IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/lpadxx/v45y2022i11p859-867.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bots, fake comments, and E-rulemaking: the impact on federal regulations

Author

Listed:
  • Sara Rinfret
  • Robert Duffy
  • Jeffrey Cook
  • Shane St. Onge

Abstract

E-rulemaking, adopted over a decade ago, allows federal agencies to use technology to provide electronic submission of public comment for a rule through the Federal Register. Some scholars suggested that this could create a space for deliberative democracy and improved regulatory outcomes. Yet, has e-rulemaking achieved its goals? The Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) Net Neutrality Rule received millions of fake public comments submitted by “bots,” many from outside the U.S. The central focus of this exploratory project is to use the e-rulemaking literature as a descriptive baseline to examine original interview data from 32 agency rule-writers and program managers from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The EPA, from 2002–2019, served as the managing partner of e-rulemaking initiatives. Our focus is to determine what, if anything, the agency did to identify bots or to screen out fake comments. The findings suggest the 2002 E-Government Act did not anticipate the emergence of bots and thus fails to provide agencies with sufficient guidance on how to identify and treat bots and fake comments.

Suggested Citation

  • Sara Rinfret & Robert Duffy & Jeffrey Cook & Shane St. Onge, 2022. "Bots, fake comments, and E-rulemaking: the impact on federal regulations," International Journal of Public Administration, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(11), pages 859-867, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:lpadxx:v:45:y:2022:i:11:p:859-867
    DOI: 10.1080/01900692.2021.1931314
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01900692.2021.1931314
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01900692.2021.1931314?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.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:lpadxx:v:45:y:2022:i:11:p:859-867. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/lpad .

    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.