@incollection{Stockmann, author = {Stockmann, Daniela}, title = {Information Overload? Collecting, Managing, and Analyzing Chinese Media Content}, series = {Contemporary Chinese Politics: New Sources, Methods, and Field Strategies}, booktitle = {Contemporary Chinese Politics: New Sources, Methods, and Field Strategies}, editor = {Carlson, Allen and Gallagher, Mary E. and Lieberthal, Kenneth and Manion, Melanie}, publisher = {Cambridge University Press}, address = {New York}, isbn = {9780521155762, 978-0521197830, 978-0521197830}, pages = {107 -- 128}, language = {mul} } @incollection{Stockmann, author = {Stockmann, Daniela}, title = {Media Influence on Ethnocentrism Towards Europeans}, series = {Chinese Views of the EU: Public Support for a Strong Relation}, booktitle = {Chinese Views of the EU: Public Support for a Strong Relation}, editor = {Dong, Lisheng and Wang, Zhengxu and Dekker, Henk}, publisher = {Routledge}, address = {London}, isbn = {9781136753244}, language = {en} } @article{StockmannLuo, author = {Stockmann, Daniela and Luo, Ting}, title = {Which Social Media Facilitate Online Public Opinion in China?}, series = {Problems of Post-Communism}, volume = {64}, journal = {Problems of Post-Communism}, number = {3-4}, doi = {10.1080/10758216.2017.1289818}, pages = {189 -- 202}, abstract = {Why does online public opinion emerge in some social media more easily than in others? Building on research on authoritarian deliberation, we describe spaces for political discussion in Chinese cyberspace in terms of interactivity, which results in different forms of political discussion. Drawing on semi-structured qualitative expert interviews with information and communications technology professionals at Tencent, Weibo, and Baidu, we explain how major social media differ in terms of their structure and the company's motivation. We specify which features are more likely to facilitate the emergence of online public opinion in Chinese social media and provide preliminary evidence from 92 semi-structured interviews with Internet users.}, language = {en} } @article{Stockmann, author = {Stockmann, Daniela}, title = {Greasing the Reels: Advertising as a Means of Campaigning on Chinese Television}, series = {The China Quarterly}, volume = {208}, journal = {The China Quarterly}, isbn = {9780415623544}, pages = {851 -- 869}, abstract = {Also published in: Chinese Media, Volume I: Politics and Communication (2014), Edited by Michael Keane, Wanning Sun, ISBN 9780415623544. This article examines a major change in campaigning through the means of mass media during the reform era. As the media commercialized and partially privatized, the state has tried increasingly to involve societal actors in the production of public service advertisements (PSAs) on television. Today, PSA campaigns are initiated by state and Party units, but their funding, production and broadcasting is made possible by a collaborative effort between broadcasters, advertising companies and commercial enterprises who voluntarily support their further development. I conducted 27 in-depth interviews with officials, broadcasters and producers in Beijing to tap into the policy rationale behind the use of public service advertisements in campaigning and the incentive structure facilitating collaboration between companies and state units. Interviews with judges of PSA competitions and content analysis of price-winning advertisements reveal the standards of the central government to employ public service advertising as a means of campaigning.}, language = {en} } @article{Stockmann, author = {Stockmann, Daniela}, title = {Race to the Bottom: Media Marketization and Increasing Negativity Toward the United States in China}, series = {Political Communication}, volume = {28}, journal = {Political Communication}, number = {3}, doi = {10.1080/10584609.2011.572447}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-23925}, pages = {268 -- 290}, language = {en} } @article{StockmannGallagher, author = {Stockmann, Daniela and Gallagher, Mary E.}, title = {Remote Control: How the Media Sustains Authoritarian Rule in China}, series = {Comparative Political Studies}, volume = {44}, journal = {Comparative Political Studies}, number = {4}, doi = {10.1177/0010414010394773}, pages = {436 -- 467}, abstract = {This study examines the role of the media in sustaining regime stability in an authoritarian context. The article engages the recent work on authoritarian resilience in comparative politics but goes beyond the standard focus on elections to other important institutions, such as the media and courts, that are used by authoritarian leaders to bolster legitimacy. The authors find that the Chinese media contribute to regime legitimacy and effective rule by propagandizing citizens' experiences in the legal system. However, unlike the "mouthpieces" of earlier communist regimes, the marketized Chinese media provide more convincing and sophisticated messages that continue to accord with state censorship demands while satisfying readers' interest in real-life stories and problems. The "positive propaganda" and the relative uniformity of information sources because of state censorship lead aggrieved citizens to the law as a realm for dispute resolution and rights protection. Statistical analysis of a randomly sampled survey conducted in four Chinese cities in 2005 demonstrates that exposure to media reporting about labor-law-related issues successfully promotes the image of a proworker bias in the law among citizens, thus encouraging them to participate in the legal system. The state is able to achieve its political goal because of the lack of conflicting sources of information and the lack of previous experience with the reformed legal system among citizens.}, language = {en} } @article{Stockmann, author = {Stockmann, Daniela}, title = {Who Believes Propaganda? Media Effects during the Anti-Japanese Protests in Beijing}, series = {The China Quarterly}, volume = {2010}, journal = {The China Quarterly}, number = {202}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-23943}, pages = {269 -- 289}, language = {en} } @article{Stockmann, author = {Stockmann, Daniela}, title = {One Size Doesn't Fit All: Measuring News Reception East and West}, series = {The Chinese Journal of Communication}, volume = {2}, journal = {The Chinese Journal of Communication}, number = {2}, doi = {10.1080/17544750902826640}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-23950}, pages = {140 -- 157}, abstract = {This article investigates how and why measures developed in the American context yield different results in China. Research in the United States has shown that a person's level of political knowledge is a stronger and more consistent predictor of news reception compared to alternative measures, such as media consumption or education. Yet a case study of news reception of pension reform in Beijing demonstrates that attentiveness and education constitute more valid indicators than knowledge. These differences in the empirical findings may result from translation from English into Chinese as well as specifics of the Chinese education system. However, when using valid measures the relationship between attentiveness and news reception is strong among Beijing residents, revealing that information-processing works as anticipated based on American media research.}, language = {en} } @incollection{Stockmann, author = {Stockmann, Daniela}, title = {Responsive Authoritarianism in Chinese Media}, series = {China's Challenges}, booktitle = {China's Challenges}, editor = {Jacques, deLisle and Goldstein, Avery}, publisher = {University of Pennsylvania Press}, address = {Philadelphia}, isbn = {9780812223125}, pages = {139 -- 156}, language = {en} } @incollection{Stockmann, author = {Stockmann, Daniela}, title = {The Chinese Internet Audience: Who Seeks Political Information Online?}, series = {Urban Mobilization and New Media in Contemporary China}, booktitle = {Urban Mobilization and New Media in Contemporary China}, editor = {Dong, Lisheng and Kriesi, Hanspeter and K{\"u}bler, Daniel}, publisher = {Ashgate}, address = {Farnham, UK and Burlington, VT}, isbn = {978-1-4724-3097-7}, language = {en} } @misc{Stockmann, author = {Stockmann, Daniela}, title = {Book Review. Martin King Whyte, Myth of the Social Volcano}, series = {Journal of Chinese Political Science}, volume = {17}, journal = {Journal of Chinese Political Science}, number = {2}, doi = {10.1007/s11366-012-9193-3}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-24474}, pages = {211 -- 212}, language = {en} } @misc{Stockmann, author = {Stockmann, Daniela}, title = {Gongyi Guanggao de Yingxiangli (The Influence of Public Service Announcements)}, series = {Zhongguo Gongyi Guanggao Nianjian (China Yearbook for Public Service Announcements)}, journal = {Zhongguo Gongyi Guanggao Nianjian (China Yearbook for Public Service Announcements)}, language = {mul} } @misc{Stockmann, author = {Stockmann, Daniela}, title = {Book Review. Young Nam Cho, Local People's Congresses in China}, series = {Perspectives on Politics}, journal = {Perspectives on Politics}, pages = {1247 -- 1248}, language = {en} } @misc{Stockmann, author = {Stockmann, Daniela}, title = {Google en oeroude duiven: Hoe de publieke opinie in China wordt gestuurd}, series = {China Nu}, volume = {2}, journal = {China Nu}, pages = {22 -- 25}, language = {nl} } @misc{Stockmann, author = {Stockmann, Daniela}, title = {Book Review. Haiqing Yu, Media and Cultural Transformation in China}, series = {China Information}, volume = {24}, journal = {China Information}, number = {1}, doi = {10.1177/0920203X100240010509}, pages = {114 -- 115}, language = {en} } @techreport{TrombleStorzStockmann, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Tromble, Bekah and Storz, Andreas and Stockmann, Daniela}, title = {We Don't Know What We Don't Know: When and How the Use of Twitter's Public APIs Biases Scientific Inference}, doi = {10.2139/ssrn.3079927}, language = {en} } @article{Stockmann, author = {Stockmann, Daniela}, title = {Greasing the Reels: Advertising as a Means of Campaigning on Chinese Television}, series = {The China Quarterly}, volume = {208}, journal = {The China Quarterly}, number = {December}, issn = {0305-7410}, doi = {10.1017/S0305741011001032}, pages = {851 -- 869}, abstract = {This article examines a major change in campaigning through the means of mass media during the reform era. As the media commercialized and partially privatized, the state has tried increasingly to involve societal actors in the production of public service advertisements (PSAs) on television. Today, PSA campaigns are initiated by state and Party units, but their funding, production and broadcasting is made possible by a collaborative effort between broadcasters, advertising companies and commercial enterprises who voluntarily support their further development. I conducted 27 in-depth interviews with officials, broadcasters and producers in Beijing to tap into the policy rationale behind the use of public service advertisements in campaigning and the incentive structure facilitating collaboration between companies and state units. Interviews with judges of PSA competitions and content analysis of price-winning advertisements reveal the standards of the central government to employ public service advertising as a means of campaigning.}, language = {en} } @incollection{StockmannTromble, author = {Stockmann, Daniela and Tromble, Rebekah}, title = {Lost Umbrellas: Bias and the Right to be Forgotten in Social Media Research}, series = {Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age}, booktitle = {Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age}, editor = {Zimmer, Michael and Kinder-Kurlanda, Katharina}, publisher = {Peter Lang}, address = {New York}, isbn = {9781433142697}, doi = {10.3726/b11077}, publisher = {Hertie School}, pages = {75 -- 90}, abstract = {Since the European Court of Justice handed down its ruling in the 2014 Costeja case - finding that Google and other search engine operators must consider requests made by individuals to remove links to websites that contain the requesting party's personal information - scholars, policymakers, legal practitioners, media commentators, and corporate representatives around the globe have been vigorously debating the so-called "right to be forgotten." In the American context, many worry that recognizing such a right would undermine the First Amendment's protections for freedom of speech and press. In the European Union, a renamed "right to erasure" has become law as part of the EU's General Data Protection Regulation in 2016. The right to erasure "prevent[s] the indefinite storage and trade in electronic data, placing limits on the duration and purpose for which businesses" can retain such data (Tsesis, 2014, p. 433) and holds that individuals may request the deletion of data when those data have become irrelevant, are inaccurate, or cause the individual harm that is not outweighed by a public benefit in retaining the data (Koops, 2011).}, language = {en} } @article{Stockmann, author = {Stockmann, Daniela}, title = {Towards Area-Smart Data Science: Critical Questions for Working with Big Data from China}, series = {Policy and Internet}, journal = {Policy and Internet}, number = {10(4)}, doi = {10.1002/poi3.192}, pages = {393 -- 414}, abstract = {While the Internet was created without much governmental oversight, states have gradually drawn territorial borders via Internet governance. China stands out as a promoter of such a territorial-based approach. China's separate Web infrastructure shapes data when information technologies capture traces of human behavior. As a result, area expertise can contribute to the substantive, methodological, and ethical debates surrounding big data. This article discusses how a number of critical questions that have been raised about big data more generally apply to the Chinese context: How does big data change our understanding of China? What are the limitations of big data from China? What is the context in which big data is generated in China? Who has access to big data and who knows the tools? How can big data from China be used in an ethical way? These questions are intended to spark conversations about best practices for collaboration between data scientists and China experts.}, language = {en} } @book{Stockmann, author = {Stockmann, Daniela}, title = {Media Commercialization and Authoritarian Rule in China}, publisher = {Cambridge University Press}, address = {Cambridge}, isbn = {9781107469624}, publisher = {Hertie School}, pages = {358}, language = {en} } @article{Stockmann, author = {Stockmann, Daniela}, title = {Who is afraid of the Chinese State? Evidence Calling into Question Political Fear as Explanation of Overreporting of Political Trust}, series = {Political Psychology}, journal = {Political Psychology}, number = {39(5)}, doi = {10.1111/pops.12471}, pages = {1105 -- 1121}, abstract = {Public opinion polls show that political trust tends to be higher in authoritarian regimes compared to liberal democracies. Many scholars have argued that respondents may provide false answers out of fear about repercussions by the state, thereby skewing survey results in a positive direction. Using an unobtrusive measure based on affect transfer, we find that adult participants in experiments conducted in China transfer positive affect toward the state onto evaluations of television advertisements upon mere exposure to the name of a central party institution. Participants did not have incentives to lie because they did not associate the advertisements with the state. Furthermore, people who evaluated the ads more positively upon viewing the name of the state also reported more positive levels of trust in government. Together, these findings raise doubt that Chinese misrepresent political trust in surveys out of political fear.}, language = {en} } @article{StockmannEsareyZhang, author = {Stockmann, Daniela and Esarey, Ashley and Zhang, Jie}, title = {Support for Propaganda: Chinese Perceptions of Public Service Advertising}, series = {Journal of Contemporary China}, volume = {26}, journal = {Journal of Contemporary China}, number = {103}, publisher = {Taylor \& Francis}, issn = {1067-0564}, doi = {10.1080/10670564.2016.1206282}, pages = {101 -- 117}, abstract = {This article examines Chinese perspectives of, and support for propaganda, relying on television public service advertisements as a means of tapping into citizens' beliefs. Through the analysis of data from focus groups conducted in Beijing and public opinion survey data from 30 cities, this study argues that Chinese people are generally supportive of state efforts to guide public attitudes through television advertisements, although levels of support vary by age, education and gender. The study suggests that considerable popular support for state propaganda contributes to the regime's capacity to guide public opinion and helps to explain the persistence of popular support for authoritarian rule.}, language = {en} } @incollection{StockmannLuo, author = {Stockmann, Daniela and Luo, Ting}, title = {Authoritarian Deliberation 2.0: Lurking and Discussing Politics in Chinese Social Media}, series = {Digital Media and Democratic Futures}, booktitle = {Digital Media and Democratic Futures}, editor = {Delli Carpini, Michael X.}, publisher = {University of Pennsylvania Press}, address = {Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA}, isbn = {9780812295894}, publisher = {Hertie School}, pages = {169 -- 195}, language = {en} } @incollection{Stockmann, author = {Stockmann, Daniela}, title = {Media or Corporations? Social Media Governance between Public and Commercial Rationales}, series = {Advances in Corporate Governance: Comparative Perspectives}, booktitle = {Advances in Corporate Governance: Comparative Perspectives}, editor = {Anheier, Helmut K. and Baums, Theodor}, publisher = {Oxford University Press}, address = {Oxford}, isbn = {9780198866367}, publisher = {Hertie School}, pages = {249 -- 268}, language = {en} } @article{Stockmann, author = {Stockmann, Daniela}, title = {Shuwei Shidai de Jiaxinwen (What is Fake News in the Digital Age?)}, series = {Hanxue Yanjiu Tongxun (Newsletter for Research in Chinese Study)}, journal = {Hanxue Yanjiu Tongxun (Newsletter for Research in Chinese Study)}, pages = {7 -- 13}, language = {mul} } @article{StockmannLuoShen, author = {Stockmann, Daniela and Luo, Ting and Shen, Mingming}, title = {Designing authoritarian deliberation: how social media platforms influence political talk in China}, series = {Democratization}, volume = {27}, journal = {Democratization}, number = {2}, doi = {10.1080/13510347.2019.1679771}, pages = {243 -- 264}, abstract = {Discussion is often celebrated as a critical element of public opinion and political participation. Recently, scholars have suggested that the design and features of specific online platforms shape what is politically expressed online and how. Building on these findings and drawing on 112 semi-structured qualitative interviews with information technology experts and internet users, we explain how major Chinese social media platforms differ in structure and motivation. Drawing upon a nationwide representative survey and an online experiment, we find that platforms aiming to make users a source of information through public, information-centred communication, such as the Twitter-like Weibo, are more conducive to political expression; while platforms built to optimize building social connections through private, user-centred communication, such as WhatsApp and Facebook-like WeChat, tend to inhibit political expression. These technological design effects are stronger when users believe the authoritarian state tolerates discussion, but less important when political talk is sensitive. The findings contribute to the debate on the political consequences of the internet by specifying technological and political conditions.}, language = {en} } @techreport{GoldzweigWachingerStockmannetal., type = {Working Paper}, author = {Goldzweig, Rafael and Wachinger, Marie and Stockmann, Daniela and R{\"o}mmele, Andrea}, title = {Beyond Regulation: Approaching the challenges of the new media environment}, series = {Dahrendorf Forum IV}, volume = {Working Paper No. 06}, journal = {Dahrendorf Forum IV}, pages = {19}, abstract = {The spread of false information and hate speech has increased with the rise of social media. This paper critically examines this phenomenon and the reactions of governments and major corporations in Europe. Policymakers have turned towards national regulation as a means to manage false information and hate speech. This article looks into the legislative frameworks on the issue in Germany, France, the UK, the Czech Republic, and Italy and compares them. In response to such regulatory pressure, tech companies have been changing aspects of their platforms to deal with this trend, for example through content moderation. We propose tentative alternatives to this current approach towards reinforcing boundaries for freedom of expression.}, language = {en} } @article{StockmannTrombleStorz, author = {Stockmann, Daniela and Tromble, Rebekah and Storz, Andreas}, title = {We Don't Know What We Don't Know: When and How the Use of Twitter's Public APIs Biases Scientific Inference}, series = {Available at SSRN}, volume = {3079927}, journal = {Available at SSRN}, doi = {10.2139/ssrn.3079927}, pages = {26}, abstract = {Though Twitter research has proliferated, no standards for data collection have crystallized. When using keyword queries, the most common data sources—the Search and Streaming APIs—rarely return the full population of tweets, and scholars do not know whether their data constitute a representative sample. This paper seeks to provide the most comprehensive look to-date at the potential biases that may result. Employing data derived from four identical keyword queries to the Firehose (which provides the full population of tweets but is cost-prohibitive), Streaming, and Search APIs, we use Kendall's-tau and logit regression analyses to understand the differences in the datasets, including what user and content characteristics make a tweet more or less likely to appear in sampled results. We find that there are indeed systematic differences that are likely to bias scholars' findings in almost all datasets we examine, and we recommend significant caution in future Twitter research.}, language = {en} } @techreport{BennettBorningLandwehretal., type = {Working Paper}, author = {Bennett, Lance and Borning, Alan and Landwehr, Marvin and Stockmann, Daniela and Wulf, Volker}, title = {Treating Root Causes, not Symptoms: Regulating Problems of Surveillance and Personal Targeting in the Information Technology Industries}, series = {G20 Insights Platform}, journal = {G20 Insights Platform}, abstract = {As part of the Digital Markets Act, the EU Commission has proposed a new competition tool to address market power in the digital economy that is dominated by large online platforms. While limiting the power of US-based tech companies, such as Google or Facebook, can be helpful, we argue that limiting competition is not enough. Business models based on invasion of privacy and behavior modification are at the root of the associated problems stemming from their use are at the root of challenges to democracy and sustainability — in order to protect democracy and support sustainable development, Europe needs to develop alternatives to the current behaviorally targeted advertising business model. This policy brief discusses current alternatives to business models based on invasion of privacy and behavior modification, arguing that current alternatives need further development before implementation. To further support the development of new business models we argue in favor of regulatory sandboxes, digital ad revenue tax, reducing accumulation of data to technical necessity only, and adapting procedures and ethics from human subjects research.}, language = {en} } @article{Stockmann, author = {Stockmann, Daniela}, title = {China's cat-and mouse game blocking web content no model for EU}, series = {EUobserver}, journal = {EUobserver}, language = {en} } @article{StockmannHartmanLuo, author = {Stockmann, Daniela and Hartman, Keri and Luo, Ting}, title = {The political position generator - A new instrument for measuring political ties in China}, series = {Social Networks}, volume = {63}, journal = {Social Networks}, issn = {0378-8733}, doi = {10.1016/j.socnet.2020.05.004}, pages = {70 -- 79}, abstract = {This paper proposes a novel instrument - the political position generator - for measuring individuals' political ties, or personal, affective connections to state officials and other political actors. It adopts and adapts the more general position generator framework in social capital research to capture three key dimensions of political ties - upper reachability, network diversity, and tie strength. The measure is validated with data from a representative survey of the Chinese population and three scales representing the three political ties dimensions are created. In correlational and multivariate regression analyses, we find initial evidence of the instrument's criterion-related (discriminant and concurrent) validity.}, language = {en} } @article{Stockmann, author = {Stockmann, Daniela}, title = {Tech companies and the public interest: the role of the state in governing social media platforms}, series = {Information, Communication \& Society}, volume = {26}, journal = {Information, Communication \& Society}, number = {1}, doi = {10.1080/1369118X.2022.2032796}, pages = {1 -- 15}, abstract = {In the early days of the internet, it was hoped that digital technology would bring about democracy and positive outcomes for society. Recently, the debate has shifted towards tech lash with many critics pointing towards technology companies undermining democracy, stability, and sustainability. As a result, a new consensus seems to be emerging among policymakers, companies, and civil societal actors that self-regulation has to move towards co-regulation. This Special Issue of Information, Communication and Society draws together cutting-edge contributions on three core themes in scholarly and policy discourse on platform regulation: First, the papers in this special issue enhance empirical understandings of the role of the state in governing social media platforms developing in the United States, Europe, and Sub-Saharan Africa. Second, they provide a holistic framework to understand policy problems that need to be addressed, which helps to develop and evaluate new policy initiatives. Finally, papers point towards three approaches in governing social media platforms and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of content moderation, process-based co-regulation, as well as competition regulation and alternative business models.}, language = {en} } @article{StockmannGartenLuo, author = {Stockmann, Daniela and Garten, Felix and Luo, Ting}, title = {Who is a PRC user? Comparing Chinese social media user agreements}, series = {First Monday}, volume = {25}, journal = {First Monday}, number = {8}, issn = {1396-0466}, doi = {10.5210/fm.v25i8.10319}, abstract = {Social media companies rely on user agreements as one means to manage content produced by users. While much has been written on user agreements and community standards of U.S.-based social media, surprisingly little is known about Chinese user agreements and their implications. We compare terms of services as well as privacy policies of WeChat and Weibo between 2014 and 2019 using their U.S. counterparts WhatsApp and Twitter as a benchmark. We find that Chinese user agreements reveal a territorial-based understanding of content management differentiating between PRC and non-PRC users based on language, IP address and country of citizenship. Second, Chinese social media companies are surprisingly transparent about what content can be published, which has implications for self-censorship among users. Third, changes in PRC user agreements reflect Xi Jinping's tightening control of the Internet. Finally, U.S.-based platforms have moved towards content management that differs by region, thus becoming more similar to the Chinese approach over time.}, language = {en} } @article{StockmannLuo, author = {Stockmann, Daniela and Luo, Ting}, title = {Surveying Internet Users in China: Comparing Representative Survey Data with Official Statistics}, series = {The China Quarterly}, journal = {The China Quarterly}, publisher = {Cambridge University Press (CUP)}, doi = {10.1017/S0305741025000177}, pages = {1 -- 17}, abstract = {China is well known for providing official data, but how to treat these data is a longstanding debate among China scholars. This paper advances understandings of how to interpret Chinese official statistics about the internet. Using standards for evaluating surveys in the social sciences, we systematically compare official data from the China Network Information Center (CNNIC), which is under the supervision of China's main regulator of internet policy, with the China Internet Survey 2018 (CIS), which is, to our knowledge, the first nationally representative survey on internet use in China. Using three examples, we illustrate how methodological differences in sampling design and measurement can lead to vastly different conclusions about key indicators of internet use in mainland China, including the percentage of internet users, their regional and urban-rural digital divide, and the percentage of specific social media platforms. We discuss the challenges of survey work on internet use in China and offer recommendations on how to interpret official statistics, especially in light of the limitations researchers face when conducting face-to-face surveys in China.}, language = {en} } @article{StockmannLuo, author = {Stockmann, Daniela and Luo, Ting}, title = {Online Political Discussion Under Authoritarianism: What Do Citizens Make of Censored Political Discussion?}, series = {Regulation \& Governance}, journal = {Regulation \& Governance}, doi = {10.1111/rego.70036}, abstract = {There is a continuing debate on whether the internet serves as a public sphere for meaningful political discussion and increases political engagement. Yet, we know little about how internet users in authoritarian regimes perceive and experience online political discussion beyond the dominant frame of censorship and surveillance. Based on the first nationally representative survey on internet use in China, this paper examines how citizens view the space for political discussion online and offline and how three types of concerns—repercussions, social desirability, and privacy—shape these perceptions. Results show that Chinese citizens tend to perceive online discussion as more diverse. Those concerned about political repercussions report higher perceived diversity in online discussions, while social desirability concerns correlate with greater perceived diversity in both online and offline settings. Only those concerned for exposure of personal information perceive online political discussion as more uniform. These findings advance understandings of citizen views on political discussion in authoritarian contexts and contribute to broader debates about the role of the internet in political engagement.}, language = {en} } @article{StockmannSchlosserKsatryo, author = {Stockmann, Daniela and Schlosser, Sophia and Ksatryo, Paxia}, title = {Social media governance and strategies to combat online hatespeech in Germany}, series = {Policy \& Internet}, journal = {Policy \& Internet}, issn = {1944-2866}, doi = {10.1002/poi3.348}, pages = {1 -- 19}, abstract = {Concerns over online hatespeech have prompted governments to strengthen social media governance. However, claims by policy-makers and political activists regarding the effectiveness and likely consequences of legal regulations remain largely untested. We rely on qualitative interviews and two expert surveys to examine the behavior of public relations professionals in response to online hatespeech when having the option of using the new user-complaint mechanism under the German Network Enforcement Act (NetzDG). Our findings reveal that strategies depend on whether professionals work at public sector institutions, business, or civil society organizations and political parties. Public sector institutions are likely to report to the platform, but not under NetzDG. Civil society organizations are likely to choose content moderation, counterspeech, and other forms of intervention. Businesses deploy a wide range of strategies. In practice, Germany's procedural approach relying on user-complaint mechanisms to deal with online hatespeech is not used by experts as a means to combat online harassment.}, language = {en} } @techreport{DariusStockmannBrysonetal., type = {Working Paper}, author = {Darius, Philipp and Stockmann, Daniela and Bryson, Joanna and Cingolani, Luciana and Griffin, Rachel and Hammerschmid, Gerhard and Kupi, Maximilian and Mones, Haytham and Munzert, Simon and Riordan, R{\´o}n{\´a}n and Stockreiter, Simona}, title = {Implementing Data Access of the Digital Services Act: Collaboration of European Digital Service Coordinators and Researchers in Building Strong Oversight over Social Media Platforms}, doi = {10.48462/opus4-4947}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-49479}, pages = {11}, abstract = {The EU Digital Service Acts signals a move away from self-regulation towards co-regulation of social media platforms within the European Union. To address online harms and rising platform power the DSA clarifies responsibilities of platforms and outlines a new technology regulatory framework to increase oversight. One key oversight instrument constitutes Article 40 of the DSA, which lays out data access for vetted researchers, who add value to regulators and the broader public as creators of knowledge, educators, advisors, innovators, and watchdogs. Currently, the EU Commission and national governments make important decisions regarding Digital Service Coordinators (DSCs) that play a key role in implementation. Based on expertise on European public administration and political science we lay out key challenges and success factors of DSCs that will play a role in promoting successful cooperation between DSCs and researchers. We provide three recommendations: First, we recommend to strengthen transfer of scientific knowledge into policy-making by processing publicly accessible publications within public administrative bodies. To this end, capacities of DSCs need to be increased. In addition, we also point towards the database of vetted researchers collected by the Board of DSCs as important resource in order to strengthen knowledge transfer. Second, the DSC network requires agile institutions with fast response time in order to enable researchers to play a constructive role in implementation. This also includes institutional procedures between DSCs and the Intermediary Body and Data Protection Agencies. To avoid delay in implementation agile institution-building needs to start now. Finally, institutional safeguards will help to avoid strategic choice of companies of the DSC of establishment. At the same time, the Irish DSC's capacity should be strengthened compared to other national DSCs since most large intermediary services providers have their European headquarters in Ireland.}, language = {en} } @misc{Stockmann, author = {Stockmann, Daniela}, title = {Propaganda in Autocracies: Institutions, Information, and the Politics of Belief by Erin Baggott Carter and Brett L. Carter}, series = {Political Science Quarterly}, journal = {Political Science Quarterly}, publisher = {Oxford University Press}, doi = {10.1093/psquar/qqaf019}, abstract = {Why do autocracies differ in terms of their strategies for propaganda? This is the fundamental question explored in Propaganda in Autocracies. In the book, Erin Baggott Carter and Brett Carter open with a puzzle to explain why propaganda in the Republic of Congo tends to include more criticism and covers news on political rivals, whereas propaganda in the People's Republic of China tends to have a mouthpiece function displaying its strength. The book argues that these two strategies—referred to as persuasion and domination—are explained by institutions. The coercive nature of autocracies leads to uncertainty among citizens about the autocrat's performance. Yet as electoral constraints become more binding, political elites will use persuasion and propaganda will be less biased toward the regime. In the absence of electoral constraints, citizens solely have the option of removing autocrats by mass protests. In this case, autocrats will choose domination to convince citizens of their capacity for repression.}, language = {en} } @incollection{StockmannLuo, author = {Stockmann, Daniela and Luo, Ting}, title = {Xi Jinping's Partnership with Technology Companies and Social Media Platforms}, series = {Chinese Politics: The Xi Jinping Difference}, booktitle = {Chinese Politics: The Xi Jinping Difference}, editor = {Lynch, Daniel and Rosen, Stanley}, edition = {2}, publisher = {Routledge}, address = {London}, isbn = {9781032191522}, doi = {10.4324/9781003257943-5}, publisher = {Hertie School}, pages = {22}, abstract = {Contrary to conventional wisdom, even Xi Jinping, who is often depicted in the media and pundit world as having centralized control over nearly every dimension of Chinese governance, still must rely on powerful technology corporations to carry out his will in the increasingly important Internet sector. This suggests a model of political control significantly more nuanced than most observers realize. This chapter argues that Xi Jinping does not rule the Internet and more specifically social media via a tight command-and-control structure, which implies that he is the ultimate decision-maker and companies simply implement his policy decisions. Instead, the chapter demonstrates based on process-tracing that China's governance of the Internet is best understood as a corporate management model, whereby the Chinese state engages in a partnership with technology companies. Xi Jinping assumes a leadership role enforced by state instruments of control and cooptation strategies. At the same time, the state remains dependent on companies due to their informational, organizational, and institutional resources.}, language = {en} }