Skip to main content

Regulating Communication — New Media, Old Challenges

  • Chapter
Contemporary Challenges in Regulating Global Crises

Part of the book series: International Political Economy ((IPES))

  • 118 Accesses

Abstract

A fascinating feature of globalised communication is the manner in which it has reshaped communities. Communities are communication and vice versa. Up until the advent of the postal service and the telephone, mass communication was bound to time and space. Today we are experiencing a communication era which ignores temporal and spatial connection. But is this so new? Does it present unique challenges for the regulation of a safe and satisfying communication environment?

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For a discussion of the wider sociology of cultural embeddedness, see Granovetter, M. (1985) ‘Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness’, The American Journal of Sociology 91/3: 481–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ayres, I. and Braithwaite, J. (1992) Responsive Regulation: Transcending the Deregulation Debate. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Winfield, R. (2007) ‘A Lesson from Victor Hugo’, in B. James (ed.) New Media: The Press Freedom Dimension. Paris: WAN Press.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Balla, S. and Daniels, B. (2007) ‘Information Technology and Public Commenting on Agency Regulations’, Regulation & Governance 1/1: 46–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Demsetz, H. and Lehn, K. (1985) ‘The Structure of Corporate Ownership: Causes and Consequences’, Journal of Political Economy 93/6: 1155–1177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Grossman, S. and Hart, O. ‘The Costs and Benefits of Ownership: A Theory of Vertical and Lateral Integration’, Journal of Political Economy 94/4: 691–719.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Djankov, S., Nenova, T., McLiesh, C. and Shleifer, A. (2003) ‘Who Owns The Media?’, Journal of Law and Economics 46/2: 341–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Sen, A. (1981) Poverty and Famines: An Essay on Entitlement and Deprivation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Raboy, M. (2003) ‘Media and Democratization in the Information Society’, in B. Girad and S. Ó Siochrú (eds.) Communicating in the Information Society. Geneva: United Nations Research Institute for Social Development.

    Google Scholar 

  10. McChesney, R. (2004) The Problem of the Media: U.S. Communication Politics in the Twenty-first Centuiy. New York: Monthly Review Press.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Williams, R. (1976) ‘The Politics of American Broadcasting: Public Purposes and Private Interests’, Journal of American Studies 10/3: 329–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. This means using a lighter touch to democratise power by dispersing and devolving the role of the state, establishing accountable and transparent administration and engaging multiple stakeholders, including civil society, in the process of governance. See, Livingstone, S. and Lunt, P. (2007) ‘Representing Citizens and Consumers in Media and Communications Regulation’, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 611/1: 51–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Buckley, S., Duer, K., Mendel, T. and Ó Siochrú, S. (2008) Broadcasting, Voice, and Accountability: A Public Interest Approach to Policy, Law, and Regulation. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  14. Levine, M. and Forrence, J. (1990) ‘Regulatory Capture, Public Interest, and the Public Agenda: Toward a Synthesis’, Journal of Law, Economics & Organization 6: 167–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Friedman, L. (2004) ‘The One-Way Mirror: Law, Privacy, and the Media’, Washington University Law Quarterly 82/2: 319–342.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Nordhaus, J. (1999) ‘Celebrities’ Rights to Privacy: How Far Should the Paparazzi Be Allowed to Go?’, The Review of Litigation 18/2: 285–315.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Altman, I. (1977) ‘Privacy Regulation: Culturally Universal or Culturally Specific?’, Journal of Social Issues 33/3: 66–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Milberg, S., Smith, J. and Burke, S. (2000) ‘Information Privacy: Corporate Management and National Regulation’, Organization Science 11/1: 35–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Bamberger, K. and Mulligan, D. (2011) ‘Privacy on the Books and on the Ground’, Stanford Law Review 63/2: 247–315.

    Google Scholar 

  20. McDonald, A. and Cranor, L. (2008) ‘The Cost of Reading Privacy Policies’, I/S: Journal of Law and Policy for Information Society 4: 543.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Findlay, M. (2008a) Governing through Globalised Crime: Futures for International Criminal Justice. Devon: Willan Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Chen, W. and Wellman, B. (2004) ‘The Global Digital Divide — Within and between Countries’, IT & Society 1/7: 39–45.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Ibid.; Guillén, M. and Suárez, S. (2005) ‘Explaining the Global Digital Divide: Economic, Political and Sociological Drivers of Cross-National Internet Use’, Social Forces 84/2: 681–708.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Cullen, R. (2001) ‘Addressing the Digital Divide’, Online Information Review 25/5: 311–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. McChesney, R. (1999) Rich Media, Poor Democracy. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  26. McIntyre, T. and Scott, C. (2008) ‘Internet Filtering: Rhetoric, Legitimacy, Accountability and Responsibility’, in R. Brownsword and K. Yeung (eds.) Regulating Technologies. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Fuchs, C. (2011) ‘New Media, Web 2.0 and Surveillance’, Sociology Compass 5/2: 134–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Boyd, D. (2008) ‘Facebook’s Privacy Train-wreck: Exposure, Invasion, and Social Convergence’, Convergence 14/1: 13–20.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Lyon, D. (2001) Surveillance Society: Monitoring Everyday Life. Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Trottier, D. (2011) ‘Mutual Transparency or Mundane Transgressions? Institutional Creeping on Facebook’, Surveillance & Society 9/1/2: 17–30.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Tiessen, M. (2011) ‘Being Watched Watching Watchers Watch: Determining the Digitized Future While Profitably Modulating Preemption (at the Airport)’, Surveillance & Society 9/1/2: 167–184.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Van Munster, R. (2004) ‘The War on Terrorism: When the Exception Becomes the Rule’, International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 17/2: 141–153, at p. 151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Wang, V., Haines, K. and Tucker, J. (2011) ‘Deviance and Control in Communities with Perfect Surveillance — The Case of Second Life’, Surveillance & Society 9/1/2: 31–46.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Wall, D. (2005) ‘The Internet as a Conduit for Criminals’, in A. Pattavina (ed.) Information Technology and the Criminal Justice System. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Koops, B. and Leenes, R. (2006) ‘ID Theft, ID Fraud and/or ID-related Crime — Definitions Matter’, Datenschutz und Datensicherheit 30/9: 553–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Clough, J. (2011) ‘Data Theft? Cybercrime and the Increasing Criminalization of Access to Data’, Criminal Law Forum 22/1–2: 145–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Kerr, O. (2003) ‘Cybercrime’s Scope: Interpreting “Access” and “Authorization” in Computer Misuse Statutes’, New York University Law Review 78/5: 1596–1668.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Balkin, J. (2004) ‘Digital Speech and Democratic Culture: A Theory of Freedom of Expression for the Information Society’, New York University Law Review 79/1: 1–55.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Cohen, J. (1996) ‘Right to Read Anonymously: A Closer Look at Copyright Management in Cyberspace’, Connecticut Law Review 28/4: 981–1039.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Strange, S. (1983) ‘Cave! Hic Dragones: A Critique of Regime Analysis’, in S. Krasner (ed.) International Regimes. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, pp. 337–354.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Hills, J. (1994) ‘Dependency Theory and Its Relevance Today: International Institutions in Telecommunications and Structural Power’, Review of International Studies 20/2: 169–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Ratti, C. and Townsend, A. (2011) ‘The Social Nexus’, Scientific American 305: 42–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Demidov, O. (2012) ‘Social Networks in International and National Security’, Security Index: A Russian Journal on International Security 18/1: 23–36.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Findlay, M. (1999) The Globalisation of Crime: Understanding Transitional Relationships in Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  45. Including regulatory arbitrage, anonymity, scarce resources: Murray, A. and Scott, C. (2002) ‘Controlling the New Media: Hybrid Responses to New Forms of Power’, The Modern Law Review 65/4: 491–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Rosenau, J. (2007) ‘Governing the Ungovernable: The Challenge of a Global Disaggregation of Authority’, Regulation & Governance 1/1: 88–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Copyright information

© 2013 Mark Findlay

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Findlay, M. (2013). Regulating Communication — New Media, Old Challenges. In: Contemporary Challenges in Regulating Global Crises. International Political Economy. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137009111_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics