Element 68Element 45Element 44Element 63Element 64Element 43Element 41Element 46Element 47Element 69Element 76Element 62Element 61Element 81Element 82Element 50Element 52Element 79Element 79Element 7Element 8Element 73Element 74Element 17Element 16Element 75Element 13Element 12Element 14Element 15Element 31Element 32Element 59Element 58Element 71Element 70Element 88Element 88Element 56Element 57Element 54Element 55Element 18Element 20Element 23Element 65Element 21Element 22iconsiconsElement 83iconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsiconsElement 84iconsiconsElement 36Element 35Element 1Element 27Element 28Element 30Element 29Element 24Element 25Element 2Element 1Element 66
The Power of Information Intermediaries – Manifestations, Structures and Regulatory Options

The Power of Information Intermediaries – Manifestations, Structures and Regulatory Options

Information intermediaries such as search engines, microblogging platforms, app stores or social networking services become increasingly important for the formation of public opinion. They influence the choice and selection of third-party offers, in other words, if and how media services can be perceived. The field of communication science has a differentiated view on this type of service: it should not only be focused on the reception but also look at the establishment of social usage patterns. The report “Power of Information Intermediaries” analyses if and to what extent the current regulation, especially competition law, is adequate to meet the potential influence on the individual and public opinion formation. The authors find that it is simply impossible to develop objective criteria for the abuse of communicative power, and that the term of “search engine neutrality” is only helpful to a certain extent. Furthermore, they find that a complete transparency (a disclosure of algorithms) will not be conducive. They recommend a self-commitment in form of a duty of declaration instead, so that the maxims of programming are focused on the interests of users. Additionally, they discuss a regulation for apps of journalistic/editorial nature in accordance with Article 31 (1), Sentence 1 of the Universal Service Directive (UDRL).
 
show more

Project Description

The short summary of this report is available for download (in German only): http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/akademie/12408.pdf.

 

Project Information

Overview

Duration: 2015-2016

Research programme:
RP1 - Transformation of Public Communication

Third party

Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung

Cooperation Partner

Contact person

Dipl.-Jur. Univ. Kevin Dankert
Junior Researcher Broadcasting & Regulation

Dipl.-Jur. Univ. Kevin Dankert

Send Mail

MAYBE YOU ARE ALSO INTERESTED IN THESE TOPICS?

Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter and receive the Institute's latest news via email.

SUBSCRIBE!