通过内容中立的社交媒体政策支持民主

Christopher L. Quarles
{"title":"通过内容中立的社交媒体政策支持民主","authors":"Christopher L. Quarles","doi":"10.38126/jspg220108","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The internet and social media carry vast amounts of new information every second. To make these flows manageable, platforms engage in content moderation, using algorithms and humans to decide which content to recommend and which to remove. These decisions have profound effects on our elections, democratic debate, and human well-being. The U.S. government cannot directly regulate these decisions due to the scale of the content and the First Amendment. Rather than focusing exclusively on whether or what content gets moderated, policy-makers should focus on ensuring that incentives and processes create an information infrastructure that can support a robust democracy. These policies are most likely to be content-neutral. Three content-neutral mechanisms are promising targets for policy: process, transparency, and de-amplification.","PeriodicalId":222224,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Science Policy & Governance","volume":"70 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Supporting Democracy through Content-Neutral Social Media Policies\",\"authors\":\"Christopher L. Quarles\",\"doi\":\"10.38126/jspg220108\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The internet and social media carry vast amounts of new information every second. To make these flows manageable, platforms engage in content moderation, using algorithms and humans to decide which content to recommend and which to remove. These decisions have profound effects on our elections, democratic debate, and human well-being. The U.S. government cannot directly regulate these decisions due to the scale of the content and the First Amendment. Rather than focusing exclusively on whether or what content gets moderated, policy-makers should focus on ensuring that incentives and processes create an information infrastructure that can support a robust democracy. These policies are most likely to be content-neutral. Three content-neutral mechanisms are promising targets for policy: process, transparency, and de-amplification.\",\"PeriodicalId\":222224,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Science Policy & Governance\",\"volume\":\"70 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Science Policy & Governance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.38126/jspg220108\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Science Policy & Governance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.38126/jspg220108","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

互联网和社交媒体每秒钟都会传播大量的新信息。为了使这些流易于管理,平台进行了内容审核,使用算法和人工来决定推荐哪些内容,删除哪些内容。这些决定对我们的选举、民主辩论和人类福祉有着深远的影响。由于内容的规模和第一修正案,美国政府无法直接监管这些决定。政策制定者不应只关注内容是否或哪些内容需要审核,而应关注确保激励机制和流程能够创建一个支持健全民主的信息基础设施。这些策略很可能是内容中立的。三个内容中立的机制是有希望实现的政策目标:流程、透明度和去放大。
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
Supporting Democracy through Content-Neutral Social Media Policies
The internet and social media carry vast amounts of new information every second. To make these flows manageable, platforms engage in content moderation, using algorithms and humans to decide which content to recommend and which to remove. These decisions have profound effects on our elections, democratic debate, and human well-being. The U.S. government cannot directly regulate these decisions due to the scale of the content and the First Amendment. Rather than focusing exclusively on whether or what content gets moderated, policy-makers should focus on ensuring that incentives and processes create an information infrastructure that can support a robust democracy. These policies are most likely to be content-neutral. Three content-neutral mechanisms are promising targets for policy: process, transparency, and de-amplification.
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
Cover Memo: Volume 23, Issue 2, Special Issue on Civic Science for Transformative Policy Solutions to Societal Challenges Left out of the Room Where it Happens: Barriers to Serving in Senior Congressional Staff Roles May Limit “Representative” Science Policymaking Community-Driven Civic Science: Relationship Building to Prioritize Public Needs Rethinking Civic Science Funding to Better Support Community Engagement From Intent to Impact: Enabling Transdisciplinary Research for Responsible Scientific Stewardship
×
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