Centre for Digital Governance
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (33)
- Part of a Book (19)
- Working Paper (12)
- Contribution to a Periodical (5)
- Doctoral Thesis (4)
- Book (2)
- Preprint (2)
- Editorship book (1)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
- Journal (1)
Keywords
Artificial intelligence (AI) is a technical term referring to artifacts used to detect contexts or to effect actions in response to detected contexts. Our capacity to build such artifacts has been increasing, and with it the impact they have on our society. This article first documents the social and economic changes brought about by our use of AI, particularly but not exclusively focusing on the decade since the 2007 advent of smartphones, which contribute substantially to “big data” and therefore the efficacy of machine learning. It then projects from this political, economic, and personal challenges confronting humanity in the near future, including policy recommendations. Overall, AI is not as unusual a technology as expected, but this very lack of expected form may have exposed us to a significantly increased urgency concerning familiar challenges. In particular, the identity and autonomy of both individuals and nations is challenged by the increased accessibility of knowledge.
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.
Designing authoritarian deliberation: how social media platforms influence political talk in China
(2019)
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.
Der föderale Staatsaufbau und die konsensorientierten Institutionen des deutschen Regierungssystems schaffen einen hohen Koordinationsbedarf und erschweren die Integration neuer Technologien und Politiken in bestehende Strukturen. Dies zeigt sich auch beim E-Government, also der Digitalisierung der Verwaltung. Besonders die föderale Organisation von Verwaltungszuständigkeiten verkompliziert die Koordination beim E-Government, während beispielsweise im Gesundheitsbereich die konsensorientierten Institutionen die Einführung technischer Innovationen verlangsamen. Gewisse Fortschritte Deutschlands sind im internationalen Vergleich gleichwohl zu erkennen.
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.
Race to the Bottom: Media Marketization and Increasing Negativity Toward the United States in China
(2012)
This article examines how Chinese newspapers respond to opposing demands by audiences and Propaganda Department authorities about news regarding the United States when competition poses pressure on marketized media to make a profit. To examine the tone of news reporting about the U.S., I rely on a computer-aided text analysis of news stories published in the People's Daily and the Beijing Evening News, comparing the years 1999 and 2003 before and after the rise of commercialized newspapers in the Beijing newspaper market. Results show that the emergence of news competitors may exert pressure on less marketized papers to change news content, resulting in an increase of negative news about the United States. Evidence is provided to show that the rise of negative news is unlikely to result from an intended strategy by Propaganda authorities, actions undertaken by the American government, or journalists' own attitudes.
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.
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.
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.
Based on a survey of more than 6700 top civil servants in 17 European countries, this book explores the impacts of New Public Management (NPM)-style reforms in Europe from a uniquely comparative perspective. It examines and analyses empirical findings regarding the dynamics, major trends and tools of administrative reforms, with special focus on the diversity of top executives’ perceptions about the effects of those reforms.
This book focuses on the implementation of digital strategies in the public sectors in the US, Mexico, Brazil, India and Germany. The case studies presented examine different digital projects by looking at their impact as well as their alignment with their national governments’ digital strategies. The contributors assess the current state of digital government, analyze the contribution of digital technologies in achieving outcomes for citizens, discuss ways to measure digitalization and address the question of how governments oversee the legal and regulatory obligations of information technology. The book argues that most countries formulate good strategies for digital government, but do not effectively prescribe and implement corresponding policies and programs. Showing specific programs that deliver results can help policy makers, knowledge specialists and public-sector researchers to develop best practices for future national strategies.