信息共享行为的公司审查伦理:一个非结果主义的视角

IF 0.3 4区 管理学 Q4 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Library Trends Pub Date : 2020-10-21 DOI:10.1353/lib.2020.0018
H. Zhong, P. Watters
{"title":"信息共享行为的公司审查伦理:一个非结果主义的视角","authors":"H. Zhong, P. Watters","doi":"10.1353/lib.2020.0018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Recent research on information-seeking behavior (Watters and Ziegler 2016) has suggested a role for managing access to ensure consistency with local regulatory or policy requirements. However, sharing of self-generated, personal data—as facilitated by socialmedia companies—should be relatively free of information-sharing controls. While many studies have examined government censorship, the extent to which the private sector is complicit is often unclear. In this study, we examine whether censorship appears to occur on a number of social-media and related sites, including the transmission of sensitive keywords and URLs. The results indicate that some level of private-sector censorship is prevalent, often in breach of the technology companies' own terms and conditions. In some cases, apparently harmless information is overblocked. These companies need to be more transparent about their censorship mechanisms and subject their actual policies and procedures to scrutiny and public debate. Removing controls on information-sharing behavior is consistent with a nonconsequentialist perspective on privacy.","PeriodicalId":47175,"journal":{"name":"Library Trends","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/lib.2020.0018","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Ethics of Corporate Censorship of Information-Sharing Behavior: A Nonconsequentialist Perspective\",\"authors\":\"H. Zhong, P. Watters\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/lib.2020.0018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract:Recent research on information-seeking behavior (Watters and Ziegler 2016) has suggested a role for managing access to ensure consistency with local regulatory or policy requirements. However, sharing of self-generated, personal data—as facilitated by socialmedia companies—should be relatively free of information-sharing controls. While many studies have examined government censorship, the extent to which the private sector is complicit is often unclear. In this study, we examine whether censorship appears to occur on a number of social-media and related sites, including the transmission of sensitive keywords and URLs. The results indicate that some level of private-sector censorship is prevalent, often in breach of the technology companies' own terms and conditions. In some cases, apparently harmless information is overblocked. These companies need to be more transparent about their censorship mechanisms and subject their actual policies and procedures to scrutiny and public debate. Removing controls on information-sharing behavior is consistent with a nonconsequentialist perspective on privacy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47175,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Library Trends\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/lib.2020.0018\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Library Trends\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/lib.2020.0018\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Library Trends","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/lib.2020.0018","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要:最近关于信息寻求行为的研究(Watters和Ziegler,2016)提出了管理访问的作用,以确保与当地监管或政策要求的一致性。然而,在社交媒体公司的推动下,共享自己生成的个人数据应该相对不受信息共享控制。尽管许多研究对政府审查制度进行了审查,但私营部门在多大程度上串通一气往往不清楚。在这项研究中,我们检查了一些社交媒体和相关网站是否出现审查,包括敏感关键词和URL的传输。研究结果表明,某种程度的私营部门审查制度普遍存在,往往违反了科技公司自己的条款和条件。在某些情况下,看似无害的信息被过度锁定。这些公司需要对其审查机制更加透明,并对其实际政策和程序进行审查和公开辩论。取消对信息共享行为的控制与对隐私的非顺序主义观点是一致的。
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
The Ethics of Corporate Censorship of Information-Sharing Behavior: A Nonconsequentialist Perspective
Abstract:Recent research on information-seeking behavior (Watters and Ziegler 2016) has suggested a role for managing access to ensure consistency with local regulatory or policy requirements. However, sharing of self-generated, personal data—as facilitated by socialmedia companies—should be relatively free of information-sharing controls. While many studies have examined government censorship, the extent to which the private sector is complicit is often unclear. In this study, we examine whether censorship appears to occur on a number of social-media and related sites, including the transmission of sensitive keywords and URLs. The results indicate that some level of private-sector censorship is prevalent, often in breach of the technology companies' own terms and conditions. In some cases, apparently harmless information is overblocked. These companies need to be more transparent about their censorship mechanisms and subject their actual policies and procedures to scrutiny and public debate. Removing controls on information-sharing behavior is consistent with a nonconsequentialist perspective on privacy.
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
Library Trends
Library Trends INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
12.50%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Library Trends, issued quarterly and edited by F. W. Lancaster, explores critical trends in professional librarianship, including practical applications, thorough analyses, and literature reviews. Both practicing librarians and educators use Library Trends as an essential tool in their professional development and continuing education. Each issue is devoted to a single aspect of professional activity or interest. In-depth, thoughtful articles explore important facets of the issue topic. Every year, Library Trends provides breadth, covering a wide variety of themes, from special libraries to emerging technologies. An invaluable resource to practicing librarians and educators, the journal is an important tool that is utilized for professional development and continuing education.
期刊最新文献
Navigating the Copyright Alternative in Small Claims Enforcement (CASE) Act in an Education and Library Environment Linda C. Smith: Fifty Years of Library and Information Science Education by Design Closing the Loop: Bridging Machine Learning (ML) Research and Library Systems Modeling of Serials The Renaissance Scholar of Library and Information Science: Professor Linda C. Smith
×
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