The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Technologies of Freedom
Abstract
How can we preserve free speech in an electronic age? In a masterly synthesis of history, law, and technology, Ithiel de Sola Pool analyzes the confrontation between the regulators of the new communications technology and the First Amendment.
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
Cited by
Uses and Gratifications Theory in the 21st Century
Ruggiero, T. E. (2000) · Mass Communication and Society · doi:10.1207/s15327825mcs0301_02 · Cited by 2,810
Barbrook, R., & Cameron, A. (1996) · Science as Culture · doi:10.1080/09505439609526455 · Cited by 1,115
Parks, M. R., & Floyd, K. (1996) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1996.tb01462.x · Cited by 1,000
Garnham, N. (2005) · International Journal of Cultural Policy · doi:10.1080/10286630500067606 · Cited by 803
Panacea or Panopticon?: The Hidden Power in Computer-Mediated Communication
SPEARS, R., & LEA, M. (1994) · Communication Research · doi:10.1177/009365094021004001 · Cited by 705
Metadata
- Authors
- de Sola Pool, I.
- Venue
- Harvard University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Harvard University Press
- Published
- 2009-06-30
- OpenAlex
- W2087180164
- Cited by
- 540
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 15.69
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Technologies of Freedom. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/j.ctvjz83s4
- The paper
- de Sola Pool, I. (2009). Technologies of Freedom. Harvard University Press eBooks. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjz83s4
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.
