Open Password – Wednesday March 28, 2022
#1047
Book of the Year 2022-2021 – Maelle Gavet – Trampled by Unicorns – Threats to Democracy – Threats to Health – Tech Industry – Regulations – Moral Revolution – Willi Bredemeier – Potential of the Tech Industry – CEOs – Collateral Damage – Salesforce – Chief Ethical and Human Use Officer – Chief Empathy Officer – Helen Fry – University College London – Hippocratic Oath for Scientists – Independent Audits – Industry Codes of Conduct – Instagram – Content Moderation – Facebook – Venture Capitalists – Business Angels –
Private Equity – Investment Banks – Governments – Economist – Media Opportunism – GDPR – European Opportunities – Gig Economy – WhatsApp – Instagram – Platform Companies – Free Speech – Print Media – Media Platforms – Pew Research – Newsrooms – Google – Mark Zuckerberg – Washington Post – Jeff Bezos – Equality between tech companies and media companies
MetaGer – SUMA-EV – Russia-Ukraine War – EU – Russian websites – Russian state disinformation campaigns – RT – Sputnik – Netzpolitik.org – Freedom of information – Circumvention options – EU Charter of Fundamental Rights – Digital courage – Snowflake – Bridges – Unhindered access to information – Legal uncertainty
National research data infrastructure – Research data repositories – Chemical Association – Cultural Property Association – FIZ Karlsruhe – KIT – TU Dresden – NFD14VCulture – NFD15Chem – RADAR4Chem – RADAR4Culture – RADAR
Qualtrics – Workplace Safety – Well-Being Solutions – PUBMed Central – National Library of Medicine – Getty Images – AI Training – Thomson Reuters – CLEAR Global Beneficial Ownership – Nature Portfolio – Ring Central Hybrid Work – Outsell
Potsdam Library Society – Crowdfunding – Hans-Christoph Hobohm – Potsdam City and State Library
I
Title:
Maelle Gavet, Trampled by Unicorns: A Moral Revolution in the Minds of Tech CEOs and Financiers – Equalizing Tech Companies to Media Companies – By Willi Bredemeier
MetaGer/SUMA-EV:
Our statement on freedom of information in the Russia/Ukraine war – Instead of blocking disinformation, downranking it in order to protect access to information
III.
National research data infrastructure: Research data repositories for the chemical and cultural heritage communities
International news
v.
Potsdam Library Society:
Crowdfunding successful
Book of the Year 2022-2021:
Maelle Gavet, Trampled by Unicorns
A moral revolution in the minds of the CEOs
and financiers of the tech industry
Equate tech companies with media companies
See also:
Trends of the year: Corona as the big accelerator, how do we counter it, what do we redesign? – An irrational resistance front with “alternative facts” – Integration of research and InfoPro functions: The wonderful story of BioNTech and U?ur ?ahin , in: Open Password, January 12, #1015
Woman of the Year 2022/2021: Frances Haugen – Exposing Facebook’s illegitimate actions with mountains of material and a clear moral compass – “If you overcome your fear of dying, everything becomes possible. This gave me the freedom to say: Do I want to follow my conscience? » – How do we manage to become a little like Frances Haugen?, in: Open Password, February 11, 2022, #1020
By Willi Bredemeier
third part
Maelle Gavet
After her comprehensive criticism of the tech companies, some of which are “ actually more powerful today than democratically elected governments” (221), Maelle Gavet turns to her suggestions for improvement. “ I remain passionately convinced that, with meaningful restructuring, realignment and regulation, the tech giants can be a force for good, human progress and empathy for years to come” (177).
Their conclusion is: “In fact, the entrepreneurial leaders of this fourth industrial revolution have an even greater opportunity – and responsibility – than their predecessors to create sustainable and inclusive economic growth because of their access to capital and the inherent scalability of the digital model” (315).
From Gavet’s perspective, how can the fundamental change in the actions of tech companies succeed? And how should the author’s suggestions be evaluated?
_____________________________________________________
- A moral revolution in the minds of CEOs and their developers.
_____________________________________________________
To ensure that tech companies act in a socially desirable manner, Gavet aims for nothing less than a moral revolution in the minds of CEOs, their developers and their economic environment. The CEOs must therefore be persuaded to want to be both economically and ethically successful (179) and to ensure that their employees and their investors also follow this moral impetus.
If this were to happen, the CEOs would first have to admit that they have so far lacked empathy (185) and have been indifferent to the consequences of their actions for the economy and society. They would have to “think about the social impact (of their actions) and limit negative consequences as best as possible ” (181) and “ make it clear in their missions that they ultimately strive to work for the benefit of humanity ” (180).
As a positive example, Gavet cites Salesforce, which has appointed a “ Chief Ethical and Human Use Officer ” and committed itself to an ethical mission: “ We understand that we have a greater responsibility to society and strive to achieve this “To develop solutions that not only drive the success of our customers, but also bring about positive social change and benefit humanity” (219). This statement is generalized by Gavet: “ We should all be chief empathy officers ” (and accordingly influence the politics of tech companies from inside and outside).
With regard to developers and managers, Gavet takes up a suggestion from Helen Fry from University College London. According to this, “ mathematicians, computer scientists and scientists should take a Hippocratic oath to protect users from new technologies developed in laboratories and by tech companies” (219). Gavet suggests creating a Jour Fixe for CEOs and management where they periodically step out of their filter bubble and talk to users and other people they would otherwise never meet.
With regard to investors, the author envisions that “ in addition to the audited annual financial statements, they systematically receive an independent audit of how they deal with freelancers, contractors and suppliers ” (208). In addition, the supervisory board should initiate an annual performance review that is independent of the board of directors (213). It is important to establish and enforce industry-specific codes of conduct (217).
Now companies like Facebook and Google have been claiming for a long time that they are working for the good of humanity. They also occasionally take steps in the directions favored by Gavet. The author cites as a positive example “Instagram’s anti-bullying tool… which uses AI to determine when a text is similar to the posts that have most often been marked as inappropriate by users” (217). But all too often these steps are insufficient – think of Facebook’s content moderation – and they come only after public and/or political pressure. Gavet quotes a US Justice Department official who said those responsible for tech companies “have no moral compass.” They simply try to dominate every single market and acquire as much data as possible” ( 224 ).
Based on all previous experience, an ethical reorientation of the tech companies without maintaining and increasing political and public pressure seems extremely unlikely, especially since the CEOs of the tech companies, with their profit and growth maximization calculations, are not that different from CEOs in other industries in the USA probably differ in other countries (if the board chairs there were given appropriate freedom). It is even more unlikely that venture capitalists will remember their social responsibility in their maniacal pursuit of hypergrowth. Although Gavet discusses alternative sources of financing for tech companies to venture capital (examples include business angels, private equity and investment banks, 135), I lack the imagination to see how a change in the sources of financing can provide an “ethical boost” for tech companies could effect.
So if the tech industry is unable to reform itself on its own initiative in a way that is desirable from an economic and socio-political perspective, all that remains is public and political pressure, the serious threat of extensive changes to the legal framework and the actual implementation of this threat , if the desired change in behavior of the tech companies has not occurred. A stronger ethical orientation of those responsible in the tech industry could then arise as a result of these measures.
_____________________________________________________
- The regulators between “mishmash” and “bite”.
_____________________________________________________
However, the history of the previous regulations of the tech companies, as well as the control of the tech companies by the media, is not a glories. The tech companies themselves represent the “libertarian/technological narrative that the government is ridiculously incompetent ” (246 ). According to The Economist’s calculations, the fines and penalties imposed by authorities accounted for less than 1 percent of the combined market value of the Big Five (234). In the US, regulation is carried out by a “mishmash” of authorities at different levels, so a federal or super regulator with real teeth and clearly defined rules of the game would be preferable.
Gavet finds the media’s reporting on the tech industry to be rock solid overall. However, the author complains about the fragmentation of the media and the high number of opportunists writing. “What is particularly annoying is the way certain stocks dance to the tune of venture capitalists ” (300).
For example, the author understands a stronger “bite” from the regulatory authorities, here quoting an article by Quest and Charry: “If you replace quarterly reports with technology platforms – which allows the supervisory authorities to access information on the most important risk factors directly from the companies’ systems – they will that can monitor companies more efficiently” (289). However, there is a risk that the regulations of tech companies in the USA will fall short of what is required, as the two major parties in the USA are quite business-friendly from a European perspective. In addition, the tech companies will want to come up with an evasion strategy and new innovations for every regulation, while the Europeans continue to be harassed by social media under American law.
Gavet seems to be relying partly on the EU’s regulatory efforts, especially since the tech companies there are quite vulnerable given the sales they generate in Europe. In any case, “ the GDPR acted as a catalyst for a global wave of data protection regulations in India, Brazil, Japan and other countries – indirectly also for the emergence of a variety of other initiatives ” (263), including in some US states such as California. In addition, Gavet points to the now at least partially successful international efforts to ensure fair taxation of tech companies, which have so far practiced de facto tax evasion by choosing to have their headquarters in countries with minimal tax rates, while in countries like Germany, where they actually generate their sales generate, hardly pay anything.
A “Europeanization” of the legal framework would also be necessary in the areas of employee protection and working conditions instead of the current partial “Americanization of the European labor markets”: “The gig economy is completely failing millions of workers and their families – without social protection and benefits such as minimum wage, hazard pay and continued payment of wages in the event of illness” (257). “The distinction between employees and freelancers must be fundamentally reviewed. … No job should be paid below the local minimum hourly wage, regardless of whether the person is a freelancer or an employee. Flexibility should not be an excuse for exploitation” (258).
Gavet advises against seeing a panacea in breaking up the big tech companies, as this would be insufficient. She seems to be considering reversing Facebook’s takeover of WhatsApp and Instagram. She also advocates for a change in merger control procedures: “ Ultimately, we should shift the burden of proof that a merger maintains competition, benefits consumers and increases innovation to the company, rather than leaving it to the government to prove the opposite ” (231). On the other hand, Gavet sees dangers of over-regulation. From their point of view, it would be best if the tech companies took the necessary measures on their own to forestall the threat of regulation by the authorities “ and thus make draconian external controls unnecessary ” (311).
_____________________________________________________
- Put tech companies on an equal footing with media companies.
_____________________________________________________
The author goes into great detail with her suggestions for regulating the tech industry, so the overview of what she prioritizes above all can be lost to some extent. Among their suggestions is one that has long been preferred by Open Password and other European authors, who are, however, a tiny minority among the European public. They have repeatedly called for social media companies to be legally treated on an equal footing with media companies. Media companies must identify a person responsible for each of their publications.
The American social media companies assume that they provide a platform for the individual opinions of their users, for which they bear no responsibility for the content and are in no way liable. The users, for their part, are exercising their right to freedom of expression, which is defined excessively broadly in US law, so that they too, if they operate from American soil, can hardly be prosecuted for hate messages and the spread of false reports. They are still required to sign their statements with their real name or provide an address, so that they can hardly be found without extensive cooperation from the social media companies.
Gavet formulates her proposal about the tech companies like this: “In reality, the tech companies (in all but name) are media companies themselves, thanks to the proprietary algorithmic recommendations that decide what is shown to users, and thus the digital equivalent of of Editorial decisions made by journalists. If already struggling media companies have to pay the price for dubious, inflammatory, harmful, fake or illegal content, then similar standards should also apply to social media platforms (including hefty fines, litigation and the obligation to prominently publish counter-statements).” (274f.).
The author says elsewhere: The tech companies “must be held accountable for the content they publish, just like television broadcasters and publishers of (print) media” (297). Reclassifying tech companies as “media platform companies,” for example, would “also encourage platforms to optimize their algorithms so that trusted and reliable news sources appear first ” (299).
Another argument in favor of this proposal is that social media companies are partly responsible for the decline of the news media and are parasitically using their content. Pew Research found that “ the number of employees in US newsrooms fell by 23% from 2008 to 2019” (291). Meanwhile, “the share of news in Google search results is between 16 and 40%, and the platform was able to generate an estimated $4.7 billion in revenue from web crawling and web scraping on journalistic content in 2018” (292).
Facebook’s CEO Zuckerberg stated: « We must do more to support the news industry so that this important social function remains viable » (293). However, the corresponding initiatives of the social media companies “so far amount to little more than artfully packaged consolation prizes when you put it in relation to the worldwide bleeding of advertising revenue in the tens of billions ” (296). Gavet sees a positive exception here with the renaissance of the Washington Post following its takeover by Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos.
With the legal equality of tech companies with media companies, there is an instrument that would be suitable for ending the mass abuse of social communication through social media.
MetaGer/SUMA-EV
Our statement on freedom of information
in the Russia/Ukraine war
Instead of blocking disinformation, downranking it for unhindered access
to information
With a regulation dated March 1, 2022 (1), the EU (Council of the European Union) initiated measures that, among other things, mean that Russian websites are no longer accessible across Europe. This is intended to stop disinformation campaigns by the Russian state. From now on, the content of the Russian state broadcasters RT and Sputnik may no longer be broadcast in the EU. Western countries are also exercising stricter information control.
Online politicians are increasingly speaking out who criticize this approach and describe restrictive measures as censorship. The result would be fear of Russian countermeasures that would affect the freedom of information of Russian citizens and journalists, according to an article by Netzpolitik.org [https://netzpolitik.org/2022/informationskontrolle-russland-verschaerft-internet-und-pressezensur /]. Freedom of information is already significantly restricted in Russia. In addition, it is also important for citizens of the West to find out what view the Russian side takes. Looking at information only in terms of its potential for manipulation is extremely problematic in a democratic society. Freedom of information is a valuable asset that must not be thrown overboard hastily and without democratic discourse – which should take place at parliamentary level.
The EU regulation can also be read as a ban on projects that enable or provide information about circumventing Internet censorship. Accordingly, it is prohibited to “knowingly and intentionally participate in activities that have the purpose or effect of circumventing the prohibitions set out in this regulation. (…)”. SUMA-EV condemns this EU-wide ban on pointing out circumvention measures in view of our focus on freedom of knowledge. We see the ban on circumvention as an unreasonably serious violation of Article 11 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. According to the Charter, every person has the right to freedom of expression and information, which must be possible without interference from public authorities and across all national borders.
On the one hand, the EU regulation could now affect actions that inform citizens about how censorship can be technically circumvented. The Digitalcourage association offers instructions on its website (2) that are particularly aimed at Russian and Ukrainian citizens. On the other hand, actions such as strengthening the Tor network (« Snowflake ») could be affected. With « Snowflake » – an interchangeable transmission type – it is possible to circumvent Internet censorship (3). This means users can access the open internet, even if regular Tor connections are censored. Many activists are working to stabilize the Tor network to prevent blockages. These so-called bridges built by activists help people in Russia in particular to have the opportunity to obtain independent information. Unhindered access to information is also an essential journalistic tool. Only an uncensored Internet offers journalists the opportunity to do investigative work, exchange information and network.
However, both the development of infrastructure and the instructions for circumventing censorship could become punishable by the regulation and hinder the project. If actors create legal uncertainty in the future through offers – which include our MetaGer instance in the Tor network – the conditions for freedom of knowledge will also become more difficult within the European Union. According to the EU regulation, blocking of websites or bans on censorship circumvention tools are based on a sanctions strategy. But the fact that they are also a censorship instrument that was introduced here should not be forgotten.
How does MetaGer position itself? We regret that certain content is now blocked and can no longer be found by search engines. In the spirit of freedom of information, we do not block any pages, but instead downrank pages that spread disinformation. We are aware that this intervention is not an ideal solution either. But in doing so, we are making a compromise with which we are still trying to ensure that information that is sought can also be found. The ability to provide information about censorship circumvention tools or to actively provide them plays a major role here and should not be restricted by politics.
(2) https://digitalcourage.de/blog/2022/tor-for-peace
(3) https://support.torproject.org/de/censorship/what-is-snowflake/
We wish you a good time. With best regards from Hanover,
your MetaGer/SUMA-EV team
National research data infrastructure
Research data repositories for
the chemistry and cultural heritage communities
(FIZ Karlsruhe) FIZ Karlsruhe has developed solutions for the management of research data in the consortium for research data on material and intangible cultural assets (NFDI4Culture) and in the specialist consortium for chemistry (NFDI4Chem) within the framework of the National Research Data Infrastructure together with KIT and the TU Dresden.
“RADAR4Chem” and “RADAR4Culture” offer researchers in the fields of chemistry and cultural studies powerful services for easy publication of their research data. The two new RADAR offerings complement the existing portfolio of specialist repositories in chemistry and the entire area of cultural assets, from architecture, art and music to theater, dance, film and media studies. Researchers in these disciplines can use the new RADAR offerings free of charge and regardless of their institutional affiliation.
It is the aim and concern of the NFDI to build, if possible, on existing infrastructures and services and to make them interoperable. In this context, discipline-specific repositories for the publication and long-term archiving of digital research data are of particular importance for the scientific communities. However, previous offers do not cover all relevant use cases in scientific practice, as was shown by analyzes by the NFDI consortia. A generically focused data repository like RADAR can help close these gaps.
RADAR is a service designed to meet the needs of researchers and has proven itself over several years. To date, it has been primarily used by academic institutions for institutional research data management. In keeping with its commitment to sustainability, FIZ Karlsruhe is now making RADAR directly accessible to researchers and adapting the service for the two new offers RADAR4Chem and RADAR4Culture to the respective discipline-specific requirements.
International News
Qualtrics Launches Workplace Safety and Well-Being Solutions
Qualtrics is launching two new solutions to help employers improve employees’ sense of physical safety and overall well-being at work. Qualtrics’ Safe Workplace solution helps employers use experience data to understand employee sentiment around certain key drivers to determine the full scope of how safe employees feel working in a physical environment.
PubMed Central Website has a Fresh Look, First Step in Ongoing Modernization Complete
The National Library of Medicine announces an update to the user interface of its PubMed Central digital archive. PMC’s fresh look and feel is the first step in an ongoing effort to modernize PMC, create a more accessible user experience across NLM literature databases, and enhance the long-term stability of the PMC infrastructure.
Getty Images announces the introduction of an industry first Enhanced Model Release form, recognizing advancements in data privacy and security and the growing importance of biometric data for the training of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) applications.
Thomson Reuters Launches Global Beneficial Ownership and Additional Sanctions Data to CLEAR Offering
Thomson Reuters has launched CLEAR Global Beneficial Ownership (GBO), a new product enabling organizations to quickly understand the ownership and control of international corporate entities and to help find global business registry information.
Nature Portfolio to Expand with Three New Journals in 2023
Three new Nature journals are to launch in 2023 as publisher Springer Nature continues to reflect the needs of research communities through its Nature portfolio. With the first issues due in January 2023, Nature Mental Health, Nature Water and Nature Reviews Bioengineering will have multi-disciplinary scopes.
RingCentral Announces Innovations to Make Hybrid Work Simple
RingCentral announced several new innovations designed to make hybrid work simple. Each is designed to solve the challenges of hybrid work: simplifying communications and collaboration; gaining data and insights to inform business decisions; and enhancing customer experience.
Source: Outsell
Potsdam Library Society
Crowdfunding successful
(Hobohm) The Potsdam Library Society’s campaign to support the anniversary celebrations of the Potsdam City and State Library this year only runs for one week: 100 years of the state library, 30 years of SLB, 20 years of support association and 25 years of book sponsorships. The support association would like to have a perpetual calendar produced for the birthday celebrations with high-quality photos from the state library’s holdings, which span over 500 years, and is asking for donations on the crowdfunding platform: www.potsdam-crowd.de/bibliothekskalender – every donation over 10 euros will be matched by the Potsdam public utility company
.
In the first three weeks, over 2,000 euros have already been raised! The chairman of the library society, Prof. Dr. Hobohm: “The current world situation in particular makes it extremely clear how important historical education and the preservation of regional cultural assets are. We are pleased and at the same time ashamed that we can record such a large participation in our fundraising campaign for the Brandenburg cultural heritage. We see this as confirmation of the mostly silent but always very broad support of libraries in our society!”
Participation is still possible until April 3rd at 8 p.m.: only if the targeted sum of 2,500 euros is reached will the money be paid out to the club and can be used to produce the calendar.
OpenPassword
Forum and news
for the information industry
in German-speaking countries
New editions of Open Password appear three times a week.
If you would like to subscribe to the email service free of charge, please register at www.password-online.de.
The current edition of Open Password can be accessed immediately after it appears on the web. www.password-online.de/archiv. This also applies to all previously published editions.
International Cooperation Partner:
Outsell (London)
Business Industry Information Association/BIIA (Hong Kong)
Open Password Archive – Publications
OPEN PASSWORD ARCHIVE
DATA JOURNALISM
Handelsblatt’s Digital Reach
MARKET TRENDS
Library Trends 2022
What are the key trends in the library market for 2022?
Online-Publications | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | GPT AI SEARCH
Print Archive | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000
