Opening the black box:
The social construction of
search engines
Astrid Mager
HUMlab, Umeå University/ Sweden
Lecture @ Wits School of Arts,
University of the Witwatersrand/ Johannesburg,
March 2011
HUMlab
founded in 1997/ 2000 (studio space)
meeting place for the humanities, culture
and information technology/ Umeå University, Sweden
„digital humanities“ – work at the intersection of computing/ new media &
humanities (social sciences) / Patrik Svensson
International collaboration/ 2 year postdoc fellowships
Googlization of Everything?
(Vaidhyanathan)
Microsoft
© Joel Saget/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
Critique of search engines/
focus on implications
-
„Googlepoly“ (Pasquinelli) / gatekeeper of knowledge
Algorithm: ordering of knowledge based on popularity/ scientometrics (Mayer)
Business Model „service for profile“/ surveillance (Elmer/ Rogers)
© http://landofthefreeish.com/
© http://lonesailor.wordpress.com/
Opening the Black Box
i)
How are search engines socially constructed?
- Who are the dominant actors shaping the technology?
- What interests do they follow & what implications result from that?
- What is expected from the future?
ii) What „information politics“ do search engines trigger?
- How do search engines present, hierarchize, display their results?
- Who succeeds in the battle for attention?
- What broader consequences does this ordering mechanism trigger?
Analysis I
Analysis II
Social construction of technology (SCOT)
Basic idea:
Innovation is not a linear process,
but involves complex negotiations of
actors/ interests
„Ordinary bicyle“ back then & now –
how did this happen?
© Skoda Museum, Chech Republic,
photo by: Agnieszka Kwiecień Nova
Stabilization in actor-network of engineers, different types of cyclists & industry
– within the societal context of the emancipation of women
=> Innovation develops in the context of economic & social relationships/ within
society
Core Actor-Network
Core Actor-Network
Server Farms
Websites
Universities
Start-Ups
Interests
Skills
Technology
Money
SEO
Economic relations
Server Farms
Websites
Universities
Start-Ups
Interests
Skills
Technology
Money
SEO
Economic relations
Server Farms
Websites
Universities
Start-Ups
Business Model
SEO
Advertising
Brand Value
Interests
Skills
Money
Technology
Spamming
Feed-Back
User Profiles
Tensions & Negotiations
information retrieval:
"more data means
better results"
critical scholar: „ahm, yeah, I use
Google constantly and I do love
it, (...) it is a great search engine
for giving me what I want“
engineer: „that improves the
quality of the information (...) and
makes your site actually more
valuable“
Tensions & Negotiations
politics: "it clearly
concerns the business
and they don't deny that"
critical scholar: „that’s
to worry, that’s
information we would
not wanna have a state
to have of us“
SEO: „I mean there is dirty
things you can do to make
your website more prominent“
Contracts
Information society/ economy
Competitors
Search Engines
User Data
Mobile
Technology
Facebook,
Twitter
& co.
Contracts
Information society/ economy
Competitors
Search Engines
User Data
Mobile
Technology
Facebook,
Twitter
& co.
China
Street View
Media
Activists
Alternatives
Hacker
Education
Civil society
Open source community
Contracts
Information society/ economy
Competitors
Search Engines
User Data
Mobile
Technology
China
Street View
Media
Activists
Alternatives
Facebook,
Twitter
& co.
Hacker
Education
Civil society
Open source community
Consumer/ Data
Protection
Politics
Legislation
Nation states
UNO
FTC
EU
Contracts
Information society/ economy
Competitors
Search Engines
User Data
Mobile
Technology
China
Street View
Media
Activists
Alternatives
Facebook,
Twitter
& co.
Hacker
Education
Civil society
Open source community
Consumer/ Data
Protection
Politics
New Actor?
Legislation
Mediator
Nation states
UNO
FTC
EU
Controlling Institution
Custodian
Foundation data protection
First conclusions
SCOT perspective shows that search technology is developed/ shaped/
stabilized in a complex actor-network
Search engine may be seen as a location where societal values are
negotiated
Core network is dominated by an economic logic – political, legal, cultural
actors stabilize the actor-network through inaction
Incorporates the ideology of the information economy/ capitalist society
Search engine bias/ „exploitation of collective intelligence“ (Pasquinelli)/
commercialization of knowledge
Future developments?
Not enough to blame the „Googlepoly“ (Pasquinelli)
understand the mechanisms behind power creation and stabilization
understand that we are all part of the picture
Future is not set
open to debate and potential social intervention
Questions to ask:
Do we really want to leave the task of „organizing the world‘s information“ to
a private firm with a clearly commercial agenda?
Who else could/ should take part in the shaping of search technology/ the
culture of search/ our access to knowledge/ construction of social reality?
How could we – as a society – strengthen these actors & their interests?
Further info/ contact
Thanks for your attention!
astrid.mager@humlab.umu.se
http://www.notesfromastridmager.tk/
0
