PDF Publication Title:
Text from PDF Page: 022
to detect a significant bias in an important algorithm?” (Sandvig et al 2014, 18). The key question remains: “how do we as society want these algorithms to behave” (Sandvig et al 2014, 18)? 1.2.6 Articulation of the algorithm Tarleton Gillespie is one of the few scholars who consider the algorithm from a discourse perspective. His notion on articulations touches upon the discursive articulations that co- constitute the algorithm that I address in this thesis: The articulations offered by the algorithm provider alongside their tool are meant to . . . define their tool within the practices of users, to bestow the tool with a legitimacy that then carries to the information provided and, by proxy, the provider. The careful articulation of an algorithm as impartial (even when that characterization is more obfuscation than explanation) certifies it as a reliable sociotechnical actor, lends its results relevance and credibility, and maintains the provider's apparent neutrality in the face of the millions of evaluations it makes. This articulation of the algorithm is just as crucial to its social life as its material design and its economic obligations. (Gillespie 2014, 179, my emphasis) According to Gillespie, articulations “bestow the tool with . . . legitimacy” and can render it “impartial” (Gillespie 2014, 179): this means that an algorithm is shaped by its surrounding articulations. This articulation happens first in the presentation of the tool, in its deployment within a broader information service. Calling them "results" or "best" or "top stories" or "trends" speaks not only to what the algorithm is actually measuring, but to what it should be understood as measuring. (Gillespie 2014, 180) In this claim, Gillespie touches upon something important: the presentation of the tool, not as something as doing particular things, but as how we perceive it. To illustrate this with an analogy: consider the terms freedom fighters and terrorists. This is an example of words that people generally know are ideologically charged; however, it is more difficult to see the underlying ideology of words if you’re in the middle of it. 1.2.7 How to proceed from here The topic of the algorithm touches upon many discussions and contemporary issues. What most studies share—regardless of what part of the algorithmic network, as I would call it, they studied—are the following points: • The lack of benchmarks. What is fair? When is something considered biased? When are search results relevant, and when not? What is neutrality? • The need for transparency of algorithms, its data, and used criteria for the selection of data. Yet, while scholars find it troubling that algorithms are opaque, they acknowledge that making it transparent may be worse than not giving disclosure of the Google Search Algorithm, since disclosure would probably result in abuse, spam, etc. 22PDF Image | peek into the discursive construction of the Google Search Algorithm: A critical discourse analysis
PDF Search Title:
peek into the discursive construction of the Google Search Algorithm: A critical discourse analysisOriginal File Name Searched:
thesis-google-search-algotithm.pdfDIY PDF Search: Google It | Yahoo | Bing
Cruise Ship Reviews | Luxury Resort | Jet | Yacht | and Travel Tech More Info
Cruising Review Topics and Articles More Info
Software based on Filemaker for the travel industry More Info
The Burgenstock Resort: Reviews on CruisingReview website... More Info
Resort Reviews: World Class resorts... More Info
The Riffelalp Resort: Reviews on CruisingReview website... More Info
| CONTACT TEL: 608-238-6001 Email: greg@cruisingreview.com | RSS | AMP |