IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v67y2021ics0160791x21002724.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Facebook and self-regulation: Efficacious proposals – Or ‘smoke-and-mirrors’?

Author

Listed:
  • Hemphill, Thomas A.
  • Banerjee, Syagnik

Abstract

Facebook, Inc. has experienced controversies involving user privacy (the Cambridge Analytica data scandal), political manipulation (the 2016 and 2020 U S. elections), mass surveillance accusations, encouraging addiction and low self-esteem, and content integrity, such as fake news, conspiracy theories, copyright infringement, and hate speech. The nature of these controversies has led to Congressional scrutiny, as well as critics' calling for federal regulation of the company's activities. In 2020, Facebook released two company white papers: Charting a Way Forward: Online Content Regulation and Recommended Principles for Regulation or Legislation to Combat Influence Operations. Subsequently, a review of the key points of both these white papers is undertaken, followed by an analysis of issues confronting Facebook. The paper concludes with a proposed digital media regulatory framework recommending a three-pronged policy approach consisting of public regulation, private regulation, and industry liability reform, as well as implications for future academic research.

Suggested Citation

  • Hemphill, Thomas A. & Banerjee, Syagnik, 2021. "Facebook and self-regulation: Efficacious proposals – Or ‘smoke-and-mirrors’?," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:67:y:2021:i:c:s0160791x21002724
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101797
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X21002724
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101797?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sule, Mary-Jane & Zennaro, Marco & Thomas, Godwin, 2021. "Cybersecurity through the lens of Digital Identity and Data Protection: Issues and Trends," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    2. Stringham, Edward Peter, 2015. "Private Governance: Creating Order in Economic and Social Life," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199365166.
    3. Taufick, Roberto D., 2021. "The underdeterrence, underperformance response to privacy, data protection laws," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Allen, Darcy W.E. & Berg, Chris & Markey-Towler, Brendan & Novak, Mikayla & Potts, Jason, 2020. "Blockchain and the evolution of institutional technologies: Implications for innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    2. Skarbek, David, 2016. "Covenants without the Sword? Comparing Prison Self-Governance Globally," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 110(4), pages 845-862, November.
    3. Bruce Benson, 2018. "The institutional determinants of self-governance: a comment on Edward Stringham’s Private Governance," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 31(2), pages 209-230, June.
    4. Matthew C. Rousu, 2018. "Using Show Tunes to Teach about Free (and Not-So-Free) Markets," Journal of Private Enterprise, The Association of Private Enterprise Education, vol. 33(Winter 20), pages 111-128.
    5. Adam Martin, 2018. "The limits of liberalism: Good boundaries must be discovered," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 31(2), pages 265-276, June.
    6. David Skarbek & Peng Wang, 2015. "Criminal rituals," Global Crime, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(4), pages 288-305, October.
    7. Francesco Angelini & Guido Candela & Massimiliano Castellani, 2020. "Governance efficiency with and without government," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 54(1), pages 183-200, January.
    8. Christopher J. Coyne & Amy Crockett, 2023. "A Conflict of Peace Visions: The Peacemonger Mentality vs. the Warmonger Mentality," Journal of Private Enterprise, The Association of Private Enterprise Education, vol. 38(Fall 2023), pages 1-24.
    9. Vincent Geloso & Louis Rouanet, 2023. "Ethnogenesis and statelessness," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 55(3), pages 377-407, June.
    10. Trent J. MacDonald, 2019. "The Political Economy of Non-Territorial Exit," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 18871.
    11. Candela, Rosolino A. & Geloso, Vincent, 2019. "Why consider the lighthouse a public good?," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    12. Andrew Young, 2015. "From Caesar to Tacitus: changes in early Germanic governance circa 50 BC-50 AD," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 164(3), pages 357-378, September.
    13. Edward Peter Stringham, 2017. "The fable of the leeches, or: The single most unrealistic positive assumption of most economists," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 30(4), pages 401-413, December.
    14. Ilya Somin, 2021. "Freedom through foot voting," Economic Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(1), pages 141-152, February.
    15. Freire, Danilo, 2017. "Prison Gangs," SocArXiv kuqqx, Center for Open Science.
    16. Jora Octavian-Dragomir & Roşca Vlad I. & Iacob Mihaela & Murea Maria-Mirona & Nedef Matei-Ștefan, 2023. "Small and medium enterprises shooting for the stars: what matters, besides size, in outer space economy?," Management & Marketing, Sciendo, vol. 18(1), pages 20-35, March.
    17. Darcy W E Allen, 2020. "When Entrepreneurs Meet:The Collective Governance of New Ideas," World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., number q0269, January.
    18. William Luther, 2015. "The monetary mechanism of stateless Somalia," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 165(1), pages 45-58, October.
    19. Luis Moreno, 2019. "Robotization and Welfare Scenarios," Working Papers 1901, Instituto de Políticas y Bienes Públicos (IPP), CSIC.
    20. Darcy W.E. Allen, 2019. "Governing the entrepreneurial discovery of blockchain applications," Journal of Entrepreneurship and Public Policy, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 9(2), pages 194-212, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:67:y:2021:i:c:s0160791x21002724. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.