↓ Skip to main content

The Design of the Internet’s Architecture by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and Human Rights

Overview of attention for article published in Science and Engineering Ethics, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
Title
The Design of the Internet’s Architecture by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and Human Rights
Published in
Science and Engineering Ethics, June 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11948-016-9793-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Corinne Cath, Luciano Floridi

Abstract

The debate on whether and how the Internet can protect and foster human rights has become a defining issue of our time. This debate often focuses on Internet governance from a regulatory perspective, underestimating the influence and power of the governance of the Internet's architecture. The technical decisions made by Internet Standard Developing Organisations (SDOs) that build and maintain the technical infrastructure of the Internet influences how information flows. They rearrange the shape of the technically mediated public sphere, including which rights it protects and which practices it enables. In this article, we contribute to the debate on SDOs' ethical responsibility to bring their work in line with human rights. We defend three theses. First, SDOs' work is inherently political. Second, the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), one of the most influential SDOs, has a moral obligation to ensure its work is coherent with, and fosters, human rights. Third, the IETF should enable the actualisation of human rights through the protocols and standards it designs by implementing a responsibility-by-design approach to engineering. We conclude by presenting some initial recommendations on how to ensure that work carried out by the IETF may enable human rights.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 21%
Student > Bachelor 10 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 11%
Lecturer 4 8%
Researcher 3 6%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 11 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 20 38%
Arts and Humanities 6 11%
Computer Science 5 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 11 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 November 2023.
All research outputs
#5,587,368
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Science and Engineering Ethics
#392
of 987 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89,105
of 358,960 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science and Engineering Ethics
#11
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 987 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 358,960 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.