Available soon.
Machines of Knowledge
Who controls the narrative?
Stories are central to our society. They have been our way of exchanging and remembering knowledge for thousands of years. Stories and their narratives create knowledge. By controlling narratives, one can control knowledge, which has important consequences in our society. The extent to which one can have control over knowledge stems from the authority one represents. For example, anti-Islamic propaganda during the crusades in the Middle-Ages was issued by the church, the most powerful institution in society at the time. Stories can also be used to control knowledge and eradicate certain forms of knowledge. Another example is how popular tales of witches were used to facilitate the hunt and execution of female doctors and botanists in the middle ages. This led to the loss of a large part of the knowledge they had (Chollet, 2018). The question “who controls the story” is crucial to understand the power dynamics at play behind the knowledge we consume.
With the development of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs), our approach to knowledge changed. In the course “Machines of Knowledge”, we discussed the evolution of the internet, which included its role as a space to share stories and create knowledge. In the assignment “Who controls the narrative?”, we discussed how players such as Facebook and Google dominate the online information market and have a disproportionate control over the information we receive. They control and curate almost infinite amounts of information using algorithms. Algorithms can work in different ways but are aimed at channeling relevant information for the user. To do so, they use preferences, previous research history, or even localisation and friends’ preferences (Bozdag, 2013).
This algorithmic catering of the stories we have access to can have harmful consequences. For example, algorithms are found to create filter bubbles and echo chambers. Eli Pariser, who first introduced the concept, argues that filter bubbles are
“information intermediaries [that] silently filter out what they assume the user does not want to see, hiding information posted by [the] opposite end of [the] political spectrum”
Pariser, E. (in Bozdag, 2013, p.218)
Echo chambers refer to a similar phenomenon in which users only interact with other users who share similar opinions and hence reinforce their common perspectives without considering opinions viewed as challenging or critical. Those phenomena are linked to the rise of political polarisation (Spohr, 2017). Hence, what started as a tool to efficiently sort through information turned into one that polarises our society.
One might think that the time of the crusades, when a population would blindly believe a polarised narrative in its most extreme form “the good against the evil, the light against the darkness” is centuries behind us. However, the impact stories can have on our societies is magnified when they are shared through the internet as they are available globally and instantly and issues like fake news and the rise of political extremism around the world might suggest that we are still at the mercy of some narratives.
However, spaces for debates and conversations between opposite opinions do exist on the internet (if you want to know more about it, read this post). Although some users appear to cross over filter bubbles, efforts must be made to circumvent filter bubbles and echo chambers and offer equal access to all kinds of stories on the internet.
References:
-Chollet, M. (2018). Sorcières – La puissance invaincue des femmes. Zones
– Bozdag, E. (2013). Bias in Algorithmic Filtering and Personalization. Ethics In Technology, 15, pp. 209-227.
– Spohr, D. (2017) Fake news and ideological polarization: Filter bubbles and selective exposure on social media. Business Information Review, 34 (3), pp. 150-160.
The #Shirtstrom controversy: does unintentionality excuse sexist actions?
In 2014, Dr. Matt Taylor, a scientist from the European Space Agency who was part of the Rosetta Mission caused an outrage also known on social media as #Shirtgate. He appeared on “BBC Breakfast” and a European Space Agency live stream to give an update on the mission while wearing a bowling shirt with a print of various women wearing skintight outfits and with guns in their hands.
And with that, Dr. Taylor became the scapegoat on the diatribe about sexism, women in science and inappropriate attires. This controversy sparked many discussions and debates from feminist groups. Some of the reactions on Twitter went on like this:
One small shirt for a man, one giant sexist remark for mankind #shirtgate #CometLanding
Andrea Ayres Deets @missafayres Nov. 12:
As a result, Dr. Taylor issued a public apology in which he teared up and showed regret for what he had done but that did not end it.The discussion provoked by his shirt became so heated that he was linked to the #GamerGate thread and even Boris Johnson, which at the time was London’s mayor, got involved and stood for him via a column in The Sunday Telegraph.
This blogpost discusses the controversy from a feminist perspective. Feminism here refers to a broad social movement fighting for equality between genders and against discrimination on the basis of gender.
As outrage over Dr. Taylor’s shirt ensued, there were also people coming to his defense. One major argument was that the shirt was made by a friend of Taylor’s, a woman named Elly Prizeman, who gave him the shirt as a birthday gift. She also came to his defense, explaining that she thought Dr. Taylor was being nice by wearing it in public. However, there were also other people coming to his defense who were not as close to the situation. These people’s arguments could be summarised as what is called “adorkable misogyny“: when men are able to get away with “a wide range of creepy, entitled, and downright sexist behaviors” because they seem to unintentionally misread social codes and practices. The fact that the man appears as stereotypical masculinity but also kind of dorky can excuse his behaviour, for some people. The audience perceives these actions as less harmful.
Assuming Dr. Taylor did not wear this shirt purposely to objectify women on an international platform the question arises: Does unintentionality count as an excuse? Do we excuse him wearing a shirt with almost naked women on public television, because a woman gifted it to him or because he has a wife and two children?
There are certain sexist habits which many men still incorporate into their everyday life without even noticing it. They maybe also don’t mean any harm but after all: they, (un)intentionally, put themselves above women. This starts with simple phrases like “boys will be boys”. A comment which is often made after a man does something that is normally not acceptable but because he is “a boy”, implementing that this is just his nature, it is excused by society. A possible scenario for that would be catcalling a woman on the street. Maybe the catcaller really just wanted to compliment the woman but this act of calling out a woman on the street can make her feel very uncomfortable or even unsafe. In society we know that this is not acceptable, but it might be excused by a group of men, excusing this behavior because eventually “boys will be boys”.
Unintentional or not, behavior like this is not acceptable and should not be easily excused with phrases or tropes.
Unintentionality and the individual fate of Dr Taylor is not the main issue in the end. The importance of the shirtstorm controversy derives from the context in which the Doctor wore the shirt. In the end, it is about a white man from a powerful institution (the European Space Agency), from a scientific field that has little representation of women, wearing the shirt while on the BBC.
The issue here is an issue of power and representation. Feminism stands for an equal repartition of power across gender (but also race and class). Hence, this demands from people in positions like Dr Taylor’s to be conscious of their power and act accordingly. Simply because their actions can have important consequences and reinforce existing power imbalances. A lead scientist from the European Space Agency wearing a shirt with practically nude depictions of women on television is not exactly encouraging for more young women to pursue scientific careers, for example.
Like the Spiderman principle states, with great power comes great responsibility. And hopefully, Dr Taylor realises this now.
Written in collaboration with:
Bastiaan Meyes – Media, Digital Technologies, and everything inbetween
Gonzalo Fernandez – MEDIA STUDIES BLOG
Tom Gerbert – Talking Ctrl
References: