电商平台算法的价值取向困境及治理路径研究
Research on the Value Orientation Dilemma and Solution Path of E-Commerce Platform Algorithms
摘要: 随着算法推荐技术成为电商平台的“智能中枢”,其在提升交易效率的同时,也引发一系列价值取向困境。在实际运行中,电商平台算法往往迎合流量与商业利益最大化的逻辑,导致信息茧房、算法歧视、虚假宣传等问题频发,不仅损害了消费者的合法权益,也侵蚀着电商市场的信任基础。本文指出,算法的负面影响并非由于技术失灵,而是电商平台价值选择的结果。基于此,本文构建了商业利益与公共价值的二元分析框架,将电商平台划分为四种理想类型,从中揭示高商业利益、低公共价值的价值取向构成算法负面影响的结构性根源。在此基础上,本文剖析了权责脱钩、激励扭曲、治理滞后三种具体困境,相应提出权责匹配、激励多元、治理前置三条可行路径。总之,推动电商平台达成商业利益与公共价值的动态平衡,让算法回归“以人为本”的定位,才是实现电商平台高质量发展的必由之路。
Abstract: As algorithmic recommendation technology has become the “intelligent backbone” of e-commerce platforms, it has not only enhanced transaction efficiency but also triggered a series of dilemmas related to value orientation. In practical operations, e-commerce platform algorithms often prioritize maximizing traffic and commercial interests, leading to frequent issues such as information silos, algorithmic bias, and false advertising. These not only harm the legitimate rights and interests of consumers but also erode the foundation of trust in the e-commerce market. This paper highlights that the negative impacts of algorithms are not due to technological malfunctions but rather the result of value choices made by e-commerce platforms. Based on this, this paper constructs a binary analysis framework of commercial interests and public value, dividing e-commerce platforms into four ideal types. This reveals that the value orientation of high commercial interests and low public value constitutes the structural root of the negative impacts of algorithms. On this basis, this paper analyzes three specific dilemmas: the decoupling of rights and responsibilities, distorted incentives, and lagging governance. Correspondingly, it proposes three feasible paths: matching rights and responsibilities, diversifying incentives, and prioritizing governance. In summary, promoting a dynamic balance between commercial interests and public value in e-commerce platforms and returning algorithms to their "people-oriented" positioning are the only ways to achieve high-quality development of e-commerce platforms.
参考文献
|
[1]
|
Fazelpour, S. and Danks, D. (2021) Algorithmic Bias: Senses, Sources, Solutions. Philosophy Compass, 16, e12760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
|
|
[2]
|
Simon, J., Wong, P.H. and Rieder, G. (2020) Algorithmic Bias and the Value Sensitive Design Approach. Internet Policy Review, 9, 1-16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
|
|
[3]
|
陈昌凤, 吕宇翔. 算法伦理研究: 视角、框架和原则[J]. 新华文摘, 2022(14): 132-135.
|
|
[4]
|
段世昌. 从归纳算法到审计算法: 直播电商创业者的非正式算法知识研究[J]. 国际新闻界, 2024, 46(4): 52-71.
|
|
[5]
|
石颖. 算法歧视的发生逻辑与法律规制[J]. 理论探索, 2022(3): 122-128.
|
|
[6]
|
van Dijck, J. (2020) Governing Digital Societies: Private Platforms, Public Values. Computer Law & Security Review, 36, Article 105377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
|
|
[7]
|
Møller, L.A. (2022) Between Personal and Public Interest: How Algorithmic News Recommendation Reconciles with Journalism as an Ideology. Digital Journalism, 10, 1794-1812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
|
|
[8]
|
陈积银, 胡睿心. 把关与操纵: 中国主流媒体与商业社交媒体推荐算法价值的比较研究[J]. 福建师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2024(2): 105-117.
|
|
[9]
|
许晓东, 邝岩. 算法权力在治理体系中的产生与规制[J]. 华中科技大学学报(社会科学版), 2024, 38(4): 105-113.
|
|
[10]
|
Wang Xuefan. 算法渗透执法的算法问责制[J]. 科技与法律(中英文), 2024(4): 115-126.
|
|
[11]
|
中华人民共和国最高人民法院公报. 最高人民法院关于审理网络消费纠纷案件适用法律若干问题的规定(一) [EB/OL]. 2022-03-01. http://gongbao.court.gov.cn/Details/1f8888b3afdf77181ca8cf257dd361.html, 2026-03-27.
|
|
[12]
|
Sun, T., Yuan, Z., Li, C., Zhang, K. and Xu, J. (2024) The Value of Personal Data in Internet Commerce: A High-Stakes Field Experiment on Data Regulation Policy. Management Science, 70, 2645-2660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
|
|
[13]
|
梅傲, 苏建维. 数据治理中“打包式”知情同意模式的再检视[J]. 情报杂志, 2021, 40(2): 154-160, 122.
|