The Rise of Content Cartels
The Rise of Content Cartels
复制标题
内容卡特尔的兴起
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2020
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Evelyn Douek
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Evelyn Douek
人们担心，一个单一的行为者可以决定在大部分在线公共领域可以说什么或不可以说什么，这导致越来越多的人呼吁采取措施促进数字平台之间的竞争。与此同时，其他人要求公共领域的监护人之间加强合作。这些压力并不一定相互矛盾，但需要做一些工作来调和它们。平台应该在多大程度上具有一致的内容审核政策？如果在公共领域强加标准和护栏，平台是否应该共同努力，确保整个在线生态系统实现这些标准，或者如果每个平台都为自己服务，社会是否会受益更多？
这些问题背后的担忧导致了“内容卡特尔”的兴起：平台之间的安排，在没有充分监督的情况下，共同努力从其服务中删除内容或行为者。它们以各种形式出现;它们可以被要求、鼓励、参与，也可以被监管机构忽视。但它们有一个共同的特点，即它们加剧了平台内容审核中现有的问责制缺失。
本文从第一部分开始，通过追踪内容卡特尔的起源和传播，表明内容卡特尔是对在线话语中越来越多的病态的回应。第二部分审查了要求加强合作的动力以及这种合作可以产生效益的方式。第三部分探讨了当前安排的失败及其对言论自由构成的威胁。第四部分提出了一项议程，以制定工具，在平台之间开展有益或不可避免的富有成效的合法合作。
本文有两个目标。第一个是对未来可能出现的前景提出警告，即不负责任的内容卡特尔以一种与不负责任的垄断一样有问题的方式对在线话语的参数做出决定。第二个是探索合作努力的好处，以及什么可以弥补它们。这是公共话语管理的关键时刻，现在建立的结构应该服务于持久的价值观。我们不需要满足于在一些问题上贴创可贴的机构，但不服务于在在线言论治理中建立信任的更深层次目标。
The fear that a single actor can decide what can or cannot be said in large parts of the online public sphere has led to growing calls for measures to promote competition between digital platforms. At the same time, others are demanding greater cooperation between the custodians of the public sphere. These pressures are not necessarily at odds, but some work needs to be done to reconcile them. To what extent should platforms have consistent content moderation policies? If standards and guardrails are imposed on the public sphere, should platforms work together to ensure that the online ecosystem as a whole realizes these standards, or would society benefit more if it is every platform for itself?
The concerns behind these questions has led to the rise of "content cartels:" arrangements between platforms to work together to remove content or actors from their services without adequate oversight. These come in various guises; they can be demanded, encouraged, participated in, or unheeded by regulators. But they share the characteristic that they compound the existing lack of accountability in platform content moderation.
This paper begins in Part I by tracing the origin and spread of content cartels, showing that content cartels are the proposed response to an increasing number of pathologies in online discourse. Part II examines the impulses behind demands for greater cooperation and the ways in which such cooperation can be beneficial. Part III explores the failures of the current arrangements and the threats they pose to free speech. Part IV sets an agenda for developing the tools to create productive and legitimate cooperation between platforms in those areas where it can be beneficial or has become inevitable.
This paper has two goals. The first is to raise the alarm about a possible future coming into view, of unaccountable content cartels making decisions about the parameters of online discourse in a way that is just as problematic as an unaccountable monopoly. The second is to explore what can be beneficial about collaborative efforts and what might redeem them. This is a pivotal moment in the management of public discourse, and the structures built now should serve enduring values. We need not settle for institutions that stick band-aids on some problems but do not serve the deeper goal of building trust in online speech governance.