Online Gatekeeping Research Articles

Changes in Suicide Ideation Among Users of Online Gatekeeping Using Search-Based Advertising

Recently, the practice of “online gatekeeping” related to suicide prevention—placing online advertisements directed at users who search the web for suicide-related terms and leading them to email-based consultations—has been implemented. However, the effectiveness of this practice has not been examined. Therefore, we quantitatively examined the effectiveness of suicide-related online gatekeeping. This was a non-randomized, single-arm study of online gatekeeping among Japanese Internet users. Outcomes were measured at the beginning of the use of the consultation service (T1) and approximately four weeks later (T2). The primary outcome measured was suicidal ideation. In total, 167 participants completed two assessment surveys; approximately 80% were women, and 59.3% were young people (in their twenties or younger). Data analysis of 167 online gatekeeping service users showed that the mean suicidal ideation at T2 was statistically significantly lower than that at T1, and its effect size was small to medium (d = 0.37, 95% confidence interval: 0.15–0.59). Online gatekeeping is a promising suicide-prevention tool, although further research is warranted to examine its effectiveness using a randomized controlled trial. Highlights We examined the effectiveness of email-based consultations for suicide prevention. About 4 weeks later, users’ suicidal ideation was significantly reduced (d = 0.37). This was a single-arm study and requires a more rigorous study design in the future.

Online Gatekeepers to Commerce and Culture

This Article provides a definition of “gatekeeper” in the context of digital markets. Within that discussion, it also asks whether the term is useful within antitrust. The Article also discusses potential concerns with gatekeepers that go beyond the standard litany of antitrust theories of harm—namely, information asymmetries and the representations made to users and businesses.

Information and Health in Digital Environments, between Agenda Setting and Online Gatekeeping. A Study on Google News Italy and Facebook Users

Information and Health in Digital Environments, between Agenda Setting and Online Gatekeeping. A Study on Google News Italy and Facebook Users

A Typology of Social Media Regulations in Europe and Their Possible Future Development

Social media, search engines, and application platforms are the most important online gatekeepers from the perspective of freedom of expression. These routinely make ‘editorial’ decisions to make certain content inaccessible or to delete or remove it (either to comply with a legal obligation, to respect certain sensitivities, to protect their business interests or at their own discretion). Through such decisions, they directly influence the flow of information. The regulation of gatekeepers also determines the extent to which they are able or obliged to intervene in the process of publishing user content. The number and scope of regulations continue to grow, and the nature of these regulations is diversifying, even more so for online gatekeepers than for traditional media, and this imposes a wide range of rights and obligations on them. The paper reviews the regulations governing social media platforms in Europe, as gatekeepers, which have the greatest impact on the public sphere, typifying the regulations and considering possible directions for their future development.

Reforming the C-DSM Reform: A User-Based Copyright Theory for Commonplace Creativity

A few years ago, Nellie Kroes warned that because of ill-adapted laws to technological development, “every day citizens […] across the EU break the law just to do something commonplace”. According to Kroes, the Single Market “cried out” for copyright reform. Finally, the EU responded to that reform call but, unfortunately, with the wrong answer. As part of its recent reform to adapt copyright to the Digital Single Market (DSM), the EU Parliament has approved Article 17 of the Copyright in the DSM Directive that might dismantle the traditional knowledge and take-down system, while imposing enhanced liability on UGC platforms, which might incentivise proactive censorship and cripple competition. Article 17 tells the story of a dream of change where ill-adapted laws that citizens break “just to do something commonplace” are no more that awakes in a reality of unfulfilled expectations. Instead of being guided by a welfare or cultural approach where citizens’ interests and fundamental rights are at the center stage, outdated fairness and personality approaches dominate the policy discourse, emphasizing rightholders’ interests and seeking cooperation with online service providers at detriment of users. Instead of changing the law so that it’s legal and easier for users “to do something commonplace”, legislators have engineered the law so that online gatekeepers have an incentive to prevent, block, filter and sanitize proactively that commonplace digital creativity. In contrast, copyright reform in the digital environment should build upon the DSM-Directive licencing emphasis by launching a coordinated approach that should focus on creators’ compensation, rather than exclusive rights, and include (1) exceptions and limitations that might serve as basis for (2) fair compensation (3) through statutory/compulsory, collective and extended licencing mechanisms (4) collected through a levy system (5) that might leverage incomes from online platform advertisement.

Reforming the C-DSM Reform: a User-Based Copyright Theory for Commonplace Creativity

A few years ago, Nellie Kroes warned that because of ill-adapted laws to technological development, “every day citizens […] across the EU break the law just to do something commonplace”. According to Kroes, the Single Market “cried out” for copyright reform. Finally, the EU responded to that reform call but, unfortunately, with the wrong answer. As part of its recent reform to adapt copyright to the Digital Single Market (DSM), the EU Parliament has approved Article 17 of the Copyright in the DSM Directive that might dismantle the traditional knowledge and take-down system, while imposing enhanced liability on UGC platforms, which might incentivise proactive censorship and cripple competition. Article 17 tells the story of a dream of change where ill-adapted laws that citizens break “just to do something commonplace” are no more that awakes in a reality of unfulfilled expectations. Instead of being guided by a welfare or cultural approach where citizens’ interests and fundamental rights are at the center stage, outdated fairness and personality approaches dominate the policy discourse, emphasizing rightholders’ interests and seeking cooperation with online service providers at detriment of users. Instead of changing the law so that it’s legal and easier for users “to do something commonplace”, legislators have engineered the law so that online gatekeepers have an incentive to prevent, block, filter and sanitize proactively that commonplace digital creativity. In contrast, copyright reform in the digital environment should build upon the DSM-Directive licencing emphasis by launching a coordinated approach that should focus on creators’ compensation, rather than exclusive rights, and include (1) exceptions and limitations that might serve as basis for (2) fair compensation (3) through statutory/compulsory, collective and extended licencing mechanisms (4) collected through a levy system (5) that might leverage incomes from online platform advertisement.

The bully chamber: Creation of funhouse selves from distorted media

Abstract This article considers how the technological changes have facilitated the establishment of a sense of ‘ressentiment’ in modern political cultures. This is the unease created when someone believes they have been injured by another but feel impotent to act. While technologies have developed at a startling rate, society’s ability to deal with them has not kept up. Consequently, neo-liberal economic principles and political narratives have distorted the culture practices as a range of agencies (political, economic, technology) have become elitist and self-serving. Individual forms of identity are undermined by a surfeit of information in which online gatekeepers (Google, Facebook, Twitter) use algorithms that synthesize real with virtual emotional values. These distortions are now being made tangible with the election of right-wing populists such as Donald Trump and the genuine sense of popular dislocation that contributed to the UK Brexit vote.

Appropriate Targets for Search Advertising as Part of Online Gatekeeping for Suicide Prevention.

Gatekeeper training is an effective suicide prevention strategy. However, the appropriate targets of online gatekeeping have not yet been clarified. We examined the association between the outcomes of online gatekeeping using the Internet and the characteristics of consultation service users. An advertisement to encourage the use of e-mail-based psychological consultation services among viewers was placed on web pages that showed the results of searches using suicide-related keywords. All e-mails received between October 2014 and December 2015 were replied to as part of gatekeeping, and the obtained data (responses to an online questionnaire and the content of the received e-mails) were analyzed. A total of 154 consultation service users were analyzed, 35.7% of whom were male. The median age range was 20-29 years. Online gatekeeping was significantly more likely to be successful when such users faced financial/daily life or workplace problems, or revealed their names (including online names). By contrast, the activity was more likely to be unsuccessful when it was impossible to assess the problems faced by consultation service users. It may be possible to increase the success rate of online gatekeeping by targeting individuals facing financial/daily life or workplace problems with marked tendencies for self-disclosure.

Online Gatekeeping and the Google Shopping Antitrust Decision: The Beginning of the End or the End of the Beginning?

This paper provides a preliminary opinion on the European Commission's decision on the Google Search (Shopping) case.

Challenges facing online research: Experiences from research concerning cyber-victimisation of people with disabilities

The victimisation of people living with disabilities and chronic conditions is a documented phenomenon. It ranges from harassment incidents to disability hate crimes, and causes physical, mental and psychosocial consequences. The Internet has further reshaped this phenomenon which lead to “cyber-victimisation” experiences, with no less impact upon victims. This methodology paper focuses mainly on the challenges and implications of using online methods in a UK-based study exploring the impact of cyber-victimisation on people coping with disabilities and chronic conditions. Mixed-method design was adopted via an online-survey followed by in-depth interviewing of victims. Online recruitment was through victim-support groups, patient-support groups, and social media. Out of 80 organisations and charities approached, 51(63.8%) gatekeepers helped to reach participants. Recruitment and data collection process was challenged by four overarching themes: 1) social identity in online support groups, 2) the role of online gatekeepers, 3) the contradictory role of social media, and 4) promoting inclusivity. These challenges were theorised from the perspective of the Social Identity Theory. Representing self as a victim and/or a disabled-person had its implications on virtual groups’ membership, social media use, gatekeepers’ decisions and subsequent participation. Some identity aspects were highlighted as positive points to improve engagement with research. In conclusion, the Internet has aggravated the vulnerability of people with disabilities, but it also has a huge potential in researching sensitive topics with this group. Future research in the cyberspace should acknowledge the challenges of online identities of disabled victimised people, and focus on positive identity aspects to facilitate the research process and encourage collaborative participation at early stages of research.

Digital Pathways to Sex Education

For most young people in the world, sex and relationships have a big impact on their lives. However, various gatekeepers restrict reliable information on sexual health that has a positive take on pleasure and relationships. Therefore, online sex education is of vital importance for young people. Using online traffic data and information on operational realities from Love Matters – an online provider of sex education on web, mobile and social media platforms in China, Egypt, Kenya, Mexico and India – this article attempts to contribute to an understanding of how online information about sexual health education in different national contexts is accessed by users and restricted by gatekeepers. Our findings show the importance of understanding audiences, visible traditional and invisible online gatekeepers, and working with local and supranational commercial organisations for effective outreach and provision of sex education.

Digital intermediaries in the UK: implications for news plurality

PurposeDigital intermediaries such as Google and Facebook are seen as the new powerbrokers in online news, controlling access to consumers and with the potential even to suppress and target messages to individuals. Academics, publishers and policymakers have raised concerns about the implications of this new power, from the impact on media plurality to implications for democratic discourse, freedom of speech and control over public opinion formation. After reviewing academic literature that has raised this concern and public policy addressing it, this paper aims to examine the empirical foundations for these claims. Through secondary analysis of industry data on referrals of online news traffic, the authors find that intermediaries do have the potential to exert significant influence over distribution of online news. The authors however find that not all news that is filtered through intermediary services is subject to the same shaping and editorial forces, in part, because user agency is also an important factor. The role of intermediaries in news distribution is thus complex; headline numbers do not translate automatically into influence due to the complex interplay and exchange between user agency and the editorial influence of intermediaries.Design/methodology/approachThis paper is based mainly on a secondary analysis of publicly available data on news referrals, and some data provided by news publishers along with re-analysis of regulatory data from Ofcom and previously unpublished data from the BBC and SimilarWeb. These data sources are combined for the first time to investigate claims regarding the current controversy about media plurality, algorithmic power and transparency.FindingsThe paper finds that evidence that intermediaries wield concentrated editorial power is mixed. While other, non-intermediated news distribution platforms such as TV and the press remain highly important, online is heading towards being the most important distribution platform, particularly for younger demographics. The authors found that intermediaries such as search and social control access to a significant proportion of online news content. Not all use of intermediaries is indicative of online gatekeeping however. User agency also determines how content is prioritised and thus consumed. The news consumed is therefore a product of a complex interplay between user agency and intermediary influence. In contrast to traditional discussions of media power and its regulation (for example the notion of mass media plurality); it is thus not possible to make inferences on influence simply by noting the market share of intermediaries. The role of intermediaries is much more subtle and opaque.Research limitations/implicationsThis paper is mainly based on publicly available data. It is crucial to find out what is possible with such data as regulators with responsibility for monitoring and regulating media plurality are similarly limited to such data. The implications are that further research with a wide range of methods and data sources will be necessary to update research on media plurality and diversity.Practical implicationsThe implications of these findings are that independent public authorities should have access to much more revealing data about public opinion formation processes, including referrals and other data currently held only by publishers. The three stage analytical framework will be of use to regulators and policymakers currently looking into these issues.Social implicationsCivil society and public debate about digital intermediaries is currently intensively discussed in policy debate. Taking these debates forward will depend on whether existing public policy frameworks (such as limits on news plurality) are able to accommodate the new challenges such as intermediary influence on news distribution and public opinion formation.Originality/valueThe recent special issue ofINFO, including contributions from Mansell and Helberger, raised a range of similar issues with regard to media plurality and intermediaries. These papers did not seek empirically to examine in depth, using all available publicly relevant data, the implications for media pluralism and diversity in one particular media market. The paper is theoretically original, contains some previously unpublished data and an entirely new empirical and theoretical analysis. The models and tables are previously unpublished.

Varieties of Online Gatekeeping

Digital intermediaries like search engines and social networking sites are increasingly important for how people find and access news, though most of the news people use continue to be produced by news media organizations. In this paper, I outline a differentiated approach to the varieties of online gatekeeping we encounter today that recognize the growing importance of a range of secondary forms of gatekeeping (link-based, affinity-based, and audience-based) while retaining a focus on the still important role of primary gatekeepers — news media organizations that continue to play a central role as editorial gatekeepers that by filtering and publishing information makes it news as most people understand it. Far from the “collapse of gatekeeping” some had hypothesized, the digital media environment is characterized by the continuing relevance of traditional forms of primary gatekeeping as well as the increased importance of new forms of secondary gatekeeping, especially in terms of the role of a few very globally dominant digital intermediaries.

Suicide Prevention Through Online Gatekeeping Using Search Advertising Techniques

Nurturing gatekeepers is an effective suicide prevention strategy. Internet-based methods to screen those at high risk of suicide have been developed in recent years but have not been used for online gatekeeping. A preliminary study was conducted to examine the feasibility and effects of online gatekeeping. Advertisements to promote e-mail psychological consultation service use among Internet users were placed on web pages identified by searches using suicide-related keywords. We replied to all emails received between July and December 2013 and analyzed their contents. A total of 139 consultation service users were analyzed. The mean age was 23.8 years (SD = 9.7), and female users accounted for 80% of the sample. Suicidal ideation was present in 74.1%, and 12.2% had a history of suicide attempts. After consultation, positive changes in mood were observed in 10.8%, 16.5% showed intentions to seek help from new supporters, and 10.1% of all 139 users actually took help-seeking actions. Online gatekeeping to prevent suicide by placing advertisements on web search pages to promote consultation service use among Internet users with suicidal ideation may be feasible.

Online gatekeeping activity using search advertising as a practice of the suicide prevention: A pilot study

Online gatekeeping activity using search advertising as a practice of the suicide prevention: A pilot study

Online Gatekeepers of History: Yahoo! Answers Community Discussing Holocaust Denial

Scholarly attention has been directed to the spread and scope of online Q&A services, including the level of activity, types and messages and the social roles the members of these sites occupy. A content analysis was conducted of the answers supplied in response to questions aimed at identifying the reasons for Holocaust denial in Yahoo! Answers. The replies denoted the existence of two main opposing online socio-cultural roles adopted by these participants: online gatekeepers of history and online gatekeepers of pseudo-history. The activity levels of those filling these roles and the community’s approval of their answers were also assessed. Future avenues of research regarding these two roles are suggested.

Suicide and Cyberspace— Befriending by e-mail

ColumnsSuicide and Cyberspace— Befriending by e-mailA Column from Befrienders InternationalSimon ArmsonSimon ArmsonSearch for more papers by this authorPublished OnlineJanuary 01, 1997https://doi.org/10.1027/0227-5910.18.3.103PDFView Full Text ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack Citations ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInReddit SectionsMoreFiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited byPeer‐based interventions targeting suicide prevention: A scoping review15 March 2021 | American Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 68, No. 1-2Suicide Prevention Through Online Gatekeeping Using Search Advertising Techniques A Feasibility StudyHajime Sueki and Jiro Ito6 October 2015 | Crisis, Vol. 36, No. 4Suicide Prevention and New Technologies: Towards Evidence Based PracticeHealth Communication and Psychological Distress: Exploring the Language of Self-harmThe Canadian Modern Language Review, Vol. 68, No. 3The Use of the Internet for Counseling the Suicidal Individual: Possibilities and Drawbacks1 May 2009 | OMEGA - Journal of Death and Dying, Vol. 58, No. 3Messages to Jo—the Samaritans’ experience of email befriending Volume 18Issue 3May 1997ISSN: 0227-5910eISSN: 2151-2396 Published online1997 tabs.informationCrisis (1997), 18, pp. 103-105 https://doi.org/10.1027/0227-5910.18.3.103.© 1997Hogrefe & Huber PublishersPDF download