Restricting digital sites of dissent: commercial social media and free expression.
The widespread use of commercial social media platforms by protesters and activists has enhanced protest mobilisation and reporting but it has placed social media providers in the intermediary role as facilitators of dissent and has thereby created new challenges. Companies like Google and Facebook...
| Published in: | Critical Discourse Studies Vol. 13; no. 3; pp. 325 - 341 |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Article |
| Published: |
Taylor & Francis Ltd
Jun2016
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | View this record in EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=114607757&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 114607757 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 17405904 RF5 jtl: Critical Discourse Studies issn: 17405904 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Jun2016 vid: 13 iid: 3 pid: 377 pub: Taylor & Francis Ltd artinfo: ui: 114607757 10.1080/17405904.2016.1141695 ppf: 325 ppct: 16 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 1.1MB tig: atl: Restricting digital sites of dissent: commercial social media and free expression. aug: au: Hintz, Arne affil: Cardiff School of Journalism, Media and Cultural Studies, Cardiff University, UK su: Digital media Social media Freedom of expression Infrastructure (Economics) Google Inc. sug: subj: Digital media Social media Freedom of expression Infrastructure (Economics) Google Inc. keyword: censorship digital rights freedom of expression protest surveillance ab: The widespread use of commercial social media platforms by protesters and activists has enhanced protest mobilisation and reporting but it has placed social media providers in the intermediary role as facilitators of dissent and has thereby created new challenges. Companies like Google and Facebook are increasingly restricting content that is published on or distributed through their platforms; they have been subject to obstruction by governments; and their services have been at the core of large-scale data collection and surveillance. This article analyses and categorises forms of infrastructure-based restrictions on free expression and dissent. It shows how private intermediaries have been incorporated into state-led content policies; how they set their own standards for legitimate online communication and intervene accordingly; and how state-based actions and commercial self-regulation intersect in the specific area of online surveillance. Based on a broad review of cases, it situates the role of social media in the wider trend of the privatisation of communications policy and the complex interplay between state-based regulation and commercial rule-making. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Critical Discourse Studies is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Critical Discourse Studies holder: Taylor & Francis Ltd dt: @attributes: year: 2016 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|