[governance] Monetising socialisation

Tue Feb 24 08:31:02 EST 2015

Dear all

What this discussion highlights for me is exactly how challenging
regulation of social networking platforms and global internet companies
is in general.

There are competition issues, human rights issues including privacy and
expression, taxation issues, internet openness issues, access to
knowledge issues and more.

And while it is easy to dismiss these platforms many people all over the
world are using them in quite meaningful ways for social and political
engagement.

They also create a more level playing field for academics from the
global south, for example, who are able to disseminate their work
through them.

They provide activists with powerful tools, but they also make them more
vulnerable in some ways.

Of course we have the choice to not use them but that does not alter the
fact that millions of people are, and that it is therefore important
that these platforms be subject to pubic interest checks and balances -
in my view.

Relying on traditional models of government-based regulation is often
not effective, and can in fact lead to complicity between these
companies and governments in some cases - and in other cases individual
rights would receive even less protection if these platforms were
obliged to provide national governments with information about users
whenever they request it.

Self-regulation is one part of this process, but is not enough on its own.

If our goal is to establish public interest oversight - and I think this
is both necessary and appropriate in the case of 'global' social
networking platforms - we need to engage with these companies directly,
with industry bodies/associations as well as explore other mechanisms
ranging from those used in Europe (courts and regulators) to civil
society watchdogs such as the fantastic Ranking Digital Rights project.

https://rankingdigitalrights.org/

APC was quite successful last year with this effort to rank social
networking platforms from the perspective of combating violence against
women.

https://www.takebackthetech.net/sites/default/files/2014-reportcard-en.pdf

Also useful are the Rugge Principles.
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/GuidingPrinciplesBusinessHR_EN.pdf

Anriette

On 20/02/2015 08:56, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote:
> FWIW, I don't think this is getting anyone anywhere. If you don't like FB, don't use it - I'll be happy to extend Ello invites to those who want them; just shout.
> 
> ;)
> 
> We've got really serious problems in the way the Internet's being abused today - just look at the SIM card disclosures of last night. Is discussing regulation of a single social media company honestly the main issue to be worried about right now?
> 
> On 20 Feb 2015, at 02:29, David Conrad <drc at virtualized.org> wrote:
> 
>> Parminder,
>>
>>> if you really think that no matter what be the level of market power involvedno
>>> (and facebook's extreme market power is so obvious)
>>
>>
>> The article you posted suggested some folks do not believe it too extreme.
>>
>>> or how deeply public interest oriented a particular service is
>>
>> Strawman.
>>
>>> (again, there can be little doubt in this regard in case of a basic social networking platform),
>>
>> There is plenty of doubt.
>>
>> An alternative perspective: Facebook is a web-based application operated by a commercial company based in the US.  It is one of a myriad (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_social_networking_websites) of similar applications, standing out only in their number of users and (as a result) a large amount of money (well, ok, and their propensity to frequently fold, spindle, and mutilate their privacy policies). 
>>
>> They are not a monopoly (as the article you posted proves).  They do not provide critical infrastructure.  As both you and I demonstrate, it is possible to live quite comfortably without their service.
>>
>> Back in the mid- to late-90s, I remember folks made similar "basic service"-type claims of AOL, arguing it needed to be regulated. You don't hear that so much anymore. If you're going to propose a global regulatory regime to impose your will on a commercial company based in the US offering a web-based application, it might be worthwhile first determining whether or not (as a proctologist will tell you) "this too shall pass."
>>
>>> the paradigm of 'individual choice' and the market is enough for all situation - we just do not ever require specific policies or regulation.  
>>
>> Strawman.
>>
>>> BTW, would you in that case also oppose net neutrality regulation,
>>
>> You'd first have to define what you mean by "net neutrality" before I could hazard a guess whether I'd support or oppose it.
>>
>>> And what about regulating financial capital that so thoroughly ruined the world economy just a few years back? Can people just not stop using the telco or the bank they do not like rather than seek regulation? 
>>
>> Red herring.
>>
>>> It is in this regard that I made a tentative construction of the problematique of the dangers of Facebook arbitrarily monetising everyday processes of socialising, without any public interest oversight. If this does not outrage you, I will accept that viewpoint as well. 
>>
>>
>> People voluntarily choose to allow Facebook to monetize their socialization. There is no requirement to use Facebook service. If their business practices outrage me, I choose not to use their service. Seems a much simpler approach than trying to devise a global regulatory regime to regulate the monetization of "everyday processes of socialization."
>>
>> Regards,
>> -drc
>>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
> 
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
> 
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
> 

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t