Fwd: Christchurch and the Dark Social Web by Luke Munn

[Luke Munn]

(and the reply to florian. these might be too belated to pick
discussion up now but posting for posterity ;-)


Thanks for the Q Florian. Yes agreed that 8chan is "the least
algorithmically regulated social medium", but I see 8chan as the 'end
of the line' in terms of an extreme right position, one that maybe
very few reach. What's more interesting to me are the larger masses at
the mid-points of this journey, and how they might be shunted along
it.

As I mentioned in my reply to Francis (which seems to have gotten held
up in moderation), the concept of the dark social web tries to show
how a smooth transition through this space is possible, for example
from gaming to gamergate and YT mens-rights vids, from gamergate to
the alt-right and its anti-sjw 'ironic' racism, from the alt-right to
the 'power levels' and dog-whistles of subreddits, etc.

I want to push back against the demented loner who visits the
'cesspool' of 8chan and consider instead the mass of young white men,
for example, that see themselves as normal, everyday, 'decent' people
holding the line against the libtards. In other words, the question
for me becomes how did you arrive at 8chan?

-best, Luke


On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 at 07:31, Florian Cramer  wrote:
>>
>> although I agree with  a large part of Lukes analyse let me put in
>> question the point of machinic agency.
>
>
> All the more since 8chan, where the Christchurch killer was at culturally and 
> literally at home and posted his announcement, is (along with the other 
> chans) the least algorithmically regulated social medium of them all - which 
> is exactly the reason of its attraction to counter and fringe culture, 
> including racist murderers.
>
> -F
#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Christchurch and the Dark Social Web by Luke Munn

[David Garcia]

Thanks Francis and Brian et al
When Francis points out that 
[….]This kind of description ascribes a lot of power/agency to the technical
medium and does in my opinion not fully grasp the agency of individuals
who have to actively seek this content (they have to go online,
subscribe to certain streams, pick their phones and read messages, click
on more extreme content and so on). 

Francis appears to be arguing that we can differentiate the workings of human 
agency from the devices, ‘smart’ infrastructurse and platforms that 
are *also* the result of human agency. There is still an important  role for 
forums (like this one) which struggle to examin the changing 'digital 
condition’ not 
only from the perspective of explicit content but also in terms of how various 
(often profit driven) configurations might actually amplify our worst or 
our better impulses. Remembering that the gun lobby like to tell us that its 
people that do the killing not guns is a useful reminder that 
technology is not neutral. This is not to underplay the role of human agency 
but it is to insist that the presence of this agency doesn’t begin and 
end with the users but is at work from the earliest point at which these 
platforms, devices and interfaces are configured. 

Brian wrote
> But now all social relations in all the developed societies are in some way 
> mediated by networks. That means two things simultaneously: computer networks 
> seep into all culture, and all elements of culture - including the worst and 
> most rancid white supremacy - seep directly into computer networks. 

The near total cybernetic entanglement that Brian points to is no reason to 
turn our attention away from political and sociological analysis of the 
formation of digital infrastructures. On the contrary it is their fading into 
the the background to become ‘the environment” that makes them so powerful 
frequently insidious and so vital to contest. 

David Garcia


On 19 Mar 2019, at 19:13, Brian Holmes  wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 11:28 AM Francis Hunger  
> wrote:
> So I wonder, why does the discussion want to look into the
> "sociotechnical properties of that environment" instead of looking into
> the political dimension which forms and enables humans who wish to kill
> other humans.
> 
>  This is spot on, and it calls for some revision of an old project: "an 
> immanent critique of the networks" -- which was the idea that Geert, I 
> believe, launched long ago (please set the record straight if it was someone 
> else, or a more collective ambition from the get-go).
> 
> A focus on, of and for computer networks has been valuable, no question. But 
> now all social relations in all the developed societies are in some way 
> mediated by networks. That means two things simultaneously: computer networks 
> seep into all culture, and all elements of culture - including the worst and 
> most rancid white supremacy - seep directly into computer networks. The 
> daunting conclusion might be that the critique of networked cultures 
> (Frankfurt School in a Linux box) must again become a general anthropology of 
> globalizing society. Kulturkritik, full stop.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Brian
> #  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
> #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:


#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Christchurch and the Dark Social Web by Luke Munn

[Francis Hunger]

> Thoughts?

I would love to hear more comments on this issue from a broader range of
people on this list (not exclusively from the usual suspects).

Francis

-- 

http://databasecultures.irmielin.org

#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Christchurch and the Dark Social Web by Luke Munn

[Morlock Elloi]

Accelerated and (unconditionally) broadcast communications affect humans 
at many levels, not just the surface cognition.


One (imperfect) model of the networked society:

We are all in the same (not Olympic-size, but half) swimming pool. As we 
pee, shit, fart, ejaculate and ooze various stuff, it spreads around and 
affects everyone within minutes or hours (on the far side of the pool.) 
The water in the pool is never recycled, everything stays there forever, 
including excrement from decade ago. Try to be friendly.


Perhaps there should be an annual (bi-annual?) Network Cleaning Day, 
when everything electronically stored is erased, under the pain of 
imprisonment?




But now all social relations in all the developed societies are in some way 
mediated by networks. That means two things simultaneously: computer networks 
seep into all culture, and all elements of culture - including the worst and 
most rancid white supremacy - seep directly into computer networks.


#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Christchurch and the Dark Social Web by Luke Munn

[Brian Holmes]

On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 11:28 AM Francis Hunger 
wrote:

> So I wonder, why does the discussion want to look into the
> "sociotechnical properties of that environment" instead of looking into
> the political dimension which forms and enables humans who wish to kill
> other humans.
>

 This is spot on, and it calls for some revision of an old project: "an
immanent critique of the networks" -- which was the idea that Geert, I
believe, launched long ago (please set the record straight if it was
someone else, or a more collective ambition from the get-go).

A focus on, of and for computer networks has been valuable, no question.
But now all social relations in all the developed societies are in some way
mediated by networks. That means two things simultaneously: computer
networks seep into all culture, and all elements of culture - including the
worst and most rancid white supremacy - seep directly into computer
networks. The daunting conclusion might be that the critique of networked
cultures (Frankfurt School in a Linux box) must again become a general
anthropology of globalizing society. Kulturkritik, full stop.

Thoughts?

Brian
#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Christchurch and the Dark Social Web by Luke Munn

[Florian Cramer]

>
> although I agree with  a large part of Lukes analyse let me put in
> question the point of machinic agency.


All the more since 8chan, where the Christchurch killer was at culturally
and literally at home and posted his announcement, is (along with the other
chans) the least algorithmically regulated social medium of them all -
which is exactly the reason of its attraction to counter and fringe
culture, including racist murderers.

-F
#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Christchurch and the Dark Social Web by Luke Munn

[Francis Hunger]

Dear Geert and Luke,

although I agree with  a large part of Lukes analyse let me put in
question the point of machinic agency.

Luke writes: "Calibrated correctly, platforms grasp the social, cultural
or ideological connections between content, presenting a sequence of
ideas that seem natural, even inevitable. These links, as [Rebecca]
Lewis argues, make “it easy for audience members to be incrementally
exposed to, and come to trust, ever more extremist political positions.”"

This kind of description ascribes a lot of power/agency to the technical
medium and does in my opinion not fully grasp the agency of individuals
who have to actively seek this content (they have to go online,
subscribe to certain streams, pick their phones and read messages, click
on more extreme content and so on). I mean, "audience members" or
individuals have to actively engage with certain political positions.
I'm not sure if this kind of argument "the user get's lured into" not
even depoliticizes the whole situation as it argues mainly "the user is
the victim".

It wasn't me – it was the actor-network.

The decision for instance to actively engage within let's say the KKK or
Blood and Honor and similar groups to me seems similar to the decision
of engaging in todays online hate-groups, which may be spread more
globally, but nethertheless these are not "algorithms" acting by
themselves (what motivation should they have?) but humans who interact
with each other trough global communication platforms.

Luke further, after describing Pewdiepies influence says: "One of the
strengths of the dark social web is that is highly individualized, an
environment algorithmically optimized to reflect its inhabitant. … Yet
in an operational sense, T.'s environment of platforms, sites and
services is exactly the same as ours—it is designed in the same way,
with the same architectures and affordances."

So I wonder, why does the discussion want to look into the
"sociotechnical properties of that environment" instead of looking into
the political dimension which forms and enables humans who wish to kill
other humans.

warm greetings,

Francis

-- 
http://databasecultures.irmielin.org

#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Christchurch and the Dark Social Web by Luke Munn

[Nick]

Quoth Geert Lovink: 
> we have just published this essay on our blog: Algorithmic Hate: Brenton 
> Tarrant and the Dark Social Web, an analysis on the role of social media in 
> the Christchurch killings, by Luke Munn, writing from Auckland/NZ:
> 
> .

Thanks for sharing Geert, I found the article very interesting 
indeed.

One interesting tension is between the more algorithmically complex 
and opaque sites more in the mainstream (twitter, facebook, youtube) 
compared to things like 8chan, which as far as I'm aware basically 
just promote what's most popularly re-shared and posted. So while 
sites like facebook can (as well described in the article) 
"effortlessly" change the sort of content one sees in mysterious 
ways that can gradually alter the social and political norms that 
are present, sites like 8chan don't facilitate the same sort of 
movement, beyond the sort of entrenchment that comes with 
desensitisation and repetition.
#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Christchurch and the Dark Social Web by Luke Munn

[Ico Maly]

Thank you! My thoughts can be read here:
https://www.diggitmagazine.com/column/white-terrorism-white-genocide-and-metapolitics20

Op di 19 mrt. 2019 om 11:01 schreef Geert Lovink :

> Dear nettimers,
>
> we have just published this essay on our blog: Algorithmic Hate: Brenton
> Tarrant and the Dark Social Web, an analysis on the role of social media in
> the Christchurch killings, by Luke Munn, writing from Auckland/NZ:
>
> http://networkcultures.org/blog/2019/03/19/luke-munn-al
> gorithmic-hate-brenton-tarrant-and-the-dark-social-web/
> 
> .
>
> We hope to continue this conversation here on the list. How do you look at
> the role of Facebook Live and Twitter?
>
> Best, Geert
>
>
>
>
>
>
> #  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
> #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:



-- 
Ico Maly
Tilburg University
Editor-in-chief diggit magazine
diggitmagazine.com 
facebook.com/diggitmagazine/ 
twitter.com/diggitmagazine 


*Nieuw*

   - Maly, I. (2018). The global New Right and the Flemish identitarian
   movement Schild & Vrienden: A case study.
   
TPCS
   working paper 2020
   - Maly, I. (2018). De Hedendaagse antiverlichting (Berchem, Epo)
   

   - Maly, I. (2018). Algorithmic populism and algorithmic activism.
   
   Diggit Magazine.
   - Maly, I. (2018). Populism as a mediatized communicative relation: The
   birth of algorithmic populism.
   
TPCS
   working paper 213
   - Maly, I. (2018). Welkom in het tijdperk van het globale nationalisme.
   

   Sampol.
   - Maly, I. (2018). Nieuw Rechts. Berchem: EPO.
   
   - Maly, I. (2017). New media, new resistance and mass media : A digital
   ethnographic analysis of the Hart – Boven – Hard movement in Belgium
   
.
   in Papaioannou, T. & Gupta, S. Media representations of ant-austerity
   protests in the EU. Routledge.



| Disclaimer |
Dit e-mailbestand, en de eventuele bijlagen, is bestemd voor de
geadresseerde(n) en kan vertrouwelijke of persoonlijke informatie bevatten.
Als u deze boodschap per vergissing hebt ontvangen, is elke publicatie,
reproductie, kopie, distributie of andere verspreiding of gebruik ervan ten
strengste verboden. Gelieve de afzender onmiddellijk te verwittigen en de
e-mail te vernietigen.Ondergetekende kan op geen enkele manier
aansprakelijk worden gesteld voor mogelijke fouten of onnauwkeurigheden in
dit bericht, noch voor schade als gevolg van onjuistheden of van problemen
veroorzaakt door of inherent aan het verspreiden van informatie via e-mail,
evenals voor technische storingen en virussen.
#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Christchurch and the Dark Social Web by Luke Munn

[Geert Lovink]

Dear nettimers,

we have just published this essay on our blog: Algorithmic Hate: Brenton 
Tarrant and the Dark Social Web, an analysis on the role of social media in the 
Christchurch killings, by Luke Munn, writing from Auckland/NZ:

http://networkcultures.org/blog/2019/03/19/luke-munn-al 
 
gorithmic-hate-brenton-tarrant-and-the-dark-social-web/ 
.

We hope to continue this conversation here on the list. How do you look at the 
role of Facebook Live and Twitter?

Best, Geert






#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: