Platform Logic: An Interdisciplinary Approach to the Platform-Based Economy

Digital platforms are not just software-based media, they are governing systems that control, interact, and accumulate. They also solidify markets; that is, social networks of exchange that do not necessarily leave data traces, into infrastructure, that is, material arrangements of traceable activity. This article examines the forms of domination found in this digital platform model, and corrects some existing simplistic theoretical conclusions about digital platforms. It first provides a schematic overview of digital infrastructures of governance, and the attendant systemic mechanics they engender. It then argues that we need a more syncretic, interdisciplinary approach to the platform-based economy. The shifting emphases of different academic disciplines in relation to digital platforms are only partially grounded in their different normative biases; they can also be attributed to use of different disciplinary lenses. The field of information systems management and design studies is chiefly concerned with direct, technical interplatform affordances and connections, and with providing observations of certain systemic attributes of digital platforms. Critical political economy, by contrast, mainly considers the emerging transnational, geopolitical formations of platform capitalism. The interplay between these different systemic mechanics is summarized and presented here in the concept of “platform logic.”

[1]  Benjamin Edelman,et al.  Efficiencies and Regulatory Shortcuts: How Should We Regulate Companies like Airbnb and Uber? , 2015 .

[2]  A. Rodway The Craft of Criticism , 2018 .

[3]  J. Dijck,et al.  The Platform Society: Public Values in a Connective World , 2018 .

[4]  Anne Helmond,et al.  The Platformization of the Web: Making Web Data Platform Ready , 2015 .

[5]  Youngjin Yoo,et al.  Distributed Tuning of Boundary Resources: The Case of Apple's iOS Service System , 2015, MIS Q..

[6]  MaryAnne M. Gobble,et al.  Regulating Innovation in the New Economy , 2015 .

[7]  Stefan Larsson,et al.  The Liability of Politicalness: Legitimacy and Legality in Piracy-proximate Entrepreneurship , 2014 .

[8]  J. V. van Dijck,et al.  Understanding Social Media Logic , 2013 .

[9]  D. Boyd,et al.  CRITICAL QUESTIONS FOR BIG DATA , 2012 .

[10]  MaryAnne M. Gobble How Government Innovates , 2016 .

[11]  Benjamin Peters,et al.  Digital Keywords: A Vocabulary of Information Society and Culture , 2016 .

[12]  Julian Wright,et al.  Exclusive Dealing with Network Effects , 2010 .

[13]  Benjamin I. Page,et al.  Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens , 2014, Perspectives on Politics.

[14]  Christian Sandvig,et al.  Infrastructure studies meet platform studies in the age of Google and Facebook , 2018, New Media Soc..

[15]  Julie E. Cohen The regulatory state in the information age , 2016, Between Truth and Power.

[16]  J. Dijck,et al.  The Platform Society , 2018, Oxford Scholarship Online.

[17]  J. Rochet,et al.  Two-sided markets: a progress report , 2006 .

[18]  Tarleton Gillespie,et al.  The politics of ‘platforms’ , 2010, New Media Soc..

[19]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Organizing for Innovation in the Digitized World , 2012, Organ. Sci..

[20]  Tim Jordan,et al.  INFORMATION AS POLITICS , 2013 .

[21]  Youngjin Yoo,et al.  The Tables Have Turned: How Can the Information Systems Field Contribute to Technology and Innovation Management Research? , 2013, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[22]  J. Dijck Datafication, dataism and dataveillance: Big Data between scientific paradigm and ideology , 2014 .

[23]  J. Rochet,et al.  Platform competition in two sided markets , 2003 .

[24]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Research Commentary - Digital Infrastructures: The Missing IS Research Agenda , 2010, Inf. Syst. Res..