Affiliation:
1. Department of Media and Communication Chosun University Gwangju South Korea
2. Department of Media Communication Sungshin Women's University Seoul South Korea
Abstract
AbstractBuilding upon previous studies that divide the governance of digital platforms into three eras (Flew, 2021; Bowers & Zittrain, 2020), this study investigates how one of the most influential digital platforms, Google, has handled removal requests from governments. By sketching the regulatory terrain of Google, the current study seeks a more balanced understanding of content moderation. This study selected an exploratory case study approach using Google's Transparency reports and accompanying public data sets relating to governments' content removal requests filed for all Google products from 2009 to 2021. The findings reveal a growing influence of nation states on moderating online content, delineating the surging point as occurring in 2016. In addition to the sheer increase of take‐down requests raised in various areas, since 2016 the trend of government interventions has outpaced those of courts; during the same period, Google, which had been more compliant with court decisions than with governmental entities' requests, showed similar compliance with government requests. The results also demonstrate how the practices of requesting content removal differed by political system while singling out Russia's distinctive characteristics. This study sheds light on our understanding of the role of nation states in shaping online environments in the era of platformization.
Funder
National Research Foundation of Korea
Ministry of Education
Subject
Computer Science Applications,Health Policy,Public Administration,Health (social science)
Reference34 articles.
1. Ananny M. &Gillespie T.(2016). Public platforms: Beyond the cycle of shocks and exceptions.IPP2016 The Platform Society.https://blogs.oii.ox.ac.uk/ipp-conference/sites/ipp/files/documents/anannyGillespie-publicPlatforms-oii-submittedSept8.pdf
2. Bowers J. &Zittrain J.(2020).Answering impossible questions: Content governance in an age of disinformation.Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review 1(1) 1–8.https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-005
3. Brown E.(2022). The top reasons countries ask Google to remove content.Zdnet.com. January 31.https://www.zdnet.com/article/the-top-reasons-countries-ask-google-to-remove-content/
4. Calo R. &Hartzog W.(2021).Op‐Ed: Banning Trump from Twitter and Facebook isn't enough. Los Angeles Times.https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2021-01-15/facebook-twitter-extremism-donald-trump-violence
5. Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE). (2015 October 16). On the position of the judiciary and its relation with the other powers of state in a modern democracy.Opinion no. 18 Council of Europe London.https://rm.coe.int/16807481a1
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献