(De)Centralization of the Global Informational Ecosystem

Abstract

Centralization and decentralization are key concepts in debates that focus on the (anti)democratic character of digital societies. Centralization is understood as the control over communication and data flows, and decentralization as giving it (back) to users. Communication and media research focuses on centralization put forward by dominant digital media platforms, such as Facebook and Google, and governments. Decentralization is investigated regarding its potential in civil society, i.e., hacktivism, (encryption) technologies, and grass-root technology movements. As content-based media companies increasingly engage with technology, they move into the focus of critical media studies. Moreover, as formerly nationally oriented companies now compete with global media platforms, they share several interests with civil society decentralization agents. Based on 26 qualitative interviews with leading media managers, we investigate (de)centralization strategies applied by content-oriented media companies. Theoretically, this perspective on media companies as agents of (de)centralization expands (de)centralization research beyond traditional democratic stakeholders by considering economic actors within the "global informational ecosystem" (Birkinbine, Gómez, & Wasko, 2017). We provide a three-dimensional framework to empirically investigate (de)centralization. From critical media studies, we borrow the (de)centralization of data and infrastructures, from media business research, the (de)centralization of content distribution.

A motivation-based typology of media companies’ cross-border engagement

“…Its CEO points to the need to engage with developing joint approaches to technology within Europe with the intent to break the technology dominance of Google and the like. Möller and von Rimscha (2017) have recently argued that socio-political motivation might be particularly valid for content-related businesses.…”

“…On the other hand, digital activities often automatically result in crossing borders. Media companies adapt to international technological infrastructures or use international platforms to increase visibility of their content and thus interact with global technology companies and platforms (Möller and von Rimscha, 2017).…”

Polish Privacy Media Discourse: Privacy as Imposed Policies

“…At the same time, users' access to their personal data is efficiently limited. Eventually, a communication market evolves towards an imbalanced struggle between centralized privatelycontrolled data flows and decentralization, i.e., giving it back to users (Möller & von Rimscha, 2017). Thus, to some extent, the technological dimension of privacy can be understood as a common discursive thread that can run through the other dimensions.…”

Can digitisation help overcome linguistic and strategic disadvantages in international media markets? Exploring cross-border business opportunities for German-language media companies

“…We will contrast primary data on the German-language market (Austria, Germany and Switzerland) with established knowledge of English-based internationalisation. Therefore, we contribute to discussions whether digitisation changes existing power structures (Doyle, 2017;Möller and von Rimscha, 2017).…”