媒体使用者和专业人士对个人资料收据的反应:一项混合方法研究

Inf. Polity Pub Date : 2022-04-22 DOI:10.3233/ip-211500
Natasja Van Buggenhout, W. V. D. Broeck
{"title":"媒体使用者和专业人士对个人资料收据的反应:一项混合方法研究","authors":"Natasja Van Buggenhout, W. V. D. Broeck","doi":"10.3233/ip-211500","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"European General Data Protection Regulation requires organisations to request the data subject’s consent for personal data processing. Data controllers must be able to demonstrate valid consent was obtained (‘transparency’). Media often struggle to meet GDPR requirements in practice. We identified several issues with existing consent procedures amongst which a need for trustworthy approaches to record and track consent. In this article, we evaluate a specific transparency initiative: a Personal Data Receipt (PDR) for news personalisation. We investigated how European media users and media professionals evaluated the PDR. We conducted qualitative surveys and interviews to explore and describe individuals’ viewpoints on/responses to the PDR. The main strengths highlighted in this study are: GDPR compliance and improved data processing transparency which leads to more control and user trust. PDR weaknesses are mainly related to users not reading the receipt, lack/overload of information, and design issues. Based on our findings, we identified missing elements and formulated recommendations for PDR improvement to optimise consent strategies. By examining how individuals responded to this specific transparency tool, and rhetorical tactics connected to it (placation, diversion, jargon, and misnaming), our study provides informed suggestions for ways out of digital resignation (Draper & Turow, 2019).","PeriodicalId":418875,"journal":{"name":"Inf. Polity","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Media users' and professionals' responses to personal data receipts: A mixed methods study\",\"authors\":\"Natasja Van Buggenhout, W. V. D. Broeck\",\"doi\":\"10.3233/ip-211500\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"European General Data Protection Regulation requires organisations to request the data subject’s consent for personal data processing. Data controllers must be able to demonstrate valid consent was obtained (‘transparency’). Media often struggle to meet GDPR requirements in practice. We identified several issues with existing consent procedures amongst which a need for trustworthy approaches to record and track consent. In this article, we evaluate a specific transparency initiative: a Personal Data Receipt (PDR) for news personalisation. We investigated how European media users and media professionals evaluated the PDR. We conducted qualitative surveys and interviews to explore and describe individuals’ viewpoints on/responses to the PDR. The main strengths highlighted in this study are: GDPR compliance and improved data processing transparency which leads to more control and user trust. PDR weaknesses are mainly related to users not reading the receipt, lack/overload of information, and design issues. Based on our findings, we identified missing elements and formulated recommendations for PDR improvement to optimise consent strategies. By examining how individuals responded to this specific transparency tool, and rhetorical tactics connected to it (placation, diversion, jargon, and misnaming), our study provides informed suggestions for ways out of digital resignation (Draper & Turow, 2019).\",\"PeriodicalId\":418875,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Inf. Polity\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Inf. Polity\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3233/ip-211500\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Inf. Polity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/ip-211500","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

欧洲通用数据保护条例要求组织在处理个人数据时征求数据主体的同意。数据控制者必须能够证明获得了有效的同意(“透明度”)。媒体在实践中往往难以满足GDPR的要求。我们确定了现有同意程序的几个问题,其中需要可靠的方法来记录和跟踪同意。在本文中,我们评估了一个具体的透明度倡议:新闻个性化的个人数据接收(PDR)。我们调查了欧洲媒体用户和媒体专业人士如何评估PDR。我们进行了定性调查和访谈,以探索和描述个人对PDR的看法/反应。本研究强调的主要优势是:GDPR合规性和提高数据处理透明度,从而带来更多的控制和用户信任。PDR的弱点主要与用户不阅读收据、信息缺乏/过载以及设计问题有关。根据我们的研究结果,我们确定了缺失的元素,并制定了改进PDR的建议,以优化同意策略。通过研究个人如何应对这种特定的透明度工具,以及与之相关的修辞策略(安置、转移注意力、行话和误命名),我们的研究为数字辞职的出路提供了明智的建议(Draper & Turow, 2019)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Media users' and professionals' responses to personal data receipts: A mixed methods study
European General Data Protection Regulation requires organisations to request the data subject’s consent for personal data processing. Data controllers must be able to demonstrate valid consent was obtained (‘transparency’). Media often struggle to meet GDPR requirements in practice. We identified several issues with existing consent procedures amongst which a need for trustworthy approaches to record and track consent. In this article, we evaluate a specific transparency initiative: a Personal Data Receipt (PDR) for news personalisation. We investigated how European media users and media professionals evaluated the PDR. We conducted qualitative surveys and interviews to explore and describe individuals’ viewpoints on/responses to the PDR. The main strengths highlighted in this study are: GDPR compliance and improved data processing transparency which leads to more control and user trust. PDR weaknesses are mainly related to users not reading the receipt, lack/overload of information, and design issues. Based on our findings, we identified missing elements and formulated recommendations for PDR improvement to optimise consent strategies. By examining how individuals responded to this specific transparency tool, and rhetorical tactics connected to it (placation, diversion, jargon, and misnaming), our study provides informed suggestions for ways out of digital resignation (Draper & Turow, 2019).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Policy Review: The Evolving Governance of Surveillance Cameras in the UK Editorial: Improving Diversity in our Journal Two Editorials: An Editorial by the Editors-in-Chief and an Editorial by ChatGPT The Dutch Open Government Act: Bridging old and new open government? The Power of Partnership in Open Government: Reconsidering Multistakeholder Governance Reform
×
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