Global Free Expression - Governing the Boundaries of Internet Content

Wagner, Ben

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-33513-1

Cited by 12 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In this sense, they are doing multiple rounds of coding of a large data set in order to ascertain which images can stay and which can not. This is very different from substantively deciding what content is placed on Facebook and what is not (Wagner, ).…”

Section: Keeping a “Human In The Loop”? Three Casesmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…There has been much debate about the lack of legal basis for Facebook's content moderation decisions, as “breastfeeding mothers are off limits [but] crushed heads, limbs, etc., are OK as long as no insides are showing” (Anderson, ). Facebook makes almost all content moderation decisions based on its terms of service and not based on the law of any given country (Wagner, ). The automation or nonautomation of content moderation decisions on the Internet's largest social media platform raises a key question for the governance of Internet architecture.…”

Section: Keeping a “Human In The Loop”? Three Casesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This raises the interesting question of why Facebook includes them in the system at all. Part of the reason may be that they fulfill a function that cannot yet be automated, although both Google and Facebook have acknowledged that they are taking extensive steps to replace this kind of work with automated systems (Wagner, ). However, it can also be suggested that much of their work is not actually there to contribute to human decision making, but rather to suggest that humans—both the users of Facebook and the staff at Facebook—actually have agency.…”

Section: Keeping a “Human In The Loop”? Three Casesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There has been an increasing awareness in the last two decades that the Internet is a socio-technical system (Brey, 2005), comprising both human and technical aspects (Kitchin & Dodge, 2011). Growing discussion about the role of humans in Internet infrastructure is reflected in the literature on Internet governance (Denardis, 2011;Johnson & Post, 1996;Mueller, 2010), content moderation (Roberts, 2014(Roberts, , 2016Wagner, 2016), and-more broadly-the invisible human labor that keeps much of the Internet going (Ekbia & Nardi, 2014;Irani, 2015;Kushner, 2013;Mathew, 2014). This tension in the relationship between people and technology is particularly evident in regard to Internet platforms, whose claim to a legal and technical neutrality in how they manage the content on their platforms is central to their ability to conduct business (Crane, 2011;Kelsey, 2008;Pasquale, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Liable, but Not in Control? Ensuring Meaningful Human Agency in Automated Decision‐Making Systems

Wagner¹

2019

Policy & Internet

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Automated decision making is becoming the norm across large parts of society, which raises interesting liability challenges when human control over technical systems becomes increasingly limited. This article defines “quasi‐automation” as inclusion of humans as a basic rubber‐stamping mechanism in an otherwise completely automated decision‐making system. Three cases of quasi‐automation are examined, where human agency in decision making is currently debatable: self‐driving cars, border searches based on passenger name records, and content moderation on social media. While there are specific regulatory mechanisms for purely automated decision making, these regulatory mechanisms do not apply if human beings are (rubber‐stamping) automated decisions. More broadly, most regulatory mechanisms follow a pattern of binary liability in attempting to regulate human or machine agency, rather than looking to regulate both. This results in regulatory gray areas where the regulatory mechanisms do not apply, harming human rights by preventing meaningful liability for socio‐technical decision making. The article concludes by proposing criteria to ensure meaningful agency when humans are included in automated decision‐making systems, and relates this to the ongoing debate on enabling human rights in Internet infrastructure.

show abstract

Section: Keeping a “Human In The Loop”? Three Casesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Keeping a “Human In The Loop”? Three Casesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Keeping a “Human In The Loop”? Three Casesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Liable, but Not in Control? Ensuring Meaningful Human Agency in Automated Decision‐Making Systems

Wagner¹

2019

Policy & Internet

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Like NetzDG, it also mandates some transparency requirements, but also is more careful in that it seeks to combat the incentive to over-block by instituting proportionality and redress requirements (Kuklis, 2019). While it is not the focus of this article, and has been examined in depth elsewhere (see e.g., Puppis, 2010;Wagner, 2016), state-based content regulation provides the baseline upon which informal governance arrangements tend to build -either as complements intended to fill in certain gaps, or as substitutes to proposals perceived as overly invasive or harmful to human rights.…”

Section: Platform Companies and Regulatory Standards For Free Expressionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The platform governance triangle: conceptualising the informal regulation of online content

Gorwa¹

2019

Internet Policy Review

122

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From the new Facebook 'Oversight Body' for content moderation to the 'Christchurch Call to eliminate terrorism and violent extremism online,' a growing number of voluntary and non-binding informal governance initiatives have recently been proposed as attractive ways to rein in Facebook, Google, and other platform companies hosting user-generated content.Drawing on the literature on transnational corporate governance, this article reviews a number of informal arrangements governing online content on platforms in Europe, mapping them onto Abbott and Snidal's ( 2009) 'governance triangle' model. I discuss three key dynamics shaping the success of informal governance arrangements: actor competencies, 'legitimation politics,' and inter-actor relationships of power and coercion.

show abstract

The Trichan takedown: Lessons in the governance and regulation of child sexual abuse material

Salter

Richardson

2021

Policy & Internet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Amidst renewed concern about the prevalence of online child sexual abuse material, the global technology sector is refocusing on models of multistakeholder governance and the development of new technological solutions. This paper argues that the language of multistakeholderism and technological solutionism obscures the administrative and commercial practices that facilitate the widespread distribution of abuse material. To illustrate this point, the paper describes the 2019 intervention of the Canadian Centre for Child Protection in the operations of "Trichan", three websites that were amongst the largest purveyors of abuse material on the open web for 7 years. The case study underscores the materiality of the Internet and the role of commercial relations within the infrastructure stack in the provision of illegal content. While identifying opportunities for the mass removal of abuse material, the paper questions the discretion granted to technology companies under laissez faire regulation, and troubles characterizations of Internet infrastructure as neutral and instrumental factors in the epidemic availability of abuse material.

show abstract

Global Free Expression - Governing the Boundaries of Internet Content

Cited by 12 publications

References 0 publications

Liable, but Not in Control? Ensuring Meaningful Human Agency in Automated Decision‐Making Systems

Liable, but Not in Control? Ensuring Meaningful Human Agency in Automated Decision‐Making Systems

The platform governance triangle: conceptualising the informal regulation of online content

The Trichan takedown: Lessons in the governance and regulation of child sexual abuse material

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About