Algorithmic regulation: A maturing concept for investigating regulationofandthroughalgorithms

Abstract

This paper offers a critical synthesis of the articles in this Special Issue with a view to assessing the concept of "algorithmic regulation" as a mode of social coordination and control articulated by Yeung in 2017. We highlight significant changes in public debate about the role of algorithms in society occurring in the last five years. We also highlight prominent themes that emerge from the contributions, illuminating what is distinctive about the concept of algorithmic regulation, reflecting upon some of its strengths, limitations, and its relationship with the broader research field. In closing, we argue that the core concept is valuable and maturing. It has evolved into an analytical bridge that fosters cross-disciplinary development and analysis in ways that enrich its early "skeletal" form, thereby enabling careful and context-sensitive analysis of algorithmic regulation in concrete settings while facilitating critical reflection concerning the legitimacy of existing and proposed regulatory regimes.

Co‐Producing Security: Platform Content Moderation and European Security Integration

“…These works have focused on the growing role of IT companies and (social media) platforms in shaping the internet, which has become a prime public space (for example Gillespie, 2010, 2018a; Crawford and Schultz, 2014; van Dijck and Poell, 2015; van Dijck et al ., 2018). These works analyse both ‘regulation by platforms’ and ‘regulation of platforms’ (Gillespie, 2018b, p. 254; Ulbricht and Yeung, 2021). The former concerns how IT companies de facto increasingly regulate social and political life, while the latter is understood as how governments seek to regulate platforms (see also Adamski, 2018; Klonick, 2018; Kuczerawy, 2019; van Hoboken, 2019; Ulbricht and Yeung, 2021).…”

“…These works analyse both ‘regulation by platforms’ and ‘regulation of platforms’ (Gillespie, 2018b, p. 254; Ulbricht and Yeung, 2021). The former concerns how IT companies de facto increasingly regulate social and political life, while the latter is understood as how governments seek to regulate platforms (see also Adamski, 2018; Klonick, 2018; Kuczerawy, 2019; van Hoboken, 2019; Ulbricht and Yeung, 2021). Poignantly, Julie Cohen (2019, p. 5) argues that the entanglements between IT companies and public authorities, or between ‘code’ and ‘law,’ are redefining the future of our societies.…”

Algorithms, contexts, governance: An introduction to the special issue

“…The concept of algorithmic governance is arguably the broadest way to conceptualize the power of algorithms. Compared with more focused terms such as algorithmic regulation (Ulbricht and Yeung, 2022), algorithmic governmentality (Harkens, 2018;Rouvroy, 2011), or the business-related algocracy (Aneesh, 2009) and algorithmic management (Galiere, 2020), algorithmic governance has been used to describe a variety of sociotechnical practices aimed at assessing, directing, regulating, and managing the behavior of both human and non-human agents (Danaher, 2016;Katzenbach and Ulbricht, 2019). In these practices, computational calculations, automated recommendation or decisionmaking, and machine learning stand central.…”

Countering Misinformation: Evidence, Knowledge Gaps, and Implications of Current Interventions

“…Interventions can take place at the system level or at the individual level (Chater & Loewenstein, 2022;Kozyreva et al, 2020). System-level responses to tackling misinformation range from data-sharing proposals between tech companies and researchers, to laws prohibiting the spread of misinformation (Nuñez, 2020) and regulatory proposals for social media platforms' algorithms (Khan, 2021;Ulbricht & Yeung, 2022). These are perhaps the most controversial form of intervention given the potentially adverse consequences for freedom of expression and media freedom (Bontcheva et al, 2020).…”