CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 48Freedom of Expression and DefamationDigitalization, Law, and RegulationDigital Platforms and Economics

“Dual‐Track” platform governance on content: A comparative study between China and United States

Liu, Jinhe, Yang, Le·2022·Policy & Internet
DOI 10.1002/poi3.307
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

An Internet platform carrying information content has dual properties of content (information) and technology (medium). We deconstruct the complicated relationships of platform governance on content in China and the United States by building a theoretical framework of dual‐track governance of content and technology. China's mechanism of platform governance on content focuses more on content governance, while the U.S. focuses more on technology governance. China and the U.S. is dominated by the state and the market separately, forming the two mechanisms of “Statism with Content Regulation First” and “Marketism with Technology Governance First”, with four different characteristics. TikTok Path, following the "Separation Principle" of content governance and technology governance, is a feasible approach for the platform company that attempts to go abroad to adapt to different or even conflicting governance contexts.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/poi3.307

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Regulatory solutions such as the European Union's Digital Services Act face significant jurisdictional hurdles in the United States and China, limiting the influence of the European Union's Brussels Effect.

    “Yet such initiatives face significant jurisdictional hurdles in the United States and China (Liu & Yang, 2022), limiting the influence of the European Union's “Brussels Effect” (Li & Chen, 2024).”

    From Stuck in the middleware with you: the challenges of capitalizing a market-oriented approach to platform governance (2025) · cites this paper as Liu & Yang, 2022

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Liu, J., & Yang, L.
Affiliations
Tsinghua University (CN)
Corresponding author
Liu, Jinhe
ORCID
Venue
Policy & Internet
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2022-06
Volume
14
Issue
2
Pages
304-323
ISSN
1944-2866 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1002/poi3.307
OpenAlex
W4281976808
Cited by
48
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 22 · 2022: 3
FWCI
50.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
Policy & Internet (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Law › Freedom of Expression and Defamation
  • Social Sciences › Law › Digitalization, Law, and Regulation
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Digital Platforms and Economics
Keywords
platform governance, content governance, technology governance, digital platforms, government regulation, market regulation, content regulation, technology regulation, TikTok, China–United States comparison

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review