policy intervention to reclaim public space would be to create a public service competitor that could drive competition along other dimensions. Online space must be reclaimed as a public space from the privately-owned US and Chinese digital giants.","PeriodicalId":269662,"journal":{"name":"Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1358246121000394","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract People value highly the digital technologies that are so pervasive in everyday life and work, certainly as measured by economists. Yet there are also evident harms associated with them, including the likelihood that they are affecting political discourse and choices. The features of digital markets mean they tend toward monopoly, so great economic and political power lies in the hands of a small number of giant companies. While tougher regulation may be one way to tackle the harms they create, it does not get at the structural problem, which is their advertising-driven business model. The hunt for people's attention drives algorithmic promotion of viral content to get ever-more clicks. An alternative policy intervention to reclaim public space would be to create a public service competitor that could drive competition along other dimensions. Online space must be reclaimed as a public space from the privately-owned US and Chinese digital giants.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
公共选择权
人们高度重视在日常生活和工作中无处不在的数字技术,这当然是经济学家所衡量的。然而,它们也有明显的危害,包括它们可能影响政治话语和选择。数字市场的特点意味着它们倾向于垄断,因此巨大的经济和政治权力掌握在少数大公司手中。虽然更严格的监管可能是解决它们造成的危害的一种方法,但它并没有解决结构性问题,即它们的广告驱动型商业模式。为了吸引人们的注意力,病毒式内容的算法推广得到了越来越多的点击。收回公共空间的另一种政策干预是创建一个公共服务竞争对手,它可以推动其他领域的竞争。网络空间必须从私有的美国和中国数字巨头手中夺回,成为公共空间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
PHS volume 94 Cover and Front matter ‘The Hermeneutic Problem of Psychiatry’ and the Co-Production of Meaning in Psychiatric Healthcare PHS volume 94 Cover and Back matter Art and the Lived Experience of Pain Notes on the Contributors
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1