The connected citizen—
A disruptive concept informing ACMAperspectives
Occasional paper
February 2016
Canberra
Red Building
Benjamin Offices
Chan Street
Belconnen ACT
PO Box 78
Belconnen ACT 2616
T+61 2 6219 5555
F+61 2 6219 5353
Melbourne
Level 32
Melbourne Central Tower
360 Elizabeth Street
Melbourne VIC
PO Box 13112
Law Courts
Melbourne VIC 8010
T+61 3 9963 6800
F+61 3 9963 6899
Sydney
Level 5
The Bay Centre
65 Pirrama Road
Pyrmont NSW
PO Box Q500
Queen Victoria Building
NSW 1230
T+61 2 9334 7700 or 1800 226 667
F+61 2 9334 7799
Copyright notice
With the exception of coats of arms, logos, emblems, images, other third-party material or devices protected by a trademark, this content is licensed under the Creative Commons Australia Attribution 3.0 Licence.
We request attribution as: © Commonwealth of Australia (Australian Communications and Media Authority) 2016.
All other rights are reserved.
The Australian Communications and Media Authority has undertaken reasonable enquiries to identify material owned by third parties and secure permission for its reproduction. Permission may need to be obtained from third parties to re-use their material.
Written enquiries may be sent to:
Manager, Editorial and Design
PO Box 13112
Law Courts
Melbourne VIC 8010
Tel: 03 9963 6968
Email:
Chairman’s foreword
Introduction
About the research
researchacma
Characterising the ‘citizen’ and ‘citizen interests’
Background
A recap on ‘citizen’ concepts
The ‘citizen’ and the ‘consumer’—three characterisations of the relationship
The ‘citizen’ and the ‘public interest’
Some further developments
International developments
The Australian context
The ‘citizen’ in regulatory practice
Citizen perspectives in public interest assessments
Empowering citizens through information and advice
Enhancing citizen engagement—service delivery
Enhancing citizen engagement—contributing to the regulatory process
Evidence gathering and research
An evolving analytical frame
Broken concepts
Applying broken concepts analysis
Enduring concepts
Applying the enduring concepts analysis
Connected citizens
Applying the connected citizens analysis
Emerging citizen challenges for regulatory practice
Citizens as the ‘connectors’ in a mass connectivity environment
Citizens as creators, sharers and curators of content
Citizens as standards-developers and arbiters of the sharing economy
Citizens and trust
Engaging with the ‘disengaged’ citizen
Conclusion
acma|1
Chairman’s foreword
When I started as the inaugural Chair of the Australian Communications and Media Authority (the ACMA) in 2006, it pretty quickly became evident that digital convergence was going to be the big dial shifter. In a variety of guises, it has continued to cast a sometimes harsh spotlight on the spaghetti-like knot of regulatory regimes and different legislative arrangements to which the ACMA is required to respond. These differing regulatory toolkits, imperatives and legislative history date back to a time when regulation centred on the delivery platform (and there were only several), content was linear—and Australian citizens only crossed borders at a Customs line.
So early on, it was my intuition that the concept of the ‘citizen’ would be a vital part of the unifying glue or narrative the ACMA could (must) weave to act as a ‘bridge’ between the ‘broken concepts’ of a regulatory regime under pressure then, and one which would atrophy; continue to support those enduring public interest matters; and find the right regulatory means (or indeed, non-regulatory means) to support citizens in their increasingly complex connections in a rapidly-evolving networked society.
At that time, the relationship of the ACMA to citizens was most evident in our broadcasting work, upholding community standards to protect citizens as ‘audiences’.However, the inexorable waves of innovation in the communications world have meant that citizens are connected and connecting in many novel ways, therefore extending the ACMA’s points of contact with citizens. In response to these several observations, the ACMA has worked to make the citizen central to our work (as the previous 2010 version of this 'Citizens' and the ACMA paper foreshadowed and as this updated iteration again demonstrates).
However, I have observed that since the initial work in 2010, any perceived neat distinction between the ‘citizen’ and the ‘consumer’ has been, and continues to be blurred, thus, as with many other elements of society being recast by digital change, disrupting the very notion of ‘citizen’.This is happening in a way analogous to how we have come to realise that the layers used to describe network operations at the heart of the contemporary world of communication are no longer, as the engineering origin of the concept might suggest, neat and clearly delineated functional constructs or markers for regulatory intervention. The distinctions between network layers are not quite the ‘bright’ lines we may have optimistically ascribed to them back in 2010. Today’s networks are instead increasingly permeable, interconnected and virtualised, meaning that much of what functions as ‘infrastructure’ is software-defined and many content layer applications can deliver an ‘infrastructure-like’ connection or service.
In a similar fashion, in the highly connected online world, ‘citizens’ are interacting much more intensely with each other and with government and they have many more interactions with business while wearing their ‘citizen hat’ (for example, using internet search tools and interfacing with internet content). At the same time, ‘consumers’ in their marketplace activities find themselves confronted with and more concerned about the ‘citizen’ aspects and implications of their transactions (for example, information security and privacy). This blurring of the lines between citizen and consumer does not mean the end of the utility of either concept to assist our understanding of the changing nature of the interactions of the individual in society, any more than the network layers’ construct ceases to have utility to aid our navigation and understanding of the networked world. However, our thinking can and must evolve to meet the complexity and disruption to well-established concepts, brought about by the ongoing development of this connected world.
This theme emerged in our Reconnecting the Customer (RTC) public inquiry, which is detailed as a case study in this paper. An important element of the inquiry was the examination, from a citizen-consumer perspective, of telecommunications service problems that arose from an increasingly complex communications services market offering multiple network, product and pricing choices. The ACMA drew insights from work in the field of behavioural economics that were useful in considering ways to assist individuals navigate this complexity. This examination of the ‘customer’ problem in terms of citizen/consumer and commercial responses to an ever more complex communications world was an early but comprehensive investigation of the impact of disruptive forces thathave continued to emerge and play out. The exploration of this issue was informative of the perspective that the complexity in communications (as encountered by consumers) cannot be divorced from that experienced by citizens.The behavioural consequences flowing from the networked complexity exhibited by the contemporary communications environment are relevant to both guises of the individual and will likely become even more so as disruptive change continues unabated.
This theme was further explored in our Contemporary community safeguards inquiry, also presented as a case study here. One major challenge for the ACMA (and the community generally) in the contemporary media world is the enormous input of user (citizen) generated content, often using platforms provided by large commercial entities (which makes the users also consumers). This content is immediately accessible and un-moderated; independent of industry, networks and devices. An important initial ACMA response to the question of future community confidence and trust in content safeguards has been to ask questions about the boundaries for future regulation, reviewing compliance strategies to adopt a ‘risk control’ approach to regulation, re-focusing on the role of industry in the co-regulatory scheme and uplifting the role of the citizen (to that of a shared responsibility).
I have also come to appreciate that as a user, as a consumer and/or as a member of an audience,the citizen’s confidence in the regulatory system (broadly embodying the operation of the marketplace, self- and co-regulation and other more black-letter prescriptions) is critical. In this regard, our enduring concepts analysis demonstrated the attribute of Confidence as an important, indeed foundational, notion for the digital communications regulatory environment.
The concept of the citizen makes a powerful contemporary contribution to understanding this context of trust and confidence. The paper observes that negative experiences for individuals and organisations may undermine the confidence with which people engage with emerging technologies, and inhibit the potential of new industries.
While in the recently emerged digitally-enabled sharing economy citizens are using ratings and reviews to build trust using the various platforms, it is also clear that in other emerging domains, the lack of citizen trust can act as a market inhibitor. For example, with regard to the Internet of Things (IoT), there are undoubtedly a number of challenges to be resolved before the future imagined by many can come to substantive fruition. Standards must be settled, spectrum needs to be available, and citizen and consumer concerns need to be addressed.
Consulting firm Accenture, in a January 2016 report titled Igniting growth in consumer technology, noted that, ‘the growth in demand for IoT devices is much slower than initially hoped for—there has been virtually no increase in purchase intent over last year.’
Accenture suggests that price, security and ease of use remain barriers to the adoption by ‘consumers’ of IoT devices and services. Of course, the ACMA perspective is that the more contemporary approach (built on the discussion above about the intertwining of the consumer/citizen perspective) is to read the reference to ‘consumer’ as also a reference to ‘citizen’. On the issue with perhaps most relevance to the regulator, Accenture observes a global concern that:
Overall, nearly half (47 per cent) of [citizen-]consumers cited “privacy risk/security concerns” as a barrier to adoption … This indicates that the consumer technology industry does not have the fundamentals in place—and the [citizen-]consumer trust established—to push into more personalized and sensitive areas as it searches for the next wave of innovation.[1]
This is where I sense that the regulator may well continue to have an integral role—to facilitate the establishment and stability of the market and the successful interaction of citizens and consumers with it, and thereby create the pre-conditions for deeper and more extensive industry self and co-regulation to operate successfully.
It is essential that Australians can make informed decisions and maintain confidence and trust as their communications services develop and change in the face of various disruptive business models and technologies. I see an important role for the ACMA, working with all sectors of the communications industry, to ensure that in the transition to the new networked information economy, we have well-informed individual participants (as citizens or as consumers) and that industry offers appropriate information and protections.
In this respect, I suspect this early and continued work by the ACMA can provide a valuable lead for the Australian Government in general, using digital platforms and technologies to engage with, communicate to and better serve Australian citizens.
Chris Chapman
Chairman
Introduction
The ACMA’s purpose is to make media and communications work in Australia’s public interest.
The citizen’s capacity to engage effectively with digital communications and media is one crucial element of making communications and media work in the public interest. The different dimensions of citizen interests are also reflectedthrough the ease of citizen engagement with regulatory process and service delivery, and through the information and advice that improves the way that media and communications work for individual citizens.
In 2010, the ACMA explored the development of a citizen-centric approach to its regulatory practice, by its provision of public services as well as through the discharge of its legislative obligations.[2]As a conclusion to this examination, the ACMA undertook to embed citizen considerations into its work in a structured and considered manner.
While the legislative construct of citizen interests has remained relatively static during this period, the embedding of citizen considerations in the ACMA’s regulatory practice continued to develop and adjust in light of citizens’ changing digital communications practices.
Increasingly, the rise of active digital citizens who, in an environment of expanded digital interaction between themselves and other citizens and with greater opportunities for such interaction with business, engage more directly with regulatory processes and with government. There are heightened expectations that citizens should form part of collaborative approaches to regulatory problem-solving, an approach that is proving more necessary in such a highly connected and networked communications environment.
In this paper, the ACMA:
reviews the concepts of citizen and citizen interests in the context of recent developments in international regulatory practice and the Australian Government and regulatory context
reflects on how the ACMA’s regulatory practice has adapted as it has embedded citizen considerations in its work
looks at what it means to be a digital citizen in the context of contemporary communications regulation through a developing analytical approach used by the ACMA to inform its understanding about this changing citizen interest.It points to where regulation can be recalibrated to remove outdated and unnecessary obligations, while continuing to target regulation to areas of risk and harm
identifies a range of emerging/future citizen challenges and opportunities for change in communications and media regulatory practice.
About the research
researchacma
Our research program—researchacma—underpins the ACMA’s work and decision-making as an evidence-informed regulator. Itcontributes tothe ACMA’s strategic policy development, regulatory reviews and investigations, and helps to make media and communications work for all Australians.
researchacma has five broad areas of interest:
market developments
media content and culture
social and economic participation
citizen and consumer safeguards
regulatory best practice and development.
This research contributes to the ACMA’s regulatory best practice and developmentresearch theme.
Characterising the ‘citizen’ and ‘citizen interests’
Background
In the 2010 paper 'Citizens' and the ACMA—exploring concepts in communications and media regulation, the ACMA explored two main drivers that informed the approach to addressing citizen interests as part of regulatory decision-making. These two strands concerned:
communications and media regulation (the ACMA seeking to develop its citizen-centric approach to the discharge of its regulatory activities)
developments in public administration (placing the citizen at the centre of public services at the commonwealth level in Australia).
Rapid change and innovation in the digital communications environment, along with continued developments in public sector administration practices that have occurred in the period since 2010, has necessitated an evolving approach to the way the ACMA has embedded citizen considerations in its regulatory practice. However, these two drivers remain highly relevant in the contemporary communications environment climate, and the ACMA has continued to draw on them as it shapes and updates such practice.
A recap on ‘citizen’ concepts
In the 2010 paper, the ACMA noted that there was no single definition of ‘citizen’ that captured all aspects of how the term and concept was used in regulation and public administration, noting that the term had different emphases depending on the particular context. For example, in the media and communications sector, the public may be referred to in a number of ways specific to a particular activity, including community, society, participant, people, Australians, contributor, viewer, audience, family, household, parent, youth, user, end-user, consumer, customer or client.
The 2010 analysis of the terms used to describe stakeholders in the ACMA’s primary legislation reveals that the term ‘citizen’ appears only four times in the Broadcasting Services Act 1992; once in the Radiocommunications Act 1992 (in both Acts, it refers to the legal status of an individual on all occasions; that is, ‘Australian citizens’); and does not appear at all in the Telecommunications Act 1997, Telecommunications (Consumer Protection and Service Standards) Act 1999 or Australian Communications and Media Authority Act 2005.A variety of other terms are used to define stakeholders.[3]
From this analysis, two varying but useful characterisations were distilled for policy-makers, reflecting the following concepts:
The citizen as an individual—an individual member of a community exercising a range of citizenship rights. These rights are often thought of as constituting three strands: civil, political and social.[4]
The vulnerable citizen—members of society who are disadvantaged and may be more dependent on government intervention to protect their interests, provide them with services or make available specific opportunities.
The ‘citizen’ and the ‘consumer’—three characterisations of the relationship
A further important distinction, particularly as noted in the communications and media regulatory context, is the relationship between ‘citizens’ and ‘consumers’. These separate characterisations reflect changes in the emphasis of regulatory practice over time, as regulatory frameworks evolved to deliver a range of different public policy outcomes such as facilitation of markets, protection of market operations, consumer protections and/or addressing specific market failures. The key characterisations reflect the following distinctions:
Citizen versus consumer—the citizen and the consumer represent a series of binary distinctions. These polarisations have highlighted the differences between a market-based, commoditised and individualistic depiction of ‘consumer interests’ compared with the public, de-commodified and collective rights of what is referred to as ‘citizen interests’.