Social media can be seen as a resource for increased interaction between municipal authorities and citizens. However, as authorities attempt usage of social media, practices can become entrenched in traditional regulatory frameworks that emphasize openness and transparency rather than interaction with citizens. Social media usage by authorities tends to touch upon a broad range of regulatory elements, some of which are legal in character and others that we see as embedded in the technologies themselves as well as practices developed in connection with the technologies. In this paper, 26 Swedish social media policies produced by municipalities are analyzed in order to better understand how the conflict between transparency and interaction is dealt with in practical guidelines. We are concerned with how the diversity of social media is understood and how public functions are identified. By analyzing challenges and policy strategies outlined in these documents, it becomes possible to identify four alternative foundational positions based on social media being perceived as a problem/possibility or homogeneous/heterogeneous. The general tendency in all material is that routines of command and control are established in order to create clear goals and practices for individual social media activities and thereafter to discipline social media activities to remain firmly within the intentions of the blueprint. This explicitly disallows activities to adapt to needs developing through interaction with citizens. Nevertheless, we have also found a number of participatory strategies that are either aimed at increased quality of community services or at extending the marketability of the municipal brand.

No abstract

No abstract

Many computer users are happy to be oblivious of the workings within the machine and yet on some level it is important to know what is occurring therein. This paper discusses an unusual type of surveillance software which may be installed in many computers. The strange aspect of this software is that it has often been downloaded and installed by the user, but without her knowledge. The software is mainly designed to collect information about the user of the computer and relay this information back to the software manufacturer. The download, installation, data collection and data transfer all take place within the users own computer but very seldom with the users knowledge. It is the intention of this paper to describe the technology involved and thereafter discuss how this new technology is affecting the online privacy debate. The paper continues to discuss the basis for legitimacy of technology and also the current level of technological deterrents available. The paper concludes with a comparison of two approaches at resolving the current problem, via legislation or the market approach.

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:448207 [] For AuthorsIf you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. The Internet is used for every conceivable form of communication and it is therefore only natural that it should be used as an infrastructure even for protest and civil disobedience. The technology however brings with it the ability to carry out new forms of protest, in new environments and also involve changed consequences for those involved.This article looks at four criminal activities, which are used as active forms of Internet based protest in use today and analysis these forms in relation to the traditional civil disobedience discourse. The analysis is done by studying four basic criteria (disobedience, civil, non-violence and justification) found in tradition civil disobedience discourse and observing their applicability in online environments. The purpose of this article is to better understand the political protest activities carried out online and to see whether traditional civil disobedience theory embraces these new forms of political activism.