Communication Policy: the Efforts to Strengthen Civil Society

In the last decades there were a tendency to make public institution more open and greater public participation in decision making. It is believed that transparency is the only way to strengthen public institutions which it is highly possible because of the progress in Information and Communication Technology. Nowadays Indonesia is entering the Era of Opennes. The idea of civil society and establisihng social welfare which is the first priority require partnership between the government and public. The whole stakeholder should cooperate to improve accessibility on ICT and should develope information and communication infra structure, and should improve application of ICT in every aspect of public services

Tackling problems, harvesting benefits: A systematic review of the regulatory debate around AI

How to integrate an emerging and all-pervasive technology such as AI into the structures and operations of our society is a question of contemporary politics, science and public debate. It has produced a considerable amount of international academic literature from different disciplines. This article analyzes the academic debate around the regulation of artificial intelligence (AI). The systematic review comprises a sample of 73 peer-reviewed journal articles published between January 1st, 2016, and December 31st, 2020. The analysis concentrates on societal risks and harms, questions of regulatory responsibility, and possible adequate policy frameworks, including risk-based and principle- based approaches. The main interests are proposed regulatory approaches and instruments. Various forms of interventions such as bans, approvals, standard-setting, and disclosure are presented. The assessments of the included papers indicate the complexity of the field, which shows its prematurity and the remaining lack of clarity. By presenting a structured analysis of the academic debate, we contribute both empirically and conceptually to a better understanding of the nexus of AI and regulation and the underlying normative decisions. A comparison of the scientific proposals with the proposed European AI regulation illustrates the specific approach of the regulation, its strengths and weaknesses

Social Media for Cities, Counties and Communities

Social media (i.e., Twitter, Facebook, Flickr, YouTube) and other tools and services with user- generated content have made a staggering amount of information (and misinformation) available. Some government officials seek to leverage these resources to improve services and communication with citizens, especially during crises and emergencies. Yet, the sheer volume of social data streams generates substantial noise that must be filtered. Potential exists to rapidly identify issues of concern for emergency management by detecting meaningful patterns or trends in the stream of messages and information flow. Similarly, monitoring these patterns and themes over time could provide officials with insights into the perceptions and mood of the community that cannot be collected through traditional methods (e.g., phone or mail surveys) due to their substantive costs, especially in light of reduced and shrinking budgets of governments at all levels. We conducted a pilot study in 2010 with government officials in Arlington, Virginia (and to a lesser extent representatives of groups from Alexandria and Fairfax, Virginia) with a view to contributing to a general understanding of the use of social media by government officials as well as community organizations, businesses and the public. We were especially interested in gaining greater insight into social media use in crisis situations (whether severe or fairly routine crises, such as traffic or weather disruptions)

Privacy as a Public Good

Privacy is commonly studied as a private good: my personal data is mine to protect and control, and yours is yours. This conception of privacy misses an important component of the policy problem. An individual who is careless with data exposes not only extensive information about herself, but about others as well. The negative externalities imposed on nonconsenting outsiders by such carelessness can be productively studied in terms of welfare economics. If all relevant individuals maximize private benefit, and expect all other relevant individuals to do the same, neoclassical economic theory predicts that society will achieve a suboptimal level of privacy. This prediction holds even if all individuals cherish privacy with the same intensity. As the theoretical literature would have it, the struggle for privacy is destined to become a tragedy. But according to the experimental public-goods literature, there is hope. Like in real life, people in experiments cooperate in groups at rates well above those predicted by neoclassical theory. Groups can be aided in their struggle to produce public goods by institutions, such as communication, framing, or sanction. With these institutions, communities can manage public goods without heavy-handed government intervention. Legal scholarship has not fully engaged this problem in these terms. In this Article, we explain why privacy has aspects of a public good, and we draw lessons from both the theoretical and the empirical literature on public goods to inform the policy discourse on privacy

Blockchain, AI and IoT to Improve Governance, Financial Management and Control of Crisis: Case Study COVID-19

Today, the coronavirus infection COVID-2019 deals a devastating blow to the economies of most countries due to disruption of production chains, bankruptcy of small and medium-sized businesses, increasing the number of unemployed and more. Under these conditions, the coverage of digitalization of all sectors of the economy and basic spheres of life of citizens becomes especially important

Who will watch the watchmen? The ethico-political arrangements of algorithmic proctoring for academic integrity

Critics of artificial intelligence have suggested that the principles of fairness, accountability and transparency (FATE) have been used for ‘ethics washing’, in order to appease industrial interests. In this article, we develop this relational and context-dependent analysis, arguing that ethics should not be understood as abstract values or design decisions, but as socio-technical achievements, enacted in the practices of students, teachers and corporations. We propose that the ethics of using AI in education are political, involving the distribution of power, privilege and resources. To illustrate this, we trace the controversies that followed from an incident in which a student was misclassified as a cheat by an online proctoring platform during the Covid-19 lockdown, analysing this incident to reveal the socio-technical arrangements of academic integrity. We then show how Joan Tronto’s work on the ethics of care can help think about the politics of these socio-technical arrangements — that is, about historically constituted power relations and the delegation of responsibilities within these institutions. The paper concludes by setting the immediate need for restorative justice against the slower temporality of systemic failure, and inviting speculation that could create new relationships between universities, students, businesses, algorithms and the idea of academic integrity

BEING PROFILED:COGITAS ERGO SUM

Profiling the European citizen: why today's democracy needs to look harder at the negative potential of new technology than at its positive potential

Eyewitness to History in Devolution of Democracy and Constitutional Rights Following 9/11

Many researchers and political experts have commented on the disenfranchisement of the citizenry caused by irresponsible use of power by the government that potentially violates the 4th Amendment rights of millions of people through secret mass surveillance programs. Disclosures of this abuse of power are presumably protected by the 1st Amendment, though when constitutional protections are not followed by the government, the result can be prosecution and imprisonment of whistleblowers. Using a critical autoethnographic approach, the purpose of this study was to examine the devolution of democratic governance and constitutional rights in the United States since 9/11. Using the phenomena of my signature indictment (the first whistleblower since Daniel Ellsberg was charged under the Espionage Act) and prosecution by the U.S. government, data were collected through interviews with experts associated with this unique circumstance. These data, including my own recollections of the event, were inductively coded and subjected to a thematic analysis procedure. The findings revealed that the use of national security as the primary grounds to suppress democracy and the voices of whistleblowers speaking truth to, and about, power increased authoritarian tendencies in government. These tendencies gave rise to extra-legal autocratic behavior and sovereign state control over the institutions of democratic governance. Positive social change can only take place in a society that has robust governance and social structures that strengthen democracy, human rights, and the rule of law, and do not inhibit or suppress them