Algorithmic Regulation in Media and Cultural Policy: A Framework to Evaluate Barriers to Accountability

Author:

Hunt Robert,McKelvey Fenwick1

Affiliation:

1. Concordia University

Abstract

Abstract The word “algorithm” is best understood as a generic term for automated decision-making. Algorithms can be coded by humans or they can become self-taught through machine learning. Cultural goods and news increasingly pass through information intermediaries known as platforms that rely on algorithms to filter, rank, sort, classify, and promote information. Algorithmic content recommendation acts as an important and increasingly contentious gatekeeper. Numerous controversies around the nature of content being recommended—from disturbing children's videos to conspiracies and political misinformation—have undermined confidence in the neutrality of these systems. Amid a generational challenge for media policy, algorithmic accountability has emerged as one area of regulatory innovation. Algorithmic accountability seeks to explain automated decision-making, ultimately locating responsibility and improving the overall system. This article focuses on the technical, systemic issues related to algorithmic accountability, highlighting that deployment matters as much as development when explaining algorithmic outcomes. After outlining the challenges faced by those seeking to enact algorithmic accountability, we conclude by comparing some emerging approaches to addressing cultural discoverability by different international policymakers.

Publisher

The Pennsylvania State University Press

Subject

Public Administration,Sociology and Political Science,Communication,Public Administration,Sociology and Political Science,Communication

Reference96 articles.

1. Ananny, Mike. “Toward an Ethics of Algorithms: Convening, Observation, Probability, and Timeliness.” Science, Technology & Human Values 41, no. 1 (2016): 93–117. doi:10.1177/0162243915606523.

2. Ananny, Mike, and Kate Crawford. “Seeing without Knowing: Limitations of the Transparency Ideal and Its Application to Algorithmic Accountability.” New Media & Society 20, no. 3 (2018): 973–89. doi:10.1177/1461444816676645.

3. Anderson, Mae. “Facebook Taps Advisers for Audits on Bias and Civil Rights.” AP News, May 2, 2018. Accessed April 17, 2019. https://apnews.com/0e2760399b7c44eb8c5dc1c34dbca1a0.

4. Andrews, Travis M. “Billboard's Charts Used to Be Our Barometer for Music Success. Are They Meaningless in the Streaming Age?” Washington Post, July 9, 2018. Accessed November 13, 2018. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2018/07/05/billboards-charts-used-to-be-our-barometer-for-music-success-are-they-meaningless-in-the-streaming-age/.

5. Angwin, Julia, and Surya Mattu. “Amazon Says It Puts Customers First. But Its Pricing Algorithm Doesn't.” ProPublica, September 20, 2016. Accessed December 5, 2018. https://www.propublica.org/article/amazon-says-it-puts-customers-first-but-its-pricing-algorithm-doesnt.

Cited by 2 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

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3