Agents of platform governance: Analyzing U.S. civil society's role in contesting online content moderation.

This paper examines the role of civil society in shaping content moderation governance arrangements in the United States. Drawing on prior research that recognizes the importance of civil society in shaping policy, this article analyzes the experiences of civil society practitioners engaged in content moderation activism. Based on in-depth original interviews with civil society practitioners, I demonstrate how civil society's activity in this space aligns with known regulatory standard-setting process competencies and suggest advocacy work benefits from the power of coalition lobbying and social capital. Moreover, I highlight the sense of frustration from some practitioners that they are not compensated by firms for their monitoring and reporting work that improves platforms' products, and I offer preliminary reasons for why practitioners contest moderation norms. The paper's insights contribute to the study of platform governance by illuminating informal mechanisms utilized by civil society, which holds broader implications for understanding the dynamics of non-state actors in shaping online platforms and their policies. • New empirical evidence contributes insight into the experiences of U.S. civil society actors involved in platform governance. • U.S. civil society practitioners engage in content moderation activism via known regulatory competencies. • Informal mechanisms such as networks, coalitions, and knowledge sharing are used to contest digital governance arrangements. • The power of coalition lobbying, dynamics of civil society-platform interactions, and motives for contestation are explored. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]