“绝对不想和别人扯上关系”:在去平台化争议中审视公共关系

Stephanie Hill
{"title":"“绝对不想和别人扯上关系”:在去平台化争议中审视公共关系","authors":"Stephanie Hill","doi":"10.1177/13548565231203981","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In August 2019, a mass shooter in the United States posted a violent manifesto to the anonymous forum 8chan prior to his attack. This was the third such incident that year and afterwards hosting and security services conceded to calls to drop 8chan as a client, pushing 8chan to the margins of the accessible internet. This article examines the deplatforming of 8chan as a public relations crisis, contributing to understanding ‘governance by shock’ (Ananny and Gillespie 2016) by examining who is shocked and their power to turn shock into online regulation. Online platforms and media attention created opportunities to study how the deplatforming was justified, drawing on the theoretical framework of economies of worth (Boltanski and Thevenot 2006) and controversy mapping methods. The examination finds: (1) that this case of deplatforming indicates the openness of infrastructure-as-a-service companies to external challenges over content, rather than hegemonic control. (2) That regulatory gaps, including the broadness of U.S. free speech laws, made these companies, rather than legal processes, the relevant authority. (3) That framing responsibility as following the law – as Cloudflare attempted to do – misunderstands the importance of normative principles, voluntary measures, and contestation in governing online content, underselling the value of policy-making at other levels. The success of the campaign to deplatform 8chan affirms the significance of PR crises in the regulation of online content, rewarding deplatforming as a political tactic for civil society groups and online networks pushing for governance in regulatory gaps. However, the significance of normative enforcement in this case underlines the difficulties of this semi-voluntary style of governance. While normative opposition to violence contributed to 8chan’s deplatforming, other normative oppositions contribute to deplatforming vulnerable users, as in the moral panics that drive the deplatforming of sexual content ( Tiidenberg 2021 ) and feed suspicion over the ideological application of deplatforming. The ambivalence of PR crises as a strategy for influencing platform governance underlines the need for clarity in policy-making at multiple levels.","PeriodicalId":47242,"journal":{"name":"Convergence-The International Journal of Research Into New Media Technologies","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘Definitely not in the business of wanting to be associated’: Examining public relations in a deplatformization controversy\",\"authors\":\"Stephanie Hill\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/13548565231203981\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In August 2019, a mass shooter in the United States posted a violent manifesto to the anonymous forum 8chan prior to his attack. This was the third such incident that year and afterwards hosting and security services conceded to calls to drop 8chan as a client, pushing 8chan to the margins of the accessible internet. This article examines the deplatforming of 8chan as a public relations crisis, contributing to understanding ‘governance by shock’ (Ananny and Gillespie 2016) by examining who is shocked and their power to turn shock into online regulation. Online platforms and media attention created opportunities to study how the deplatforming was justified, drawing on the theoretical framework of economies of worth (Boltanski and Thevenot 2006) and controversy mapping methods. The examination finds: (1) that this case of deplatforming indicates the openness of infrastructure-as-a-service companies to external challenges over content, rather than hegemonic control. (2) That regulatory gaps, including the broadness of U.S. free speech laws, made these companies, rather than legal processes, the relevant authority. (3) That framing responsibility as following the law – as Cloudflare attempted to do – misunderstands the importance of normative principles, voluntary measures, and contestation in governing online content, underselling the value of policy-making at other levels. The success of the campaign to deplatform 8chan affirms the significance of PR crises in the regulation of online content, rewarding deplatforming as a political tactic for civil society groups and online networks pushing for governance in regulatory gaps. However, the significance of normative enforcement in this case underlines the difficulties of this semi-voluntary style of governance. While normative opposition to violence contributed to 8chan’s deplatforming, other normative oppositions contribute to deplatforming vulnerable users, as in the moral panics that drive the deplatforming of sexual content ( Tiidenberg 2021 ) and feed suspicion over the ideological application of deplatforming. The ambivalence of PR crises as a strategy for influencing platform governance underlines the need for clarity in policy-making at multiple levels.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47242,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Convergence-The International Journal of Research Into New Media Technologies\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Convergence-The International Journal of Research Into New Media Technologies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/13548565231203981\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Convergence-The International Journal of Research Into New Media Technologies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13548565231203981","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2019年8月,美国一名大规模枪手在袭击前在匿名论坛8chan上发布了一份暴力宣言。这是该年发生的第三起此类事件,之后托管和安全服务机构迫于要求放弃8chan客户的呼声,将8chan推到了可访问互联网的边缘。本文将8chan的平台化作为一场公共关系危机进行了研究,通过研究谁受到了冲击,以及他们将冲击转化为网络监管的能力,有助于理解“冲击治理”(Ananny and Gillespie 2016)。利用价值经济的理论框架(Boltanski and Thevenot 2006)和争议映射方法,在线平台和媒体关注为研究去平台化是如何被证明是合理的创造了机会。研究发现:(1)这种去平台化的情况表明,基础设施即服务公司对内容的外部挑战持开放态度,而不是霸权控制。(2)监管缺口,包括美国言论自由法律的宽泛性,使这些公司,而不是法律程序,成为相关权威。(3)将责任定义为遵守法律——就像Cloudflare试图做的那样——误解了规范原则、自愿措施和争议在管理在线内容中的重要性,低估了其他层面决策的价值。取消8chan平台运动的成功,证实了公关危机在网络内容监管中的重要性,让取消平台成为公民社会团体和在线网络在监管缺口中推动治理的一种政治策略。然而,在这种情况下,规范执行的重要性突显了这种半自愿治理风格的困难。虽然对暴力的规范反对导致了8chan的去平台化,但其他规范反对也导致了弱势用户的去平台化,比如道德恐慌推动了性内容的去平台化(Tiidenberg 2021),并引发了对去平台化的意识形态应用的怀疑。公共关系危机作为一种影响平台治理的战略所存在的矛盾心理,突显了在多个层面上明确决策的必要性。
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
‘Definitely not in the business of wanting to be associated’: Examining public relations in a deplatformization controversy
In August 2019, a mass shooter in the United States posted a violent manifesto to the anonymous forum 8chan prior to his attack. This was the third such incident that year and afterwards hosting and security services conceded to calls to drop 8chan as a client, pushing 8chan to the margins of the accessible internet. This article examines the deplatforming of 8chan as a public relations crisis, contributing to understanding ‘governance by shock’ (Ananny and Gillespie 2016) by examining who is shocked and their power to turn shock into online regulation. Online platforms and media attention created opportunities to study how the deplatforming was justified, drawing on the theoretical framework of economies of worth (Boltanski and Thevenot 2006) and controversy mapping methods. The examination finds: (1) that this case of deplatforming indicates the openness of infrastructure-as-a-service companies to external challenges over content, rather than hegemonic control. (2) That regulatory gaps, including the broadness of U.S. free speech laws, made these companies, rather than legal processes, the relevant authority. (3) That framing responsibility as following the law – as Cloudflare attempted to do – misunderstands the importance of normative principles, voluntary measures, and contestation in governing online content, underselling the value of policy-making at other levels. The success of the campaign to deplatform 8chan affirms the significance of PR crises in the regulation of online content, rewarding deplatforming as a political tactic for civil society groups and online networks pushing for governance in regulatory gaps. However, the significance of normative enforcement in this case underlines the difficulties of this semi-voluntary style of governance. While normative opposition to violence contributed to 8chan’s deplatforming, other normative oppositions contribute to deplatforming vulnerable users, as in the moral panics that drive the deplatforming of sexual content ( Tiidenberg 2021 ) and feed suspicion over the ideological application of deplatforming. The ambivalence of PR crises as a strategy for influencing platform governance underlines the need for clarity in policy-making at multiple levels.
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
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
7.10%
发文量
98
期刊最新文献
Managing the visibility of dissent: Stigma, social media, and family relationships among Azerbaijani activists Producing intimacy in virtual reality From permissive to resistive tactics: How audience members engage with and make sense of datafied journalism No Cap: ASCAP and the fragmentation of music publishing Digital placemaking and its discontents: Exploring practices, power relations, and socio-spatial dynamics in Salzburg’s ‘Andräviertel’
×
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