Prometheus bound: an historical content analysis of information regulation in Facebook.

AuthorMedzini, Rotem
PositionI. Introduction: Consumer Information in the Digital Innovation Environment through Case Study Analysis - Privacy Controls through the Lens of Facebook ii. Facebook: Pushing the Limits on People's Ability to Connect a. November 2007-Facebook Beacon, p. 195-224 - Author abstract

Introduction: Consumer Information in the Digital Innovation Environment

The rise of online social networks has engaged regulators, users' representatives, and social-network intermediaries in a vibrant regulatory dialogue around shifting privacy norms and laws. Driven by competitive market forces, these social-networking online intermediaries have introduced new services and opened privacy barriers to allow greater information flow which, in turn, has created disjunctions between users' desired and achieved levels of privacy. On both individual and collective level, social networks influence the social behavior and discourse. (2) On the one hand, as Julie Cohen explains, surveillance has become privatized and commercialized, overall motivating networked individuals to participate through "gamification." (3) This commercial surveillance environment includes an important characteristic, in which personal information is collected during the course of play, partly to deliver rewards through games, and partly for targeted marketing. (4) Simultaneously, on the other hand, on a collective level, where repeat players act, (5) while regulators and policymakers promote notions of users' trust, (6) information processing industries positioned privacy and innovation as two opposing values on the policy-making debate. (7) Yet, the industry considers innovation in information processing as an expression seeking protection, while promoting a narrative, which tells decision-makers that marginalized regulation is preferred. (8)

Meanwhile, over the years, driven by competitive market forces, information processing industries, and specifically social-networking online intermediaries, have introduced new services and opened privacy barriers to allow greater information flow which, in turn, has created disjunctions between users' desired and achieved levels of privacy. Undoubtedly, one of the most enduring social issues associated with information technologies is privacy. (9) One of the first scholars that looked into the regulation of privacy as information flow was the social psychologist Irwin Altman. (10) According to Altman, social interaction is conceived as a continuous "dialect between forces driving people to come together and to move apart." (11) As privacy is an interpersonal bidirectional process moving between two unwanted poles of "intrusion," and "isolation," people implement continually changing levels of desired privacy based on momentary circumstances. (12) In order to achieve privacy balance, Altman claims, people are opening and closing informational boundaries by the use of context-based mechanisms such as verbal cues, non-verbal cues, environmental privacy mechanisms, and norms. (13)

As people continue to seek an optimal level of social interaction, opening and closing their information barriers based on context, they dislike any attempt to deviate in either direction of isolation or intrusion. (14) As a matter of fact, Helen Nissenbaum claims that all life circumstances are influenced by "contextual integrity," which means that all areas of life are governed by norms of information flow. (15) This is notably true for media dominated society, where contexts change on a regular basis, and users can, for instance, suddenly discover they are public figures to their Facebook friends. (16) Yet, moving from the physical to the digital world, verbal and non-verbal cues were "easily" replaced with less "richer" cues such as characters, emoticons, and capital letters. (17) At the same time, the way in which we regulate our privacy through our environment not only became digital, but also more influential. (18)

Clearly, given this influential change in the importance of code regulation, it seems appropriate now to look back, analyze, and evaluate the way in which information practices are regulated. This paper explores how the regulatory system affects information collection practices by examining the conflict of values among stakeholders and subsequent technology changes. (19) Specifically, this paper focuses on institutions, which are characterized as being repeat players in a world of innovation and information technologies. To be clear, what makes these institutions unique is the strength of their ability to influence individual behavior, (20) either through implementing their values into the technologies they develop or regulate technologies for the wide audience. (21)

Generally, the relevant stakeholders can be mapped into three groups of institutional stakeholders, (22) which are based on concepts of regulatory regimes that encompass norms, decision-making mechanisms, and regulatory actors' networks. (23) Normally, each group of institutional stakeholders are pushing to reach their own goals. (24) The group most influencing policy is probably the regulators. (25) Sharing the information "regulatory space" (26) in the U.S. are the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the State and Federal courts. (27) The second group of collective actors is composed of intermediaries such as Facebook. (28) Specifically, as Facebook is one of the largest social networks in the world, and one of the organizations that influence users on a daily basis, (29) Facebook will be the focus of this paper. Finally, though users comprise the third group, collectively, users are usually represented by either repeat actors such as privacy and civil liberties organizations or "one-shot" class-action litigators. (30) Importantly, these two sub-groups initiate many of the regulatory processes. (31)

This paper will include a survey of the stakeholders' discourse and its narratives, between 2007 and 2013 as a basis for the more recent events, as the stakeholders discuss among themselves how to regulate Facebook. (32) The goal of this survey is to better shed light on how the three groups of stakeholders regulate privacy in social media, and in particular, online social networks. (33) The argument proceeds as follows: the next chapter describes the research methodology and the scholarly contribution of this project. (34) Then, in the second chapter, I analyze Facebook as a case study to reveal the dynamic relationship between the stakeholders as they correspond to one another in the shadow of privacy laws. (35) The conclusion maps trends in on-the-ground behavior of the stakeholders in order to allow the development of robust policy to facilitate rational trade-offs among stakeholders. (36)

Methodology-Historical Content Analysis

Looking at regulatory discourse requires a systematic examination of case studies. (37) In order to better understand the "privacy on the ground" and the stakeholders' narratives, (38) this research aims to follow the digitalization of information and the dynamic automation of opening users' information barriers to share this information. However, given the high pace of updates occurring online, it would be a difficult task to qualitatively mention each and every one of those changes. (39) Rather, we can put emphasis on the few "hard cases" that caused...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT