Gatekeeping: A critical review

Toward a theory of network gatekeeping: A framework for exploring information control

Abstract Gatekeeping theories have been a popular heuristic for describing information control for years, but none have attained a full theoretical status in the context of networks. This article aims to propose a theory of network gatekeeping comprised of two components: identification and salience . Network gatekeeping identification lays out vocabulary and naming foundations through the identification of gatekeepers, gatekeeping, and gatekeeping mechanisms. Network gatekeeping salience , which is built on the bases of the network identification theory, utilizes this infrastructure to understand relationships among gatekeepers and between gatekeepers and gated, the entity subjected to a gatekeeping process. Network gatekeeping salience 1 Salience refers to the degree to which gatekeepers give priority to competing gated claims. proposes identifying gated and their salience to gatekeepers by four attributes: (a) their political power in relation to the gatekeeper, (b) their information production ability , (c) their relationship with the gatekeeper, and (d) their alternatives in the context of gatekeeping.

Loss of Oversight: How AI systems may become harder to audit, monitor, and investigate

The safety of advanced AI systems increasingly depends on the ability to oversee them: to audit models for concerning behaviours before deployment, monitor their activity during operation, and investigate incidents after they occur. This report maps the landscape of AI oversight and assesses how it is likely to change. Drawing on 25 expert interviews across frontier AI developers, government, NGOs, and academia, together with a literature review and internal analysis, we examine five sources of oversight signal: model behaviour, chain-of-thought reasoning, internals activations and circuits, memory architectures, and honesty training. For each source, we identify the properties that current oversight relies on, the pathways by which these properties could degrade, and the technical levers available to preserve them. Our central finding is that literature and expert opinion support the conclusion that current oversight rests on foundations that are likely to erode, absent effective intervention. We recommend that developers track and report shifts in oversight-relevant properties, preserve oversight affordances by design, and invest in emerging oversight techniques as fallbacks against continued degradation of current methods.

This machine kills secrets: how WikiLeakers, cypherpunks and hacktivists aim to free the world's information

The barbarians aren't at the gates. They're inside. Thi…

So maybe now we can agree that having an unchecked research integrity militia who unfortunately has the ear of the press and increasingly that of the the publishers, but who fiercely rejects any… | Ioana A. Cristea

So maybe now we can agree that having an unchecked research integrity militia who unfortunately has the ear of the press and increasingly that of the the publishers, but who fiercely rejects any minimal ethics or code of conduct, is a (growing) problem? Also, that 1. problems have to be investigated before deciding they are are legitimate and serious; 2. this investigation is not social media, blogs and the press; 3. this investigation should not be on the front page of journals and Retraction Watch; 4. there are degrees of seriousness and some things can just be corrected or are simply not very consequential (no, it's not a house of bricks where we have to check every brick, that's a dumb analogy), so being absolutely hysterical and overdramatic about any lie, inaccuracy or mistake is purposeful at worse and should be ignored at best and 5. it is not only unnecessary, but harmful, to also go into other, non-academic things the person did or does to complete "investigations" that you (press, sleuth, blogger, etc) do not have the tools and information to do completely and accurately (this fixation would be called harassment in the before times). Others will justly write about what the institutions did or did not do, but what I want to say is that we really should end it with the blank credit we give to any and all allegations that come from the establish research integrity truth fighters.

The New Control Society

The gatekeepers are dying. Why is everything so mid?

Four Functional Quadrants for Trust & Safety Tools: Detection, Investigation, Review & Enforcement (DIRE) <div> <br> </div>

Public discourse and regulatory debates about online trust and safety have long been dominated by a focus on rules, not tools: preoccupied mostly by the questio

Paranoia: A Beginner's Guide — LessWrong

People sometimes make mistakes. (Citation Needed) …

When Nature Calls: The Enshittification of Science and Its Enablers

Proof-of-work papers, policy laundering, and the collapse of self-correction

The review mills, not just (self-)plagiarism in review reports, but a step further

Review mills sum up a new category of reviewer misconduct that flies in the face of reviewer ethics and integrity. A pattern of generic, vague, and repeated affirmations (identical or very similar boilerplate phrasing) is noted in the analysis of 263 review reports, regardless of the scientific content of the papers under review, coupled with coercive citation (perhaps among the main reasons for such behavior), which when combined produce fake reviews. The misconduct associated with review mills is unlike mere plagiarism (self-plagiarism) of reviewer comments. It is important to quantify the problem and to take urgent measures: (a) to identify the review millers; (b) to rectify the published literature; and (c) to determine procedures for journals and publishers on procedures to counter this new type of misconduct.

Recently I’ve been thinking a lot about this 2015 observatio...

Recently I’ve been thinking a lot about this 2015 observation on Tumblr about the dangerous conflation of respect of personhood and the respect of authority.

Q&A: Robin Berjon on freeing journalists' feeds.

The AT protocol and “long-term, lifelong, sustainable protection against enshittification.”

Trust & Safety Library - Trust & Safety Professional Association

Welcome to the Trust & Safety Library! We use this space to collect articles, blog posts, journal articles, lectures, podcasts, and websites that trust and safety professionals may find useful in developing policies, supporting moderators, building systems to detect violations, and generally deepening their practice. We welcome your submissions and feedback. This project was initially

Why the Gates Foundation Abandoned Article Processing Charges (and What They’re Doing Instead)

In 2024, the Gates Foundation updated their Open Access Policy to redirect funds from APCs to support more equitable models. Ashley Farley explains their thinking and vision for the future.