Blended Stakeholder Participation for Responsible Information Systems Research

McCarthy, Stephen; Rowan, Wendy; Lynch, Laura; Fitzgerald, Ciara

doi:10.17705/1cais.04733

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Citizen engagement is also designed to encourage consensus building between a broad range of actors in research, innovation and public policy decisions (Ju et al, 2019;McCarthy et al, 2020;Olphert and Damodaran, 2007). This is achieved using various practices such as foresight processes and scenario planning (McCarthy et al, 2020). Online communication tools can also be used to make IS research more collaborative by supporting knowledge creation and dialog across geographical locations (Khan and Krishnan, 2021).…”

Section: Citizen Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Citizen engagement is also designed to encourage consensus building between a broad range of actors in research, innovation and public policy decisions (Ju et al. , 2019; McCarthy et al. , 2020; Olphert and Damodaran, 2007).…”

Section: Conceptual Foundationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…, 2020; Olphert and Damodaran, 2007). This is achieved using various practices such as foresight processes and scenario planning (McCarthy et al. , 2020).…”

Section: Conceptual Foundationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…, 2019). Responsible governance aims to ensure an informed and positive imprint for change by listening to the voices of different actors affected by a system (McCarthy et al. , 2020; Stahl, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Considering these issues, research is urgently needed to steer the future of digitalization and social media platform governance in a more responsible, ethical and inclusive direction (D'Arcy et al, 2014;Tarafdar et al, 2015;Turel et al, 2019). Responsible governance aims to ensure an informed and positive imprint for change by listening to the voices of different actors affected by a system (McCarthy et al, 2020;Stahl, 2012). The goal is to deliver socio-technical innovations that have beneficial consequences for all by highlighting the responsibilities of different stakeholders to make the "world a better place" (Walsham, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The dark side of digitalization and social media platform governance: a citizen engagement study

McCarthy

Rowan

Mahony

et al. 2023

INTR

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeSocial media platforms are a pervasive technology that continues to define the modern world. While social media has brought many benefits to society in terms of connection and content sharing, numerous concerns remain for the governance of social media platforms going forward, including (but not limited to) the spread of misinformation, hate speech and online surveillance. However, the voice of citizens and other non-experts is often missing from such conversations in information systems literature, which has led to an alleged gap between research and the everyday life of citizens.Design/methodology/approachThe authors address this gap by presenting findings from 16 h of online dialog with 25 citizens on social media platform governance. The online dialog was undertaken as part of a worldwide consultation project called “We, the internet”, which sought to provide citizens with a voice on a range of topics such as “Digitalization and Me,” “My Data, Your Data, Our Data” and “A Strong Digital Public Sphere.” Five phases of thematic analysis were undertaken by the authors to code the corpus of qualitative data.FindingsDrawing on the Theory of Communicative Action, the authors discuss three dialogical processes critical to citizen discourse: lifeworld reasoning, rationalization and moral action. The findings point toward citizens’ perspectives of current and future issues associated with social media platform governance, including concerns around the multiplicity of digital identities, consent for vulnerable groups and transparency in content moderation. The findings also reveal citizens’ rationalization of the dilemmas faced in addressing these issues going forward, including tensions such as digital accountability vs data privacy, protection vs inclusion and algorithmic censorship vs free speech.Originality/valueBased on outcomes from this dialogical process, moral actions in the form of policy recommendations are proposed by citizens and for citizens. The authors find that tackling these dark sides of digitalization is something too important to be left to “Big Tech” and equally requires an understanding of citizens’ perspectives to ensure an informed and positive imprint for change.

show abstract

Section: Citizen Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Conceptual Foundationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…, 2020; Olphert and Damodaran, 2007). This is achieved using various practices such as foresight processes and scenario planning (McCarthy et al. , 2020).…”

Section: Conceptual Foundationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%