Marijn gave a lecture at Spui25 about his research on mhealth apps. He discussed the subtle merging of health and commerce in mhealth apps and the discourse on health that enables this commercialization of health.
Our Commerce team (Sophie Boerman, Sanne Kruikemeier and Frederik Zuiderveen Borgesius) just published an article in the Literature Review Corner of Journal of Advertising about Online Behavioral Advertising. In their article, they provide an overview of the empirical, academic research regarding OBA. For example, they discuss consumers’ privacy concerns, the effects of OBA on purchases and click through rates, and whether transparency approaches help consumers understand the practice (they don’t).
Advertisers are increasingly monitoring people’s online behavior and using the information collected to show people individually targeted advertisements. This phenomenon is called online behavioral advertising (OBA). Although advertisers can benefit from OBA, the practice also raises concerns about privacy. Therefore, OBA has received much attention from advertisers, consumers, policymakers, and scholars. Despite this attention, there is neither a strong definition of OBA nor a clear accumulation of empirical findings. This article defines OBA and provides an overview of the empirical findings by developing a framework that identifies and integrates all factors that can explain consumer responses toward OBA. The framework suggests that the outcomes of OBA are dependent on advertiser-controlled factors (e.g., the level of personalization) and consumer-controlled factors (e.g., knowledge and perceptions about OBA and individual characteristics). The article also overviews the theoretical positioning of OBA by placing the theories that are used to explain consumers’ responses to OBA in our framework. Finally, we develop a research agenda and discuss implications for policymakers and advertisers.
You can find the article here: (Open Access)
Under the aegis of the Personalized Communication Research Priority Area of the University of Amsterdam, the Institute for Information Law, and the Amsterdam School of Communication Research organize a one day symposium on the theory and practice of political micro-targeting. The symposium discusses papers submitted to the upcoming special issue of the Internet Policy Review on the topic.
Date: Friday, 22 September 2017
The Huibregtsen award exists since 2005 and is awarded to research projects that succeed in combining academic excellence with societally relevant research. The price will be awarded at the Avond van de Wetenschap on 9 October.
The report of the jury (in Dutch) can be found here.
Avond van Wetenschap en Maatschappij
On Thursday January 26, there will be a preconference about Personalized Communication organized by members of our team.
The preconference aims to contribute to the debate regarding personalized communication, by bringing together researchers from the Netherlands and Belgium that study personalized communication. By assembling these researchers, we aim to discuss research that addresses all fields of personalized communication, including journalism, political communication, advertising, health communication. By discussing our research, we aim to identify ongoing research regarding personalized communication, and address theoretical, methodological, and ethical issues related to this research. For instance, we want to detect where there may be theoretical and methodological differences and overlap and stimulate a discussion about these theories and methods. In addition, we hope to discuss shared research ideas, inspire researchers, and bring about new research collaborations.
Interested? You are very welcome to join the preconference!
Who: All researchers interested in personalized communication and that are going to Etmaal 2017
When: Thursday January 26, 10:15-11:15
Where: Tilburg University, Dante building, DZ6
More information: https://etmaal2017.nl/preconferences/
This paper aims to shed light on the impact of personalized news media on the shared issue agenda that provides democracies with a set of topics that structure the public debate. The advent of personalized news media that use smart algorithms to tailor the news offer to the user challenges the established way of setting the agenda of such a common core of issues.
This paper tests the effects of personalized news use on perceived importance of these issues in the common core. In particular, the authors study whether personalized news use leads to a concentration at the top of the issue agenda or to a more diverse issue agenda with a long tail of topics.
Based on a cross-sectional survey of a representative population sample (n = 1,556), we find that personalized news use does not lead to a small common core in which few topics are discussed extensively, yet there is a relationship between personalized news use and a preference for less discussed topics. This is a result of a specific user profile of personalized news users: younger, more educated news users are more interested in topics at the fringes of the common core and also make more use of personalized news offers. The results are discussed in the light of media diversity and recent advances in public sphere research.
This paper contributes to the ongoing debate about algorithmic news dissemination. While, currently, much attention is reserved for the role of platforms as information gatekeepers in relationship to the news media, maybe their ability to enable or hinder the audience in discovering and distributing news content is part of what really characterizes their influence on the market place of ideas.
Natali Helberger and Marijn Sax from Personalised Communication will enter into debate with the makers of a documentary about how Big Data, algorithms and persuasive strategies are used to influence our behavior as voters, consumers, readers and citizens. What are the implications of data-driven persuasion strategies on our autonomy, attention and even our political choices? What does it mean that major internet companies know more about us than we do? What goals do data-driven persuasion strategies serve? And what is the role of the law, regulation and governments? Do we need a code of algorithmic ethics? The debate is organized by the Dutch public broadcaster VPRO, and part of the successful Tegenlicht Meet Up series. It takes place on 28 September from 2000 onwards in Pakhuis de Zwijger in Amsterdam. The debate (in Dutch) can also be followed via life stream. Entrance is free, registration needed.
On 30 June, Frederik is one of the speakers at an event organized by Dutch political party D66, in Amsterdam. The event concerns privacy in the 21st century.
This Thursday, 26 May, Frederik will be speaking at an event organised by the Dutch Section of the International Commission of Jurists: “Big Data, Big Responsibility”. Other speakers are Mr. Bart van der Sloot (IViR), Mr. Merel Koning (Pl.Lab), and Mr. Vincent Böhre (Privacy First).
The presentations and discussion will be in Dutch. More information here: http://njcm.nl/site/events/show/198