حکمرانی اینترنتی توسط سیستم عامل های رسانه های اجتماعی  Internet governance by social media platforms

1. An Internet governance lens into social media platforms Much scholarship related to the politics of social media has focused on content and usage issues, such as the salutary relationship between social media and political transformation (Howard et al., 2011), the use of these platforms for selfrepresentation (boyd & Ellison, 2007; Correa, Willard Hinsley, & Gil de Zuniga, 2010; Gray, 2009, Marwick & boyd, 2010; Tufekci, 2008), and ways in which social media usage expands freedom of expression and facilitates new forms of citizen journalism, alternative media, and dissent (Lynch, Freelon, & Aday, 2014). These inquiries are primarily focused on content rather than the less visible area of the technical infrastructure supporting social media content. Though not visible in the same way content is visible, how technical infrastructure is designed and administered is not only a technically complex function but one with significant public interest implications. The broad term “Internet governance” is often used to describe the design and administration of the technical infrastructure necessary to keep the Internet operational and the enactment of substantive policies around these technologies (DeNardis, 2014). A dominant theme in both the scholarship and practice of Internet governance examines the policymaking role of new global institutions, such as the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) overseeing domain names and the Internet address space, the Regional Internet Registries distributing Internet Protocol (IP) addresses, or the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) establishing the technical standards that enable interoperability among computing devices (Froomkin, 2003; Klein, 2002; Mueller, 2002). Another prominent theme is the role of nation states and intergovernmental organizations in regulating or coordinating the Internet in areas as diverse as antitrust, net neutrality, computer fraud and abuse, privacy, or hate speech (DeNardis, 2009; Goldsmith & Wu, 2006; Mueller, 2010). A less established but growing area of inquiry examines private information intermediaries, such as social media platforms, in enacting global governance via platform design choices and user policies. Discussing real identification requirements on Facebook and Googleþ, Rebecca MacKinnon (2012) contends that these platforms take a “Hobbesian approach to governance” (p. 164), with users consenting to give up fundamental rights in exchange for services. Tarleton Gillespie (2010) suggests that private intermediaries strategically frame themselves as “platforms” to pursue economic interests and impact the legal framework in which they operate.