Regulation of broadcast was justified on the basis that the airwaves were a scarce and shared public resource. In looking at a coherent, pragmatic, and equitable basis for regulating online content and surveillance, the notion of a common public good and interest might be a good anchor.
In discussion, the notion that public awareness, attention, mindshare, and understanding are themselves a common good ... gets to some interesting (and yes, scary) places.
Interests in privacy, concerns over widespread or highly targeted manipulation, and similar concerns could possibly form the basis of coherent limits on tracking, surveillance, and "information sharing" on individuals and groups. Open, transparent, and ethically guided research ("who decides" being university and professional ethics review boards, as is presently largely the case in human-subjects research) could be excepted, but would require those components.
Regulation of broadcast was justified on the basis that the airwaves were a scarce and shared public resource. In looking at a coherent, pragmatic, and equitable basis for regulating online content and surveillance, the notion of a common public good and interest might be a good anchor.
In discussion, the notion that public awareness, attention, mindshare, and understanding are themselves a common good ... gets to some interesting (and yes, scary) places.
Interests in privacy, concerns over widespread or highly targeted manipulation, and similar concerns could possibly form the basis of coherent limits on tracking, surveillance, and "information sharing" on individuals and groups. Open, transparent, and ethically guided research ("who decides" being university and professional ethics review boards, as is presently largely the case in human-subjects research) could be excepted, but would require those components.