Search results

The purpose of this paper is twofold: first, to explore how China uses a social credit system as part of its “data-driven authoritarianism” policy; and second, to investigate how datafication, which is a method to legitimize data collection, and dataveillance, which is continuous surveillance through the use of data, offer the Chinese state a legitimate method of monitoring, surveilling and controlling citizens, businesses and society. Taken together, China’s social credit system is analyzed as an integrated tool for datafication, dataveillance and data-driven authoritarianism.

This study combines the personal narratives of 22 Chinese citizens with policy analyses, online discussions and media reports. The stories were collected using a scenario-based story completion method to understand the participants’ perceptions of the recently introduced social credit system in China.

China’s new social credit system, which turns both online and offline behaviors into a credit score through smartphone apps, creates a “new normal” way of life for Chinese citizens. This data-driven authoritarianism uses data and technology to enhance citizen surveillance. Interactions between individuals, technologies and information emerge from understanding the system as one that provides social goods, using technologies, and raising concerns of privacy, security and collectivity. An integrated critical perspective that incorporates the concepts of datafication and dataveillance enhances a general understanding of how data-driven authoritarianism develops through the social credit system.

This study builds upon an ongoing debate and an emerging body of literature on datafication, dataveillance and digital sociology while filling empirical gaps in the study of the global South. The Chinese social credit system has growing recognition and importance as both a governing tool and a part of everyday datafication and dataveillance processes. Thus, these phenomena necessitate discussion of its consequences for, and applications by, the Chinese state and businesses, as well as affected individuals’ efforts to adapt to the system.

This paper will provide an overview of the contemporary surveillance environment in the age of Big Data and an insight into the complexities and overlap between security, bodily and informational surveillance as well as the subsequent impacts on privacy and democracy. These impacts include the ethical dilemmas facing librarians and information scientists as they endeavour to uphold principles of equality of access to information, and the support of intellectual freedom in private in an increasingly politicised informational environment. If we accept that privacy is integral to the notion of learning, free thought and intellectual exploration and a crucial element in the separation of the state and the individual in democratic society, then the emergence of the data age and the all-encompassing surveillance and exposure of once private acts will undoubtedly lead to the reimagining of the social and political elements of society.

This chapter explores how data-driven methods such as Artificial Intelligence pose real concerns for individual privacy. The current paradigm of collecting data from those using online applications and services is reinforced by significant potential profits that the private sector stands to realize by delivering a broad range of services to users faster and more conveniently. Terms of use and privacy agreements are a common source of confusion, and are written in a way that dulls their impact and dopes most into automatically accepting a certain level of risk in exchange for convenience and “free” access. Third parties, including the government, gain access to these data in numerous ways. If the erosion of individual protections of privacy and the potential dangers this poses to our autonomy and democratic ideals were not alarming enough, the digital surrogate product of “you” that is created from this paradigm might one day freely share thoughts, buying habits, and your pattern of life with whoever owns these data. We use an ethical framework to assess key factors in these issues and discuss some of the dilemmas posed by Artificial Intelligence methods, the current norm of sharing one's data, and what can be done to remind individuals to value privacy. Will our digital surrogate one day need protections too?

Proponents of paternalistic leadership argue that a paternalistic leader is authoritative and at the same time, a benevolent and moral individual, and this style is effective in non-Western societies. However, past empirical studies consistently found that authoritarianism related negatively to benevolence, morality and job outcomes. The authors posit that the original proposed style probably did not exist, or at least not being a dominant style, in modern Chinese business organizations.

The authors collected supervisor–subordinate dyadic data from three independent Chinese sample in Taiwan (N = 305), Hubei (N = 350) and Jiangsu (N = 270) and utilized the latent profile analysis method to test the hypotheses.

First, authoritarianism ratings are much lower than ratings of benevolence and morality. Second, none of the identified profiles is high on authoritarianism, benevolence and morality at the same time. Third, leadership style with low authoritarianism, but high on benevolence and morality leads to the best employee outcomes.

Conceptually, the authors clarify the typical leadership styles that compose of the independent dimensions proposed by paternalistic leadership researchers. Methodologically, the authors showed that using person-centered latent profile analysis method can examine combinations of various leadership dimensions or constructs to examine a leader as a whole person. Practically, understanding a leadership style that composes of different levels of various leadership constructs may better inform managers and leaders how they could effectively influence subordinates.

This chapter lays out a research agenda in the sociology of work for a type of data and organizational intermediary: work platforms. As an example, the authors employ a case study of the adoption of automated hiring platforms (AHPs) in which the authors distinguish between promises and existing practices. The authors draw on two main methods to do so: critical discourse analysis and affordance critique. The authors collected and examined a mix of trade, popular press, and corporate archives; 135 texts in total. The analysis reveals that work platforms offer five core affordances to management: (1) structured data fields optimized for capture and portability within organizations; (2) increased legibility of activity qua data captured inside and outside the workplace; (3) information asymmetry between labor and management; (4) an “ecosystem” design that supports the development of limited-use applications for specific domains; and (5) the standardization of managerial techniques between workplaces. These combine to create a managerial frame for workers as fungible human capital, available on demand and easily ported between job tasks and organizations. While outlining the origin of platform studies within media and communication studies, the authors demonstrate the specific tools the sociology of work brings to the study of platforms within the workplace. The authors conclude by suggesting avenues for future sociological research not only on hiring platforms, but also on other work platforms such as those supporting automated scheduling and customer relationship management.

Blockchain is often presented as a technological development; however, clearly it is not only that: the ‘Blockchain buzz’ exists in the context of current social and political developments. In this essay, we analyse blockchain technology and its social and political context from a perspective of Marxist economic theory. Since arguably the last great inflection point in society and technology was analysed by Marx in terms of labour and capital and since we seem to be experiencing a shift in the balance between these forces today, it makes sense to revisit the Marxist ideas and apply them to the current situation, to see how well they still apply and if necessary to update them for current events.