Advanced

Google as a political subject : the right to be forgotten debate 2014-2016

Lindsköld, Linnéa LU (2018) In Online Information Review 42(6). p.768-783
Abstract
Purpose
The aim of the study is to create knowledge on how Google and Google search are discursively constructed as a political subject suitable or not suitable for governing in the debate regarding the Right to be Forgotten ruling (RTBF).

Design/Methodology/Approach
28 texts are analysed using a Foucauldian discourse analysis focusing on political problematisations in the media and in blogs.

Findings
Google is conceptualised as a commercial company, a neutral facilitator of the world and as a judge of character. The discourse makes visible Google’s power over knowledge production. The individual being searched is constructed as a political object that is either guilty or innocent, invoking morality as a... (More)
Purpose
The aim of the study is to create knowledge on how Google and Google search are discursively constructed as a political subject suitable or not suitable for governing in the debate regarding the Right to be Forgotten ruling (RTBF).

Design/Methodology/Approach
28 texts are analysed using a Foucauldian discourse analysis focusing on political problematisations in the media and in blogs.

Findings
Google is conceptualised as a commercial company, a neutral facilitator of the world and as a judge of character. The discourse makes visible Google’s power over knowledge production. The individual being searched is constructed as a political object that is either guilty or innocent, invoking morality as a part of the policy. The ruling is framed as giving individuals power over companies, but the power still lies within Google’s technical framework.

Originality/value
The ruling opens up an empirical possibility to critically examine Google. The value of the study is the combination of focus on Google as a political subject and the individual being searched to understand how Google is constructed in the discourse. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
Online Information Review
volume
42
issue
6
pages
768 - 783
publisher
Emerald Group Publishing Limited
external identifiers
  • scopus:85053264343
ISSN
1468-4527
DOI
10.1108/OIR-06-2017-0198
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
10474dac-87b6-4313-9589-88970f7ecf28
date added to LUP
2018-03-23 09:04:34
date last changed
2019-02-20 11:11:37
@article{10474dac-87b6-4313-9589-88970f7ecf28,
  abstract     = {Purpose<br/>The aim of the study is to create knowledge on how Google and Google search are discursively constructed as a political subject suitable or not suitable for governing in the debate regarding the Right to be Forgotten ruling (RTBF). <br/> <br/>Design/Methodology/Approach<br/>28 texts are analysed using a Foucauldian discourse analysis focusing on political problematisations in the media and in blogs. <br/> <br/>Findings<br/>Google is conceptualised as a commercial company, a neutral facilitator of the world and as a judge of character. The discourse makes visible Google’s power over knowledge production. The individual being searched is constructed as a political object that is either guilty or innocent, invoking morality as a part of the policy. The ruling is framed as giving individuals power over companies, but the power still lies within Google’s technical framework.<br/><br/>Originality/value<br/>The ruling opens up an empirical possibility to critically examine Google. The value of the study is the combination of focus on Google as a political subject and the individual being searched to understand how Google is constructed in the discourse. },
  author       = {Lindsköld, Linnéa},
  issn         = {1468-4527},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {6},
  pages        = {768--783},
  publisher    = {Emerald Group Publishing Limited},
  series       = {Online Information Review},
  title        = {Google as a political subject : the right to be forgotten debate 2014-2016},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/OIR-06-2017-0198},
  volume       = {42},
  year         = {2018},
}