IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/meanco/v11y2023i2p379-391.html

Platforms and Exposure Diversity: Towards a Framework to Assess Policies to Promote Exposure Diversity

Author

Listed:
  • Heritiana Ranaivoson

    (imec-SMIT, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium)

  • Nino Domazetovikj

    (imec-SMIT, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium)

Abstract

The fragmentation of consumption and algorithms’ increasing impact on how content is recommended and displayed makes it even more important to analyse and promote exposure diversity, i.e., the extent to which audiences are exposed to, discover, and engage with diverse content. Although there is a growing literature addressing how to define media diversity in the context of the challenges posed by platformisation, this article translates the normative dimensions into a framework for operationalising exposure diversity into a tangible policy goal, taking into account datafication and its consequences in terms of increasing data requirements towards platforms. The main objective of this study is to analyse initiatives to assess exposure diversity in the platform era and to discuss how such assessment could be improved, particularly for policy initiatives. This involves addressing several challenges of existing approaches for the assessment of exposure diversity related to defining an appropriate frame of reference, determining the degree of diversity required, dealing with data transparency issues, and promoting user autonomy. To achieve this, we propose a framework for analysing initiatives aimed at assessing and promoting exposure to media diversity. Our framework is composed of four key features: measures (type of initiative), metrics (quantifying exposure diversity), data collection methods, and data requirements. We apply this framework to a set of 13 initiatives and find that policy initiatives can benefit from adopting metrics based on distances and experimenting with data collection methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Heritiana Ranaivoson & Nino Domazetovikj, 2023. "Platforms and Exposure Diversity: Towards a Framework to Assess Policies to Promote Exposure Diversity," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(2), pages 379-391.
  • Handle: RePEc:cog:meanco:v11:y:2023:i:2:p:379-391
    DOI: 10.17645/mac.v11i2.6401
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/6401
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/mac.v11i2.6401?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Philip Napoli, 1997. "Rethinking Program Diversity Assessment: An Audience-Centered Approach," Journal of Media Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 59-74.
    2. Andy Stirling, 2007. "A General Framework for Analysing Diversity in Science, Technology and Society," SPRU Working Paper Series 156, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    3. Maria Luisa Stasi, 2019. "Social media platforms and content exposure: How to restore users’ control," Competition and Regulation in Network Industries, , vol. 20(1), pages 86-110, March.
    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. Heritiana Ranaivoson & Nino Domazetovikj, 2023. "Platforms and Exposure Diversity: Towards a Framework to Assess Policies to Promote Exposure Diversity," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(2), pages 379-391.
    2. Jian Xu & Yi Bu & Ying Ding & Sinan Yang & Hongli Zhang & Chen Yu & Lin Sun, 2018. "Understanding the formation of interdisciplinary research from the perspective of keyword evolution: a case study on joint attention," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(2), pages 973-995, November.
    3. Su, Hsin-Ning & Moaniba, Igam M., 2017. "Investigating the dynamics of interdisciplinary evolution in technology developments," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 12-23.
    4. Loet Leydesdorff & Dieter Franz Kogler & Bowen Yan, 2017. "Mapping patent classifications: portfolio and statistical analysis, and the comparison of strengths and weaknesses," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1573-1591, September.
    5. Battke, Benedikt & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Stollenwerk, Stephan & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "Internal or external spillovers—Which kind of knowledge is more likely to flow within or across technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 27-41.
    6. Hackett, Edward J. & Leahey, Erin & Parker, John N. & Rafols, Ismael & Hampton, Stephanie E. & Corte, Ugo & Chavarro, Diego & Drake, John M. & Penders, Bart & Sheble, Laura & Vermeulen, Niki & Vision,, 2021. "Do synthesis centers synthesize? A semantic analysis of topical diversity in research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    7. Dejing Kong & Jianzhong Yang & Lingfeng Li, 2020. "Early identification of technological convergence in numerical control machine tool: a deep learning approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 1983-2009, December.
    8. Xian Li & Ronald Rousseau & Liming Liang & Fangjie Xi & Yushuang Lü & Yifan Yuan & Xiaojun Hu, 2022. "Is low interdisciplinarity of references an unexpected characteristic of Nobel Prize winning research?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(4), pages 2105-2122, April.
    9. Rafols, Ismael & Leydesdorff, Loet & O’Hare, Alice & Nightingale, Paul & Stirling, Andy, 2012. "How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1262-1282.
    10. Kerai, Anita & Sharma, Sunil, 2015. "Innovation in Business Group Firms: Influence of Network Diversity," IIMA Working Papers WP2015-03-26, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    11. Sándor Soós & Zsófia Vida & András Schubert, 2018. "Long-term trends in the multidisciplinarity of some typical natural and social sciences, and its implications on the SSH versus STM distinction," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 795-822, March.
    12. Yury Dranev & Maxim Kotsemir & Boris Syomin, 2018. "Diversity of research publications: relation to agricultural productivity and possible implications for STI policy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1565-1587, September.
    13. Lina Xu & Steven Dellaportas & Zhiqiang Yang & Jin Wang, 2023. "More on the relationship between interdisciplinary accounting research and citation impact," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(4), pages 4779-4803, December.
    14. Martin Woerter, 2009. "Industry diversity and its impact on the innovation performance of firms," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 19(5), pages 675-700, October.
    15. Quaranta Giovanni & Salvia Rosanna, 2014. "An Index to Measure Rural Diversity in the Light of Rural Resilience and Rural Development Debate," European Countryside, Sciendo, vol. 6(2), pages 161-178, June.
    16. Victor Ginsburgh & Shlomo Weber, 2016. "Linguistic Diversity, Standardization, and Disenfranchisement: Measurement and Consequences," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/277407, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    17. Andy Stirling & Go Yoshizawa & Tatsujiro Suzuki, 2009. "Electricity System Diversity in the UK and Japan - a Multicriteria Diversity Analysis," SPRU Working Paper Series 176, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    18. Watson, Jim & Scott, Alister, 2009. "New nuclear power in the UK: A strategy for energy security?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 5094-5104, December.
    19. Lawson, Cornelia & Soós,Sándor, 2014. "A Thematic Mobility Measure for Econometric Analysis," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201408, University of Turin.
    20. repec:osf:socarx:ep5bx_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Tapia, Mariela & Heinemann, Detlev & Zondervan, Edwin, 2026. "Too many eggs in one basket: On the vulnerability of the Ecuadorian power system and the need for a more sustainable and resilient strategy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 209(PA).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:cog:meanco:v11:y:2023:i:2:p:379-391. 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: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    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.