Tumblelog by Soup.io
Newer posts are loading.
You are at the newest post.
Click here to check if anything new just came in.

June 19 2017

surveyork
18:24

A Tack in the Shoe: Neutralizing and Resisting the New Surveillance

A Tack in the Shoe: Neutralizing and Resisting the New Surveillance

Journal of Social Issues, forthcoming May 2003, vol. 59 (2)

By Gary T. Marx

Professor Emeritus, MIT

In light of contemporary efforts to intensify the collection of personal information, this article, as well as articles elsewhere on this web site dealing with the engineering of social control and computer matching and profiling, may be of more than academic interest.

 

Abstract: Eleven behavioral techniques of neutralization intended to subvert the collection of personal information are discussed:  discovery moves, avoidance moves, piggy backing moves, switching moves, distorting moves, blocking moves, masking moves, breaking moves, refusal moves, cooperative moves and counter-surveillance moves. In Western liberal democracies the advantages of technological and other strategic surveillance developments are often short-lived and contain ironic vulnerabilities. The logistical and economic limits on total monitoring, the interpretive and contextual nature of many human situations, system complexity and interconnectedness, and the vulnerability of those engaged in surveillance to be compromised, provide ample room for resistance. Neutralization is a dynamic adversarial social dance involving strategic moves and counter-moves and should be studied as a conflict interaction process.

May 06 2015

surveyork
20:10

The main argument being squeezed to pulp is that CH was, and is, an inherently racist magazine. That it is staffed by "privileged white men", who either deliberately or like "wanton boys", continuously defecate on a beleaguered minority (French Muslims, whether from the Maghreb or other parts of Africa) while making their jejune barbs. That they've been doing this while ignoring France's history of colonial oppression, and while trying to impose a shallow Enlightenment universalism that blindly feeds into the West's project of re-colonizing Muslim countries.

This is untrue on almost every count. CH has always been run by a kind of fringe leftist-anarchist bunch who are anything but privileged; over the years the team has been a mix of men and women, white and not, straight and gay. And as to constantly attacking an already oppressed minority, Le Monde recently did an infographic of the 523 Charlie Hebdo covers between 2005 and 2015, and the subject breakdown is this: politics - 336 covers, economic and social - 85, sport and others - 42, other subjects - 22, and, finally, religion - 38. Of the 38 covers lampooning religion, Christianity catches it in the neck 21 times, other religions 10 times and Islam a total of 7 times. Leaving that aside for a moment, CH's main targets by far have been the racist, white supremacist Front National led by Jean-Marie Le Pen and his daughter, and after them a certain Nicolas Sarkozy (remember those 336 political covers). Besides this, CH has made it a point to lampoon the military, oligarchs of every nationality, and capitalism in general. Here's a link that explains in some detail what some of the more startling covers and cartoons mean: http://www.understandingcharliehebdo.com/#theorie-du-genre

All the critics of CH I know, Facebook contacts claiming to be anarchist, artist friends taking on big business, academic friends who so love to drop names of hefty lefty intellectuals, journalists who are assiduous in defending minorities, none of them addresses the major part of CH's output. None of them, not once. Instead, they prefer to put a magnifying glass on about 1.5 per cent of what the magazine has produced in the last decade. They then take this and claim they have a fair fix on CH and its staff. Ten years, 523 issues, but, like some pungent spicing, those 7 covers obviously go a long way.

December 11 2014

surveyork
06:12

Three public school students in Mesa, Arizona, including a team captain, were allegedly removed from their varsity softball team, in part because they did not want to start each game with a “team prayer.” According to a complaint filed in a federal court in Arizona, the three girls were “penalized for not conducting ‘team prayer’ in accordance with the directive of Joseph Goodman,” the team’s coach. Coach Goodman, allegedly acted “for himself and at the behest of certain parents that were part of the [Mormon] Church.”

<!-- In-Content Ads -->

The complaint paints a picture of a community where Mormon parents and students demanded the ability to micromanage other students’ lives. During a 2014 tournament, for example, the suit alleges that the plaintiffs liked to play “contemporary hip-hop and other popular music liked by teenage girls,” but that they were punished for doing so because one girl on the team thought that the music offended her “religious sensitivities.” At another point, the suit alleges that this girl’s parent monitored tweets sent by one of the three plaintiffs, and that certain “[s]ocial media postings made” by this plaintiff “were reported by certain [Mormon] Church members to Joseph Goodman at his direction and request.”

November 18 2014

surveyork
17:02
surveyork
17:02
surveyork
17:02

October 02 2014

surveyork
18:23
surveyork
18:07

September 15 2014

surveyork
08:56

August 30 2014

surveyork
01:19

August 23 2014

surveyork
23:18
surveyork
23:18

August 22 2014

surveyork
13:21

July 15 2014

surveyork
13:02
surveyork
13:02
surveyork
12:45
surveyork
12:45
surveyork
12:45

June 29 2014

surveyork
18:37

June 28 2014

surveyork
12:08
Older posts are this way If this message doesn't go away, click anywhere on the page to continue loading posts.
Could not load more posts
Maybe Soup is currently being updated? I'll try again automatically in a few seconds...
Just a second, loading more posts...
You've reached the end.

Don't be the product, buy the product!

Schweinderl