{"title":"透视数字权利:互联网治理论坛辩论的演变","authors":"Adriana Veloso Meireles","doi":"10.1111/polp.12571","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <p>The article discusses the transformations of technology in the last two decades, especially those related to privacy, based on the digital rights perspective. It debates how the concept of privacy is grounded on the distinction between public and private, a spatial metaphor no longer applicable in the face of the ubiquity of information and communication technologies. Hence, there is a premise stating the personal is increasingly more political nowadays, due to the phenomenon of surveillance capitalism. To anchor the theoretical debate in an empirically informed discussion, the work analyzes discourses about digital rights used in the main sessions of the Internet Governance Forum. The goal is to map the main Forum controversies about digital rights and their relation with contemporary democracies. Using a combined methodology based on both quantitative and qualitative data from the main sessions of the event, the analysis starts from a survey of the recurrence keywords related to the research; privacy, rights, surveillance, and freedom. From these results, a qualitative analysis of the discourses mobilized in these activities is conducted. The outcomes of the empirical analysis are then discussed from examples of technology regulation in the United States and the European Union. Among the main conclusions of the work, the emphasis lies on the need for transparency and accountability of the artificial intelligence algorithms.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Related Articles</h3>\n \n <p>Glen, Carol M. 2021. “Norm Entrepreneurship in Global Cybersecurity.” <i>Politics & Policy</i> 49(5): 1121–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12430.</p>\n \n <p>Robles, Pedro, and Daniel J. Mallinson. 2023. “Catching Up with AI: Pushing Toward a Cohesive Governance Framework.” <i>Politics & Policy</i> 51(3): 355–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12529.</p>\n \n <p>Zeng, Jinghan, Tim Stevens, and Yaru Chen. 2017. “China's Solution to Global Cyber Governance: Unpacking the Domestic Discourse of ‘Internet Sovereignty.’” <i>Politics & Policy</i> 45(3): 432–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12202.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51679,"journal":{"name":"Politics & Policy","volume":"52 1","pages":"12-32"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Digital rights in perspective: The evolution of the debate in the Internet Governance Forum\",\"authors\":\"Adriana Veloso Meireles\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/polp.12571\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <p>The article discusses the transformations of technology in the last two decades, especially those related to privacy, based on the digital rights perspective. It debates how the concept of privacy is grounded on the distinction between public and private, a spatial metaphor no longer applicable in the face of the ubiquity of information and communication technologies. Hence, there is a premise stating the personal is increasingly more political nowadays, due to the phenomenon of surveillance capitalism. To anchor the theoretical debate in an empirically informed discussion, the work analyzes discourses about digital rights used in the main sessions of the Internet Governance Forum. The goal is to map the main Forum controversies about digital rights and their relation with contemporary democracies. Using a combined methodology based on both quantitative and qualitative data from the main sessions of the event, the analysis starts from a survey of the recurrence keywords related to the research; privacy, rights, surveillance, and freedom. From these results, a qualitative analysis of the discourses mobilized in these activities is conducted. The outcomes of the empirical analysis are then discussed from examples of technology regulation in the United States and the European Union. Among the main conclusions of the work, the emphasis lies on the need for transparency and accountability of the artificial intelligence algorithms.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Related Articles</h3>\\n \\n <p>Glen, Carol M. 2021. “Norm Entrepreneurship in Global Cybersecurity.” <i>Politics & Policy</i> 49(5): 1121–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12430.</p>\\n \\n <p>Robles, Pedro, and Daniel J. Mallinson. 2023. “Catching Up with AI: Pushing Toward a Cohesive Governance Framework.” <i>Politics & Policy</i> 51(3): 355–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12529.</p>\\n \\n <p>Zeng, Jinghan, Tim Stevens, and Yaru Chen. 2017. “China's Solution to Global Cyber Governance: Unpacking the Domestic Discourse of ‘Internet Sovereignty.’” <i>Politics & Policy</i> 45(3): 432–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12202.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51679,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Politics & Policy\",\"volume\":\"52 1\",\"pages\":\"12-32\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Politics & Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/polp.12571\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politics & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/polp.12571","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
文章基于数字权利的视角,讨论了过去二十年技术的变革,尤其是与隐私有关的变革。文章讨论了隐私概念是如何建立在公共与私人的区别之上的,面对无处不在的信息和通信技术,这一空间隐喻已不再适用。因此,有一个前提是,由于监控资本主义现象的出现,个人如今越来越具有政治性。为了将理论辩论锚定在有实证依据的讨论中,作品分析了互联网治理论坛主要会议中使用的有关数字权利的论述。其目的是描绘出论坛关于数字权利的主要争议及其与当代民主的关系。分析采用了一种基于活动主要会议定量和定性数据的综合方法,首先调查了与研究相关的重复出现的关键词:隐私、权利、监控和自由。根据这些结果,对这些活动中的话语进行了定性分析。然后,从美国和欧盟的技术监管实例中讨论了实证分析的结果。在这项工作的主要结论中,重点强调了人工智能算法透明度和问责制的必要性。"Norm Entrepreneurship in Global Cybersecurity." Politics & Policy 49(5).Politics & Policy 49(5):https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12430.Robles, Pedro, and Daniel J. Mallinson.2023."Catching Up with AI: Pushing Toward a Cohesive Governance Framework." Politics & Policy 51(3).Politics & Policy 51(3):https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12529.Zeng, Jinghan, Tim Stevens, and Yaru Chen.2017."China's Solution to Global Cyber Governance:解读'互联网主权'的国内话语"。Politics & Policy 45(3):432–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12202.
Digital rights in perspective: The evolution of the debate in the Internet Governance Forum
The article discusses the transformations of technology in the last two decades, especially those related to privacy, based on the digital rights perspective. It debates how the concept of privacy is grounded on the distinction between public and private, a spatial metaphor no longer applicable in the face of the ubiquity of information and communication technologies. Hence, there is a premise stating the personal is increasingly more political nowadays, due to the phenomenon of surveillance capitalism. To anchor the theoretical debate in an empirically informed discussion, the work analyzes discourses about digital rights used in the main sessions of the Internet Governance Forum. The goal is to map the main Forum controversies about digital rights and their relation with contemporary democracies. Using a combined methodology based on both quantitative and qualitative data from the main sessions of the event, the analysis starts from a survey of the recurrence keywords related to the research; privacy, rights, surveillance, and freedom. From these results, a qualitative analysis of the discourses mobilized in these activities is conducted. The outcomes of the empirical analysis are then discussed from examples of technology regulation in the United States and the European Union. Among the main conclusions of the work, the emphasis lies on the need for transparency and accountability of the artificial intelligence algorithms.
Related Articles
Glen, Carol M. 2021. “Norm Entrepreneurship in Global Cybersecurity.” Politics & Policy 49(5): 1121–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12430.
Robles, Pedro, and Daniel J. Mallinson. 2023. “Catching Up with AI: Pushing Toward a Cohesive Governance Framework.” Politics & Policy 51(3): 355–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12529.
Zeng, Jinghan, Tim Stevens, and Yaru Chen. 2017. “China's Solution to Global Cyber Governance: Unpacking the Domestic Discourse of ‘Internet Sovereignty.’” Politics & Policy 45(3): 432–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12202.