Technical and professional communicators need to continue to interrogate how the seemingly mundane documents they create, such as terms of service (ToS) and community guidelines, and the systems those documents become a part of can oppress, exclude, and affect marginalized and hypermarginalized communities. This article presents an adapted corpus-assisted discourse analysis of how “sexual content” is defined across a corpus of 176 ToS and community guidelines from 118 social media sites. The findings show how ToS and community guidelines can work together to complicate our understanding of how values are intentionally and unintentionally embedded in these documents in order to uphold power or to meet emancipatory ends.
AnesaP.Arinas PellónI. (2019). Disseminating and hiding information in technical communication courses: The case of patents from the perspective of digital humanities. Hermes(Århus, Denmark), 59(1), 231. https://doi.org/10.7146/hjlcb.v59i1.117041
BambergerK. A.MulliganD. K. (2022). Allocating responsibility in content moderation: A functional framework. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 36(3), 1091–1171. https://doi.org/10.15779/Z383B5W872
5.
BhaleraoR.HamiltonV.McDonaldA.RedmilesE. M.StrohmayerA. (2022). Ethical practices for security research with at-risk populations. In 2022 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy Workshops (pp. 546–553). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EuroSPW55150.2022.00065
6.
CarradiniS. (2020). A comparison of research topics associated with technical communication, business communication, and professional communication, 1963–2017. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 63(2), 118–138. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2020.2988757
7.
ColtonJ. S.HolmesS. (2018). Rhetoric, technology, and the virtues. University Press of Colorado.
8.
ColtonJ. S.HolmesS.WalwemaJ. (2017). From NoobGuides to #OpKKK: Ethics of anonymous’ tactical technical communication. Technical Communication Quarterly, 26(1), 59–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2016.1257743
DingH.KongY. (2019). Constructing artificial intelligence in the U.S. and China: A cross-cultural, corpus-assisted study. China Media Research, 15(1), 93–105.
11.
DombrowskiP. (2000). Ethics in technical communication. Allyn and Bacon.
12.
DombrowskiP. M. (2007). The evolving face of ethics in technical and professional communication: Challenger to Columbia. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 50(4), 306–319. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2007.908729
EdenfieldA.CheekR.ClemS. (2021). Trans vulnerability and digital research ethics: A qubit ethical analysis of transparency activism. In The 39th ACM International Conference on Design of Communication(pp. 101–107). https://doi.org/10.1145/3472714.3473628
15.
EdwardsD. W. (2018). Circulation gatekeepers: Unbundling the platform politics of YouTube’s content ID. Computers and Composition, 47, 61–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2017.12.001
FrithJ. (2014). Forum moderation as technical communication: The social web and employment opportunities for technical communicators. Technical Communication, 61(3), 173–184.
18.
FrostE. C. (2023). Feminisms. In YuH.BuehlJ. (Eds.), Keywords in technical and professional communication (pp. 119–128). WAC Clearinghouse.
19.
GallagherJ. R.ChenY.WagnerK.WangX.ZengJ.KongA. L. (2019). Peering into the internet abyss: Using big data audience analysis to understand online comments. Technical Communication Quarterly, 29(2), 155–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2019.1634766
GelmsB.JohnsonC. (2024). (Re)defining “professional” in technical & professional communication. Technical Communication Quarterly, 33(3), 1–9https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2024.2342581
22.
GillespieT.AufderheideP.CarmiE.GerrardY.GorwaR.Matamoros-FernándezA.RobertsS. T.SinnreichA.Myers WestS. (2020). Expanding the debate about content moderation: Scholarly research agendas for the coming policy debates. Internet Policy Review, 9(4), 1–30.https://doi.org/10.14763/2020.4.1512
23.
GilliganC. (2014). Moral injury and the ethic of care: Reframing the conversation about differences. Journal of Social Philosophy, 45(1), 89–106. https://doi.org/10.1111/josp.12050
24.
GrahamS. S.KimS.-Y.DeVastoD. M.KeithW. (2015). Statistical genre analysis: Toward big data methodologies in technical communication. Technical Communication Quarterly, 24(1), 70–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2015.975955
ItchuaqiyaqC. U.EdenfieldA. C.Grant-DavieK. (2022). Sex work and professional risk communication: Keeping safe on the streets. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 36(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/10506519211044190
30.
ItchuaqiyaqC. U.RanadeN.WaltonR. (2021). Theory-to-query: Developing a corpus-analysis method using computer programming and human analysis. Technical Communication, 68(3), 7–28.
31.
JordanR. (2023). Shifting dynamics in online sex work: A pilot analysis of “sexual content” in terms of service. In Proceedings of the annual IEEE ProComm Conference, (pp. 21–26). https://doi.org/10.1109/ProComm57838.2023.00010
32.
JordanR.HolmesS. (in press). Inclusive flourishing as activist content moderation practice. In PattersonA.BlackmonC. R.AllenN.DightonD.ClarkE.EbleM.BanksW. (Eds.), Practicing digital activisms.University Press of Colorado.
KatzS. B. (1992). The ethic of expediency: Classical rhetoric, technology, and the holocaust. College English, 54(3), 255–275. https://doi.org/10.2307/378062
LangS.BuellD. A.ElliotN. (2023). Computer-assisted corpus analysis: An introduction to concepts, processes, and decisions. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 66(1), 94–113. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2022.3228026
38.
LingelJ. (2017). Digital countercultures and the struggle for community. MIT Press.
39.
MarkelM. (1997). Ethics and technical communication: A case for foundational approaches. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 40(4), 284–298. https://doi.org/10.1109/47.650006
40.
MarkelM. (2001). Ethics in technical communication: A critique and synthesis. Ablex.
41.
MarkelM. (2005). The rhetoric of misdirection in corporate privacy-policy statements. Technical Communication Quarterly, 14(2), 197–214. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15427625tcq1402_5
42.
MarkelM. (2010). Monitoring changes to federal health IT privacy policy: A case study in punctuated equilibrium. Technical Communication Quarterly, 20(1), 25–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2011.528344
MillerZ. (2022). Do you know it when you see it? Cinema, pornography, and the first amendment.Texas Law Review, 101, 509–537. https://texaslawreview.org/8459-2/
MoeggenbergZ. C.EdenfieldA. C.HolmesS. (2022). Trans oppression through technical rhetorics: A queer phenomenological analysis of institutional documents. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 36(4), 403–439. https://doi.org/10.1177/105065192211054
48.
MotschenbacherH. (2022). Linguistic dimensions of sexual normativity: Corpus-based evidence. Routledge.
49.
PaasonenS.JarettK.LightB. (2019). #NSFW: Sex, humor, and risk in social Media. MIT Press.
50.
PiggS. (2014). Coordinating constant invention: Social media's role in distributed work, Technical Communication Quarterly, 23(2), 69–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2013.796545
51.
PottsL.SmallR.TriceM. (2019). Boycotting the knowledge makers: How Reddit demonstrates the rise of media blacklists and source rejection in online communities. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 62(4), 351–363. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2019.2946942
52.
PottsL.TriceM. (2022). Digital community moderation values: Politics, news, and hot beverages on Reddit. In 2022 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference (pp. 133–139). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ProComm53155.2022.00028
53.
PottsL.TriceM. (2023). Social media. In YuH.BuehlJ. (Eds.), Keywords in technical and professional communication (pp. 273–279). WAC Clearinghouse.
RiceJ. A. (2014, October). A rhetorical reboot: Technical writing ethics in the age of digital media. In 2014 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference. (pp. 1–4). IEEE.
SuzorN. P. (2019). Lawless: The secret rules that govern our digital lives. Cambridge University Press.
58.
SwartsJ. (2015). What user forums teach us about documentation and the value added by technical communicators. Technical Communication, 62(1), 19–28.
59.
TriceM.PottsL.SmallR. (2020). Values versus rules in social Media communities: How platforms generate amorality on Reddit and Facebook. In ReymanJ.SparbyE. M. (Eds.), Digital ethics(1st ed., pp. 33–50). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429266140-3
VerbeekP. P. (2017). Designing the morality of things: the ethics of behaviour-guiding technology. In van dan HovenJ.MillerS.PoggeT. (Eds.), Designing in Ethics (pp. 78–94). Cambridge University Press.
63.
WaldmanA. E. (2022). Disorderly content. Washington Law Review, 97, 2022.
64.
WalwemaJ.ColtonJ. S.HolmesS. (2022). Introduction to special issue on 21st-century ethics in technical communication: Ethics and the social justice movement in technical and professional communication. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 36(3), 257–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/10506519221087
65.
WalwemaJ.ColtonJ. S.HolmesS. (2024). The ethics of inclusion, exclusion, and protection in the green book. Technical Communication Quarterly, 33(1), 19–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2023.2184498
