Annett Heft, Eva Mayerhöffer, Susanne Reinhardt, C. Knüpfer
{"title":"Beyond Breitbart: Comparing Right‐Wing Digital News Infrastructures in Six Western Democracies","authors":"Annett Heft, Eva Mayerhöffer, Susanne Reinhardt, C. Knüpfer","doi":"10.1002/poi3.219","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.219","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46894,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Internet","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/poi3.219","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42916222","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Extremist exploitation of social media platforms is an important regulatory question for civil society, government, and the private sector. Extremists exploit social media for a range of reasons-from spreading hateful narratives and propaganda to financing, recruitment, and sharing operational information. Policy responses to this question fit under two headings, strategic communication and content moderation. At the center of both of these policy responses is a calculation about how best to limit audience exposure to extremist narratives and maintain the marginality of extremist views, while being conscious of rights to free expression and the appropriateness of restrictions on speech. This special issue on "Countering Extremists on Social Media: Challenges for Strategic Communication and Content Moderation" focuses on one form of strategic communication, countering violent extremism. In this editorial we discuss the background and effectiveness of this approach, and introduce five articles which develop multiple strands of research into responses and solutions to extremist exploitation of social media. We conclude by suggesting an agenda for future research on how multistakeholder initiatives to challenge extremist exploitation of social media are conceived, designed, and implemented, and the challenges these initiatives need to surmount.
{"title":"Countering Extremists on Social Media: Challenges for Strategic Communication and Content Moderation","authors":"B. Ganesh, Jonathan Bright","doi":"10.1002/poi3.236","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.236","url":null,"abstract":"Extremist exploitation of social media platforms is an important regulatory question for civil society, government, and the private sector. Extremists exploit social media for a range of reasons-from spreading hateful narratives and propaganda to financing, recruitment, and sharing operational information. Policy responses to this question fit under two headings, strategic communication and content moderation. At the center of both of these policy responses is a calculation about how best to limit audience exposure to extremist narratives and maintain the marginality of extremist views, while being conscious of rights to free expression and the appropriateness of restrictions on speech. This special issue on \"Countering Extremists on Social Media: Challenges for Strategic Communication and Content Moderation\" focuses on one form of strategic communication, countering violent extremism. In this editorial we discuss the background and effectiveness of this approach, and introduce five articles which develop multiple strands of research into responses and solutions to extremist exploitation of social media. We conclude by suggesting an agenda for future research on how multistakeholder initiatives to challenge extremist exploitation of social media are conceived, designed, and implemented, and the challenges these initiatives need to surmount.","PeriodicalId":46894,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Internet","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/poi3.236","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42298424","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Expressing and Challenging Racist Discourse on Facebook: How Social Media Weaken the “Spiral of Silence” Theory","authors":"I. Chaudhry, A. Gruzd","doi":"10.1002/POI3.197","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/POI3.197","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46894,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Internet","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/POI3.197","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44175146","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The online space is a haven for extremists of all kinds. Although efforts to remove violent and extremist content are increasing, there is a widely accepted need to also contest extremist messages with counter messages designed to undermine and disrupt extremist narratives. While the majority of academic focus has been on large and well‐funded efforts linked to governments, this article considers the experiences of informal actors who are active in contesting extremist messaging but who lack the support of large institutions. Informal actors come without some of the baggage that accompanies formal counter message campaigns, which have been attacked as lacking in credibility and constituting “just more government propaganda.” This has been noted by some of the wider countering violent extremism industry and the appetite for incorporating “real‐world” content in their campaigns seems to be rising. This article fills a gap in our knowledge of the experiences of informal counter messaging actors. Through a series of in‐depth qualitative interviews it demonstrates that, despite the potentially serious risks of incorporating greater levels of informal content, there is an appetite among informal actors to engage with formal campaigns where they can be selective over who they work with and maintain a degree of control.
{"title":"Countering Violent Extremism Online: The Experiences of Informal Counter Messaging Actors","authors":"B. Lee","doi":"10.1002/POI3.210","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/POI3.210","url":null,"abstract":"The online space is a haven for extremists of all kinds. Although efforts to remove violent and extremist content are increasing, there is a widely accepted need to also contest extremist messages with counter messages designed to undermine and disrupt extremist narratives. While the majority of academic focus has been on large and well‐funded efforts linked to governments, this article considers the experiences of informal actors who are active in contesting extremist messaging but who lack the support of large institutions. Informal actors come without some of the baggage that accompanies formal counter message campaigns, which have been attacked as lacking in credibility and constituting “just more government propaganda.” This has been noted by some of the wider countering violent extremism industry and the appetite for incorporating “real‐world” content in their campaigns seems to be rising. This article fills a gap in our knowledge of the experiences of informal counter messaging actors. Through a series of in‐depth qualitative interviews it demonstrates that, despite the potentially serious risks of incorporating greater levels of informal content, there is an appetite among informal actors to engage with formal campaigns where they can be selective over who they work with and maintain a degree of control.","PeriodicalId":46894,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Internet","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/POI3.210","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45347001","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Regulating Digital Campaigning: The Need for Precision in Calls for Transparency","authors":"K. Dommett","doi":"10.1002/poi3.234","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.234","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46894,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Internet","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2020-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/poi3.234","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44819560","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The use of end‐to‐end encryption services by terrorists and criminals has led many of the world's security and law enforcement agencies to emphasize the need for exceptional access: a backdoor in encryption. The debate involves governments and private parties, and can be approached through the different prisms of privacy, national security, and economics. This article provides historical background and context on the issue of government access to encryption, before focusing on the Dutch government's position on encryption. In January 2016 the Netherlands was the first country to adopt an official and unambiguous standpoint that ruled out backdoors in encryption. Building on interviews conducted with policymakers in various ministries, the authors elucidate the decision making process and identify key factors that led to the government's position. The impetus provided by Parliament, the role of the NGO Bits of Freedom, and an approach that transcended sectoral interests all contributed. While the unique political context and culture of the Netherlands complicates the application of lessons identified to other countries, the case study does illustrate how a multistakeholder process can lead to a clear standpoint of ruling out backdoors in encryption.
{"title":"No Backdoors: Investigating the Dutch Standpoint on Encryption","authors":"J. Veen, S. Boeke","doi":"10.1002/poi3.233","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.233","url":null,"abstract":"The use of end‐to‐end encryption services by terrorists and criminals has led many of the world's security and law enforcement agencies to emphasize the need for exceptional access: a backdoor in encryption. The debate involves governments and private parties, and can be approached through the different prisms of privacy, national security, and economics. This article provides historical background and context on the issue of government access to encryption, before focusing on the Dutch government's position on encryption. In January 2016 the Netherlands was the first country to adopt an official and unambiguous standpoint that ruled out backdoors in encryption. Building on interviews conducted with policymakers in various ministries, the authors elucidate the decision making process and identify key factors that led to the government's position. The impetus provided by Parliament, the role of the NGO Bits of Freedom, and an approach that transcended sectoral interests all contributed. While the unique political context and culture of the Netherlands complicates the application of lessons identified to other countries, the case study does illustrate how a multistakeholder process can lead to a clear standpoint of ruling out backdoors in encryption.","PeriodicalId":46894,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Internet","volume":"12 1","pages":"503-524"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2020-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/poi3.233","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41784259","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Nikos Koutsimpogiorgos, J. Slageren, A. Herrmann, K. Frenken
We conceptualize the gig economy along four dimensions: online intermediation, independent contractors, paid tasks, and personal services. From our framework, one can derive both a narrow definition of the gig economy as ex ante specified, paid tasks carried out by independent contractors mediated by online platforms, and broader definitions that include offline next to online intermediation, employees next to independent contractors, unpaid tasks next to paid tasks, and asset sharing next to performing gigs. The four dimensions also span four key regulatory questions: how should online platforms be classified and regulated, how should gig workers be classified and regulated, what should count as paid and unpaid work, and should we treat earnings from performing gigs different from earnings from sharing assets. We conclude that the positions taken on these regulatory issues are essentially contingent upon political choices, which will determine how the gig economy will evolve in the future.
{"title":"Conceptualizing the Gig Economy and Its Regulatory Problems","authors":"Nikos Koutsimpogiorgos, J. Slageren, A. Herrmann, K. Frenken","doi":"10.31235/osf.io/jmqyt","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/jmqyt","url":null,"abstract":"We conceptualize the gig economy along four dimensions: online intermediation, independent contractors, paid tasks, and personal services. From our framework, one can derive both a narrow definition of the gig economy as ex ante specified, paid tasks carried out by independent contractors mediated by online platforms, and broader definitions that include offline next to online intermediation, employees next to independent contractors, unpaid tasks next to paid tasks, and asset sharing next to performing gigs. The four dimensions also span four key regulatory questions: how should online platforms be classified and regulated, how should gig workers be classified and regulated, what should count as paid and unpaid work, and should we treat earnings from performing gigs different from earnings from sharing assets. We conclude that the positions taken on these regulatory issues are essentially contingent upon political choices, which will determine how the gig economy will evolve in the future.","PeriodicalId":46894,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Internet","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2020-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43696481","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
One major strand of contemporary research on political participation addresses online deliberation. Over time, online deliberation has become increasingly pluralistic. Our study applies a framework derived from systemic deliberative theory to evaluate different online deliberation processes on German immigration policy. A crucial premise of the systemic deliberative theory is that the quality of deliberation varies systematically between different arenas within a political system. We differentiate between highly formal, semi ‐ formal, and informal deliberative arenas (arenas 1 – 3) and develop seven theory ‐ driven hypotheses concerning the quality of deliberative procedures in arenas 1 – 3 that we test through quantitative content analysis. Our study confirms the overarching expectation: processes ’ deliberative quality varies systematically between arenas. The highest level of (aggregated) deliberative quality is displayed in arena 1 — deliberations, that is, on the government ‐ run consultation platform. The more fine ‐ grained analysis of different dimensions of deliberative quality reveals that the patterns observed with regards to certain dimensions of deliberative quality (e.g., constructiveness and reciprocity) do not conform with our theory ‐ driven hypotheses. We discuss the theo retical and empirical implications of these findings. Future collaborations of theoretical and empirical scholars of deliberative democracy must address the specifics of online communication and the function of emotional communication in different deliberative arenas.
{"title":"Different Arenas, Different Deliberative Quality? Using a Systemic Framework to Evaluate Online Deliberation on Immigration Policy in Germany","authors":"Katharina Esau, Dannica Fleuss, Sarah-Michelle Nienhaus","doi":"10.1002/poi3.232","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.232","url":null,"abstract":"One major strand of contemporary research on political participation addresses online deliberation. Over time, online deliberation has become increasingly pluralistic. Our study applies a framework derived from systemic deliberative theory to evaluate different online deliberation processes on German immigration policy. A crucial premise of the systemic deliberative theory is that the quality of deliberation varies systematically between different arenas within a political system. We differentiate between highly formal, semi ‐ formal, and informal deliberative arenas (arenas 1 – 3) and develop seven theory ‐ driven hypotheses concerning the quality of deliberative procedures in arenas 1 – 3 that we test through quantitative content analysis. Our study confirms the overarching expectation: processes ’ deliberative quality varies systematically between arenas. The highest level of (aggregated) deliberative quality is displayed in arena 1 — deliberations, that is, on the government ‐ run consultation platform. The more fine ‐ grained analysis of different dimensions of deliberative quality reveals that the patterns observed with regards to certain dimensions of deliberative quality (e.g., constructiveness and reciprocity) do not conform with our theory ‐ driven hypotheses. We discuss the theo retical and empirical implications of these findings. Future collaborations of theoretical and empirical scholars of deliberative democracy must address the specifics of online communication and the function of emotional communication in different deliberative arenas.","PeriodicalId":46894,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Internet","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2020-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/poi3.232","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45711542","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：