CaMP Anthropology

  • Home
  • Author Interviews
    • Author Interviews Posts
    • Books Sorted by Press
    • Books Sorted by Regions
    • Alphabetical List of Interviews
  • Celebrations
    • Page 99 of CaMP Dissertations
    • Retirement Reflections
  • Virtual Reading Group
  • Possible Research Topics
    • Animals
    • Circulation
    • Education
    • Language and Media Forms
    • Law and Language (and Media)
    • Lexicalization
    • Media Etiquette
    • New Participant Roles
    • Old Media
    • Old Participant Roles, New Media
    • Orthography
    • Rituals
  • Publishing Advice
  • Anthropologists on Fiction
  • About

Communication, Media and Performance

  • Edith Podhovnik on her book, Purrieties of Language

    November 13th, 2023
    https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/purrieties-of-language/DE1A04A7E248AFCA72D8F94FE0917D6F?utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=copy_link&utm_source=bookmark

    Katja Politt: The book is not about cats alone, but also about science. It introduces many important concepts relevant to studying and describing language empirically and even provides a clawssary of them. In a nutshell: What is the most important takeaway one can gain for engaging with phenomena like purrieties in a scientific way? 

    Edith Podhovnik: Good question. I think, the most important takeaway is that looking at language is fun and  that we can look at whatever phenomenon we want – as long as we know what we doing and how we are doing it in science. If we are interested in a phenomenon, let’s go for it. And if it is a fun subject, there is no reason not to research it. On the contrary, it makes science more relatable and approachable for a wider audience. I had a few eyebrows raised at me when I said I was looking at online cats – as if online cats were not a science-worthy subject. To be honest, that made me even more determined to research cat-related digital spaces. 

    The fun side of cats aside, it is important to do a proper scientific study with a proper research design and methodology. At the same time, the more theoretical approach to science and scientific thinking is nothing to be afraid of. I have been teaching undergraduate students in research-related classes and have been supervising Bachelor’s and Master’s theses, so I have encountered students’ questions about research first-hand and I always try to take away their fears of doing something wrong. 

    Another aim for me was to offer a comprehensive linguistic description of the purrietie, in the same way as we would describe a language or a dialect that exists in the offline world.  It’s like a linguistic treasure trove: we find examples that show us how language works in general, like phonetics/phonology, semantics, syntax, and pragmatics. We can also go into more specialised fields, like computer-mediated communication. Language in the cat-related digital spaces is a living breathing thing: purrieties are evolving and changing, and that is fascinating. 

    I also show that online cats are not just a shortlived Internet fad but are part of our online culture. For some people, online cats might just be a silly social endeavour, but I have always thought that there is more behind the online cats than just the memes and funny cat videos. This is also what I wanted to bring across. 

    One final point I would  like to mention is that we can do our research also on our own without, say, institutional support. There are open source tools out there. I have been working on the purrieties as an independent scholar in my free time. Admittedly, this is hard sometimes, but absolutely worth it. 

    Katja Politt: During the process of writing, how has the book changed from what you had originally planned, e.g. by feedback from colleagues, cats, and your survey respondents? You seem to have made a great effort in including feedback, e.g. by including the constructive additions of Purr Reviewer 2.  

    Edith Podhovnik: Before I started writing, I had a clear outline of what I wanted to include in which chapter, say dialectology and lexicology should be covered in Chapter “The Feline Territory of Language” and the attitude studies should be in Chapter “Cattitude and Purrception”. There was quite a lot of preparation before I started writing, and it took some time to create a good workable outline. 

    Additionally, I was doing fieldwork to get the data: I collected data – scraping from social media and communicating with cat account holders. This is a cyclical process: we analyse a phenomenon, get feedback and more input from the people actually producing the data, we go back to our analysis of the data, then back to the respondents, and so on. 

    I received really good feedback on the first draft I submitted: additional resources to include, then the narrative approach to social media to complement my chapter on computer-mediated communication; I had inconsistencies in style as my draft was too academic in some parts and too informal in others. Well, and there was Purr Reviewer 2, who was only happy when I included him in the chapter. [Purr Reviewer 2 is sitting next to me on the radiator while I am writing this. Apparently he is happy because he does not use the keyboard on his way across my desk],

    The reviewers were always very encouraging and made really helpful suggestions. Based on their comments, I restructured the book. For example, it was not clear why I had a whole chapter devoted the real language of cat, and the reviewers felt that it did not quite fit in with the other chapters. That made me think about my reasons why I had included this chapter in the first place. I scrapped that chapter in the final version and kept only the bit on cat phonetics. I used the cat sounds as an introduction to phonetics in the chapter on phonetics/phonology – one reason being that I wanted to include the figure with the cat vowel chart. 

    Instead of the chapter on the real language of cats, I included the narrative approach that we can use to study social media, which was something I had not really touched upon in the first draft. So all the changes were geared towards filling in bits and pieces to come up with a fuller picture of the cat-related digital spaces. 

    I also asked authors whose data I included in my book to check if I could use their data for my book. Even though their data is freely available on github, I wanted to let them know that I was looking at their data for my own purposes and to have them give their OK to the context in which I was including their data. They also plotted some data visualisations for me, which I am really grateful for. 

    Katja Politt: The book features chapters on phonetics/phonology, meowphology, semantics, pragmatics, and sociolinguistics. As a researcher, which CATegory here is your favourite to research and analyse? 

    Edith Podhovnik: I like all the CATegories, to be honest. They were all fun to research and to write about. And going through the cat-inspired language data was very easy to do  because the purrieties and the cat-related digital spaces are lighthearted and fun. Showing the underlying linguistic processes by using the many feline examples I had come across in my research was just entertaining. 

    My absolute favourite CATegory is – and has always been – dialectology, I had specialised in social dialectology in my PhD, and I wanted to apply the same approach to purrieties. I just love dialects in all their variations, and with the purrieties I could study online language variation. Additionally, I was so happy when I found all the lovely dialect expressions in the English Dialect Dictionary and in the Survey of English Dialects. Well, it is phonetics and lexicology really. 

    When I went through the literature in the respective fields, I found that cats had already sneaked in. That meant that I could include cat-related linguistic quotes and cat-related material other linguists had used in the respective context. So, in addition to the linguistic content, I was on the lookout for cats. I am still doing that: checking if authors use cats in one way or another in their studies. 

    I would also like to mention that I love linguistic fieldwork. Going out to people and asking them language-related questions is something that I really like because I am fascinated by their answers. 

    Katja Politt: Would you say that there is also a way to describe semeowtics from a purrieties point of view? 

    Edith Podhovnik: Oh yes, definitely. Looking at semiotics with cats makes absolute sense – at least to me – because social media is full of cat pictures and videos. We have the memes, we have the vernacular photos, the cat gifs, cat emoji, cat stickers, cat videos, and the like. In the offline world, when we take into account the linguistic landscapes, we find cats, too: on T-shirts, on mugs, on various other consumer goods. Cats are used in advertising because they convey certain messages for us. 

    People are using purrieties, which means purrieties are not an isolated phenomenon but quite widespread. And they occur in other languages, too, like in French or German. 

    Katja Politt: Is there anything you would have loved to add to your book that you have come across since submoewtting [submitting] it? 

    Edith Podhovnik: Definitely. I keep coming across more examples of meowlogisms, I have found a new meowpheme (‘chonk’ as in ‘to dechonkify”, which means for a big cat to lose weight), I have collected more contributions in the digital spaces of academics and their cats, there are more books (of the fiction kind) featuring cats). As a dialectologist, I want to record all the different cat-related word formations, so I am still doing that. 

    I also find more meowlogisms in languages other than English, and I enjoy adding cat-inspired varieties in, say, German, French, Italian, and Russian, to my ever expanding cat-related linguistic repertoire. As the book is already submitted, I write posts about meowlogisms and purrieties in my research blog (https://meowfactor.hypotheses.org). 

  • Thinking with “Thinking with an Accent”: A Roundtable Conversation

    November 6th, 2023

    A conversation between Slava Greenberg, Michelle Pfeifer, Vijay Ramjattan, Pooja Rangan, Ragini Tharoor Srinivasan, and Pavitra Sundar

    In 2021, as our co-edited book Thinking with an Accent: Toward a New Object, Method, and Practice entered production, a Silicon Valley start-up began advertising an app that uses AI to modify accents in real time. As one reporter put it, “rather than learning to pronounce words differently, technology could do that for you. There’d no longer be a need for costly or time-consuming accent reduction training. And understanding would be nearly instantaneous.” Thinking with an Accent offers a sorely-needed alternative to this vision of a world where communication and understanding happen automatically, and seemingly magically, without translation or friction. Taking as our point of departure the idea that an accent is not an unfortunate thing that only some people putatively have, but rather a powerful and world-forming mode of perception, a form of minoritarian expertise, and a complex formation of desire, our volume convenes scholars of media, literature, education, law, language, and sound to theorize accent as an object of inquiry, an interdisciplinary method, and an embodied practice.

    Thinking with an Accent was published in print and Open Access in February 2023. This summer, a few of us co-editors and contributors gathered online for a conversation about our respective contributions to the book and our thinking on and after its publication. Highlights from our virtual roundtable appear below.

    Ragini Tharoor Srinivasan (co-editor): It’s been six months since the publication of Thinking with an Accent (TWA). In the intervening time, I’ve been tremendously excited by how many of us are already extending and expanding our interventions in the accent volume: in new articles, in video essays, and even in just-published or forthcoming monographs. I know that my own recently completed book manuscript, on the pedagogy and accented reading of Indian English literature in the Anglo-American university, could not have been written as it is without TWA.

    Pavitra, you’ve just written a book (congratulations!) in which you theorize the practice of “listening with a feminist ear.” Relatedly, your chapter for TWA theorizes “listening with an accent” as a “queer kind of listening.” In a recent video essay, you perform “listening to listening.” How do these four forms or modalities of listening relate to each other?

    Pavitra Sundar (co-editor): Thanks for this question, Ragini! As you know, I was working on my book and our accent volume around the same time, which meant that I was circling around similar issues in the two projects. Both “listening with a feminist ear” and “listening with an accent” are animated by a kind of critical utopianism. Enfolded within them is a critique of current sonic regimes – of what Jennifer Stoever, for example, calls the racialized “listening ear” – as well as a challenge to those regimes. My concepts turn on the belief that we can re-tune the listening ear. In my book, Listening with a Feminist Ear, I bring a sonic sensibility to the analysis of Bombay cinema, examining how specific voices, languages, genres, and sounds come to be understood as they are. So the questions at the heart of my monograph are similar to the ones we ask in Thinking with an Accent: how do we hear accent/cinema? Can we hear it differently?

    In my essay for TWA, I play with a wonderful poem by Aracelis Girmay to re-theorize accent in relation to place. Accent is often thought to be tied in place by place. The aural trace of the place in which we were born or raised is taken as a sign of our national, ethnic, and/or racial identity. I take that potentially essentializing notion and apply it to myself (the listener or reader) instead of the accented speaker. Rather than listening for the place audible in others’ tongues, I ask how my own listening is placed. From where do I listen? In your feedback on my draft, you noted the proximity of my framework to standpoint epistemology. You’re absolutely right! But where standpoint epistemology tends to mobilize visual metaphors (regarding how one sees the world) I emphasize the aural. How does my social location, including and especially my experiences with language, shape the ways in which I listen? To what extent is that place from which I listen fixed? How might I re-orient – or, better yet, disorient – the standpoint I habitually occupy as a listener?

    In these projects and in my recent video-essay work, I’ve been inspired by Nina Sun Eidsheim (another of our TWA contributors!), who, in her brilliant book The Race of Sound, calls on us to “listen to listening.” To shift attention away from the sonic object (voice, in particular) and to the naturalized ways in which we make sense of voice through listening. Relatedly, I’ve been thinking about your work on voice, Slava. One of the things I love about your TWA chapter, “Accenting the Trans Voice, Echoing Audio-Dysphoria,” is that it forces us to think about voice and accent in relation to each other. Could you say a bit about how your thinking on either or both of those categories developed over the course of writing the essay?

    Slava Greenberg: Thank you, Pavitra, for the opportunity to share my writing process, some of which was inspired by conversations with you, Rigini, Pooja, and Akshya, and which have also influenced my work on the unauthorized biography of gender dysphoria. When I first sat in front of a blank document to write my chapter, a childhood memory from preschool in Kyiv typed itself. It was about hearing a disembodied voice that sounded like my mom, speaking Ukrainian, which drew me out of the classroom and onto the school grounds, where I found a child on a tree on the other side of the school fence being scolded by my teacher in Russian while surrounded by my classmates. I told the kid to wait for me because my mom would be able to understand. The next thing I remember is the three of us eating sweet strawberries in our kitchen. What was actually at the core of that memory was my dad’s condescending jokes about my mom’s Ukrainian accent. It wasn’t that she gladly spoke Ukrainian – with whoever was willing (or not), particularly her two siblings, at any and all occasions – but her accent that became the punchline of his jokes. My mom laughed along, paying it no attention and carrying on with pride.

    I deleted the story, realizing that I had conflated voice and accent because they were both the butt of my dad’s jokes, and the kid was just speaking Ukrainian in a Russian-speaking-dominant city, not Russian with a Ukrainian accent as I initially remembered. I also deleted the bit about my dad’s favorite joke merging the two by provoking my mom to respond with a word that sounded like a bark to a Russian-speaking ear (how). As an accented speaker, I am experienced with training for vocal assimilation. As a trans man, I am experienced with the transition of my voice on hormone replacement therapy (HRT) into a deeper, yet somewhat grinding-sounding and, as I elaborate in the chapter, feminine-sounding voice over the phone. The accenting of my voice and speech are intertwined.

    Activating and then deleting this childhood memory was how I knew that the only representation of this entangled voice-accent phenomenon that resonated with me was in a film centering an accented trans woman who does not utter a word but sings one karaoke song, echoing someone else’s words and muffling her accent and trans voice at the same time. Hiding an accented trans voice for safety has brought back to me the memory of the child up on a tree, proudly yelling back in their own voice and language, and the taste of those strawberries my mom sprinkled sugar all over, which we shared.

    Michelle, I would like to extend the same opportunity to you now, to share a shift in your thought process as you were writing your chapter, “‘The Native Ear’: Accented Testimonial Desire and Asylum.” Is there a deletion, omission, perhaps a scene or moment of forgetfulness that you’re now rethinking? I’d love to know more about the motivations behind your thinking through the synthetic voices and the possibilities of migrant testimony.

    Michelle Pfeifer: Thank you so much for your question, Slava. I started working on linguistic analysis and migrant testimony in 2015 when Germany took center stage in the so-called European refugee crisis. While Germany was hailed as a benevolent, liberal, and humanitarian center of Europe – supposedly “welcoming” refugees with open arms – what we were actually observing on the ground was an intensification of border and asylum regimes. One way in which this intensification took place was through different technological, biometric, and data-driven tools that were used to determine the identities and countries of origin of people seeking asylum in Germany. One of those tools is a dialect recognition software that supposedly can distinguish between different, mostly Arabic, dialects on the basis of a speech sample with an average length of 25 seconds. This software was used to contradict the statements people made in their asylum interviews and ended up further restricting the right to asylum in Germany because people’s claims to asylum could be and still are regarded with suspicion.

    As I started to research this dialect recognition software, it became apparent that its use, development, and functioning were shrouded in intentional secrecy and obfuscation. So, the motivation for my research was twofold. First, I wanted to find, collect, and publish information on linguistic analysis and asylum in order to expose and challenge how it reproduces and intensifies the precarity of people seeking asylum. Second, I wanted to dig deeper into the underlying assumptions and claims of linguistic expertise of voice recognition and asylum to show and critique how applicants are placed in a double bind: they are incited to speak during asylum procedures, and then simultaneously have their testimony scrutinized and placed under general suspicion. My contribution to TWA shows one of the directions of this research. I focus on predecessors of dialect recognition software and the convergences of linguistic expertise and law, as well as the longer colonial continuities that produce what I call a linguistic passport that, like other passports, distributes both possibilities and impossibilities of movement and mobility.

    Since writing my chapter, I’ve been thinking about linguistic mobilities more broadly, including within the classroom setting. Vijay, your chapter, “Accent Reduction as Raciolinguistic Pedagogy,” ends with a discussion of possible strategies for a counterpedagogy to accent reduction programs. This discussion was very generative for my thinking on my own pedagogical practice and experience navigating educational institutions. Would you like to share an example (or examples) of these counterpedagogical strategies from your teaching, research, and/or writing practice?

    Vijay A. Ramjattan: Thanks, Michelle! As someone who teaches listening and speaking to international students, who may experience anxiety about their accents and thus seek out accent reduction, my counterpedagogy attempts to alleviate this anxiety by challenging the alleged effectiveness of accent reduction. While this service is marketed as a means to become intelligible, its conceptualization of intelligibility is problematic, to say the least. Instead of being a quality of an individual, intelligibility should be understood as a goal requiring the collaboration of speaker and listener (in the case of oral communication). The problem with accent reduction, then, is that it requires the speaker to undertake the entire burden of communication without ever considering how the listener needs to put in some effort as well. This is particularly concerning when listening practices can be informed by ideologies of oppression and thus unfairly position certain speakers as orally deficient no matter how they sound.

    In my chapter, I imagine a counterpedagogy in terms of and at the scale of institutional change. However, as an educator, I realize that counterpedagogies first form at the micro level. To counteract the idea of intelligibility as an individual trait and place more importance on listening, I try to have students develop listening strategies, which can range from paying closer attention to the context of an utterance to decipher unclear words, to recognizing how other semiotic practices such as gesture help to communicate a message. Wherever possible, I also have classroom discussions that explore how accent helps to reproduce racism, xenophobia, and other interlocking systems of oppression in educational contexts and beyond. Inspired by these discussions, students have given presentations on accent discrimination.

    To return to the matter of scale, I continue to imagine how what I do in the classroom could be translated into a collective effort to undo the pernicious effects of accent reduction. Ragini, I wonder if you might similarly describe your chapter “Is There a Call Center Literature?” as a micro-instance of a larger possible intervention. In your chapter, you use the idea of call center literature to pursue the accentedness of reading. For example, your discussion of Megha Majumdar’s debut novel A Burning  highlights your own accented perception that Majumdar is writing for a non-Indian Anglophone reader. For readers who may be uninterested in “call center literature” as such, what are some key takeaways from your chapter that you would like to emphasize?

    Ragini Tharoor Srinivasan: A terrific question, Vijay. You’re very right that I hope my essay on call center literature might offer an intervention at multiple scales. On the one hand, it is an inside baseball response to academic debates on World Literature. On the other hand, I intend it to be a more generally applicable performance of thinking and argument-formation that takes seriously the ways that all of us variously pronounce our desired interventions into any critical conversation. Call center literature is an archive, a method, and an object of desire. It is also, I argue, a literature of accommodation that draws our attention to what we might call, following Jennifer Stoever, the “reading ear” and how it is primed to perceive the non-Western Anglophone text. To repeat Pavitra’s questions about listening with a difference: from where and how do we read, and how do our own accented readings in fact produce the texts we read?

    I mentioned earlier that I recently completed a book manuscript on the pedagogy of Indian English literature. In that work, I try to further develop a method of accented reading that combines close textual exegesis of literary texts with discursive analysis of critical debates and responses to the texts. The result is a metacritical mode of engagement with literature that strives to attend to the cross-pollinating and co-creative dynamics of reading and writing. When we read any work of literature, we have to ask not just what the author is saying, but rather what they are saying to whom in what disciplinary and curricular contexts – or, for that matter, what the text is being made to say by a critic or pedagogue in order to advance some particular argument. In this way, I seek to build on TWA’s signal revisioning of the relationship between listening and speaking through an elaboration of accent as a non-indexical mode of perception, and not simply as an identitarian marker.

    It’s been such a joy to do this work alongside all of you! Looking forward to our next opportunity to think together with and about accent.

  • Darren Byler on his book, Terror Capitalism

    October 30th, 2023

    https://www.dukeupress.edu/terror-capitalism

    Interview by Xiao Ke

    Xiao Ke: Thank you so much for accepting my interview invitation. After reading this book in detail (again), I just want to reaffirm what I said in our personal conversation – that I admire this book, and I believe, for many years to come, this will be an indispensable reference for people who work in China-related topics and beyond. My first question is the following: Your dissertation, which Terror Capitalism is based on, is titled Spirit Breaking. I was wondering, in both the research and writing stages of this book, how you were able to reflexively balance your witnessing of unprecedent psychological trauma of a people (possibly the totality of 11 million Uyghurs and 1.5 million Kazakhs) and generalizations of terror-colonial-capitalist processes that are “more complex than interment camps” (p.5)?

    Darren Byler: Balancing the obligations I feel toward the people who shared some of the most difficult moments of their lives with me and scholarly impulse to analyze the colonial structure they were dealing with was one of deepest challenges I faced in my work. One of the ways I dealt with this was by committing to engaging my interlocutors as complex social figures and as storytellers. I strove to frame the book around their stories, allowing them to narrate its shape, and use their voices to develop the concepts such as enclosure, devaluation, and dispossession that I, and they, saw driving the capitalist-colonial structure. But, of course, at times it still feels like the language of social science overwhelms the affective dimension of their worlds, and there was a great deal of their emotional labor that I was unable to adequately represent in a single book. As I mention in the final chapter of the book, that ethnographic storytelling can evoke the pain of others, it can help readers sit with it, but in the end it really cannot offer much protection to them. I suppose that one of the ways I balance my witnessing of all this, is not much of a balance at all, but rather a practice of holding onto the affective experience of the powerless rage that some of my Uyghur friends felt, and letting it shape my own outrage at the capitalist-colonial structures that still dominate the world.    

    Xiao Ke: Following proposals in your book, what is both the purchase and difficulty of thinking China’s Xinjiang, Apartheid South Africa, Palestine/Israel, India’s Kashmir, US’s War on Terror together? In making analogues between these historical-geopolitical entities now, what are the arguments to be made trans-regionally (possibly beyond Robinson 1983 and Stoler and McGranahan 2007)?

    Darren Byler: This is such a great question. I do want to be careful about shallow comparisons that can flatten out the particular histories and dynamics of particular colonial situations in the world. I’m inspired for instance by the work of scholars such as Iyko Day and Peter Hudson in looking at specific genealogies and applications of concepts related to racial capitalism and settler colonialism. For me the most fruitful way of thinking beyond analogy is related to both discourse and materiality. The first has to do with examining the specific transfer of colonial and policing strategy, the ways in which Chinese politicians and police are reading and emulating Israeli, European, and U.S. policing and colonial theory in their own words. The second has to do with the way specific technologies are built, transferred and transformed beyond the nation form. So for instance I see the Chinese state contractors buying U.S. and Israeli counter-terrorism equipment and then developing versions of Palantir and Cellebrite of their own. Or I see them hiring graduates from the same computer science programs. That sort of thing can provide a grounding to the claim that these are interrelated phenomena, that Chinese policing and anti-Muslim racism is different not in kind but in scale and intensity. I also find the internal forced migration and labour, the racialized banning of certain populations from positions of economic and political power, and the global economic forces, that were present in 1970s Apartheid South Africa, especially useful for understanding the capitalist-colonial dynamics of contemporary Xinjiang. But of course there are some major dynamics that set Xinjiang apart from all of the places you mentioned. A colonial project centered around a mass thought reform campaign that utilizes cutting-edge automated surveillance systems and is carried out by a post-Maoist state, that is also itself a former semi-colony made up of 1.4 billion brown people (here a comparison to Kashmir could be made), is a singular structure. That is to say, contemporary Xinjiang, is both an outcome of the contemporary global world system, and yet in its specifics, it is unprecedented.     

    Xiao Ke: One of the really interesting features of your book is how you tie literary and ethnographic figures together, for instance: Yusup and “Iron Will…” (p.82-92); Ablikim, The Backstreets and the sad “ending” of an anticolonial homosocial friendship (p.148-162); or even Chen Ye and his reading collection of the lone, critical poet Bei Dao (p.179). How does thinking with and talking about contemporary literature help your ethnographic research and writing of this book?

    Darren Byler: I remember rereading Benedict Anderson’s work on imagined communities in graduate school with the anticolonial scholar Chandan Reddy, and really being struck by the way Anderson discussed the work of literature as staging, for a mass audience, something that is held in common. Great literature condenses and makes sensible things that many readers experience. For someone like me who grew up outside of both the Uyghur and Chinese world, their literature gave me a way of accessing deeply felt experiences of life in rural Xinjiang. It showed me how Muslim migrants on the run in the Chinese city, and also Chinese poets, could evoke a refusal of the pull of the authoritarian, ethnonationalist project of the state. Literature and poetry gave me a language, an archive of evocative portraits of times, places and people that would have otherwise been inaccessible, but which spoke to the life experiences of the people I was building relationships with. So, in that way reading and translating literature with my Uyghur and Han friends helped me to ground my writing in the concepts and experiences of people whose worlds were not my own.  

    Xiao Ke: You described the longer history of utilizing social media among young men to share Islamic teachings in Xinjiang. The initial media optimism makes a stark, almost ironic, contrast with the later digital enclosure they find themselves in. How do you see your book contributing to the field of media anthropology, its turn to digitality, as well as contemporary discussions of surveillance and artificial intelligence?

    Darren Byler: The transition from techno-optimism to techno-pessimism that the narrative of Terror Capitalism presents mirrors a similar growing unease that many technology consumers and a minority of technology producers experienced over the past decade. As I completed my dissertation I was surprised to come across Shoshana Zuboff’s book Surveillance Capitalism and to see how quickly it found a mass audience. I was seeing similar things in a radically different space and independently developing my own conceptualization of “Terror Capitalism”—as a technology driven frontier of the global economy that centered on the production of the terrorist data subject and terrorist-worker.

    The primary difference between the two frames, is that in my research I was focused on the way racialized minorities are differentially affected by the same, or similar tools, to the ones Zuboff examines among white middle class global North consumers. The rise of smartphones as digital tracking devices of online behavior has literally decimated Uyghur society—resulting in more than a tenth of the population being placed in forms of material confinement as well as a dramatic subtraction of Uyghur knowledge production and autonomy among the remaining 10-11 million yet-undetained. In this sense, the Uyghur experience functions as a limit case for the way population management technologies can be used to aid already existing colonial-capitalist systems. So, the story is useful in media anthropology, in that sense, as a worst case scenario.

    At the same time, over the same period of this study, colleagues of mine such as Carolina Sanchez Boe and Michael Jefferson have shown that similar technologies are also being used in ostensibly liberal political systems such as the United States to target asylum seekers and other racialized groups. This simultaneity—and the blurring between intentional racialization in illiberal spaces and the so-called misuse of similar tech in liberal spaces—will, I hope, push media scholars and technologists to signal the alarm and demand accountability from technology companies and governments who incentivize the building of harmful technology. It’s gratifying to see scholars like Brian Massumi and technologists like Signal’s president Meredith Whittaker engaging my work precisely in this manner.  

    Xiao Ke: When reading your writings about how Uyghur male bodies and desires (bonding over anticolonial homosocial solidarities) are placed at the intersection of Native/indigenous dispossession, proletarianization, racialization, demographic subtraction, as well as global Islamophobia, I cannot help thinking this is almost an exemplary case for Jaspir Puar’s (2007) observation on how “queer terrorist corporealities” are produced against the normative white patriotic imperial expansion. Can you help us make sense of the differences and relations between whiteness (that US-based scholars often talk about) and Chinese-ness in the context of your book?

    Darren Byler: Scholars such as Iyko Day have shown precisely how Chinese-ness is racialized relative to whiteness as having a supposedly machine-like automaton quality, a permitted, even model, difference that could be put to work to build the infrastructure of the U.S.’s internal colonial empire. This framing of the Chinese other was also in play in semicolonization of the Chinese mainland by the U.S., and other global North powers in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

    However, within China, before and after the Maoist revolution there has been an acceleration of something that Shanshan Lan frames as racial learning. Even as Chinese leaders strove to build Third Worldist solidarities with the formerly colonized—something well examined by a recent book by Jay Ke-Schutte, they also drew on what Nitasha Kaul refers to as the moral wound of past colonization as a way of justifying their colonization of non-Chinese within the borders of the revolutionary nation. The modernist project of sub-colonial nation building and the racial learning it entailed was really first operationalized with something Grace Zhou conceptualizes as settler socialism in the 1950s, but was radically accelerated I argue in Terror Capitalism as China became a capitalist nation in the 1990s and 2000s

    All this is to say that within China, Chinese-ness has taken on all of the features of an ethnonationalist racial supremacy—something that is similar to the Hindutva movement we see in India. At the same time, outside of the nation state, Chinese bodies are still racialized relative to whiteness.  What I hope my book shows is that the racialization of normative bodies relative to phobias directed toward queer, terrorist others is temporally and spatially situational, nested in the nation state form which are themselves within the world system.        

    Xiao Ke: Not to get into the nitty-gritty of the digital enclosure system in your book, but I have a set of remaining questions: When large volumes of biometric data of ethnoracialized subjects are collected (say, in order to detect embodied signs of religiosity), how is this data marked, sifted, and categorized, according to what kinds of metrics and thresholds? Where do these metrics and thresholds come from? Did the system often succeed or fail in achieving its goals? And finally, what other consequences might we expect from such installations under which Xinjiang might be a global frontier?

    Darren Byler: The automation-driven digital forensics tools I have looked at most closely are devices that were built originally to utilized cyberhacking software from the Israeli company Cellebrite, but were then adapted to the specifics of the Chinese campaign against so-called “foreign” or normative Islam. These systems were trained to detect images, text, and video content that seemed to be connected with Islam, images of women dressed in hijabs, men with beards, Arabic script, that sort of thing. Having downloaded or sent such images, texts or recordings in the past would be a reason to be interrogated and likely detained. If a user possessed a certain quantity of such items—5 or 10 or 20 or more, depending on how they were categorized—they would likely be criminally prosecuted and sentenced on terrorism related charges. Having a certain quantity was taken to be an indicator of intent to distribute. Such people could be characterized as the ringleaders of “black” or “evil” terrorist gangs.

    That is to say, as in U.S. policing, when it comes to the quantification of intent much of the rhetoric around the war on drugs has been applied to the so-called war on terror; and though blackness or darkness has a different genealogy than the racial discourse of the U.S. slave economy it is nevertheless attached to Muslim difference and thus participates in the same global discourse of anti-Muslim racism. So called extremist ideas, and the digital possession of particular quantities of such ideas by racialized people are taken to be not only a predictor of future violence but being suffused with violence itself. These tools produce a shift from what Brian Massumi might describe as policing of imminent danger to a policing of imminant threat that demands and endless process of elimination.

    Because it is part of a colonial elimination project, the system is often used in an extremely blunt way. Many assessments which might be described as false positives—like a student using a VPN to upload her homework to a University of Washington Canvas server for instance—nevertheless were taken to be positive indicators of terrorist guilt. What this signals, is the danger of the blackbox effect of technology evacuating the space for critical thought, and instead being taken at face value as an indicator of truth. This is particularly the case in racialized, colonial spaces where technological assessments are simply reinforcing preexisting prejudice. Police in the United States who successfully detain black and brown men using such tools, like police in Xinjiang detaining Muslim men, would undoubtedly say that such smart tools have accelerated their work and given them greater confidence in the precision of threat elimination. They refuse to recognize the sweeping and intimate violence that these tools strive to hide. One of the lessons of Xinjiang for me is the way technology can be used to accelerate and justify racialization processes. Powerless people everywhere suffer when this happens.

  • Sahana Udupa and Ethiraj Gabriel Dattatreyan on their book, Digital Unsettling

    October 23rd, 2023

    Digital Unsettling

    Interview by James Slotta

    https://nyupress.org/9781479819157/digital-unsettling/

    James Slotta: A couple of decades ago, paeans to the liberatory potential of the internet were common. Since then, the mood has darkened considerably as the capacity of digital media to buttress all manner of domination and inequality has become clear. In this book, you argue that there is truth to both digital optimist and digital pessimist perspectives—that, in fact, it is this Jekyll-and-Hyde quality of digital media that needs attending to. What led you to this ambivalent—unsettled—view of the digital and how does it shape your analysis of digital media?

    Sahana Udupa: I have been researching political cultures of digital media and digitalization for about two decades now. It started with my ethnographic study on news cultures in early 2000s when print journalists had started to worry about the “specter of digital media” that haunted them. I explored these tensions in my first monograph, Making News in Global India, observing how digital networks were beginning to reshape the conditions of mediated political discourse. The expansion of interactive social media
    amplified the momentum around digital networks as novel constellations for political participation. What form this would take remained an open question, but liberal technocratic ideology advocated especially by Silicon Valley pundits helped ramp up the euphoria around digital media as radical enablers of
    civic participation. Although digitial social media have no doubt offered pathways to enter and alter political discursive fields for multiple publics, it became apparent in the later years that the democratizing force of digital media did not necessarily portend a progressive future.

    My fieldwork took me to the darker sides of digital discourse and growing incidents of intimidation and abuse on social media. Ironically, abusive exchange had also opened up lines of political participation for a diverse range of actors who had been excluded or found themselves alienated from the serious tone of political deliberation and official centricity. The analytics of “gaali cultures” [gaali is an emic term for vitriol] developed in this work prompted me to collaborate for a global ethnographic inquiry around online extreme speech. Taking a closer look at this phenonmenon in the Digital Hate volume, I started to center decolonial perspectives in ways to emphasize ethnographic and historical sensibility and
    to depart from technocentric and leader-centric analyses common in this field of research.

    These efforts helped me to open the broader question around decoloniality
    and the digital. In a 2020 e-seminar paper, I approached coloniality as a
    global unfolding of the interrelated relations of the nation-state, race, and
    market, arguing that coloniality continues to shape the macro-historical
    structures within which proximate, affect-intensive battles of words are fought
    online, often with grave political consequences. Collaborating with Gabriel
    ignited more lines of inquiry around varied entanglements and ambivalences of
    the digital in relation to decoloniality.  Unsettling for us functions as
    a heuristic that helped us to probe the ambivalences but this not a sort of
    balancing act. Far from it, it highlights the profound unevenness of the
    digital condition. In my view, ambivalence does not just signal transcending an
    either/or dyad. It is about the specific ways in which digital networks
    entrench, rework and reinforce longstanding and novel forms of heirarchy while
    co-creating multifarious conditions to challenge them. We have sought to
    advance this approach in Digital Unsettling.

    Ethiraj Gabriel Dattatreyan:  I first started writing about digital media in 2011. I had recently begun following a group of emerging hip hop artists from socially and spatially marginalized locations in Delhi. As I watched them develop their aesthetic, creative, and playful audio-visual interventions online, I grew enamored with how these young men were taking up the participatory condition, to borrow a term or concept from one of the major and early proponents of the liberatory potential of the internet, Henry
    Jenkins. It seemed, at first glance and from afar, that the otherwise deeply segregated, classed worlds of Delhi were opening up for them in ways that would have been unthinkable just a few years prior, before the advent of 3G networks and flood of inexpensive smartphones in India.  It was only when I started doing on-the-ground fieldwork with various hip hop crews in Delhi that I saw the complicated ways that digital media at once opened new opportunities—social, economic, even political—for these young men even as it reinforced their racialized and classed positions in the city and country. In my first book, The Globally Familiar, I grappled with this contradiction.

    From this on-the-ground experience (as well as other ethnographic and personal forays into the worlds of digital media in the last decade) I have developed an increasingly ambivalent position towards digital media and its circuits of flow. As Sahana rightly suggests, ambivalence is not an affective register that marks a transcendence from an either/or dyad. Rather, it is a disposition towards the relationships between online and offline words that locates the distance between what is performed and what is lived and that, crucially, engages with the political economies and histories that frame and engender (social) media production, circulation, and consumption. I approached writing Digital Unsettling with Sahana with this analytical stance.

    James Slotta: Beyond analysis for analysis’s sake, the book is
    deeply interested in the role of digital media in activist, decolonial
    projects. What makes digital media particularly well suited to facilitate such
    projects? What dangers lurk for these projects when they embrace the digital?

    Gabriel and Sahana: In social movement contexts,
    digital/social media enables a way to quickly and efficiently communicate
    goals, set agendas, and coordinate action. Digital/social media also creates
    opportunities to broadcast interventions and direct action—as we discuss in the
    book—in ways that put pressure on institutional actors to change policy and/or
    practice by generating public spectacle while creating the potential to spark
    or invigorate action across borders.

    The dangers to using social media/digital media in service of social movements –
    particularly commercial, mainstream platforms – are multiple. Social movement
    actors, once identified as such, are under constant surveillance and exposure
    can lead to various forms of risk and, potentially, violence and harm.
    Mainstream social media companies, as we have seen across national contexts,
    have very little motivation to protect individuals (or collectives) given that
    their platforms run at the discretion of state interests.

    Another danger, of course, is the appropriation and commodification of social movement
    symbols, methods, and intellectual projects. As we briefly discuss in the
    introduction, decoloniality has suffered from its pop discursive success in
    online circuits and academia in ways that have taken away from materially
    grounded, historically rooted struggles where decoloniality has been developed
    as a rigorous praxis.

    Finally, creating online affinities towards addressing social issues doesn’t necessarily
    translate into embodied forms of action. Often, liking a protest or commenting
    on a movement agenda offers a way to feel like one is doing something while not
    necessarily putting anything on the line.

    James Slotta: The book moves across an impressive array of settings—from campus protests to content moderation to right-wing movements to your own online lives. Why did you decide to bring all of these different contexts together here? Is there something about digital media that compels such a multi-sited approach?

    Gabriel and Sahana: There are three key factors, we think, that produced the montage of sites/settings/encounters in Digital Unsettling. First, each of us brought a different set of cultivated research relationships and inquiries to the table. Sahana has been working with content moderators and on right-wing movements for several years. Gabriel had been engaging with campus
    movements and various, heterogenous online (creative) knowledge projects. As we
    began to discuss the book we felt these different sites/relationships/encounters spoke to each other in important ways, ways that gave shape to the kind of unsettling that the digital has engendered in the
    last decade.

    The ethnographic method we developed to theorize these multiple unsettlings
    works by placing events and spaces each of us have encountered in our
    respective long term projects—similar to a timeline on a social media site—into
    radical juxtaposition. Our reimagining of comparison as digital method puts
    distinct locations in productive relation with each other in ways that hold the
    potential to reveal the enduring structures that connect contexts.

    As important was our decision to bring a reflexive, personal engagement to
    the book. We were, in the tradition of feminist approaches to ethnography,
    committed to creating a text that offered a rigorous view from somewhere, that
    sincerely located each of us in the contexts we analyzed and in relation to one
    and other.

    Finally, the pandemic shaped our approach and writing. The majority of this
    book was written in 2020 and 2021, when forced quarantines, lockdowns, and
    rising death tolls seismically impacted the world. It seemed fitting and
    appropriate that, as we watched this unfold on our respective social media
    timelines, we took up a multi-sited approach to this project.

    James Slotta: Throughout the book, you stress the need to decenter
    the perspectives and experiences of white male elites when researching digital
    technologies. What do we gain when we bring other perspectives to the center of
    our analysis, such as those from the global South?

    Sahana and Gabriel: The digital has touched the lives of
    millions of people around the world, especially in the global South, and staying
    close to how it unfolds in the lived worlds of diverse actors is an essential
    approach to any grounded study. This is not just an empirical task but also an
    epistemological challenge.

    In the book, we emphasise that decentering hegemonic perspectives is a critical step
    towards unsettling the conceits and deciepts of liberal thinking. One example
    in our book comes from the Capture chapter. We begin the chapter by revisiting
    the vastly popular Netflix production, “Social Dilemma.” The docudrama
    highlighted how big tech firms have imbedded polarization as part of the
    business model, driving democracies to the danger point where animosities are
    hardwired into the business models of mega corporations rather than spilling
    out as unintended effects.

    While laudable for stirring public consciousness around the pitfalls of internet
    communication—at least among its audiences—the film nonetheless diverted
    attention from the diverse stakes of the political economy of digital
    capitalism. At the outset, by reproducing the white, male, tech elite as the
    central moral subject and eventual savior, it reinstated the terms of debate
    within the European-Enlightenment racial paradigm of the reflexive interiority
    of the white subject as the bearer of the authoritative view of the world and
    concomitant curative capacity. By pinning the focus on well-meaning white guys
    whose passionate creation has now transformed into Frankenstein’s creature
    beyond the original intentions or control of its creators, the film, despite
    its title, ironically had little to say about “the social”—the entangled
    complex of histories, institutions, interests, and mediations—that compose the
    actual grounds on which technology emerges and expands, in turn deepening and
    disrupting the grounds that seed it.

    Such an analytical turn opens up a range of questions that liberal elite moral
    consciousness tends to obscure—vast global disparities in content moderation,
    pronounced effects of extreme speech upon historically marginalized
    communities, domination exerted within the nation state structure, and so on.
    In other words, this analytical approach—what we call a decolonial
    sensibility—helps us to recognize that digital data practices have not affected
    everyone uniformly in a presumed post-political state of brute oppression.

    James Slotta: This book is the result of what appears to be a close
    collaboration between the two of you. I’m curious how the book would have
    differed if each of you had written it by yourself. How did the collaborative
    nature of this project shape the outcome?

    Sahana and Gabriel: Perhaps the book would have tilted more
    toward the darker side or the hopeful side, depending on who wrote it. What we
    have accomplished together with a theory of unsettling has emerged from
    continous exchange to nuance our own theoretical assumptions and conceptual
    frames. As a result, we have been able to excavate the potential of digital
    participation by tracing its vastly diverse and contradictory outcomes while
    staying steadfast in highlighting the reality of (neo)colonial structures that
    shape them.

    Working together has also yielded a range of examples and experiences to think with. We
    critically engage with the digital in this book as the two of us—each from our
    distinct positions—have seen, heard, and felt the deep push for change and
    reckoning with the past that has created our present and our visions for the
    future, alongside the effects of political, economic, social, and
    epistemological formations that continue to immiserate the racialized poor and
    expropriate resources for the few.

     

  • Stefanie Duguay discusses her book, Personal but not Private

    October 16th, 2023

    https://global.oup.com/academic/product/personal-but-not-private-9780190076191

    Interview by Elias Alexander

    Elias Alexander: In the preface of your work, you give us readers a wonderful insight into how your own positionality has uniquely affected your work. You also speak to the importance of looking at queer women’s lived experiences as they are often overlooked in the literature. With this in mind, can you speak further to why it is critical at this juncture to highlight queer women’s experiences and how you came to be interested in queer women’s use of online platforms in particular?

    Stefanie Duguay: There are three intertwined reasons that I decided to focus on queer women’s use of digital platforms, defining queer women broadly as including a range of people who are transgender and cisgender women under the LGBTQ+ rainbow. First, as you mention, my starting point for the research was my own positionality; I came out in my mid-twenties and social media played a large role in that process, from notifying acquaintances to figuring out how I wanted to express queerness in my style and everyday life. By experiencing a context collapse among my different audiences, such as family, coworkers and close friends, it attuned me to the difficulty of conveying sexual identity through digital media in ways that reflected exactly how I wanted to be seen. This led me down the path of asking, how do people actually do this through their identity-related practices on platforms?

    Secondly, the focus on queer women balances out what I observed most in the field of digital media and technology studies as a disproportionate focus on gay men. In the 2010s, there seemed to be an explosion of what could informally be termed Grindr studies. And while this research built meaningfully on careful work that looked into gay men’s online representation and sexuality in the 2000s, it seemed that one had to seek out studies about people expressing other sexual identities. With the more recent momentum gained by trans digital media studies and more scholars attending to queer women, I feel that the field of LGBTQ+ digital media studies is broadening out.

    Lastly, the book stresses that a focus on queer women matters because digital platforms are integral to lives and experiences on these platforms have the capacity to impact their wellbeing. They exist at the intersection of gender and sexual identities that can place them in the crossfire of misogyny and homophobia, both of which are rampant on the internet. Given this, parts of the book ask how, then, do queer women create lives within and through digital technologies that persevere even within these conditions?  

    Elias Alexander: In your work you forward the concept of identity modulation. This concept is extremely relevant, insightful, and adeptly presented. I was particular struck by queer women’s almost strategic use of stereotypes surrounding lesbian, bi, and queer experiences as a way to leverage identity modulation through the axes of personal identifiability, reach, and salience across dating apps and social media applications. Could you say more about the importance of identity modulation as a concept for queer folks and how the utilization of stereotypes can potentially and paradoxically produce effective outcomes for queer women on online spaces?

    Stefanie Duguay: Identity modulation is the ongoing process through which individuals and platforms both modulate, or adjust, the volume on representations of identity. In this process, individuals can make decisions about how they want to show up, and who they want to show up for. At the same time, platforms provide the means for signaling aspects of identity and also tend to respond to our activity, such as through personalization and the curation of content.

    Scholars have been thinking about stereotypes for a long time and so I’m not the first one to discuss their utility and constraints. But stereotypes showed up in my research as a way to be recognizable to others. Stereotypes aid the salience element of identity modulation, since they allow people to self-represent aspects of identity in ways that ping on others’ radars. In a sea of information, if you’re a queer person who is attuned to rainbow flags or plaid shirts as a means of finding other people like you, then others signaling identity in this manner is going to be very helpful. At the same time, stereotypes can narrow our perception of what constitutes acceptable or appealing ways of expressing identity. Platforms can also contribute to this narrowing by providing specific menus or categorizing people according to rigid identity labels. So, we need to watch for where stereotypes are useful and resist when they render identities one-dimensional.

    Elias Alexander: In Chapters 3 and 4 you explore the ways in which queer women engage in identity modulation across various social media sites, artfully elucidating how women’s efforts at self-branding can rightfully be understood as a form of affective labour. It seems to me that such efforts, however, may work to reify forms of homonormativity that enfolds queer subjectivities into the logic of a heteronormative capitalist agenda. Yet, at the same time, you highlight how your interlocuters like Alex, Jaxx and Chrissy, as well as Mïta, utilize the affordances provided through applications like Instagram and Vine to engage in posting images and videos that seem to subvert and challenge heteronormative standards, taking pride in posting overtly queer or more sexually themed content for their audiences. You note that these practices hold a potentiality to foster a more personalized community among your interlocuters and their followers, producing publics and counterpublics. Can you speak further to how you view the tension between the ever-present specter of homonormativity and capitalist exploitation alongside the possibility for individuals to queer these online spaces?

    Stefanie Duguay: I think that so long as this activity is happening on commercial platforms, it’s going to be subject to capitalist markets in various ways. The policies and interests of platforms in appeasing advertisers and appealing to broad audiences means that they reward ad-friendly, marketable content, which can pressure social media users toward homonormativity. At the same time, there might be something to be gained by playing this game: individuals who I interviewed talked about how self-branding on social media gained them visibility and clients that were conducive to their career growth. Yet, they also often strived to post content that they felt still reflected their everyday lives. Therefore, I think we need to move away from attitudes that judge social media creators according to a dichotomy of supposedly selling out or being authentic, and rather consider how individuals are logically self-representing in ways that respond to the commercial conditions in which they’re posting. Of course, I’m not the only one saying this and I encourage folks to check out the work of Tobias Raun, Crystal Abidin and others working in this area.

    Elias Alexander: Following the previous question, you further speak about how queer women’s practices of identify modulation on online platforms are buttressed, or rather constrained, by online platforms’ governance policies that are often guided by profit motives. You highlight how such polices are insufficient at protecting queer women from becoming targets of misogynist, homophobic, and racist harassment and discrimination. In today’s climate, and with the continued popularity of platforms like Instagram as well as the rise of applications like Tik Tok what particular challenges to do you see queer folks facing on social media platforms and what strategies do you see queer folks employing to navigate said challenges?

    Stefanie Duguay: There are quite a few challenges that queer people face on platforms today, but I think they can pretty much be summed up as not knowing whether a platform has your back – not feeling or being protected.

    This is reflected, for example, in the experiences of so many queer people who wonder if they are shadowbanned, which is a state of reduced visibility for one’s posts and activity. Alex Chartrand, a PhD Candidate at Concordia with whom I work, is looking specifically at the algorithmic imaginaries that queer people develop in response to what they observe as shadowbanning and other forms of algorithmic bias. Some of what we’re seeing, and what I heard from queer women in my interviews, is that it’s difficult to know if the platform is punishing you in this way and so you try to respond as best you can, but it really leaves you feeling uncertain.

    The queer people I spoke to also didn’t feel that reporting accounts would be very effective in protecting them from harassment and they worried that others would maliciously report them for their queer content, using platform’s automated moderation against them. The main problem here is that platforms assert that they are being fair by treating all users the same. However, we know that in our society there are some people who have been historically (and presently) treated unequally. Certain groups of people, including queer people, have been targeted, discriminated against, and left to function within an inequitable social landscape. These people deserve greater forms of protection and often require specialized attention to these inequities and residual forms of prejudice. When platforms do not provide that, they become inhospitable to queer people.

    Elias Alexander: I have been particularly taken by the methods you employ in your study. Your work applies a mixed methods approach with an emphasis on interviews alongside a walkthrough method. Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic I have seen many of my collogues in the field of anthropology turn to online mediums to conduct fieldwork. It seems as though the pandemic has re-emphasized the importance of online spaces within the lived lives of individuals. At the same time, I have also been privy to the uncertainty expressed by many researchers of how to appropriately and ethically conduct research in online spaces. In this regard your work stands out as exemplarily. Could you speak to what challenges and possibilities qualitative research through online mediums presents for researchers, and why now, more than ever, understanding peoples use of such mediums is critical?

    Stefanie Duguay: Since our lives are thoroughly enmeshed with digital technologies and media, what happens online can’t be ignored in our research. Indeed, it is extremely important to conduct this research ethically and many scholars spanning decades have thought deeply about this. I’d like to point readers to the Association of Internet Researchers’ ethics guidelines that set out key ground principles of ethical internet research.

    When thinking about the walkthrough specifically, ethical considerations arise even though the method itself is meant to only engage with an app’s interface and not its users. The researcher must think about whether their profile is disruptive to activity on the app. They need to consider whether users’ personal data is being caught up in screenshots or field notes and how this needs to be protected. More broadly, researchers must reflect on their own positionality and what it means for them to be co-present in that space with others who may be using the app for very personal and intimate reasons. I’ve been thinking through such ethical implications with Hannah Gold-Apel, an MA student at Concordia who is adapting aspects of the walkthrough method to examine TikTok, and we’ve recently published our thoughts in an open access article. One main takeaway is that users must always be considered, since without them, there would be no social media.  

  • Jonathan A. Gómez takes the page 99 test

    October 9th, 2023

    From my first steps towards considering how Black Americans hear and represent themselves in musical sound, I have wanted to address the question of how Black musicians can effectively organize around the idea of shared musical histories and practices without straying into essentialist discourses. My goal has been to work towards understanding how sounds recognizable as Black emerge, develop, and transform over time, simultaneously offering a challenge to Blackness(es) as purely biological rather than cultural. Page 99 of my dissertation, “The Way We Play: Black American History, Humanity, and Musical identity,” is a critical point at which I make an intervention into anti-essentialist discourses. Roughly a quarter of the way through my second chapter, a case study of vocalist Alberta Hunter (1895-1984), in a sub-section titled “the qualia of Black voice,” I argue:

    While Hunter foregrounds race-based suffering as a component for “authentic” blues performance, her earlier claim that Black performers possess little “tricks” of performance that others frequently overlook, situates blues performance in practice rather than biology. The instability of these tricks from performance to performance, modified intentionally (as Hunter did to avoid a stable model for [vocalist Sophie] Tucker’s mimicry) or not, further marks an underlying improvisatory aesthetic which makes a singular set of performance characteristics difficult, or impossible, to grasp. I further argue that Hunter’s understanding does not reflect a biological notion of race but rather one socio-politically and culturally rooted in the particular experience of Black Americans within the racial hierarchies of U.S. society. (page 99)

    The culturally-rooted practices to which I refer function semiotically as indexes of Blackness for those who hear them, commenting metapragmatically (cf. Silverstein 1993) on Black musical history through the act of performance. I reframe these practices as “musical qualia of Blackness,” sonic embodiments or manifestations of the quality Blackness, shared and transformed between and amongst Black American musicians across time and space.

    Page 99 is a point of transition in my argument made via Black feminist scholar bell hooks’s thinking on “strategic essentialism” in her oft-cited Teaching to Transgress (1994). She argues that adopting an essentialist position may function as “a strategic response to domination and to colonization,” (hooks 1994, 83), offering an important lesson for the study of music. For Black musicians whose histories and culture are so frequently stolen, appropriated, or “silenced” (Trouillot 1995), music has been a critical site for the development, maintenance, and transmission of this historical and cultural knowledge. Such processes of knowledge production and sharing are accomplished via a kind of musical interdiscursivity (cf. Silverstein 2005), connecting Black musicians in the present to performances and performers from Black musical history. In that way, I pose a challenge to anti-essentialist considerations of Black music, by augmenting hooks’s argument, insisting that Black musical identities are historically-grounded and carefully “curated,” to borrow form Daphne Brooks (2021), within Black communities. Page 99 is a useful window into the thought process behind my desire to understand to offer an alternative to essentialist understandings of Blackness, taking seriously the histories, experiences, and choices made by Black musicians across time and space.

    Jonathan A. Gómez. 2022. “The Way We Play”: Black American History, Humanity, and Musical Identity. Harvard University, PhD diss.

  • Dillon Ludemann takes the page 99 test

    October 2nd, 2023

    The subject of my dissertation, the anonymous image-board forum called 4chan, is a space that, while many who know of it often have a very strong, negative reaction to (and usually for good reason). My project showed me overwhelmingly that 4chan is a space that defies categorization, which I have taken  to heart within my dissertation and the research that followed.

    Simply, my dissertation examined what many would consider to be some of the worst parts of this website (yes, there is a hierarchy!). That is, I looked at what is widely recognized as a politically incorrect subforum, known colloquially as /pol/, and how users on this particular board talk about politics.

    On page 99 of my dissertation, one particular statement sticks out to me:

    “Given the continued description of the board throughout this project, one may wrongly infer that talk on this website is always one hundred percent wild; that discourse on this website is always incredibly visible, violent, and chaotic, with all capital letters and exclamation points deriding all manner of politics and practices. While these types of display are still obviously present in this space, there is generally just as much dialogue that appears in a more tempered or even-keeled manner.”

    While I cannot speak to the quality of work this page represents for my overall work (I’d like to think I did a solid job), this statement speaks to some of the way that I was drawn to studying 4chan in the first place. This is a digital space that, for many anthropologists and others not within the field, is considered lawless, chaotic, and almost impermeable for scholarship. 4chan, and /pol/ more specifically, exists as a digital boogeyman, a place by which many have heard of, but few well-meaning folk ever explore, or in some cases, is seen as the entrance to the dark web. My work has sought to complicate this notion and legitimate exploration of this space as a linguistic anthropologist. Not as a way to condone the actions and discourses that occur within /pol/, but rather to offer an examination of digitally located, far-right political discourses, such as the alt-right (which will no doubt resurge this upcoming US presidential election cycle) that does not outright dismiss, but instead highlights the important of studying these spaces, and the impacts that it has on other social media platforms, and beyond.

    Dillon Ludemann. 2022. ” And Their Name was Legion: Discourse and Politics on 4chan’s /pol/ Board.” SUNY Binghamton Phd.

  • Stephanie Love takes the page 99 test

    September 25th, 2023

    It was late winter of 2020. I stood near the entrance of a residential building in Oran, Algeria’s second-largest city. I snapped a picture of a spray-painted message: Danger, crumbling building. The scene was not particularly remarkable; Oran is brimming with such “visual noise,”[1] graffiti displaying on external walls the housing dramas taking place behind closed doors.

    Seconds later, a man stepped out of a taxicab. He asked me and my companions: Would you like to go inside? We entered the dangerously dilapidated building. The inhabitants ensured I recorded everything: official documents, a decaying roof, floor holes, black mold. Are we not Algerians too? they asked. I had been scripted into their performance of hogra (contempt, disdain, degradation, lowering)—a key Algerian genre of grievance. The state was its ultimate audience; I was merely an instrument for amplifying their case for public housing in the…

    “…fight for a piece of the ‘patrimonial cake’ (le gateau patrimonial)[2] of which the state has claimed the lion’s share.”

    I contextualize such struggles over urban space on page 99 of my dissertation—Streets of Grievance: Everyday Poetics and Postcolonial Politics in Urban Algeria. They are residues of 132 years of French settler colonialism and stunted postcolonial attempts to repair that past. After independence in 1962, this building was a bien vacant (“an abandoned good”)—property left behind by nearly one million French Algerian settlers (pieds noirs) who fled Algeria after a bloody eight-year war (1954-1962). Postcolonial urban politics have since revolved around the fight for postwar “spoils”—the patrimonial cake increasingly consumed by a few.   

    My dissertation outlines how ordinary Oranis navigate this political terrain through everyday urban poetics. City dwellers draw attention to everyday life’s forms—both linguistic (placenames, jokes, and strategic code-switches) and urban (the shape of public spaces, traffic lights, and monuments). The confluence of linguistic and urban materiality produces widely circulating sentiments carrying political potential. In the ruins of their beloved city, Oranis reanimate the colonial past in their fight for the patrimonial cake. For example:

    A man holds a photocopy of a French identity card from the colonial era. He uses its mediality to prove his family had been in a decayed building for nearly a century—photo by author.

    City authorities have razed historic neighborhoods. In the rubble, former inhabitants post makeshift signs claiming it as private property since the colonial-era—photo by author.


    [1] Strassler, Karen. 2020. Demanding Images: Democracy, Mediation, and the Image-Event in Indonesia. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

    [2] Madani, Safar Zitoun. 2012. “Le logement en Algérie: programmes, enjeux et tensions.” Confluences Méditerranée 2: 133-152.

  • Frank Cody on his book, The News Event

    September 21st, 2023

    https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/N/bo190464205.html

    Shikhar Goel: Describe for us some intellectual motivations behind writing this book. What were some significant moments that led you to this book project? 

    Francis Cody: This book came out of a longstanding interest in news media circulation and publics that I had already developed while doing research in rural South India for my dissertation.  But after a few articles that I wrote based on fieldwork done during that time, I still had a very vague understanding of where I wanted to go with the materials I was collecting until I realized that I was increasingly dissatisfied with how the literature on publics was so thoroughly grounded in liberal political theory.  This was the case even among the most important critics of liberalism.  And since I was approaching questions about democracy and the public sphere from postcolonial theory and the literature on populism, I saw an opportunity to intervene.  The occasion for this was an article, later published as a book chapter in an edited volume, that I was asked to write on the theme of media and utopia by the wonderful media scholar, Arvind Rajagopal.  By examining how crowds of angry supporters of political leaders attacked newspaper offices when their leader had been defamed in the press, and how newspaper editors published articles with the potential for such attacks to occur in mind, I was able to show the co-constitutive relationship that had developed between crowd violence and print capitalism, thereby undermining some of the key binaries underpinning liberal theories of publicity.

    My interests had moved past liberalism or its postcolonial critics to hone in on political logics of event-making and spectacle.  And from that starting point, I took my lead from the reporters I was becoming close to.   I paid special attention to how limits were imposed to control what could be published as news, and how those limits were sometimes used as opportunities to amplify the importance of an event when newsmakers chose to breach them.  For example, all the journalists I talked to complained of the government’s overzealous application of criminal defamation laws or the degree to which judges were likely to charge a journalist with contempt of court if they were unhappy with how they were being portrayed.  And yet, I noticed that they would continue to publish news items that drew these charges, and some even appeared attract such charges on purpose for the sake of their own publicity.  I saw this dynamic unfold across a range of contexts, echoing what I had learned about crowd violence against journalists, and I began to realize that this kind of amplification turning into a positive feedback loop was, in fact, becoming a focal topic of my research.  Another significant moment that led to this project was a workshop on law and media technology organized by the Sarai project at the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies in Delhi.  It was there that I was able to begin to interpret what I saw happening around me in Chennai with the help of media scholars who had actually studied law and even among lawyers who were arguing before the Supreme Court of India to decriminalize things like defamation or to stop the government from attacking critics with sedition charges.  I was motivated by these encounters, where the need for legal reform is quite clear, to try to put these questions in a wider sociological and historical frame.


    Shikhar Goel:  What would be some key contributions that you think this book makes to the existing literature in the field of media anthropology in South Asia and beyond?

    Francis Cody: Beyond having reopened the question of political publicity from a new angle, I hope that the concept of the “news event” I develop over the course of the book will be useful to think through a range of topics.  News media become event-makers in their own right, thereby blurring the distinction between events in the world being represented in the news and the event of news representation itself.  And this ubiquitous phenomenon is at the center of our concerns about misinformation in the age of digitalization, for very good reasons.  The fact of an event’s communicability – its capacity to circulate widely, thereby producing value and the production of circulation itself as an event – has eclipsed news media’s power to communicate something about the world outside of itself for many.  But this should also remind us of some much older arguments, like Baudrillard’s claims about the “implosion of meaning in media,” or critical theory’s claims about the “culture industry” and how news is part of a much larger transformation in media circulation.  These are long-standing concerns that have taken on new urgency in our times because of the obvious connections between transformations in technologies of circulation and the rise of populist attacks on traditional structures of representation, both in formal politics and in news media.

    What I would like to think I have contributed with the concept of the news event is a way to ask empirical questions about these very abstract theoretical claims – assertions that have often been made without much evidence.  By taking seriously the politics that continue to unfold under the regime of what Jodi Dean terms “communicative capitalism,” my focus on the news event allows me actually track, through events that are as real as they are virtual, how positive feedback loops emerge, and why news makers pursue the politics of communicability at particular historical conjunctures.  The stakes in understanding these phenomena are obviously high in South Asia, with the dominance of highly mediatized anti-democratic regimes in India or Bangladesh, as they are in many other places.  The advantage that comes with having studied these problems in a place like Tamil Nadu, India, is that political actors have been remarkably reflexive about the mediatization of politics there, and have purposefully pursued power through the production of news media from the very beginning of the Dravidian movement that has dominated electoral politics for over half a century.  But digitalization is playing a large role in the rapid transformations in Tamil politics as it is everywhere.  I am developing the concept of the news event in a context everyone is highly conscious of the power and limits of news representation in creating a political climate.  I am also aiming to provide a methodological model of how one might do this kind of media anthropology that is grounded in place, but which does not necessarily follow traditional models of ethnographic research and writing.

    Shikhar Goel:  Our readers might be curious to know more about your choice of working with “event as a method” in this book. How did you zero in on it, were there any competing alternatives you had experimented with during your research?  

    Francis Cody: My method of tracking events and logics of event-making to raise questions about the media politics of our time took a while to develop.  And it draws inspiration from at least two very different traditions of thinking about the event.  I really had no idea what I was looking for when beginning to do ethnographic research among news consumer and journalists, in addition to spending time in newspaper archives. But I was driven by a general sense that political sovereignty is mediated by news media and it is for this reason that political parties and other activists trying to change the world were so invested in how they are represented in the news and in trying to mold that image.  I was working as a sort of second generation among media anthropologists, as a number of studies were being published at the time about particular news organizations or about particular media technologies.  I realized that this study would have to be multi-sited in an institutional sense and multi modal in the sense of tracking news circulation across media such as newspapers, television, and the then emergent world of online publication and social media, especially WhatsApp.  Books that immediately inspired me in terms of method were asking big questions beyond the study a particular media house, like Amahl Bishara’s critique of “objectivity” under conditions of war and occupation among Palestinian journalists, and Zeynep Devrim Gürsel’s study of how digitalization was transforming the way news photographs were circulating and representing the world.

    Tracing the event started as a methodology to answer questions I had about how political power was mediated by news representation before it eventually became a concept to be theorized more abstractly.  I draw on Veena Das’s concept of the “critical event” which she developed to understand how an anthropologist might engage with large questions about community, kinship, and the nation when these very categories were being thrown into question in the context of national crises.  While many of the events discussed in the book are for less significant than those that fall under this category, the method of paying attention to the contours of contestation that are drawn when certain thresholds of social norms are crossed by news media or the politicians they report on was very powerful.  The other concept that became important, much later when writing the book, was Bernard Stiegler’s idea of “event-ization” which he develops to capture the processes through which the distinction between a storyline and that which it is reporting on collapses as a result of media saturation.  It appealed to my own sense that methodology must be ground in a processual approach to how events of representation become events of historical importance, and it captured that blurring of the distinction between the world represented in the news and the world of news representation that I saw happening all around me in the world of journalism in Tamil Nadu.


    Shikhar Goel: This book pushes scholars across fields and disciplines to relook at some of their established assumptions and concepts by elegantly emplacing media as a fundamental constitutive building block for critical theory in the contemporary. At the same time, the term media itself has promiscuously and generatively become a placeholder for a galaxy of objects, concepts, and phenomena in the academy. What were some challenges that you faced as an anthropologist while working with a term like media that has come to engender such wide-ranging theoretical possibilities?

    Francis Cody: You’ve put your finger on a very important problem, there is a sort of impasse that has arisen between media studies and anthropology.  One the one hand, media as an explicit topic of study has receded into the background of much of anthropology compared to ten or fifteen years ago.  I suspect that the question of alterity, which still drives so much of anthropological research in North America at least, is not as easy to ground in studies of technologies that are increasingly shared across the globe.  This has happened at a time when ethnography is much more highly mediatized than ever before, where a great deal of anthropological research takes place online, for example.  Media studies, on the other hand, has moved from seeing media, like television, digital media, and so on, as a kind of ecology within which culture grows to treating clouds, water, and so other elements of organic and inorganic matter as media in their own right.  But too often, this kind of ecology-as-media approach grounds itself in a rereading of the European philosophical canon that treats the rest of world as having empirical interest but nothing much to offer in the way of theory. There is, furthermore, a sometimes anti-humanist ethos in some corners of media studies that is hostile to questions about the public sphere, or even to questions of meaning and interpretation, questions I have found to be of such central interest to my research.         

    So, there’s a fairly large disciplinary divide.  At the same time, some of the hang-ups anthropologists have had about human agency and the problem of technological determinism have receded as well, opening the way for a greater appreciation for the scale-making qualities of media infrastructure and the technologically distributed quality of agency.  So, in that sense, this is a fortuitous time to develop a media anthropology that is more tune with developments happening elsewhere in the world of critical theory.  And doing so from the perspective of concerns arising out of recent transformations in India’s media ecology has the added advantage of avoiding many of the teleological assumptions about techno-social change that continue to undergird a media theory machine that remains incredibly Eurocentric.  You see this in some of the literature on machine learning, for example.  I’m interested in making general claims about media as a fundamental constitutive building block for critical theory in the contemporary, as you put it so elegantly, from an India-based point of view that doesn’t need to argue its importance by claiming that this the future of the global North, another Occidentalist teleology we continue to find in anthropology.  This is precisely about the contemporary!

    Shikhar Goel:  Law, both inside and outside the courtroom, emerges as your key ethnographic site in this book. The existing literature across disciplines of history, critical legal studies, and media studies among others in South Asia and elsewhere suggests that law and media share a constitutive relationship, where law emerges as an always already mediatized entity. What is then unique to this equation between law and media in the contemporary moment where digital technology with its robust circulation engines has come to dominate our mediascapes? How do you read the mutating relationship between law and media through time?

    Francis Cody: As the scholarship from India and elsewhere shows, this co-constitutive relationship between law and media is old.  It runs through cinematic representations of law and the legal regulation of cinema to our age of live reporting on legal procedure and legal attempts to shield the judiciary from the glare of instant publicity.  Of course, courtroom events form a great deal of news content.  But what I was struck by in my research is how often media are discussed in legal judgements and how much the judiciary is concerned with the influence of news media on the course of legal proceedings. 

                 The problem of “trial by media” has become much more acute as the time lag between media reporting and the slow pace of legal procedure appears to stretch further and further.  At the same time, police often play an important role in bypassing legal procedure by feeding evidence to television news channels, maybe because of the public pressures for the speedy delivery of some sort of justice (which is often profoundly unjust).  One of the genres that I’m writing about at the moment is that of the mass forensic event where CCTV camera footage and postmortem reports are endlessly analyzed by news anchors and the news consuming publics.  These kinds of evidence often ground very disturbing media trials where the criminality of certain types of people is decided upon ahead of time, and then seems to be corroborated by these kinds of indexical traces of violence, all before the courts are able to provide a procedural framework for weighing the value of evidence.  At a more general level, if the legal system always played a large role in regulating what could appear on news media, it appears that news media are playing much stronger role now in determining the meanings, and even outcomes of trials.  If we are already concerned with how political influence has hurt the independence of the judiciary, we should extremely worried about how the compulsions of communicative capitalism, coupled with corporate and political influence on news reporting, are driving the ways that the media environment conditions the life of law.

  • Eléonore Rimbault takes the p. 99 test

    September 18th, 2023

    No matter the size of shows, and the actual count of the public, the Indian circus works hard to appear larger-than-life. The image of the circus, in other words, is in many ways larger than the show itself, the publicity that fuels it traveling ahead and enticing expectant crowds before a company’s arrival. The circus and its image bleed into each other, they exist symbiotically; when one is attacked, the other suffers with it.

    In my dissertation, I track the ongoing disappearance of the circus in India as performances get associated with accusations that prove increasingly difficult to shrug off, including charges of animal mistreatment.

    On P. 99, I locate one such shift in the public’s perception of the circus to a period from 1988 to 1998. Drawing from reports and opinion pieces appearing mainly in the Times of India, I track animal rights NGOs’ strategies as they shifted from earlier suits against individual street performers and animal tamers to large-scale reports and rescue operations targeting itinerant circus companies. Because the public did not tend to differentiate between one company and another, these strategies ultimately led to the entire profession being seen as complicit, at all levels, in the mistreatment of animals.

    Caption (translated from Malayalam): This circus bear rides a motorcycle by himself

    Source: Mathrubhumi weekly, January 1955.

    P. 99 also notes the class disparities that mark the stark divide between the ideals of interspecies ethics that exist among circus practitioners and the more abstract notions of humane treatment and harm stipulated by members of animal rights organizations removed from the material conditions of work with animals.

    Interestingly, both sides play upon the image of animals and humans working side by side in the circus foregrounded by circus publicity: one in the name of sociality, the other in the name of exploitation. Both also invoke the motif of the circus’s disappearance to their own end—one to harken back to the circus’s former glory and bestow upon it the mantle of an expiring art form, the other to look forward to a future in which its practices have been definitively relegated to the past.

    Ironically, I claim, both sides, in insisting on the circus’s disappearance, have contributed in their way to sustain the ongoing presence of this performance, whose survival now seems predicated precisely on its being an object of dispute, always disappearing, yet never out of view.

    Eléonore Rimbault. 2022. Disappearance in the Ring: The Perpetual Unmaking of India’s Big Top Circus. University of Chicago Phd.

←Previous Page
1 … 11 12 13 14 15 … 53
Next Page→

Blog at WordPress.com.

 

Loading Comments...
 

    • Subscribe Subscribed
      • CaMP Anthropology
      • Join 257 other subscribers
      • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
      • CaMP Anthropology
      • Subscribe Subscribed
      • Sign up
      • Log in
      • Report this content
      • View site in Reader
      • Manage subscriptions
      • Collapse this bar