Open Score 2016: Panel 3: Art in an Overseen World, presented by New Museum and Rhizome
Articles

Open Score 2016: Panel 3: Art in an Overseen World, presented by New Museum and Rhizome



hi everyone good afternoon my name is Zachary Kaplan I'm the executive director of rhizome and co-presenting this fantastic event and I think so far it's been really amazing for those of you who do not know us in the room we're an organization based on the internet that focuses on commissioning presenting and preserving born digital art and that last part preserving has become a bigger part of who we are over the past you're a few years actually and I think it was really remarkable in the last two panels how the kind of link rot and the disappearance and materials online was of pressing urgency so I wonder if that will come up again throughout the rest of the conversation but it's something that we're really focused on at the moment since 2003 we've been an affiliate of the new museum and it's a complementary partnership to basically do what we're doing here explore and break new ground in the art and tech space and in fact this conference is just one expression of a diversity of approaches that take place here at 235 Bowery and now next door at 231 Bowery from the galleries you know including the unforgettable tranny 'el to the front page of rhizome org where we present browser-based work everyday 24/7 to the future facing Studios and startups that are at new ink it's quite astounding when you look at it all so I wanted to begin by thanking both Lauren Cornell associate director our new technology initiatives for Co presenting this program with us and also of course the Lisa Phillips for sending an institutional vision we're breaking new ground and Arden Tech is like an active priority every day it's it's quite impressive and I'm also finally thrilled to be co-presenting this new art and tech conference because this year 2016 happens to be rhizomes 20th anniversary and I'll save you a joke about being older than the met in internet art year and Internet years but it is a milestone and it's something we'll be celebrating throughout the year not least with seven-on-seven which will happen in May before I pass this over to Lauren to begin the next panel I just want to thank again the rush Berg foundation for supporting this effort I think Michael my esteemed colleague artistic director of rhizome did an excellent job of you know showing the kind of historical background that makes this partnership make so much sense so thank you to them as well hi everyone so I noticed that there was someone who was conspicuously absent in the first session and that was you the audience so I would love to take questions there's a very bright light on me but I can see hands go up so prepare questions and we'll try to get a few and even though the panels are short so we're covering a lot of ground in open score we're now moving from the drama of listicles to surveillance this is art in an overseen world so the intention of this panel is to examine how artists and non artists all of us are responding to our relatively new conditions of visibility and to consider the conventions through which we've come to think about surveillance and being overseen today so of course surveillance is not new as we all know today and historically it's always structured by specific national political and technological protocols and also who is considered a target of particular times one of our esteemed panelists Simone Brown provides an essential history of surveillance in her new book dark matters in it she examines how surveillance technologies and practices are informed by the history of racism and methods of policing black life under slavery the book begins with her recounting her failed attempts to retrieve information from the CIA and FBI on the revolutionary philosopher Franz fanon and meditates on the trajectory between the time in which he lived and her own so certainly in the u.s. in the recent past with Snowden's disclosures and other revelations around privacy surfacing there has been an increased awareness around the potential for our lives to be monitored and yet at the same time as kind of Orwellian reality appears to have come true the term surveillance no longer seems to wholly fit it somehow seems to twentieth-century to outside of us for not only have surveillance techniques become so advanced that they fully surround us tracking us at all times and making us as Simone and countless others have pointed out vulnerable to our lives being narrated outside of us and potentially against us but they've also become cooked quotidian all of us as you know survey ourselves and each other through social media and digital tools all the time every day and as we've discussed today that's an experience that is totally fun totally harrowing and occasionally meaningful so all of our panelists have made a contribution along this spectrum of being overseen and seen too much whether by addressing governmental oppressions or the politics of presenting oneself on Facebook I've mentioned Simone's work adrian chen a staff writer for The New Yorker has written on a number of communities who thrive on being anonymous and he has also written extensively about the often invisible labor that goes into different forms of surveillance such as content moderators in factories in Malaysia or employees and Russian troll farms Rob Horning his writings for the new inquiry in his own blog marginal utility often served to critique conventions around how technology related subjects are taken up in the MSM relevant to our conversation Horning has looked into the ways we can modify and calibrate our own relationships and persona online from the article no your product which is a critique of a notion that users on social media falsely believe they are consumers when they're really the product he instead kind of flips it and explores the possibility that users actually enjoy the process of becoming the product quote only as a product can we recognize ourselves as genuinely real he writes Emily Siegel is a writer editor and co-founder of Kay whole a collective that among many other things has been exploring strategies of visibility from their first report with Kay whole Siegel also Co coined the concept core which I'm sure you're all familiar with a term that proposes another solution to a voyeuristic society and their formulation normcore is a form of coolness not based on notions of difference from the norm but rather on shape-shifting and as they put it being vague and so we're going to start off with brief three-minute remarks from each of the panelists thank you so there were reports last week that since May of last year certain people who sought asylum in Cardiff Wales are being forced to wear brightly colored wristbands in order to ask to access certain goods and services mainly food supplied by a private company that is under contract with the Home Office to service recent migrants who were not other like otherwise allowed to work or receive monies so they complained of having to wear the wristbands at all time and feeling like second-class citizens and outcasts so after this story was reported in the news and social media the wristbands were said to be replaced by photo ID so I point to this story of the surveillance technology of the wristband as it touches on branding or the branding of certain people as cause for alarm and in need of supervision and allows us to see the operation of what sociologists di Bao calls the bed optic on this is when certain individuals and groups are labeled as potentially dangerous and then this labeling is as dangerous and as cause for alarm then shaped security measures and policing practices borders on city streets and other spaces that become associated with risk or at risk of becoming risky so you can think of the border here as something that gets enacted when make people make claims for certain things like food or in the case of Flint Michigan and Beyond clean water so many artists have continued and continued to take up the ways that surveillance is practiced and resisted with a particular focus on race gender and their various intersections with other markers of social location including Misha Canaris her Auto Nets which is a use of wearable technology for prison abolition and in response to gendered violence or exact blasts a facial weaponization sweet which is a critique of biometric technologies particularly facial recognition and also from 1992 keeps Piper surveillance tagging others which questions a the criminalization of black men through the stereotype of black man as being criminals and many many others but I'll close here with Mandi at Keith's of a decays blackness for sale from 2001 for the ways in which it speaks about surveillance and the making and remaking of borders so for a few days in August of 2001 they spooked the eBay site by putting a keith's blackness up for auction and providing potential bought buyers with a list of benefits and warnings including this blackness may be used for creating black arts and the seller does not recommend that this blackness be used while demanding and the seller does not recommend that this black must be used while voting in the United States and Florida so so blackness for sale this is something that you know from 2001 that still continues to be a primer for understanding the institutionalized and everyday surveillance appropriation and negation of black life in the overseen world thank you so I'm I'm a journalist and I've covered technology for many years and among many of the techniques that I have encountered surveillance is framed as a problem that requires a technical solution and for them the solution can be found in technology that protects anonymity like the Tor network Bitcoin or even a Guy Fawkes mask in this frame anonymity becomes a stand-in for privacy and freedom and it becomes something like a right and when I first started reporting on technology i roughly accepted this kind of techno livery an idea of anonymity but as I investigated the dynamics of surveillance and anonymity online I came to see the issue as more complicated a battle between surveillance bad and anonymity good far from an absolutely evil in many cases I found surveillance being used to more ambiguous ends so there are the content moderators in the Philippines like these guys who review posts on social media sites and remove violent images and child pornography I've written about activists live streamers whose surveillance of the police make other activists feel safer I met a group of Swedish anti-racists who monitor and expose anonymous racist trolls on the Internet including politicians and judges and at the same time I came to see how anonymity is often used to shirk responsibility for bad behavior in 2012 I investigated an anonymous moderator who had become hugely influential on the online community reddit despite his avowed racism and his fondness for posting non-consensual creep shots of women I grew skeptical of the hacktivists collective Anonymous whose bullying tactics often do more harm than good and today I believe that fetishizing anonymity can't be at the center of any response to the challenge of surveillance fixating on technological solutions to the problem of surveillance obscures the complex complexity of the issue and distracts from more essential questions of how we can build a better society where everyone enjoys freedom and privacy regardless of their access to technology hi I'm Emily that's okay that's my slide I'm one of the founders of cable which is a trend forecasting group an art collective that started in 2010 with me and four other members who are artists writers and designers and we used the conceit of corporate trend forecasting and this idea of charting emergent behavior to explore one central idea which we finally laid out in our third report which is that the job of the advanced consumer is managing anxiety period so we kind of went through our own anxieties to figure out how to present this in a lot of reports and as Lauren mentioned our very first report was actually about strategies of visibility and it was we we came up with this term fragmentation to explain in the way that different brands wordy contextualizing or breaking off parts of themselves to catch the eyes of consumerism and we echoed back to this first idea about the about fragmentation in our fifth report which was about magic basically as a response to a mounting sense of powerlessness that we had in terms of figuring out what was going to happen to the future of the world or of consumption or of ourselves as an art practice and we came up with these dark arts competencies so up here is the third one which is stealth mode and it was a sort of fantasy magical power for somebody who can modulate their visibility in the world and it was sort of a play on people like Anna Wintour having a flip phone or the luxury good of being able to turn off and we were sort of called it a Dark Arts competency because it was kind of more of a fantasy of a way somebody might be able to operate then a real thing we're best known for Co pointing the word normcore and what's funny about that is when we were coming up with the term we were actually talking a lot about what it meant to hide in plain sight and how you could look at something like the use of lol and a Facebook post could meaning to somebody's parents that they thought something was funny and could mean to their friends that they were opening some joke space of radical skepticism in the same post and we were trying to think about how things like wearing Uniqlo and Nike were kind of sending the same type of multi-tonal signals that could navigate a lot of different environments of course it ended up becoming this meme that had to do with dressing really rigidly basic so the scenario that we were trying to critique kind of ended up wrapping it up in the end but a lot of our stuff obviously isn't explicitly about surveillance but it does have to do with these questions of visibility and hiding in plain sight and I think that anxiety and surveillance are very intimately related I'm Rob I have a few general sort of remarks about surveillance hope these aren't anyway it's priestly comment for surveillance to be represented as a kind of total threat an all-encompassing cop a condition that's more like a climate than a particular apparatus made of people or institutions or technologies much like the impending doom invoked by climate change this representation of surveillance can inspire helpless anxiety if not outright disavowal but despite the massive power ascribed to the surveillance apparatus the threat it represents is sometimes represented as being limited to a matter of personal privacy which seems to frame a self-protective response as the first and best line of resistance hide yourself to be safe office gate or withhold your data try to disappear those sorts of evasive countermeasures tend to reinstall the omnipotence of surveillance suggesting that you can't dismantle the apparatus you can only play hide and seek with it there may be some personal satisfaction in such resistance but it does little to disrupt the forms of control that stem from broad-based data collection and it has likely to stimulate an arms race effect in which obfuscation provokes the development of more and more invasive surveillance techniques putting more and more people under greater scrutiny when such tactics fit a scrambling individual against the monolithic as a it can obscure health surveillance comprises a variety of agents serving a range of interests pursuing different purposes surveillance doesn't merely seek to prohibit behavior it can also try to compel it its sweep is not fully indiscriminate it's instead unevenly distributed in its targets which may not be determined in advance and may not even consist of discrete individuals it can create new ways of being known new degrees and dimensions of publicity that didn't exist prior to the surveillance being deployed surveillance has not been merely a matter of unwanted scrutiny that imposes repressive social control its mechanisms are inseparable from desired forms of social attention serving as a guarantor of legibility visibility revel irrelevance what have you given how social media undergird everyday life surveillance has become the contemporary form of social part patient it conveys that we belong it can be experienced as a systemic form of care so being watched qualifies us for the more specific forms of recognition that can build our reputation and establish our economic viability as well as a sense of social belonging but the attention that we experience as support an opportunity is obviously also the data that sustains the surveillance systems and makes them seem on you know unchangeable so we become complicit in surveillance as productivity tracking ourselves and others recognizing each other within the spaces of capture we want to be seen and we want to control how we are seeing but we accept that one can only come at the expense of the other okay so let's let's pick up on Rob's point which gets to some of my motivations for this panel too which is that you know the term surveillance is sort of used so often now that it's become somewhat nebulous and and used to encompass so much you just used it to encompass care and participation which I haven't heard before so I thought maybe I'd ask Simone and also Adrian and just to ask you do you have any kind of working definitions of surveillance maybe so anticipating this question I used the search function on my book and put in surveillance is and the first thing that came up was surveillance is nothing new to black folks and I think that's that's you know so I wanted to you know look at surveillance and the ways and the various so I use the term in various ways and define it in various ways as well too but mainly around its its intense and its targets and I use the term it's or the pronoun it's here not to say that surveillance is an actor because people do things people program things and make algorithms as well but to kind of just use it as a shorthand for this moment and so one of the important things to me is to historicize the practices of surveillance so even in New York City in step in the 1700s there were laws that were instituted that would compel black mixed-race and indigenous people to walk through the streets if they weren't accompanied by some white person to have a cat lit candle of course people resisted that as well too to kind of make the to use that as to think of it as a the legal framework for something like stop and frisk or even Josh channel recently made that connection to these lantern laws and the NYPD's omnipresence practices this is when they use their flashing lights or other kinds of high beams or fluorescent lights all night in housing projects and so my work I guess to think to give a definition of surveillance I looked at more how surveillance becomes an act of racism and act of race making and and remaking through racializing surveillance so surveillance practices that have as their effects discriminate discriminatory treatment for people who are negatively racialized by that very surveillance and so I guess that is the definition of yeah I mean just to sort of I mean also Adrian I think something to add a question for you something that your work has done so much is to again make visible people and make visible dynamics of race and class that are usually that can sometimes be hidden under abstract concepts like surveillance and particularly with content moderators and the Russian troll farms also thinking about them with a larger within a larger global economic system so maybe you can also address that sure I mean I think what's interesting to me about surveillance is really when kind of the fruits of surveillance are kind of laid out and revealed and people are able to kind of see what others have been seeing about them you know kind of secretly and so you know I wrote a story about I these this group in Sweden called research group which basically did kind of a systematic outing of anonymous commenters on this racist website and and you know was able to identify a lot of judges and politicians and and so so yeah I mean I think I think to me it's more about what what people are able to do with you know the material that they gather and yeah I don't think that I have any kind of systematic definition of surveillance that I'm looking at okay so so maybe two we focus back a bit on art and Minoan other– reason I was motivated to organize this panel and something that came up in the remarks is this idea that being Anonymous is the only way or the best way to get out of our current system of surveillance and and I want to sort of play that out and take that further and in question whether that's really the case and I say there may be the best way because in recent years projects like the Tor network have really been held up as examples of how to retain privacy also WikiLeaks has been an organization that seemed to be effective whereas other activist groups may question their own efficacy so um you know within the realm of art I want to to ask you what do you what do you see as projects recently that have been effective or proposed other kinds of ways to opt-out or critique the kind of relationships of visibility that we're dealing with now I don't know it just seems like they're framing an anonymous anonymous nough some access to truth it seems like a strange setup as though there's some privileged relationship to truth that is established by by masking your identity as opposed to for grounding you know or that there's some singular truth that you get out when you strip away all identity or something and that like that part's function is to be that kind of truth-telling that seems like a it seems like there's a different way of constructing that weird like you're you know we you don't want to be an honest you want to foreground identity or foreground the fluidity about them or something along those lines and you want to you know you want to you know gather the attention that that is unused to create some kind of truth wasn't pre-existing so you know it seems strange that like that there'd be a sense of you to be safe to say something artistic be truthful you need to somehow be anonymous or outside of surveillance it seems like what you want to be as in in surveillance you want to be you want to have a you know to be have an audience and it's just the nature of that audience can you know may not be the one you want that was really useful Thank You Adrian do you want to speak to maybe there live streaming article well I I I was thinking about projects that I've been interested in that kind of deal with you know anonymity and and the ways that surveillance and animating play out online and and neither of these are our projects but I think they they share a lot in common with like the issues that motivate a lot of art about it um so one thing is this thing called data arbitrage and I I don't even remember how I found that found this but it's like this startup that basically their goal is to buy start buying fake Twitter accounts fake facebook accounts and kind of like pollute the internet with all of this fake persona and then they are gonna sell the data on these fake people in order to fund more purchases in a you know infinite cycle until the internet is destroyed that's that's their explicit goal is basically to make the internet on on user Paul so I don't I don't really know if it's an art project or just some like really weird evil scheme but I think it's pretty funny and the other project is this thing called Turk optic on which is made by some professor at UCSD or something and and it's basically a tool for people who use Mechanical Turk and Mechanical Turk is Amazon's kind of crowdsourcing platform where people sign up and are you know given small tasks which they do for like 5 cents or something like identifying photos or sorting you know data and and this professor made a tool that basically allows them to kind of review the workers to review the employers and so it you know used to be where if you signed up for Mechanical Turk you would get these tasks and you wouldn't know anything about really who was employing you whether they would you know they were good for the money whether they would you know try to cheat you and and basically this this is like a plugin that sits on top of your browser and you know you can kind of look up every every person who's hiring people on Mechanical Turk by you know how good they are and so that you know that's kind of an interesting like use of surveillance you know in a way that kind of empowers people um so clearly I read all your articles and in the advance of this panel Adrian's I'm gonna ask you to talk about one more which is you did research on live-streaming and wrote about that as a movement and I just wanted to ask you to talk about it a little bit in relationship to being anonymous because in a sense what's happening with live-streaming were being live-streamed right now seems to be kind of the opposite it's a kind of example of total visibility where people are broadcasting 24 hours a day mm-hmm yeah I mean I I just got I got interested in in live streaming from from Occupy when you know that was kind of when there were a few people who were down at Zuccotti Park and and broadcasting live and you know I think for me at first it was just kind of an aesthetic thing where I was just like really transfixed by this dislike unbroken feed you know it was like kind of like reality TV but even like realer and so I was just like watching it you know for hours and and then you know during during the protest in Ferguson and kind of the black lives matter protest the live streamers came back and now it's interesting because the technology has advanced so the pictures are much clearer they're able to go for much longer without having to recharge and so you really have this kind of like immersive you know and there are many more of them and and so it's like following the protests in that way you you're kind of it's it's just like a really interesting way to watch news unfold but you know and and I think the way that it's different I I spoke with one guy who used to be a TV producer for CNN and he became a live streamer because he said he was in the control room at CNN during I think during occupy and you know he he mentioned that on CNN they in the control room they had you know one of the live streamers up on the other thing just to track what what kind of pictures they were getting and then they had the CNN reporter on another screen what they were broadcasting on CNN and he said you know the CNN reporter was kind of like two blocks away being like everything's pretty calm down here and meanwhile on the other screen with the live streamer you know police were beating the crap out of protesters and he was just like you know how how can we not be showing this and it's just like strange that this is the the material that they're putting out there and and so yeah I mean I think that the the way that live streaming is kind of embedded with the movements that they're covering offers like a very different perspective and a more kind of immediate and engaging experience of watching it and so I'll answer my own question and mention a couple of other artworks that I think relate to ideas of what are kind of potent ways to intervene in our conditions of visibility so first Trevor Paglen I'm sure all of those in the room who follow art know about him so much of his work which is is about visualizing things that are hidden in plain sight so his photographs sort of render visible drones that are in the sky that we don't see also as a class an artist who seems to be on every panel about privacy and art who's made a facial weaponization suite of tools where basically he creates masks that throw off the facial detection scanning software around you potentially and so those are projects that either in Trevor's case kind of bring things into the picture and give language to things that you know right in front of us but we might not be aware of and with Zach's it's a way to really like counter this you know kind of sense of being overseen but I was really happy Simone that you brought up oh but the OVA DK's project blackness for sale because I think it also dovetails with work that Rob has done to sort of questions of how so much of what we are doing online involves kind of commodifying ourselves and thinking of ourselves as as a product that we want to to sell and that was something that the first panel of the day was was intended to explore as well which is that online how do we manage the fact that our identities feel so often branded or that we feel a sort of pressure to brand ourselves so it's wondering if maybe you Simone could speak a little bit about you know the significance of that project now and and Rob maybe also follow up and I suggest that you all look it up yourselves and it's on the unstoppable project this is a direct action project so back to your question about anonymity and it gets me thinking like whose bodies who can be who can be make themselves anonymous and whose bodies are publicly available for scrutiny for policing and what kind of technologies people are set to create so that they can live so that their lives can matter and so this is a project that is a collaborative project between Michigan heiress and I mentioned her work a bit earlier and also one of the cofounders of the black lives matter movement purchased colors and this is a DIY solution for to create bulletproof clothing so what kinds of technologies could you produce for black lives to be safe and so it's a Direct Action project this is not only just about creating this clothing and but creating conversations around and police around abolition of prison abolition and also around repressive policing so that's um it's another case I think or that's important let me talk about you know especially the concerns around what black people are wearing people of color in their hoodies and their pants and the policing of that it's like what are the types of clothing kid could be created particular to have people be safe in the streets referring back to the the blackness for sale project like it seems to me that there's an attempt or it needs a sense that like surveillance is going to constitute us as a particular object of interest or an object of value to whomever and then there's an effort to then somehow intervene in that process and somehow you know reclaim some agency in the process of how you're being objectified by all these you know unknown on Watchers or unknown people overseeing you so then there's a various ways in which that you have to sort of presume surveillance in order to intervene and surveillance and reclaiming agency from within that kind of being observed as opposed to like trying to prevent the observation or confront the you know confront the inescapability of that observation so I think that there's always like this like attempt to preemptively objectify oneself or you know on the other hand to accept the objectification as some sort of as some sort of care some sort of attention that that constitutes your presence in a society that as it is as opposed to feeling that you need to like somehow define yourself against what exists in order to you know register as a unique individual whose valuable instead you sort of register as someone who is you know worthy of attention in the broadest sense and that someone takes up surveillance away from sort of you know a limited definition of being precisely the kind of attention you're not seeking or the kind of attention that's going to like you know curtail freedom but I think that it's hard to separate surveillance from the other kinds of attention that were pursuing their sort of constitutive at this point but to say about that and you follow up on that before I ask you a question and audience I'm going to turn to you soon – okay then I will say so I'm interested and you know I in and also the kind of as we've all as Rob has talked about the sort of banality of of surveillance in a sense and that we and which is I think something that Emily has addressed – and that in that it's part of our lives and every day and that we and we're participating it and every day and so I wonder – that and Cahill's strategy of stealth mode maybe if you could elaborate on that Emily and then maybe if the panelists if you could respond to whether you think that's that's applicable or not well that's what is a little bit of a joke because it's impossible to be completely stealth or I guess I think it's impossible to be completely stealth in the situation of total surveillance but it is such a desire and some people seem to be able to modulate it but it's better than others so when we wrote about it in the report it was like you used yours or social capital – you cashed it in in some way for like the actual power to control who sees you or who doesn't see you like it's somehow very costly in a way to like really turn off or you have to be very privileged is this something that I've thought about reading some of Rob's writings were like switching off or like not being on Facebook is actually in a lot of cases a really like privileged thing to do because it means that you can just kind of dispense a lot of networks that a lot of people need to just like exist or get work or be connected to people so we were kind of with these dark arts competencies we were also talking about like startup founder it's this ability to sort of manifest or the trend forecaster who can see the future which was like kind of us or these stealth stealth mode people as people who kind of approached a way to solve anxiety but could never really make good on it or that everything that you did to try and lay your anxiety kind of made more anxiety pop up in its place like the whack-a-mole so I'm interested in in how you're connecting stealth mode to this idea of privilege and and luxury and I'm wondering how other people in the panel feel like is is stealth mode some stealth mode something that's reserved for Anna Wintour maybe you want to respond Emily or is it something that could be kind of universally applicable Anna Wintour be editor ugh I don't think that she's literally stealth but I think that she's Oh Anna Wintour is famously been using a flip phone Rihanna was also spotted with a pink razor phone and not that long ago but I think that was more of an aesthetic thing but that actually speaks the fact that it's all kind of aesthetic it's saying that in a certain way you're powerful enough to not be connected in a particular way so it's finding that as a look so so it's kind of thinking about the way the ways of these dynamics might inform a look and not actually have to do it the way that you're functioning in the world definitely Anna Wintour's communications are pretty heavy but it ends up starting to inform what power looks like literally in a fashion way I just think of stuff Wood is like you know it's very contextual it's not it's not like you know like you know you can try to be stealthy in a sense of like some sort of total evasion but that's never really the situation you're always trying to be hidden from a particular group through a particular means and playing sort of cat-and-mouse with that and the difficulty is obviously figuring out who your opponents are if they're even and if your conception of the opponent is relief is a really a real conception and I guess that speaks to some of the art works that you were talking about earlier that's trying to like make those make those opponents be you know more more comprehensible when you want to slip into some sort of you know contextual stealth mode but the idea but you know the you know the idea that like see a stealth is sort of a that you can buy yourself into once you've got enough recognition you don't need the economic viability of sort of reputational capital within a social media you don't need the sort of sense of belonging to feel that you are part of the society that's you know that's like allotted and spoken of and you know it's like you need when you need visibility you just elf isn't really an option if you need that visibility to try to get power or try to get sort of like access and some sort of like get a voice and those sorts of things okay okay any questions I have more but anybody really okay I can't see you with the energetic hand scandal showed you know surveillance on these giant multinational corporations maybe they wouldn't be like many different countries kind of cascading into recession right now that's well I if there's one area where I think I'm kind of more surveillance or you know kind of monitoring would be good and and there's like you know these debates about kind of online harassment that are always going on with um you know Twitter and there was the whole gamergate controversy where you know women were being targeted harassment by like angry video game people and you know Twitter is like constantly trying to figure out how how to deal with this problem is it you know better reporting mechanisms or like you know just safety people or whatever but like I keep on thinking that what somebody should do is basically create like a like an online like militia of people to like go around and kind of like like counter you know people who are harassing or like anonymous trolls and and basically kind of like you know it'd be awesome if Twitter had their own like you know I'm probably not Twitter actually I don't think I would trust Twitter to run this militia but like you know just like a sadistic like concerned anti-racist citizens who are going around kind of some doxing racists I think would be kind of interesting I've never been on an art panel where there's been a call for an online okay I'm gonna take two more questions one from Twitter Thomas thank you I wanted to go back to your question and Lauren about the role of art or the space of art in this conversation because it seems like in some ways the things that we might have gone to art for in terms of truth finding judgment critique just like these kind of Enlightenment ideas that we have about what art is we're finding in other cultural spheres in this conversation and I'm wondering if there's a way in which the you know internet effect in some ways has migrated the places in which we look in culture for these forms of social intervention to other sites outside of our what the you know what the viability of that term is in this moment in which we live anybody um I mean I think that part of the reason that I've invited you know people who may like experts and other fields onto this panel is that I do feel like we need to rethink how we talk about surveillance now and yeah we're we're really I'm significant critiques of it and critiques of even more casual forms of looking are coming from and so yeah I think you know Adrienne's work you know uncovering kind of racist trolls and livestreaming I think are really significant examples right now they're not happening in art that's said I always think there's a place for art and I urged Simone to use the the Oba decays iconic project blackness for sale and I mentioned Paglen and blast before so I think absolutely there are there are these these projects happening with within our context and they're really viable and they do set an example um I also want to call in one there's an active Twitter discussion happening I don't know if a REIT got is in the room but she's twittering um a REIT and do you want to ask your question IRL you're gonna say it online it's like the last panel the question was kind of I think it's really important to talk about what you mentioned about Trevor peg lens work and Zach glasses work I'm gonna throw James vital there too just to have another dude there I'm a huge fan of all of their works but I think we've kind of succumbed to discussing visualizing you know the invisible as the only artistic methodology available to discuss this and it might be the cultural moment right now but it might not be enough yeah I mean maybe I'll turn to Rob for that because I think Rob wrote a really a cogent article that I think critiques these practices that are really solely about visualizing and and also it's and being anonymous as well yeah like sort of speak to that before about this idea that like yeah there's like there's some like the truth is manifested through like making these things visible as though you know it's there's some pre-existing truth and you need bring it into the light and that's as instead of looking at these how these things are sort of like constituted through the practices but I'm not sure that it really speaks to what you're saying I don't think that I think I can like gloss what you said it any better than we need something different than that locality but I don't know what it is I mean I you know Adrian and I were speaking also about you know these kind of problems and limits of being anonymous and maybe that it's also reserved for the kind of high tech Wizards in Silicon Valley and activists and programmers and where does that leave the rest of us I don't know if you want to speak to that to that point and you're sort of critiques of being a voice I mean I think going going to the to the point about like kind of revealing and and investigating as like an art practice and kind of limits of that I think that maybe that goes you know I think that that that's that's maybe one reason why a lot of these issues are not happening as much in art because you know the act of like investigating uncovering it seems like in a lot of these art a lot of the artists that you mentioned who I also like it's more about the kind of act and and there's that kind of this like heroism I think and like kind of ego to it that maybe obscures from like the actual material or maybe gives it some gloss that that doesn't help actually address the issues but on the other hand you know I find those those artists inspiring because of that because the way that they're able to make these kind of impenetrable sometimes boring issues very like seem urgent and like sexy and something where you you're kind of excited to learn more about it so you know that's kind of what I try to approach it these issues in my own work is thinking about what's the way to do it in the most like entertaining engaging way while also not like oversimplifying it okay and I've taken advantage of my position as co-organizer to run over so I think we need to wrap up and any burning closing remarks thank you so much thank you so much you

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *