Carla's Blog

For those of you interested, my webpage is finally up and running.  Any comments will be read with interest.  Disfruta.  The site can be reached at diversityuniversity.be

After reading Lanier’s article, “You are not a gadget,” I took the time to watch Eli Pariser’s video on web filtering where he points out that different people are fed different information through their web searches based on individual search history. In other words, past web activity has an effect on what items come to the forefront when a search is made. While Lanier’s article, with his emphasis on social engineering and lock-ins did not completely discombobulate me, Pariser’s video did. The Internet, with all of its promise of unbridled information at my fingertips, has been displaced by a dark foreboding place where the other, in the form of an algorithm, decides what it worthy of my attention.

Pariser makes an astute comparison between the function of a newspaper editor in 1915 and the search engines of today. Editors eventually fulfilled the function of ethics curators because most agree that for a democracy to function, there also needs to be a ‘good’ flow of information. While he does not specifically specify what constitutes ‘good,’ we can infer from the rest of his presentation that a balanced flow of information would, can and hopefully will be the future of web searches. Right now on the web, algorithms are deciding what information to provide, without any ‘responsibility’ filter to render a balanced field of inquiry. This effectively creates a web of one, where balanced access to information simply does not happen.

Through the readings and videos introduced through this semester, it has become clear that to simply navigate the web is not enough. As we have been told time and time again, there is a battle royale occurring this very moment over who will control the web. The populace can choose to be puppets, and ingest the pabulum force fed to us by the powers that be, or they can arm themselves with the ammunition of education to persist in the ongoing struggle for unfettered web access.

In reading Lanier’s article, “You are not a gadget,” I was initially amazed to learn that the height of a person’s avatar would have bearing on one’s self esteem and social self-perception. Then I realized that the one’s avatar is simply another outfit in the personal wardrobe of one’s socially mediated closet. In a space that more and more often serves as one of the most utilized portals to communication, many of those who interact via the Internet, most specifically by utilizing Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube, have taken the creative process of writing, photography, and moviemaking, and mainstreamed it into something so totally banal that it has lost almost all sense of creativity. There are still those that carefully craft their entries before posting, but unfortunately, those are not the majority. There is no doubt that this shift has been caused by multiple factors.
One simple motivating factor could simply be motive. Some people choose to communicate through the act of posting “sound bites” of their lives that serve to highlight those events that might make them seem more interesting, cool, or plugged into to the hippest happenings of the day. Others choose to carefully research a subject before crafting a response, either in prose or pictures, to represent a certain view. As I have argued in the past, this simply serves to highlight the diversity of web uses. In the first case, web use becomes a vast vacuum where people surf the web for the latest cute pet video or viral clip. Others, seeing the vast potential of the web, choose to interact with other like-minded people, and create new interactive forms of digital poetry or writing.
Lanier claims that working with information technology also allows one to engage in social engineering. While this is a particularly thought provoking statement, it is also slightly ambiguous for what exactly is social engineering? Social engineering can be seen to be any attempt to influence popular attitudes and social behaviors on a large scale. Therefore, governments and large corporations often have this goal in mind when introducing new campaigns. What must be remembered is that social engineering comes about from people manipulating language through rhetoric to convince others of some specific something. When one has been educated to observe the power of words, rhetoric, and argument, one also becomes able to resist those attempts at manipulation. Lanier makes some valid points about “locked in” systems. His concerns about the future of computing should not be taken lightly. Alternatively, it should always be remembered that people are capable of thinking. With that capability, they should also be capable of resisting attempts at social engineering. I will continue to hope for the best while also monitoring future development.

In the article “Toward Participatory Expertise,” David explores the new ratings systems being developed in on-line communities by focusing on four specific sites and their solutions to the “problems of legitimization and extension by privileging participation over prior accreditation” (179). To paraphrase, Wikipedia “creates an open-community development space for viewing, editing, and linking web pages,” where there is some volatility when dealing with “hard to reconcile positions” (182). Wikipedia, and its advocates claim that unstructured collaborative authorship leads to community and quality (184).
Slashdot.org has dealt with the problem of site legitimacy by developing a rating system that rewards both participation and community judgment of that participation, terming these actions as “karma.” By linking the activities on the site to the concept of an action or deed, understood as that which causes the entire cycle of cause and effect, the site’s organizers have effectively invoked the hermeneutical circle. One becomes part of the whole by posting or responding to a story. This action automatically elevates the status of the “contributor” to that of “member.” While there have been some revisions due to the incredible growth of the site, the product of this site continues to be the attention that the members focus on specific stories.
Amazon.com has developed a multi-layered system of review, where the authors, promotional book reviewers, community reviewers, readers, community opinion, and a reviewers ranking system all work together to create the accreditation process. As David points out, and the reader must remember, Amazon is in the business of selling. Therefore, there have been some instances of “padding” in the review process., where family members or the authors themselves had favorably commented on their own books in order to increase sales. To this date, Amazon has survived these ‘minor’ scandals.
Experts-Exchange.com has chosen to rate entries based on a point system where the problem is answered when the poser of the question is satisfied. Points are earned by both asking and answering questions. While mimicking traditional forms of accreditation, this also serves to privilege participation, extending the model to incorporate the input of the audience in the accreditation process (191).
Finally, in the recent article that appeared in the Chronicle of Higher Learning, “A Future Full of Badges,” Carey reveals the developing practice of awarding digital badges, validated indicators of accomplishments, skills, qualities or interests that organize evidence of both formal and informal learning. He explains that these badges will include traditional transcripts and CV’s as well as allowing the badge’s recipients to tailor the ways the badges and metadata within are displayed. Carey acknowledges that as this system develops, there are bound to be some system failures, but optimistically points to the opportunities available through this burgeoning system. While employers will have access to traditional accreditation systems, they will also be able to access other forms of accreditation that the applicant has amassed through less traditional settings.
At this point in the discussion, it is helpful to turn to Krapp’s article “Hactivisim,” where he focuses on the ever-widening rift between the “profit-oriented actors” and those devoted to both political activism and artistic expression. To follow Krapp’s argument to its conclusion, if those motivated by the accumulation of capitol get their way, those artists momentarily disrupting sites devoted to the accumulation of wealth will be labeled cyber-terrorists, and prosecuted accordingly.
These articles all point to the ongoing struggle over access to the Internet and new forms of accreditation available through that very access. Krapp dishearteningly sees hactivism, once a positive term coined for those industrious enough to disentangle the hidden computer codes and thus gain access to the inner hidden workings of computer systems, being redefined by the powers-that-be into cyber-terrorism. As with almost all of the readings this semester, it is important to remember that the struggle for domination of the web continues. For every SOPA or PIPA that is introduced, the populace has come back with a response, effectively saying, “No, this is OUR INTERNET, and we demand equal access.” Additionally, when powerful group such as the Susan B. Komen Foundation have used bully tactics to influence outcomes, they been reprimanded resoundingly. To maintain access, the populace, organized through these on-site communities, will and must remain vigilant to the machinations of those who would limit our access. The Internet is a powerful tool, one to which we the people continue to demand to have access.

When I first began reading Tactical Media, I was struck with the names of the artistic groups, Electronic Disturbance Theatre, EDT, and Critical Art Ensemble, CAE, and how much their names sounded like some type of terrorist organization. Upon further reading, I realized why they sounded like terrorist organizations. In their attempts to move from purely rhetorical spaces to “tactical media,” they were also moving toward tactile participation. This in turn “provoked the FBI to suspect terrorism” (62). But, as both Raley and CAE continually remind us, these groups are concerned and constructed to provide “a continual process of questioning the premises of the channels they work with” (46). Through their manipulation of media and the web, they work to unveil the power structures at work, while at the same time momentarily creating a glitch in these power structures. These actions serve to illuminate the multiplicity of uses of the web. It can, and is, used by hegemonic power structures to proliferate control of those structures. It can, and is also, used by multiple individuals and groups to inhabit and inhibit, at least momentarily, those selfsame power structures. In my opinion, this serves to illustrate the beauty of the web in its unfettered state, where access to information is still available and not censored by those power structures mentioned above.
Projects like Tuesday Afternoon, and games like Turista Fronterizo and Corridos examine the underlying tensions of the rhetoric surrounding the U.S./Mexico border where capitol is allowed free movement between the two territories, but individuals aren’t, effectively proving that in the eyes of the powers that be, “cash is king.” (Like that is a startling revelation.) When it comes to the border, there have been many works, of varying lengths, as well as styles and mediums, that have explored the formation of identity in this real, rhetorical, and often staged space. Rodolfo Corky Gonzales’ poem Yo soy Joaquín, Gloria Anzuldúa’s book Borderland: The New Mestiza =La Frontera, Maná’s song Latinoamerica, as well as Calle 13’s song Latinoamerica, just to name a few, all explore different aspects of identity through the lens of the border. Tactical Media simply serves to continue, extend and expand this practice, effectively taking the struggle from the streets to the information highway.

When first perusing the website http://collection.eliterature.org/2/, I found myself at a loss as to what to say. How was one to comment on this diverse site with so many formats, such a visual array of images, sounds, and ideas, and all in a multiplicity of languages? I decided to begin by focusing on the first visual image one comes to when accessing the site. The organizers of this site, in their infinite wisdom, have chosen to portray each piece as a “patch” of a patchwork quilt, or a small piece of a mosaic, effectively reminding the reader that assemblages in art are not a new practice, but a time-honored one, firmly placing this project in the vast continuum of art projects. Therefore, each piece has existed and continues to exist independently, while also residing within the larger framework of the site. With that said, the ‘reader,’ and that term is used extremely loosely considering the scope and depth of this project, is then introduced to a vast panoply of projects. Each project addresses different concepts, while the unifying thread is one of multiple sites or concepts visited. As an example, I will focus momentarily on the art piece “Tailspin.” In this piece, the artist has worked to convey the separate realities of a daughter, her father, who was an aircraft fitter in WWII, who also suffers from tinnitus, and her children who are often alternately frightened by their grandfather and reprimanded by him. He sees their activity as noisome and disrespectful, and wonders why they can’t read books like his daughter did. The young girls, Lauren and Chloe wonder why their grandmother and mother always tell them to ask their grandfather when they have a question. As one enters the site, there are a series of swirling images. Each time the pointer is placed over the image, a short description comes to the screen, accompanied by different noises ranging from the reminisces of the grandfather or his daughter, to flashbacks of the grandfather’s more graphic remembrances of the war. The piece is a brilliantly woven tapestry of multi-generational issues that serves to exhibit separate realities all seeming to exist simultaneously.
In yet another ‘essay,’ poemas no meio, the work consists of phrases in Portuguese that can be manipulated to craft different poems. The visitor to the site can either manipulate the piece horizontally or vertically. Each manipulation brings an alternate effect. There is no attempt to translate the words for those visitors who do not read Portuguese, though those conversant in Spanish will be able to come to some approximation of the text.
Both pieces are refreshingly innovative and offer a new way of reading and writing that is now possible with the Web 2.0.

At the beginning of Chapter Eleven, Poster describes his idyllic stroll through Ljubljana, Slovenia with its delightful lack of “the repertoire of the marketers imagination.” Later on in the chapter, he references de Certeau’s concept that “Humans are spoken by the language of socioeconomic determinism long before they can speak it,” (240) eerily echoing Heidegger’s concept of thrownness, that state we enter at birth through no control of our own: our parents socioeconomic status, the neighborhood where we live, our ethniticity, the color of our skin. What Heidegger goes on to propose is that while one cannot escape her thrownness, one can develop one’s ‘authentic’ self by disregarding the patter of the they-self in exchange for the existential authentic self one is privy to through the silent voice of the conscience. If one applies this concept to consumerism, it would then be possible to disregard or deny the proliferation of ads assembled, created, and disseminated by the disparate arms of the media and exist beyond the tag of consumerism. This is the very concept Poster wrestles with in Chapter Eleven.
In Chapter Twelve, Poster discusses Walter Benjamin’s eye of the flâneur, one who strolls through the landscape regarding the things in the urban landscape with the ‘eyes of a child,’ that one would assume have not been wearied through the repeated and repetitious assault of advertising through multiple media outlets. From this it is an easy step to approach Debord’s concept of the dérive, as he explains it ‘a technique of rapid passage through varied ambiances’ that ‘involves playful-constructive behavior and awareness of psychogeographical effects’. The participants of a Dérive must ‘let themselves be drawn by the attractions of the terrain and the encounters they find there. In other words, participants approach the physical landscape and space with eyes trained on the banal, reimaging and reimagining these often overlooked spaces and finding new meaning or beauty or whatever in these daily excursions. In both these instances, the goals of the mass marketers have been ingeniously sidestepped. The individuals participating in these processes have in essence taken back the urban spaces for their own use, not the privileged prescribed use the urban planners and politicians would have us be permanently programmed to follow. Personally, I plan to explore the phychogeographical spaces of my life with aplomb and abandon. I invite all of you to join me.

In Society of the Spectacle, written in 1967, Debord argues, among other things, “to the extent that necessity is socially dreamed, the dream becomes necessary,” the “spectacle… is the opposite of dialogue,” and, “the specialization of power is at the root of the spectacle.” Thus he develops the concept of the spectacle as a social relation among people mediated by images, and as an instrument of unification that subverts reality where the “liar has lied to himself.” Debord, and the group he is closely associated with, the Situationists, are then closely involved with the uprising in France in 1968, commonly referred to as May 68. Jumping forward to the year 2006, the movie V for Vendetta incorporates the Guy Fawkes mask as an emblem for anti-establishment protest groups. The Guy Fawkes mask has become ubiquitous in the Occupy Movement, effectively incorporating the concept of détournement. As David Lloyd, the British graphic novelist artist who created the original image of the mask for the comic strip written by Alan Moore explains, “The Guy Fawkes mask has now become a common brand and a convenient placard to use in protest against tyranny – and I’m happy with people using it.”
For my final project, I propose to incorporate Debord’s concept of the spectacle, artwork and images from the May 68 uprising, images of the Guy Fawkes mask, and other images from the Occupy Movement, into a seven to ten minute movie working to advance the theory that while art can be appropriated by the hegemony to represent the sometimes seemingly serene concept of consumerism as an identity marker, it can also effectively be appropriated by those intent on rebelling against the stultifying influences of consumerism. The movie will focus on the artwork of those involved with the Occupy movement that are working to re-occupy the places, both literal and conceptual, overtaken by consumerism. Additionally, they are attempting to re-formulate the political, private and public spaces of today’s reality.

Earlier this week, I finished watching Part 3 of the documentary “Century of the Self.” One of my initial thoughts was, “Edward Bernays was evil.” Then I thought that was too simple and simplistic of a response, so I decided to address this concept further. What follows are my ruminations about this documentary and some of the specific ideas or concepts the video touched upon.
Edward Bernays took the practices of his uncle, Sigmund Freud, and applied them to society here in America. Through his development of “public relations” in the 1920’s he was able to further the goals of large corporations, one of which is to promote the purchase of their goods. He did this by emotionalizing the purchase. Instead of being motivated to purchase based on need, he personalized the process by suggesting that if you buy this, you will feel better. He was vastly successful. Throughout the decades, consumerism developed, many times through the use of subliminal messages. Psychoanalysts were solicited in droves to further the goals of corporations. Many of the corporations and the psychoanalysts became vastly wealthy.
In the early 1950s, with the threat of the Cold War, many of the new elite were convinced that the masses were irrational. Then Bernays, convinced of the malleability of the group, manipulated the press to expose the “communist threat” in Guatamala. Then came Dr. Cameron and his plan to erase the dangerous forces in unstable individuals by “de-patterning” their past. The 1970’s heralded self-expression. The corporations now worked to discover what these people wanted to become. Their marketing was based on desires, wishes and values, and was again was vastly successful. After watching this documentary I was completely disillusioned with the powers that be in America and how knowledge had been detoured to control “the masses”. I decided to take a break from studying and listen to a song by Calle 13 that had been recommended by a friend. The lyrics to the chorus follow:

Tu no puedes comprar el viento. (You are not able to buy the wind.)
Tu no puedes comprar el sol. (You are not able to buy the sun.)
Tu no puedes comprar la lluvia. (You are not able to buy the rain.)
Tu no puedes comprar el calor. (You are not able to buy the heat.)
Tu no puedes las nubes. (You are not able to buy the clouds.)
Tu no puedes comprar los colores. (You are not able to buy colors)
Tu no puedes me alegria. You are not able to buy my happiness.)
Tu no puedes me dolor. (You are not able to buy my pain.)

While I am still convinced of the evil of Bernays as well as many of his associates, I remember that I still, as do you, have a choice. I do not have to be completely motivated and shaped by consumerism.  I chose to develop my sense of self through thought.

In regards to Poster – Rules and laws are not stationary because they are bound by discourse.  Discourse is made up of language.  Language is subject to change.  Just as language is subject to change so are rules, laws, and I would argue, ethics.

(This blog has been short due to time constraints – it will be “fleshed out” after class).

In Chapter Five, “Identity Theft and Media”, Poster explores concepts of identity through the Foucauldian framework of a technology of power.  He begins with the question, “If one’s identity is subject to the felony of theft…is not the nature of identity itself called into question?” (87).  He then explores several definitions of identity theft.  Jennifer Lee defines identity theft as when the criminal uses personal information to open and use accounts that are in the victim’s name.  Sheila Cherry informs us that “identity theft is only possible with the full cooperation of three major participants:  the imposter, the creditor and the credit bureau” (91).  As Poster points out, both refer to stolen information that is deployed in a digital network illegally to obtain money and goods (my emphasis).  What is important to note here is what is being obtained – items that exist because of a capitalist system.  When Poster informs us that he is exploring identity through the Foucauldian concept, he has already situated the argument within the framework of a capitalist society, thus neatly skirting the classic question of identity as the “basis of subjectivity, as the center of the self, its spiritual core” (87).  The very concept “identity theft” is thus a misnomer.  What is being stolen is not one’s identity, but one’s “good name”; not in the sense of Arnaud du Tilh, who assumes the identity of Martin Guerre, but is eventually found out and executed, but one’s “good credit,” which is then assumed so that the perpetrator can go on to purchase whatever it is that his little heart desires.  If one has poor credit, it is safe to assume that his credit would not be in danger of being appropriated, for in doing so the perpetrator would not “gain” anything.  In this instance, the Media has misappropriated the term “identity,” in order to sensationalize a sensitive subject.

In Chapter Six, “The Aesthetics of Distracting Media,” Poster examines Benjamin’s Essay, “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction,” in which Benjamin argues that the ‘aura’ has been destroyed by the position of the camera in the artistic process, eliciting a “phony spell of a commodity” (231).  He then examines Marshall McLuhan’s concept of machine, claiming that the “otherness of information machines and the destabilization of the subject when interacting with them is lost on McLuhan” (123).  From this Poster explores new concept of digitized art where subject object positions are brought into question through the participation of the audience in artistic installations.   What one must remember through all of this is that we still have the power to turn off the computer and walk away, walk outside, and walk barefoot in the grass.  We are still individuals with extraordinary senses and sensations.  Computers have the capability to enhance and enlighten, but there are still other extremely tactile ways of experiencing the world around us.

Poster’s analysis then turns to narrative and the different modes of narrative, observing how access to the computer has and continues to alter the nature of narrative.  What I believe is important to note here is that the way the narrative is inserted into to the computer database “defines” its narrative.  It can be entered with a closed code, effectively sealing the narrative; or it can be entered with an open code, which allows other participants to alter the existing narrative.  The ‘author’ still has control over his/her text.  The hypertext is a space where many have argues that the term “narrative” no longer applies.  Poster examines television and its lack of narrative or maybe more importantly its role as a supernarrator.  This is an interesting premise, and one that we will continue to approach throughout the remaining weeks of the semester.