PDF(1569 KB)
“Playing the Algorithm Game”: Discourse and Mechanism of Platform Paternalism
HUANGFU Boyuan
Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication ›› 2021, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (11) : 111-129.
PDF(1569 KB)
PDF(1569 KB)
“Playing the Algorithm Game”: Discourse and Mechanism of Platform Paternalism
With the “algorithmic turn” of cultural production, the competition between content producers and information intermediary platforms around the algorithmic visibility constitutes the practice of “algorithm game”. Based on discourse analysis, this paper critically probes discourses of “algorithm game” and practices of platform paternalism. The moral framework of “traffic devaluation” is formed in China. It consists of three themes: opposition, ecology and cooperation. As a result, the information intermediary platform is shaped as a paternalistic role, formulating and enforcing the authority in the field of cultural production. Platform paternalism interweaves with political power and technology myth through the three mechanisms of self-discipline, transplantation and dominance, potentially widening the power disparity between not only the platform and content producers, but also the content producers of different classes.
cultural production / platform paternalism / algorithm / information intermediary / media discourse
| [1] |
21世纪经济报道(2019年12月30日). 抖音对抗“黑产”:封禁刷量账号171万个、黑产带货账号1.6万个.检索于 http://finance.eastmoney.com/a/201912301340927658.html.
|
| [2] |
21世纪经济报道(2020年1月2日). 抖音整治流量造假真人刷粉难题待解.检索于 http://finance.eastmoney.com/a/202001021344546766.html.
|
| [3] |
36氪(2020年6月11日). 为防疫情期间恶意营销,腾讯封停 2万微信公众号.检索于 https://36kr.com/p/746870938684162?from=groupmessage&isappinstalled=0.
|
| [4] |
ZAKER(2017). 众媒时代,自媒体的演变、转型和未来发展. 检索于: http://www.myzaker.com/article/59a7a12d1bc8e06d3f00002c.
|
| [5] |
北京商报(2019年12月4日). 抖音两月内封禁作弊帐号超127万.检索于 https://finance.ifeng.com/c/7s8Qsudwbp0.
|
| [6] |
范英杰, 李艳红(2020). 草根全球化,技术赋权与中国农村青年的非洲叙事:对快手平台上三个视频主播的分析. 《国际新闻界》, 42(11),78-100.
|
| [7] |
南宁网警巡查执法(2020年3月13日). 新浪微博将开展蔚蓝计划内容生态治理专项行动.检索于 https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1661003686745781070&wfr=spider&for=pc.
|
| [8] |
凤凰网(2019年7月7日). 微信微博先后清理整治,背后原因是?.检索于 https://tech.ifeng.com/c/7o7dgAsrVH6.
|
| [9] |
环球时报(2020年4月17日). 已删1.59万篇!微信再表态. 检索于: https://www.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_7019869.
|
| [10] |
环球网(2020年6月12日). 微信严厉打击恶意营销和违规外链 3个月永久封停账号超19000个.检索于 https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1669285436431057333&wfr=spider&for=pc.
|
| [11] |
腾讯网(2019年5月5日). 抖音官方发出声明,以后这6种视频将不进行推荐.检索于: https://page.om.qq.com/page/OmIWi3tiYqCjibrN3dh9UGWg0.
|
| [12] |
腾讯网(2020年6月10日). 微信官方告诉你为何会被封号. 检索于: https://new.qq.com/omn/20200612/20200612A0DWU900.html.
|
| [13] |
蓝鲸传媒(2019年9月14日). 微博暑期蔚蓝计划收官,两月内处置低俗涉黄信息1175万条.检索于 https://www.lanjinger.com/d/122360.
|
| [14] |
刘海龙(2017年7月10日). 刘海龙:新媒体的“出世神话”:以互联网、博客和微博为例. 检索于: https://xwxy.gdufs.edu.cn/info/1360/4500.htm.
|
| [15] |
刘建龙(2020年7月24日). 东山岛民间俗语“鼠”趣多. 检索于: https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1673066927173718500&wfr=spider&for=pc.
|
| [16] |
刘锐, 徐敬宏(2018). 网络视频直播的共同治理:基于政策网络分析的视角. 《国际新闻界》, 40(12),34-51.
|
| [17] |
刘战伟, 李嫒嫒, 刘蒙之(2021). 平台化、数字灵工与短视频创意劳动者:一项劳动控制研究. 《新闻与传播研究》,(7),42-58+127.
|
| [18] |
米歇尔·福柯(1969/1998). 《知识考古学》(谢强,马月译). 北京: 三联书店.
|
| [19] |
澎湃新闻(2020年6月14日). 微信严厉打击恶意营销和违规外链,3个月封停账号近2万个.检索于 https://www.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_7837599.
|
| [20] |
宋谊青(2020年6月9日). 张一鸣:走向卓越要闯过这三关.检索于: https://new.qq.com/omn/20200608/20200608A0RAGC00.html.
|
| [21] |
钛媒体(2019年12月19日). 字节跳动公布打击黑灰产进展:封禁100万粉丝以上抖音账号超240个. 检索于 https://www.tmtpost.com/nictation/4215672.html.
|
| [22] |
王茜(2020). 批判算法研究视角下微博“热搜”的把关标准考察. 《国际新闻界》,(7),26-48.
|
| [23] |
网络传播杂志(2019年3月20日). “组合拳”整治自媒体乱象.检索于 http://www.cac.gov.cn/2019-03/20/c_1124259403.htm?tdsourcetag=s_pcqq_aiomsg.
|
| [24] |
网信天津(2020年4月4日). 国家网信办新规施行一月,网络平台有何新气象?.检索于 https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1662969138431550964&wfr=spider&for=pc.
|
| [25] |
网易新闻(2020年7月29日). 《标题党无处遁形,微信严厉打击,消费者:请清除这些垃圾毒瘤》.检索于 https://3g.163.com/dy/article/FINRGS1N0511N84J.html.
|
| [26] |
微信110(2020年6月12日). 近半年,微信处理违规外链超100万条.检索于 https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/6ej3UDH-QN5EIklB6r6s1w.
|
| [27] |
蔚蓝计划(2020年4月2日). 明星娱乐内容生态治理公告.检索于 https://m.weibo.cn/status/4489212155578888?.
|
| [28] |
蔚蓝计划(2020年4月14日). 黑产信息治理公告.检索于 https://m.weibo.cn/status/4493623544328439?.
|
| [29] |
潇湘晨报(2020年8月6号). 共同维护网络清朗空间|广东以“四个推动”贯彻落实《网络信息内容生态治理规定》.检索于 https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1674268377811071796&wfr=spider&for=pc.
|
| [30] |
新华网(2020年6月29日). 我国网络信息内容生态治理取得成效.检索于 http://www.ce.cn/cysc/tech/gd2012/202006/29/t20200629_35214358.shtml.
|
| [31] |
新浪财经(2020年6月13日). 微信半年封杀 100 多万条违规外链:欺诈红包减少 60%. 检索于 https://tech.sina.com.cn/digi/2020-06-13/doc-iircuyvi8257681.shtml?cre=tianyi&mod=pcpager_news&loc=13&r=9&rfunc=100&tj=none&tr=9.
|
| [32] |
易前良, 唐芳云(2021). 平台化背景下我国网络在线内容治理的新模式. 《现代传播(中国传媒大学学报)》,(1),13-20.
|
| [33] |
张爱军, 李圆(2019). 人工智能时代的算法权力:逻辑、风险及规制. 《河海大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》,(6),18-24+109.
|
| [34] |
张文锋(2015). 《走向治理:媒介融合背景下西方传媒规制理性与实践》. 成都: 西南交通大学出版社.
|
| [35] |
张志安, 周嘉琳(2019). 基于算法正当性的话语建构与传播权力重构研究. 《现代传播(中国传媒大学学报).(1),30-36+41.
|
| [36] |
|
| [37] |
|
| [38] |
|
| [39] |
|
| [40] |
|
| [41] |
|
| [42] |
Beauty vloggers’ feminised outputs often position them outside of traditional spheres of technical expertise, however, their strategic management of algorithmic visibility makes them an illuminating source of algorithmic knowledge. I draw from an ethnography of beauty vloggers and industry stakeholders to study the collaborative and directive processes used to formulate and sustain algorithmic expertise – algorithmic gossip. Algorithmic gossip is defined as communally and socially informed theories and strategies pertaining to recommender algorithms, shared and implemented to engender financial consistency and visibility on algorithmically structured social media platforms. Gossip is productive: community communication and talk informs and supports practices such as uploading frequently and producing feminised beauty content to perform more effectively on YouTube. Taking gossip seriously can present a valuable resource for revealing information about how algorithms work and have worked, in addition to revealing how perceptions of algorithms inform content production.
|
| [43] |
This article explores the new modalities of visibility engendered by new media, with a focus on the social networking site Facebook. Influenced by Foucault’s writings on Panopticism – that is, the architectural structuring of visibility – this article argues for understanding the construction of visibility on Facebook through an architectural framework that pays particular attention to underlying software processes and algorithmic power. Through an analysis of EdgeRank, the algorithm structuring the flow of information and communication on Facebook’s ‘News Feed’, I argue that the regime of visibility constructed imposes a perceived ‘threat of invisibility’ on the part of the participatory subject. As a result, I reverse Foucault’s notion of surveillance as a form of permanent visibility, arguing that participatory subjectivity is not constituted through the imposed threat of an all-seeing vision machine, but by the constant possibility of disappearing and becoming obsolete.
|
| [44] |
|
| [45] |
|
| [46] |
This article examines how brands have iteratively experimented with mobile and social media. The activities of brands – including Coca-Cola, Virgin and Smirnoff – at music festivals in Australia since 2005 are used as an instructive case. The article demonstrates how these brands imagined social media, attempted to instruct consumers to use mobile devices, and used cultural events to stimulate image production tuned to the decision-making of social media algorithms. The article contributes to debate by articulating how brands are important actors in the development of algorithmic media infrastructure and devices. Accounts of algorithmic media need to examine how the analytic capacities of social and mobile media are interdependent with orchestrating the creative participation of users.
|
| [47] |
|
| [48] |
Algorithms are said to affect social realities, often in unseen ways. This article explores conscious, instrumental interactions with algorithms, as a window into the complexities and extent of algorithmic power. Through a thematic analysis of online discussions among Instagram influencers, I observed that influencers’ pursuit of influence resembles a game constructed around “rules” encoded in algorithms. Within the “visibility game,” influencers’ interpretations of Instagram’s algorithmic architecture—and the “game” more broadly—act as a lens through which to view and mechanize the rules of the game. Illustrating this point, this article describes two prominent interpretations, which combine information influencers glean about Instagram’s algorithms with preexisting discourses within influencer communities on authenticity and entrepreneurship. This article shows how directing inquiries toward the visibility game makes present the interdependency between users, algorithms, and platform owners and demonstrates how algorithms structure, but do not unilaterally determine user behavior.
|
| [49] |
|
| [50] |
|
| [51] |
|
| [52] |
|
| [53] |
|
| [54] |
|
| [55] |
|
| [56] |
|
| [57] |
|
| [58] |
|
| [59] |
|
| [60] |
|
| [61] |
|
| [62] |
|
| [63] |
|
| [64] |
|
| [65] |
|
| [66] |
|
| [67] |
|
| [68] |
|
| [69] |
|
| [70] |
|
| [71] |
|
| [72] |
When measures come to matter, those measured find themselves in a precarious situation. On the one hand, they have a strong incentive to respond to measurement so as to score a favourable rating. On the other hand, too much of an adjustment runs the risk of being flagged and penalized by system operators as an attempt to 'game the system'. Measures, the story goes, are most useful when they depict those measured as they usually are and not how they intend to be. In this article, I explore the practices and politics of optimization in the case of web search engines. Drawing on materials from ethnographic fieldwork with search engine optimization (SEO) consultants in the United Kingdom, I show how maximizing a website's visibility in search results involves navigating the shifting boundaries between 'good' and 'bad' optimization. Specifically, I am interested in the performed as SEO consultants artfully arrange themselves to cope with moral ambiguities provoked and delegated by the operators of the search engine. Building on studies of ethics as a practical accomplishment, I suggest that the ethicality of optimization has itself become a site of governance and contestation. Studying such practices of 'being ethical' not only offers opportunities for rethinking popular tropes like 'gaming the system', but also draws attention to often-overlooked struggles for authority at the margins of contemporary ranking schemes.
|
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |