Public Actors Without Public Values: Legitimacy, Domination and the Regulation of the Technology Sector.

Philosophy & Technology Pub Date : 2021-01-01 Epub Date: 2021-01-20 DOI:10.1007/s13347-020-00441-4
Linnet Taylor
{"title":"Public Actors Without Public Values: Legitimacy, Domination and the Regulation of the Technology Sector.","authors":"Linnet Taylor","doi":"10.1007/s13347-020-00441-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The scale and asymmetry of commercial technology firms' power over people through data, combined with the increasing involvement of the private sector in public governance, means that increasingly, people do not have the ability to opt out of engaging with technology firms. At the same time, those firms are increasingly intervening on the population level in ways that have implications for social and political life. This creates the potential for power relations of domination, and demands that we decide what constitutes the legitimacy to act on the public. Business ethics and private law are not designed to answer these questions, which are primarily political. If people have lost the right to disengage with commercial technologies, we may need to hold the companies that offer them to the same standards to which we hold the public sector. This paper first defines the problem and demonstrates that it is significant and widespread, and then argues for the development of an overarching normative framework for what constitutes non-domination with regard to digital technologies. Such a framework must involve a nuanced idea of political power and accountability that can respond not only to the legality of corporate behaviour, but to its legitimacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":513391,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy & Technology","volume":"34 4","pages":"897-922"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s13347-020-00441-4","citationCount":"28","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy & Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-020-00441-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 28

Abstract

The scale and asymmetry of commercial technology firms' power over people through data, combined with the increasing involvement of the private sector in public governance, means that increasingly, people do not have the ability to opt out of engaging with technology firms. At the same time, those firms are increasingly intervening on the population level in ways that have implications for social and political life. This creates the potential for power relations of domination, and demands that we decide what constitutes the legitimacy to act on the public. Business ethics and private law are not designed to answer these questions, which are primarily political. If people have lost the right to disengage with commercial technologies, we may need to hold the companies that offer them to the same standards to which we hold the public sector. This paper first defines the problem and demonstrates that it is significant and widespread, and then argues for the development of an overarching normative framework for what constitutes non-domination with regard to digital technologies. Such a framework must involve a nuanced idea of political power and accountability that can respond not only to the legality of corporate behaviour, but to its legitimacy.

没有公共价值的公共行为者:技术部门的合法性、支配和监管。
商业技术公司通过数据对人们的权力的规模和不对称性,加上私营部门对公共治理的日益参与,意味着人们越来越没有能力选择不与技术公司接触。与此同时,这些公司越来越多地以对社会和政治生活有影响的方式干预人口水平。这就为统治的权力关系创造了潜在的可能性,并要求我们决定什么构成了对公众采取行动的合法性。商业道德和私法不是为了回答这些问题而设计的,这些问题主要是政治性的。如果人们失去了脱离商业技术的权利,我们可能需要以与公共部门相同的标准来约束提供这些技术的公司。本文首先定义了这个问题,并证明了它的重要性和广泛性,然后主张制定一个总体规范框架,以确定在数字技术方面什么是非支配性。这样一个框架必须包含一种微妙的政治权力和问责制理念,不仅能够回应企业行为的合法性,还能回应其合法性。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信