No abstract

Blockchain is one of the most widely debated technologies in recent years. Pundits and scholars have described it as a disruptive technology that will impact many sectors of society. Skeptics argue blockchain’s popularity is fuelled by the media’s obsession for the ‘next big thing’ rather than the intrinsic potential of the technology. In this paper, we follow a social constructivist approach with the aim of explaining how different discourses are creating new meanings about this technology. As Communication scholars, we focus on the role media play in framing debates about blockchain. Our analysis relies on a human coding of the most popular news about blockchain circulating on Twitter from October 2014 to July 2018. The findings show the general attitude about blockchain is predominantly positive. The discourses developing around crypto technologies are complex and multifaceted and indicate a general transition in the rhetorical definition of blockchain.

Fred Turner is considered one of the most influential experts on, and critical observers of, cyberculture. He is Harry and Norman Chandler Professor of Communication at Stanford University in the Department of Communication. Through his work, he provided a thoughtful analysis of the politics and culture of Silicon Valley. In his books, he explored the connections between the collaborative and interdisciplinary research culture of the Second World War, the protest movements of the 1960s, and the managerial ethos permeating digital and new media industries. In this interview, we discuss about the consequences that the countercultural movements had on the organization of labor in modern tech giants, especially in relation to the substitution of hierarchies for flat and more entrepreneurial structures. We also talk about the consequences that a code of ethics might have in the democratization of technology and the responsibility that we have as citizens and academics.

Public and private investments are increasingly being directed towards the development of ICTs for the construction of more inclusive and connected communities. Labelled as Collective Awareness Platforms (CAPs) under the European Seventh Framework Program, these initiatives explore the possibility of tackling societal issues relying on digitally-mediated citizen cooperation. As their diffusion increases, it is important to critically reflect on the extent to which they can effectively trigger forms of engagement and sustainable collaboration within and through digital artefacts. Among the associated risks is the furthering of a technocratic understanding of how collaborative processes work, based on the assumption that the introduction of CAPs would be a sufficient condition for the construction of inclusive and engaged communities. In this respect, this contribution investigates a case in which a digital platform was implemented with the aim of promoting citizens' deliberation on urban-related issues. This experiment is analyzed by 1) assessing whether the platform functioned as a deliberative space; 2) tracking the negotiation processes of the digital artefacts' functionalities occurring among initiative's organizers, platform developers, and participants. The goal of the paper is to understand how different understandings and unexpected usages of the digital platform affected the deliberation process and therefore the initiative's outcomes.

No abstract