Negotiating Accountability and Power Dynamics: Governing Social Media Platforms in 2024
Translated title
Forhandling af ansvar og magtdynamikker: Regulering af sociale medieplatforme i 2024
Author
Pedersen, Sophia Storm
Term
4. term
Publication year
2024
Submitted on
2024-05-31
Pages
77
Abstract
Denne afhandling undersøger, hvordan sociale medieplatforme styres og reguleres i 2024, med særligt fokus på forhandlinger om ansvarlighed og de magtdynamikker, der former debatten om børns sikkerhed online. Studiet stiller spørgsmålet, hvordan politikere, topledere i Big Tech og platformbrugere rammesætter ansvar og løsninger, når der forhandles om regulering. Metodisk bygger afhandlingen på et enkelt casestudie af den amerikanske kongreshøring “Big Tech and the Online Child Exploitation Crisis” samt YouTube-kommentarspor fra tre kanaler, der streamede og lagde høringen ud. Materialet analyseres med Norman Faircloughs tredimensionelle kritiske diskursanalyse og fortolkes gennem Mark Dawsons normative ramme for ansvarlighed og Michel Foucaults begreber om disciplinær magt og biomagt. Analysen viser, at komitémedlemmer prioriterer skærpet platformregulering og virksomheders ansvar, mens topcheferne betoner kollektivt ansvar og brugeres egenkontrol, og YouTube-brugere i højere grad placerer ansvaret hos forældre og individer. Topchefernes positionering påvirkes markant af komitéens spørgsmål og rammesætning, hvilket giver komitéen en central rolle i at definere diskurserne om normativ ansvarlighed. Samtidig viser studiet, at magtforhold i regulering og i forhandlingen af løsninger løbende former aktørernes positioner og praksisser, og at sociale normer og diskursive strategier påvirker både platformsstyring og individers selvregulering. Afhandlingen peger på behovet for tættere samarbejde mellem lovgivere, virksomheder og borgere for at styrke effektiv beskyttelse af børn online og belyser de vedvarende udfordringer ved at regulere sociale medier i 2024.
This thesis investigates how social media platforms are governed and regulated in 2024, with a focus on how accountability is negotiated and how power dynamics shape debates on child safety online. It asks how lawmakers, Big Tech executives, and platform users frame responsibility and solutions when regulation is contested. The study employs a single case design using empirical material from the U.S. congressional hearing “Big Tech and the Online Child Exploitation Crisis” and YouTube comment threads from three channels that streamed and posted the hearing. The material is examined with Norman Fairclough’s three-dimensional critical discourse analysis and interpreted through Mark Dawson’s normative framework of accountability and Michel Foucault’s concepts of disciplinary power and biopower. The analysis identifies distinct positions: committee members push for stricter platform rules and corporate responsibility; CEOs emphasize collective responsibility and user agency; and YouTube users often place primary responsibility on parents and individuals. CEOs’ responses are shaped by the committee’s framing, giving lawmakers a central role in defining discourses of normative accountability. Across the case, power relations in regulation and in negotiating solutions continually influence actors’ stances and practices, with social norms and discursive strategies shaping both platform governance and individual self-regulation. The thesis underscores the need for closer collaboration among legislators, companies, and the public to ensure effective online child protection and highlights the ongoing challenges of governing social media in 2024.
[This summary has been generated with the help of AI directly from the project (PDF)]
Documents