Safe From “Harm”

Platforms have long been under fire for how they create and enforce policies around hate speech, harmful content, and violence. In this study, we examine how three major platforms (Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube) conceptualize and implement policies around how they moderate “harm,” “violence,” and “danger” on their platforms. Through a feminist discourse analysis of public facing policy documents from official blogs and help pages, we found that platforms are often narrowly defining harm and violence in ways that perpetuate ideological hegemony around what violence is, how it manifests, and who it affects. Through this governance, they continue to control normative notions of harm and violence, denying their culpability, and effectively manage perceptions of their actions and directing users’ understanding of what is “harmful” versus what is not. Rather than changing the mechanisms of their design that enable harm, the platforms reconfigure intentionality and causality to try to stop users from being “harmful,” which, ironically, perpetuates harm

Business · Corporate governance · Criminology · Culpability · Harm · Ideology · Internet governance · Internet privacy · Law and economics · Normative · Political science · Politics · Public relations · Sociology · Computer Science · Gender, Feminism, and Media · Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection · Law · Social Media and Politics

• Unintended by Design

  Open Access•Nassim Parvin, A Pollock•Engaging Science Technology and…•2020

  Incluir item

• Gamergate and The Fappening

  Open Access•Adrienne Massanari•New Media & Society•2015

  Incluir item

• Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis

  Michelle M Lazar•Critical Discourse Studies•2007

  Incluir item

• Language and Symbolic Power

  Ian Buchanan, Pierre Bourdieu et al.•SubStance•1993

  Incluir item

• Social Media and Symbolic Violence

  Open Access•Raquel Recuero•Social Media + Society•2015

  Incluir item