{"title":"From Embassy Ties to Twitter Links: Comparing Offline and Online Diplomatic Networks","authors":"E. Sevin, I. Manor","doi":"10.1002/POI3.199","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/POI3.199","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46894,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Internet","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/POI3.199","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48880888","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":"Why Do Politicians Tweet? Extremists, Underdogs, and Opposing Parties as Political Tweeters","authors":"Sounman Hong, Haneul Choi, Taek Kyu Kim","doi":"10.1002/POI3.201","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/POI3.201","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46894,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Internet","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/POI3.201","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48287541","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":"Followers Retweet! The Influence of Middle‐Level Gatekeepers on the Spread of Political Information on Twitter","authors":"Jeff J. Hemsley","doi":"10.1002/POI3.202","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/POI3.202","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46894,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Internet","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/POI3.202","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47708718","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":"Issue Information","authors":"","doi":"10.1002/poi3.180","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.180","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46894,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Internet","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/poi3.180","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44982518","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":"Does Aid for Information and Communications Technology Help Reduce the Global Digital Divide?","authors":"S. Gnangnon","doi":"10.1002/POI3.220","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/POI3.220","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46894,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Internet","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2019-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/POI3.220","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48364765","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":"Contextual Integrity and its Discontents: A Critique of Helen Nissenbaum's Normative Arguments","authors":"J. Rule","doi":"10.1002/POI3.215","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/POI3.215","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46894,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Internet","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2019-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/POI3.215","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42242158","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}
K. Frenken, A. V. Waes, P. Pelzer, M. Smink, R. Est
This article examines the main public interests at stake with the rise of online platforms in the sharing economy and the gig economy. We do so by analyzing platforms in five sectors in the Netherlands: domestic cleaning (Helpling), taxi rides (UberPop), home restaurants (AirDnD), home sharing (Airbnb), and car sharing (SnappCar). The most salient public interests are a level playing field between platforms and industry incumbents, tax compliance, consumer protection, labor protection, and privacy protection. We develop four policy options (enforce, new regulation, deregulation, and toleration), and discuss the rationales for each option in safeguarding each public interest. We further stress that arguments supporting a particular policy option should take into account the sectoral context. We finally highlight the tension between the subsidiarity principle, which would call for local regulations as platforms mostly concern local transactions and innovation policies that aim to support innovation and a single digital market.
{"title":"Safeguarding Public Interests in the Platform Economy","authors":"K. Frenken, A. V. Waes, P. Pelzer, M. Smink, R. Est","doi":"10.1002/POI3.217","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/POI3.217","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the main public interests at stake with the rise of online platforms in the sharing economy and the gig economy. We do so by analyzing platforms in five sectors in the Netherlands: domestic cleaning (Helpling), taxi rides (UberPop), home restaurants (AirDnD), home sharing (Airbnb), and car sharing (SnappCar). The most salient public interests are a level playing field between platforms and industry incumbents, tax compliance, consumer protection, labor protection, and privacy protection. We develop four policy options (enforce, new regulation, deregulation, and toleration), and discuss the rationales for each option in safeguarding each public interest. We further stress that arguments supporting a particular policy option should take into account the sectoral context. We finally highlight the tension between the subsidiarity principle, which would call for local regulations as platforms mostly concern local transactions and innovation policies that aim to support innovation and a single digital market.","PeriodicalId":46894,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Internet","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2019-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/POI3.217","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46609686","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}
This article empirically assesses the relationship between government use of the web, service performance, and cost ‐ effectiveness. It tests and challenges the assumption, prevalent in government thinking and in the Digital Era Governance (DEG) quasi ‐ paradigm, that the delivery of web ‐ based public services is associated with better outcomes. English local government is used as a test case, for which (uniquely) good ‐ quality full ‐ population time ‐ series data for council performance, cost, and web quality are available. A new panel data set is constructed covering 2002 – 2008, allowing the actual relationship between web performance and council cost and quality to be estimated using dynamic regression models which control for both general changes over time and the time ‐ invariant differences between councils. Consistent growth is shown in the scope and quality of local government web provision. Despite this, and governmental enthusiasm for bringing services online, no association is found between web development and performance, or cost ‐ effectiveness. The article concludes that governments ’ enthusiasm for citizen ‐ facing digital government is not supported by this empirical data, and that a skeptical view is warranted of DEG ’ s advocacy of digitalization as a core focus for service improvement.
{"title":"Local Government Performance, Cost‐Effectiveness, and Use of the Web: An Empirical Analysis","authors":"T. Nicholls","doi":"10.1002/POI3.209","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/POI3.209","url":null,"abstract":"This article empirically assesses the relationship between government use of the web, service performance, and cost ‐ effectiveness. It tests and challenges the assumption, prevalent in government thinking and in the Digital Era Governance (DEG) quasi ‐ paradigm, that the delivery of web ‐ based public services is associated with better outcomes. English local government is used as a test case, for which (uniquely) good ‐ quality full ‐ population time ‐ series data for council performance, cost, and web quality are available. A new panel data set is constructed covering 2002 – 2008, allowing the actual relationship between web performance and council cost and quality to be estimated using dynamic regression models which control for both general changes over time and the time ‐ invariant differences between councils. Consistent growth is shown in the scope and quality of local government web provision. Despite this, and governmental enthusiasm for bringing services online, no association is found between web development and performance, or cost ‐ effectiveness. The article concludes that governments ’ enthusiasm for citizen ‐ facing digital government is not supported by this empirical data, and that a skeptical view is warranted of DEG ’ s advocacy of digitalization as a core focus for service improvement.","PeriodicalId":46894,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Internet","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2019-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/POI3.209","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42075714","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}
Revelations about the misuse and insecurity of user data gathered by social media platforms have renewed discussions about how best to characterize property rights in user data. At the same time, revelations about the use of social media platforms to disseminate disinformation and hate speech have prompted debates over the need for government regulation to assure that these platforms serve the public interest. These debates often hinge on whether any of the established rationales for media regulation apply to social media. This paper argues that the public resource rationale that has been utilized in traditional media regulation in the U.S. applies to social media. The public resource rationale contends that, when a media outlet utilizes a public resource – such as the broadcast spectrum, or public rights of way – the outlet must abide by certain public interest obligations that may infringe upon its First Amendment rights. This paper argues that aggregate user data can be conceptualized as a public resource that triggers the application of a public interest regulatory framework to social media sites and other digital platforms that derive their revenue from the gathering, sharing, and monetization of massive aggregations of user data.
{"title":"User Data as Public Resource: Implications for Social Media Regulation","authors":"Philip M. Napoli","doi":"10.1002/POI3.216","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/POI3.216","url":null,"abstract":"Revelations about the misuse and insecurity of user data gathered by social media platforms have renewed discussions about how best to characterize property rights in user data. At the same time, revelations about the use of social media platforms to disseminate disinformation and hate speech have prompted debates over the need for government regulation to assure that these platforms serve the public interest. These debates often hinge on whether any of the established rationales for media regulation apply to social media. This paper argues that the public resource rationale that has been utilized in traditional media regulation in the U.S. applies to social media. The public resource rationale contends that, when a media outlet utilizes a public resource – such as the broadcast spectrum, or public rights of way – the outlet must abide by certain public interest obligations that may infringe upon its First Amendment rights. This paper argues that aggregate user data can be conceptualized as a public resource that triggers the application of a public interest regulatory framework to social media sites and other digital platforms that derive their revenue from the gathering, sharing, and monetization of massive aggregations of user data.","PeriodicalId":46894,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Internet","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2019-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/POI3.216","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43145558","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":"Issue Information","authors":"","doi":"10.1002/poi3.179","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.179","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46894,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Internet","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/poi3.179","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43404295","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：