Policy, Participation & Power on YouTube, Facebook, Blogger and

Wikipedia

Laura SteinUniversity of Texas at Austin

Lstein@mail.utexas.edu

Significance

• Relevance of terms of service – Often legally binding contracts that specify user

power– Part of the social arrangements influencing

platform use– Potential default position platform owners can

evoke in case of conflict• Informed choices by users• Advocacy for betters terms of service

Alternative Media (Downing)

• Offers alternative to mainstream media• Challenges existing power structures• Represents/empowers marginalized groups• Makes horizontal linkages between

communities of interest• Provides an alternative public forum

Paper Tiger Reads Paper Tiger Television

Alternative Media Dimensions

• Content• Aesthetic• Organization• Relationship to Audience/Users

Participatory Culture

• Jenkins- digital media consumers actively participate in the creation and circulation of new content (though under unclear rules and conditions of differential power)

• Benkler- radically decentralized, collaborative and nonproprietary ways of organizing production (commons-based peer production)

• Participation fosters empowerment & democracy

Critical Questions:

• Do specific instances of participation challenge or reinforce existing power structures?

• Are opportunities to participate equitably distributed?

• What are the terms and conditions of participation?

• Do governments and markets support or suppress participation?

Level of Power Participation Type Policy Mechanisms

Empowering(formalizes user influence/control over platform content & governance)

Control- users exercise full control over platform content, activities or regulation

Influence- users share in decision-making with platform owners and managers; formal mechanisms that can’t be unilaterally removed or altered by platform owners

Semi-empowering(facilitates participation but doesn’t guarantee user can influence outcomes)

Choice- enables platform users to select among predetermined options, or to determine the activities in which they want to engage (but not to shape the choices offered)

Input- allows users to make their views known, but does not require platform owners or managers take these views into account when making decisions

Information- informs users about policies, practices, procedures and options.

Informed consent- clearly discloses practices

No power/Disempowering

Uninformed Consent- engages users in deceptive, misleading or undisclosed practices

(gives users no influence/power or takes power away)

Nonparticipation- forecloses avenues of participation; engages in deceptive or exploitative participation

Group Exercise

• Pick a platform and examine its user policies [Facebook, YouTube, Blogger, Wikipedia, or Indymedia Portugal].

• Where do these policies fall on the typology of participation/power? Why?

• Briefly report your findings back to the larger group

Level of Power

Participation Type

Policy Mechanisms

Empowering Control Users determine featured content; users own content; users determine appropriate content; open source copyright licenses; open source software; user registration not required; user acceptance of terms not required; users resolve disputes; users administrate; users formulate and approve policy

Influence [Users influence content; users influence dispute resolution; users influence policy; users hold some administrative positions]

Semi-empowering Choice Users can withhold personal information; Users can limit access to personal information through privacy settings; users can remove identifying tags on photos; users can control who sees tags; users can opt in/out of ad tracking and targeting; users can select among provided policy options

Input Users can flag/tag content for company review; users can appeal decisions to remove content; users can submit questions and complaints; users can comment on proposed policy changes

Information Information about content prohibitions; information about content ownership; information about copyright restrictions; information about the collection, use & visibility of personal information; information on the limitations on content and service use; information about options; transparent procedures governing content; transparent procedures governing policy formation; transparent procedures governing disputes

Informed consent

[Policies described in plain language; Adequate notification of policy changes; Policy risks and benefits explicated]

No power/Disempowering

Uninformed Consent

Platform use signals acceptance of terms; policies written in “legalese”; policies framed as user “rights”; default privacy settings exposing personal data

Nonparticipation Requiring personal information to use platform; unilateral decisions to remove content or terminate accounts; no appeal process; no comment mechanism

Conclusion

• YouTube and Facebook policies mainly elaborate user prohibitions and company permissions

• Wikipedia gives users collective control of nearly all decision-making surrounding content & policy

• Users should question the terms & conditions of participation on these platforms

• Scholars should critically evaluate & oppose exploitative policies

Findings/Analysis

Wikipedia- between citizen control and delegated power

Facebook- between partnership and placation

YouTube- Consultation