Playbooks Flashcards
Digital Inequality
Choose good, make cool, see life
Using Helsper’s (2021) three-level model for understanding socio-digital inequalities.
* emphasizes that digital and social inequalitirs reinforce each other
* utilizes Corresponding Fields framework - maps online activities onto Bourdieusian capitals (economic, social, cultural), suggests that online resources will align with offline resources
(1) access/infrastructure
* focuses on access and quaity of access (broadband, mobile, etc.)
* “autonomous” access is important - no interruption or interference
* Chimbunde (2022) - Zimbabwean ICT program in schools - interviews with 6 heads of school - demonstrates categorical inequalities - highlights importance of autonomous access, infrastructure inequalities in rural vs urban schools (power sources/outages as example)
* Gonzales (2016) - interviews with 72 low-income US residents - struggle to maintain access, first level is not a binary - “technology maintenance theory” and “dependable instability” - paying bills, fixing broken hardware
(2) skills/use
* how people actually use tech
* different kinds of engagement (economic, educational, political/civic, social, creative/leisure)
* Mannell et al (2024) - rural australian study based on interviews with low-income families participating in a digitial inclusion initiative (removed 1st level) - shows complex reality of skills/use, how people actively negotiate their digital engagement through skills and choices
* Cascone & Bonini (2024) - ethnography of three Sicilian migrant/asylum seeker reception centers - asylees vs migrants demonstrate different actual uses / different skills - access and outcomes are somewhat similar but there is a lot of nuance in the actual use that helps understand a lot of social context
(3) outcomes
* similar usage patterns don’t always lead to similar outcomes
* different groups benefit even when using similar ways
* Scheerder et al (2019) - high/low education dutch families, outcomes different via this classification, examples: parents <> kids teaching; online shopping luxury/necesity; necesity of internet/disconnection
* Liu et al (2022) - ethnographic fieldwork in South China - rural/low-income workers using same dating app (momo) have very different outcomes compared to urban/wealthier users - similar usage patterns, different outcomes - “cruel optimism”
Internet Imaginaries
Jasanoff’s 2015 work on “sociotechnical imaginaries” -
- collectively held, institutionally stabilized, and publicly performed visions of desirable futures
- bridge the materiality of technological systems and the normative aspirations of societies
- dynamic and context-dependent, varying across cultures, nations, and historical periods
– examples –
(1) Aalders (2023) BNPL
* examines how BNPL platforms reframe indebtedness as a tool for responsible financial consumption, emphasizing accessibility and empowerment
* BNPL platforms create an imaginary of the internet as a financial equalizer, where digital credit systems democratize economic participation and redefine responsibility
* demonstrates how corporate narratives embed specific values into technological systems, shaping societal expectations of technology’s role in personal finance
(2) Miltner & Highfield (2017) GIFs
* explores GIFs as cultural artifacts that facilitate affective communication, identity expression, and resistance in digital spaces
* Imaginary of Digital Expressiveness - The internet is imagined as a participatory space where individuals use digital tools like GIFs to enhance cultural connection and emotional expression, perhaps surpassing what is possible in other forms of native human expression.
* It highlights how everyday technologies embed shared visions of connectivity and creativity, revealing how cultural imaginaries shape technology use.
(3) Ratner & Elmholdt (2023) Risk Algorithms
* examines how predictive algorithms in child protection construct risk and enable anticipatory governance
* Imaginary of Algorithmically Derisked Society - The internet and algorithms are imagined as tools for anticipatory governance, enabling society to manage uncertainty and preempt future risks.
* It shows how competing imaginaries (e.g., precision vs. preemption) illustrate the role of technology in constructing and stabilizing societal visions of governance and care.
(4) Munn (2022) Cables
* investigates the societal implications of undersea cables and data centers, focusing on their role in global economic and informational infrastructures
* The internet is imagined as an infrastructural backbone of global economic acceleration, prioritizing speed and efficiency in financial transactions.
* It highlights how material infrastructures shape societal aspirations, illustrating how imaginaries of the internet are tied to global connectivity and economic integration.
AMRM
Privacy
Eklund et al (2022)
Macro-Level Structures:
* Legal: Laws governing anonymity and data use vary across jurisdictions and sectors, influencing how platforms manage user data and enforce identification.
* Commercial: EULAs and TOSs shape anonymity by determining how platforms use, collect, and share user data.
* Technological: Platform designs and technological features (e.g., anonymity settings, data collection mechanisms) affect user anonymity.
Micro/Meso-Level Facets:
* Factual Anonymity: The extent to which personal data like names and identifiers are concealed or exposed.
* Social Group Anonymity: How users’ social identities (e.g., gender, ethnicity) are revealed or inferred in interactions.
* Physical Anonymity: Embodied elements such as avatars, emotional cues, or interaction styles that signal identity.
Examples:
* Evangelista and Bruno (2019) - WhatsApp Brazillian Elections: Macro - encrypted messaging and commercial exploitation of group segmentation reflect technological and commercial influences; Micro/Meso - Factual anonymity is leveraged to obscure identities in misinformation campaigns. Social group anonymity is evident in the segmentation of voter groups, and physical anonymity is bypassed by exploiting trust within networks.
* Hobbis & Hobbis (2020) - Solomon Islands Internet: Macro - Limited technological infrastructure and commercial dependencies define the operational environment. Legal frameworks are less formalized, creating ad hoc regulatory conditions. Micro/Meso - concept of brokers have big impact on factual, social group, and physical anonmity - erase concept?
* Lindell et al. (2022) - Geomedia Practices in Sweden: Macro - Social media platforms’ technological affordances and algorithms amplify conspicuous self-representation. Commercial logic incentivizes visibility and status-oriented sharing. Micro/Meso - Factual anonymity is reduced by public geotagging. Social group anonymity is redefined as users align their identities with class-specific places, while physical anonymity diminishes through the overt display of lifestyles.
EHL
Money
KPLP
Digital Money and Affordances
Gibson (1977) and Gaver (1991)
Affordances are the perceived and actual properties of an object that indicate how it can be used for/by particular actors.
Affordances in digital money intersect with cultural, social, and technical dimensions, reflecting a dual nature of empowerment and constraint. Whether through enabling financial independence (Kenya), exposing workers to systemic risks (Venezuela), automating financial ecosystems (HFT), or shaping national monetary systems (WeChat), these affordances are not neutral. They are actively shaped by the interaction of technology design, user practices, and broader systemic forces.
In summary, the theory of affordances provides a lens to understand how digital money technologies mediate human interaction, redistribute power, and reconfigure social norms. These dynamics are crucial for designing equitable and inclusive systems that leverage digital money for broader social good.
- Komen & Ling (2022) mPesa Kenya - mobile phones and mBanking services afford women greater financial autonomy and privacy, but also afford husbands opportunities to monitor and potentially control transactions
- Posada (2024) Venezuelan data workers - currency affordances but also fees/layers; duality of affordances — providing access to stable income but constraining autonomy via fees and risks — underscores the tension between empowerment and exploitation in platform-mediated digital payments
- Lange et al (2016) HFT - Algorithms afford speed and efficiency in trading, reshaping market dynamics by automating price discovery and liquidity provision. But also, reate vulnerabilities, such as flash crashes and ethical dilemmas related to algorithmic decision-making and market manipulation
- Plantin & de Seta (2019) WeChat - help understand how technology becomes infrastructural via thinking about affordances WeChat Pay has - new monetary transaction standards, QR code scan to pay
KPLP
Time
W2MtB
Argue that while digital tools promise to liberate users from temporal constraints, they often reinforce systemic pressures, fostering environments where speed, surveillance, and synchronization dominate.
The collective argument posits that technological acceleration reshapes both individual and organizational temporalities. By intertwining autonomy, obligation, and efficiency, these dynamics redefine the modern workplace, aligning with Wajcman’s broader critique of high-speed societies as sites of both promise and constraint. This lens urges a reevaluation of how digital tools mediate time, advocating for more equitable and sustainable temporal arrangements.
- Wajcman (2020) - Pressed for Time - explores how technological advancements accelerate societal rhythms, creating a pervasive sense of busyness and time scarcity; argues that while digital technologies promise efficiency, they often exacerbate time pressures by reshaping human experiences of time into fragmented, high-speed patterns
- Wajcman (2018) - Google Calendar - examines how Silicon Valley technologies, such as digital calendars, enforce a quantitative and mechanistic view of time management, treating time as a resource to be optimized; critiques the hegemonic belief that automation can “save” time, highlighting how these tools embed users in systems of surveillance and temporal control
- Mazmanian et al (2013) - Email Autonomy Paradox - investigates how knowledge professionals use mobile email devices, finding that while these tools offer flexibility and control, they simultaneously intensify demands for availability, reducing overall autonomy; introduces the “autonomy paradox,” where technologies framed as liberating actually constrain users through escalating engagement
- ten Brummelhuis et al (2021) - Constant Connectivity - analyzes the effects of constant work connectivity, highlighting a dual impact: enhanced communication effectiveness and collaboration versus increased interruptions and stress; connectivity fosters autonomy and competence in communication but also undermines productivity through interruptions, illustrating the productivity and social connectivity paradoxes
