Transparency for what purpose?: Designing outcomes‐focused transparency tactics for digital platforms

IF 4.1 1区文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION

Policy and Internet Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1002/poi3.362

Yinuo Geng

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Transparency has long been held up as the solution to the societal harms caused by digital platforms' use of algorithms. However, what transparency means, how to create meaningful transparency, and what behaviors can be altered through transparency are all ambiguous legal and policy questions. This paper argues for beginning with clarifying the desired outcome (the “why”) before focusing on transparency processes and tactics (the “how”). Moving beyond analyses of the ways algorithms impact human lives, this research articulates an approach that tests and implements the right set of transparency tactics aligned to specific predefined behavioral outcomes we want to see on digital platforms. To elaborate on this approach, three specific desirable behavioral outcomes are highlighted, to which potential transparency tactics are then mapped. No single set of transparency tactics can solve all the harms possible from digital platforms, making such an outcomes‐focused transparency tactic selection approach the best suited to the constantly‐evolving nature of algorithms, digital platforms, and our societies.

查看原文本刊更多论文

透明的目的是什么?为数字平台设计以结果为中心的透明度策略

长期以来，透明度一直被认为是解决数字平台使用算法造成的社会危害的办法。然而，透明度意味着什么，如何创造有意义的透明度，以及通过透明度可以改变哪些行为，这些都是模棱两可的法律和政策问题。本文认为，在关注透明过程和策略(“如何”)之前，首先要澄清期望的结果(“为什么”)。除了分析算法影响人类生活的方式之外，本研究还阐明了一种方法，该方法可以测试和实施一套正确的透明度策略，这些策略与我们希望在数字平台上看到的特定预定义行为结果相一致。为了详细说明这种方法，强调了三种特定的理想行为结果，然后绘制了潜在的透明度策略。没有一套单一的透明度策略可以解决数字平台可能带来的所有危害，因此，这种以结果为中心的透明度策略选择方法最适合算法、数字平台和我们社会不断发展的本质。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Policy and Internet Multiple-

CiteScore

8.40

自引率

10.20%

发文量

期刊介绍： Understanding public policy in the age of the Internet requires understanding how individuals, organizations, governments and networks behave, and what motivates them in this new environment. Technological innovation and internet-mediated interaction raise both challenges and opportunities for public policy: whether in areas that have received much work already (e.g. digital divides, digital government, and privacy) or newer areas, like regulation of data-intensive technologies and platforms, the rise of precarious labour, and regulatory responses to misinformation and hate speech. We welcome innovative research in areas where the Internet already impacts public policy, where it raises new challenges or dilemmas, or provides opportunities for policy that is smart and equitable. While we welcome perspectives from any academic discipline, we look particularly for insight that can feed into social science disciplines like political science, public administration, economics, sociology, and communication. We welcome articles that introduce methodological innovation, theoretical development, or rigorous data analysis concerning a particular question or problem of public policy.