脱欧之后?全民投票期间和之后公众参与竞选数据决策

IF 2.6 2区 文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION
J. Rone
{"title":"脱欧之后?全民投票期间和之后公众参与竞选数据决策","authors":"J. Rone","doi":"10.17645/mac.v11i1.6200","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While the Brexit referendum campaign has been extensively researched, media, regulatory bodies, and academics have often talked at cross-purposes. A strong focus on Cambridge Analytica’s role in the 2016 referendum, despite official investigations concluding the company had only limited involvement in the campaign, has distracted attention from more mundane but highly controversial data practices, including selling voters’ data to third parties or re-using campaign data without consent from data subjects. This empirical case study of data-driven referendum campaigning around Brexit raises two broader theoretical questions: First, moving beyond the current focus on transparency and accountability, can public participation in the ownership and management of campaign data address some of the problematic data practices outlined? Second, most academic literature on data-driven campaigning, in general, and referendum campaigns, in particular, has often overlooked the key question of what happens with campaigning data once campaigns are over. What legal safeguards or mechanisms of accountability and participation are there to guarantee consent when it comes to further re-use of people’s data gathered during campaigns? Ultimately, the article raises the question of who should have a say in how “people’s data” is used in referendum campaigns and afterwards and makes a case for democratising such decisions.","PeriodicalId":18348,"journal":{"name":"Media and Communication","volume":"53 21","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Beyond Brexit? Public Participation in Decision-Making on Campaign Data During and After Referendum Campaigns\",\"authors\":\"J. Rone\",\"doi\":\"10.17645/mac.v11i1.6200\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"While the Brexit referendum campaign has been extensively researched, media, regulatory bodies, and academics have often talked at cross-purposes. A strong focus on Cambridge Analytica’s role in the 2016 referendum, despite official investigations concluding the company had only limited involvement in the campaign, has distracted attention from more mundane but highly controversial data practices, including selling voters’ data to third parties or re-using campaign data without consent from data subjects. This empirical case study of data-driven referendum campaigning around Brexit raises two broader theoretical questions: First, moving beyond the current focus on transparency and accountability, can public participation in the ownership and management of campaign data address some of the problematic data practices outlined? Second, most academic literature on data-driven campaigning, in general, and referendum campaigns, in particular, has often overlooked the key question of what happens with campaigning data once campaigns are over. What legal safeguards or mechanisms of accountability and participation are there to guarantee consent when it comes to further re-use of people’s data gathered during campaigns? Ultimately, the article raises the question of who should have a say in how “people’s data” is used in referendum campaigns and afterwards and makes a case for democratising such decisions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":18348,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Media and Communication\",\"volume\":\"53 21\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Media and Communication\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v11i1.6200\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Media and Communication","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v11i1.6200","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

尽管人们对英国脱欧公投运动进行了广泛的研究,但媒体、监管机构和学者们的讨论往往是背道而驰的。尽管官方调查得出结论,剑桥分析公司在2016年公投中所扮演的角色有限,但人们对该公司的强烈关注分散了人们对更平凡但极具争议的数据做法的注意力,包括将选民数据出售给第三方,或在未经数据主体同意的情况下重新使用竞选数据。这个数据驱动的脱欧公投活动的实证案例研究提出了两个更广泛的理论问题:首先,超越目前对透明度和问责制的关注,公众参与竞选数据的所有权和管理能否解决一些有问题的数据实践?其次,大多数关于数据驱动的竞选活动,尤其是公投活动的学术文献,往往忽视了一个关键问题,即竞选活动结束后,竞选数据会发生什么。有什么法律保障或问责制和参与机制来保证在进一步重复使用竞选期间收集的人们数据时获得同意?最后,这篇文章提出了一个问题,即谁应该对“人民的数据”如何用于全民公决运动及其之后有发言权,并提出了将此类决定民主化的理由。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Beyond Brexit? Public Participation in Decision-Making on Campaign Data During and After Referendum Campaigns
While the Brexit referendum campaign has been extensively researched, media, regulatory bodies, and academics have often talked at cross-purposes. A strong focus on Cambridge Analytica’s role in the 2016 referendum, despite official investigations concluding the company had only limited involvement in the campaign, has distracted attention from more mundane but highly controversial data practices, including selling voters’ data to third parties or re-using campaign data without consent from data subjects. This empirical case study of data-driven referendum campaigning around Brexit raises two broader theoretical questions: First, moving beyond the current focus on transparency and accountability, can public participation in the ownership and management of campaign data address some of the problematic data practices outlined? Second, most academic literature on data-driven campaigning, in general, and referendum campaigns, in particular, has often overlooked the key question of what happens with campaigning data once campaigns are over. What legal safeguards or mechanisms of accountability and participation are there to guarantee consent when it comes to further re-use of people’s data gathered during campaigns? Ultimately, the article raises the question of who should have a say in how “people’s data” is used in referendum campaigns and afterwards and makes a case for democratising such decisions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Media and Communication
Media and Communication COMMUNICATION-
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
3.20%
发文量
108
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: Media and Communication (ISSN: 2183-2439) is an international open access journal dedicated to a wide variety of basic and applied research in communication and its related fields
×
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