somely-14 - Tumblr blog

[somely-14]

Blog post #11 due 11/18

1. What digital platform is being created?

The platform I wish to create is an all-inclusive platform named “SharedX” where users can share their experiences with others who may or may not have been through similar situations or are currently going through the same. The platforms will be about mental health in its foundation, where sharing experiences can help users feel heard and not alone. The platform will allow for a desktop form as well as an app as a way to allow easy communication as well as a blog form so that information’s and expert testimony can also be shared regarding the topics discussed of mental health. Following a “Tumblr” foundation but with “Bumble” aspects, the platform will be a learning tool for mental health that will provide advice, information and tools to get help, whilst also serving as a tool of communication where people can grow and feel heard through other’s experiences. Only an email or phone will be required to create an account with the only reason being to have a duo identification system to reduce their information from being stolen.

2. What will you measure?

The site will measure demographics like age, top interests, sex, hobbies, likes or reposts on information or topics shared, and amount of time that users viewed certain topics. These will be measured as a way to personalize user’s accounts as a way for them to connect with people that share their personal experience. They will also have the option to connect with those that don’t necessarily have the same experiences but share this struggle with mental health. Like with Tumblr, the users' most viewed topics will pop up on their feed.

3. How will you weight these factors?

The factors listed previously will be weighed: amount of time on certain topics, interests, hobbies, age, sex, and likes. I feel these factors are vital to the functioning of the platform since it is what will allow users a more personalized and safe-feeling experience through the form of shared experiences, as the tittle foreshadows. Age is not meant to be a limitation but more of a consciousness that must be taken because some experiences may be too much for those users in the younger side of the spectrum. Of course, the user has the option of putting whatever name, or gender that they prefer or identify with. The user’s personal information like email, birthday, or the people they communicate with or information that they see will not be shared.

4. What factors will not be measured?

The factors that will not be measured will be things like social status, /ethnicity because, income level, or sexual preference. I think these things can be shared by each user if they chose to do so when connecting with others. The bottom message of this platform is positivity through a work-in progress mental health lens so that users can feel safe and non-discriminated. Just as in Tumblr, the user may update their profile/bio whenever they choose.

5. How will the model learn or adapt to new information?

The model of my platform will be very flexible and adaptive to any issues or concerns that may arise. The app will consist of new tools depending on the activity of users’ as well as monthly updates (if necessary) in order to fix bugs or any other algorithmic issues. There will also be continued check-ups in the system to make sure no information is being sold

6. What biases will be built into the model? How will this change the algorithm’s outcome?

Like any other digital platform “SharedX” will also come with some bias, although the intent is for the bias to be limited or with a positive connotation. Although the demographic factors are intended to provide users with others who share similar struggles or experiences, it may produce a bias in the way their recommendations are given regarding people that share their experience. This may change the algorithm’s outcome by not providing an equal opportunity for everyone to connect with others and only the specific demographic of users that share their experiences. However, the user will be given options like “Surprise friend” where they will be linked with someone else that doesn’t necessarily share similar background or experiences. Another bias may be that the mental health information may be larger and more comprehensive for women since there is more research on it, but my platform will try to balance that by maybe even providing both male and female testimonies and experiences, expert and non-expert.

7. How will the model live out the unethical practices we have discussed?

The app will not sell any information from its users and use the highest technology and algorithm strength possible to protect their information. In addition, “SharedX” will provide users the options to deactivate or completely delete their account so that they are not held hostage to the platform and feel free to leave it whenever they wish. A “right to be forgotten” right for the user.

#WGST320BADDIES

[somely-14]

Blog Post- (Week 12 Due 11/11)

1. Is surveillance online by the government in our best interest?

Surveillance online is supposed to be a tool used to make users feel and be safer when showcasing their identity online. I do believe there are some great benefits of surveillance that have our interest at heart by preventing harmful things. However, just like many algorithms that make up the internet, surveillance systems may also be a double-edged sword. When working for that intent to protect our identity online, surveillance online by the government is a very beneficial tool that does have our best interest in mind. Yet, when companies that make these surveillance systems use their tool to have us further controlled with the masks of “protecting us”, then do they really have our best interest in mine? Most likely not. We see this discrepancy with The Patriot Act, which allowed to federal government to legalize violating our privacy laws with the motive of preventing another terrorist attack. However, it is highly likely that they utilized all the information they got violating our privacy laws as a way to keep us under surveillance without consent.

2. How do we contribute to the violation/invasion of our privacy by the government?

Modern society has grown a co-dependency relationship with the internet that has normalized the idea of sharing your information and essentially identity, willingly to the world. Although it it’s not particularly a bad thing to share your life, it does enable the government to use that information without our direct consent since we are willingly putting out for everyone to see. We unconsciously or maybe even consciously give up our information and privacy for others to use. A great example would be leaving your location on 24/7 when you don’t need to have it on, this sonly enable the surveillance systems to have us under surveillance and knowing our every move, which can maybe even used negatively and without our permission, even though we were the ones to turn the location on. It is a tricky balance of consent, but when we overshare online, it can lead to a. further invasion. Of our privacy, that we didn’t intent to experience when choosing to share.

How do these surveillance policies negatively impact minorities?

Most abundantly, it has been seen that when these surveillance systems are set place, they target the monitoring of minority groups. Take into consideration the surveillance against Arabs in the wake of the tragic. 9/11 tragedy. These surveillance systems moss often are set in place as a protection for White people who view other minority groups as a threat to their superiority. It is even worse when we don’t know that these surveillance systems are in place and specifically targeting the minority groups. This even more evident when for instance the surveillance limits and suppresses protest that are being created to advocate the rights of minorities. Once, again showcasing how the White supremacy in society views minorities as a threat and the surveillance systems are essentially protecting them and not the minorities.

4. Can one be truly “safe” within these online spaces?

Just like the internet bias, I think that we have a long road ahead of us, if we want to create a truly “safe” environment via online spaces. There is many grey area in the internet that hides those who are seeking to be harmful and we should always be careful of what we share. When we share, we must have in mind that it will now be available information of our identity to everyone, and many times unfortunately, it may be used for a malicious intent. The internet has many great aspects that really engage society to communicate and be connected, and we must all just try to be careful and intelligent when utilizing these online spaces, because ultimately, they are surveilling us.

Parenti, C. (2004). The Soft Cage: Surveillance in America from slavery to the War on Terror. Basic Books.

Power, M. (2010, March 11). How your twitter account could land you in jail. Mother Jones. Retrieved November 11, 2021, from https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2010/03/police-twitter-riots-social-media-activists/.

[somely-14]

Blog Post #9 (Week 11 Due 11/4)

1. Is the internet a positive innovation to activism and awareness or is it a more negative one?

The internet has definitely changed the way activism takes place and how it is organized. If it has been for the better or not, can be argued, but the internet has definitely brought a whole new way of communication that can empower a movement in an international level within seconds. The internet can definitely bring about some negative consequences to a movement when utilized incorrectly or with a malicious intent. However, I think that even with some negatives, the internet has overall brought on more positives when organizing a movement. As Lee says in her response to bias in media, many people of color use social media platforms as a path to speak back to the challenges that arise with. The dominant narratives of Blackness and criminality that plagues mainstream media. People of color use this the internet to provide awareness of this issue through the internet as a way to get their message across to more people, whereas without the internet, it may not be so effective.

2. Should hacktivists be considered a crime or have criminal repercussions?

A hacktivist is an internet activist who adopts political causes as the justification for their actions, through the use of their technical knowledge of information technology as a form of civil disobedience. I think that sometimes in order to get something across one needs to be more direct or civilly aggressive, when nothing else is working, especially for a relevant and important issue. Sometimes the government or media companies try to block or lessen media coverage on a controversial yet relevant and important tissue, and hacktivist are the ones that get that media attention to happen so that we know what is happening. With the condition that someone doesn’t get harmed, especially not physically, I do not believe that hacktivists should have criminal repercussions, especially when they are letting the public know what is happening and sometimes even advocating for the correct actions to be taken.

3. Is it possible to have a powerful and effective movement without the internet now a days?

I think that just as other things have evolved as a way to adapt to society, activism has also evolved in a way to adapt to the phenomena of the internet in society. The internet has become an integral, if not co-dependent foundation of modern society where if something is not on the internet, it is almost non-existent. Having said that, I think that a movement can have some success without the internet, but definitely not the same impact that a movement that is using the internet has. The internet facilitates the organization and communication that is needed to move a movement along. Since the internet tis the tool we use the most to keep ourselves informed and up to date, I think that it would be extremely hard to produce an impactful movement without the help of the internet.

4. How are hashtags beneficial to maximizing the impact of a movement?

Hashtags are ultimately the fastest way to spread the word and globalize anything. Hashtags are then very beneficial when a social issue is trying to be combated, since it can make the issue known within minutes to everyone across the globe. The hashtag #BlackLivesMatter and #MeToo movements are a great example of how hashtags can provide global impact of these relevant and important issues. Many times, if it weren’t for hashtags making an issue viral, I myself wouldn’t even be aware of them. Of course, like many things, hashtags also have some shortcomings but for the most part I think they are a great tool for a movement to have significant impact, so that in consequence, the issue may be resolved.

Fuchs, C. (2018). Communication Power in the Arab Spring and Occupy Movement . In Social Media: A Critical Introduction

Lee, L. (2017). Black twitter: A Response to Bias in Mainstream Media.

Vegh, S. (2013). Classifying Forms of Online Activity . In Cyberactivism: Online Activism in Theory and Practice.

[somely-14]

WEEK 10: Blog post #8 due 10/28

1. Can trolling be a cause of mental distress on an individual?

Trolling can absolutely lead to a person suffering of any type of mental distress due to the stressing and overwhelming environment that trolling can enable. As W. Phillips explains himself, that, trolling is “mean-spirited and abusive”. Essentially Phillips plays of the idea that trolling subculture is different for everyone but like he argued, trolling is mean-spirited and abusive, which can lead to creating a toxic and hurtful environment for not only the victims of trolling but also the troller (whether self-identified or labeled as one). This is especially true when the trolling is done with malicious intent to just disrupt or expose a group or person, for instance. What may seem funny to the troller may actually be mean-spirited and can potentially destabilize their victim’s mental health by making them feel made fun of or antagonized in a public platform. On the other hand, a troller may project their poor mental health or self-confidence by trolling others which may only hinder them from dealing with what really is going on with them.

2. How can cyberstalking escalate as to become a steppingstone to in-person stalking?

Cyberstalking can be defined as a redundant pattern and unwarranted online behaviors and attention that can potentially cause a person to fear for their safety. As seen in this definition given by Professor Lee, once can see that non-present stalking, but rather just via online can already cause the victim’s safety to be compromised by the insistent unwarranted behaviors of the perpetrator. So, it’s not hard to imagine that if the perpetrator of cyberstalking activities becomes even more obsessed with their victim, that they may feel the urge or courage to continue this dangerous behavior in person. This, furthering the danger for the victim because now they know that their perpetrator can actually contact them in person if their stalking continues to escalate. As a criminal justice major, I have been told firs-person experiences where this escalation has happened, where the stalker began their stalking via online in a very intrusive way that one day, they felt with the courage to escalate their stalking to in person an become a first-level Joe (from the show “YOU”). (Possible spoiler of show ahead!!) This show and character is actually a great example of this where Joe (who is an elite stalker and murderer) usually begins stalking his victims through their online accounts and other online platforms, which he then utilizes to confront his victims.

3. How does trolling contribute to the underlying bias in which the internet is constructed on and evolved into?

Trolling is a done by a person who purposefully disrupts these online spaces as a way to be funny, provocative, and/or antagonistic. This very definition itself, when taken in with a closer and critical lens, highlights the enormous bias that it includes. These behaviors by trollers are done with an intent across the internet where everyone sees it, and in order to achieve their intent, they must post or “troll” in a biased way. In addition, trolling has become very prevalent and pervasive in individuals who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender. Some victims have even been outed in reference to their sexual preference online, which only enables the spread of misinformation and hate towards them which in turn contributes to the bias of the internet. Hence, trolling contributes greatly to the bias that already clouds the internet, which will only further hinder a positive progress of such into a safer and more neutral space.

4. What are some ways in which one can help combat trolling?

Just as there is not one solution to the bias that clouds the internet, trolling also can have many solutions or at least steps in the right direction to help combat it. I believe that the first step to doing this is by simply not engaging in any trolling activity. Although it sounds easy and obvious, many people who see trolling online, engage in it by reading, searching the trolling to get more details, or even retweeting, reposting, and liking the conversations or communities that are being trolled. So, just by not supporting the trolling this way, one can already help combat trolling. Another great way to combat this issue is to report any trolls that one sees being provocative in a malicious way or even antagonistic to anyone, because as mentioned before, this may cause someone mental distress, and we don’t want to enable that.

Citron, D. K. (2014). Introduction. Hate Crimes in Cyberspace, 1–32. https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674735613.intro

Phillips, W. (2015). Defining terms: The origins and evolution of subcultural trolling. This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/10288.003.0004

Silman, A. (2016, August 24). A Timeline of Leslie Jones's Horrific Online Abuse. The Cut. Retrieved October 27, 2021, from https://www.thecut.com/2016/08/a-timeline-of-leslie-joness-horrific-online-abuse.html.

[somely-14]

Blog Post: Week 8 Due 10/14

1. Can the cyborg that Haraway discusses be a sound basis to construct a more neutral internet space?

Although I believe that the internet will never be truly neutral, I do think that innovations like the “Cyborg” discussed by Haraway are steps in the right direction to eliminating some of the bias and sex/gender stereotypes. Haraway explains how this cyborg which is half machine, and half organism is a “…creature of social reality as well as a creature a fiction” (354), that has no origin story. This purposeful lack of origin story serves to depict a neutral creature that is not tied to any gender roles. Hence, the idea behind Haraway’s cyborg can be a sound basis in constructing a more neutral atmosphere within the internet where characters and depictions of reality are not constructed by the realms of womanhood or manhood and instead have more sex and gender fluidity. This will not only help make the internet space more neutral but also break some of the stereotypes that characters sometimes depict which enable people to believe them to be reality.

2. How does technology alter our behavior and mentality?

As discussed through the different interpretations of the phenomena of the “cyborg” by both Haraway and J. OW’s “Yellow faced cyborg”, technology can greatly alter the way we perceive reality and hence alter the way we behave in society. Even more so, technology can distort a person’s view of reality inn way that they believe things they see or hear on the interest to be real, when it is not. As we saw through J. OW’s. yellow faced cyborg, people are presented with objectification of women. Through nudity, violence, racist portrayals, and sexualization. This would be a negative way in which technology can alter our behavior and mentality. On the other hand, when presented with the cyborg that Haraway describes, it depicts a more positive view of technology and gender roles that can alter our behavior and mentality to be more neutral open-minded.

3. Why is it that we tend to disregard the involvement of women in online racism?

Although the times have evolved where women’s representation and depiction in society has advanced greatly, there are still many stereotypes and sexist ideologies that flood society. Many times, these stereotypes revolve around women being seen as weak or delicate beings that need to be protected by men. Hence, it is not surprising that people have no idea that women can actually be racist and sexist as well, especially in online spaces as argued by J. Daniels’. Daniels’ article challenges these stereotypes of women being weak and not racist by describing the women-only spaces that are being seen with more frequency were women are being seen to be involved in white supremacy activity online. However, since as a society, we still tend to see women as the more submissive sex, we don’t think that women are capable of being involved in such male dominated activity like white supremacy. The reality is that women make up almost 50% of new member of white supremacy online groups (Daniels, 63), and unless people read articles like Daniels’ work, people will continue to live under the illusion that women are not capable of being involved in racist activity online, and the stereotypes will only continue to exist.

4. How can the depiction of femininity via online simulation be detrimental to overcoming gender roles?

As talked about by. O’Riordan, many virtual assistants that we use on a daily basis, consist of female voices. Female simulations such as Apple product’s Siri, have become a basis to functioning in society, where many have become dependent on them. To continue, these female simulations are used for the goal of assisting people and being at their service and disposition. This can be detrimental to overcoming gender roles because it gives off the idea that females are meant to always be helpful and at the service of others at any time they are needed. For example, as soon as you click on the button to use Siri or say you need Siri, the female voice immediately states “What can I help you with”. This may only reinforce the already existing gender roles of women which assume women should be submissive and helpful to their husbands for example. It only supports the erroneous gender roles that are still existent in society and limit society from overcoming them.

Daniels, J. (2009). Gender, White Supremacy, and the Internet. Cyber Racism: White Supremacy Online and the New Attack on Civil Rights (pp. 61-86). Rowman & Littlefield

Haraway, D. (1991). A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century. (354-359).

O’Riordan, K. (2006). Gender, Technology, and Visual Cyberculture. Critical Cyberculture Studies (pp. 243-252). New York University Press.

[somely-14]

Blog Post: Week 7 Due 10/7

1. T. Senft and S. Noble rationalize that the internet is not a neutral space, but can the internet ever become neutral?

As touched on this reading by Senft and Noble, race is a social construct which means that we are the ones who give meaning and connotation to race. Hence, whether it be in person or online, people will continue to place their own significant and bias through their interactions on the internet, which will make it very hard for the internet to become a neutral space. Just as in person interactions, online interactions are also embedded with race, racism, and sexism foundations that make it hard for neutrality to prevail. This can be seen with a user picture, name, or even username. Depending on either of these things other internet users can assume a person’s race or how they act depending on the racial connotations that were made by people, that are adjudicated to a pertaining race. This is only enhanced through the anonymity that the internet provides. People can spread their hate or misconceptions across the internet under an anonymous user, making neutrality even harder to reach.

2. How can the internet and the algorithms that comprise it make us believe that we have progressed into being more neutral?

Benjamin explores how this shift towards multiculturalism that is being seen with more frequency, is essentially internet algorithms that are being used to show us what we want to see, which is neutrality and progress. In other words, through the illusion of multiculturalism which promotes diversity, the algorithms that makeup the internet trick us into thinking that we have progressed into becoming a more diverse society, when the reality is not quite that. In addition, this misuse of multiculturalism by the algorithms can be big enabler of race, which is a social construct. Having a token person of color in a film, for instance, just as a way to say that the movie and production is diverse only cloud our outlook on this so-called neutrality and progress.

3. How does the color-blind ideology permit the further marginalization of certain groups?

The color-blind ideology is essentially this idea of not seeing or recognizing “color”. In other words, it is a privilege to be able to say that you don’t see “color” only because your life experiences have not been shaped by your race. Hence, when a person or people claim and believe that they “don’t see color”, they are only ignoring and disregarding how these systems in society benefit some over others and that it is not their choice to not see color, but rather a given privilege that lets them say that because they are not affected by the disadvantages that others do face based on their race. This failure to acknowledge that they are privileged to say that allows for the people that are affected by these systems to be further marginalized.

4. How can white supremacy in online spaces be detrimental to youth?

It is not a shocker or news that young people are highly dependent on the internet. Hence, it is also not shocking to say that the content that they interact with and see in these online spaces, can shape the way that they act and perceive the real world. We saw this to be true through the video games, like the “Yellowfaced Cyborg” described by J. OW, that many youth or even older people play. Therefore, if youths come across white supremacy content online, it can definitely shape that way that they interact in real life. This is many times also due to the fact that many young people are not taught how to choose what platforms or space they should rely on.

Benjamin, R. (2020). Race after technology abolitionist tools for the new jim code. Polity.

Daniels, J. (2009). Cyber racism: White supremacy online and the new attack on Civil Rights. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Hunsinger, J., & Senft, T. M. (2015). The Social Media Handbook. Routledge.

[somely-14]

Blog Post #6 Due 9/30

1. Why is it dangerous to disregard the racial slurs that are “harmlessly” said during video games?

Many times, during gaming sessions, where people are behind screens, and many times anonymously, racial slurs are thrown around as if it were something normal. Even those who don’t see it as normal and know it is not right, many times don’t speak up because they see it as not being literal or as “just playing around”. This mentality of disregard, however, can be very dangerous in not only reinforcing racial slurs and stereotypes but in also spreading ignorance of race being a racial construct. Many times, these gamers consider themselves as not being participants of this racial discrimination because they don’t say these racial slurs. This only makes ignorance more prevalent as well decreasing accountability, and hence progress in society. Hence, it is not enough to say that we don’t see or think about race, class, or gender just because we don’t say a racial slur during game or laugh at one. The bottom line is that these concepts are built into the very institutions that guide our lives and therefore, we can’t say that they don’t exist and that we don’t participate in them. In other words, by disregarding these racial slurs in video games, individuals become enablers of the discrimination against people of color which becomes dangerous when these gamers come back to real life and continue to be enablers of such in society.

2. How do game characters like the cyborg in the game 3D Realms help reinforce the objectification and portrayal of women in society?

Although there has been reform and advance in the way women are treated and perceived, there is still many outlets in society that continue to convey the negative perceptions of women that make them as weak an as mere objects to satisfy men. A great exemplification of this can be seen in the game 3D Realms, where women are heavily objectified through nudity, violence, brutality, and sexualization. As described by J. OW, the “Yellowfaced Cyborg” character in this game, which is played by the gamers, is a misogynistic cyborg that rapes, pillages and kill masses of people. Although many would disregard this as just being a game, the truth is that video games mirror real life, hence the stuff that gamers do in these games at some point and to a certain degree become a part of reality. Therefore, this objectification of perpetuation of violence against women become normalized in the game, which can be problematic in reinforce this objectification of women in society, and gamers thinking it is okay to treat women this way.

3. Can any game be entirely for fun and/or positive, in the sense that it is not constructed with a certain intention in mind?

Just like social media platforms, the algorithms or construction of video games have a great deal of bias in them in conjunction with the intent for which they created it for, and for whom. Video games have propaganda and trailers that are meant to capture the attention of a certain public and if not peak interest to a new target of people. Even games that seem fun or harmless like animal crossing or Mario games, still have bias and creating intent for a specific audience. For instance, animal crossing had the intent of promoting capitalism while Super Mario bros has even some sexist foundations in its plot that includes rescuing the damsel in distress, Princess Peach. In the Mario games for instance, the bias is already embedded in this plot that have the intent of teaching boys and girls who play it that men need to rescue women in order for women to survive. Ultimately, games must have a subliminal or no-subliminal specific target audience and intent in order for them to be able to seem interesting enough for that audience to buy the game. Hence, it is very difficult for a game to be entirely for fun without having a specific intent as its foundation.

4. Since race is a social construct, is there a viable way we can deconstruct this system?

Race is not an inherent concept but rather a concept that has been given meaning by people in society, which is why race is in fact a social construct. In other words, race is a concept that has been given negative connotations and meaning by people which in turn has made race to become an integral and rooted ideology that guides our lives. Without these connotations and meanings that we have placed on this concept, race is just a grouping of people based on their ethnicity and phenotypical difference. Therefore, as long as we keep not only perpetuating and supporting the negative connotations that have been given to race, but also forming new ones, it will be impossible to deconstruct this social construct. Many people have deep rooted ideologies of race which they continue to perpetuate with no leeway for chance, which will make it very difficult for us to deconstruct these negative meanings that are given based on race.

Fickle, T. (2019). The race card: From gaming technologies to model minorities. New York University Press.

Kolko, B. E., Nakamura, L., & Rodman, G. B. (2000). Race in cyberspace. Routledge.

Ow, Jeffrey A. “The Revenge of the Yellowfaced Cyborg Terminator: The Rape of Digital Geishas and the Colonization of Cyber-Coolies in 3D Realms’ Shadow Warrior.” Asian America.Net: Ethnicity, Nationalism, and Cyberspace. Eds. Rachel C. Lee and Sau-Ling Cynthia Wong. New York: Routledge, 2003. Print.

[somely-14]

Blog Post:  Week 4 Due 9/16

1. The pandemic has highlighted the ways in which digital divide theory has reemerged in present day, but what is an example that contradicts this reemergence of said theory?

It is abundantly clear that the racially biased technology that exists in current day has similarities to that of the social divide theory which argues that poor and working-class groups do not have the same access to the internet and digital technology due to the low resources or non-interest in said technologies (Everett). While this can certainly be seen, the other side of coin can also be seen. A perfect example is my prior high school, which resides in a low-income community consisting of minorities. Since the pandemic began, the school invested the funds given to them by the government in providing every student with a computer and internet so that they could continue their education. Even now that schools have opened, they are still providing students with such technology and making all efforts to provide them with access to efficient internet and technology. Hence, even though social theory can definitely be seen in modern day with the increase in technology usage, there is also support to provide access to reliable and fast internet speeds to poor and working class communities. In other words, although it is rough out here, there is still some good in the efforts that do exist to provide equity for all.

2. Why is it that creators of algorithms have not been held accountable to the degree of the racial bias that their programs have embedded?

There may be many reasons why these creators of algorithms are not being held accountable for the racist and sexist codes that they embed in their programs, but I believe that the biggest reason is ignorance, Ignorance and dismissal of the American people who have become so dependent on technology that they don’t look more closely to what using these technologies actually entails (Benjamin). I myself am part of the problem as well due to my ignorance. Before this class I had no idea about who creates these technologies that I like everyone else use on a daily basis, that help shape the way we look and interact with others. We are all just so conformed to using these technologies that we don’t see the racist and sexist seeds that are being planted in us by these creators. Until more people start gaining consciousness about what goes on behind creating and “improving” these technologies, these creators will continue to not be held accountable and continue to form this “New Jim Code” that Benjamin argues is the new technology.

3. How do these racially biased technological algorithms talked about by Noble and the discrimination produced by names talked about by Benjamin, enhance the marginalization of minorities?

Both of these issues touched upon by each author, promote the marginalization of minority groups whether it be through altruistic algorithms or just by the racist and discriminatory implications that come with a name. One example of how both these issues continue to promote this marginalization of minority groups can be seen by even the autocorrect of technology. As a LatinX member, my last name portrays my heritage, yet whenever I type my name in any technology, it is always autocorrected or marked as incorrect, and if not, I am given another option of my last name that is “common” in my community. The algorithms that these technologies are created from only identify the “common” names that these white creators believe encompass all the pertaining minority population. This only promotes this marginalization of minorities by implying that our culture is not very important to have more options that cover more native names, only those stereotypical names that are seen as being universal for the pertaining community.

4. How can learning about intersectionality help combat the racial bias that is still embedded into these technologies that we use as a foundation in our society?

Many people have never even heard of this term that portrays so well the underlying discrimination and disadvantages that different people face in distinct ways. I have come to notice that people who are receiving higher education are those who have come across this term or really know all about it. Whether the lack of education on this term by lower-level education systems is on purpose or not, it is vital to learn about intersectionality to continue battling this racism and discrimination that plagues us through technology. Said by the creator of this term herself, Crenshaw elaborates on how intersectionality is just a term to represent the way in which multiple forms of inequality morph together and create obstacles of disadvantage (2018). Crenshaw showcases the big spectrum that intersectionality encompasses the many forms of inequality and disadvantages that people and groups of people face, and in different ways. Understanding that not everyone faces discrimination or inequality in the same way is very important understanding how these technologies are harmful to people. Hence, in understanding what intersectionality means, we can understand what it implies and how we are only supporting such embedded racism and discrimination with our lack of understanding.

Benjamin, R. (2019). Race after TECHNOLOGY: ABOLITIONIST tools for the New Jim Code. Social Forces, 98(4), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soz162

Everett, A. (2002). The revolution will be digitized. Social Text, 20(2), 125–146. https://doi.org/10.1215/01642472-20-2_71-125

National Association of Independent Schools (2018, June 22). Kimberlé Crenshaw: What is Intersectionality? [Video]. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ViDtnfQ9FHc

Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1pwt9w5

[somely-14]

Week 3 Blog Post (Due 9/9)

1. Do people really know how invasive and controlling technology is in their lives?

Technology has become an integral part of our daily lives that many of us disregard how invasive these technologies that we use really are, and how they are used to surveil us, many times without our knowledge. Many of the technologies that we encounter in our daily lives, like our phones, street cameras, our laptops/computers, and police drones (Eubanks, 2019), are keeping track of daily movements that are then used in algorithmic surveillance technologies to further control us, as explained by assistant professor in sociology, Nicole Brown. This is why many times when we search up a couch, we want to buy, we are later given more ads and links to relevant websites or information about that couch we searched up, without us even looking it up anymore. Yet, many of us are unaware that it is through our technologies and what we see that we are being tracked in order to for these systems to keep us using their platforms. Just as Eubanks claims, these technologies’ tracking of us is so “deeply woven into the fabric of social life that, most of the time we don’t even notice we are being watched an analyzed” (16). Most of us are so consumed with the entertainment or facility that these technologies provide for us that we don’t even consider how much we’re really being monitored and manipulated by the big companies that run these technologies. This is only enhanced with the low knowledge we have of how these algorithms are made, which only allow for us to continue being oblivious or with little power to change this surveillance.

2. How do digital technologies continue to control or harm marginalized groups?

One of the biggest negatives of these digital technologies is that they continue to ingeniously target minority groups by collecting the most data from them, and hence being the most surveilled and controlled. This can be seen throughout the digital security guards that Eubanks talks about, which collect a higher amount of information from marginalized groups such as low-income communities and people of color, as a way to keep them under surveillance. Since these marginalized groups make use of healthcare or other public benefits they are constantly having to share voluntarily and involuntarily their information, which in turn only allows these technologies to keep the under surveillance more than other non-marginalized groups.

3. Given all the limitations and power-driven motives of technology: is technology a bigger harm than good?

Technology is a very powerful tool that has become a foundation to the way society runs and evolves. For the benefits that technology brings to us as individuals and a society, it has many more disadvantages, given the white and power run systems that make them up as a means to keep us under surveillance and controlled. It is ignorant to say that technology is all bad, however with the current accessibility and anti-minority algorithms that structure these big technologies, it can be argued that without constant accountability, technology is a bigger harm than good. What I mean by this is that if the systems that make up these technologies are not improved and/or held accountable for their misuse of information, then technology will always be a big enabler to minority suppression, white heterosexual and masculine cultures and power structures that these systems claim to subvert (Daniels). Technology can continue to grow and improve to truly become an equal tool for all to use that really does subvert these toxic cultures and power hierarchies and struggles that currently dominate it.

4. Given the grave mistakes in facial recognition programs, should they even be used or considered in police investigations?

The mistakes that have produced the incarceration of innocent black men clearly highlight why facial recognition programs either need to be heavily improved or simply not used as a basis to take a person’s freedom. The fact that that a recent 2019 national study found that over 100 facial recognition algorithms showcased that they weren’t as accurate when used on Black and Asian faces (Hill, 2020). This inaccuracy can only enhance and further promote the racial bias that already exists for these groups as well as increasing the number of falsely incarcerated individuals. Furthermore, this only shows that these facial recognition programs have a fundamental bias against minority groups, hence they should not be used for police investigations as this white, masculine cultures that Jessie Daniels argued on, would only continue to reproduce.

Brown, N. [Nicole Brown]. (2020, September 18). Race and Technology [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8uiAjigKy8

Daniels, J. (2009). Rethinking Cyberfeminism(s): Race, gender, and embodiment. WSQ: Women's Studies Quarterly, 37(1-2), 101–124. https://doi.org/10.1353/wsq.0.0158

Eubanks, V. (2019). In Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. Picador.

Hill, K. (2020, December 29). Another arrest, and jail time, due to a BAD facial recognition match. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/29/technology/facial-recognition-misidentify-jail.html.

[somely-14]

Week 2 Blog Post due 9/2

Q1. How can subjectivity allow for social media to be of harm to the public?

Although many news outlets as well as many other outlets of information such as Twitter, Instagram, and TikTok, inform and keep people up to date, most people are still misinformed. This can be a product of the subjectivity that can many times corrupt or distort the reality of what is being presented to us. This can be harmful because we begin to accommodate to this distorted lens of reality that can many times even incite erroneous beliefs. News outlets, for instance, rely heavily on their reporters who compile the current events they are to present to the public. However, like offered by Gonzales and Torres, many times these reports are infected by the beliefs and perception of reality of the reporter whose “…upbringing, education, class, race, religion, and gender” come into play (3). Hence, due to the reporter’s subjectivity in a certain event or subject they are reporting about, can enable a biased or misleading representation of reality.

Q2. What role do power struggles have in the creation of racial bias in news media?

Just as it happened back in the day, power struggles still have a big role in the creation of racial bias in the news media, especially in favor of non-minority populations. Beginning from back in the day when news media was emerging, the information perpetuated had been dominated by political parties who wanted power and control of their population. Many times, they did this by “…routinely portraying non-white minorities as threats to white society and by reinforcing racial ignorance, group hatred, and discriminatory government policies” (Gonzalez & Torres, 2013). The same situations can still be seen in current day, especially a few months back when Hispanic communities were being targeted as a means to reinforce the ideology of the nation’s ex-leader, who by supporting this hatred against Hispanics, got more powerful and controlled the population to do his bidding.

Q3. What effect has social media produced in older generations?

Social media has become the biggest way to communicate with others and to share ideas and cultures. Young people especially have become dependent on social media and if not a big aspect of their lives involves using social media. However, it now seems that older generations have also become dependent on social media whether to entertain themselves or as a way to “stay young”. Many people belonging to these older generations are now doing TikTok videos or even starting their own YouTube channels, many times as a way to pass the time during this pandemic.

Q4. How have social networking sites changed the way we communicate?

Social networking sites have drastically changed how we communicate with each other, moving towards a more anti-social direction. In other words, social networking sites have added many other options to communicate with each other as opposed to talking in person, which many people are opting for (Fuchs, 2014). This is especially more prevalent during current pandemic times when everyone had to become more dependent on technology and social networking sites to stay connected for whatever their reasoning, whether it be for work, entertainment, school, or just staying connected.

Fuchs, C. (2014). Social Media: A Critical Introduction. SAGE Publications Ltd, https://www.doi.org/10.4135/9781446270066

Gonzalez, J., & Torres, J. (2013). News for All the People: The Epic Story of Race and the American Media. European Journal of Communication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323113476985c

[somely-14]

Blog Post Week #1

STORY TIME: Internet glitch got my CSUF admission rescinded! 

My worst, all-time experience where technology didn’t live up to its promises was when my online CSUF orientation glitched and I was not able to complete it before the deadline. Technology really failed me in this instance since it gave way for my admission to be rescinded, due to my failure to complete the orientation by the deadline at 12pm. II was at my school’s resource center during lunch, which was about an hour before the deadline, and I was in the process of completing the orientation when the catastrophe happened. Half-way through the orientation program the computer crashed, and my orientation program logged and timed me out, thus marking it as uncompleted. I tried logging in through other computers at different location at my high school, but the orientation was no longer letting me login to finish it and when the deadline was hit, it was marked as incomplete. And under the orientation website it stated that the orientation must be complete by the deadline or my admission was subject to be rescinded, which is exactly what occurred. What happened thereafter was filled with tears and sweat in order to get my admission back. My first step (after cry-calling my mom to tell her about the disaster), was to go to my school’s career center and speak to the career advisor. He himself found it strange that they would take my admission away due to an orientation video. Nevertheless, I was very lucky that the advisor was so great and that he went out of his way to help me regain my admission. I had to file petition at CSUF explaining what had happened, make various calls and visits to the admissions office, and I was even given a letter signed by all my school’s administrators in support of my petition. The vice-principal even called the Orange County mayor, whom he knew, to see if there was anything he could do for me! Finally, after several weeks of stress, my petition was accepted, and my admission was reinstated. Unfortunately, since the process took several weeks to process, all the on-campus orientation dates had passed but one, which was right in the middle of my vacation at Cancun, Mexico. It was so devastating that my first time visiting Cancun had to be cut short, after only 3 days of being there. I had no other choice since the university did not give me any other date or option but the date they gave me to attend in order to regain my admission. So, this is the long journey I had to take due to a computer glitch. A glitch that stress induced my last days in high-school, and interrupted my dream vacation. It was a long and stressful journey to get here but I’m here at CSUF and close to graduating!!