Hubert Etienne

We combine philosophical theories with quantitative analyses of online data to propose a sophisticated approach to social media influencers. Identifying influencers as communication systems emerging from a dialectic interactional process between content creators and in-development audiences, we define them mainly using the composition of their audience and the type of publications they use to communicate. To examine these two parameters, we analyse the audiences of 619 Instagram accounts of French, English, and American influencers and 2,400 of their publications in light of Girard’s mimetic theory and McLuhan’s media theory. We observe meaningful differences in influencers’ profiles, typical audiences, and content type across influencers’ classes, supporting the claim that such communication systems are articulated around ‘reading contracts’ upon which influencers’ image is based and from which their influence derives. While the upkeep of their influence relies on them sticking to this contract, we observe that successful influencers shift their content type when growing their audiences and explain the strategies they implement to address this double bind. Different types of contract breaches then lead to distinct outcomes, which we identify by analysing various types of followers’ feedback. In mediating social interactions, digital platforms reshape society in various ways; this interdisciplinary study helps understand how the digitalisation of social influencers affects reciprocity and mimetic behaviours.

Autonomous vehicle moral dilemmas matter less for the particular outcomes of potential accidents than for their role in defining the values of the society we wish to live in. Different approaches have been suggested to determine the ethical settings that autonomous vehicles should be implemented in and identify the legitimate agents for making such decisions. Most of these, however, fail on theoretical grounds, facing severe issues related to moral justifications and compliance to the law, or on practical grounds, being insufficiently universal, action-guiding, or technically viable to be implemented. The analogy with the “trolley problem” has been extensively discussed. However, researchers have rarely tried to adapt this framework to autonomous vehicle cases or investigate how it could be used to address these issues. In doing so, this paper aims to answer the two key problems of autonomous vehicle dilemmas. With regards to the decision-maker, it rejects autonomous vehicle users’ choice-based models, showing the absurdity of both switch of control and adaptative preferences and arguing for common legislator-determined ethical settings. With regards to the decisions themselves, it criticizes both utilitarian views and those based on individuals’ criteria to suggest a deontologist rights-based approach. This allows for the defence of a morally coherent, regulatory compliant, explainable, and easily implementable framework capable of addressing all autonomous vehicle moral dilemma scenarios present in the literature.