Patrice Riemens on Fri, 28 Feb 2014 14:15:35 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> Ippolita Collective, In the Facebook Aquarium, Part One, Section 6, |
Ippolita Collective, In the Facebook Aquarium And this is not all: identities are constantly evolving. At 15, fast and furious rebelion against one's parents is the thing to do, but at 30 this doesn't make very much sense - and if still the case, the symptom of something much more serious dooms up, typical a person whose growing-up process hasn't been particularly smooth. Our mates from primary school, at least those we haven't lost of sight altogether (only to find them back on Facebook of course) all remember a very much different persons. In the same vein, our first loves may in retrospect see us as the sunshine in their lives, while our ex-partner hates our guts because of the alimony that has to be vired every month. Which we repay in kind by showing only coldness and ill temper: love is over, everything's different, Baby! We change, we have changed and our social relations reflect the change that makes us alive. We'll give here a few examples to show how perverse are the mechanisms of fixed identity/identification that are proposed, or rather imposed, by Facebook. These examples, admitedly a bit simplified, and which we have set in the feminine gender, are unfortunately fast becoming, or have become, reality. Example 1, abusive dismissal: A very competent young female teacher, adored by her students, is filmed being seriously plastered at a party among friends. Explicit pics and clips are circulating in no time on Facebook, posted and reposted by 'friends' of 'friends' of 'friends' ... till they reach her director and the college's boeard. Upon which she is no longer allowed to apply for tenure, and gets a severe reprimand. Her plea that her private life has nothing to do with her work as teacher is dismissed, and she herself gets the sack for being a bad example to her students. Example 2, violence at home: A mother tries to protect her child against her violent husband, gets beaten up, and then raped in the process. After untold sufferings, she manages to escape her tormentor. She moves to another, far-away city and starts her life afresh, together with her son. Crisis over - so she thinks. But there is Facebook. Her tormentor finds her out, either simply by reading her messages, or by checking out on an application she sometimes uses, and which gives away the user's exact location. In order not to be found out, this woman, will have to close her acount, whatever she tries otherwise. In her case, being on Facebook can put her life in peril. Example 3, suicide: A young woman is capptured on video by 'friends' while she's cock-sucking her boy-friend in the college's toilet. The clip is instantly on line, and in no time everyone knows about her private, but now very public skills, which are profusely commented on Facebook. She tries to defend herself, switches educational institution, but to no avail: her new pals are also on Facebook, and are very well clued in on 'what kind of girl she is', thank you. She is constantly ridiculed, insulted and marginalised. "You did it, so now you get what you deserve" is the backdrop, but also often explicit attitude, which convinces her that her life is longer worth living. She slashes her arteries in her bathtub after having written 'I am not like that' on her Facebook wall.[28] (end of section 6) (section 7) Privacy no more. The ideology of radical transparency. Facebook, in its first five years of 'public' existence (2005 - 2010) has increasingly narrowed the private space of its users [29] Facebook centers its public relations drive around transparency, or even, radical transparency: 'our transparency with regard to machines shall make us free' [30]. We have already deconstructed the assertion that "you can't be on Facebook without being your authentic self" [31a]. The 'authentic self', however, is a tricky concept. Authenticity is a process whereby one is oneself with others, who in their turn, contribute to one's personnal development. It is not an established fact, fixed once and for all. But the 'faith' of/in Facebook is a blind faith, an applied religion, impervious to reason. Indeed: Members of Facebook's radical transparency camp, Zuckerberg included, believe more visibility make us better people. Some claim, for example, that because of Facebook, young people today have a harder time cheating on their boyfriends or girlfriends. They also say that more transparency should make for a more tolerant society in which people eventually accept that everybody sometimes does bad or embarassing things. The assumption that transparency is inevitable was reflected in the launch of the News Feed in September 2006. It treated all your behaviour identically[...] [31b] The fact that 'behavioural' social networks and 'affinity' ones are merged together online, is, as we have seen before, the cause of serious problems in daily life, when not of very real dangers. Yet the merger is one of the main credo of Facebook, and this for very precise, commercial motives: in order to maximize the sale of on-line advertisements, it is necessary that users' data are in the open as much as possible, and that their privacy shrinks to the point of being only a vague remembrance from a distant past. Advertisers must be able to verify at all times, without infringing on anyone's privacy, that their ads have indeed reached the Facebook pages of those internauts whose profiles match the hypothetical consumer of their product or service. All this is of course, for our greater benefit. This at least is Facebook's official stance, a mission the company broadcasts by way of numerous press releases, interviews and road shows. But what if I do not want to be totally transparent? Not because I have something to hide, but simply because I don't want everybody to know the same things about me at the same time. I have many aspects, I am not afraid of contradictions, and I have more resources than my Facebook account allows me to express. I like to introduce chaos and discordance in the data that purport to define me. I love to shake up the deck! (to be continued) next time: Party time ... without you! ................... [28] There have been a number of 'Facebook suicides' in Italy, and all over the world - 'Google' for that term for particular cases in England, Mexico, etc. (This replaces the authors' original note about one referenced case in Italy - in italian -transl) [29] See the interactive graph by Matt McKeon: http://mattmckeon.com/Facebook-privacy/ [30] See Danah Boyd, Facebook and radical transparency (a rant): http://zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2010/05/14/Facebook-and-radical-transparency-a-rant.html Such transparency imperative, by the way, does not appear to apply to Mark Zuckerberg himself, who is rumoured to protect his own 'privacy' with increasing intransigeance. For a good laugh, see: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/oct/11/mark-zuckerberg-facebook-neighbouring-houses Or to upturn the latin proverb: quod licet 'Jovi non licet bovi' (-transl) [31ab] David Kirkpatrick, op cit [26], p210 and 210-11. ----------------------------- Translated by Patrice Riemens This translation project is supported and facilitated by: The Institute of Network Cultures, Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences (http://networkcultures.org/wpmu/portal/) The Antenna Foundation, Nijmegen (http://www.antenna.nl - Dutch site) (http://www.antenna.nl/indexeng.html - english site under construction) Casa Nostra, Vogogna-Ossola, Italy # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org