A legal cure for news choice overload: Regulating algorithms and AI with ‘light patterns’ to foster autonomy and democracy

Abstract Despite an unprecedented abundance of news content, both news avoidance and dissatisfaction are rising. Blending journalism, philosophy and law scholarship, this paper argues that ‘news choice overload’ causes paralysis and poor outcomes as it transfers power to algorithms, thereby harming autonomy and, in turn, democracy. An analysis of Australian and European regulatory responses shows the need for an algorithmic regulator and a transparency requirement for digital platforms. Further, people's ability to choose autonomously can be fostered by positive interventions, or ‘light patterns’, including ‘diversity nudges’ and a shift from caveat emptor to a caveat venditor approach, in which digital platforms are assigned legal responsibility. Recognising that it is autonomy and democracy—not choice per se—that are valuable, such interventions can shift meaningful decision‐making back to citizens at a moment when the rise of generative artificial intelligence is giving algorithms yet more power.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Policy & Internet
Published
2024-08-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.412
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.63

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A legal cure for news choice overload: Regulating algorithms and AI with ‘light patterns’ to foster autonomy and democracy

Sacha Molitorisz
5 citations
Policy & Internet
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
2.63
article

A legal cure for news choice overload: Regulating algorithms and AI with ‘light patterns’ to foster autonomy and democracy

Sacha Molitorisz
article en
5 citations

Abstract

Abstract Despite an unprecedented abundance of news content, both news avoidance and dissatisfaction are rising. Blending journalism, philosophy and law scholarship, this paper argues that ‘news choice overload’ causes paralysis and poor outcomes as it transfers power to algorithms, thereby harming autonomy and, in turn, democracy. An analysis of Australian and European regulatory responses shows the need for an algorithmic regulator and a transparency requirement for digital platforms. Further, people's ability to choose autonomously can be fostered by positive interventions, or ‘light patterns’, including ‘diversity nudges’ and a shift from caveat emptor to a caveat venditor approach, in which digital platforms are assigned legal responsibility. Recognising that it is autonomy and democracy—not choice per se—that are valuable, such interventions can shift meaningful decision‐making back to citizens at a moment when the rise of generative artificial intelligence is giving algorithms yet more power.

Policy & InternetVol. 16(3)
University of Technology Sydney (AU)
University of Technology Sydney
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
2.63
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.