The Paradoxical Effects of Blockchain Technology on Social Networking Practices

Blockchain technology is a promising, yet not well understood, enabler of large-scale societal and economic change. For instance, blockchain makes it possible for users to securely and profitably share content on social media platforms. In this study, w

Spartan Daily, March 28, 2019

Volume 152, Issue 28https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/spartan_daily_2019/1027/thumbnail.jp

Platforms and the Fall of the Fourth Estate: Looking Beyond the First Amendment to Protect Watchdog Journalism

Journalists see the First Amendment as an amulet, and with good reason. It has long protected the Fourth Estate—an independent institutional press—in its exercise of editorial discretion to check government power. This protection helped the Fourth Estate flourish in the second half of the twentieth century and ably perform its constitutional watchdog role. But in the last two decades, the media ecology has changed. The Fourth Estate has been subsumed by a Networked Press in which journalists are joined by engineers, algorithms, audience, and other human and non-human actors in creating and distributing news. The Networked Press’s most powerful members are platforms. These platforms—companies like Facebook, Google, and Twitter—shun the media label even as they function as information gatekeepers and news editors. Their norms and values, including personalization and speed, stymie watchdog reporting. The Networked Press regime significantly threatens watchdog journalism, speech that is at the core of the press’s constitutional role. Yet, limited by the state action doctrine, the First Amendment cannot shield this speech from a threat by private actors like platforms. Today, the First Amendment is insufficient to protect a free press that can serve as a check on government tyranny. This article argues that we must look beyond the First Amendment to protect watchdog journalism from the corrosive power of platforms. It describes the limits of the First Amendment and precisely how platforms threaten watchdog journalism. It also proposes a menu of extra-constitutional options for bolstering this essential brand of speech

A Decade of Social Bot Detection

On the morning of November 9th 2016, the world woke up to the shocking outcome of the US Presidential elections: Donald Trump was the 45th President of the United States of America. An unexpected event that still has tremendous consequences all over the world. Today, we know that a minority of social bots, automated social media accounts mimicking humans, played a central role in spreading divisive messages and disinformation, possibly contributing to Trump's victory. In the aftermath of the 2016 US elections, the world started to realize the gravity of widespread deception in social media. Following Trump's exploit, we witnessed to the emergence of a strident dissonance between the multitude of efforts for detecting and removing bots, and the increasing effects that these malicious actors seem to have on our societies. This paradox opens a burning question: What strategies should we enforce in order to stop this social bot pandemic? In these times, during the run-up to the 2020 US elections, the question appears as more crucial than ever. What stroke social, political and economic analysts after 2016, deception and automation, has been however a matter of study for computer scientists since at least 2010. In this work, we briefly survey the first decade of research in social bot detection. Via a longitudinal analysis, we discuss the main trends of research in the fight against bots, the major results that were achieved, and the factors that make this never-ending battle so challenging. Capitalizing on lessons learned from our extensive analysis, we suggest possible innovations that could give us the upper hand against deception and manipulation. Studying a decade of endeavours at social bot detection can also inform strategies for detecting and mitigating the effects of other, more recent, forms of online deception, such as strategic information operations and political trolls.Comment: Forthcoming in Communications of the AC

Semantic discovery and reuse of business process patterns

Patterns currently play an important role in modern information systems (IS) development and their use has mainly been restricted to the design and implementation phases of the development lifecycle. Given the increasing significance of business modelling in IS development, patterns have the potential of providing a viable solution for promoting reusability of recurrent generalized models in the very early stages of development. As a statement of research-in-progress this paper focuses on business process patterns and proposes an initial methodological framework for the discovery and reuse of business process patterns within the IS development lifecycle. The framework borrows ideas from the domain engineering literature and proposes the use of semantics to drive both the discovery of patterns as well as their reuse

Blind Spot: The Attention Economy and the Law

Human attention, valuable and limited in supply, is a resource. It has become commonplace, especially in the media and technology industries, to speak of an attention economy and of competition in attention markets.” There is even an attentional currency, the basic attention token, which purports to serve as a medium of exchange for user attention. Firms like Facebook and Google, which have emerged as two of the most important firms in the global economy, depend nearly exclusively on attention markets as a business model. Yet despite the well-recognized commercial importance of attention markets, antitrust and consumer protection authorities have struggled when they encounter the attention economy. Antitrust agencies, tasked with assessing the effects of mergers and controlling anticompetitive behavior, seem to lack a way to understand the market dynamics when the firms offer free products that are actually competing for attention. Meanwhile, those tasked with consumer protection have no good paradigm for dealing with attentional intrusions stemming from non-consensual, intrusive advertising or debates over the use of telephones on airlines. This essay aims to provide a legal and economic analysis to help face the challenges here described. In other work, I have described the rise and spread of the attention industry, the businesses that depend on the resale of attention, a global industry with an annual revenue of approximately $500 billion. This essay builds on that work by focusing on the economic decisions implicit in Attention Brokerage. As described here, brokerage is the resale of human attention. It is to attract attention by offering something to the public (entertainment, news, free services, and so on), and then reselling that attention to advertisers for cash. Examples of pure Attention Brokers include social media companies like Instagram and Facebook, search engines like Google or Bing, ad-supported publishers like Buzzfeed or AM News, and some television channels like CBS or NBC. The Brokers\u27 activities are critical to the operation of attention markets, for the business model creates much of the competition for attention that this essay describes

The Facebook Story

This capstone is an exploration of the Facebook phenomenon in today\u27s world. It delves into Facebook\u27s creation and evolution; the construction of an identity on online social-networking sites and the nature of Facebook relationships and interactions; and the News Feed controversy of 2006 and other issues of Facebook privacy and security

Social media, political polarization, and political disinformation: a review of the scientific literature

The following report is intended to provide an overview of the current state of the literature on the relationship between social media; political polarization; and political “disinformation,” a term used to encompass a wide range of types of information about politics found online, including “fake news,” rumors, deliberately factually incorrect information, inadvertently factually incorrect information, politically slanted information, and “hyperpartisan” news. The review of the literature is provided in six separate sections, each of which can be read individually but that cumulatively are intended to provide an overview of what is known — and unknown — about the relationship between social media, political polarization, and disinformation. The report concludes by identifying key gaps in our understanding of these phenomena and the data that are needed to address them