We have just published a new contribution to Issue #1: Politics after Networks! Based on his research project Campus Medius, Simon Ganahl explores “Digital Mapping in the Humanities.” After presenting the initial and the forthcoming version of campusmedius.net, he elaborates on the website’s data model, which operationalises Foucault’s dispositif and Latour’s actor-network. The article finally outlines the project’s long-term plans of establishing a digital platform for “mapping modern media”.
Over the last years we have been witnessing a shift in the conception of artificial intelligence, in particular with the explosion in machine learning technologies. These largely hidden systems determine how data is gathered, analyzed, and presented or used for decision-making. The data and how it is handled are not neutral, but full of ambiguity and presumptions, which implies that machine learning algorithms are constantly fed with biases that mirror our everyday culture; what we teach these algorithms ultimately reflects back on us and it is therefore no surprise when artificial neural networks start to classify and discriminate on the basis of race, class and gender. (Blockbuster news regarding that women are being less likely to get well paid job offers shown through recommendation systems, a algorithm which was marking pictures of people of color as gorillas, or the delivery service automatically cutting out neighborhoods in big US cities where mainly African Americans and Hispanics live, show how trends of algorithmic classification can relate to the restructuring of the life chances of individuals and groups in society.) However, classification is an essential component of artificial intelligence, insofar as the whole point of machine learning is to distinguish ‘valuable’ information from a given set of data. By imposing identity on input data, in order to filter, that is to differentiate signals from noise, machine learning algorithms become a highly political issue. The crucial question in relation to machine learning therefore is: how can we systematically classify without being discriminatory? (more…)
The years following the 2008 economic crisis have seen a return to questions of social reproduction (e.g. Bhattacharya 2017, Cooper and Waldby 2014, Dimitrakaki et al. 2016, Fraser 2016, Federici 2012, Laboria Cuboniks 2015, Preciado 2013, Vora 2015, and Weeks 2011). A series of issues and problems that were at stake in the ‘domestic labour debates’ of the 1970s and ’80s (e.g. Malos 1980) have been revisited and variously reaffirmed or rethought. Johanna Brenner and Barbara Laslett’s (1989) influential definition of feminist work on social reproduction describes it as addressing ‘the activities and attitudes, behaviours and emotions, responsibilities and relationships directly involved in the maintenance of life on a daily basis, and intergenerationally’. As such, it has encompassed an engagement with the (gendered) ways needs and expectations are met, how the young, the elderly, the ill and others are cared for, the manner in which socialisation take place, and the ways sexuality is produced, organised and regulated. These phenomena have often also been studied in terms of the role they play in reproducing society as a whole; both how they serve to reproduce society’s means of producing, and how they (re-)produce various social hierarchies, differences, and forms of inclusion/exclusion. (more…)
News from Issue #3! In their article The Experience of Digital Objects, Ned Rossiter and Soenke Zehle reconsider the question of human agency and intervention in relation to digital objects. They presume that digital objects change who we are and offer a speculative entropology which seeks to unfold modes of relation to make them open to contingency.
Please join us for the launch of our fourth issue on “Media and Migration” at the Welcome and Learning Center in Lüneburg on July 4th. spheres: Journal for Digital Cultures is an open peer reviewed web journal associated with the Centre for Digital Cultures (CDC) at Leuphana University of Lüneburg. It is concerned with contemporary, historical and emerging discussions about digital cultures, while at the same time exploring the theoretical, political and social stakes within these debates.
In our fourth issue of spheres, we investigate the significance of digital technologies for migration and the relation between migratory regimes and practices on the one hand, and digital cultures and infrastructures on the other.
For more information, visit the Facebook event that you can find here.
Have a look at our newest contribution to Issue #3: Unstable Infrastructures! In their article “Humanitarian Media Intervention”, Tim Schütz and Sebastian Kubitschko focus on the entanglement of forced migration, humanitarianism and the attempt to spread sociotechnical imaginaries of alternative wireless networks. By the example of “Freifunk for Refugees”, the authors highlight the struggle for migrants’ communication rights – not only in terms of providing Internet access at refugee shelters but also of articulating the infrastructural and political implications of open communication networks.
Carolin Wiedemann, Kritische Kollektivität im Netz. Anonymous, Facebook und die Kraft der Affizierung in der Kontrollgesellschaft, Bielefeld, transcript, 2016
Gilles Deleuze hatte es schon 1991 prophezeit: Jedem Gesellschaftstyp seine Maschinen, den Kontrollgesellschaften die Computer. Deren kybernetische Logiken haben sich mit neuen, biopolitischen Formen des Kapitalismus verbunden. Herausgekommen ist dabei Facebook, jene Plattform, auf der die User_innen sich permanent selbst vermessen und vergleichen.
Doch wodurch kann das Dispositiv von Kommodifizierung und Kontrolle unterlaufen werden? Was kann als subversiv gelten, wenn die Unterwerfung freiwillig ist und die Theorie kein intentionales Subjekt mehr kennt?
Digital Culture & Society is a refereed, international journal, fostering discussion about the ways in which digital technologies, platforms and applications reconfigure daily lives and practices. It offers a forum for critical analysis and inquiries into digital media theory and provides a publication environment for interdisciplinary research approaches, contemporary theory developments and methodological innovation.
The second issue »Quantified Selves | Statistical Bodies« provides methodological and theoretical reflections on technologically generated knowledge about the body and socio-cultural practices that are subsumed, discussed, and criticized using the key concept »Quantified Self«.
Clemens Apprich, Vernetzt. Zur Entstehung der Netzwerkgesellschaft, Bielefeld, transcript, 2015.
Many technologies and practices that have shaped Web 2.0 today date back to the 1990s – and so do the ideas of social media, user-generated content and participatory platforms. Thus, from a media-historical perspective, a lot of the ideas from that period about the future of the Internet have been implemented, albeit without fulfilling the envisioned socio-political utopias. (more…)
Florian Sprenger, The Politics of Micro-Decisions. Edward Snowden, Net Neutrality, and the Architectures of the Internet, Lüneburg, Meson Press, 2015.
Be it in the case of opening a website, sending an email, or high-frequency trading, bits and bytes of information have to cross numerous nodes at which micro-decisions are made. These decisions concern the most efficient path through the network, the processing speed, or the priority of incoming data packets. (more…)
Irina Kaldrack, Martina Leeker (eds.): There Is no Software just Services, Lüneburg, Meson Press, 2015.
Contributors: Ned Rossiter, Jussi Parikka, Christoph Neubert, Liam Magee, Andrew Lison, Christopher M. Kelty, Anders Fagerjord, and Seth Erickson. (more…)