The World Health Organization (WHO) strives to assist and inspire cities to become more ‘age-friendly’ through the Global Age-Friendly Cities Guide. An age-friendly city offers a supportive environment that enables residents to grow older actively within their families, neighbourhoods and civil society, and offers extensive opportunities for their participation in the community. In the attempts to make cities age-friendly, ageism may interact with these developments. The goal of this study was to investigate the extent to which features of age-friendly cities, both facilitators and hindrances, are visible in the city scape of the Dutch municipalities of The Hague and Zoetermeer and whether or not ageism is manifested explicitly or implicitly. A qualitative photoproduction study based on the Checklist of Essential Features of Age-Friendly Cities was conducted in five neighbourhoods. Both municipalities have a large number of visual age-friendly features, which are manifested in five domains of the WHO model, namely Communication and information; Housing; Transportation; Community support and health services; and Outdoor spaces and buildings. Age-stereotypes, both positive and negative, can be observed in the domain of Communication and information, especially in the depiction of third agers as winners. At the same time, older people and age-friendly features are very visible in the cityscapes of both municipalities, and this is a positive expression of the changing demographics. Original article at Sage: https://doi.org/10.1177/1420326X19857216
MULTIFILE
Content moderation is commonly used by social media platforms to curb the spread of hateful content. Yet, little is known about how users perceive this practice and which factors may influence their perceptions. Publicly denouncing content moderation—for example, portraying it as a limitation to free speech or as a form of political targeting—may play an important role in this context. Evaluations of moderation may also depend on interpersonal mechanisms triggered by perceived user characteristics. In this study, we disentangle these different factors by examining how the gender, perceived similarity, and social influence of a user publicly complaining about a content-removal decision influence evaluations of moderation. In an experiment (n = 1,586) conducted in the United States, the Netherlands, and Portugal, participants witnessed the moderation of a hateful post, followed by a publicly posted complaint about moderation by the affected user. Evaluations of the fairness, legitimacy, and bias of the moderation decision were measured, as well as perceived similarity and social influence as mediators. The results indicate that arguments about freedom of speech significantly lower the perceived fairness of content moderation. Factors such as social influence of the moderated user impacted outcomes differently depending on the moderated user’s gender. We discuss implications of these findings for content-moderation practices.
