Workshopvin2 A Socio Legal View On Virtual Individual Networks


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Workshopvin2 A Socio Legal View On Virtual Individual Networks

  1. 1. A socio-legal view on virtual individual networks Socio-legal challenges and opportunities for computer-mediated audiovisual communication in open and closed communities.
  2. 2. MICT, SMIT and ICRI within VIN 2
  3. 3. MICT within VIN 3
  4. 4. web2.0 or social software? 4
  5. 5. a definition for social software software that enables communication through digital technologies during which people connect, converse, collaborate, manage information and/or form online networks in a social, bottom-up fashion social software: a) is mediated through digital technology; b) enables communication; c) helps people reach certain goals – it enables content(management), communication, collaboration and community(forming); d) works bottom up. e) is based on principles of social networking and user participation 5
  6. 6. what is social software (Mayfield, 2003) 6
  7. 7. what is social software (Smith, 2007) 7
  8. 8. how does social capital relate to this? 28% of online Americans say they have tagged content (Pew Internet & American Life Project, 2007) 8
  9. 9. what is social capital? Lin summarises social capital as: “resources embedded in a social structure that are accessed and/or mobilised in purposive actions” (Lin, 2001, p. 29). 9
  10. 10. social capital & ict: deskresearch 1st level effects: efficiency effects no physical presence required to share knowledge collective knowledge is automatically stored & easily retrievable control over time … 2nd level effects: social effects degree to wich people identify with communication partners & group (collectivism) different roles in CMC hyperpersonal interactions … 10
  11. 11. social capital & ict: empirical results few participants in the focusgroups knew what social software or web2.0 entails or participate/contribute in/to ‘virtual’ communities: “I never think: lets go online and spent an hour answering questions raised on a forum.” (Hugo, medium internet user) some participants acknowledged that new relations can be created online but most participants are very critical towards online sociability, they think relations created or sustained online are ‘not real’ discussions on online three-dimensional worlds indicated that most people see it ‘as a waste of time’ 11
  12. 12. social capital & ict: empirical results Does the internet serve a bridging or bonding function? How much has the internet helped you at: score 45 become more involved with groups you already belong to? 41 connecting with groups based in your local community? 39 finding people or groups who share your interests? 30 connecting with people of different ages or generations? 25 finding people or groups who share your beliefs? 21 connecting w people from different socio-cultural backgrounds? 16 connecting with people from different economic backgrounds? red = bridging green = bonding 12
  13. 13. SMIT within VIN 13
  14. 14. The era of communities The networked society The community QuickTime™ and a TIFF (LZW) decompressor are needed to see this picture. The person is the portal 14
  15. 15. research topics Network Generated Content in relation to VIN Exploring Living Lab as a research framework for VIN Identifying new research methods for user oriented approach (ethnographic design) Framework for ad hoc and longitudinal living labs Working on meta-data model network society Conscious data: user generated Unconscious data: network/device generated Work in progress 15
  16. 16. research topics Online vs offline networks/communities Developing a theoretical framework for analyzing networks and communities. Researching community experiences in relation to individual networks (social capital) Identifying new situations for CMC A way to discover applications that can enrich participating in individual networks/communities and enrich social capital. 16
  17. 17. Method In depth research of 4 individuals + 3 communities (April - October) Multi-method Individuals Questionnaire Diaries In-depth interview Network diagram Communities Questionnaire Focus groups Community scans 17
  18. 18. Dimensions of individual networks “When I am online, I occasionally talk to people I don’t really know, but have found through the profiles of MSN-messenger. I use it when I’m online and I need social contact.” “I have 5 or 6 really close friends and they are all scouts. So these scouts and this group of people are the center of my activities” 18
  19. 19. Identifying dimensions for CMC in individual networks 19
  20. 20. Example Mediators of communication Characteristics of communication 20
  21. 21. The community Development Integrated Community Model (ICM) Explore the dimensions of communities Experience level within communities Integrated Community Model [ICM] Identification & classification Interaction layers Van Lier (T.), Pierson (J.). Identification of community practices and co- creation of pre-adolescents: the case of Ketnet Kick. Paper presented at Cost 298, Moscow 21
  22. 22. The experience of online and offline communities 22
  23. 23. CMC in communities Mediators of communication Characteristics of communication 23
  24. 24. Conclusion Optimizing communication in individual networks and communities Need to provide the right tool in the right situation Need for adaptability and flexibility in the CMC applications Influence of several dimensions on the communication process. We have initiated a first proposal for identifying these dimensions Need to think beyond the traditional communication tools Our research has shown new domains and situations of CMC that need further research 24
  25. 25. ICRI within VIN 25
  26. 26. ICRI’s research within VIN Goal: Identifying regulatory barriers for the success of user- centric networks/VIN with respect to CONTENT issues Drafting recommendations for the modernisation and adaptation of the regulatory framework with respect to user-generated content 26
  27. 27. focus of ICRI’s research 3 research streams Research on the clash between new user-centric networks and services and old regulatory frameworks (T.2.1) D.2.1. Analysis of the legal issues related to user-generated content on VIN (T.2.1) D.2.1. Creation of a blueprint for a coherent and future-proof framework for content regulation in the converging media environment (T.2.2) D.2.2. 27
  28. 28. content on VIN: legal issues Circulation of content (text, AV, audio, pictures, …) on VIN: issues with legal impact Unprecedented lowering of the threshold to media content production from a limited number of content producers to an enormous number of content generators Blurring of the traditional allocation of tasks between producer and consumer blurring of traditional rights, responsibilities and tasks of different actors These developments clash with traditional legal concepts and frameworks 28
  29. 29. selection of content issues Freedom of expression Illegal and harmful content (case-study: protection of minors against harmful content) Regulation of audiovisual content: the Television without Frontiers Directive and its successor the Audiovisual Media Services Directive User-generated content Liability for content creation 29
  30. 30. selection of content issues Freedom of expression: the application of fundamental human rights on VIN international, European and Belgian regulatory framework Illegal and harmful content overview of categories of illegal content: Belgian regulatory framework, international and European initiatives trends in the United States and Europe for dealing with harmful content – with specific attention for the protection of minors against harmful content The TVWF Directive and AVMS Directive regulation of audiovisual content: existing and upcoming regulatory framework at the European level implications for new phenomena such as e.g. YouTube 30
  31. 31. selection of content issues User-generated content the legal status of user-generated content: brief overview of possible legal issues the legal status of content-generators: rights and responsibilities, application of traditional legal concepts on a new category of content providers Liability for content creation liability regime for Internet service providers: E- commerce directive and Belgian E-commerce law application on new phenomena 31
  32. 32. ongoing research Creation of a blueprint for a coherent and future-proof framework for content regulation in the converging media environment (T.2.2) D.2.2. Potential of alternative regulatory instruments (use of self- and co-regulation) to “regulate” VIN Re-interpretation and update of traditional legal concepts … 32
  33. 33. contact MICT SMIT ICRI 33