Showing posts with label journalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label journalism. Show all posts

14 September 2017

Solutionism - The Role of Technology in Solving SocioTechnical Problems

It all began, over a year ago (June 2016), with what author Ethan Zuckerman described as hate-linking. Through this practice, Zuckerman stumbled upon and read an article by Shane Snow who is the co-founder of a content-marketing platform. Briefly, in his article, Snow advocates for change in US prison systems - to lessen the financial burden and remove instances of violence - by locking everyone in a room...indefinitely and by feeding them the Silicon Valley version of Ensure. The role of technology - a crucial point to Zuckerman's response - in this prison life would be to give all those incarcerated access to VR (virtual reality) equipment and video games to socialize and learn. Snow's thought is that with less contact, there will be less violence and deaths.

In his lengthy response, The Perils of Using Technology to Solve Other People's Problems for the Atlantic, Zuckerman systematically pokes holes in Snow's proposed solutions to the US prison system (as a design developed out of context and without input from those living and working in such a system) and questions the role of technology as the prolific savior in sociotechnical issues.

As an engineering instructor at MIT, Zuckerman is interested in finding ways to: disrupt better, challenge knowledgeably, and engaging (or codesigning) new and better technology alongside the intended or target audience. Zuckerman drives home what he sees as an issue in (most) engineering design processes where many of the technologies we benefit from, weren’t designed for their ultimate beneficiaries, but were simply designed well and adopted widely.

Zuckerman draws attention to Evgeny Morozov's critique of “solutionism” which Morozov describes as the act of focusing on problems that (only) have “nice and clean technological solution at our disposal.” The problem with the solutionist critique, Zuckerman argues, is that it tends to remove technological innovation from the problem-solver’s toolkit. He advocates that robust solutions to social problems must incorporate technology as one of many levers toward social change.

Zuckerman mentions the work of Genevieve Bell at intel to briefly mention the role of ethnography and ethnographers in collecting important user information in the design process. He writes:
Understanding the wants and needs of users is important when you’re designing technologies for people much like yourself, but it’s utterly critical when designing for people with different backgrounds, experiences, wants, and needs.

Although an older article, Zuckerman's response to Snow's design situates anthropological and ethnographic analysis into the heart of the design process, where the heart does not represent the centre of a process, but the life blood of design and innovation. It's here that the expert - that is the user or client or target audience - and their knowledge is paramount.

Quick Links: 
  • Perils of Using Technology to Solve Other People's Problems: What will it take to design socio-technical systems that actually work? Ethan Zuckerman in the Atlantic (June 23, 2016)
  • How Soylent and Oculus Could Fix The Prison System (A Thought Experiment) - note, this has been revised due to feedback from the wider community - Shane Snow (Sept 23, 2015) 

  • For more links about technology on AnthroEverywhere!
  • Isuma TV - Indigenous Media collective (Sept 4 2017)
  • Anthropology Podcasting (Aug 24 2017)
  • Remembering & Memories: there's an app for that... (Jul 17 2017)

  • 27 March 2017

    What's in a Word? The Importance of Recognizing the Etymology of Words

    There have been a number of interesting posts lately about the 'unsavory' history of some everyday words and phrases in a growing discourse which argues that the use of slurs and unsavory language needs to be protected as one's right to freedom of speech.

    In perusing social media of late, it's not hard to see how language has changed and the use of racialized, prejudiced, or derogatory language is becoming more common place (for example, see Sabreena Ghaffar-Siddiqui's recent article in the National Observer entitled You know there’s a problem when you get 50,000 anti-Muslim emails in your inbox).

    In a recent post, Adeshina Emmanuel explores the background of few phrases that don't typically show up in such reviews, including: No can do, uppity, long time no see, and peanut gallery.

    Linguistic Anthropologist Sarah Shulist from MacEwan University has also recently pointed out the issue with arguing for the continued right to use these unsavory words by those in privilege. She argues that negative meanings are particularly potent and their meanings enhanced (read: prioritized, highlighted, understood, or run through conversations as an undercurrent) through their continued use (as slurs, through discussion or analysis...which she admits is what she's doing in her post) in discussion.

    As for whether or not the use of slurs should continue under the guise of arguments defending free speech, she writes:
    The loss of a few (or even a lot of) words from my repertoire doesn’t really hinder my communicative creativity all that much – it limits me verbally about to the same degree that not being allowed to hit people limits my range of acceptable arm motions. The fact that we strive for ideologies of maximal offensiveness allowed is yet another ugly feature of a structurally racist society.

    Quick links and further reading:

    02 February 2017

    Neanderthals, racism, science

    This New York Times article offers an interesting discussion about how Western European scientific racism also played a significant role in how we classified and described Neanderthals.

    "Neanderthals Were People, Too" (2017) asks us to think about how the same racial thinking that supported the brutalities of Western imperialism also filtered into our understanding of pre-history.

    As long-form journalism, this would be an interesting piece to assign alongside anthropological classics on scientific and systemic racism, racial thinking, and colonialism as part of the history of anthropological thought. Alternatively, it might be a good discussion piece for thinking about epistemological questions, and how science is part of a deeply cultural worldview.

    17 November 2016

    Where to find Alternative News Sources

    Check out Simon Fraser Universities Alternative News Sources page.

    As described at the top of the page:
    For the purposes of this guide, "alternative" means that which does not represent society's mainstream or dominant ideology.  However, some alternative media sources are widely read and could be considered mainstream. Both progressive and conservative resources are included, as both are arguably excluded from the mainstream media.
    Reasons for seeking out alternative sources?

    1. To gain a holistic understanding of a particular event or happening. In theory, this understanding should guide you to a more representative perspective through its multiplicity
    2. To question the Western perspective that holds priority in academic and media due to our Canadian geographic and historical location.

    Happy Alt reading!

    10 April 2016

    Making Anthropology Public... Again

    8 Awesome Anthropologists Advancing Public Outreach (2016, Forbes)

    What's not to love about this headline?! Kristina Killgrove lists off 8 awesome (women) anthropologists whose blogs and work (ranging from bio and forensic to cultural and linguistic anthropology) bring an anthropological perspective to a wide range of issues and a popular audience.

    See for instance, Carrie Hersh's relevANTH! or Krystal D’Costa's Anthropology in Practice blog via Scientific American.


    24 March 2016

    No Other Discipline Produces as Many Terrorists...Is quite a headline

    Rhiannon and I recently came upon a news article about the link between education, namely the discipline of Engineering, and Terrorism (see our previous post on the Anthropology of Terrorism).

    What most of you likely don't know is that I'm a cultural anthropologist teaching for a Bachelor of Technology program in a School of Engineer Practice and Technology. My students would be lumped into the larger category of 'engineering students' referred to in this article and therefore, this article is of particular interest to me as an anthropologist and an instructor.

    In the article, Does Engineering Education Breed Terrorists?, by the Chronicle of Higher Education, the author details the work of two social scientists, Diego Gambetta and Steffen Hertog who sought to understand why there are a disproportional number of terrorists who have been educated as engineers. Note, the article, and unfortunately this post, mentions but does not go into enough detail concerning the inherent issues, bias, and geo-politics that are involved when labeling of any individual a 'terrorist'.

    The author describes the notable pattern determined through Gambetta and Hertog's research: [Of the 207 viable subjects], 93 of them, nearly 45 percent, had studied engineering. This frequency far exceeded what would be predicted statistically; among male college students from the 19 countries represented in the sample, fewer than 12 percent studied engineering.

    Gambetta and Hertog point to the following sociological and psychological reasons as to why engineering students & graduates may be over-represented in this group:
    1. Sociological reason: Relative Deprivation. Individuals who 'feel denied their due' when graduates do not receive the lucrative career and status they have come to expect upon graduation.
    2. Psychological reasons: Cognitive closure: described as a preference for order and distaste for ambiguity (and also a need for closure and/or related to a systematic thinking that would allow one to compartmentalize the outcome of their actions, and may be accompanied by traits such as self-aggrandizement and low levels of empathy) which, in turn, is related to two factors: (1) the prevalence to accepting prevailing hierarchies and (2) to experience high levels of disgust.
        
    See the article for a more detailed description of these factors.

    What the research says: the authors DO NOT argue that engineering education causes tendencies or proclivities toward acts of violence or extremism (and advocate not to profile engineers at airports). The authors belief the chief reason so many violent extremists are engineers is that these programs appeal to a certain kind of mind.

    In my opinion, an important take away from the article is the questioning of how students learn in engineering. Other scholars interviewed for the article discuss the apolitical nature of teaching and content in engineering courses as well as the divestment of nontechnical factors as irrelevant to the work of "real" engineering. (...) Engineering education fosters a culture of disengagement that defines public welfare concerns as tangential to what it means to practice engineering. The article also includes rebuttals to these points with scholars noting the introductory (what I teach) and capstone courses that engage with open-ended questions that foster tolerance for ambiguity as well as communication and teamwork skills.

    At the heart of this discussion is whether or not there is a causal link between education and violent, extremist attitudes and although the answer is absolutely not...that finding doesn't make for as good a headline.


    Related posts:

    22 March 2016

    The Anthropology of Terrorism: Learning about threat, fear, and community building in times of loss and anguish

    I chose today to write about terrorism as another bomb blast rocks the European world, not because it was any more important than the blasts that rocked Ankara just last week but because the media coverage, and backlash, will be much more pronounced here in Canada and North America in general than what came of the former (see Rhiannon's previous post on who and what makes the news to understand why). It is also another event in a series of terrorist threats and actions that seemingly culminates around the terrorist group ISIS.

    Let me ask, do any of the words in the above title of this post strike you as odd? While I'm sure the words threat and fear will be used in media coverage over the next week, as well as loss and perhaps anguish, community building might wait to surface until the aftermath of this event. That is, what happens in everyday life in Brussels after the alarm and urgency of this tragic event have passed (and just a note here, I speak for both myself and Rhiannon when I write that we are both deeply saddened by the loss of life and the wounds inflicted by this event - it is not my intention to only use this event as a set of circumstances to discuss anthropology but instead, to write and discuss the very real and pertinent way this event will/has affect(ed) us all, and how an anthropological perspective can help us make sense of such events that connect local lives with global processes).

    In January 2015, Scott Atran, an anthropologist who interviews "would-be and convicted terrorists about their extreme commitment to their organizations and ideals," was interviewed for an article in Scientific American in order to help answer questions that juxtapose religion, European culture and influence from terrorist organizations. Atran is noted as one of the few anthropologists studying in this area and uses this article to try and describe what events could lead human beings to decide to carry out a terrorist attack.

    Below are some of the highlights from this interview:
    1. ISIS cultivates would-be terrorists by appealing to feelings and experiences of social inequality. They tell them: "Look, you're on the outs, nobody cares about you, but look what we can do. We can change the world."
    2. Terrorists must be self-motivated - "Even if people buy into the [ISIS or Al Qaeda] ideology, buy into the values, it’s far from a sufficient condition [to carry out an attack]". Instead, these actions are cultivated over time through a network of similarly-minded individuals: "The best predictors turn out to be things like who your friends are and whether you belong to some action group".
    3. Mosques are not fertile ground for terrorist plots. Atran states (and was questioned in relation to the Paris attacks): "In the case of the Kouachi brothers [who committed the Charlie Hebdo attack], [they] had the greatest bonding experience - prison [Atran notes earlier in the article that "France has about 7.5% Muslims and [they make] up to 60–75% of the prison population. It’s a very similar situation to black youth in the United States"]. But it could be soccer, it could be whitewater rafting". This follows what Atran stated earlier in the interview: "Plots never occur in mosques: you have to be quiet in a mosque. They occur in fast food places, soccer fields, picnics and barbecues".

    There is a lot of emotion surrounding any terrorist attack (I've been using the word 'event' above as a means to think through what is happening in a less emotional manner). As an anthropologist, one might take a step back to look at events holistically: What is happening at this moment in Belgium or the EU that would lead to the culmination of these events? What would lead these attackers, on a societal level, to commit such acts?  

    One might also think about the specificity surrounding such an event. In the news articles coming out of Brussels, many of those interviewed noted that they heard 'yelling in Arabic' before the bomb exploded. An anthropologist might make note of the following:

    All Arabic speakers are NOT terrorists
    All Muslims are NOT Arabic speakers
    All terrorists are NOT Muslims
    Individuals commit terrorist acts. Full stop.

    Thinking about these perpetrators as individuals committing actions on behalf of a small group (even if they act on behalf of ISIS) is important to remember when thinking about the potential fall out this event could have for those living in Brussels and in greater Belgium (including Muslim Belgians).

    As Robb Willer has recently argued, terrorist events drive up feelings of nationalism, particularly in presidential elections. Although it likely comes as no surprise, demagogue Donald Trump has already phoned into right-wing news houses to lay blame at Brussels' feet, he has linked these attacks to the recent refugee crisis, and whipped up more terror and fear among the American public. Willer goes on to note that terrorist attacks not only bring national communities together but create a more sharp dividing line between who is and who is not a part of the national community.

    It's with an anthropological lens, and other critical social science theories and approaches, that one might think not only of the short term but long term effects of the actions following such an attack.

    My heart and thoughts are with those in Brussels today.

    22 February 2016

    Anthropologists on Wall Street

    Back in 2011, American Gov. Rick Scott sparked the discussion about the market value of STEM over liberal-arts education. The Economist featured this piece in their blog's Education Policy section about what anthropologists can bring to the table, including in the field of finance: "More anthropologists on Wall Street please" (24 October 2011)

    16 February 2016

    What can you do with anthropology?

    EDIT - This post has a permanent home on our page titled "Applying an anthropological perspective outside of university." This page is regularly updated with new links related to anthropologists who work outside of the university.

    At university, a lot of students may find anthropology interesting as a course, but not really be sure what you can do with an anthropology degree or what your anthropological perspective can bring to a workplace after you graduate. 

    The Anxious Anthropologist has already written a couple of great posts about the value of an anthropological perspective in general:

    Here are a few more links that help explain what an anthropological perspective can add in various fields:

    JOURNALISM

    MARKETING/ BRAND & PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT

    HEALTH PROFESSIONS

    TECHNOLOGY