Input transparency involves higher costs and lower benefits

Evidence

With respect to inputs, the argument for disclosure is significantly altered, and it is also weakened in two critical respects. First, the benefits of disclosure are usually much lower (definitely not always, but usually). Second, the costs of disclosure are much higher. These are categorical statements with major qualifications, to which I will turn in due course. — David E Pozen; Michael Schudson, Troubling Transparency- The History and…, 955

Categorization

• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — David E Pozen; Michael Schudson, Troubling Transparency- The History and…, 955
• XREF: connects to: Output transparency and input transparency are distinct concepts — David E Pozen; Michael Schudson, Troubling Transparency- The History and…, 912; Transparency tools can paradoxically undermine democratic values. — David E Pozen; Michael Schudson, Troubling Transparency- The History and…, 821; Higher output transparency improves public access to useful information. — David E Pozen; Michael Schudson, Troubling Transparency- The History and…, 977 (+3 more)

Library Connections

• The benefits of input transparency are usually significantly lower than outputs. #corroborates (0.85)

Broader Connections

• Money functions as an equivalent-certainty that reduces the need for information #corroborates (0.75)
• Transparency can function as a mechanism of control, not liberation #complicates (0.50) — , The Braided Reading EPUB, 1259