Capitalismo de vigilancia, poder de la digitalización y los niños: un análisis del discurso de padres y tutores
Contenido principal del artículo
Resumen
Este estudio tuvo como objetivo analizar las percepciones de padres y tutores sobre el uso de datos sobre los niños por parte de las organizaciones que conforman el llamado capitalismo de vigilancia. Para ello, se desarrolló una encuesta cuali-cuanti, que contó con la participación de 565 encuestados en la parte cuantitativa, de los cuales 107 respondieron una pregunta abierta opcional, correspondiente a la etapa cualitativa, comentando sus percepciones o inquietudes sobre el uso de datos por empresas que se enfocan en la audiencia infantil. Los resultados cuantitativos mostraron que, aun notando un aumento en el volumen de uso de medios y dispositivos digitales por parte de los niños, sus padres y tutores nunca o casi nunca leen los términos de consentimiento. Además, el análisis del discurso de las respuestas a la pregunta abierta, en la parte cualitativa de la investigación, mostró que los participantes guardan silencio sobre la responsabilidad de las organizaciones que conforman el capitalismo de vigilancia. Así, atribuyen a sí mismos, a terceros o a situaciones contextuales las distorsiones en el uso de dispositivos y medios digitales por parte de los niños, así como en la expropiación y explotación de datos por parte de las organizaciones. Para el campo de la administración, los hallazgos representan un avance en las discusiones sobre el lado oscuro de la digitalización, especialmente en Brasil, donde el tema permanece inédito.
Descargas
Métricas
Detalles del artículo
Cadernos EBAPE.BR se compromete a contribuir con la protección de los derechos intelectuales del autor. En ese sentido:
- Adopta la licencia Creative Commoms BY (CC-BY) en todos los textos que publica, excepto cuando hay una indicación de titulares específicos de derechos de autor y derechos de propiedad;
- Adopta software de verificación de similitud de contenido - Plagio (Crossref Similarity Check);
- Adopta acciones para combatir el plagio y la mala conducta ética, alineado con las directrices del Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Más detalles del Código de Ética adoptado por Cadernos EBAPE.BR pueden ser vistos en Normas éticas y Código de conducta.
Citas
Adler, P. S., Forbes, L. C., & Willmott, H. (2007). 3 Critical management studies. Academy of management annals, 1(1), 119-179.
Alaimo, C. (2021, julho). From people to objects: the digital transformation of fields. Organization Studies. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1177/01708406211030654
Baraniuk, C (2016). Call for privacy probes over cayla doll and I-Que Toys. London, UK: British Broadcasting Corporation.
Barwise, P., & Watkins, L. (2018). The evolution of digital dominance. In M. Moore, & D. Tambini (Eds.), Digital dominance: the power of Google, Amazon, Facebook, and Apple (pp. 21-49). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Beaunoyer, E., Dupéré, S., & Guitton, M. J. (2020, outubro). Covid-19 and digital inequalities: reciprocal impacts and mitigation strategies. Computers in Human Behavior, 111, 106424.
Beer, D. (2009). Power through the algorithm? Participatory web cultures and the technological unconscious. New media & society, 11(6), 985-1002.
Belli, L., & Venturini, J. (2016). Private ordering and the rise of terms of service as cyber-regulation. Internet Policy Review, 5(4), 1-17.
Bickman, L., & Rog, D. J. (2008). The Sage handbook of applied social research methods. London, UK: Sage Publications.
Blevins, D. P., & Ragozzino, R. (2019). On social media and the formation of organizational reputation: How social media are increasing cohesion between organizational reputation and traditional media for stakeholders. Academy of Management Review, 44(1), 219-222.
Borzekowski, D. L., & Robinson, T. N. (2001). The 30-second effect: an experiment revealing the impact of television commercials on food preferences of preschoolers. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 101(1), 42-46.
Brito, R., Dias, P., & Oliveira, G. (2018). Young children, digital media and smart toys: How perceptions shape adoption and domestication. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(5), 807-820.
Bryman, A. (2007). Barriers to integrating quantitative and qualitative research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 8-22.
Bucher, E. L., Schou, P. K., & Waldkirch, M. (2021). Pacifying the algorithm–Anticipatory compliance in the face of algorithmic management in the gig economy. Organization, 28(1), 44-67.
Bunderson, J. S., & Reagans, R. E. (2011). Power, status, and learning in organizations. Organization Science, 22(5), 1182-1194.
Burn, A. (2014). Children’s playground games in the new media age. In A. Burn, C. Richards (Eds.), Children’s games in the new media age: childlore, media and the playground (pp. 1-30). New York, NY: Routledge.
Chandler, D., & Fuchs, C. (2019). Digital objects, digital subjects: interdisciplinary perspectives on capitalism, labour and politics in the age of big data. London, UK: University of Westminster Press.
Clegg, S. R., Courpasson, D., & Phillips, N. (2006). Power and organizations. London, UK: Sage.
Collins, C., Ocampo, O., & Paslaski, S. (2020). Billionaire bonanza 2020: wealth windfalls, tumbling taxes, and pandemic profiteers. Washington, DC: Institute for Policy Studies. Recuperado de https://ips-dc.org/billionaire-bonanza-2020/
Constantiou, I. D., & Kallinikos, J. (2015). New games, new rules: big data and the changing context of strategy. Journal of Information Technology, 30(1), 44-57.
Couldry, N., & Mejias, U. A. (2019). The costs of connection: how data is colonizing human life and appropriating it for capitalism. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Creswell, J. W., & Tashakkori, A. (2007). Developing publishable mixed methods Mmnuscripts. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 107-111.
Davenport, T. (2014). Big data at work: dispelling the myths, uncovering the opportunities. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
Duncan, S., & Edwards, R. (1997). Lone mothers and paid work-Rational economic man or gendered moral rationalities? Feminist economics, 3(2), 29-61.
Elliott, J. (2005). Telling better stories? Combining qualitative and quantitative research. In J. Eliott (Ed.). Using Narrative in Social Research-Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches (pp. 171-188). London, UK: Sage.
Elmholdt, K. T., Elmholdt, C., & Haahr, L. (2021). Counting sleep: ambiguity, aspirational control and the politics of digital self-tracking at work. Organization, 28(1), 164-185.
Etter, M., Ravasi, D., & Colleoni, E. (2019). Social media and the formation of organizational reputation. Academy of Management Review, 44(1), 28-52.
Fahey, R. A., & Hino, A. (2020, dezembro). Covid-19, digital privacy, and the social limits on data-focused public health responses. International Journal of Information Management, 55, 102181.
Fairclough, N. (2012). Critical discourse analysis. In J. P. Gee, & M. Handford (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Discourse Analysis. New York, NY: Routledge.
Fleming, P. (2019). Robots and organization studies: why robots might not want to steal your job. Organization Studies, 40(1), 23-38.
Fleming, P., & Spicer, A. (2014). Power in management and organization science. Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 237-298.
Foer, F. (2017). World without mind. New York, NY: Penguin Press.
Franco, D. S., & Ferraz, D. L. D. S. (2019). Uberização do trabalho e acumulação capitalista. Cadernos EBAPE.BR, 17(Especial), 844-856.
Fuchs, C. (2021). Social media: a critical introduction. London, UK: Sage.
Gasser, U., Ienca, M., Scheibner, J., Sleigh, J., & Vayena, E. (2020). Digital tools against covid-19: taxonomy, ethical challenges, and navigation aid. The Lancet Digital Health, 2(8), 425-434.
Gillespie, T. (2018). Custodians of the internet: platforms, content moderation, and the hidden decisions that shape social media. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Harris, M. (2017, dezembro 27). 72M data points collected on children in spite of COPPA. App Developer Magazine. Recuperado de https://appdevelopermagazine.com/72m-data-points-collected-on-children-in-spite-of-coppa/
Haugaard, M., & Clegg, S. R. (2009). Introduction: why power is the central concept of the social sciences. In S. Clegg, & M. Haugaard (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Power. London, UK: Sage.
Holloway, D. (2019). Surveillance capitalism and children’s data: the internet of toys and things for children. Media International Australia, 170(1), 27-36.
Holloway, D., Green, L., & Livingstone, S. (2013). Zero to eight: young children and their internet use. London, UK: EU Kids Online.
Huston, A. C. (2001). Mixed methods in studies of social experiments for parents in poverty: commentary. In Proceedings of the Conference on Discovering Successful Pathways in Children’s Development, Santa Monica, CA.
Iñiguez, L. (2004). Manual de análise do discurso em ciências sociais. Petrópolis, RJ: Vozes.
Kellogg, K. C., Valentine, M. A., & Christin, A. (2020). Algorithms at work: The new contested terrain of control. Academy of Management Annals, 14(1), 366-410.
Kitchin, R. (2014). The data revolution: Big data, open data, data infrastructures and their consequences. London, UK: Sage.
Lei nº 8.069, de 13 de julho de 1990. (1990). Dispõe sobre o Estatuto da Criança e do Adolescente e dá outras providências. Brasília, DF. Recuperado de http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/l8069.htm
Leonardi, P. M., & Treem, J. W. (2020). Behavioral visibility: a new paradigm for organization studies in the age of digitization, digitalization, and datafication. Organization Studies, 41(12), 1601-1625.
Lindgren, S. (2017). Digital media and society. London, UK: Sage.
Lupton, D., & Williamson, B. (2017). The datafied child: the dataveillance of children and implications for their rights. New Media & Society, 19(5), 780-794.
Marsh, J., Mascheroni, G., Carrington, V., Árnadóttir, H., Brito, R., Dias, P., ... Trueltzsch-Wijnen, C. (2017). The online and offline digital literacy practices of young children: a review of the literature. Brussels, Belgium: COST Action
Martinez-Pastor, E., & Núñez, P. (2019). Covert Advertising on IoToys. In G. Mascheroni, & D. Holloway (Eds.), The Internet of toys: Practices, affordances and the political economy of children's smart play (pp. 307-337). London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Mascheroni, G. (2018). Researching datafied children as data citizens. Journal of Children and Media, 12(4), 517-523.
Mascheroni, G., & Holloway, D. (2019). The internet of toys: practices, affordances and the political economy of children's smart play. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Morgade, M., Aliagas, C., & Poveda, D. (2019). Reconceptualizing the home of digital childhood. In M. Morgade, C. Aliagas, & D. Poveda (Eds.), The routledge handbook of digital literacies in early childhood. London, UK: Routledge.
Morozov, E. (2018). Big tech. São Paulo, SP: Ubu Editora.
Mosco, V. (2017). Becoming digital: toward a post-internet society. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing.
Nyst, C. (2018). Children and digital marketing: rights risks and responsibilities (Discussion Paper). Geneva, Switzerland: Unicef. Recuperado de https://sites.unicef.org/csr/css/Children_and_Digital_Marketing_-_Rights_Risks_and_Responsibilities.pdf
O’Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of math destruction: how big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. New York, NY: Broadway Books.
Obar, J. A., & Oeldorf-Hirsch, A. (2018, julho). The clickwrap: a political economic mechanism for manufacturing consent on social media. Social Media + Society. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118784770
Orlandi, E. P. (2007a). As formas do silêncio: no movimento dos sentidos. Campinas, SP: Editora da Unicamp.
Orlandi, E. P. (2007b). Análise de discurso: princípios e procedimentos (9a ed.). Campinas, SP: Pontes.
Pallant, J. (2013). SPSS survival manual: a step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS (4a ed.). Crows Nest, IN: Allen & Unwin.
Pansardi, P. (2012). Power to and power over: two distinct concepts of power? Journal of Political Power, 5(1), 73-89.
Perrow, C. (1991). A society of organizations. Theory and Society, 20(6), 725-762.
Poell, T., Nieborg, D., & Van Dijck, J. (2019). Platformisation. Internet Policy Review, 8(4), 1-13.
Rideout, V. (2017). The common sense census: media use by kids age zero to eight. San Francisco, CA: Common Sense Media.
Ruckenstein, M., & Granroth, J. (2020). Algorithms, advertising and the intimacy of surveillance. Journal of Cultural Economy, 13(1), 12-24.
Scantlin, R. (2008). Media use across childhood: access, time, and content. In S. L. Calvert, & B. J. Wilson (Eds.), The Handbook of Children, Media, and Development (pp. 51-73). West Sussex, UK: Blackwell Pub.
Schwarzkopf, S. (2020). Sacred excess: organizational ignorance in an age of toxic data. Organization Studies, 41(2), 197-217.
Shah, N. (2019). Interface. In T. Beyes, R. Holt, & C. Pias (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of media, technology, and organization studies. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Srnicek, N. (2017). Platform capitalism. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. New York, NY: Sage Publications.
Tashakkori, A., Johnson, R. B., & Teddlie, C. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research: integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. New York, NY: Sage Publications.
Thompson, J. D. (1956). Authority and power in" identical" organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 62(3), 290-301.
Trittin-Ulbrich, H., Scherer, A. G., Munro, I., & Whelan, G. (2021). Exploring the dark and unexpected sides of digitalization: toward a critical agenda. Organization, 28(1), 8-25.
Van Dijck, J. (2013). The culture of connectivity: a critical history of social media. London, UK: Oxford University Press.
Van Dijk, T. A. (2004). Cognição, discurso e interação. São Paulo, SP: Contexto.
Van Dijk, T. A. (2015). Critical discourse analysis. In D. Tannen, H. E. Hamilton, & D. Sciffrin (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis (2a ed., pp. 466-485). West Sussex, UK: Wiley Blackwell.
Van Dijk, T. A., & Coelho, M. Z. P. (2005). Discurso, notícia e ideologia: estudos na análise crítica do discurso. Braga, Portugal: Edições Humus Ltda.
Venturini, J., Louzada, L., Maciel, M. F., Zingales, N., Stylianou, K., & Belli, L. (2016). Terms of service and human rights: an analysis of online platform contracts. Rio de Janeiro, RJ: Revan.
Vianna, F. R. P. M., & Meneghetti, F. K. (2020). Is it crowdsourcing or crowdsensing? An analysis of human participation in digital platforms in the age of surveillance capitalism. Revista Eletrônica de Administração, 26(1), 176-209.
Walker, M., Fleming, P., & Berti, M. (2021). ‘You can’t pick up a phone and talk to someone’: How algorithms function as biopower in the gig economy. Organization, 28(1), 26-43.
Wartella, E., & Robb, M. (2008). Historical and recurring concerns about children’s use of the mass media. In S. L. Calvert, & B. J. Wilson (Eds.), The Handbook of Children, Media, and Development (pp. 7-26). West Sussex, UK: Blackwell Pub.
Weber, M. (1999). Economia e sociedade. Brasília, DF: Editora UnB.
Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: the fight for a human future at the new frontier of power: Barack Obama’s books of 2019. London, UK: Profile Books.