|
|
楼主 |
发表于 2023-3-15 16:55:05
|
显示全部楼层
246;nberger and Cukier 2013; Turow 2012; Van Dijck, 2014). The collection of data is enabled and shaped by hardware and software; devicespeople use to access platform services often come equipped with software and apps thatcan automatically collect data. With each mouse click and cursor movement user dataare generated, stored, automatically analyzed, and processed— not just Internet protocoladdresses and geolocations but detailed information about interests, preferences,and tastes. Large quantities of data are also collected across the Web through the implementationof “social buttons” and “pixels” (Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Instagram,YouTube, or Google+) on websites (Gerlitz and Helmond 2013).
Data provide the fuel for a growing connectivity between platforms. By meansof application programming interfaces (APIs), platforms, subsequently, offer thirdparties controlled access to their platform data, giving them detailed insights intouser behavior and metrics— information on which they can build new applicationsor platforms (Helmond 2015; Langlois et al. 2009; Zittrain 2008).5 Since eBaylaunched the first open API in the year 2000, its ubiquitous employment has arguablytransformed the Web into a data- driven, platform- based ecosystem.
Algorithms are another significant technological ingredient defining the connectivearchitecture of platforms; they are sets of automated instructions to transform inputdata into a desired output (Gillespie 2014; Pasquale 2015). For instance, Google’sPageRank algorithms define the relevance of a web page by calculating the numberand quality of hyperlinks to this page. And Facebook’s News Feed algorithms determinethe content you will be exposed to, calculated on the basis of the online activitiesof “friends” and “friends of friends” (Bucher 2012). Platforms use algorithmsto automatically filter enormous amounts of content and connect users to content,services, and advertisements. Although platform owners may lift a veil on how theiralgorithms work, they are often well- kept trade secrets and are everything but transparent.
Moreover, algorithms have become increasingly complex and are subject toconstant tweaking.Shifting the focus from technological to economic relations, two particularly importantingredients of a platform’s architecture are its ownership status and businessmodel. To start with the former, each platform has a specific legal– economic status;most distinctively, platforms may be operated on a for- profit or a nonprofit basis,even though such labels often leave implicit who stands to profit from a platform’sactivities.7 Airbnb, for instance, is run by a US company with headquarters in SanFrancisco and satellite offices in nineteen cities around the world; the companyis owned by its stockholders, who are, besides its founders, a number of SiliconValley venture capitalists. Whether a company calls itself “global” or “American”has implications for compliance with regulatory regimes including taxation.
Ownership status also has consequences for a site’s economic transactions and itssocial interactions with users. It is relevant for users to recognize owner– consumerrelationships, especially because they may change over time. Couchsurfing Inc. is acase in point; the “hospitality site” started in 2005 as the Couchsurfing Collectives,with local teams operating from the United States, Canada, Austria, and NewZealand. When the site changed from a volunteer- based organization financedby donations to a corporation in 2011, many members objected to the shift froma nonprofit “travelers network” to a for- profit “accommodation site.”The switchtranslated accordingly into the selection of a different business model.Business models in the context of platforms refer to the ways in which economicvalue gets created and captured. In the online world, value gets measured in varioustypes of currency: along with money and attention, data and user valuation havebecome popular means of monetization.9 One of the most pertinent myths is thatplatform services are “free” because many do not charge for their services. Facebook,Twitter, and Google+ are just a few of the many online social networks that aremonetized through automating connections between users, content, data, and advertising(Couldry 2015; Fuchs 2011; Turow 2012). The “free” strategies adopted bymany platforms have resulted in an ecosystem where the default mode is to tradeconvenient services for personal information (Schneier 2015).
Technological and economic elements of platforms steer user interaction but simultaneouslyshape social norms. Although a platform’s architecture affords a particularusage and users are often met with a finite set of possible options, they are not“puppets” of the techno- commercial dynamics inscribed in a platform. Through itsinterfaces, algorithms, and protocols, a platform stages user interactions, encouragingsome and discouraging other connections (Helmond 2015); for example, insertinga “like button” in the right- hand corner of an interface activates more “liking” thanan insertion in the left- hand corner. Indeed, one could argue that any major platformis a recalibration laboratory where new features are constantly tested on users(Benbunan- Fich 2016).
Another important element in platform- governing methods is its user agreement,usually called “terms of service” (ToS). These pseudo- legal contracts defineand shape the relationships between users and platform owners, but they are oftenlong, difficult to understand, and subject to constant change, which is why manypeople check the box without even looking at this “agreement.”
以上内容节选自Van Dijck, J., Poell, T., & De Waal, M. (2018). The platform society: Public values in a connective world. Oxford University Press.
答案来源：www.ybaotk.com
|
本帖子中包含更多资源
您需要 登录 才可以下载或查看，没有帐号？立即注册
x
|
发表于 2023-3-15 16:55:05
中发现Ni：
中发现Ni：
中发现Ni：
中发现Ni：
中发现Ni：
中发现Ni：
QQ登录
