Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 24 - The Debate

  • from Part V - Internet Balancing Formula
  • Mart Susi, Tallinn University
  • Book:
    The Non-Coherence Theory of Digital Human Rights
    Published online:
    22 February 2024
    Print publication:
    29 February 2024, pp 286-292

  • Summary

    The academic debate which emerged after the first introduction of the IBF concerns either directly the formula, or matters closely connected to the balancing of conflicting rights by private online portals. The article reviews some positions and offers alternative views. In general, capabilities variance leads to an image of weakened or absent legitimacy of online content assessment only through the lens of the offline assessment framework, that is, when one wishes to ask the same questions and apply similar tools towards both domains. Legitimacy in the online domain may, however, originate from enforced consent, or it may have a default and undefined origin, which may lead to questioning the suitability of the legitimacy language online and its overall scope.