Delegitimising Data Subjects’ Economic Interests During Automatic Propertisation of Their Data: A Comparative Study of Data Protection on Social Media Platforms in the UK and China

Social media platforms (SMPs) generate revenue from the automatic propertisation of data contributed by users (i.e. they process these data algorithmically to feed products and services they sell to other customers, especially advertisers). This comparative study of the UK and China builds on key law and policy documents as well as in-depth interviews with 25 experts. We find that neither the human rights–based regulatory approach in the UK nor the impact-based approach of China provides users with economically meaningful forms of redress for harm suffered due to insufficient protection of their rights as data subjects. The study reveals the reasons for this: (1) by analysing data subjects’ rights in data protection law and establishing whether these rights preserve the economic interests of data subjects pertaining to their data; (2) by spelling out the conditions under which users can exercise their rights and (3) through an in-depth analysis of the existing mechanisms, which are not suitable to protect data subjects’ economic interests during automatic propertisation. This also helps us to understand the social impacts of China’s recently approved Personal Information Protection Law. Finally, it suggests two possible ways to improve the balance between the economic interests of data controllers and data subjects.

‘Pathetic earthlings! Who can save you now?’ Science fiction, planetary crisis and the globalisation of Chinese culture

Chinese policy has turned to the globalisation of communication and stories. Beyond the diplomatic ‘voice’, one of the ways that Chinese culture is reaching out to the rest of the world is through science fiction. Sci-fi can be construed as a specialist thinking-circuit for cultures to build and explore experimental models of collective action at global and planetary scale. What do its stories tell us about the globalisation of Chinese culture? When the need to ‘save the world’ has crossed over from sci-fi to science, from entertainment to activism, and from a thought experiment to imminent danger, humans as a whole face challenges of their own making: climate change, environmental pollution, pandemics, extinctions, exclusions and nuclear annihilation. Can sci-fi inspire collective action at species scale? What role will globalising China play?

Comparing newspapers in mainland China and Hong Kong: The limits of media systems theory

Most comparative studies of media are undertaken between different countries. It is normally assumed that there are considerable commonalities between the media in a given country and it is usually argued that these are sufficient to form a ‘media system’, which can usefully be contrasted with that of another country. It is relatively unusual to find two sets of media within one country that are sufficiently distinct as be considered as different systems. This paper explores one of the exceptions to that general rule: the case of the Hong Kong media as compared with those of mainland China. Given the different historical and current situations of the two locations at the time the research was conducted, it is to be expected that the kinds of journalism practised would be radically dissimilar. The results of a content analysis of five mainland and three Hong Kong papers demonstrate that, at the aggregate level, there are indeed important differences. A more detailed analysis, however, demonstrates that each of the three Hong Kong papers is in fact closer to mainland groupings than they are to each other. One Hong Kong paper, Ta Kung Pao, is closest to the most ‘official’ grouping of mainland papers, while Ming Pao falls in to a grouping with the ‘liberal’ mainland paper. The now defunct Apple Daily, on the other hand, has the closest links with the ‘popular official’ mainland press. Taken together, these findings suggest that the common assumption that different forms of journalism are best compared on a national basis is incorrect and that factors like market position and ideological orientation have an important influence on the kinds of journalism practised across borders.

Collectivism and Altruistic Behavior: A Third-Person Effect Study of COVID-19 News Among Wuhan Residents

This study examines the third-person effects of COVID-19 news among Wuhan residents during the peak of the outbreaks in the city. Using data collected in a telephone survey of 1,071 Wuhan residents, results show that respondents believed others were more influenced by the COVID-19 news. However, the more the respondents systematically processed the news through elaboration and the more they were oriented toward collectivist values, the smaller the self-other perceptual gap. Finally, results suggest the moderating effect of collectivism on the relationship between perceived effects of COVID news and altruistic behavior—collectivism enhances the influence of perceived effects on others on adoption of altruistic behavior. The influence of culture in shaping risk perception and behavioral responses is discussed.

Fake news, information overload, and the third-person effect in China

Based on a national survey of 1111 Chinese citizens, this study analyzes how exposure to fake news and perceptions of information overload are associated with the third-person effect. The findings indicate that fake news exposure correlates with perceived information overload and third-person perceptions of fake news. Respondents with higher levels of perceived information overload also report stronger third-person perceptions. In addition, Chinese respondents who believe that fake news affects others more than themselves are less likely to support stricter controls of fake news.

The politics of platform power in surveillance capitalism: A comparative case study of ride-hailing platforms in China and the United States

This article uses a comparative case study of two ride-hailing platforms—DiDi Chuxing in China and Uber in the United States—to explore the comparative politics of platform power in surveillance capitalism. Surveillance capitalism is an emerging economic system that translates human experiences into surveillance assets for behavioral predictions and modifications. Through this comparative study, we demonstrate how DiDi and Uber articulate their operational legitimacy for advancing their corporate interests and visions of datafication in the face of legal uncertainty. Although DiDi and Uber are both “sectoral platforms” in urban mobility with similar visions of datafication and infrastructuralization, we highlight that they deploy different discursive legitimation strategies. Our study shows that Uber adopts a “confrontational” strategy, while DiDi employs a “collaborative” strategy when they need to legitimize their data and business practices to the public and regulatory authorities. This study offers a comparative lens to examine the social and political dynamics of platform firms based in China and the United States and, therefore, contributes to understanding the various aspirational logic of platform thinking in different political contexts.