Centre for Internet and Society

Internet Liability

Admin — 2019-10-20T07:04:53Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/files/internet-liability

AI for Good

Shweta Mohandas and Saumyaa Naidu — 2019-10-13T05:32:28Z

CIS organised a workshop titled ‘AI for Good’ at the Unbox Festival in Bangalore from 15th to 17th February, 2019. The workshop was led by Shweta Mohandas and Saumyaa Naidu. In the hour long workshop, the participants were asked to imagine an AI based product to bring forward the idea of ‘AI for social good’.

The report was edited by Elonnai Hickok.

The workshop was aimed at examining the current narratives around AI and imagining how these may transform with time. It raised questions about how we can build an AI for the future, and traced the implications relating to social impact, policy, gender, design, and privacy.

Methodology

The rationale for conducting this workshop in a design festival was to ensure a diverse mix of participants. The participants in the workshop came from varied educational and professional backgrounds who had different levels of understanding of technology. The workshop began with a discussion on the existing applications of artificial intelligence, and how people interact and engage with it on a daily basis. This was followed by an activity where the participants were provided with a form and were asked to conceptualise their own AI application which could be used for social good. The participants were asked to think about a problem that they wanted the AI application to address and think of ways in which it would solve the problem. They were also asked to mention who will use the application. It prompted participants to provide details of the AI application in terms of the form, colour, gender, visual design, and medium of interaction (voice/ text). This was intended to nudge the participants into thinking about the characteristics of the application, and how it will lend to the overall purpose. The form was structured and designed to enable participants to both describe and draw their ideas. The next section of the form gave them multiple pairs of principles. They were asked to choose one principle from each pair. These were conflicting options such as ‘Openness’ or ‘Proprietary’, and ‘Free Speech’ or ‘Moderated Speech’. The objective of this section was to illustrate how a perceived ideal AI that satisfies all stakeholders can be difficult to achieve, and that the AI developers at times may be faced with a decision between profitability and user rights.

Participants were asked to keep their responses anonymous. These responses were then collected and discussed with the group. The activity led to the participants engaging in a discussion on the principles mentioned in the form. Questions around where the input data to train the AI would come from, or what type of data the application will collect were discussed. The responses were used to derive implications on gender, privacy, design, and accessibility.

Responses

Analysis

Even as the responses were varied, they had a few key similarities and observations.

Participants’ Familiarity with AI

The participants’ understanding of AI was based on what they read and heard from various sources. While discussing the examples of AI, the participants were familiar with not just the physical manifestation of AI such as robots, but also AI software. However when asked to define an AI the most common explanations were, bots, software, and the use of algorithms to make decisions using large amounts of data. The participants were optimistic of the way AI could be used for social good. However, some of them showed concern about the implications on privacy.

Perception of AI Among Participants

With the workshop, our aim was to have the participants reflect on their perception of AI based on their exposure to the narratives around AI by companies and the government.

The participants were given the brief to imagine an AI that could solve a problem or be used for social good. Most participants considered AI to be a positive tool for social impact. It was seen as a problem solver. The ideas conceptualised by the participants varied from countering fake news, wildlife conservation, resource distribution, and mental health. This brought to focus the range of areas that were seen as pertinent for an AI intervention. Most of the responses dealt with concerns that affect humans directly, the one aimed at wildlife conservation being the only exception.

On being asked, who will use the AI application, it was interesting to note that all the responses considered different stakeholders such as individuals, non profits, governments and private companies to be the end user. However, it was interesting that through the discussion the harms that might be caused by the use of AI by these stakeholders were not brought up. For example, the use of AI for resource distribution did not take into consideration the fact that the government could provide unequal distribution based on the existing biased datasets. Several of the AI applications were conceptualised to work without any human intervention. For example, one of the ideas proposed was to use AI as a mental health counsellor which was conceptualised as a chatbot that would learn more about human psychology with each interaction. It was assumed that such a service would be better than a human psychologist who can be emotionally biased. Similarly, while discussing the idea behind the use of AI for preventing the spread of fake news, the participant believed that the indication coming from an AI would have greater impact than one coming from a human. They believed that the AI could provide the correct information and prevent the spread of fake news. By discussing these cases we were able to highlight that the complete reliance on technology could have severe consequences.

Form and Visual Design of the AI Concepts

In most cases, the participants decided the form and visual design of their AI concepts keeping in mind its purpose. For instance, the therapy providing AI mentioned earlier, was envisioned as a textual platform, while a ‘clippy type’ add on AI tool was thought of for detecting fake news. Most participants imagined the AI application to have a software form, while the legal aid AI application was conceptualised to have a human form. This revealed that the participants perceived AI to be both a software and a physical device such as a robot.

Accessibility of the Interfaces

The purpose of including the type of interface (voice or text) while conceptualising the AI application was to push the participants towards thinking about accessibility features. We aimed to have the participants think about the default use of the interface, both in terms of language and accessibility. The participants though cognizant of the need to have a large number of users, preferred to have only textual input into the interface, not anticipating the accessibility concerns.

The choices between access vs cost, and accessibility vs scalability were also questioned by the participants during the workshop. They enquired about the meaning of the terms as well as discussed the difficulty in having an all inclusive interface. Some of the responses consisted only of text inputs, especially for sensitive issues involving interactions, such as for therapy or helplines. This exercise made the participants think about the end user as well as the ‘AI for all’ narrative. We decided to add these questions that made the participants think about how the default ability, language, and technological capability of the user is taken for granted, and how simple features could help more people interact with the application. This discussion led to the inference that there is a need to think about accessibility by design during the creation of the application and not as an afterthought.

Biases Based on Gender

We intended for the participants to think about the inherent biases that creep into creating an AI concept. These biases were evident from deciding identifiably male names, to deciding a male voice when the application needed to be assertive, or a female voice and name for when it was dealing with school children. Most of the other participants either did not mention the gender or they said that the AI could be gender neutral or changeable.

These observations are also revealing of the existing narrative around AI. The popular AI interfaces have been noted to exemplify existing gender stereotypes. For example, the virtual assistants were given female identifiable names and default female voices such as Siri, Alexa, and Cortana. The more advanced AI were given male identifiable names and default male voices such as Watson, Holmes etc. Although these concerns have been pointed out by several researchers, there needs to be a visible shift towards moving away from existing gender biases.

Concerns around Privacy

Though the participants were aware of the privacy implications of data driven technologies, they were unsure of how their own AI concept could deal with questions of privacy. The participants voiced concerns about how they would procure the data to train the AI but were uncertain about their data processing practices. This included how they would store the data, anonymise the data, or prevent third parties from accessing it. For example, during the activity, it was pointed out to the participants that there would be sensitive data collected in applications such as therapy provision, legal aid for victims of abuse, and assistance for people with social anxiety. In these cases, the participants stated that they would ensure that the data was shared responsibly, but did not consider the potential uses or misuses of this shared data.

Choices between Principles

This part of the exercise was intended to familiarise the participants with certain ethical and policy questions about AI, as well as to look at the possible choices that AI developers have to make. Along with discussing the broader questions around the form and interface of AI, we wanted the participants to also look at making decisions about the way the AI would function. The intent behind this component of the exercise was to encourage the participants to question the practices of AI companies, as well as understand the implications of choices while creating an AI. As the language in this section was based on law and policy, we spent some time describing the terms to the participants. Even as some of the options presented by us were not exhaustive or absolute extremes, we placed this section to demonstrate the complexity in creating an AI that is beneficial for all. We intended for the participants to understand that an AI that is profitable to the company, free for people, accessible, privacy respecting, and open source, though desirable may be in competition with other interests such as profitability and scalability.

The participants were urged to think about how decisions regarding who can use the service, how much transparency and privacy the company will provide, are also part of building an AI. Taking an example from the responses, we talked about how having a closed proprietary software in case of AI applications such as providing legal aid to victims of abuse would deter the creation of similar applications. However, after the terms were explained, the participants mostly chose openness over proprietary software, and access over paid services.

Conclusion

The aim of this exercise was to understand the popular perception of AI. The participants had varied understanding of AI, but were familiar with the term. They also knew of the popular products that claim to use AI. Since the exercise was designed for people as an introduction to AI policy, we intended to keep questions around data practices out of the concept form. Eventually, with this exercise, we, along with the participants, were able to look at how popular media sells AI as an effective and cheaper solution to social issues. The exercise also allowed the participants to understand certain biases with gender, language, and ability. It also shed light on how questions of access and user rights should be placed before the creation of a technological solution. New technologies such as AI are being featured as problem solvers by companies, the media and governments. However, there is a need to also think about how these technologies can be exclusionary, misused, or how they amplify existing socio economic inequities.

[1]. https://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/news/2019/08/26/maximizing-the-potential-of-ai-starts-with-trust.html

[2]. https://qz.com/1023448/if-youre-not-a-white-male-artificial-intelligences-use-in-healthcare-could-be-dangerous/

[3]. https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2018/11/29/18118469/instagram-accessibility-automatic-alt-text-object-recognition

[4]. https://www.theguardian.com/pwc-partner-zone/2019/mar/26/why-are-virtual-assistants-always-female-gender-bias-in-ai-must-be-remedied

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/ai-for-good-event-report-on-workshop-conducted-at-unbox-festival

Designing a Human Rights Impact Assessment for ICANN’s Policy Development Processes

Collin Kure, Akriti Bopanna and Austin Ruckstuhl — 2019-10-03T14:18:13Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/files/designing-a-human-rights-impact-assessment-for-icann2019s-policy-development-processes

Analysis on the strategies of Mozilla and Wiki communities on gender gap aspects

bhuvana — 2019-10-03T11:56:37Z

There is a need for research on how Open Source communities are trying to balance the gender ratio and how they provide the safe space environment to its contributors. With this in mind I have come up with this blog as I am an active contributor of Mozilla since 5 years and also got myself recently introduced to Wikimedia and its sister projects, have interacted with few Indian women contributors in both of these communities and came out with a few observations on how I see them in India and what could be improved in both communities.

Opening note

Wikipedia community

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia of articles where many users can edit it freely and it has become so large that you run across it all the time in Google. It is so popular that it is now one of the Top 5 websites in the world! The reason behind the growth is because the articles are simple and useful.

Wikipedians are the contributors who do a communal work to improve the content by editing bits of text and cluster them to the large database. Beyond this there are other sister projects of Wikimedia which interest the audience on whichever they are expertise about. The main motivation for these contributors is their freedom to contribute in their own native language which they are more passionate about. This is a great social cause they are contributing towards.

Mozilla community

Mozilla makes browsers, apps, code and tools that put people before profit. In fact, there’s a non-profit Foundation at the heart of the enterprise.Their mission is to keep the internet open and accessible to all. Hope everyone uses or had at least at some point seen Firefox browser/logo, so this is the prime product of Mozilla. There are various projects to support the Firefox browser and they are mostly Open Source.

Mozillians are the volunteers who contribute in the improvement of these projects thus helping the world to access the internet and the Open web.Mozilla Volunteers are passionate to learn,collaborate and knowledge share among a large world-wide community and the crew is a mix of coder, non-coders, policy makers and anyone who supports Open Web. The point that drives everyone to contribute is that the community creates a vibe to contribute and to create a safe and better experience in accessing the digital world.

WikiProject Women

This a group of editors who aim to improve Wikipedia's coverage of women's topics. It brings Wikipedia users of all genders, sexual orientations, geographic locations, and personal backgrounds together to discuss and collaborate on coverage of women's content across Wikipedia.There are various streams in which women can be part of the larger mission for instance:

Art and Feminism

Women in Red

Wiki loves women

Womoz

Women & Mozilla ("WoMoz") a community composed of members from different Open Source projects.It is mainly dedicated to improving women's visibility and involvement in Free/Open Source and Mozilla, and to increase the number of women contributors. Anyone can participate in this project, regardless of sex, age, job, etc. We are united by the common goal of promoting women's visibility and involvement in open source communities. They also believe that the Internet, FLOSS projects and computing must remain open and participatory. This also means accessible in the same way to all - women and men alike.

It also believe solutions should continuously be proposed in order to improve the visibility of all minorities, who for various reasons might not have equal access to computers or the Internet. This project is an example of this, as it aims at ameliorating women's presence and participation in Mozilla and open source. But currently this group is not very active, except for a few regional contributors where they find massive necessity to focus on the women participation.

Overview of the strategies used for increasing women participation

Methodologies used

Both the communities are great supporters of the Free Softwares and licenses and so the methods that is used in addressing the gender gap issues is as follows:

Conduct gender neutral events like hack-a-thons/ edit-a-thons where the tutor is a woman or there is a large ratio of under represented community in the event.
Host monthly offline/online meetups.
Work on projects which are gender neutral based.
Following up special protocols like CoCs strictly at these events.
Days like “International Women’s Day” and on similar significant occasions some unique events will be hosted and contributors will be appreciated.

Impact on Indian communities

The WikiProject woman and WoMoz programs play a very important role among the Indian communities. Although I do not see a single or uniform progress there is always a good scale-up among the regional communities. For a country like India where there is still necessity for uplifting the presence and awareness of these type of FOSS programs I feel that most of these programs are extensively hosted in urban or developed phases of the country. Recently, the internet access has spread across but then the basic knowledge of contributing to Open Source is still abandoned. The end result and the what the contributors shall get on contributing to these communities must be emphasised more.

Closing note

My study and analysis on these two communities is drawn from personal interest and engagement with these communities since I have been contributing and interacting with the contributors for the last few years. The objective of this post is basically to bring about an awareness on the accessible resources on bridging the digital divide , and how these resources can be modified and taken further for a country like India. The efforts taken to improve the gender neutrality by the above communities is laudable but more light has to be thrown on improving the measures taken to sustain women contributors

References:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedians

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/contribute/

http://www.womoz.org/

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/analysis-on-the-strategies-of-mozilla-and-wiki-communities-on-gender-gap-aspects-1

Draft Rules and Manila Principles

Akriti Bopanna and Gayatri Puthran — 2019-10-13T05:45:08Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/files/draft-rules-and-manila-principles-1

September 2019 Newsletter

praskrishna — 2019-12-06T04:53:12Z

The newsletter for the month of September 2019.

Highlights for September 2019
Centre for Internet & Society's application for membership of the Christchurch Call Advisory Network has been accepted! As a part of this network, we, along with other civil society groups based out of various jurisdictions, would be providing inputs on making the Call a robust, human rights-centred initiative. A book by Amber Sinha titled 'The Networked Public: How Social Media is Changing Democracy' was published by Rupa Publications. The book looks at how networks exert unchecked power in subverting political discourse and polarizing the public in India. Towards that, it investigates the history of misinformation and the biases that make the public susceptible to it, how digital platforms and their governance impacts the public’s behaviour in them, as well as the changing face of political targeting in a data-driven ecosystem. Akriti Bopanna and Gayatri Puthran co-authored a research paper which compares the Manila Principles to Draft of The Information Technology [Intermediary Guidelines(Amendment) Rules], 2018, introduced by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) in December, 2018. Gurshabad Grover and Torsha Sarkar along with Rajashri Seal and Neil Trivedi co-authored a paper that examines the constitutionality of the government prohibition on the broadcast of news against private and community FM channels. The authors also mapped chronologically the history of the development of community and private radio channels in India. Ambika Tandon and Aayush Rathi generated empirical evidence about the CCTV programme well underway in Delhi. The case study was published by Centre for Development Informatics, Global Development Institute, SEED, in the Development Informatics working paper series housed at the University of Manchester. Shruti Trikanand and Amber Sinha published a blog post titled Core Concepts and Processes by which the authors hope to arrive at a shared vocabulary to discuss and critically analyse digital identity systems, both within our team and in engagements with other stakeholders. Pooja Saxena and Akash Sheshadri contributed to the project. The Global Commission on the Stability of Cyberspace released a public consultation process that sought to solicit comments and obtain feedback on the definition of “Stability of Cyberspace”, as developed by the Global Commission on the Stability of Cyberspace (GCSC). CIS gave detailed commentary on the definitions and suggested a new definition of cyber stability. CIS is undertaking a study on digital mediation of domestic and care work in India, as part of and supported by the Feminist Internet Research Network led by the Association for Progressive Communications (APC), funded by the International Development Research Centre (IDRC). The study is exploring the ways in which structural inequalities, such as those of gender and class, are being reproduced or challenged by digital platforms. The project sites are Delhi and Bangalore, where we are conducting interviews with workers, companies, and unions. In Bangalore, we are collaborating with Stree Jagruti Samiti to collect qualitative data from different stakeholders. The outputs of the research will include a report, policy brief, and other communication materials in English, Hindi, and Kannada. This study is being led by Ambika Tandon and Aayush Rathi, along with Sumandro Chattapadhyay. CIS-A2K has put up a call for joining the Free Knowledge movement #Wikipedia #Wikimedia. Are you an individual or do you represent any organisation, institution, groups or enterprises? You can actually help the ‘Free Knowledge’ movement by donating photos, media, content or archives.

CIS and the News

The following articles and research papers were authored by CIS secretariat during the month:

Doing Standpoint Theory (Ambika Tandon and Aayush Rathi; Gender IT.org; September 1, 2019).
Traffic Rules, Mindset and On-Time Payments (Shyam Ponappa; Business Standard; September 4, 2019).
Kashmir’s digital blackout marks a period darker than the dark side of the moon (Nishant Shah; Indian Express; September 15, 2019).
The Networked Public: How Social Media Changed Democracy (Amber Sinha; Rupa Publications; September 19, 2019).
Capturing Gender and Class Inequities: The CCTVisation of Delhi (Aayush Rathi and Ambika Tandon; Centre for Development Informatics, Global Development Institute; September 27, 2019).

CIS in the News

CIS secretariat was consulted for the following articles published during the month in various publications:

Why having more CCTV cameras does not translate to crime prevention (Manasa Rao; The News Minute; September 3, 2019).
Android 10 out, big on ‘privacy’ (Roshan H. Nair; Deccan Herald; September 4, 2019).
Internet pour toutes (Isabelle Grégoire; L'Actualite; September 11, 2019).
Chennai residents rue fuzzy CCTV surveillance (Vivek Narayanan and R. Srinivasan; The Hindu; September 18, 2019).

Millions of kids in India access the Net on their parents’ devices, says study (Varun Aggarwal; Hindu Businessline; September 27, 2019).
SC directs govt to further regulate social media: Is it necessary? Experts weigh in (Geetika Mantri; The News Minute; September 28, 2019).

Access to Knowledge

Access to Knowledge is a campaign to promote the fundamental principles of justice, freedom, and economic development. It deals with issues like copyrights, patents and trademarks, which are an important part of the digital landscape.

Wikipedia

Under a grant from Wikimedia Foundation we are doing a project for the growth of Indic language communities and projects by designing community collaborations and partnerships that recruit and cultivate new editors and explore innovative approaches to building projects.

News

Bhuvana Meenakshi elected Mozilla Rep for July 2019 (Bhuvana Meenakshi was selected as a Rep of the Month (July 2019) by Mozilla for her active contributions).

Openness

Participation in Events

FOSSCON India 2019 (Organized by KLS Gogte Institute of Technology; Belgaum; August 29 - 31, 2019). Bhuvana Meenakshi gave a talk on "The revolution of WebXR".
DevFest'19 (Organized by Google Developers Groups; Coimbatore; September 14, 2019).
React India 2019 (Organized by React India; Goa; September 26 - 28, 2019). Bhuvana Meenakshi was a speaker.

Internet Governance

The Tunis Agenda of the second World Summit on the Information Society has defined internet governance as the development and application by governments, the private sector and civil society, in their respective roles of shared principles, norms, rules, decision making procedures and programmes that shape the evolution and use of the Internet. As part of internet governance work we work on policy issues relating to freedom of expression primarily focusing on the Information Technology Act and issues of liability of intermediaries for unlawful speech and simultaneously ensuring that the right to privacy is safeguarded as well.

Freedom of Speech & Expression

Under a grant from the MacArthur Foundation, CIS is doing research on the restrictions placed on freedom of expression online by the Indian government and contribute studies, reports and policy briefs to feed into the ongoing debates at the national as well as international level. As part of the project we bring you the following outputs:

Research Papers

Examining the Constitutionality of the Ban on Broadcast of News by Private FM and Community Radio Stations (Gurshabad Grover, Torsha Sarkar, Rajashri Seal and Neil Trivedi; September 27, 2019).
Comparison of the Manila Principles to Draft of The Information Technology [Intermediary Guidelines(Amendment) Rules], 2018 (Akriti Bopanna and Gayatri Puthran; September 30, 2019).

News

Turning off the internet: Chips with Everything podcast (Gurshabad Grover and Ambika Tandon recorded an episode with the Guardian's podcast on digital culture, called Chips with Everything).

Privacy

Under a grant from Privacy International and IDRC we are doing a project on surveillance. CIS is researching the history of privacy in India and how it shapes the contemporary debates around technology mediated identity projects like Aadhar. As part of our ongoing research, we bring you the following outputs:

Submission

Submission to Global Commission on Stability of Cyberspace on the definition of Cyber Stability (Arindrajit Basu and Elonnai Hickok; September 11, 2019).

Participation in Events

Policy Design Jam (Organized by Whatsapp and ISPP; Qutub Institutional Area, New Delhi; September 16, 2019). Pallavi Bedi, Akash Sheshadri and Anubha Sinha attended the event.
Conceptualising India's Digital Policy Vision (Organized by National University of Juridical Sciences; National University of Juridical Sciences; Kolkata; September 18, 2019).
All Partners Meeting (Organized by Partnership on AI; London; September 26 - 27, 2019). Elonnai Hickok reprsented CIS as the co-chair for the Labour and Economy Expert Group.

Digital Identity

Omidyar Network is investing in establishment of a three-region research alliance — to be co-led by the Institute for Technology & Society (ITS), Brazil, the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Technology Law (CIPIT) , Kenya, and CIS. As part of this Alliance, CIS is examining the policy objectives of digital identity projects, how technological policy choices can be thought through to meet the objectives, and how legitimate uses of a digital identity framework may be evaluated.

Featured Research

Core Concepts and Processes (Shruti Trikanand and Amber Sinha; September 13, 2019). Research by Shruti Trikanad and Amber Sinha. Conceptualization by Pooja Saxena and Amber Sinha. Illustrations by Akash Sheshadri and Pooja Saxena.

Artificial Intelligence

With origins dating back to the 1950s Artificial Intelligence (AI) is not necessarily new. However, interest in AI has been rekindled over the recent years due to advancements of technology and its applications to real-world scenarios. We conduct research on the existing legal and regulatory parameters:

Participation in Events

AI in Healthcare (Organized by Center for Information Technology and Public Policy and International Institute of Information Technology; Bangalore). Radhika Radhakrishnan gave a talk.
Responsible AI Workshop (Organized by Facebook; September 17, 2019; New Delhi). Sunil Abraham participated in the meeting.
Constitutionalizing Artificial Intelligence (Organized by Constitutional Law Society; National University of Juridical Sciences; Kolkata). Arindrajit Basu delivered a lecture.

Researchers@Work

The researchers@work programme at CIS produces and supports pioneering and sustained trans-disciplinary research on key thematics at the intersections of internet and society; organise and incubate networks of and fora for researchers and practitioners studying and making internet in India; and contribute to development of critical digital pedagogy, research methodology, and creative practice.

Announcement

Digital mediation of domestic and care work in India: Project Announcement (Ambika Tandon and Aayush Rathi; October 1, 2019).

Essays on #List — Selected Abstracts

In response to a recent call for essays that social, economic, cultural, political, infrastructural, or aesthetic dimensions of the #List, we received 11 abstracts. Out of these, we have selected 4 pieces to be published as part of a series titled #List on the r@w blog.

Blog Entries

#HookingUp (Akhil Kang, Christina Thomas Dhanraj, Dhrubo Jyoti, and Gowthaman Ranganathan; August 1, 2019).
Call for Contributions and Reflections: Your experiences in Decolonizing the Internet’s Languages! (P.P. Sneha; August 7, 2019).
Simiran Lalvani - Workers’ fictive kinship relations in Mumbai app-based food delivery (Sumandro Chattapadhyay; August 16, 2019).

Telecom

The growth in telecommunications in India has been impressive. While the potential for growth and returns exist, a range of issues need to be addressed for this potential to be realized. One aspect is more extensive rural coverage and the second aspect is a countrywide access to broadband which is low at about eight million subscriptions. Both require effective and efficient use of networks and resources, including spectrum.

Monthly Blog

Traffic Rules, Mindset and On-Time Payments (Shyam Ponappa; September 4, 2019).

About CIS

CIS is a non-profit organisation that undertakes interdisciplinary research on internet and digital technologies from policy and academic perspectives. The areas of focus include digital accessibility for persons with disabilities, access to knowledge, intellectual property rights, openness (including open data, free and open source software, open standards, open access, open educational resources, and open video), internet governance, telecommunication reform, digital privacy, and cyber-security. The academic research at CIS seeks to understand the reconfigurations of social and cultural processes and structures as mediated through the internet and digital media technologies.

Follow CIS on:

Twitter: http://twitter.com/cis_india
Twitter - Access to Knowledge: https://twitter.com/CISA2K
Twitter - Information Policy: https://twitter.com/CIS_InfoPolicy
Facebook - Access to Knowledge: https://www.facebook.com/cisa2k
E-Mail - Access to Knowledge: a2k@cis-india.org
E-Mail - Researchers at Work: raw@cis-india.org
List - Researchers at Work: https://lists.ghserv.net/mailman/listinfo/researchers

Support CIS:

Please help us defend consumer and citizen rights on the Internet! Write a cheque in favour of 'The Centre for Internet and Society' and mail it to us at No. 194, 2nd 'C' Cross, Domlur, 2nd Stage, Bengaluru - 5600 71.

Collaborate with CIS:

We invite researchers, practitioners, artists, and theoreticians, both organisationally and as individuals, to engage with us on topics related internet and society, and improve our collective understanding of this field. To discuss such possibilities, please write to Sunil Abraham, Executive Director, at sunil@cis-india.org (for policy research), or Sumandro Chattapadhyay, Research Director, at sumandro@cis-india.org (for academic research), with an indication of the form and the content of the collaboration you might be interested in. To discuss collaborations on Indic language Wikipedia projects, write to Tanveer Hasan, Programme Officer, at tanveer@cis-india.org.

CIS is grateful to its primary donor the Kusuma Trust founded by Anurag Dikshit and Soma Pujari, philanthropists of Indian origin for its core funding and support for most of its projects. CIS is also grateful to its other donors, Wikimedia Foundation, Ford Foundation, Privacy International, UK, Hans Foundation, MacArthur Foundation, and IDRC for funding its various projects.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/september-2019-newsletter

Ban of News on Radio

Torsha Sarkar — 2019-09-27T16:25:38Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/files/ban-of-news-on-radio.pdf

Development Informatics

Aayush Rathi and Ambika Tandon — 2019-09-27T15:12:01Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/files/development-informatics

Bhuvana Meenakshi elected Mozilla Rep for July 2019

Admin — 2019-09-25T16:33:55Z

Bhuvana Meenakshi was selected as a Rep of the Month (July 2019) by Mozilla for my active contributions.

Reps are community coordinators interested in:

finding and connecting new talent with Mozilla projects they are contributing to
developing communities on a functional or local level
supporting local communities and Mozilla to have an effective and decentralized environment for contribution
creating collaborations with adjacent communities to spread Mozilla’s mission and expand Mozilla’s outreach in the open source ecosystem
collecting local knowledge from Mozilla communities to inform and inspire Mozilla’s strategy, activities and priorities

How is the Rep of the Month nominated?

Every Rep can be nominated by any Reps Mentor to receive this recognition. Therefore it's possible to nominate other Reps, not just the mentor's mentees. This nomination is meant as a recognition for outstanding contributions to Mozilla through the Reps program. Mentors are encouraged to nominate any Reps that have stood out in the past month.

For more see here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/news/bhuvana-meenakshi-elected-mozilla-rep-for-july-2019-1

CIS joins the Christchurch Call Advisory Network

Admin — 2019-09-25T13:57:49Z

Centre for Internet & Society's application for membership of the Christchurch Call Advisory Network has been accepted! As a part of this network, we, along with other civil society groups based out of various jurisdictions, would be providing inputs on making the Call a robust, human rights-centred initiative.

The Christchurch Call Advisory Network membership has been drawn from interested civil society groups, who represent a range of perspectives, including human rights, freedom of expression, digital rights, counter-radicalization, victim support and public policy. Many of the Advisory Network members have been engaged on the Christchurch Call since its launch and are committed to continuing to share their expertise.

The Christchurch Call Advisory Network

Access Now
Africa Digital Policy Project
Annenberg Public Policy Center, University of Pennsylvania
Article 19
Association for Progressive Communications
Brookings Institution
Center for Humane Technology
Centre for Internet and Society, India
Chicago Project on Security and Threats, University of Chicago
Committee to Protect Journalists
Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)
Dangerous Speech Project
Data & Society
Electronic Frontier Foundation
French National Bar Council
Global Disinformation Index
Global Forum for Media Development (GFMD)
Global Partners Digital
Global Network Initiative
Hedayah Center
Human Rights Centre, UC, Berkeley School of Law
ICT for Peace Foundation
Institute for Strategic Dialogue
International Cyber Policy Centre (Australian Strategic Policy Institute)
Internet Governance Project, Georgia Tech
Internet NZ
Internet Sans Frontières
Islamic Women's Council of New Zealand
Life After Hate
Netsafe
New America's Open Technology Institute (New America Foundation)
NZ Council for Civil Liberties
Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
Social Media Governance Initiative, Yale Law School
Syrian Archive
Tech Against Terrorism
The International Muslim Association of New Zealand
The Internet Society
Tony Blair Institute for Global Change
Wellington Abrahamic Council of Jews, Christians, and Muslims (NZ)
WITNESS
Women’s Organisation of the Waikato Muslim Association
Elina Noor (Visiting Fellow, Institute of Strategic and International Studies Malaysia)
Matthew Shears (Internet and telecommunications policy consultant)

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/cis-joins-the-christchurch-call-advisory-network

CIS Team

praskrishna — 2025-02-17T13:15:42Z

CIS undertakes policy-focused, applied, and academic research on topics at the intersection of internet and society, driven by concerns of human rights and public interest. CIS is based in Bengaluru and New Delhi.

Senior Staff

Tanveer Hasan A K
Amrita Sengupta

Anubha Sinha

Puthiya Purayil Sneha
Pranav M. B
Isha Suri
Pallavi Bedi
Pavan Santhosh Surampudi

Programme and Policy Officers

Shweta Mohandas
Yesha Tshering Paul
Yatharth
Nishkala
Chetna
Chiara
Garima Agrawal
Abhineet Nayyar
Nishant Shankar

A2K Team Members

Subodh Kulkarni
Nivas
Chris
Nitesh Gill
K.N. Medini

Administration and Finance

Ajoy Kumar
Nagaraj MP
Nima Lama
Velankanni Royson
Chandra Bhushan

Non-Resident Fellow

Ambika Tandon
Arindrajit Basu

Senior Staff

Amrita Sengupta
Tanveer Hasan A K
	Tanveer Hasan A K is the Executive Director of the Centre for Internet and Society. Previously, Tanveer worked at the Wikimedia Foundation leading global alliances for the Free and Open knowledge movement, and resource allocation in South Asia. In the past, Tanveer was also the Program Manager for CIS's Access to Knowledge project, and an Assistant Professor at the Centre for Indian Languages in Higher Education at the Tata Institute of Social Sciences TISS.
	Amrita Sengupta is a Research and Programme Lead at CIS. Her research interests and work lie in the areas of gender and technology, digital cultures, ethics in research methods, digital access, algorithmic biases and tech design, and sustainability and tech. She holds an undergraduate degree in sociology from Miranda House, Delhi University and a post graduate degree in internet studies from the Oxford Internet Institute. In the past, Amrita has worked in managing and implementing large scale people practices, diversity and inclusion in the workplace, as well as in conducting and leading long-form research on impacts of tech on businesses and society, with both quantitative and qualitative methodologies. E-mail: amrita@cis-india.org Twitter: https://twitter.com/iamgondogol

Anubha Sinha
	Anubha Sinha is a researcher working on impact of copyright law on access to knowledge, with a focus on users’ rights. She also tracks and comments on policymaking at international fora such as WTO and WIPO. She is a lawyer by training. Email: anubha@cis-india.org Twitter: @anubhasinha_

Anubha Sinha

Anubha Sinha is a researcher working on impact of copyright law on access to knowledge, with a focus on users’ rights. She also tracks and comments on policymaking at international fora such as WTO and WIPO. She is a lawyer by training.

Email: anubha@cis-india.org
Twitter: @anubhasinha_

Puthiya Purayil Sneha
	Sneha is a Senior Researcher with the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), India. Her areas of interest and work include digital media and cultures, arts and humanities practice, scholarship and pedagogy, and access to knowledge. Email: sneha@cis-india.org


Pranav M B
	Pranav is the Communications Lead at CIS. He has studied humanities and law at National Law School of India University, Bangalore. His previous work at CIS has primarily centred on Artificial Intelligence research, and research on issues surrounding Privacy, Cyber-security, and the Future of Work. E-mail: pranav@cis-india.org Twitter: @pranavbarkwhip

Isha Suri
	Isha Suri is a Research Lead at the Centre for Internet and Society. Her areas of interest include Telecom Policy, Competition Law, Internet Governance, Intellectual Property Rights, and Privacy and Data Protection. She holds an LL.B. (Hons.) with a specialisation in Intellectual Property Law from the Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur. She also has a degree in Electrical Engineering that often comes to her aid when grappling with complexities of the techno-legal domain. E-mail: isha@cis-india.org
Pallavi Bedi
	Pallavi is a Senior Researcher at CIS, where she works on privacy and data protection. She is a lawyer by training, and holds a BA, LLB (Hons) degree from the National Law Institute University, Bhopal and an LLM from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. E-mail: pallavi@cis-india.org

Pavan Santhosh Surampudi
	Pavan currently spearheads the Access to Knowledge programme at the Centre for Internet and Society, focusing on catalysing the growth of the open knowledge movement across South Asia and in Indic languages. With a background of nearly a decade in the internet industry, he brings expertise in community building, content strategy, trust and safety operations, and forging partnerships. Pavan earlier worked with Quora as a community manager. His background includes launching and nurturing communities, fostering collaboration, auditing content, enforcing policies, and providing policy-level recommendations for Wikimedia projects. Pavan has been a dedicated contributor to Wikimedia Projects for many years and serves as one of the administrators for Telugu Wikipedia. His areas of interest and expertise lie in film studies, as well as the Telugu language and culture.
Researchers

Shweta Mohandas
	Shweta is a Policy Officer at the Centre for Internet and Society, India. Her areas of work and interest include Artificial Intelligence, Privacy, and Intellectual Property Rights and India’s policies surrounding them. She is currently researching on the development and use of voice based technologies in India, with a focus on languages, accessibility and privacy. E-mail: shweta@cis-india.org Twitter: @says_shweta

Yesha Tshering Paul
	Yesha Tshering Paul is a Programme Officer at the Centre for Internet and Society and works on the Digital Identities project. She studied Law at ILS Law College, Pune, and has a Masters in Regulatory Governance from the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai. E-mail: yesha@cis-india.org Twitter: @oldpinkdog

Yatharth
	Yatharth is a Design Researcher with CIS. His interest areas include New Media Arts, Creative Technology and Design Edcation with Anti Caste and Critical perspectives. He is a Designer and Media Artist by training from National Institute of Design Ahmedabad.
Nishkala	Nishkala is a researcher at CIS. Her research interests include urban inequality and the particular ways in which it is manifesting via platform labor, and in the digital world. She has a degree in development studies and mechanical engineering.
Chetna	Chetna is a social science researcher with a background in economics. She is interested in interdisciplinary research and seeks to understand the world in a more wholesome manner. After graduating with a master's from the University of Hyderabad in 2021, she has contributed to many research projects specifically pertaining to labour. At CIS, she researches the nature of work and challenges faced by workers in the platform economy.
Chiara	Chiara is a researcher at CIS, working on digital labour and the platformisation of work in the global south. Her areas of interest involve the politics of labour and technology, and differential experiences with digitalisation in contexts of structural inequalities. She has studied development and economics. Email: chiara@cis-india.org Twitter: @chiara_furtado

Garima Agrawal

Garima is a researcher currently working on digital safety, data security and governance at the Centre for Internet and Society in Bangalore, India. She also works on understanding digitalisation's impact on access to information and services, and the shape of our working lives.

Email: garima@cis-india.org

Abhineet Nayyar

Abhineet is an IIC Fellow at CIS, working primarily on AI data supply chains in India's healthcare sector. His areas of interest also include data and privacy, digital competition, and the impact of technologies on workers. Abhineet is an engineer by training, with a minor in Philosophy, Economics, and Political Science, and a recipient of the YLAC Policy in Action and the UChicago Anubhav programmes.

Email: abhineet@cis-india.org

Nishant Shankar

Nishant is a Technology Researcher at CIS. His areas of work are primarily privacy and security, which he aims to situate within the political economy of computing. Trained in computer engineering and machine learning, he worked on dataset creation and language model development during his masters. Before joining CIS, he conducted research on the political economy of software development as part of the Programmable Infrastructures project at TU Delft. His areas of interest include the business of (cloud) computing, technology policy, and alternative computing infrastructures.

Email: nishant.s@cis-india.org

A2K Team Members

Subodh Kulkarni

Subodh is Senior Program Officer in A2K team at CIS. He has been active on various development issues and has worked with several organizations across India. He is an active WIkimedian in several projects since 2015. He is working with CIS-A2K from 2017. Presently, he is building partnerships with various institutions, communities and research & social organisations to create free knowledge on Wikimedia projects. Digitisation and relicensing (releasing content in free license) are also his focus areas. He is developing 'Wiki communities with concern' for reliable, qualitative and sustainable content generation in the field of environment and gender issues.

E-mail: subodh@cis-india.org

Nivas

Nivas is a Programme Associate with the A2K team of CIS. He has been contributing to various Wikimedia projects since 2017. Before joining CIS, he was a freelancer building customised data dashboards. Currently, he is working with the technical and language communities in the Wikimedia movement to improve the basic technical understanding of language Wikimedians while understanding their technical requirements and challenges. He is also working with FOSS communities based in India to enhance the technical community of Wikimedia. He is an engineer by training, currently pursuing his Masters and loves reading concepts and facts related to Classical Physics.

E-mail: nivas@cis-india.org

Chris

Chris is a Communications Associate for the Access to Knowledge team at the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS). Fluent in six languages, they are deeply committed to social justice advocacy, especially disability rights. As an advocate for abolitionist feminist praxis and transformative justice, Chris dedicates time to nurturing ecosystems of care and envisioning collective futures. Their research interests include media archeology, archival anxiety and gender justice. Chris believes in community collaboration and strives to restructure the existing knowledge production apparatus to hold space for the fullness of our humanities.

E-mail: chris@cis-india.org


Nitesh Gill
	Nitesh is a Program Officer in A2K team at CIS. She is an active Wikimedian since 2015. She joined the A2K team in 2019. Currently, she is coordinating content creation programs in collaboration with communities. She is supporting the communities and individuals through the A2K request page. She is handling social media channels and overall communications. Email: nitesh@cis-india.org
K N Medini
	Medini is a Program Officer in A2K team at CIS. Prior to joining CIS, she worked in NGO sector. Medini has been working closely with the CIS-A2K team since 2019 handling finance and administration works besides providing logistics support towards organising events. E-mail: medini@cis-india.org

Administration and Finance

Ajoy Kumar
	Ajoy is an Administrator at the CIS. He manages all the events organised by CIS including hotel and travel bookings, does the liasoning with government offices and Members of Parliament, etc. Ajoy also works as a part-time lawyer doing property documentation. Email: ajoy@cis-india.org Resume: Download (PDF)

Ajoy Kumar

Ajoy is an Administrator at the CIS. He manages all the events organised by CIS including hotel and travel bookings, does the liasoning with government offices and Members of Parliament, etc. Ajoy also works as a part-time lawyer doing property documentation.

Email: ajoy@cis-india.org
Resume: Download (PDF)

Nagaraj MP
	Nagaraj has a background in Advanced Accountancy with a specialisation in NGO Accounting and Practices. As Manager - Finance and Operations, he handles the preparation of accounts statements, statuary compliance, budget and monitoring, and accounts for all research projects at CIS. He has previously worked at Centre for the Study of Culture and Society (CSCS), ‘Kalike’ associate organisation of TATA Trusts, India Foundation for the Arts (IFA), Ramaiah Public Policy Centre, and CIS in its early days. Email: nagaraj@cis-india.org

Nagaraj MP

Nagaraj has a background in Advanced Accountancy with a specialisation in NGO Accounting and Practices. As Manager - Finance and Operations, he handles the preparation of accounts statements, statuary compliance, budget and monitoring, and accounts for all research projects at CIS. He has previously worked at Centre for the Study of Culture and Society (CSCS), ‘Kalike’ associate organisation of TATA Trusts, India Foundation for the Arts (IFA), Ramaiah Public Policy Centre, and CIS in its early days.

Email: nagaraj@cis-india.org

Nima Lama
Nima has been in charge of security at CIS since 2015. He maintains the daily staff register and provides assistance to the administration team. Prior to CIS, Nima worked as a security person at a car parking solution.

Velankanni Royson

Royson is the Office Assistant in the Bangalore office. He assists the administration department in organising events, takes videos of the events, uploads them to the CIS website, Blip TV, YouTube, etc.

Email: royson@cis-india.org

Chandra Bhushan

Chandra has been working as an Accounts Officer with CIS since 2018 with specialties in Accounts and Banking, managing accounting software like Tally, bank accounts, bookkeeping, different types of financials for projects, utilisation certificates, etc. Earlier, he was an Officer at a nationalised bank, and thereafter was associated with a Chartered Accountant.

Email: chandraa@cis-india.org

Non-Resident Fellow

Ambika Tandon

Ambika Tandon studies the intersections of gender and technology. She focuses on women’s work in the digital economy, and the impact of emerging technologies on social inequality. She is also interested in developing feminist methods for technology research.

E-mail: ambika[at]cis-india.org
Twitter: @AmbikaTandon

Arindrajit Basu

Arindrajit Basu is a Non-resident Fellow at the Centre for Internet & Society, India, where he focuses on the geopolitics and constitutionality of emerging technologies. He is a lawyer by training and holds a BA, LLB (Hons) degree from the National University of Juridical Sciences, Kolkata, and an LLM in public international law from the University of Cambridge, U.K.

E-mail: arindrajit@cis-india.org
Twitter: @BasuArindrajit

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/about/people/cis-team-members

Responsible AI

Admin — 2019-09-20T14:50:05Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/files/responsible-ai

GCSC Response

Admin — 2019-09-11T01:30:47Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/files/gcsc-response

Essays on #List — Selected Abstracts

sneha-pp — 2019-09-03T13:38:12Z

In response to a recent call for essays that social, economic, cultural, political, infrastructural, or aesthetic dimensions of the #List, we received 11 abstracts. Out of these, we have selected 4 pieces to be published as part of a series titled #List on the r@w blog. Please find below the details of the selected abstracts. The call for essays on #List remains open, and we are accepting and assessing the incoming abstracts on a rolling basis.

1. Manisha Chachra

2. Meghna Yadav

3. Sarita Bose

4. Shambhavi Madan

Manisha Chachra

MeToo in Indian journalism: Questioning access to internet among intersectional women and idea of rehabilitative justice in digital spaces

The advent of LoSHA and MeToo era witnessed an intriguing intersection of technology, politics and gender. The list and name-shame culture of social media has not only displayed changing power dynamics in digital space but an increasing movement towards engendering of internet spaces. The social, political and economic matrix defined by power relationships -- a patriarchy reflected in internet spaces, percolating in our interactions confronted a major challenge when women rose up to claim the same space. Internet space cannot be called a virtual reality as it is a sharp mirror into what is going in the power dynamics of society and politics. My paper broadly seeks to examine this engendering of spatial reality of digital space by looking at various conversations that took place on Twitter around MeToo in Indian journalism. MeToo has been widely understood as narration of one’s tale and how that experiential reality is connected with other women. However, a universalisation of such an experience often neglects intersectional reality attached to women’s experiences -- belonging to different caste, class, ethnicity and other kinds of differences. My paper attempts to question how far MeToo in digital space accommodated the differential aspects of woman as a heterogeneous category. The spatial realities of technological spaces function like a double edged sword-- liberating as well as mobility paralysing. I use the term mobility paralysis to denote a contradiction in digital space-- which might be equally available to all sections of women but not fairly accessible. The accessibility is often a reflection of deep rooted patriarchies and kinship relationships that bind women in same voiceless zone. MeToo in Indian journalism is a case study of how women of different backgrounds access digital spaces in questioning this mobility paralysis and inch towards a certain kind of emancipatory politics. Examining MeToo from the perspective of a social movement emerging on Twitter and Facebook, I aim to scrutinise scope of rehabilitative justice for the accused. The emergence of lists, and claiming of spaces is attached to the question of justice and being guilty or innocent of allegations. Online spaces in the recent times have also emerged as platforms of e-khaps (online khap panchayats with certain gatekeepers of the movement) where screenshot circulation, photoshop technology could be used to garner a public response against a particular person. It is interesting how after MeToo the question was not whether the person is guilty or accused rather how they should abandon their social media accounts and probably go absent virtually. In such a context, it is crucial to question the relationship between justice, one’s digital identity and who owns this identity. If rehabilitative justice is not an option, and apology-seeking is not available, what are we hoping from MeToo? The aim of any name-shame movement must be to reclaim digital space, narrate experiences and also to leave scope for others to respond, and seek justice. The question of justice is also closely linked with how women from intersectional backgrounds access internet, and emancipate themselves.

Meghna Yadav

For most people, the Internet is now synonymous with social media. Likewise, consumption of content on the Internet has shifted. We’ve moved from an earlier design of explicitly going to content-specific websites, to now, simply “logging in” and being presented with curated content spanning multiple areas. The infrastructure for consuming this content, however, remains predominantly screen based, implying a space constraint. Websites must, hence, decide what content users are to be presented with and in what order. In other words, social media must generate itself as a ranked list of content.

In the classical theory of social choice, a set of voters is called to rank a set of alternatives and a social ranking of the alternatives is generated. In this essay, I propose to look at ranking of content as a social choice problem. Ranking rules of different social media platforms can be studied as social welfare functions for how they aggregate the preferences of their voters (i.e. users). Current listings of content could be modelled as the results of previously held rounds of voting. Taking examples, Reddit is built on a structure of outward voting, visceral through ‘upvotes’ and ‘downvotes’, constantly displaying to users the choice they have to alter content ranks on the website. TikTok, on the other hand, relies on taking away most of the voting power of its users.

As the Internet tends towards centralisation, studying how different list ranking rules aggregate our choices and in turn, alter the choices presented to us, becomes important to design a more democratic Internet.

Sarita Bose

Mapping goes local: A study of how Google Maps tracks user’s footprints and creates a ‘For You’ list

The ‘Explore Nearby’ feature in Google Maps has three sections – Explore, Commute and For You. Of this, ‘For You’ section contains ‘Lists based on your local history’ as mentioned by Google itself. The Google Maps auto tracks a user’s movements and creates a digital footprint map and lists up events, programmes, restaurants, shops etc for the user. This research will focus on the ‘For You’ feature of Google Maps and its cultural and social dimensions. The work will focus on how the mapping is done and the logic behind drawing up the list. It will try to find out how the economy of Google Maps works. Why some lists shows up while some doesn’t. What kind of ‘algorithm – economy – user’ matrix is used to make up the list? The work will also try to understand cultural dimensions based on mind mapping techniques of Google. This research will follow three dimensions. The first is the mapping of user’s footprints itself and how the distance covered by a user becomes the user’s own digital existence. The Google Maps automatically asks for reviews of places the user might have visited or passed. The question is what algorithm is Google using to ask for the review? Is it pre-pointed or post-pointed? Thus, we come to the second part. Is Google only listing places that paid it or is it trying to digitally map a user’s area of geographical reach in general. If so, why? This brings us to the third dimension of the research work. What kind of cultural mapping is done of the user? The list the user gets is based on his own history and as more data is added, the more mapping is done. These three dimensions are intricately woven with each other and the work will try to establish this relationship.

Shambhavi Madan

List of lists of lists: Technologies of power, infrastructures of memory

Lists make infinities comprehensible, and thus controllable. By virtue of the ubiquity of cyberspace and the digitized information infrastructures curating reality within these infinities, we are increasingly subjected to curatorial efforts of individuals as well as codes – algorithmic and architectural.

Statistical lists are Foucauldian technologies of power in modern societies; tools for the functioning of governmentality – not just in terms of state control over population phenomena but the governmentality of groups or individuals over themselves. The framework of biopolitics identifies a bureaucracy imposed by determining social classifications through listing and categorizing, within which people must situate themselves and their actions (Foucault, 2008). Thus, the authorship of lists is often reflective of power that allows for the perpetuation of hegemonic constructions of social reality, making the lists themselves sites of struggle.

This paper seeks to contextualize (public-oriented) lists as forms of biopolitical curation that often lie at points of intersection between collective consciousness and social order, through an approach that problematizes the socio-technics of agency and the subjective objectivity of authorship. Although list-making acts such as the National Population Register, NRC, #LoSHA, the electoral roll, the census, and Vivek Agnihotri’s call for a list of “Urban Naxals” all differ in terms of content, intent, and impact, and contain different asymmetries of power, the lowest common denominator lies in their role as producers of public knowledge and consequently, infrastructures of public memory. This approach allows for a reinterpretation of the fundamental duality of lists of and within publics: the functionality of enforcing/maintaining social order, and the phenomenological practise of publicly self-presenting with a (semi-material) manifestation of a collective identity. The former sees the use of lists as tools of population management, enacting citizenship and belonging through forms of inclusion and exclusion; the latter is reflective of the workings of self-autonomy – redefining the authorship of justice and punishment – in networked societies. Thus, a secondary theme in this paper would be to question the change and significance in the role of authorship through a phenomenological comparative of lists that are institutionalised practice versus those that are open and collaborative.

Both the act of list-making and the lists themselves are framed as coalescences of material and imaginary, by juxtaposing the idea of infrastructures as primarily relationalities – i.e. they can’t be theorized in terms of the object alone (Larkin, 2013) – with Latour’s relational ontology of human and non-human actors. The list itself is a non-human object/actant that after emerging as a product of co-construction, takes on an agential role of its own (Latour, 2005). Each of these lists can be considered as a quasi-object, a complex convergence of the technological and the social. Both #LoSHA and the NRC are not mere placeholders being ‘acted upon’, but real and meaningful actors acting as cultural mediators and not intermediaries. The integration of a socio-technical, infrastructural approach with one that emphasizes upon the aesthetics of authorship and public memory allows the subject to be seen as constitutive of an embodied, relational experience as opposed to just existing as a dissociative (re)presentation.

References:

Foucault, M. 2008. The Birth of Biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France 1978-1979. Trans. G. Burchell. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Larkin, B. 2013. "The Politics and Poetics of Infrastructural." Annual Review of Anthropology. 42:327-343.

Latour, B. 2005. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/raw/essays-on-list-selected-abstracts

Future of Work in ASEAN

aayush — 2019-09-02T04:16:36Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/files/future-of-work-in-asean