온라인플랫폼 규제 철학 및 방법 비교 연구 - EU 디지털서비스법ㆍEU 시청각미디어서비스지침을 중심으로

The paper focuses on the challenges that the ‘sharing economy’ presents to the updating of the European Union’s (EU) Audiovisual Media Service Directive (AVMSD), part of the broader Digital Single Market (DSM) strategy of the EU. It suggests that the convergence of media markets and the emergence of video-sharing platforms may make the existing regulative tradition obsolete. It demonstrates an emergent need for regulatory convergence – AVMSD to create equal terms for all technical forms of content distribution. It then shows how the operational logic of video-sharing platforms undermines the AVMSD logic aimed at creating demand for professionally produced European content – leading potentially to the liberalisation of the EU audiovisual services market. Lastly, it argues that the DSM strategy combined with sharing-related network effects may facilitate the evolution of the oligopolistic structure in the EU audiovisual market, potentially harmful for cultural diversity.

The internet has become an everyday tool to communicate and network with people around the globe, but its perceived anonymity, availability, and instant access have made it an environment conducive to spreading hateful content and connecting to like-minded individuals with similar hateful ideologies. Hate speech and other prejudice-motivated behavior, however, need to be considered on a continuum of victimization, and "like other social processes, [be seen as] dynamic and in a state of constant movement and change, rather than static and fixed" (Bowling, 1993, p. 238). It is a social process that is marked by multiple, repeat, and constant victimization (Bowling, 1993), with victims no longer distinguishing between specific hateful events, and rather normalizing experiences of hateful conduct "as an everyday, unwanted but routine reality of being 'different'" (Chakraborti, 2016, p. 581). Understanding hateful behavior and victimization as a process allows us to connect "low-level" incidents of hateful behavior to the more serious and life-threatening incidents at the more extreme end of the spectrum (Bowling & Phillips, 2002). The Christchurch attacks in New Zealand and their link to hateful communication on the online platform 8chan is only one such example of how online hate speech and cyberhate can escalate to "in real life" attacks, leaving the online sphere and spilling into the offline world. As per Allport's (1954) scale of prejudice, more extreme forms of prejudice-motivated violence are founded on "lower level" acts of prejudice and bias, therefore, hateful content online should not be ignored. Intervening online to interrupt or counter hateful behavior already at the lower end of the scale of prejudice becomes important; online interventions which are to be identified and synthesized through this systematic review. Allport's (1954) scale of prejudice will be the basis for this systematic review. Early on, Allport (1954) asserted that individuals with negative attitudes toward groups are likely to act out on these prejudices "somehow, somewhere" (p. 14), and that the more intense such negative attitudes are, the more hostile the action will be. Allport (1954) put forward a scale of acts of prejudice to illustrate different degrees of acting out negative attitudes, a scale that starts with antilocution (or what we call hate speech), described as explicitly expressing prejudices through negative verbal remarks to either friends or strangers (Allport, 1954). Avoidance is the next level on the scale of prejudice, with people avoiding members of certain groups, followed by discrimination, where distinctions are made between people based on prejudices, which leads to the active exclusion of members from certain groups (Allport, 1954). This level of acting on prejudices is routed in institutional or systemic prejudices, for example, in the differential treatment of people within employment or education practices, but also within the criminal justice system, or through social exclusion of certain minority group members. Physical attack is the next level on the scale of prejudice, which includes violence against members of certain groups by physically acting on negative attitudes or prejudices. The last level is extermination, which is the ultimate act of violence against members of specific groups, an expression of prejudice that systematically eradicates an entire group of people (e.g., genocide or lynchings; Allport, 1954). Allport's (1954) scale of prejudice makes it clear how hate speech/cyberhate is connected to more extreme forms of violence motivated by specific prejudices and biases, with hate speech (or antilocutions) being only the starting point on a 5-point continuum (Bilewicz & Soral, 2020). The importance of this scale of prejudice is not only that it clearly illustrates a range of different ways and intensity levels to act out prejudices, but also the "progression from verbal aggression to physical violence or, in other words, the performative potential of hate speech" (Allport, 1954; Kopytowska & Baider, 2017, p. 138). This is where interventions at the lower level of the scale of prejudices, interventions targeting hate speech/cyberhate, become important. There is no universal definition of hateful conduct online, but there is some consensus that hate speech targets disadvantaged social groups (Jacobs & Potter, 1998). Bakalis (2018) more narrowly defines cyberhate as "any use of technology to express hatred towards a person or persons because of a protected characteristic—namely race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability and transgender identity" (p. 87). Another definition that also points out the ambiguity and challenges involved with identifying more subtle forms of hate speech, and also making reference to the potential threat of hate speech escalating to offline violence, is that put forward by Fortuna and Nunes (2018), who analyzed various definitions of hate speech "Hate speech is language that attacks or diminishes, that incites violence or hate against groups, based on specific characteristics such as physical appearance, religion, descent, national or ethnic origin, sexual orientation, gender identity or other, and it can occur with different linguistic styles, even in subtle forms or when humour is used" (p. 5). In this systematic review, we also distinguish hate speech/cyberhate specifically from other forms of harmful online activity, such as cyber-bullying, harassment, trolling or flaming, as perpetrators of such online behavior repeatedly and systematically target specific individuals to cause upset, to seek out negative reactions, or to create discord on the internet. In contrast, hate speech/cyberhate is more general and does not necessarily target a specific individual (Al-Hassan & Al-Dossari, 2019), instead hate speech/cyberhate heavily features prejudice, bias and intolerance toward certain groups within society. With the majority of hate speech happening online, interventions that take place online are an important way to challenge prejudice and bias, potentially reaching masses of people across the globe. The unique feature of the internet is that such individual negative attitudes toward minority groups and more extreme hateful ideology can find its way onto certain platforms and can instantly connect people sharing similar prejudices. By closing the social and spatial distance, the internet creates a form of collective identity (Perry, 2000, p. 123) and can convince individuals with even the most extreme ideologies that others out there share their views (Gerstenfeld et al., 2003). In addition, the enormous frequency of hate speech/cyberhate within online environments creates a sense of normativity to hatred and the potential for acts of intergroup violence or political radicalization (Bilewicz & Soral, 2020, p. 9). It is, therefore, important to challenge this hate speech epidemic (Bilewicz & Soral, 2020), especially since hate movements have increasingly crossed into the mainstream (Perry, 2000). With hate speech/cyberhate posing a threat to the social order by violating social norms (Soral et al., 2018), perceptions of social norms as either supporting or opposing prejudice has been found to have an influence on how individuals react online (Hsueh et al., 2015). Seeing other people post prejudiced (opposed to antiprejudiced) comments online can lead to the adoption of an online group's biases and can influence an individual's own perceptions and feelings toward the targeted stigmatized group (Hsueh et al., 2015). In addition, research around desensitization also suggests that being exposed to hate speech leads to desensitization, which further leads to an increase in outgroup prejudice toward groups targeted by such speech (Soral et al., 2018). With society increasingly recognizing that it is inappropriate to express prejudices in public settings, many interventions will include some form of social norms nudging to reduce such prejudices; interventions that "nudge behavior in the desired direction" (Titley et al., 2014, p. 60). Therefore, hate speech not only affects minority group members, but also has an influence on opinions of majority group members (Soral et al., 2018), which makes strategies that can elicit change in people's prejudice-related attitudes crucial (see, e.g., Zitek & Hebl, 2007). Governments around the world face increased demand for understanding and countering hateful ideology and violent extremism both online and offline (e.g., the Christchurch Call in New Zealand). The U.S. Government's 2011 CVE Strategy highlights the importance of ongoing research and analysis, the sharing of knowledge and best practices internationally, and the countering of hateful ideologies and propaganda (see also Department of Homeland Security, 2016, 2019). The goal of this systematic review is to use an integrated and interdisciplinary approach to examine the effectiveness of online campaigns and strategies for reducing hate speech and cyberhate. The internet also provides an opportunity to reach masses of people who have been exposed to hateful content and ideology online, therefore, this systematic review will focus on online interventions addressing online hate speech and cyberhate. The specific settings where we would expect to see the online interventions deployed will be on websites, text messaging applications, and online and social media platforms including, but not limited to, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, WhatsApp, Google, YouTube, and Snapchat. As mentioned previously, many online interventions will be based on social norm nudges to reduce online hate. These interventions aim to change people's online behavior and encourage individuals or groups to conform to established social norms. The communication of social norms can happen through establishing community standards on online platforms themselves (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, etc.), through more formal online training courses, or through anti-hate speech/anti-cyberhate campaigns teaching people to recognize hate, embrace diversity, and stand up to bias. Such prevention campaigns are designed to challenge bias and build ally behaviors by supplying people with constructive responses to combat, for example, antisemitism racism, and homophobia, as well as provide resources to help people explore and critically reflect on current events. Other interventions may add messages to hateful online comments, counter hateful content or extremist ideology, or redirect people to more credible sources. Both peers and parents have been found to foster racial consciousness and identity development, define interracial relationships and cultivate ethnic heritage and culture (Hagerman, 2016). Socialization influences how children understand their group's social position and their membership within that group by providing an understanding of racial, religious, and sexual privilege (Bowman & Howard, 1985). Socialization often reflects peers' and parents' experiences with racism, discrimination, and their ideological perspectives about race, religion, or sexuality (Umaña-Taylor & Fine, 2004). This is important because peers and parents who feel discriminated against or believe that the "other" is a threat may impart their prejudices to their children or friends, which could lead them to interpret the social world with similar discriminatory views and/or behavior. Individuals who feel socially alienated or rejected are especially vulnerable to such socialization practices as they feel that adopting these views will provide them with a sense of acceptance and belonging (Leiken, 2012). Regardless of how an individual develops certain racial, religious, or sexual biases, the online interventions under review are expected to target and reduce the production of original hateful content such as antisemitic Tweets and/or homophobic blog posts as well as the consumption of hate speech material (e.g., watching or reading hate speech videos or blogs). For example, some interventions take a rather broad messaging approach by implementing racial sensitivity and diversity training through Public Service Announcements, peer-to-peer dialogue workshops, or films that provide opportunities for youth and adults to self-reflect and learn about historical oppression, people of color, women, and the LGBTQIA+ community from credible sources. The factual understanding of diverse groups is often supplemented by experiences with people within the group. These educational programs often identify a cultural guide who is willing to introduce youth to new experiences and who can aid in processing thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. These interventions intend to dispute and contradict negative stereotypes associated with specific cultures, people, and institutions by sharing different points of view based on human rights values such as openness, respect for difference, freedom, and equality (Gomes, 2017). Moreover, such interventions tend to involve blanket bans on specific behaviors enforced through the public promotion of norms or individual sanctions enforced by moderators. Other interventions, such as the "Redirect Method," are narrower in their messaging. These interventions generate curated playlists and collections of authentic content that challenge hate speech/cyberhate narratives and propaganda (Helmus & Klein, 2018). For instance, people who are directly searching for extremist content online may be linked to videos and written content that confronts such claims. These videos are designed to be objective in appearance instead of containing material that explicitly counters extremist propaganda. The underlying goal of this type of interventions is to provide credible content that effectively undermines extremist messaging but does not overtly attack the source of propaganda. In addition to confronting hate speech narratives, these interventions provide users with links to numerous social services such as anger management training, drug and alcohol treatment, and mental health resources. Online platforms, such as Twitter and Facebook, have also started to employ a similar method, redirecting people who comment on or share "fake news" or conspiracy theories, which often are fraught with prejudicial undertones and are harmful to minority groups, to more credible content and news sources. The aforementioned interventions are designed to counter-balance these biased perceptions (e.g., unsupported claims of the Black community as criminal or the LGBTQIA+ community as pathologized) Blacks as criminals, LGBTQIA+ as pathologized) by blunting the occurrence of racist discourse and reducing the likelihood these individuals will internalize and normalize racial, religious, and/or sexual prejudices (Qian et al., 2019). Being in new situations is uncomfortable and often awakens fears and apprehensions that can block our experiential development. Acquiring information or being exposed to minority-run businesses, poverty, and writings from minority authors allows a person to understand the thoughts, hopes, fears, and aspirations of the people outside their racial perspective rather than from the perspective of the majority society (Dunham et al., 2013; Lee et al., 2017). Doing so, counters racist programming by challenging hegemonic beliefs, which can lead to the acceptance of tolerant attitudes and the reduction of hateful expressions online. Findings from the proposed review will enhance our understanding of the effectiveness of online anti-hate speech/anti-hate interventions, will help ensure that programming funds are dedicated to the most-effective efforts, and will play a critical role in helping individual programs improve the quality of service provisions. It will inform governments and policymakers of the current state of such online efforts, what works and which modes of interventions to implement, and help guide economically viable investments in nation-state security. Our search of the scholarly literature identified one review, Blaya (2019), as similar to the proposed topic. Blaya's (2019) review, however, focused on the prevalence, type, and characteristics of existing interventions for counteracting cyberhate and did not include a meta-analysis. Two other similar reviews focused on exposure to extremist online content (Hassan et al., 2018) and communication channels associated with cyber-racism (Bliuc et al., 2018). A search of the Campbell Library using key terms (hate OR radical*) returned two protocols and one review identified for further inspection to assess potential overlap. The protocols include "Psychosocial processes and intervention strategies behind Islamist deradicalization: A scoping review" by de Carvalho et al. (2019) and "Police programs that seek to increase community connectedness for reducing violent extremism behavior, attitudes and beliefs" by Mazerolle et al. (2020). A further review on a similar topic is a recently completed Campbell review (January 2020), "Counter-narratives for the prevention of violent radicalization: A systematic review of targeted interventions" by Carthy et al. (2018) at the National University of Ireland, Galway. Our proposed review is distinguished from the de Carvalho et al. (2019) review in that we are focusing on hate speech and cyberhate generally without delimiting our approach to a specific type of radicalization (e.g., Islamist). Furthermore, we are electing to complete a systematic review and meta-analysis. Likewise, the protocol by Mazerolle et al. (2020) focuses on interventions involving police officers either as initiators, recipients, or implementers of community connectedness interventions. Our review will focus specifically on any online intervention, which may or may not involve police, but police will not be the focus nor be the basis of the online intervention strategy. Judging from Carthy et al. (2018) protocol, we anticipate our review will also capture counter-narrative interventions, but will differ based on setting, timing, and scope of interventions. Specifically, we are interested in online interventions that extend beyond counter-messaging campaigns to include a broad array of interventions outlined above and extend beyond radicalization to include everyday hate and prejudice. In addition to conducting a meta-analysis, the proposed review would build on Blaya's (2019) work by expanding the population parameters to include both adolescents as well as adults. Blaya (2019) limited her search to include interventions aimed toward youth, young people, children, young adults, adolescents, children, and teenagers and did not focus on extremism. The main objective of this review is to synthesize the available evidence on the effectiveness of online interventions aimed at reducing the creation and/or consumption of online hate speech/cyberhate material. To what extent are online interventions effective in reducing online hate speech/cyberhate? How is effectiveness related to the type of online hate speech/cyberhate intervention used? How is effectiveness related to the characteristics of individuals experiencing the online hate speech/cyberhate intervention (e.g., age, gender, race/ethnicity, offense history, childhood trauma)? Both experimental and quasi-experimental quantitative studies will be included. These study designs will address research questions #1 to #3. Eligible quantitative study designs include the following: Eligible experimental designs must involve random assignment of participants to distinct treatment and control group(s). Designs that involve quasi-random assignment of participants such as alternate case assignment are also eligible and will be coded as experimental designs. All eligible quasi-experimental designs must include a comparison group of participants compared to participants in the treatment condition. Eligible studies include those that report matching procedures (individual- or group-level) and statistical procedures employed to achieve equivalency between groups. Statistical procedures may but are not limited to, analysis, and Furthermore, in of a limited quantitative evidence we will also include quasi-experimental studies with comparison groups that provide of for both groups. will also be included. Eligible include designs with a control group and designs with or without a control group than quasi-experimental designs include studies that a comparison group of participants who either to in the study or who in a but out to the of a Eligible comparison include other online interventions or in which participants not or an online Both youth and participants of any gender sexual orientation, or will be eligible for this review. The eligible youth population will be study participants with a of through The eligible population will be study participants with a of and in which only a of the is eligible for example, a study in both online and offline hate speech be not anticipate studies based on as our will be and we will take to studies that only online interventions. will of the of a study for through and be we will elicit the of a the of and studies will be these studies will be they will be and be in the and any related Blaya's (2019) of intervention strategies to the potential of eligible interventions. The intervention is the of responses to hate speech/cyberhate, which includes the countering of violent extremism and to address online interventions that are eligible range from hateful content online specific (e.g., of social media to to online hate using targeted strategies (e.g., through hateful of studies focusing on online include the and of online and content online content and & 2018), hateful online comments to comments et al., 2018), and to users out of online are also interested in interventions such as the of 8chan this online platform linked to "in real life" attacks in New Zealand and the and interventions that further hateful online content and radicalization similar events. hateful content online such has up speech as well as around online users and hateful groups on to other online to hateful content online using targeted strategies therefore, been as an effective online include using the from & 2020), the use of to online responses to in online where hate speech has been (Qian et al., 2019), and redirecting online users to videos for example, Our systematic review will include a range of online interventions, many of which have only recently Two other strategies identified by Blaya (2019) are the and of hate speech/cyberhate using technology as well as the creation of online and These interventions include online counter-narrative the and/or use of online counter online interventions, online training, and online narrowly to address extremist ideologies and hate speech that incites targeted violence and In such interventions seek to or the occurrence of violent extremism or the of hate speech and extremist by channels and opportunities to such groups. The and intervention eligible for this systematic review educational programs for example, provide people with online and challenge 2019). will include online programs with an online (e.g., and and educational and online interventions. of these interventions may by individuals no longer in the creation and/or consumption of cyberhate and extremist material online. These online interventions may be by and internet service or or in the case of interventions. The comparison may be routine exposure and to hate speech/cyberhate or online The of is the creation and/or consumption of hateful content online. By we to the production and of original hateful content such as antisemitic racist and/or homophobic blog The consumption of hate speech material may include or being a of a hate watching or reading hate speech videos or being a target of online hate speech/cyberhate, or hate speech material. of include and of study participants such as and attitudes toward hate Eligible studies must report a or (or to be included. There will be no exclusion on the source of for the and can be from any institutional or completed by will include any of from strategies to increase the scale of of potentially effective anti-hate speech and interventions for These could include to or to the creation of and behaviors. can also include such as a of hate speech/cyberhate to other platforms instead of a reduction of hate All described in eligible studies will be in the will focus on the between and the current The starting with the when the internet to a and community et al., are for an approach in the lower end of our search to the may be it is hate speech/cyberhate online through or and some studies may capture Our population of studies will also be limited to studies in and but of studies completed in any as we are focused on online content that can be and across and nation-state The language parameters reflect the language of the review Our will where studies the of study in will be between the members of the review These will be and as a from the protocol in the review. In the of a change in we will search online OR OR internet OR Twitter OR OR 8chan OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR speech" OR cyberhate OR OR OR OR OR speech OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR peer-to-peer OR OR OR

ABSTRACTThis article investigates and compares the changes to both the Audiovisual Media Services Directive and the Copyright Directive, through which European Union policymakers have sought to protect European content producers, mainly in the face of competition from US-based platforms. Contributing to debates about platform and content regulation, we examine the approaches taken with these two legislative changes and assess the potential for success of the most recent efforts. Ultimately, we argue that if revised as proposed the Copyright Directive runs the risk of further adding to the imbalance of power between press publishers and online platforms, and that the level playing field approach taken in the AVSMD revision is more likely to be at least somewhat effective in addressing that imbalance.

ObjectivesThis study aimed to generate evidence to help improve the quality of information provided by Chinese online platforms for retail of prescription medicines, as a baseline for enhancing the supervision by the regulatory authorities of internet retail of prescription medicines to offer comprehensive, accurate and reliable information to consumers.MethodsThis is an observational study to investigate the quality of the information provided by two key types of online platforms in China that sell paroxetine online, a common mental health medication. The authors utilized the DISCERN with the Likert 5 scale, a validated instrument comprising three domains and 16 items to assess the comprehensiveness, accuracy and reliability of information provided by a total of 34 Chinese online platforms. We firstly examined whether these online platforms have been diligent in their duty to provide appropriate retail service-related information (e.g. delivery, payment, return policies) for prescription medications. We also evaluated the quality of the medication information associated with treatment plans for specific prescriptions provided by the online platforms. Three trained master medical students independently conducted the evaluation. By securing the consistency of the scoring results among different evaluators and the reliability of the evaluation, we adopted the mean score of the three evaluators for each item to perform further analysis at the item and domain levels, and between two types of online platforms.ResultsAmong the 34 online platforms, 2 were evaluated as providing excellent information for retail of paroxetine (1/34, 5.88%), 6 were good (6/34, 17.65%), 25 were fair (25/34, 73.53%), and 1 was poor (1/34, 2.94%). The key identified flaws of the online platforms for providing appropriate information for retail of paroxetine included (1) inadequate provision of medication information, (2) absence of prescription validation and authentication, and (3) lack of professional pharmacy services such as mandatory pharmacist consultations or patient-specific drug counselling.ConclusionsConsumers face challenges in obtaining comprehensive, accurate and reliable information from the online platforms for common mental health prescription medications. The quality of information provided by the online platforms for retail of prescription medicines is generally suboptimal, and the compliance of prescription validation and authentication is problematic. These highlight the need for strengthening the supervision of the online platforms with novel approaches along with their rapid developments, and ensuring appropriate online information provided to consumers.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12911-026-03386-4.

Intellectual virtues and online information literacy are critical issues in education. This has a significant impact on the development of pre-service teachers’ learning skills, as they will play an important role in transferring knowledge to students in the future. This article investigates the relationship between intellectual virtues and information literacy among pre-service teachers on an online platform. To collect qualitative data, in-depth interviews and focus group discussions were used. Thirty pre-service teachers from three universities in northeastern Thailand served as key informants. The philosophical analysis was used to analyze the data, along with phenomenological analysis. The results looked into the intellectual virtues that pre-service teachers needed to improve their learning skills. Curiosity played a role in encouraging pre-service teachers to improve their critical thinking skills when dealing with online information. Furthermore, intellectual thoroughness and intellectual attentiveness were helpful for pre-service teachers to improve information literacy skills. Improving pre-service teachers’ information literacy through various instructional approaches was beneficial in allowing them to make rational choices when accessing online information. The article suggests higher education institutes providing more instructional practices to pre-service teachers to boost their critical thinking skills and information literacy on an online platform.

The article explores the EU Digital Markets Law and Digital Services Law adopted in the fall of 2022. The new legislative framework aims to control large digital platforms and search engines that have become market dominant and abuse their power by discriminating against third–party businesses, and to make online platforms and intermediaries more accountable. The authors provide examples of troubling practices by such companies. The provisions of the first document apply to the socalled gatekeepers, which include service providers that have become gateways between businesses and end users and for this reason have a significant impact on the EU internal market, of the second one – to providers of intermediary services qualified as mere conduit, caching and hosting services. A separate group includes very large online platforms and search engines. The laws set quantitative thresholds for companies subject to the laws. They contain lists of rights and responsibilities of such companies. The laws caused conflicting responses. One group of experts supports them, believing that they will solve many problems faced by businesses and ordinary users. Other researchers argue that new laws were not necessary and existing legal framework should have been improved. They also criticize certain provisions of the laws. The authors conclude that the laws correspond to the current market reality, but their application changes the competition environment.

In recent years, many large Internet companies have introduced their own digital currencies. Most of these companies run large platforms that span media, entertainment, and e-commerce. The market has seen Amazon Coins, Facebook Credits, Q-coins, Microsoft Points, and Reddit gold, to only name a few. This is on top of the many video games and gaming platforms that have their own currencies—for example, World of Warcraft gold, Second Life’s Linden dollars, or Eve Online’s Interstellar Kredits. All of these currencies have been introduced by large online platforms that, in one way or another, help interactions between their large groups of diverse members: buyers and sellers, game players, or simply people who want to exchange pictures and messages with one another. These interactions often involve some form of trade that may be helped by a special, custom-built, currency that online platforms provide for the convenience of their members. It is important to see that in all these cases, the currency is entirely controlled by the platform, which can set all of its features and properties. In this chapter, we review a few such “centrally controlled” currencies to understand the key drivers of their design and the rules governing their use.

Since the 19th century, the coevolution of humans and machines has transformed the political economy of production, value creation, and consumption across multiple historical stages. The most recent chapter in this ongoing story is the coevolution between humans and artificial intelligence (AI) – a social phenomenon whereby humans and AI-driven online platforms evolve in tandem, each influencing the evolution of the other, producing complex and unintended collective outcomes. At the heart of this process lies the human-AI feedback loop, its core mechanism, that significantly exacerbates economic inequalities through preferential attachment and marginalization processes. The article draws a political economy of this emerging phenomenon considering the study of Very Large Online Platforms as a vantage point. It contributes to the literature in three ways. First, it considers jointly classical processes of capital accumulation and those emerging as a result of human-AI coevolution, elaborating the concepts of ‘privatization of the general intellect’ and ‘accumulation of the means of recommendation’. Second, it discusses the phenomenon of economic inequality amplification due to the human-AI feedback loop on the basis of empirical evidence from computer science. Third, it explores potential regulatory frameworks aimed at limiting the unintended collective outcomes of the human-AI feedback loop. By adopting an interdisciplinary approach, the article associates social and hard sciences to open a debate at the intersection between technology, society and political economy.

The EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA) marks the biggest shake up to the rules for online intermediary liability in twenty years. The DSA is accompanied by flanking instruments regulating terrorist content, child sexual abuse material (CSAM) and political ads which, together, will create an entirely new framework for the regulation of online harms in the EU. These new and wide-ranging obligations attempt to reconcile the damage caused by unregulated user-generated content, fundamental rights to freedom of information and the practical limitations of moderating content at scale. The DSA is likely to shape the global approach to content regulation in this emerging area of law. Digital Services Act, DSA, Online Harm, Intermediary Liability, Intermediary Services, Hosting Services, Very Large Online Search Engines, Online Platforms, Very Large Online Platforms

This chapter deals with light of the new trends and research findings. The agendas of online and offline media were found to be correlated and Intermedia agenda-setting across various media systems and platforms. The accumulating empirical evidence suggests the traditional media lost some of their agenda-setting potential, their impact is maintained in the new media environment and has incorporated some of the flow into online platforms. The new agenda for agenda-setting research comprises the theoretical adjustments and refinements of the original paradigm as well as the development of new measures and new data analysis techniques. The rising popularity of the Internet and online social media, people have become more independent from traditional news media. Traditional media companies are also adapting some of these new online platforms and social media. Social media platforms, wikis or video sharing sites are designed - technically and ideologically for users to share contents and it relates to the agenda-setting paradigm.

Today the media landscape is undergoing rapid transformations, driven by technological advancements. The rapid advancements in technology have led to the convergence of various media platforms, resulting in a paradigm shift in the way health information is communicated. The convergence of media platforms and technologies has transformed the media landscape, bringing about significant changes in the way information is accessed, consumed, and shared. The dynamic interplay between traditional and digital media platforms has created new opportunities and challenges in the realm of health communication, shaping the way individuals receive and engage with health information. In this context of media convergence, it is crucial to understand how the changing media landscape affects the delivery and reception of health messages. The integration of multiple media platforms, such as television, radio, print, online platforms, and social media, has led to an unprecedented availability of health information.

In contemporary society, due to the exponential growth of technology and the online platform, data acquisition has never been so effortless. Subsequent accessibility to health information has been reported as having many positive and negative effects. Health anxiety is the apprehension of experiencing or developing an ailment due to symptomology misinterpretation. One such lifetime occurrence which causes increased anxiety is becoming a new parent. New parents often use the online platform to seek information which will educate them on how best to care for their child and to keep their child's health at the optimum level. The online Pregnancy Questionnaire used within this study was inclusive of the Short HAI Health Anxiety Inventory (HAI) and was tailored for both pregnant women and new parents. This study focuses specifically on the results provided by the new parents. The research was disseminated and advertised on social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and a purpose-built website named "A Healthy Search" which provided all information relevant to the study and participation. Quantitative data were analysed using a regression and qualitative data were thematically analysed. Results shows that medical complications in pregnancy did not significantly predict health anxiety however medical care within the past year did. It can also be seen that frequency of searching online for self, did not significantly predict health anxiety, yet searching online for child did significantly predict health anxiety. Anxiety specific to pregnancy ceases when gravidity comes to an end and feelings of health anxiety then tend to be transferred from the mother (parent) to the child when one becomes a new parent. New parents strive to expand their own knowledge base, in regards to typical and atypical symptomology, so that they are better equipped to monitor development, care for, and make decisions on behalf of their child. The online platform was used as opposed to offline provisos due to inexperience, judgement and anonymity. Online health information seeking behaviour also has the probability of both increasing and decreasing levels of anxiety in new parents. This research recognised and reinforced positive and negative aspects of online health information seeking behaviour. It is recommended that further research be carried out into relevant, efficacious interventional techniques that may relieve health anxiety within new parents as contemporary technology has become a pivotal aspect of life.

With the rapid development of network technology, online platforms have profoundly transformed people's learning modes, lifestyles, and work habits, becoming an important channel for university students to acquire diverse information and exchange ideological views, playing a crucial role in enhancing students' sense of gain in ideological and political education. However, there are practical challenges in using online platforms to enhance students' sense of gain in ideological and political education, including information complexity, insufficient interactivity, contradictions between content supply and student needs, and effectiveness that needs further improvement. To overcome these challenges, comprehensive measures must be taken with sustained effort: strengthening online information screening, optimizing platform content; stimulating students' enthusiasm for participating in online platforms, enhancing platform interactivity; establishing effective online public opinion guidance mechanisms, strengthening network information supervision; and enhancing network literacy education to improve university students' network literacy. KEYWORDS: Online Platforms, University Students' Ideological and Political Education, Sense of Gain, Enhancement

How Big Data Confers Market Power to Big Tech: Leveraging the Perspective of Data Science

The rapid expansion of video-on-demand platforms, such as Netflix or Disney Plus, associated with the advance of digital capitalism makes the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) adopted by the European Union a particularly relevant case for understanding the politics of the digital media policy. Based on an actor-centred constructivism, the article seeks to propose a conceptual approach to explore platform governance and highlight the key dynamics through which platform governance related to the media sector is formulated in light of the actors involved. As such, it provides an ‘in situ and in action’ view on normative building, introducing politics into the analysis of platform governance. The study focuses on the political framing of two key issues related to the crystallization of AVMSD: (1) the financial contribution of online platforms to European and national audio-visual content creation and (2) the presence and prominence of European and national audio-visual works in the online catalogues.