نوع مقاله : علمی
نویسنده
دانشجوی دکترای مدیریت رسانه دانشگاه تهران
چکیده
بنیانگذاران پلتفرم های رسانه های اجتماعی، به این امید این رسانه ها را تاسیس کردند که کاربران از طریق آن، برای اقتصاد و کارآفرینی، بالا بردن سطح تعاملات اجتماعی و فرصتی برای گفتگوی دوطرفه کاربران، بهره ببرند. از سوی دیگر، این بسترها می تواند برای ترویج؛ تروریسم و بنیادگرایی اسلامی، تمایلات جنسی همجنسگرا و سوء رفتار و خشونت علیه زنان -که برای دولت و کاربران مضر هستند- نامناسب باشد و این موارد، مطالبی است که توسط کاربران آماده و منتشر می شود در حالی که فلسفه وجودی پلتفرم ها، واسطه بودن بین کاربران است و آنها مسئول باز نشر مطالب استفاده کنندگان نیستند. بر این اساس، هم بایستی کاربران، برای صاحبان شبکه های اجتماعی دردسر درست نکنند و هم ضروری است که مسئولان پلتفرم ها با خودتنظیم گری و انجام اقداماتی چون؛ حذف، فیلتر و پرچم گذاری مطالب کاربران برای نشر مطالب نامناسب - با در نظرگرفتن جوانب آزادی بیان، رعایت اعتدال، واگذاری کار تعدیل مطالب به افراد بی طرف - محدودیت ایجاد کنند.
کلیدواژه‌ها
- Archetti, C. (2015). Terrorism, communication and new media: Explaining radicalization in the digital age. Perspectives on Terror-ism, 9(1).
- Ardia, D. S. (2010). Free speech savior or shield for scoundrels: An empirical study of intermediary immunity under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, 43(2), 373–506
- Armijo, E. (2013). Kill switches, forum doctrine, and the First Amendment’s digital future
- Balkin, J. (2004). Digital speech and democratic culture: A theory of freedom of expression for the information society. New York University Law Review, 79, 1–55
- Balkin, J. M. (2014). Old school/new school speech regulation. Harvard Law Review, 127(8), 2296–2342
- Baym, N. K., & Boyd, dana. (2012). socially mediated publicness: An introduction. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56(3), 320–329.
- Boyd, dana. (2011). Social network sites as networked publics: Affordances, dynamics, and implications. In Z. Papacharissi (Ed.), A networked self: Identity, community, and culture on social network sites (pp. 39–58). New York: Routledge
- Bruns, A., & Burgess, J. (2015). Twitter hashtags from ad hoc to calculated publics. In N. Ram-bukkana (Ed.), Hashtag publics: The power and politics of discursive networks (pp. 13–28) New York: Peter Lang.
- Bucher, T. (2012). Want to be on the top? Algorithmic power and the threat of invisibility on Facebook. New Media & Society, 14(7), 1164–1180.
- Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal, 32, 411–469.
- Citron, D. K. (2014). Hate crimes in cyberspace. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Couldry, N., & van Dijck, J. (2015). Researching social media as if the social mattered. Social Media + Society, 1(2), 2056305115604174.
- Crawford, K., Gillespie, T. (2016). What is a flag for? Social media reporting tools and the vocabulary of complaint. New Media & Society 18 (3), 410–428.
- DeNardis, L., & Hackl, A. M. (2015). Internet governance by social media platforms. Tele-communications Policy, 39(9), 761–770.
- DeNardis, L., & Hackl, A. M. (2015). Internet governance by social media platforms. Tele-communications Policy, 39(9), 761–770.
- Forsyth, H. (2016). Forum. In B. Peters (Ed.), Digital keywords. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
- Gerlitz, C., & Helmond, A. (2013). The like economy: Social buttons and the datainten-sive web. New Media & Society, 15(8), 1348–1365.
- Gillespie, T. (2015). Platforms intervene. Social Media + Society, 1(1), 2056305115580479.Ginsburg, J. C. (1995). Putting cars on the ‘information superhighway’: Authors, exploiters, and copyright in cyberspace. Columbia Law Review, 95(6), 1466–1499.
- Gillespie, T. (2015). Platforms intervene. Social Media + Society, 1(1), 2056305115580479
- Godwin, M. (2003). Cyber rights: Defending free speech in the digital age. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Grimmelmann, J. (2015). The virtues of moderation: Online communities as semicommons. Yale Journal of Law and Technology, 17(42).
- Grimmelmann, J. (2015). The virtues of moderation: Online communities as semicommons. Yale Journal of Law and Technology, 17(42).
- Humphreys, S. (2013). Predicting, securing and shaping the future: Mechanisms of governance in online social environments. International Journal of Media & Cultural Politics, 9(3), 247–258
- Jeong, S. (2015). The Internet of garbage. Forbes Media. Retrieved from forbes.com/ebooks/the-internet-of-garbage/
- Kayyali, N., & O’Brien, D. (2015). Facing the challenge of online harassment. Retrieved from eff.org/deeplinks/2015/01/facing-challenge-online-harassment
- Kreimer, S. F. (2006). Censorship by proxy: The First Amendment, Internet intermediaries, and the problem of the weakest link. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 155(1), 11
- Langlois, G. (2013). Participatory culture and the new governance of communication: The paradox of participatory media. Television & New Media, 14(2), 91–105
- Lessig, L. (1999). Code and other laws of cyber-space. New York: Basic Books.
- Litman, J. (1999). Electronic commerce and free speech. Ethics and Information Technology, 1(3), 213–225.
- MacKinnon, R. (2012). Consent of the net-worked: The worldwide struggle for Internet freedom. New York: Basic Books.
- MacKinnon, R., Hickok, E., Bar, A., & Lim, H. (2014). Fostering freedom online: The roles, challenges and obstacles of Internet intermediaries. New York: United Nations Educational
- MacKinnon, R., Hickok, E., Bar, A., & Lim, H. (2014). Fostering freedom online: The roles, challenges and obstacles of Internet intermediaries. New York: United Nations Educational.
- Mann, R. J., & Belzley, S. R. (2005). The promise of Internet intermediary liability. William & Mary Law Review, 47, 239–308.
- Matias, J. N., Johnson, A, Boesel, W. E., Keegan, B., Friedman, J., & DeTar, C. (2015). Reporting, reviewing, and responding to harassment on Twitter. Women, Action & the Media. Retrieved from womenac-tionmedia.org/twitter-report/
- Matias, J. N., Johnson, A., Boesel, W. E., Keegan, B., Friedman, J., & DeTar, C. (2015). Reporting, reviewing, and responding to harassment on Twitter. Women, Action & the Media. Retrieved from womenac-tionmedia.org/twitter-report/
- Meyerson, M. (2001). The neglected history of the prior restraint doctrine: Rediscovering the link between the First Amendment and the separation of powers. Indiana Law Review, 34(2), 295–342
- Milan, S. (2015). When algorithms shape collective action: Social media and the dynamics of cloud protesting. Social Media + Society, 1(2), 2056305115622481.
- Mueller, M. L. (2015). Hyper-transparency and social control: Social media as magnets for regulation. Telecommunications Policy, 39(9), 804–810.
- Mueller, M. L. (2015). Hyper-transparency and social control: Social media as magnets for regulation. Telecommunications Policy, 39(9), 804–810
- Obar, J. A., & Wildman, S. (2015). Social media definition and the governance challenge: An introduction to the special issue. Telecommunications Policy, 39(9), 745–750.
- Postigo, H. (2009). America Online volunteers: Lessons from an early co-production com-munity. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 12(5), 451–469.
- Reagle, J. (2015). Reading the comments: Likers, haters, and manipulators at the bottom of the web. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Roberts, S. T. (2016). Commercial content moderation: Digital laborers’ dirty work. In S. U. Noble & B. Tynes (Eds.), Intersectional Internet: Race, sex, class and culture online. New York: Peter Lang
- Roth, Y. (2015). ‘No overly suggestive photos of any kind’: Content management and the policing of self in gay digital communities. Communication, Culture & Critique, 8(3), 414–432.
- Sandvig, C. (2015). The social industry. Social Media + Society, 1(1), 2056305115582047.
- Shepherd, T., & Landry, N. (2013). Technology design and power: Freedom and control in communication networks. International Journal of Media & Cultural Politics, 9(3), 259–275.
- Shirky, C. (2008). Here comes everybody: How change happens when people come together. New York: Penguin Press.
- Stein, L. (2013). Policy and participation on social media: The cases of YouTube, Facebook, and Wikipedia. Communication, Culture & Critique, 6(3), 353–371.
- Thompson, J. B. (2005). The new visibility. Theory, Culture & Society, 22(6), 31–51.
- Urban, J. M., Karaganis, J., & Schofield, B. L. (2016). Notice and takedown in everyday practice. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2755628
- Vaidhyanathan, S. (2011). The Googlization of everything (and why we should worry). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press
- van Dijck, J. (2013). The culture of connectivity: A critical history of social media. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Varnelis, K. (Ed.). (2008). Networked publics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Varnelis, K. (Ed.). (2008). Networked publics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
- Wagner, B. (2013). Governing Internet expression: How public and private regulation shape expression governance. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 10(4), 389–403.
- Weltevrede, E., Helmond, A., & Gerlitz, C. (2014). The politics of real-time: A device perspective on social media platforms and search engines. Theory, Culture & Society, 31(6), 125–150
)