The limits of transparency: Data brokers and commodification

Crain, Matthew

doi:10.1177/1461444816657096

Cited by 155 publications

(105 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Overall, however, it appears that presenting a motivational message can lead to a participant disclosing more personal information, even when the data requests pertain to sensitive personal information. This is in line with both the link between motivation and disclosure found by Bowser et al [3] as well as the theoretical link between the importance of clarity in communication about the aims of collecting data and the ability of data collectors to successfully gather personal information about data subjects [5] .…”

Section: Hypothesissupporting

confidence: 88%

Why Do You Need This?

Rudnicka

Cox

Gould

2019

Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent scandals involving data from participatory research have contributed to broader public concern about online privacy. Such concerns might make people more reluctant to participate in research that asks them to volunteer personal data, compromising many researchers' data collection. We tested several motivational messages that encouraged participation in a citizen science project. We measured people's willingness to disclose personal information. While participants were less likely to share sensitive data than neutral data, disclosure behaviour was not affected by attitudes to privacy. Importantly, we found that citizen scientists who were exposed to a motivational message that emphasised 'learning' were more likely to share sensitive information than those presented with other types of motivational cues. Our results suggest that priming individuals with motivational messages can increase their willingness to contribute personal data to a project, even if the request pertains to sensitive information.

show abstract

Section: Hypothesissupporting

confidence: 88%

Why Do You Need This?

Rudnicka

Cox

Gould

2019

Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is a growing body of literature in the new field of critical data studies focusing on questions related to the mechanisms for extracting data: how is it extracted, who are the extractors, and from where/whom is it extracted? For example, relevant work has investigated the operations and implications of specific corporate sectors such as the shadowy, multi‐billion‐dollar data broker industry (Crain ; Roderick ). It has detailed the political economic imperatives that compel increasingly more organisations—from rentier platforms to police departments and everything in between—“to capture all data, from all sources, by any means possible” (Sadowski :1) and are “powerfully equipped with the tools to enact [this imperative]” (Fourcade and Healy :13).…”

Section: Mechanisms Of Rentier Platformsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Internet of Landlords: Digital Platforms and New Mechanisms of Rentier Capitalism

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Digital platforms are a nearly ubiquitous form of intermediary and infrastructure in society. By positioning platforms in the geographical political economy/ ecology literature, this paper provides a critical analysis of platforms as a dominant form of rentier in contemporary capitalism. In doing so, I extend this work on rent theory beyond applications to land and nature so that it also includes platforms and data. I argue that the rapid rise of the "X-as-a-service" business model across nearly all sectors of the economy is creating rentier relations by another name. This model is premised on the platform latching onto and inserting itself into the production, circulation, or consumption process, thus creating opportunities to capture value. To better understand the operations and implications of platforms, I outline three key mechanisms: data extraction, digital enclosure, and capital convergence.

show abstract

“…My discussion of the consent paradox speaks to an 20 emerging strand of literature exploring how political, scientific and popular discourses shape the field of data protection (Matzner et al 2016;Draper 2017;Hull 2015;Bellanova 2014;van Dijk, Gellert, and Rommetveit 2016). Quite a few of those works come to similar conclusions: They observe an increasing individualization and commodification of data protection (Matzner et al 2016;Draper 2017;Hull 2015;Crain 2016). It is tempting to dismiss these studies as broad and undifferentiated attempts to explain developments in data protection as influenced by a neoliberal zeitgeist.…”

Section: The Data Market Worldmentioning

confidence: 98%

The Consent Paradox: Accounting for the Prominent Role of Consent in Data Protection

Bergemann

2018

IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Abstract. The concept of consent is a central pillar of data protection. It features prominently in research, regulation, and public debates on the subject, in spite of the wide-ranging criticisms that have been levelled against it. In this paper, I refer to this as the consent paradox. I argue that consent continues to play a central role not despite but because the criticisms of it. I analyze the debate on consent in the scholarly literature in general, and among German data protection professionals in particular, showing that it is a focus on the informed individual that keeps the concept of consent in place. Critiques of consent based on the notion of "informedness" reinforce the centrality of consent rather than calling it into question. They allude to a market view that foregrounds individual choice. Yet, the idea of a data market obscures more fundamental objections to consent, namely the individual's dependency on data controllers' services that renders the assumption of free choice a fiction. Terms of use: Documents in

show abstract

The limits of transparency: Data brokers and commodification

Cited by 155 publications

References 25 publications

Why Do You Need This?

Why Do You Need This?

The Internet of Landlords: Digital Platforms and New Mechanisms of Rentier Capitalism

The Consent Paradox: Accounting for the Prominent Role of Consent in Data Protection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About