The politics of 'platforms'
The politics of 'platforms'
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/1461444809342738
复制
发表时间：
2010-05-01
影响因子：
5
通讯作者：
Gillespie, Tarleton
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Gillespie, Tarleton
YouTube 等在线内容提供商正在谨慎地向用户、客户、广告商和政策制定者定位自己，对他们做什么和不做什么以及如何理解他们在信息领域的地位提出战略主张。特别是“平台”这个术语，揭示了这部话语作品的轮廓。这个词已经被运用在他们的民粹主义诉求和营销宣传中，有时作为技术“平台”，有时作为说话的“平台”，有时作为机会“平台”。为所有这些选区服务时存在的任何紧张局势都被小心地忽略了。该术语也适合他们制定信息政策的努力，他们寻求保护以促进用户表达，但也寻求对这些用户所说的内容承担有限责任。当这些提供者成为公共话语的策展人时，我们必须审视他们想要扮演的角色，以及他们希望被评判的条件。
Online content providers such as YouTube are carefully positioning themselves to users, clients, advertisers and policymakers, making strategic claims for what they do and do not do, and how their place in the information landscape should be understood. One term in particular, 'platform', reveals the contours of this discursive work. The term has been deployed in both their populist appeals and their marketing pitches, sometimes as technical 'platforms', sometimes as 'platforms' from which to speak, sometimes as 'platforms' of opportunity. Whatever tensions exist in serving all of these constituencies are carefully elided. The term also fits their efforts to shape information policy, where they seek protection for facilitating user expression, yet also seek limited liability for what those users say. As these providers become the curators of public discourse, we must examine the roles they aim to play, and the terms by which they hope to be judged.