Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/156489
|
Title: | 監控資本主義下的數位廣告投放專員主體性初探 Subjectivity of Digital Advertising Specialists under the Framework of Surveillance Capitalism |
Authors: | 黃彥燕 Huang, Yen-Yen |
Contributors: | 劉慧雯 Liu, Hui-Wen 黃彥燕 Huang, Yen-Yen |
Keywords: | 平台 監控資本主義 數位廣告投放專員(廣告投手) 主體性 Platform Surveillance Capitalism Digital Advertising Specialists (DAS) Subjectivity |
Date: | 2025 |
Issue Date: | 2025-04-01 12:28:48 (UTC+8) |
Abstract: | 本研究探討在監控資本主義背景下,數位廣告投放專員(以下簡稱「廣告投手」)的主體性如何展現與受限。隨著數位廣告市場的發展,廣告投手不僅需要熟悉各大平台的廣告演算法,還需在商業利益與個人價值觀之間尋求平衡。透過質性研究與深度訪談,本研究分析廣告投手的行動選擇及其對數據蒐集、廣告操作策略的看法。
研究發現,廣告投手的行動受制於平台機制,主要透過「養、套、殺」三部曲運作——平台初期吸引廣告投手依賴其工具(養),隨後調整規則增加對廣告投手的控制(套),最終透過變更演算法、發展人工智慧等手段鞏固自身優勢(殺)。此外,廣告投手在數據蒐集議題上意見分歧,部分受訪者認為精準推播能帶來商業效益,另有投手則擔憂數據隱私的侵害。
本研究亦探討廣告投手在面臨道德爭議時的應對策略。有些投手選擇「技術中立」,將廣告操作視為純粹的專業技能,而另一些投手則試圖在工作要求與個人倫理之間找到折衷。這些策略顯示,廣告投手並非完全受平台所宰制,仍具備一定的能動性,可透過個人選擇影響數據運用與廣告內容的傳播。
總結而言,廣告投手的主體性受限於監控資本主義的框架,但仍存在可操作的空間。本研究強調,在數據監控日益強化的環境下,廣告投手的角色與行動模式不僅影響數位廣告產業,也與整體資訊生態的公平性與透明度息息相關。未來研究可進一步探討廣告投手如何運用自身知識影響平台規則,或如何透過集體行動改變現有的數位廣告生態。 This study explores the subjectivity of digital advertising specialists (DAS) under the framework of surveillance capitalism. As the digital advertising market evolves, DAS must not only master platform algorithms but also navigate the balance between commercial interests and personal values. Through qualitative research and in-depth interviews, this study analyzes the choices DAS make and their perspectives on data collection and advertising strategies.
Findings reveal that DAS’s actions are constrained by platform mechanisms, which operate through a three-stage process: “attract, trap, and exploit.” Initially, platforms encourage DAS to rely on their tools (attract), then adjust rules to tighten control over DAS (trap), and finally consolidate their dominance through algorithmic changes and the development of artificial intelligence (exploit). Additionally, DAS hold differing views on data collection -- some believe precise targeting enhances commercial benefits, while others express concerns about privacy violations.
The study also examines how DAS respond to ethical dilemmas. Some adhere to the principle of “technological neutrality,” viewing advertising operations as purely technical skills. Others attempt to strike a balance between professional obligations and personal ethics. These findings suggest that while DAS are influenced by platform structures, they still possess agency and can shape data usage and advertising content dissemination through their choices.
In conclusion, DAS’s subjectivity is constrained by surveillance capitalism but remains operable within certain limits. This study highlights how DAS’s roles and decision-making impact not only the digital advertising industry but also the fairness and transparency of the broader information ecosystem. Future research could further examine how DAS leverage their expertise to influence platform policies or engage in collective actions to reshape the digital advertising landscape. |
Reference: | 〈台灣網路報告〉(2023)。取自財團法人台灣網路資訊中心網頁https://report.twnic.tw/2023/ 〈【易生誤解】網傳影片「這不是作票!什麼才是作票」?〉(2024年1月31日)。取自台灣事實查核中心https://tfc-taiwan.org.tw/articles/10259 王志弘、高郁婷譯(2023)。《技術與社會理論》。群學。(原書 Matthewman, Steve. [2011]. Technology and Social Theory. Palgrave Macmillan.) 王宜燕(2012)。〈閱聽人研究實踐轉向理論初探〉,《新聞學研究》,113,39-75。 外交部國際傳播司(2024年1月10日)。〈外交部長吳釗燮主持選前外媒說明會,分析中國意圖侵蝕台灣民主體制,籲請國際社會警覺中國介選〉【新聞稿】。https://www.mofa.gov.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=95&sms=73&s=116344 行政院經貿談判辦公室(2024年1月9日)。〈2024年全球重點國家大選日程表〉【新聞稿】。https://www.ey.gov.tw/File/AF35BCC3BA144907 汪寶榮(2014)。〈資本與行動者網路的運作——《紅高粱家族》英譯本生產及傳播之社會學探析〉,《編譯論叢》,7(2),35-72。 林文源(2007)。〈論行動者網絡理論的行動本體論〉,《科技、醫療與社會》,4,65-108。 ——(2023)。〈STS如何介入AI:ANT取徑朝向AI公共性的思考實驗〉,《科技、醫療與社會》,36,233-270。 洪漢鼎(1992)。《語言學的轉向——當代分析哲學的發展》。遠流。 胡幼慧編(1996)。《質性研究:理論、方法及本土女性研究實例》。巨流。 馬傑偉(2014)。〈悼念霍爾:反思批判傳播學〉,《傳播與社會學刊》,29,25-32。 馮建三、程宗明譯(1998)。《傳播政治經濟學——再思考與再更新》。五南。(原書 Mosco, Vincent. [1996]. The Political Economy of Communication: Rethinking and Renewal. Sage.) 曹家榮(2013)。〈理解技術實作:現象學取徑初探〉,《社會分析》,7,1-43。 ——(2016)。〈混雜主體:科技哲學中的「後人類」〉,《政治與社會哲學評論》,57,47-93。 ——(2020)。〈Pokémon GO的「擴增實境」如何可能?一種科技現象學的詮釋〉,《資訊社會研究》,39,71-98。 張玉佩(2003)。《當代閱聽人研究之理論重構:試論閱聽人的思辨能力》。政治大學新聞研究所博士論文。 張國暉(2011)。〈對技術的社會建構論之挑戰:建構東亞技術研究主體性的一個契機〉,《科技、醫療與社會》,13,171-222。 張錦華(1990)。〈傳播效果理論批判〉,《新聞學研究》,42,103-121。 張鎮宏(2024年1月14日)。〈國際媒體:「台灣選民拒絕中國」,北京在520前對台壓力動作可能加大〉,《報導者》。取自https://www.twreporter.org/a/2024-election-international-media-view 陳立妍(2016年12月5日)。〈王大陸「大平台」原稿曝光被打臉,「講稿有調整」重申非口誤〉,《自由時報》。取自https://ent.ltn.com.tw/news/paper/1058560 傅東飛(2023年12月28日)。〈北京如何加大施壓台灣總統大選〉,《BBC News中文》。取自https://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/trad/chinese-news-67832273 葉浩(2016年1月29日)。〈原諒與承諾-大選之後,跟著鄂蘭想想政治和解與希望基礎〉,《Café Philo @ Boston|哲學星期五@波士頓》。取自https://bostonphilo.blogspot.com/2016/01/blog-post.html 溫澤元、林怡婷、陳思穎譯(2020)。《監控資本主義時代》。時報。(原書 Zuboff, Shoshana. [2019]. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. Public Affairs.) 楊威廉(2023年12月12日)。〈中國加大力度幹預台灣即將舉行的選舉〉,《美國之音》。取自https://www.voanews.com/a/china-ramps-up-efforts-to-interfere-in-taiwan-s-coming-elections/7395061.html 劉致昕(2020年1月6日)。〈專訪前「劍橋分析」業務總監:只要臉書的生意繼續,民主就有危機〉,《報導者》。取自https://www.twreporter.org/a/information-warfare-business-interview-cambridge-analytica-brittany-kaiser 劉慧雯(2017)。〈建構「倫理閱聽人」:試論社群媒體使用者的理論意涵〉,《新聞學研究》,131,87-125。 蔡英文(2002)。《政治實踐與公共空間——漢娜˙鄂蘭的政治思想》。聯經。 賴昀(2021年7月13日)。〈馮建三X蔡蕙如X程宗明|巨型數位平台贏者全拿,新聞產業與內容生產者何去何從?〉,《卓越新聞電子報》。取自https://feja.org.tw/60022?utm_source=mailpoet&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=FEJA 韓連慶譯(2008)。《讓事物「說話」:後現象學與技術科學》。北京大學出版社。(原書 Ihde, Don. [2006, April]. Let Things Speak: Post-Phenomenology and Technology. Beijing, China.) 譚以諾譯(2022)。《平台資本主義》。手民。(原書Srnicek, Nick. [2017]. Platform Capitalism. Polity Press.) Abercrombie, N., & Longhurst, B. (1998). Audiences: A Sociological Theory of Performance and Imagination. Sage. Alasuutari, Pertti. (Ed.). (1999). Rethinking the media audience. Sage. Albrechtslund, Anders. (2006). Interview with Don Ihde at Stony Brook University (2006). [Youtube]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8_qkaFnMnA Bijker, Wiebe E. (1987). The Social Construction of Bakelite: Toward a Theory of Invention. In Wiebe E. Bijker, Thomas P. Hughes, & Trevor F. Pinch (Eds.), The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology (pp. 159-187). MIT Press. ——(1995). Of Bicycles, Bakelites and Bulbs: Toward a Theory of Socio-Technical Change. MIT Press. Ellul, Jacques. (1954/1964). The Technological Society (John Wilkinson, Trans.). Vintage. Heidegger, Martin. (1977). The Question Concerning Technology and Other Essays (William Lovitt, Trans.). Harper & Row. Klein, Hans K., & Kleinman, Daniel Lee. (2002). The Social Construction of Technology: Structural Considerations. Science, Technology & Human Values, 27(1), 28-52. Mathews, Joe. (2023, December 28). Opinion: 2024 will be the biggest voting year in world history. Can democracy survive it?. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2023-12-28/democracy-election-authoritarianism-voting Matthewman, Steve. (2011). Technology and Social Theory. Palgrave Macmillan. Mishra, Stuti. (2021, November 9). The Independent - Buttigieg says America’s highways are racist and infrastructure bill will help fix it. The Independent. Retrieved from https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/buttigieg-racist-highways-biden-infrastructure-bill-b1954051.html Pinch, Trevor J., & Bijker, Wiebe E. (1984). The Social Construction of Facts and Artefacts: or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology might Benefit from Each Other. Social Studies of Science, 14, 399-441. [In Wiebe E. Bijker, Thomas P. Hughes, & Trevor F. Pinch (Eds.), The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology (pp. 17-50). MIT Press.] Rajvanshi Astha, & Serhan Yasmeen. (2024, January 10). A Make-or-Break Year for Democracy Worldwide. Time. Retrieved from https://time.com/6551743/2024-elections-democracy-trump-putin/ Sherwell Philip. (2024, January 7). China tries to sway Taiwan election from the skies and online. The Times. Retrieved from https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/china-tries-to-sway-taiwan-election-from-the-skies-and-online-l29ns8f8c Winner, Langdon. (1980). Do Artifacts Have Politics?. Daedalus, 109(1), 121-136. ——(1993). Upon Opening the Black Box and Finding It Empty: Social Constructivism and the Philosophy of Technology. Science, Technology & Human Values, 18(3), 362-378. Varieties of Democracy Institute. (2022). Free and fair elections index. Retrieved from https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/free-and-fair-elections-index?tab=table&time=latest®ion=Asia&country=~TCD |
Description: | 碩士 國立政治大學 傳播學院碩士在職專班 106941017 |
Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0106941017 |
Data Type: | thesis |
Appears in Collections: | [傳播學院碩士在職專班] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
File |
Size | Format | |
101701.pdf | 2798Kb | Adobe PDF | 0 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|