The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Reframing platform power
Open accessAbstract
This article addresses the problem of platform power by probing current regulatory frameworks' basic assumptions about how tech firms operate in digital ecosystems.Platform power is generally assessed in terms of economic markets in which individual corporate actors harness technological innovations to compete fairly, thereby maximising consumer welfare.We propose three paradigmatic shifts in the conceptualisation of platform power.First, we suggest to expand the notion of consumer welfare to citizen wellbeing, hence addressing a broader scope of platform services' beneficiaries.Second, we recommend considering platform companies as part of an integrated platform ecosystem, acknowledging its interrelational, dynamic structure.And third, we shift attention from markets as level playing fields towards societal platform infrastructures where hierarchies and dependencies are built into their architecture.Reframing platform power may be a necessary condition for updating and integrating current regulatory regimes and policy proposals.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
van Dijck, J., Poell, T., & de Waal, M. (2018) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190889760.001.0001 · Cited by 2,951
Self-citationGillespie, T. (2010) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444809342738 · Cited by 2,522
The platformization of cultural production: Theorizing the contingent cultural commodity
Nieborg, D. B., & Poell, T. (2018) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444818769694 · Cited by 1,530
Self-citationThe Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information
(2016) · Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.1177/0094306116641409c · Cited by 1,334
Introduction—Platforms and Infrastructures in the Digital Age
Constantinides, P., Henfridsson, O., & Parker, G. G. (2018) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2018.0794 · Cited by 943
Rieder, B., & Sire, G. (2014) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444813481195 · Cited by 147
A Critical Political Economy of Web Advertising History
Crain, M. (2019) · The SAGE Handbook of Web History · doi:10.4135/9781526470546.n22 · Cited by 12
Cited by
Migration and Migrant Labour in the Gig Economy: An Intervention
van Doorn, N., Ferrari, F., & Graham, M. (2023) · Work, Employment and Society · doi:10.1177/09500170221096581 · Cited by 291
Bodó, B. (2021) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444820939922 · Cited by 137
“Dual‐Track” platform governance on content: A comparative study between China and United States
Liu, J., & Yang, L. (2022) · Policy & Internet · doi:10.1002/poi3.307 · Cited by 48
Safe from “harm”: The governance of violence by platforms
DeCook, J. R., Cotter, K., Kanthawala, S., & Foyle, K. (2022) · Policy & Internet · doi:10.1002/poi3.290 · Cited by 46
Borderline practices on Douyin/TikTok: Content transfer and algorithmic manipulation
Su, C., & Valdovinos Kaye, B. (2023) · Media, Culture & Society · doi:10.1177/01634437231168308 · Cited by 26
Metadata
- Authors
- van Dijck, J., Nieborg, D., & Poell, T.
- Venue
- Internet Policy Review
- Published
- 2019-06-30
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 2
- ISSN
- 2197-6775 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2956356921
- Cited by
- 275
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 37.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Reframing platform power. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.14763/2019.2.1414
- The paper
- van Dijck, J., Nieborg, D., & Poell, T. (2019). Reframing platform power. Internet Policy Review. https://doi.org/10.14763/2019.2.1414
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
