{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"1d3bd28e-c1ba-4af2-8580-60b32ef26053","title":"If...Then Algorithmic Power and Politics","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"2017054909","requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"1d3bd28e-c1ba-4af2-8580-60b32ef26053","id":"1d3bd28e-c1ba-4af2-8580-60b32ef26053","uuid":"1d3bd28e-c1ba-4af2-8580-60b32ef26053","title":"If...Then Algorithmic Power and Politics","normalized_title":"ifthenalgorithmicpowerandpolitics","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"2017054909","isbns":["2017054909","9780190493042","9780190493059"],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":211,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/1d3bd28e-c1ba-4af2-8580-60b32ef26053","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/If...Then%20Algorithmic%20Power%20and%20Politics","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/1d3bd28e-c1ba-4af2-8580-60b32ef26053/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/1d3bd28e-c1ba-4af2-8580-60b32ef26053/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/1d3bd28e-c1ba-4af2-8580-60b32ef26053","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/1d3bd28e-c1ba-4af2-8580-60b32ef26053/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/1d3bd28e-c1ba-4af2-8580-60b32ef26053/search"},"page":{"printed_page":140,"pdf_page":150,"physical_index":150,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"423568fabda6201d1d9c9497d294a3755a1e381e0e4dd24811bfbb256d7e5fce"},"chapter":"IF...THEN","content":"Jyllandsposten, says it has been “absolutely fantastic to discover the strength in having something 100% algorithmically controlled,” he was quick to point out the danger of compromising the public ideal of journalism by creating filter bubbles. Similarly, Møller says that filter bubbles are exactly what they want to avoid. The question for many of the news organizations is how to solve this conundrum. On one hand, there is an increasing need to cater to the specific interests of individual readers. On the other hand, as Møller contends, “If everything were based on algorithms, we would be worried that you were missing some of the other things we would like to tell you about” (Interview 5, March 2014).\n\nThere is a general wariness among editors and managers of granting too much agency to algorithms. What really maters is how algorithms can be used to augment and support journalists in accomplishing their work. Jørgen Frøland, project manager for personalization at Polaris Media and developer of the algorithm at iTromsø thinks that much of the fear and concern surrounding algorithms stems from the fact that many people still do not understand what they really are. In most instances, Frøland points out, “algorithms are just plain stupid” (Interview 19, August 2016). It is not an either/or but a mater of using technology for the things that technology does well and people for what they know best. For example, Frøland adds, algorithms cannot make decisions based on common sense. For Ingeborg Volan (who works in the Polaris Media–owned regional newspaper Adresseavisen) the relative dumbness of algorithms means that their role in journalism should not be considered too problematic. She draws on a familiar argument voiced in debates about robot journalism: the algorithm is not as a threat to the job security of journalists but something that has the potential to make the job more exciting by “relieving journalists of some of their most tedious tasks” (Interview 4, August 2016). Because “good journalism is about asking critical questions, being able to judge the trustworthiness of sources, and to go out into the world and talk to people,” Volan does not think that algorithms pose a very serious threat to the journalistic profession.\n\nThe words people choose to talk about algorithms mater. Ola Henriksson, web editor and project manager at Sweden’s national newspaper Svenska Dagbladet, thinks that the word “algorithm” is too confusing and abstract. When I ask what the word “algorithm” means to him, he says “mathematics” and “calculations” (Interview 18, June 2016). However, this is not what journalism is really about, he says, suggesting that the term itself may do more harm than good. The Schibsted-owned Svenska Dagbladet became the first newspaper to implement the algorithmic infrastructure and valuation practices developed by Omni. Rather than talking about an algorithm, the Omni-inspired approach became more widely known as an “editor-controlled algorithm.” I asked Henriksson whether he thinks calling it editor-controlled makes a diference. “Yes, for some, it actually seemed to make a diference,” he replied. The notion of “editor-control” helped ease people’s minds, and ensure them that they would still play an important role, despite the emergence of an algorithmic media landscape.\n\n140\n\nI F . . . T H E N","previous_page":139,"next_page":141}