抵制数字监控改革:通信服务提供商的争论与策略

IF 1.6 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
W. Chivers
{"title":"抵制数字监控改革:通信服务提供商的争论与策略","authors":"W. Chivers","doi":"10.24908/ss.v17i3/4.10836","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Communications surveillance in the UK has been an increasingly contentious issue since the early 2000s. The Investigatory Powers Act 2016 is the result of a long series of attempts by the UK government to reform communications surveillance legislation. The consultations on this legislation—and on its precursor, the Draft Communications Data Bill 2012—offer unique insight into how such efforts generate resistance to surveillance. This article draws attention to the role of communications service providers (CSPs)—who are increasingly being responsibilised to collect and retain communications data—within a multi-actor network of resistance. It also identifies the reasons CSPs gave for resisting these proposed reforms. Content analysis of the consultation documents reveals three themes that were central to the CSPs’ arguments: technology, territory, and trust. The article concludes by considering the implications for understanding resistance to contemporary digital surveillance.","PeriodicalId":47078,"journal":{"name":"Surveillance & Society","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.24908/ss.v17i3/4.10836","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Resisting Digital Surveillance Reform: The Arguments and Tactics of Communications Service Providers\",\"authors\":\"W. Chivers\",\"doi\":\"10.24908/ss.v17i3/4.10836\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Communications surveillance in the UK has been an increasingly contentious issue since the early 2000s. The Investigatory Powers Act 2016 is the result of a long series of attempts by the UK government to reform communications surveillance legislation. The consultations on this legislation—and on its precursor, the Draft Communications Data Bill 2012—offer unique insight into how such efforts generate resistance to surveillance. This article draws attention to the role of communications service providers (CSPs)—who are increasingly being responsibilised to collect and retain communications data—within a multi-actor network of resistance. It also identifies the reasons CSPs gave for resisting these proposed reforms. Content analysis of the consultation documents reveals three themes that were central to the CSPs’ arguments: technology, territory, and trust. The article concludes by considering the implications for understanding resistance to contemporary digital surveillance.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47078,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Surveillance & Society\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.24908/ss.v17i3/4.10836\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Surveillance & Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v17i3/4.10836\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surveillance & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v17i3/4.10836","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

自21世纪初以来,英国的通信监控一直是一个越来越有争议的问题。《2016年调查权力法》是英国政府改革通信监控立法的一系列尝试的结果。关于这项立法及其前身《2012年通信数据法案草案》的磋商,为这些努力如何产生对监控的抵制提供了独特的见解。这篇文章提请注意通信服务提供商(CSP)在多参与者的抵抗网络中的作用,他们越来越多地负责收集和保留通信数据。它还确定了CSP拒绝这些拟议改革的原因。对咨询文件的内容分析揭示了CSP争论的三个核心主题:技术、领土和信任。文章最后考虑了理解当代数字监控阻力的含义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Resisting Digital Surveillance Reform: The Arguments and Tactics of Communications Service Providers
Communications surveillance in the UK has been an increasingly contentious issue since the early 2000s. The Investigatory Powers Act 2016 is the result of a long series of attempts by the UK government to reform communications surveillance legislation. The consultations on this legislation—and on its precursor, the Draft Communications Data Bill 2012—offer unique insight into how such efforts generate resistance to surveillance. This article draws attention to the role of communications service providers (CSPs)—who are increasingly being responsibilised to collect and retain communications data—within a multi-actor network of resistance. It also identifies the reasons CSPs gave for resisting these proposed reforms. Content analysis of the consultation documents reveals three themes that were central to the CSPs’ arguments: technology, territory, and trust. The article concludes by considering the implications for understanding resistance to contemporary digital surveillance.
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
Surveillance & Society
Surveillance & Society SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
20.00%
发文量
42
审稿时长
26 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信