Data & Society

Nice White Ladies: The Truth About White Supremacy, Our Role in it, and How We Can Help Dismantle it, by D&S 2018-2019 Fellow Jessie Daniels, and hosted by Principal Researcher & Race and Tech Program Director Sareeta Amrute -- Named a Best Book of 2021 by Kirkus An acclaimed expert illuminates the distinctive role that white women play in perpetuating racism, and how they can work to fight it. In a nation deeply divided by race, the “Karens” of the world are easy to villainize. But in Nice White Ladies, Jessie Daniels addresses the unintended complicity of even well-meaning white women. She reveals how their everyday choices harm communities of color. White mothers, still expected to be the primary parents, too often uncritically choose to send their kids to the “best” schools, collectively leading to a return to segregation. She addresses a feminism that pushes women of color aside, and a wellness industry that insulates white women in a bubble of their own privilege. Daniels then charts a better path forward. She looks to the white women who fight neo-Nazis online and in the streets, and who challenge all-white spaces from workplaces to schools to neighborhoods. In the end, she shows how her fellow white women can work toward true equality for all.

Tamara K. Nopper and Chaz Arnett in conversation with Raúl Carrillo and Alyx Goodwin This panel focuses attention on how datafication processes are related to social control and surveillance, whether policing and the criminal punishment system or credit scoring systems and monitoring the use of cash. State power is expanded through the widening net of surveillance and the use of tools of automated detection and enforcement, which maintains racial and class hierarchies. Our panel also examines how communities and organizations are resisting the datafied state and its particular impact on Black and people of color communities, including efforts to regulate data collection, politically organize against harmful data initiatives, or propose policies that attempt more ethical data processes.

Ranjit Singh, Researcher at D&S, in conversation with Joanna Redden, Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Information & Media Studies at the University of Western Ontario and the co-director of the Data Justice Lab, and Michele E. Gilman, Venerable Professor of Law and Associate Dean for Faculty Research and Development at the University of Baltimore School of Law and director of the Civil Advocacy Clinic. The automated state is one that seeks to replace human workers with machines. There are three general motivations. One, the desire to leverage computational speed to handle rote and routine work more efficiently. Two, the desire to improve the accuracy, fairness, or consistency of decision-making in light of human fallibility. Three, the desire to depoliticize decision-making (or appear to) by placing it out of reach of human discretion. These motivations, however, raise distinctive concerns about oversight and the ability to seek recourse in the case of errors or bugs in decision-making. What does interacting with systems, interfaces, and datasets require of people interfacing with the Datafied State? What literacies are necessary? What room is there for voice? What does automation look like in practice? Who is rendered invisible when showcasing success in automating state practices? About Data & Society Data & Society is an independent nonprofit research organization. We believe that empirical evidence should directly inform the development and governance of new technology. We study the social implications of data and automation, producing original research to ground informed, evidence-based public debate about emerging technology. About the Series The Datafied State is an emerging research agenda that seeks to explore the relationship between datafication and public administration. It is concerned with the proliferation of data sources, infrastructures, and computational techniques adopted across the public sector. The processes through which governments procure, develop, implement, and legally mandate the use of digital and computational systems are increasingly blurring the boundaries between what is considered public and private. So, how datafied is the state today? How can we find out?

Jenna Burrell, Director of Research at Data & Society, in conversation with Anne Washington, Assistant Professor of Data Policy at NYU, and Deirdre Mulligan, Professor in the School of Information at UC Berkeley. Part one in a series of three Conversations on The Datafied State. The role of government is distinct from the private sector. Governments serve the public and prioritize values beyond market fit and return on investment. Governments interface with advocacy groups, unions, and other publics and not just individuals. In their approach to solving problems using computational, data-driven systems, governments have an opportunity to model responsible, accountable, and accessible tech. But what exactly would it mean for that tech to be in “the public interest,” and how are such publics constituted?

Meredith D. Clark, Ph.D. is an assistant professor in the Media Studies department at the University of Virginia. Her professional journalism background informs her primary research on the relationships between Black communities and news media in social media spaces. Her secondary research in critical journalism studies addresses questions of systemic racism in U.S. news media, with a focus on culture and processes in print and digital newsrooms. Her current work contextualizes Black Americans’ use of Twitter to create digital counter-narratives to mainstream news coverage of Black lived experiences as contemporary forms of resistance.Shaka McGlotten is Professor of Media Studies and Anthropology at Purchase College-SUNY, where they also serve as Chair of the Gender Studies and Global Black Studies Programs. Their work stages encounters between Black study, queer theory, media, and art. Their research focuses on networked intimacies and messy computational entanglements as they interface with QTPOC lifeworlds.

Algorithmic impact assessments have emerged as a centerpiece of the conversation about algorithmic governance. Impact assessments integrate many of the chief tools of algorithmic governance (e.g., auditing, end-to-end governance frameworks, ethics reviews) and speak to the challenges of algorithmic justice, equity, and community redress. Impact assessment (or similar accountability mechanisms) are at the core of recent headlines about procurement practices in Canada, leaked regulatory proposals in the EU, and new efforts to regulate the tech industry in the US. But do impact assessments promise too much? Multiple national and state governments have instituted, or are considering, requirements for impact assessment of algorithmic systems, but there is a surprisingly wide range of structures for these regulations.Sarah Chander leads EDRi's policy work on AI and non-discrimination with respect to digital rights. She is interested in building thoughtful, resilient movements and she looks to make links between the digital and other social justice movements. Sarah has experience in racial and social justice, previously she worked in advocacy at the European Network Against Racism (ENAR), on a wide range of topics including anti-discrimination law and policy, intersectional justice, state racism, racial profiling and police brutality. Comment endFenwick McKelvey is an Associate Professor in Information and Communication Technology Policy in the Department of Communication Studies at Concordia University. He studies digital politics and policy. He is the author of Internet Daemons: Digital Communications Possessed (University of Minnesota Press, 2018) winner of the 2019 Gertrude J. Robinson Book Award. He is co-author of The Permanent Campaign: New Media, New Politics (Peter Lang, 2012) with Greg Elmer and Ganaele Langlois.Jacob (Jake) Metcalf, PhD, is a researcher at Data & Society, where he is a member of the AI on the Ground Initiative, and works on an NSF-funded multisite project, Pervasive Data Ethics for Computational Research (PERVADE). For this project, he studies how data ethics practices are emerging in environments that have not previously grappled with research ethics, such as industry, IRBs, and civil society organizations. His recent work has focused on the new organizational roles that have developed around AI ethics in tech companies.Brittany Smith is the Policy Director at Data & Society. Prior to joining Data & Society, Brittany worked at DeepMind and Google in policy, ethics and human rights roles. Brittany also currently serves on the Advisory Board of JUST AI, a humanities-led network inviting new ways of thinking about data and AI ethics. Brittany graduated from Northwestern University and the London School of Economics.

In the final episode of our season, “Becoming Data,” scholars Sareeta Amrute and Emiliano Treré join our host, Natalie Kerby, to discuss the concept and lived reality of racial capitalism. The episode explores how data-centric systems perpetuate racial capitalism, and how different communities, particularly in the Global South, have resisted this datafication.Sareeta Amrute (@SareetaAmrute) is an anthropologist, associate professor at the University of Washington, and Director of Research at Data & Society.Emiliano Treré (@EmilianoTrere) is a senior lecturer in Media Ecologies and Social Transformation and co-director of the Data Justice Lab at Cardiff University."Becoming Data" is co-produced by Data & Society and Public Books.