Publications - Page 64 of 267

Mediated trust: A theoretical framework to address the trustworthiness of technological trust mediators external link

New Media & Society, 2020

Abstract

This article considers the impact of digital technologies on the interpersonal and institutional logics of trust production. It introduces the new theoretical concept of technology-mediated trust to analyze the role of complex techno-social assemblages in trust production and distrust management. The first part of the article argues that globalization and digitalization have unleashed a crisis of trust, as traditional institutional and interpersonal logics are not attuned to deal with the risks introduced by the prevalence of digital technologies. In the second part, the article describes how digital intermediation has transformed the traditional logics of interpersonal and institutional trust formation and created new trust-mediating services. Finally, the article asks as follows: why should we trust these technological trust mediators? The conclusion is that at best, it is impossible to establish the trustworthiness of trust mediators, and that at worst, we have no reason to trust them.

Links

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820939922

digitale technologie, frontpage, Informatierecht, Regulering, trust

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Bodó, B.
PY  - 0717
DA  - 2020-07-17
T1  - Mediated trust: A theoretical framework to address the trustworthiness of technological trust mediators
JO  - New Media & Society
UR  - https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1461444820939922
DO  - https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820939922
AB  - This article considers the impact of digital technologies on the interpersonal and institutional logics of trust production. It introduces the new theoretical concept of technology-mediated trust to analyze the role of complex techno-social assemblages in trust production and distrust management. The first part of the article argues that globalization and digitalization have unleashed a crisis of trust, as traditional institutional and interpersonal logics are not attuned to deal with the risks introduced by the prevalence of digital technologies. In the second part, the article describes how digital intermediation has transformed the traditional logics of interpersonal and institutional trust formation and created new trust-mediating services. Finally, the article asks as follows: why should we trust these technological trust mediators? The conclusion is that at best, it is impossible to establish the trustworthiness of trust mediators, and that at worst, we have no reason to trust them.
K1  - digitale technologie
K1  - frontpage
K1  - Informatierecht
K1  - Regulering
K1  - trust
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Article{Bodó2020b,
	title = {Mediated trust: A theoretical framework to address the trustworthiness of technological trust mediators},
	author = {Bodó, B.},
	doi = {https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820939922},
	year = {0717},
	date = {2020-07-17},
	journal = {New Media & Society},
	abstract = {This article considers the impact of digital technologies on the interpersonal and institutional logics of trust production. It introduces the new theoretical concept of technology-mediated trust to analyze the role of complex techno-social assemblages in trust production and distrust management. The first part of the article argues that globalization and digitalization have unleashed a crisis of trust, as traditional institutional and interpersonal logics are not attuned to deal with the risks introduced by the prevalence of digital technologies. In the second part, the article describes how digital intermediation has transformed the traditional logics of interpersonal and institutional trust formation and created new trust-mediating services. Finally, the article asks as follows: why should we trust these technological trust mediators? The conclusion is that at best, it is impossible to establish the trustworthiness of trust mediators, and that at worst, we have no reason to trust them.},
	keywords = {digitale technologie, frontpage, Informatierecht, Regulering, trust},
}

Save .bib

Challenging rabbit holes: towards more diversity in news recommendation systems external link

Helberger, N., Bernstein, A., Schulz, W. & Vreese, C.H. de

LSE Media Blog, 2020

Abstract

Access to diverse sources of news and information is more important than ever in this time of global crisis, yet far too often, people can find themselves diving into ‘rabbit holes’ of information and opinion that are hard to escape. Here, the following authors provide an in depth assessment of how algorithmic recommendation systems for news can play a more constructive role in a diverse media landscape.

frontpage, Journalistiek, Mediarecht, nieuws, recommender systems

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

The Political Power of Platforms: How Current Attempts to Regulate Misinformation Amplify Opinion Power external link

Helberger, N.

Digital Journalism, vol. 8, num: 6, pp: 842-854, 2020

Abstract

This contribution critically reviews the ongoing policy initiatives in Europe to impose greater societal responsibility on social media platforms. I discuss the current regulatory approach of treating social platforms as mere 'intermediaries' of the speech of others and propose a different perspective. Instead of perceiving platforms as intermediaries and facilitators of the speech of others, I view social media platforms as active political actors in their own right, and wielders of considerable opinion power. I will explain how taking the perspective of opinion power throws a very different, and rather alarming light on the recent regulatory initiatives.

europe, frontpage, Mediarecht, opinion power, pluralism, Regulation, Social media platforms

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Helberger, N.
PY  - 0714
DA  - 2020-07-14
T1  - The Political Power of Platforms: How Current Attempts to Regulate Misinformation Amplify Opinion Power
JO  - Digital Journalism
VL  - 8
NV  - 6
SP  - 842-854
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2020.1773888
AB  - This contribution critically reviews the ongoing policy initiatives in Europe to impose greater societal responsibility on social media platforms. I discuss the current regulatory approach of treating social platforms as mere \'intermediaries\' of the speech of others and propose a different perspective. Instead of perceiving platforms as intermediaries and facilitators of the speech of others, I view social media platforms as active political actors in their own right, and wielders of considerable opinion power. I will explain how taking the perspective of opinion power throws a very different, and rather alarming light on the recent regulatory initiatives.
K1  - europe
K1  - frontpage
K1  - Mediarecht
K1  - opinion power
K1  - pluralism
K1  - Regulation
K1  - Social media platforms
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Article{Helberger2020d,
	title = {The Political Power of Platforms: How Current Attempts to Regulate Misinformation Amplify Opinion Power},
	author = {Helberger, N.},
	year = {0714},
	date = {2020-07-14},
	journal = {Digital Journalism},
	volume = {8},
	number = {6},
	pages = {842-854},
	abstract = {This contribution critically reviews the ongoing policy initiatives in Europe to impose greater societal responsibility on social media platforms. I discuss the current regulatory approach of treating social platforms as mere \'intermediaries\' of the speech of others and propose a different perspective. Instead of perceiving platforms as intermediaries and facilitators of the speech of others, I view social media platforms as active political actors in their own right, and wielders of considerable opinion power. I will explain how taking the perspective of opinion power throws a very different, and rather alarming light on the recent regulatory initiatives.},
	keywords = {europe, frontpage, Mediarecht, opinion power, pluralism, Regulation, Social media platforms},
}

Save .bib

Technologiereuzen moeten zeggen hoe ze ons gedrag bepalen en zo dwingen we dat af external link

Ausloos, J.

2020

Abstract

Vandaag verschijnt een rapport met aanbevelingen voor de Europese Commissie. Dat zet uiteen hoe onlineplatformen verplicht kunnen worden om aan bepaalde transparantie-eisen te voldoen. Jef Ausloos is hoofdauteur van het rapport en bepleit waarom zo'n kader nodig is. "Transparantie is van cruciaal belang om donkere kantjes in kaart te brengen, zodat we collectief kunnen bepalen waar en hoe we de groeiende macht van onlineplatformen moeten inperken."

frontpage

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

Hungary’s fast tracked implementation of Article 5 CDSM directive in response to the pandemic external link

Keller, P.

Kluwer Copyright Blog, 2020

Auteursrecht, Digital Single Market Directive, frontpage, Hongarije

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

Operationalizing Research Access in Platform Governance: What to learn from other industries? external link

Ausloos, J., Leerssen, P. & Thije, P. ten

2020

Abstract

A new study published by AlgorithmWatch, in cooperation with the European Policy Centre and the University of Amsterdam’s Institute for Information Law, shows that the GDPR needn’t stand in the way of meaningful research access to platform data; looks to health and environmental sectors for best practices in privacy-respecting data sharing frameworks.

Facebook, frontpage, governance, Platforms, research access

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

Annotatie bij EHRM 24 januari 2019 (Catt / Verenigd Koninkrijk) external link

Dommering, E.

Nederlandse Jurisprudentie, num: 24, pp: 3185-3187, 2020

Abstract

Ten onrechte opneming van een vredesactivist in een databank tegen binnenlands terrorisme. Databank dienst een legitiem doel, maar voortdurend bewaren disproportioneel.

Annotaties, databanken, evrm, frontpage

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

User Perspectives on the News Personalisation Process: Agency, Trust and Utility as Building Blocks external link

Monzer, C., Möller, J., Helberger, N. & Eskens, S.

Digital Journalism, vol. 8, num: 9, pp: 1142-1162, 2020

Abstract

With the increasing use of algorithms in news distribution, commentators warn about its possible impacts on the changing relationship between the news media and news readers. To understand the meaning of news personalisation strategies to users, we investigated how they currently experience news personalisation, perceive their role in the personalisation process, and envision increasing the utility of personalised news by giving users more agency and fostering trust. We conducted four focus groups with online news readers in Germany. For the analysis, grounded theory techniques were suitable due to their applicability in reconstructing user perspectives through their own experiences. We found that (1) users fail to distinguish between news personalisation and commercial targeting, which may negatively bias their perception; (2) there is a contradiction in how users perceive themselves as active participants in the process, but lack the means to exercise agency; (3) user concerns extend beyond privacy to what information they receive and their right to personal autonomy—a solution requires offering users the ability to dynamically adjust their “news interest profiles”; (4) while news personalisation strategies afford new opportunities for introducing reciprocity in the media-audience relationship, negotiating competing logics of journalistic, personal and algorithmic curation remains a challenge.

Links

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2020.1773291

agency, focus groups, frontpage, grounded theory, news personalisation, personal curation, Privacy, trust, utility

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Monzer, C.
AU  - Möller, J.
AU  - Helberger, N.
AU  - Eskens, S.
PY  - 0616
DA  - 2020-06-16
T1  - User Perspectives on the News Personalisation Process: Agency, Trust and Utility as Building Blocks
JO  - Digital Journalism
VL  - 8
NV  - 9
SP  - 1142-1162
UR  - https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21670811.2020.1773291
DO  - https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2020.1773291
AB  - With the increasing use of algorithms in news distribution, commentators warn about its possible impacts on the changing relationship between the news media and news readers. To understand the meaning of news personalisation strategies to users, we investigated how they currently experience news personalisation, perceive their role in the personalisation process, and envision increasing the utility of personalised news by giving users more agency and fostering trust. We conducted four focus groups with online news readers in Germany. For the analysis, grounded theory techniques were suitable due to their applicability in reconstructing user perspectives through their own experiences. We found that (1) users fail to distinguish between news personalisation and commercial targeting, which may negatively bias their perception; (2) there is a contradiction in how users perceive themselves as active participants in the process, but lack the means to exercise agency; (3) user concerns extend beyond privacy to what information they receive and their right to personal autonomy—a solution requires offering users the ability to dynamically adjust their “news interest profiles”; (4) while news personalisation strategies afford new opportunities for introducing reciprocity in the media-audience relationship, negotiating competing logics of journalistic, personal and algorithmic curation remains a challenge.
K1  - agency
K1  - focus groups
K1  - frontpage
K1  - grounded theory
K1  - news personalisation
K1  - personal curation
K1  - Privacy
K1  - trust
K1  - utility
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Article{Monzer2020,
	title = {User Perspectives on the News Personalisation Process: Agency, Trust and Utility as Building Blocks},
	author = {Monzer, C. and Möller, J. and Helberger, N. and Eskens, S.},
	doi = {https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2020.1773291},
	year = {0616},
	date = {2020-06-16},
	journal = {Digital Journalism},
	volume = {8},
	number = {9},
	pages = {1142-1162},
	abstract = {With the increasing use of algorithms in news distribution, commentators warn about its possible impacts on the changing relationship between the news media and news readers. To understand the meaning of news personalisation strategies to users, we investigated how they currently experience news personalisation, perceive their role in the personalisation process, and envision increasing the utility of personalised news by giving users more agency and fostering trust. We conducted four focus groups with online news readers in Germany. For the analysis, grounded theory techniques were suitable due to their applicability in reconstructing user perspectives through their own experiences. We found that (1) users fail to distinguish between news personalisation and commercial targeting, which may negatively bias their perception; (2) there is a contradiction in how users perceive themselves as active participants in the process, but lack the means to exercise agency; (3) user concerns extend beyond privacy to what information they receive and their right to personal autonomy—a solution requires offering users the ability to dynamically adjust their “news interest profiles”; (4) while news personalisation strategies afford new opportunities for introducing reciprocity in the media-audience relationship, negotiating competing logics of journalistic, personal and algorithmic curation remains a challenge.},
	keywords = {agency, focus groups, frontpage, grounded theory, news personalisation, personal curation, Privacy, trust, utility},
}

Save .bib

Drie mogelijke boetes van mededingings-, consumenten- en persoonsgegevensautoriteiten voor hetzelfde datagebruik external link

Yakovleva, S., Geursen, W,W, & Arnbak, A.

Tijdschrift Mededingingsrecht in de Praktijk, num: 2, pp: 30-37, 2020

Abstract

Door de toename van datagebruik door ondernemingen is er sprake van convergentie tussen het mededingings-, consumenten- en gegevensbeschermingsrecht. Er kan dan parallelle handhaving plaatsvinden ten aanzien van één en dezelfde handeling door dezelfde onderneming door drie verschillende autoriteiten. Dat noemen wij caleidoscopische handhaving. Dat heeft volgens ons verschillende keerzijden, waaronder het risico op overhandhaving door drie afzonderlijke procedures van drie afzonderlijke autoriteiten en mogelijk drie boetes. Wij onderzoeken in dit artikel waarom het ne-bis-in-idem-beginsel niet van toepassing is en het beginsel van eendaadse samenloop evenmin (net als in de recente Marine Harvest gun-jumping zaak), waardoor proportionaliteit overblijft.

Consumentenrecht, frontpage, gegevensbescherming, Mededingingsrecht, Privacy

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Yakovleva, S.
AU  - Geursen, W,W,
AU  - Arnbak, A.
PY  - 0609
DA  - 2020-06-09
T1  - Drie mogelijke boetes van mededingings-, consumenten- en persoonsgegevensautoriteiten voor hetzelfde datagebruik
JO  - Tijdschrift Mededingingsrecht in de Praktijk
NV  - 2
SP  - 30-37
UR  - https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/MP_2020_164.pdf
AB  - Door de toename van datagebruik door ondernemingen is er sprake van convergentie tussen het mededingings-, consumenten- en gegevensbeschermingsrecht. Er kan dan parallelle handhaving plaatsvinden ten aanzien van één en dezelfde handeling door dezelfde onderneming door drie verschillende autoriteiten. Dat noemen wij caleidoscopische handhaving. Dat heeft volgens ons verschillende keerzijden, waaronder het risico op overhandhaving door drie afzonderlijke procedures van drie afzonderlijke autoriteiten en mogelijk drie boetes. Wij onderzoeken in dit artikel waarom het ne-bis-in-idem-beginsel niet van toepassing is en het beginsel van eendaadse samenloop evenmin (net als in de recente Marine Harvest gun-jumping zaak), waardoor proportionaliteit overblijft.
K1  - Consumentenrecht
K1  - frontpage
K1  - gegevensbescherming
K1  - Mededingingsrecht
K1  - Privacy
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Article{Yakovleva2020b,
	title = {Drie mogelijke boetes van mededingings-, consumenten- en persoonsgegevensautoriteiten voor hetzelfde datagebruik},
	author = {Yakovleva, S. and Geursen, W,W, and Arnbak, A.},
	year = {0609},
	date = {2020-06-09},
	journal = {Tijdschrift Mededingingsrecht in de Praktijk},
	number = {2},
	pages = {30-37},
	abstract = {Door de toename van datagebruik door ondernemingen is er sprake van convergentie tussen het mededingings-, consumenten- en gegevensbeschermingsrecht. Er kan dan parallelle handhaving plaatsvinden ten aanzien van één en dezelfde handeling door dezelfde onderneming door drie verschillende autoriteiten. Dat noemen wij caleidoscopische handhaving. Dat heeft volgens ons verschillende keerzijden, waaronder het risico op overhandhaving door drie afzonderlijke procedures van drie afzonderlijke autoriteiten en mogelijk drie boetes. Wij onderzoeken in dit artikel waarom het ne-bis-in-idem-beginsel niet van toepassing is en het beginsel van eendaadse samenloop evenmin (net als in de recente Marine Harvest gun-jumping zaak), waardoor proportionaliteit overblijft.},
	keywords = {Consumentenrecht, frontpage, gegevensbescherming, Mededingingsrecht, Privacy},
}

Save .bib

Public Registers Caught between Open Government and Data Protection – Personal Data, Principles of Proportionality and the Public Interest download

Lokhorst, G. & van Eechoud, M.

In: Data Protection and Privacy, Volume 12 : Data Protection and Democracy, Hallinan, D., Leenes, R., Gutwirth, S. & De Hert, P. (eds.), Hart Publishing, 2020, ISBN: 9781509932740

Abstract

For governments across the globe, public registers are an increasingly popular means to help achieve a range of objectives. These include safeguarding the independence of judiciary, upholding food hygiene and safety standards, fostering proper use of subsidies, and protecting the public from unqualified professionals. Most public registers are subject to data protection laws because they contain some form of personal data. In the Netherlands, the number of online public register has risen dramatically. On the basis of exploratory research on Dutch public registers, we hypothesised that governments easily assume that public registers serve their designated goals, but rarely adequately assess their effectiveness. A comprehensive analysis of registers confirms that hypothesis is correct. This is problematic from the perspective of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the human right to privacy as enshrined in, for example, Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). Both require that the means used to serve a (legitimate) purpose are proportionate to the (potential) privacy harms. Based on the experience in the Netherlands, in this chapter we query to what extent and by which means policy and lawmakers actually test effectiveness of public registers and analyse the privacy implications from the perspective of proportionality. The adoption of open government policies combined with technological possibilities result in a strong growth of online public registers, and possibilities to link data from multiple sources multiply. The potential privacy impacts on individuals need to be better understood and safeguarded already at the design stages of public registers.

Data protection, open government, Personal data, Privacy, public registers

RIS

TY  - CHAP
AU  - Lokhorst, G.
AU  - van Eechoud, M.
PY  - 2020
DA  - 2020-06-01
T1  - Public Registers Caught between Open Government and Data Protection – Personal Data, Principles of Proportionality and the Public Interest
UR  - https://www.ivir.nl/publications/public-registers-caught-between-open-government-and-data-protection-personal-data-principles-of-proportionality-and-the-public-interest/publicregisterscaug_dataprotectionandpriv/
AB  - For governments across the globe, public registers are an increasingly popular means to help achieve a range of objectives. These include safeguarding the independence of judiciary, upholding food hygiene and safety standards, fostering proper use of subsidies, and protecting the public from unqualified professionals. Most public registers are subject to data protection laws because they contain some form of personal data. In the Netherlands, the number of online public register has risen dramatically. On the basis of exploratory research on Dutch public registers, we hypothesised that governments easily assume that public registers serve their designated goals, but rarely adequately assess their effectiveness. A comprehensive analysis of registers confirms that hypothesis is correct. This is problematic from the perspective of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the human right to privacy as enshrined in, for example, Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). Both require that the means used to serve a (legitimate) purpose are proportionate to the (potential) privacy harms. Based on the experience in the Netherlands, in this chapter we query to what extent and by which means policy and lawmakers actually test effectiveness of public registers and analyse the privacy implications from the perspective of proportionality. The adoption of open government policies combined with technological possibilities result in a strong growth of online public registers, and possibilities to link data from multiple sources multiply. The potential privacy impacts on individuals need to be better understood and safeguarded already at the design stages of public registers.
K1  - Data protection
K1  - open government
K1  - Personal data
K1  - Privacy
K1  - public registers
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Chapter{nokey,
	title = {Public Registers Caught between Open Government and Data Protection – Personal Data, Principles of Proportionality and the Public Interest},
	author = {Lokhorst, G. and van Eechoud, M.},
	year = {2020},
	date = {2020-06-01},
	abstract = {For governments across the globe, public registers are an increasingly popular means to help achieve a range of objectives. These include safeguarding the independence of judiciary, upholding food hygiene and safety standards, fostering proper use of subsidies, and protecting the public from unqualified professionals. Most public registers are subject to data protection laws because they contain some form of personal data. In the Netherlands, the number of online public register has risen dramatically. On the basis of exploratory research on Dutch public registers, we hypothesised that governments easily assume that public registers serve their designated goals, but rarely adequately assess their effectiveness. A comprehensive analysis of registers confirms that hypothesis is correct. This is problematic from the perspective of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the human right to privacy as enshrined in, for example, Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). Both require that the means used to serve a (legitimate) purpose are proportionate to the (potential) privacy harms. Based on the experience in the Netherlands, in this chapter we query to what extent and by which means policy and lawmakers actually test effectiveness of public registers and analyse the privacy implications from the perspective of proportionality. The adoption of open government policies combined with technological possibilities result in a strong growth of online public registers, and possibilities to link data from multiple sources multiply. The potential privacy impacts on individuals need to be better understood and safeguarded already at the design stages of public registers.},
	keywords = {Data protection, open government, Personal data, Privacy, public registers},
}

Save .bib

Top Keywords

Abstract

Links

RIS

Bibtex

Abstract

RIS

Bibtex

Abstract

RIS

Bibtex

Abstract

RIS

Bibtex

RIS

Bibtex

Abstract

RIS

Bibtex

Abstract

RIS

Bibtex

Abstract

Links

RIS

Bibtex

Abstract

RIS

Bibtex

Abstract

RIS

Bibtex