Datafication as parenthesis: reconceptualising the best interests of the child principle in data protection law

References

• Acquisti, Alessandro, and Jens Grossklags. 2005. “Privacy and Rationality in Individual Decision Making.” IEEE Security and Privacy Magazine 3 (1): 26–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agre, Philip. 2001. “Changing Places: Contexts of Awareness in Computing.” Human-Computer Interaction 16 (2): 177–192.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allen, Anita. 2011. Unpopular Privacy: What Must We Hide?. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Alston, Philip. 1982. “A Third Generation of Solidarity Rights: Progressive Development or Obfuscation of International Human Rights Law?” Netherlands International Law Review 29: 307–322.
   Google Scholar
• Alston, Philip. 1985. “The Shortcomings of a ‘Garfield the Cat’ Approach to the Right to Development.” California Western International Law Journal 15: 510–518.
   Google Scholar
• Alston, Philip. 1988. “Making Space for New Human Rights: The Case of the Right to Development.” Harvard Human Rights Yearbook 1: 3–40.
   Google Scholar
• Altman, Irwin. 1975. The Environment and Social Behavior: Privacy, Personal Space, Territory and Crowding. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Altman, Irwin. 1976. “Privacy: A Conceptual Analysis.” Environment and Behavior 8: 7–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Article 29 Data Protection Working Party. 2010. Opinion 3/2010 on the principle of accountability, 13 July (WP 173).
   Google Scholar
• Article 29 Data Protection Working Party. 2014. Statement on the Role of a Risk-Based Approach in Data Protection Legal Frameworks, 30 May, 14 EN (WP 218).
   Google Scholar
• Article 29 Data Protection Working Party. 2016. Guidelines on Data Protection Officers (‘DPOs’) 13 December, 16/EN (WP 243).
   Google Scholar
• Article 29 Data Protection Working Party. 2017. Guidelines on Consent under Regulation 2016/679, 28 November, 17/EN (WP 259), pp. 23–26.
   Google Scholar
• Atkinson, Sarah. 2013. “Beyond Components of Wellbeing: The Effects of Relational and Situated Assemblage.” Topoi 32 (2): 137–144.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bachrach, Yoram, Thore Graepel, Pushmeet Kohli, Michal Kosinski, and David Stillwell. 2014. “Your Digital Image: Factors Behind Demographic and Psychometric Predictions from Social Network Profiles.” Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS), pp. 1649–1650.
   Google Scholar
• Balkin, Jack M. 2016. “Information Fiduciaries and the First Amendment.” U.C. DAVIS L.REV 49: 1183–1234.
   Google Scholar
• Barassi, Veronica. 2017. “Digital Citizens? Data Traces and Family Life.” Contemporary Social Science 12: 84–95.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benkler, Yochai. 2001. “Siren Songs and Amish Children: Autonomy, Information, and Law.” N.Y.U. Law Review 76: 23–113.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ben-Zeev, Aaron. 2003. “Privacy, Emotional Closeness, and Openness in Cyberspace.” Computers in Human Behavior 19 (4): 451–467.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Best, Kirsty. 2010. “Living in the Control Society: Surveillance, Users and Digital Screen Technologies.” International Journal of Cultural Studies 13: 5–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bingham, N., G. Valentine, and S. L. Holloway. 1999. “Where Do You Want to Go Tomorrow? Connecting Children and the Internet. Environment and Planning D.” Society and Space 17 (6): 655–672.
   Google Scholar
• Blum-Ross, Alicia, and Sonia Livingstone. 2017. “‘Sharenting,’ Parent Blogging, and the Boundaries of the Digital Self.” Popular Communication 15 (2): 110–125.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blum-Ross, Alicia, and Sonia Livingstone. 2018. “The Trouble with ‘Screen Time’ Rules.” In Digital Parenting: The Challenges for Families in the Digital Age, edited by Giovanna Mascheroni, Cristina Ponte, and Ana Jorge, 179–187. Göteborg: Nordicom.
   Google Scholar
• Borgman, Christine L. 2000. From Gutenberg to the Global Information Infrastructure: Access to Information in the Networked World. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Boyd, Danah. 2010. “Social Networked Sites as Networked Publics: Affordances, Dynamics, and Implications.” In A Networked Self: Identity, Community, and Culture in Social Network Sites, edited by Zizi Papacharissi, 39–58. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Breiter, A., and A. Hepp. 2018. “The Complexity of Datafication: Putting Digital Traces in Context.” In Communicative Figurations, edited by A. Hepp, A. Breiter, and U. Hasebrink, 387–405. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Briggs, A., and P. Burke. 2009. A Social History of the Media: From Gutenberg to the Internet. 3rd ed. Malden, MA: Polity.
   Google Scholar
• Brkan, Maja. 2019. “Do Algorithms Rule the World? Algorithmic Decision-Making and Data Protection in the Framework of the GDPR and Beyond.” International Journal of Law and Information Technology. https://doi-org.liverpool.idm.oclc.org/10.1093/ijlit/eay017.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buitelaar, J. C. 2018. “Child’s Best Interest and Informational Self-Determination: What the GDPR Can Learn from Children’s Rights.” International Data Privacy Law 8: 293–308.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burrows, R., and D. Beer. 2013. “Rethinking Space: Urban Informatics and the Sociological Imagination.” In Digital Sociology, edited by K. Orton-Johnson and N. Prior, 61–78. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Byrne, J., and P. Burton. 2017. “Children as Internet Users: How can Evidence Better Inform Policy Debate.” Journal of Cyber Policy 2 (1): 39–52.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, James David, Avi Goldfarb, and Catherine E. Tucker. 2015. “Privacy Regulation and Market Structure.” Journal of Economics & Management Strategy 24 (1): 47–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheney-Lippold, J. 2017. We Are Data: Algorithms and the Making of Our Digital Selves. New York, NY: NYU Press.
   Google Scholar
• Children’s Commissioner for England. 2017. Life in ‘Likes’: Children’s Commissioner Report into Social Media Use among 8–12 Year Olds. Children’s Commissioner. https://www.childrenscommissioner.gov.uk/publication/life-in-likes/.
   Google Scholar
• Christl, Wolfie. 2017. “Corporate Surveillance in Everyday Life. How Companies Collect, Combine, Analyze, Trade, and Use Personal Data on Billions.” http://crackedlabs.org/en/corporate-surveillance.
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, Roger. 2009. “Privacy Impact Assessment: Its Origins and Development.” Computer Law & Security Review 25 (2): 123–135.
   Google Scholar
• Clifford, Damian, and Jef Ausloos. 2018. “Data Protection and the Role of Fairness.” Yearbook of European Law 37: 130–187.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. E. 2012. Configuring the Networked Self: Law, Code, and the Play of Everyday Practice. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, Julie. 2018. “Information Platforms and the Law.” Geo L Tech Rev 2: 191–196.
   Google Scholar
• Coleman, Stephen, Kruakae Pothong, and Elvira Perz Vallejos. 2017. “The Internet on Our Own Terms: How Children and Young People Deliberated about their Digital Rights.” 5 Rights. https://casma.wp.horizon.ac.uk/casma-projects/5rights-youth-juries/the-internet-on-our-own-terms/.
   Google Scholar
• Couldry, Nick. 2018. “Digital Traces in Context - Tracing Capitalism’s Turn to Data: Or, Contextualizing Daily Life’s New Data ‘Context’ — Commentary.” International Journal of Communication 12: 701–705.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Council of Europe. 2018. New Recommendation Adopted on Children’s Rights in the Digital Environment. Council of Europe. https://www.coe.int/en/web/children/-/new-recommendation-adopted-on-children-s-rights-in-the-digital-environment.
   Google Scholar
• De Hert, Paul. 2012. “A Human Rights Perspective on Privacy and Data Protection Impact Assessments.” In Privacy Impact Assessment Law, Governance and Technology Series, Vol 6, edited by David Wright, and Paul De Hert, 33–76. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• De Hert, Paul, and Vagelis Papakonstantinou. 2016. “The New General Data Protection Regulation: Still a Sound System for the Protection of Individuals?” Computer Law & Security Review 32: 179–194.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dixon, Rosalind, and Martha Nussbaum. 2011–2012. “Children’s Rights and a Capability Approach: The Question of Special Priority.” Cornell Law Review 97: 549–594.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dreyfus, H. L., and P. Rabinow. 1982. Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics. 2nd ed., [Nachdr.]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eekelaar, John. 1986. “The Emergence of Children’s Rights.” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 6 (2): 161–182.
   Google Scholar
• Eekelaar, John. 1994. “The Interests of the Child and the Child’s Wishes: The Role of Dynamic Self-Determination.” International Journal of Law and the Family 8 (1): 42–61.
   Google Scholar
• Englehardt, Steven, Jeffrey Han, and Arvind Narayanan. 2018. “I Never Signed Up for this! Privacy Implications of Email Tracking.” Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies 2018 (1): 109–126.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2015. “Special Eurobarometer 431, Data Protection.” European Commission Report. Accessed 7 September 2017. http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_431_sum_en.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Falk, Emily B., Christopher N. Cascio, and Jason C. Coronel. 2015. “Neural Prediction of Communication-Relevant Outcomes.” Communication Methods and Measures 9 (1-2): 30–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fast, Lisa, and David C. Funder. 2008. “Personality as Manifest in Word Use: Correlations with Self-Report, Acquaintance Report, and Behavior.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 94 (2): 334–346.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Federal Trade Commission. 2016. Big Data: A Tool for Inclusion or Exclusion? Understanding the Issues. Washington, DC: FTC Report.
   Google Scholar
• Floridi, Luciano. 2013. “Distributed Morality in an Information Society.” Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (3): 727–743.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foucault, Michel. 1980. “Two Lectures.” In Michel Foucault, Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and other Writings, edited by Colin Gordon, 78–108. Brighton: Harvester.
   Google Scholar
• Foucault, Michel. 1982. “The Subject and Power.” Critical Inquiry 8 (4): 777–795.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gandon, Fabien L., and Norman M. Sadeh. 2004. “Semantic Web Technologies to Reconcile Privacy and Context Awareness.” Journal of Web Semantics 1 (3): 241.
   Google Scholar
• Gasper, Des. 2007. “What is the Capability Approach? Its Core, Rationale, Partners and Dangers.” Journal of Socio-Economics 36: 335–359.
   Google Scholar
• Gelman, Susan A, M. Martinez, N. S. Davidson, and N. S. Noles. 2018. “Developing Digital Privacy: Children’s Moral Judgments Concerning Mobile GPS Devices.” Child Development 89: 17–26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibson, James J. 1977. “The Theory of Affordances.” In Perceiving, Acting, and Knowing: Toward an Ecological Psychology, edited by Robert E. Shaw, and John D. Bransford, 67–82. Hillsdale: Wiley Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Gillespie, Tarleton. 2010. “The Politics of ‘Platforms’.” New Media & Society 12: 347–364.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• González-Bailón, Sandra. 2013a. “Social Science in the Era of Big Data.” Policy and Internet 5 (2): 147–160.
   Google Scholar
• González-Bailón, Sandra. 2013b. “Big Data and the Fabric of Human Geography.” Dialogues in Human Geography 3 (3): 292–296.
   Google Scholar
• GSMA and BCG. 2017. Embracing the Digital Revolution Policies for Building the Digital Economy. February. Accessed 15 December 2018. https://www.gsma.com/publicpolicy/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/GSMA_DigitalTransformationReport2017_Web.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Hartson, Rex. 2003. “Cognitive, Physical, Sensory and Functional Affordances in Interaction Design.” Behaviour & Information Technology 22 (5): 315–338.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helberger, Natali, Frederik J. Zuiderveen Borgesius, and Agustin Reyna. 2017. “The Perfect Match? A Closer Look at the Relationship Between EU Consumer Law and Data Protection Law.” CMLR 54: 1427–1465.
   Google Scholar
• Helmond, Anne. 2015. “The Platformization of the Web: Making Web Data Platform Ready.” Social Media + Society 1 (2). doi:10.1177/2056305115603080.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henaghan, Mark. 2017. “Article 12 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Children: Where Have We Come from, Where Are We Now and Where to from Here?” The International Journal of Children’s Rights 25 (2): 260–274.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hepp, Andreas, Andreas Breiter, and Thomas N Friemel. 2018. “Digital Traces in Context — An Introduction.” International Journal of Communication 12: 439–449.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holloway, D., and L. Green. 2016. “The Internet of Toys.” Communication Research and Practice 2 (4): 506–519.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• House of Lords, Select Committee on Communications. Growing Up with the Internet, HL 2016-17, 130.
   Google Scholar
• Hughes, Kirsty. 2012. “A Behavioural Understanding of Privacy and its Implications for Privacy Law.” Modern Law Review 75 (5): 806–836.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hull, Gordon, Heather Richter Lipford, and Celine Latulipe. 2011. “Contextual Gaps: Privacy Issues on Facebook.” Ethics and Information Technology 13 (4): 289–302.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hutchby, Ian. 2001. “Technologies, Texts and Affordances.” Sociology 35 (2): 441–456.
   Google Scholar
• International Working Group on Data Protection in Telecommunications. 2014. Working Paper on Big Data and Privacy (55th Meeting). http://www.datenschutz-berlin.de/content/europa-international/international-working-group-on-dataprotection-in-telecommunications-iwgdpt/working-papers-and-common-positions-adopted-by-theworking-group.
   Google Scholar
• Jasmontaite, Lina, and Paul De Hert. 2015. “The EU, Children under 13 Years, and Parental Consent: A Human Rights Analysis of a New, Age-Based Bright-Line for the Protection of Children on the Internet.” International Data Privacy Law 5: 20–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• John, Nicholas A. 2013. “Sharing and Web 2.0: The Emergence of a Keyword.” New Media & Society 15 (2): 167–182.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jourová, Věra. 2018. “Keynote Speech by Commissioner Jourová at General Data Protection Regulation Conference.” http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_STATEMENT-18-3949_en.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Kahneman, Daniel. 2003. “Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics.” American Economic Review 93 (5): 1449–1475.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kennan, Danielle, C. Keenaghan, U. O’Connor, L. Kinlen, and John McCord. 2011. A Rights-Based Approach to Monitoring Children and Young People’s Wellbeing. Paris: UNESCO Children and Youth Programme. October. https://aran.library.nuigalway.ie/bitstream/handle/10379/3392/A_Rights_Based_Approach_to_Monitoring_Child_and_Youth_Well-Being.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.
   Google Scholar
• Kennedy, Helen, Dag Elgesem, and Cristina Miguel. 2017. “On Fairness: User Perspectives on Social Media Data Mining.” Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 23: 270–288.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kidron, Baroness, and Alexandra Evans. 2018. Disrupted Childhood. The Cost of Persuasive Design. London: 5rights. https://5rightsfoundation.com/in-action/disrupted-childhood-the-cost-of-persuasive-technology.html.
   Google Scholar
• Kokott, Juliane, and Christoph Sobotta. 2013. “The Distinction Between Privacy and Data Protection in the Jurisprudence of the CJEU and the ECtHR.” International Data Privacy Law 3: 222–228.
   Google Scholar
• Kramer, Adam D. I., Jamie E. Guillory, and Jeffrey T. Hancock. 2014. “Experimental Evidence of Massive-Scale Emotional Contagion Through Social Networks.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111 (24): 8788–8790.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lambrecht, Ingrid, Valerie Verdoodt, and Jasper Bellon. 2018. “Platforms and Commercial Communications Aimed at Children: A Playground under Legislative Reform?” International Review of Law, Computers & Technology 32: 58–79.
   Google Scholar
• Lazer, David, Alex (Sandy) Pentland, Lada Adamic, Sinan Aral, Albert Laszlo Barabasi, Devon Brewer, Nicholas Christakis, Noshir Contractor, et al. 2009. “Life in the Network: The Coming Age of Computational Social Science.” Science 323 (5915): 721–723.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levesque, R. J. R. 2016. Adolescence, Privacy, and the Law: A Developmental Science Perspective. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lievens, Eva, and Valerie Verdoodt. 2018. “Looking for Needles in a Haystack: Key Issues Affecting Children’s Rights in the General Data Protection Regulation.” Computer Law & Security Review 34: 269–278.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Livingstone, S. 2009. Children and the Internet. 1st ed. Malden, MA: Polity.
   Google Scholar
• Livingstone, Sonia. 2016. “Reframing Media Effects in Terms of Children’s Rights in the Digital Age.” Journal of Children and Media 10: 4–12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Livingstone, Sonia. 2018. “Children: A Special Case for Privacy?” Intermedia 46: 18–23.
   Google Scholar
• Livingstone, Sonia, John Carr, and Jasmina Byrne. 2015. One in Three: The Task for Global Internet Governance in Addressing Children’s Rights. London: Global Commission on Internet Governance.
   Google Scholar
• Livingstone, Sonia, Gerison Lansdown, and Amanda Third. 2017. The Case for a UNCRC General Comment on Children’s Rights and Digital Media. Children’s Commissioner for England.
   Google Scholar
• Livingstone, Sonia, and Brian O’Neill. 2014. “Children’s Rights Online: Challenges, Dilemmas and Emerging Directions.” In Minding Minors Wandering the Web: Regulating Online Child Safety, edited by Simone van der Hof, Bibi van den Berg, and Bart Schermer, 19–38. Berlin: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Livingstone, S. M., and J. Sefton-Green. 2016. The Class: Living and Learning in the Digital Age. New York: New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Livingstone, Sonia, and Amanda Third. 2017. “Children and Young People’s Rights in the Digital Age: An Emerging Agenda.” New Media & Society 19: 657–670.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupton, Deborah, and Ben Williamson. 2017. “The Datafied Child: The Dataveillance of Children and Implications for their Rights.” New Media & Society 19 (5): 780–794.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynskey, Orla. 2014. “Deconstructing Data Protection: The ‘Added Value’ of a Right to Data Protection in the EU Legal Order.” International and Comparative Law Quarterly 63: 569–597.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macenaite, Milda, and Eleni Kosta. 2017. “Consent for Processing Children’s Personal Data in the EU: Following in US Footsteps?” Information & Communications Technology Law 26: 146–197.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, Florence, Chuang Wang, Teresa Petty, Weichao Wang, and Patti Wilkins. 2018. “Middle School Students’ Social Media Use.” Educational Technology & Society 21: 213–224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mascheroni, Giovanna. 2018. “Researching Datafied Children as Data Citizens.” Journal of Children and Media 12 (4): 517–523.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mascheroni, Giovanna, Cristina Ponte, and Ana Jorge, eds. 2018. Digital Parenting. The Challenges for Families in the Digital Age. Göteborg: Nordicom. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:norden:org:diva-5398.
   Google Scholar
• McCullagh, Karen. 2016. “The General Data Protection Regulation: A Partial Success for Children on Social Network Sites?” In Data Protection, Privacy and European Regulation in the Digital Age, edited by Tobias Bräutigam and Samuli Miettinen, 110–139. Forum Iuris.
   Google Scholar
• Mendoza, Isak, and Lee A. Bygrave. 2017. “The Right Not to Be Subject to Automated Decisions Based on Profiling.” In EU Internet Law: Regulation and Enforcement, edited by Tatiana-Eleni Synodinou, Philippe Jougleux, Christiana Markou, and Thalia Prastitou, 77–98. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Milkaite, Ingrida, and Eva Lievens. 2019. “Towards a Better Protection of Children’s Personal Data Collected by Connected Toys and Devices.” Accessed 28 January 2019. http://hdl.handle.net/1854/LU-8583780.
   Google Scholar
• Moulier Boutang, Y., and E. Emery. 2011. Cognitive Capitalism. Malden, MA: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nissenbaum, H. F. 2010. Privacy in Context: Technology, Policy, and the Integrity of Social Life. Stanford, CA: Stanford Law Books.
   Google Scholar
• Nissenbaum, Helen. 2011. “A Contextual Approach to Privacy Online.” Daedalus 140 (4): 32–48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nissenbaum, H. 2015. “Respecting Context to Protect Privacy: Why Meaning Matters.” Science and Engineering Ethics 24 (3): 831–852.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nussbaum, Martha. 2000. “Women’s Capabilities and Social Justice.” Journal of Human Development 1: 219–247.
   Google Scholar
• Nussbaum, Martha. 2011. Creating Capabilities – The Human Development Approach. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• OfCom. 2016. Children and Parents: Media Use and Attitudes Report. London.
   Google Scholar
• OfCom. 2017. Children and Parents: Media Use and Attitudes Report. London.
   Google Scholar
• O’Manique, John. 1992. “Development, Human Rights and Law.” Human Rights Quarterly 14: 383.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Papacharissi, Zizi. 2010. “Conclusion: A Networked Self.” In A Networked Self: Identity, Community, and Culture in Social Network Sites, edited by Zizi Papacharissi, 304–318. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Parker, Stephen. 1994. “The Best Interests of the Child - Principles and Problems.” International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family 8 (1): 26–41.
   Google Scholar
• Parker, David. 2012. “(Regulatory) Impact Assessment and Better Regulation.” In Privacy Impact Assessment Law, Governance and Technology Series, Vol 6, edited by David Wright, and Paul De Hert, 77–96. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Peleg, Noam. 2013. “Reconceptualising the Child’s Right to Development: Children and the Capability Approach.” International Journal of Children’s Rights 21: 523–542.
   Google Scholar
• Peleg, Noam. 2017. “Developing the Right to Development.” International Journal of Children’s Rights 25: 380–395.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petronio, Sandra. 2012. Boundaries of Privacy: Dialectics of Disclosure. Albany, NY: Suny Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pettitt, T. 2013. “Media Dynamics and the Lessons of History: The ‘Gutenberg Parenthesis’ as Restoration Topos.” In A Companion to New Media Dynamics, edited by J. Hartley, J. Burgess, and A. Bruns, 53–72. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Quercia, Daniele, Renaud Lambiotte, David Stillwell, Michal Kosinski, and Jon Crowcroft. 2012. “The Personality of Popular Facebook Users.” Proceedings of the ACM 2012 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 955–964.
   Google Scholar
• Robeyns, Ingrid. 2016. “The Capability Approach.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta. forthcoming. Accessed 2 February 2018 http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/capability-approach/.
   Google Scholar
• Savirimuthu, Joseph. 2016. “Networked Children, Commercial Profiling and the EU Data Protection Reform Agenda: In the Child’s Best Interests?” In The EU as a Children’s Rights Actor. Law, Policy and Structural Dimensions, edited by Ingi Iusmen, and Helen Stalford, 221–257. Barbara Budrich.
   Google Scholar
• Selbst, Andrew D, and Julia Powles. 2017. “Meaningful Information and the Right to Explanation.” International Data Privacy Law 7: 233–242.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sen, Amartya. 1999. Development as Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, Amartya. 2005. “Human Rights and Capabilities.” Journal of Human Development 6: 151–166.
   Google Scholar
• Shelton, Dinah. 1985. “A Response to Donnelly and Alston.” California Western International Law Journal 15: 524–527.
   Google Scholar
• Solove, Daniel. 2002. “Conceptualizing Privacy.” California Law Review 90: 1087–1156.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Star, Susan Leigh, and Karen Ruhleder. 1996. “Steps Toward an Ecology of Infrastructure: Design and Access for Large Information Spaces.” Information Systems Research 7: 111–134.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swist, Teresa, and Philippa Collin. 2017. “Platforms, Data and Children’s Rights: Introducing a ‘Networked Capability Approach.” New Media & Society 19 (5): 671–685.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swist, Teresa, Philippa Collin, Jane McCormack, and Amanda Third. 2015. Social Media and the Wellbeing of Children and Young People: A Literature Review. Subiaco, Australia: Commissioner for Children and Young People. July. www.uws.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/930502/Social_media_and_children_and_young_people.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Tobin, John. 2013. “Justifying Children’s Rights.” The International Journal of Children’s Rights 21 (3): 395–441.
   Google Scholar
• Turow, J. 2011. The Daily You: How the New Advertising Industry is Defining Your Identity and Your Worth. New Haven: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Turow, Joseph. 2014. “The Case for Studying in-Store Media.” Media Industries Journal 1 (1): 62–68.
   Google Scholar
• UK Council for Child Internet Safety. 2015. Child Safety Online: A Practical Guide for Providers of Social Media and Interactive Services. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/child-safety-online-a-practical-guide-for-providers-of-social-media-and-interactive-services.
   Google Scholar
• UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC). 2003. General Comment No. 5(2003): General Measures of Implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, 27 November, CRC/GC/2003/5.
   Google Scholar
• UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC). 2013. General Comment No.14 on the Right of the Child to Have His or Her Best Interests Taken as a Primary Consideration (art.3, para.1), 29 May, CRC/C/GC/14.
   Google Scholar
• UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC). 2013. General Comment No. 17 on the Right of the Child to Rest, Leisure, Play, Recreational Activities, Cultural Life and the Arts (art. 31), 17 April, CRC/C/GC/17.
   Google Scholar
• UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC). 2014. Report of the 2014 Day of General Discussion ‘Digital media and children’s rights’ UNCRC. September. Accessed 25 February 2018, p.16. http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/CRC/Discussions/2014/DGD_report.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC). 2016. General Comment No. 20 (2016) on the Implementation of the Rights of the Child During Adolescence, 6 December, CRC/C/GC/20.
   Google Scholar
• UNICEF. 2017. Children in a Digital World. New York: UNICEF. https://www.unicef.org/publications/index_101992.html.
   Google Scholar
• Valentine, Gill, and Sarah Holloway. 1999. “‘The Vision Thing’: Schools and Information and Communication Technology.” Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 5: 63–79.
   Google Scholar
• van Alsenoy, Brendan, Rob Heyman, Valerie Verdoodt, and Jef Ausloos. 2015. From Social Media Service to Advertising Network: A Critical Analysis of Facebook’s Revised Policies and Terms. Leuven, Belgium: KU Leuven Centre for IT & IP Law.
   Google Scholar
• van der Hof, Simone. 2017. “I Agree... or Do I? – A Rights-Based Analysis of the Law on Children’s Consent in the Digital World.” Wisconsin International Law Journal 34: 409–445.
   Google Scholar
• van der Hof, Simone, and Eva Lievens. 2018. “The Importance of Privacy by Design and Data Protection Impact Assessments in Strengthening Protection of Children’s Personal Data under the GDPR.” Communications Law 23: 33–43.
   Google Scholar
• van der Sloot, Bart. 2014. “Do Data Protection Rules Protect the Individual and Should They? An Assessment of the Proposed General Data Protection Regulation.” International Data Privacy Law 4: 307–325.
   Google Scholar
• van Dijck, José. 2013. The Culture of Connectivity: A Critical History of Social Media. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• van Dijck, José. 2014. “Datafication, Dataism and Dataveillance: Big Data Between Scientific Paradigm and Ideology.” Surveillance & Society 12 (2): 197–208.
   Google Scholar
• van Dijck, J., T. Poell, and M. de Waal. 2018. The Platform Society. Vol. 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• van Dijk, J. A. G. M. 2013. “Inequalities in the Network Society.” In Digital Sociology, edited by K. Orton-Johnson and N. Prior, 105–124. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Veale, Michael, Reuben Binns, and Jef Ausloos. 2018. “When Data Protection by Design and Data Subject Rights Clash.” International Data Privacy Law 8: 105–123.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verdoodt, Valerie, Damian Clifford, and Eva Lievens. 2016. “Toying with Children’s Emotions, the New Game in Town? The Legality of Advergames in the EU.” Computer Law & Security Review 32: 599–614.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wachter, Sandra. 2018. “Normative Challenges of Identification in the Internet of Things: Privacy, Profiling, Discrimination, and the GDPR.” Computer Law & Security Review 34: 436–449.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warren, Adam, and Andrew Charlesworth. 2012. “Privacy Impact Assessment in the UK.” In Privacy Impact Assessment Law, Governance and Technology Series, Vol 6, edited by David Wright, and Paul De Hert, 205–224. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Waters, Nigel. 2012. “Privacy Impact Assessment – Great Potential Not Often Realised.” In Privacy Impact Assessment Law, Governance and Technology Series, Vol 6, edited by David Wright, and Paul De Hert, 149–160. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• WHO (World Health Organisation). 2016. Tackling Food Marketing to Children in a Digital World: Trans-disciplinary Perspectives. WHO. See also Francisco Lupiáñez-Villanueva et al., ‘Study on the impact of marketing through social media, online games and mobile applications on children’s behaviour’ (European Commission, DG JUST March 2016), available at: http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/consumer_evidence/behavioural_research/docs/final_report_impact_marketing_children_final_version_approved_en.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Wiebe, Andreas. 2015. “Data Protection and the Internet: Irreconcilable Opposites? The EU Data Protection Reform Package and CJEU Case Law.” Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 10: 64–68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williamson, Ben. 2017. “Learning in the ‘Platform Society’: Disassembling an Educational Data Assemblage.” Research in Education 98: 59–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Economic Forum. 2011. Personal Data: The Emergence of a New Asset Class— Opportunities for the Telecommunications Industry. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
   Google Scholar
• Wright, David, Rachel Finn, and Rowena Rodrigues. 2013. “A Comparative Analysis of Privacy Impact Assessment in Six Countries.” Journal of Contemporary European Research 9 (1): 160–180.
   Google Scholar
• Wright, David, and Charles Raab. 2012. “Constructing a Surveillance Impact Assessment.” Computer Law & Security Review 28 (6): 613–626.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, Tim. 2016. The Attention Merchants: The Epic Scramble to Get inside Our Heads. 1st ed. New York: Alfred A Knopf.
   Google Scholar
• Youyou, Wu, Michal Kosinski, and David Stillwell. 2015. “Computer-Based Personality Judgments are More Accurate than Those Made By Humans.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112 (4): 1036–1040.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zarsky, Tal Z. 2003. “Mine Your Own Business!: Making the Case for the Implications of the Data Mining of Personal Information in the Forum of Public Opinion.” Yale JL & Tech 5: 1–56.
   Google Scholar
• Zarsky, Tal Z. 2003. “Mine Your Own Business!: Making the Case for the Implications of the Data Mining of Personal Information in the Forum of Public Opinion.” Yale JL & Tech 5: 1–56.
   Google Scholar
• Zwick, Detlev, and Janice Denegri-Knott. 2009. “Manufacturing Customers: The Database as New Means of Production.” Journal of Consumer Culture 9: 221–247.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar