Performing Platform Governance: Facebook and the Stage Management of Data Relations.
Controversies surrounding social media platforms have provided opportunities for institutional reflexivity amongst users and regulators on how to understand and govern platforms. Amidst contestation, platform companies have continued to enact projects that draw upon existing modes of privatized gove...
| Publicado en: | Science & Engineering Ethics Vol. 30; no. 2; pp. 1 - 29 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Springer Nature
Apr2024
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=176459918&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 176459918 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 13533452 GNI jtl: Science & Engineering Ethics issn: 13533452 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Apr2024 vid: 30 iid: 2 pid: 237 pub: Springer Nature artinfo: ui: 176459918 10.1007/s11948-024-00473-5 ppf: 1 ppct: 28 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 886KB tig: atl: Performing Platform Governance: Facebook and the Stage Management of Data Relations. aug: au: Huang, Karen Krafft, P. M. affil: https://ror.org/05vzafd60 McCourt School of Public Policy, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA https://ror.org/04cnfrn26 Creative Computing Institute, University of the Arts London, London, UK sug: keyword: Controversy Data relations Performativity Platform governance Reflexivity ab: Controversies surrounding social media platforms have provided opportunities for institutional reflexivity amongst users and regulators on how to understand and govern platforms. Amidst contestation, platform companies have continued to enact projects that draw upon existing modes of privatized governance. We investigate how social media companies have attempted to achieve closure by continuing to set the terms around platform governance. We investigate two projects implemented by Facebook (Meta)—authenticity regulation and privacy controls—in response to the Russian Interference and Cambridge Analytica controversies surrounding the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election. Drawing on Goffman’s metaphor of stage management, we analyze the techniques deployed by Facebook to reinforce a division between what is visible and invisible to the user experience. These platform governance projects propose to act upon front-stage data relations: information that users can see from other users—whether that is content that users can see from “bad actors”, or information that other users can see about oneself. At the same time, these projects relegate back-stage data relations—information flows between users constituted by recommendation and targeted advertising systems—to invisibility and inaction. As such, Facebook renders the user experience actionable for governance, while foreclosing governance of back-stage data relations central to the economic value of the platform. As social media companies continue to perform platform governance projects following controversies, our paper invites reflection on the politics of these projects. By destabilizing the boundaries drawn by platform companies, we open space for continuous reflexivity on how platforms should be understood and governed. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Science & Engineering Ethics is a copyright of Springer, 2024. All Rights Reserved. item: Science & Engineering Ethics holder: Springer Nature dt: @attributes: year: 2024 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|