Exposure Diversity as a New Cultural Policy Objective in the Digital Age

Diversity has been conceptualized as a key objective of national and international cultural policies. The 2005 UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions is a clear proof of this. The UNESCO Convention is a culmination of the efforts of the international community to secure regulatory space for domestic policy-makers in the field of culture, on the one hand. On the other hand, it goes beyond this and the inherent trade versus culture, international versus culture contestations and tries to promote diversity as a matter of global law and policy. One flaw of the Convention that has been rarely thematized is that in this endeavour, the primary focus has been placed upon analogue means of communication. This flaw of the Convention is natural rather than triggered by political economy contexts, and has to do with the conventional evolution of law and its tendency to lag behind technological advances. Indeed, this ‘error’ flows from the similar ‘errors’ made at the national level in formulating and implementing cultural policy tool kits for the protection and promotion of diversity. This chapter argues that a peculiar characteristic of all these policies has been the almost concentration on the diversity of supply – that is, on the availability of diverse formats, outlets, media owners, etc. The chapter casts some doubt upon the both the viability as well as the efficiency of such policies in the digital age. It will on the one hand question the underlying presumption for a causal link between source diversity, diversity of content, and the actual consumed diverse content. On the other hand, it should be underscored that the chapter is not intended to criticize past and existing policies. Learning from past mistakes, it is rather meant to serve as a forward-looking analysis of the possibilities offered by digital technologies and how these can be best utilized to ensure exposure diversity – that is, a palette of diverse contents, as actually consumed by users. The chapter argue argue that although the balance between state intervention and non-intervention in the digital media certainly is precarious and individual rights are to be safeguarded, there may be subtle ways of intervening and promoting exposure diversity, such as for instance by fostering serendipity or facilitating exposure. It will explore a number of tools as potentially more efficient instruments of cultural policy aimed at diversity.

[1]  Mira Burri Cultural Diversity as a Concept of Global Law: Origins, Evolution and Prospects , 2010 .

[2]  C. Sunstein Republic.com 2.0 , 2007 .

[3]  Mira Burri The UNESCO Convention on Cultural Diversity: An Appraisal Five Years after Its Entry into Force , 2013, International Journal of Cultural Property.

[4]  M. Wendy Hennequin,et al.  The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It , 2011 .

[5]  C. B. Graber,et al.  Trade Liberalization and Cultural Policy , 2000 .

[6]  N. Helberger Exposure Diversity as a Policy Goal , 2012 .

[7]  Jonathan Cave,et al.  Trends in connectivity technologies and their socioeconomic impacts , 2009 .

[8]  D. Gervais The Regulation of Inchoate Technologies , 2010 .

[9]  Chicago Unbound Libertarian Paternalism Is Not an Oxymoron , 2003 .

[10]  Mira Burri,et al.  Controlling New Media (without the Law) , 2011 .

[11]  Eli Pariser The Filter Bubble: How the New Personalized Web Is Changing What We Read and How We Think , 2012 .

[12]  David Hendy Public Service Broadcasting , 2013 .

[13]  Bart Cammaerts,et al.  Critiques on the participatory potentials of Web 2.0 , 2008 .

[14]  Yu Jeffrey Hu,et al.  From Niches to Riches: Anatomy of the Long Tail , 2006 .

[15]  Jan van Cuilenburg,et al.  Towards a New Communications Policy Paradigm , 2010 .

[16]  Cass R. Sunstein,et al.  Television and the Public Interest , 2000 .

[17]  Mira Burri,et al.  Misunderstanding Creativity: User Created Content in Virtual Worlds and its Constraints by Code and Law , 2009 .

[18]  Natali Helberger,et al.  Diversity by Design , 2011 .

[19]  Helen Nissenbaum,et al.  Shaping the Web: Why the Politics of Search Engines Matters , 2000, Inf. Soc..

[20]  P. Valcke Looking For the User in Media Pluralism Regulation: Unraveling the Traditional Diversity Chain and Recent Trends of User Empowerment in European Media Regulation , 2011, Journal of Information Policy.

[21]  Mira Burri,et al.  Cultural Protectionism 2.0: Updating Cultural Policy Tools for the Digital Age , 2012 .

[22]  R. Coase British Broadcasting: A Study in Monopoly , 1950 .

[23]  Mira Burri,et al.  Trade and Culture in International Law: Paths to (Re)Conciliation , 2009 .

[24]  Peter Dahlgren The Internet, Public Spheres, and Political Communication: Dispersion and Deliberation , 2005 .

[25]  Lawrence Lessig,et al.  Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace , 1999 .

[26]  Jennifer Todd,et al.  IISSSSCC DD IISSCCUUSSSSIIOONN PP AAPPEERR SS EERRIIEESS T HE R OOTS OF I NTENSE E THNIC C ONFLICT MAY NOT IN FACT BE E THNIC :C ATEGORIES , C OMMUNITIES AND P ATH D EPENDENCE Joseph , 2017 .

[27]  Klaus Schoenbach,et al.  ‘The own in the foreign’: reliable surprise - an important function of the media? , 2007 .

[28]  D. Weinberger Everything Is Miscellaneous: The Power of the New Digital Disorder , 2007 .

[29]  J. P. Singh Negotiation and the Global Information Economy: Services and intellectual property: multilateral framework negotiations , 2008 .

[30]  Tim Wu,et al.  Network Neutrality, Broadband Discrimination , 2003, J. Telecommun. High Technol. Law.

[31]  Ellen P. Goodman Media Policy Out of the Box: Content Abundance, Attention Scarcity, and the Failures of Digital Markets , 2004 .

[32]  Mark A. Lemley Is the Sky Falling on the Content Industries? , 2010, J. Telecommun. High Technol. Law.

[33]  Lawrence Lessig,et al.  Code - version 2.0 , 2006 .

[34]  Christoph Lutz,et al.  Public Service Media in the Digital Age| Diversity by Choice: Applying a Social Cognitive Perspective to the Role of Public Service Media in the Digital Age , 2015 .

[35]  James Grimmelmann,et al.  The Structure of Search Engine Law , 2007 .

[36]  M. Hindman The Myth of Digital Democracy , 2008 .

[37]  Natali Helberger,et al.  Diversity Label: Exploring the Potential and Limits of a Transparency Approach to Media Diversity , 2011, Journal of Information Policy.

[38]  Hannibal Travis The Future According to Google: Technology Policy from the Standpoint of America's Fastest-Growing Technology Company , 2009 .

[39]  N. Simpson Selling Hollywood to the World: U.S. and European Struggles for Mastery of the Global Film Industry , 2005 .

[40]  Thomas B. Ksiazek,et al.  The Dynamics of Audience Fragmentation: Public Attention in an Age of Digital Media , 2012 .

[41]  Ellen P. Goodman,et al.  Modeling Policy for New Public Service Media Networks , 2010 .

[42]  Erik Brynjolfsson,et al.  Goodbye Pareto Principle, Hello Long Tail: The Effect of Search Costs on the Concentration of Product Sales , 2011, Manag. Sci..

[43]  Natascha Just,et al.  Governance of algorithms: options and limitations , 2015 .

[44]  Y. Benkler,et al.  The Wealth of Networks , 2008 .

[45]  Mira Burri The New Audiovisual Media Services Directive: Television without Frontiers, Television without Cultural Diversity , 2007 .