Content Labeling: SocioCultural Dynamics

1
Content Labeling Socio-Cultural Dynamics

• Rachel Yould
• Keio University

2
Why do socio-cultural considerations matter?
3
The traditional cross-disciplinary divide is
closing for purposes of research funding

• Collaborative teams are increasingly a necessity
  for the attainment of foundation public sector
  funding for technical visioning
• Marriage of technical vision socio-political
  considerations

4
Socio-cultural considerations must now be
incorporated

• Before
• Policy-makers formed strategy (though not
  necessarily innovation!)
• Computer scientists led implementation
• (ARPA as exception in one way, but this too,
  was the product of non-scientist strategy)
• Now
• Major initiatives to integrate these strands

5
The traditional cross-disciplinary divide
persists in technology policy circles

• Social scientists populate most high-level task
  forces in North America and Australia and,
  perhaps to a slightly lesser degree, in Europe
  and Asia

6
The traditional cross-disciplinary divide
persists in technology policy circles

• Social scientists and social activists
  predominate in conferences that address the
  social integration of emerging technologies
• (cf. UN World Summit on the Information Society)

7

• Thus, non-scientists are contributing heavily to
  the legislation, regulation, non-commercial
  funding initiatives, and activist agenda-setting
  that will, in many ways, ultimately shape the
  uptake, integration, and deployment for many
  networking capabilities

8
Socio-cultural dynamics inform user preferences
and assimilation of new technologies

• These dynamics differ considerably across social
  contexts
• User preferences and concerns vary considerably
  according to online device

9
Community based Web of Trust must incorporate
the input of all elements of the growing (and
diversifying) Web user base
10

• Influx of non-technically oriented user classes
• Differs considerably from the techies that
  characterized the original North American user
  population
• Trust mechanisms must respond to non-techie needs
  and concerns and be communicated in terms they
  can appreciate this is not simply an issue of
  technical capability and deployment

11
Content labeling is inherently subjective and
will be perceived through diverse socio-cultural
lenses
12

• Perceptions of profanity and nudity in the US as
  compared to Western Europe is one fairly
  straightforward example
• How are labels defined?
• Do labels differ according to perceived user
  demographics? Articulated user preferences (e.g.,
  a scale from conservative to liberal)?

13
Content labeling hinges upon accountability that
will be enforced largely through community
response

• This requires an active, educated, and empowered
  user base that involves effectively even
  non-technically inclined users

14
The specifications for content labeling will vary
according to cross-cultural market preferences

• Compare cellular phone-enabled text messaging
  labeling requirements relative to devices
  supporting rich multi-media components
• Compare relatively closed networks such as the
  proprietary content systems deployed by Japanese
  mobile Internet systems relative to the open
  architecture associated with PC-enabled WWW
  content

15
The Traditional Computer Science Social Science
Divide is closing

• Organizational trends and forces
• Fundamental cross-disciplinary relevance
• Issues of regulation and security emerge
  alongside new innovations
• Influx of non-technically literate users

16
This requires that computer scientists be in
conversation with social scientists,
policy-makers and activists, and non-technical
user groups in more sustained and robust terms.
17
How do we initiate this dialogue?

• Issues ? Action Agendas
• Inclusive Development for Diverse Applications
• Active Sustained Involvement
• Inclusive Web of Trust

18
Inclusive Development for Diverse Applications

• How do we involve social scientists and
  non-technical users in the development and
  deployment of RDF?
• How do we specify RDF so that it serves as an
  agile and responsive mechanism that is seamlessly
  applicable across diverse device and
  socio-cultural contexts?

19
Active Sustained Involvement

• How do we raise awareness of mechanisms such as
  RDF among communities of non-scientists and
  encourage widespread participation in holding
  content providers accountable to RDF-enabled
  content labels?

20
Inclusive Web of Trust

• How do we engender social trust in mechanisms
  such as RDF (as opposed to technical confidence
  among knowledgeable computer scientists)?
• How do we extend this sense of trust to user
  groups that will never play an active role in the
  interactive development process?