To cite this page | Internet Policy Review

APA

in 't Veld, S. (2017). On democracy. Internet Policy Review, 6(4). https://doi.org/10.14763/2017.4.779

American Psychological Association. For more info, see https://www.apastyle.org

Chicago

in 't Veld, Sophie. 2017. "On democracy". Internet Policy Review 6 (4). DOI: 10.14763/2017.4.779. https://policyreview.info/articles/analysis/democracy.

Chicago Referencing Style. For more info, see https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org

Harvard

in 't Veld, Sophie (2017). On democracy. Internet Policy Review,[online] 6(4). Available at: https://policyreview.info/articles/analysis/democracy [Accessed: 4 Sep. 2026].

Harvard Referencing Style

MLA

in 't Veld, Sophie. "On democracy". Internet Policy Review 6.4 (2017). Web. 4 Sep. 2026.

Modern Language Association, 7th Ed. For more info, see https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/mla_style/index.html

Vancouver

in 't Veld S. On democracy. Internet Policy Review [Internet]. 2017 [4 September 2026];6(4). Available from: https://policyreview.info/articles/analysis/democracy

Vancouver Style. For more info, see https://library.vcc.ca/media/vcc-library/content-assets/documents/VancouverStyleGuide.pdf

Under-16 social media bans may seem like a reasonable response that forestalls consequences, but, in ways we have yet to appreciate, they may prove a strategic blunder, serving the best interests of the very tech companies they seek to counter.

Commons

AI as commons: Why we need community-controlled Artificial Intelligence

Vasilis Kostakis, Tallinn University of Technology (TalTech)
Aristotle Tympas, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens

PUBLISHED ON: 8 Dec 2025

AI development is concentrated in corporate hands, but community-controlled alternatives ‒ open, efficient, and democratically governed ‒ are already proving viable.

This article explores some conditions and possibilities for public contestability in AI governance; a critical attribute of governance arrangements designed to align AI deployment with the public interest.

KEYWORDS: Artificial intelligence, AI governance, Democracy, Public contestability, Public interest

Over the past fifty years, surveillance practices once considered untenable due to their incompatibility with democratic rights and values have been rebranded as tolerable, neutral, or even desirable.

KEYWORDS: Profiling, Surveillance, Digitalisation, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Democracy

Internet freedom rankings are a comparative tool that serves as an evaluative shorthand in decision-making contexts internationally. Understanding their aims and how they define internet freedom, as well as the power relationships within the ranking ecosystem, can reveal a lot about their politics – and their limits.

KEYWORDS: Rankings, Digital rights, Framing, Internet freedom, Democracy

Internet Policy Review is an open access and peer-reviewed journal on internet regulation.

Scholars, regulators, journalists, activists, and other stakeholders publish in the journal in a variety of formats

Research articles: In-depth scholarly research papers and essays
Concepts: Critical reflections on emerging core concepts of the digital society
Editorials: Contextual or thematic introductions to special issues
Essays: Free-form yet in-depth contentions with issues of academic or social relevance
News: Journalistic reports on events of interest to the Internet Policy Review community
Opinions: Opinion pieces commenting on developments in the realm of internet policy
Open Abstract: Extended abstracts for works in progress that receive public peer review

Published by

Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society Center for Advanced Internet Studies in cooperation with additional partners

Special issue on the topic of
Inclusive by design? Participatory governance and the future of digital public spaces

Full call here

Additional indexing