![]() Kakao stated that it does not allow advertisers to target children under 14, but offered no other information about types of ad targeting that it might prohibit (F3c). Its ad content policies only listed what types of ad content is prohibited, but failed to further explain how the company enforces its policies (F3b). Advertising content and targeting: Kakao revealed little about how it regulated its advertisements.On the positive side, Kakao’s terms of service for developers offered rules to regulate the use of bots on its platform (F13). The company disclosed nothing about how it uses algorithms for content curation or recommendations in Daum Search, its search engine (F12). Algorithmic use and content curation:Kakao failed to publish operational policies that govern the use or development of its algorithmic systems (F1d, P1b).At the same time, Kakao published more comprehensive data about content and account restrictions in its transparency reports than any other digital platform except Twitter, and it made the data available for download (F4a, F4b). Content moderation: Kakao provided less information about how it enforces its terms of service through content or account restrictions than most of its digital platform peers, except Amazon (F3a).Kakao was more transparent about policies affecting users’ freedom of expression than Facebook and Apple but still failed to provide information in some key areas, including on algorithmic systems. KakaoTalk, Kakao’s chat app, did not publish adequate information about how users can appeal content moderation decisions (G6b). Companies in South Korea are by law required to provide a remedy mechanism. Remedy: Kakao enabled users to file complaints about privacy and freedom of expression and information and disclosed more about this process than any other digital platform we evaluated (G6a).It did not join any multi-stakeholder initiative centered on human rights. Stakeholder engagement: Kakao maintained membership with the Korean Internet Self-Governance Organization (KISO), which includes civil society members (G5).Kakao engages in zero rating through a partnership between its subsidiary for transportation services and South Korean telco LG Uplus (G4b, G4, G4d, G4e). ![]() It also failed to publish any information about human rights impact assessments on its policy enforcement, targeted advertising practices, use of algorithmic systems, or zero rating. Human rights due diligence: Kakao conducted privacy impact assessments on existing products and services and on new activities but failed to clarify whether it evaluated the risks and impacts of laws and regulations in jurisdictions in which it operates (G4a).It published an ethical framework rather than a human rights framework to describe its commitments on developing and using algorithmic systems (G1). Commitment to human rights: Kakao made commitments to respect users’ freedom of expression and privacy.Despite publishing commitments to respect users’ privacy and freedom of expression, Kakao fell short to disclose its internal process for implementing those commitments. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |