追踪的陷阱:数字方法、监视和极右翼

IF 1.6 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Surveillance & Society Pub Date : 2021-09-21 DOI:10.24908/ss.v19i3.15018
Robert J. Topinka, A. Finlayson, Cassian Osborne-Carey
{"title":"追踪的陷阱:数字方法、监视和极右翼","authors":"Robert J. Topinka, A. Finlayson, Cassian Osborne-Carey","doi":"10.24908/ss.v19i3.15018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Computational methods and network analysis are vital means for understanding how digital platforms are employed by political extremists. Western democracies focused on the security threat of jihadi extremism have been comparatively slow to recognise the threat of the far-right extremism (see Crosby 2021 and Rostami and Askanius 2021). Understandably, scholars have reacted to the knowledge gap about far-right extremists by practicing what we call “surveillance-as-method,” or the use of computational methods to gather data on far-right activities on digital media platforms, typically in order to track keywords or phrases or to map network connections. As we suggest here, the limits of surveillance-as-method include reproducing problems associated with state surveillance (van Dijck 2014) and underestimating the messiness (Pink, Lanzeni, and Horst 2018) of digital culture. Those limits need to be appreciated and approaches combined if we are to understand online politics. In this dialogue, we urge greater caution and reflexivity in reproducing surveillant methods, and greater attention to the historical, ideological context of far-right politics.","PeriodicalId":47078,"journal":{"name":"Surveillance & Society","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Trap of Tracking: Digital Methods, Surveillance, and the Far Right\",\"authors\":\"Robert J. Topinka, A. Finlayson, Cassian Osborne-Carey\",\"doi\":\"10.24908/ss.v19i3.15018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Computational methods and network analysis are vital means for understanding how digital platforms are employed by political extremists. Western democracies focused on the security threat of jihadi extremism have been comparatively slow to recognise the threat of the far-right extremism (see Crosby 2021 and Rostami and Askanius 2021). Understandably, scholars have reacted to the knowledge gap about far-right extremists by practicing what we call “surveillance-as-method,” or the use of computational methods to gather data on far-right activities on digital media platforms, typically in order to track keywords or phrases or to map network connections. As we suggest here, the limits of surveillance-as-method include reproducing problems associated with state surveillance (van Dijck 2014) and underestimating the messiness (Pink, Lanzeni, and Horst 2018) of digital culture. Those limits need to be appreciated and approaches combined if we are to understand online politics. In this dialogue, we urge greater caution and reflexivity in reproducing surveillant methods, and greater attention to the historical, ideological context of far-right politics.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47078,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Surveillance & Society\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Surveillance & Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v19i3.15018\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surveillance & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v19i3.15018","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

计算方法和网络分析是了解政治极端分子如何利用数字平台的重要手段。专注于圣战极端主义安全威胁的西方民主国家相对较慢地认识到极右翼极端主义的威胁(见Crosby 2021和Rostami和Askanius 2021)。可以理解的是,学者们对极右翼极端分子的知识差距做出了反应,他们实践了我们所说的“监视即方法”,或者使用计算方法在数字媒体平台上收集极右翼活动的数据,通常是为了跟踪关键词或短语,或者绘制网络连接图。正如我们在这里所建议的,监控作为一种方法的局限性包括再现与国家监控相关的问题(van Dijck 2014)和低估数字文化的混乱性(Pink、Lanzeni和Horst 2018)。如果我们要理解网络政治,就需要认识到这些局限性,并将各种方法结合起来。在这次对话中,我们敦促在复制监视方法时更加谨慎和自省,并更加关注极右翼政治的历史和意识形态背景。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Trap of Tracking: Digital Methods, Surveillance, and the Far Right
Computational methods and network analysis are vital means for understanding how digital platforms are employed by political extremists. Western democracies focused on the security threat of jihadi extremism have been comparatively slow to recognise the threat of the far-right extremism (see Crosby 2021 and Rostami and Askanius 2021). Understandably, scholars have reacted to the knowledge gap about far-right extremists by practicing what we call “surveillance-as-method,” or the use of computational methods to gather data on far-right activities on digital media platforms, typically in order to track keywords or phrases or to map network connections. As we suggest here, the limits of surveillance-as-method include reproducing problems associated with state surveillance (van Dijck 2014) and underestimating the messiness (Pink, Lanzeni, and Horst 2018) of digital culture. Those limits need to be appreciated and approaches combined if we are to understand online politics. In this dialogue, we urge greater caution and reflexivity in reproducing surveillant methods, and greater attention to the historical, ideological context of far-right politics.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Surveillance & Society
Surveillance & Society SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
20.00%
发文量
42
审稿时长
26 weeks
期刊最新文献
Flock of Rogue Drones Surveillance Stories: Imagining Surveillance Futures Ten-Four Asian Embodiment as Victim and Survivor: Surveillance, Racism, and Race during COVID 2020
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1