Developing the Good Citizen: Digital artifacts, peer networks, and formal organizations in contemporary political practice

   In this part our agenda is to discuss about political technologies, political artifacts, organizations, and institutions, how internet is related to political process, presidential campaigns which includes networked collaboration and formal organizations, democratic implications etc.

The Work of Machines:

   Machines were developed to repeat a particular process many times and reduce the labour work. They increase the efficiency of particular work compared to when done manually and thus were developed and implemented in a historical and social context.  These machines are embedded in an institutional and organizational environment. And they help hold political relationships in place.

   Technology has now lead to huge transformation such as use of Hollerith to political maps.

Political artifacts (such as Television, internet), organizations and institutions are very closely linked to each other.


   What was the cause of rise of political consulting? The main point was organizational and institutional changes in the 1960s-1970s. There was a new set of technical practices relating to broadcast media, data, and narrowcasting. And the most influential cause was the emergence of a new class of independent political professionals.

   There were many political websites created during the elections Eg:

   The political web during 1996-2002 mostly highlighted campaigns. They used the Web as a broadcast medium. Brochurewares played a particular role in this background. During the 2000 elections many activities such as fund raising, publicizing banner Ads, E-mailing,  searching for prospective volunteers were taken up which made internet one of main target for political parties. Theories of democratic practice include : Ideal was deliberative democracy, disintermediation and diversity, concerns over personalization and fragmentation.

   The 2003-2004 presidential election paved the way to larger exploitation of internet.The Dean campaign lead to the emergence of two new terms ‘blogosphere’ and ‘netroots’. Many political activities were organized through blogging and other online media including wikis and social networking technologies.  This lead to institutionalized backend practices.

   Popular narrative is the celebration of peer networks that can make political communication go ‘viral’ in the absence of formal organizations. It follows like this:

Campaign volunteerà YouTubeàBlogosphereà Professional press.

   A web page was created named MyBarackObama.com.  Awareness among the public was created through e-mail and mobile technologies. And the databases of the voters and supporters were maintained. The figure below shows the integration of databases, internet, and field.
                                                        YES WE CAN

     

   The peer networks during the Obama time introduced “Get FISA Right” (The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) was originally passed in 1978 order to balance the legitimate need to spy on the nation's foreign enemies, with the Constitutional rights of her citizens, and especially to curb existing abuse). Facebook an Youtube were the alternative distribution system for campaign.

   In conclusion, the new media and political practices need to consider technologies, organizations and institutions. The initial assessments should include the continuing importance of elites and formal organizations, institutionalized forms of participation, depth and breadth of citizen reach increased. Thus internet has been an implication for democracy.

  

Do artifacts have politics with reference of music players

All man made things are for reducing efforts and increasing efficiency. Different people have different perspective by which they see things around us. Artifacts are to help us.It means they make something easy,means increases power .Here the politics issue comes. Owner or having rights of using some artifacts have more power than a common person. The ordinary have a feeling that he is being in a lower state.

Some people who have enough rights or from high society they think that artifacts are neutral to society. They think that artifacts have nothing to do with politics.For them artifacts are to help community. science makes best guarantees of freedom,the factory system,automobile,telephone,radio,television,space program, fertiliser.The machine have the occasion for reshaping of social relationships involved in production in rural. And humans are powerfully transformed as they are adapted to technical means. With this view we see an ongoing social process in which scientific knowledge, technological invention, and corporate profit reinforce each other deeply that bear political and economic power. The things we call “technologies” are ways of building order in our world. Many technical devices and systems important in everyday life contain possibilities for many different ways of ordering human activity.

Technical arrangements creates social order, and concerns how the invention, design, or arrangement of artifacts becomes a mechanism for settling the affairs of a community. This lead to inbalance between social groups. For an example when in india first railway service started the indian were treated like dirt. British government made the rules that only britain residents can travel in high class compartments other will be in third class.There are other examples also.This way the simple categories of ‘intended’ and ‘unintended’ altogether, representing in which the process of technical development is so thoroughly biased in a particular direction that it regularly produces results as wonderful breakthroughs by some social interests and crushing setbacks by others.Histories of architecture, city planning, and public works contain many examples of arrangements with explicit or implicit political purposes. Like different pathways for servents and owner.

Let me take ipod ,these created such a effect that made it so much famous among people. but it has also created partitions between them. those who listen western music or follow foreign culture are considered as higher status than who like to play normal songs. Those who don’t use ipod are to be considered at a lower understanding state.

Now coming to the point of politics the adoption of a given technical system unavoidably brings with it conditions for human relationships that have a political issues . Technological politics draws attention to large socieotechnical systems to the response of modern societies to certain technological artfacts.Technologies are relatively flexible in design and arrangement and variable in their effects. Although we can recognize a particular result produced in a particular setting of an artifact, we can also easily imagine how a similar device or system might have been built or situated with very much different political consequences to reduce partitions among people.

There are countless ways in which machines, instruments, and structures of common use–buses, buildings, sidewalks, plumbing fixtures, and so forth–made it impossible for many low class persons to leave freely. The adoption of a given technical system actually requires the creation and maintenance of a particular set of social conditions as the operating environment of that system like particular culture. it become evident that justice requires remedy. A whole range of artifacts should be redesigned and rebuilt to accommodate minority.So this is how artifacts do have politics.


References
1)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ langdon winner
2)Which politics for which artifacts? By Bruno latour
3)http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/category/do-artifacts-have-politics

praveen
na09b019

DO ARTIFACTS HAVE POLITICS ??? wiki leaks

Do artifacts have politics ??? it has been most hottest topic among so many anthroplogists during these modren days ...i will explain this taking WIKILEAKS as an example.

WikiLeaks is an international non-profit organization that publishes submissions of private, secret, and classified media from anonymous new sources and news leaks. Its website, launched in 2006 under The Sunshine Press organisation,claimed a database of more than 1.2 million documents within a year of its launch.

 WikiLeaks describes its founders as a mix of Chinese dissidents, journalists, mathematicians, and start-up company technologists from the United States, Taiwan, Europe, Australia, and South Africa. Julian Assange, an Australian Internet activist, is generally described as its director. The site was originally launched as a user-editable wiki, but has progressively moved towards a more traditional publication model and no longer accepts either user comments or edits.

In April 2010, WikiLeaks posted video from a 2007 incident in which Iraqi civilians and journalists were killed by US forces, on a website called Collateral Murder. In July of the same year, WikiLeaks released Afghan War Diary, a compilation of more than 76,900 documents about the War in Afghanistan not previously available for public review. In October 2010, the group released a package of almost 400,000 documents called the Iraq War Logs in coordination with major commercial media organisations. This allowed every death in Iraq, and across the border in Iran, to be mapped. In November 2010, WikiLeaks began releasing U.S. State department diplomatic cables.

WikiLeaks has received praise as well as criticism. The organisation has won a number of awards, including The Economist's New Media Award in 2008 and Amnesty International's UK Media Award in 2009. In 2010, the New York City Daily News listed WikiLeaks first among websites "that could totally change the news", and Julian Assange was named the Readers' Choice for TIME's Person of the Year in 2010.

The UK Information Commissioner has stated that "WikiLeaks is part of the phenomenon of the online, empowered citizen". In its first days, an internet petition calling for the cessation of extra-judicial intimidation of WikiLeaks attracted over six hundred thousand signatures. Supporters of WikiLeaks in the media and academia have commended it for exposing state and corporate secrets, increasing transparency, supporting freedom of the press, and enhancing democratic discourse while challenging powerful institutions.

At the same time, several U.S. government officials have criticised WikiLeaks for exposing classified information, harming national security, and compromising international diplomacy. Several human rights organisations requested with respect to earlier document releases that WikiLeaks adequately redact the names of civilians working with international forces, in order to prevent repercussions. Some journalists have likewise criticised a perceived lack of editorial discretion when releasing thousands of documents at once and without sufficient analysis. In response to some of the negative reaction, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has expressed her concern over the "cyber war" against WikiLeaks.^] and in a joint statement with the Organization of American States the UN Special Rapporteur has called on states and other actors to keep international legal principles in mind.

conclusion : Thus WIkileaks became popular by revealing so many facts to the world .But its being criticised sometimes for leaking some facts belongs to security matters of different matters .It should be careful in such matters.

By

J.santosh kumar

EE09b085

Digital Artifacts have politics - Exorbitant prices of Apple products

 “The topic in discussion, “Whether Digital artifacts have the tendency to show a political face value as well”, has been wholly debated. No idea is more provocative in controversies about technology and society than the notion that technical things have political qualities. In his article, Bruno Latour has mentioned about his favorite example of the low bridges in New York City and how, without any apartheid laws, it created a sense of politics and racism. One may even say that it was a clearly a case of misconception. Are Digital Artifacts prone to such misconceptions as well?

Although a digital artifact is created by humans to meet ends, but it might as well lead to political battles. Moreover it is almost impossible to figure out whether something is a misconception or is there a hidden selfish motive in it.

The modern age has already seen a lot of technological advances. With the advent of high end laptops, mobile phones and music players the sector of electronics has increased many folds. These days , personal grooming is incomplete without a high end mobile phone or an mp3 player, not forgetting the powerful Apple product, iPod.

As a tech savvy teenager, even I am very fond of these sleek and stylish products from Apple and always wish I had one. My insatiable curiosity led made me browse through a lot of reviews about these powerful products.

Apple Inc. is an American multinational corporation that designs and markets consumer electronics, computer software, and personal computers. The company's best-known hardware products include the Macintosh line of computers, the iPod, the iPhone and the iPad. For reasons as various as its philosophy of comprehensive aesthetic design to its distinctive advertising campaigns, Apple has established a unique reputation in the consumer electronics industry. This includes a customer base that is devoted to the company and its brand, particularly in the United States.

But one question which everyone has in mind is, “Why are the products so exorbitantly priced everywhere outside USA?” Some obvious answers might be, “Apple sells their products at an 18% gross profit margin compared to other manufacturers which barley make any profit.” Or “Since Apple is an American company so they don't have to pay shipping far distances”.


In the positive side, Apple's costs are high on their notebooks because they use quality parts from the ground up. For example, instead of moulded plastics, they use a block of aluminum and laser cut it to size, and then attach all the parts inside that single block. This is a more expensive process in all aspects, but results in higher build quality, showed by the low number of faults in their first year due to accidents. Their screens are much sharper than most of the competition. They are the only manufacturer on the market with a functional, highly sensitive and useful multi-touch track pad, made from frosted glass. Most of the competition use plastics. The list goes on.

Looking into the other side, many of us know that Apple is an U.S. brand, but the question is, how many of us know where are apple products manufactured?  Let me tell you about the ones who manufacture computers for Apple. Two large IT solution brands manufacturers in the industry are named Foxconn and Inventec. If you never heard of them, that may happen just because they aren`t Indian or U.S. brands, they are from China. Yes you got it, the answer for the question where are apple computers manufactured? It is quite simple. They are made in China. Then how does cost of shipping come into picture? Isn’t this quite similar to the issue of low bridges in New York?

“…If you are not an American you get to have the ownership of an Apple product only if you pay three times the actual price…”

In a lot of ways, Apple are like the BMW of computers, but different. Yes, they are expensive, but because of their process of construction, and dedication to their product. Also, they do need to feed their families, and keep the shareholders happy as well. Finally, they do not "cheap out" like a lot of other companies, they will stick their ground with pricing, and punish any reseller who under prices their products. Apple do not like to sell to the masses, they prefer to deal with special individuals, on a no pressure to buy basis, that is why they have Apple stores with specialist techies and bookings for one on one demos and support.

Well although this is a never ending discussion, I personally feel that when someone is paying a good amount for a commodity, he is entitled to get the best possible quality which is irrespective of the country or region he lives in. Yes, I do feel there is at least some amount of politics in this!

References:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc.

http://www.bruno-latour.fr/presse/presse_art/GB-06%20DOMUS%2006-04.html

….

SAPTARSHI PRAKSH

EE09B076

http://www.saptarshi.co.nr/

social networking sites Killed the Private Life !!??

A social network service is an online service, platform, or site that focuses on building and reflecting of social networks or social relations among people

Social Networking is Ironical in it’s name because it doesn’t bring people closer but creates big gaps in relationships with people who really matter the most in our life

Although some of the largest social networks were founded on the notion of digitizing real world connections, many networks focus on categories from books and music to non-profit business as ways to provide both services and community to individuals with shared interests.

Digital artifacts and Politics - Social Netwok Service

"Do artifacts have politics?”

This question has provoked many to look for different dimensions of technology. Technologies hold specific forms of power and authority and should be taken seriously as their own political phenomena. Technologies are socially shaped by human actors, institutional choices and political power. They are not neutral instrument of social and economic progress but rather they have well defined political agendas.

For example: The increased deployment of nuclear power facilities leads society towards authoritarianism. This states the presence of technology as being political.
Politics is defined as-
“arrangement of power in human associations as well as the activities that take place within those arrangements” -Winter.
When reflecting on some of the claims about technology's impact on society; such as the factory system, automobile, telephone, radio, television, space program, and of course nuclear power, the central idea seems to be that these things have all been described as democratizing. The idea of control over nuclear plants and technology holds to that of a big responsibility and wouldn't work in a democratic society, is again another example of technology dictating politics. The machines, structures, and systems of modern material culture can be accurately judged not only for their contributions of efficiency and productivity, not merely for their positive and negative environmental side effects, but also for the ways in which they can embody specific forms of power and authority.

“When we accept certain technology ; We should realize and receive it in the same sense of a legislative act or political founding that establish a framework for public order that will endure over many generations” -Winter.

There are numerous accounts and examples where technology had some type of influence or power to guide society in certain directions. I would like to discuss the power of Social Network Service in influencing the society.

A Social Network Service is an online service, platform, or site that focuses on building and reflecting of social networks or social relations among people. Most social network services are web based and provide means for users to interact- share ideas, activities, events, and interests within their individual networks across political, economic, and geographic borders.

Social networking tools serve as a quick and easy way for the government to get the opinion of the public and to keep the public updated on their activity. Audience reach and public acceptance make social networks a medium to which campaigns must attend. In 2006, campaigns began to view these sites as a means to distinguish themselves from each other and potentially re-energize grassroots political organizing. Recognizing the potential of social networking sites, all of the presidential candidates in 2008 have established a presence on Facebook and acquired a significant number of supporters.

“In the first week of January 2008, which included the Iowa caucus date, Democratic Senator Obama had the most supporters on Facebook with 205,872, a big bump up from 172,205 at mid-December. The Obama campaign was the first and possibly only one so far to employ Facebook in an explicitly strategic way by asking supporters whose networks included friends in Iowa to send them a reminder about attending the Iowa caucus”. 

Demonstrating a causal connection between online strategies and votes identifies social networking sites’ potential as an essential tool in enhancing the democratic process. This way, specific features of the social network service could provide a convenient means of establishing patterns of power and authority in a given setting.

-- 

    MANEKA

    BT09B009

REFERENCES:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Langdon_Winner
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_network_service