Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.5325/JINFOPOLI.11.2021.0001
Kiernan, Mueller
{"title":"Standardizing Security: Surveillance, Human Rights, and the Battle Over Tls 1.3","authors":"Kiernan, Mueller","doi":"10.5325/JINFOPOLI.11.2021.0001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5325/JINFOPOLI.11.2021.0001","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":55617,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73837958","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0562
Maphosa
{"title":"Students' Awareness and Attitudinal Dispositions to E-Waste Management Practices at a Zimbabwean University","authors":"Maphosa","doi":"10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0562","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0562","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":55617,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80284525","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0523
Layton, Witkowski
{"title":"5G Versus Wi-Fi: Challenges for Economic, Spectrum, and Security Policy","authors":"Layton, Witkowski","doi":"10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0523","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0523","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":55617,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79058662","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0222
Gwen Shaffer
ABSTRACT This research anticipates a future where “smart cities” rely extensively on data analytics to determine budget allocations, to manage traffic, to design infrastructure, and to advance sustainability efforts. In this study, Helen Nissenbaum's contextual integrity framework helps us understand how smart city residents consider privacy norms, and provides a structure for comparing these norms to current data privacy practices. The study findings and policy recommendations are based on focus group discussions with more than 80 residents of Long Beach, California, as well as 60 responses to an open-ended question asked in a smart city survey.
{"title":"Applying a Contextual Integrity Framework to Privacy Policies for Smart Technologies","authors":"Gwen Shaffer","doi":"10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0222","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0222","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This research anticipates a future where “smart cities” rely extensively on data analytics to determine budget allocations, to manage traffic, to design infrastructure, and to advance sustainability efforts. In this study, Helen Nissenbaum's contextual integrity framework helps us understand how smart city residents consider privacy norms, and provides a structure for comparing these norms to current data privacy practices. The study findings and policy recommendations are based on focus group discussions with more than 80 residents of Long Beach, California, as well as 60 responses to an open-ended question asked in a smart city survey.","PeriodicalId":55617,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138541922","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0444
Wilson, Hahn
{"title":"Twitter and Turkey: Social Media Surveillance at the Intersection of Corporate Ethics and International Policy","authors":"Wilson, Hahn","doi":"10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0444","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0444","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":55617,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83915131","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0266
A. Heldt, Stephan Dreyer
After many years of much-criticized opacity in the field of content moderation, social media platforms are now opening up to a dialogue with users and policymakers. Until now, liability frameworks in the United States and in the European Union (EU) have set incentives for platforms not to monitor user-generated content—an increasingly contested model that has led to (inter alia) practices and policies of noncontainment. Following discussions on platform power over online speech and how contentious content benefits the attention economy, there is an observable shift toward stricter content moderation duties in addition to more responsibility with regard to content. Nevertheless, much remains unsolved: the legitimacy of platforms’ content moderation rules and decisions is still questioned. The platforms’ power over the vast majority of communication in the digital sphere is still difficult to grasp because of its nature as private, yet often perceived as public. To address this issue, we use a governance structure perspective to identify potential regulatory advantages of establishing cross-platform external bodies for content moderation, ultimately aiming at providing insights about the opportunities and limitations of such a model.
{"title":"Competent Third Parties and Content Moderation on Platforms: Potentials of Independent Decision-Making Bodies From A Governance Structure Perspective","authors":"A. Heldt, Stephan Dreyer","doi":"10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0266","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0266","url":null,"abstract":"After many years of much-criticized opacity in the field of content moderation, social media platforms are now opening up to a dialogue with users and policymakers. Until now, liability frameworks in the United States and in the European Union (EU) have set incentives for platforms not to monitor user-generated content—an increasingly contested model that has led to (inter alia) practices and policies of noncontainment. Following discussions on platform power over online speech and how contentious content benefits the attention economy, there is an observable shift toward stricter content moderation duties in addition to more responsibility with regard to content. Nevertheless, much remains unsolved: the legitimacy of platforms’ content moderation rules and decisions is still questioned. The platforms’ power over the vast majority of communication in the digital sphere is still difficult to grasp because of its nature as private, yet often perceived as public. To address this issue, we use a governance structure perspective to identify potential regulatory advantages of establishing cross-platform external bodies for content moderation, ultimately aiming at providing insights about the opportunities and limitations of such a model.","PeriodicalId":55617,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80937237","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0403
Ogbo, Brown, Gant, Davis, Sicker
{"title":"The Impact of Over-the-Top Services on Preferences for Mobile Services: A Conjoint Analysis of Users in Nigeria","authors":"Ogbo, Brown, Gant, Davis, Sicker","doi":"10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0403","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0403","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":55617,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86022838","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0301
René L. P. Mahieu, H. Asghari, Christopher Parsons, J. Hoboken, Masashi Crete-Nishihata, Andrew Hilts, Siena Anstis
We investigate empirically whether the introduction of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) improved compliance with data protection rights of people who are not formally protected under GDPR. By measuring compliance with the right of access for European Union (EU) and Canadian residents, we find that this is indeed the case. We argue this is likely caused by the Brussels Effect, a mechanism whereby policy diffuses primarily through market mechanisms. We suggest that a willingness to back up its rules with strong enforcement, as it did with the introduction of the GDPR, was the primary driver in allowing the EU to unilaterally affect companies’ global
{"title":"Measuring the Brussels Effect through Access Requests: Has the European General Data Protection Regulation Influenced the Data Protection Rights of Canadian Citizens?","authors":"René L. P. Mahieu, H. Asghari, Christopher Parsons, J. Hoboken, Masashi Crete-Nishihata, Andrew Hilts, Siena Anstis","doi":"10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0301","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0301","url":null,"abstract":"We investigate empirically whether the introduction of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) improved compliance with data protection rights of people who are not formally protected under GDPR. By measuring compliance with the right of access for European Union (EU) and Canadian residents, we find that this is indeed the case. We argue this is likely caused by the Brussels Effect, a mechanism whereby policy diffuses primarily through market mechanisms. We suggest that a willingness to back up its rules with strong enforcement, as it did with the introduction of the GDPR, was the primary driver in allowing the EU to unilaterally affect companies’ global","PeriodicalId":55617,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85735066","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.5325/JINFOPOLI.11.2021.0104
Erezi Ogbo, T. Brown, J. Gant, D. Sicker
The Internet has been identified as a tool to overcome poverty; by improving communication, facilitating innovation, and driving economic growth. However, as seen in studies on the benefits of Internet adoption and use, the welfare effect of technology is not only based on its adoption, but also from the type of use. In this study, drawing on the Uses and Gratifications Theory, we identified distinct classifications and predictors of Internet activities (second-level digital divide) and Internet outcomes (third-level digital divide) relevant to Sub-Saharan Africa. Gender, age, and educational level are key predictors of the second-level digital divide, while educational level and Internet use patterns affect the third-level digital divide.
{"title":"When Being Connected is not Enough: An Analysis of the Second and Third Levels of the Digital Divide in a Developing Country","authors":"Erezi Ogbo, T. Brown, J. Gant, D. Sicker","doi":"10.5325/JINFOPOLI.11.2021.0104","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5325/JINFOPOLI.11.2021.0104","url":null,"abstract":"The Internet has been identified as a tool to overcome poverty; by improving communication, facilitating innovation, and driving economic growth. However, as seen in studies on the benefits of Internet adoption and use, the welfare effect of technology is not only based on its adoption, but also from the type of use. In this study, drawing on the Uses and Gratifications Theory, we identified distinct classifications and predictors of Internet activities (second-level digital divide) and Internet outcomes (third-level digital divide) relevant to Sub-Saharan Africa. Gender, age, and educational level are key predictors of the second-level digital divide, while educational level and Internet use patterns affect the third-level digital divide.","PeriodicalId":55617,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84621602","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0063
Josephine Wolff,Nicole Atallah
ABSTRACT The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which went into effect in May 2018, enabled European Data Protection Authorities (DPAs) to fine companies up to 4 percent of their annual revenue in the event that they were found in violation of the regulation's requirements for data collection, processing, and use. But the regulation gave DPAs considerable leeway to determine how they would implement these penalties. This article analyzes 261 publicly available GDPR enforcement orders issued by DPAs during the first 24 months of the GDPR implementation. The findings show that most GDPR fines levied so far have been relatively small, many of them within the thresholds set by earlier laws prior to the GDPR. Additionally, only half of the GDPR articles for which penalties are designated have actually resulted in public enforcement actions, and those fines that have been levied focus primarily on violations of five particular articles, four of which pertain primarily to user privacy protections. However, despite the fact that most of the fines issued under the GDPR have been in response to privacy violations, the largest fines have been triggered by security incidents, and, on average, security violations still receive larger fines than privacy violations.
{"title":"Early GDPR Penalties: Analysis of Implementation and Fines Through May 2020","authors":"Josephine Wolff,Nicole Atallah","doi":"10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0063","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0063","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which went into effect in May 2018, enabled European Data Protection Authorities (DPAs) to fine companies up to 4 percent of their annual revenue in the event that they were found in violation of the regulation's requirements for data collection, processing, and use. But the regulation gave DPAs considerable leeway to determine how they would implement these penalties. This article analyzes 261 publicly available GDPR enforcement orders issued by DPAs during the first 24 months of the GDPR implementation. The findings show that most GDPR fines levied so far have been relatively small, many of them within the thresholds set by earlier laws prior to the GDPR. Additionally, only half of the GDPR articles for which penalties are designated have actually resulted in public enforcement actions, and those fines that have been levied focus primarily on violations of five particular articles, four of which pertain primarily to user privacy protections. However, despite the fact that most of the fines issued under the GDPR have been in response to privacy violations, the largest fines have been triggered by security incidents, and, on average, security violations still receive larger fines than privacy violations.","PeriodicalId":55617,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138537086","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","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：