ARDAC Anthropology Reviews: Dissent and Cultural Politics

ARDACAnthropologyReviews:DissentandCulturalPoliticsISSN20411405AimThe purpose of ARDAC is to produce an open access anthropology researchbased review aimed at theacademiccommunityatlargethatanalysesresponsestoculturalpoliticswithreflective,incisivearticlesintextualandnontextualformats.AnthropologyReviews:DissentandCulturalPoliticsispublishedtwotimesayearinFebruaryandOctoberby Open Access and supported by iCES, Institute of Contemporary European Studies, Regents CollegeLondon.ThefirstissuewillbepublishedinMay2010.Thejournalisorganizedthroughsubmissionstotheeditorandaneditorialboardanditisavailablefreelyonlineasanopenaccessanthropologypublication.

DescriptionDissent and Cultural Politics is an European andinternational, open access anthropology journal thatanalyseshowculturalinnovation,transnationalandpoliticalissuesunderpinthecharacterofrelationalityofglobalissues.Intheanalysisofculturalpolitics,thejournalisinterestedinsocialresponsestothefutureof culture in the public domain in the age of globalization and within the altermodern period that isemergingafterpostmodernity.Thereviewsaimtolookatthepoliticalintersectionsbetweencultureand

,andspecifically,thewayinwhichhumanrelationsaremediatedthroughpoliticalvoiceandglobalizationculturalinnovation.The journal encourages broad, critical, speculative and experimental interventions in discussionsconcerninganthropologyandculturalpoliticswithaparticularemphasisonpoliticalvoicesanddissent,inany fields, from communication technologies to socialmedia, political to popularmovements, and from

and intervention in society to any broad topics on technologies and experiences of socialengagementengagementandrelatedness.The journal is inclusiveof all typesof submissions,workingpapers, researchpapers,prepeerreviewedandreviewedpublications,multimedia(includingaudio,video)andinternetbaseddata.The journalwillbepartofopenaccessanthropologyjournalsstructuredwithinamediatedwebsiteandforums.

GuidelinesWewelcomesubmissionsonanytopicwithinanthropologythatconsiderstheremitofthejournalanditisinclusiveoftheacademiccommunityatlarge.

EditorialBoardandReviewersDrngelsTriasiValls,iCES,Regent'sCollegeDrKatherineSmith,UniversityofEssexDrDavidO'Kane,UniversityofAucklandDrIngvillKristiansen,UniversityofTromsoMsRoulaPipyrou,UniversityofDurhamMrDanielKnight,UniversityofDurhamMsClarePerkins,UniversityofWorcesterSubmissionofarticles

Articlesshouldbesubmittedelectronicallytotheeditor.Submissionsmayincludephotographs,audiofiles,blogs,videofilesandotherdata.Pleasecontactheeditoraboutappropriateformats.

econsidered.ArticlesinotherthanEnglishwillbMaximumwordlimit:7,000wordsMaximumnontextuallimit:2minutesperpiece(severalfilesmayaccompanyanarticle)

KeywordsandAbstractsAllarticlesshouldbeaccompaniedbya250wordabstract(inEnglish)andupto5keywords.AllarticlesshouldfollowtheHarwardreferencingsystemfortexts,broadcast,videosandelectronicsources

ARDAC

AnthropologyReviews:DissentandCulturalPolitics

AnOpenAccessAnthropologyJournal

Issue1Altermodern:journeys,globalcultures,

fragmentations

EditedbyngelsTriasiValls

Pub ticslishedMay2010byARDAC:AnthropologyReviews,DissentandCulturalPoliOpenAccessJournals

InstituteofContemporaryEur ES),RegentsCollegeLondonopeanStudies(iCISS 05

N204114May2010

www.ebslondo y_journal.aspx

n.ac.uk/ices/research/publications/anthropologhttp://ardacanthropologyjournal.ning.com/

http://www.anthropologyprojects.co.uk/ardac

EditorialCloud

ARDACAnthropologyReviews:DissentandCulturalPoliticsAltermodern>Journeys,GlobalCultures,Fragmentations

3

Editorial1stMay 2009 saw the first Open Access Anthropology Day.The journal thatwehavehere is theoutcomeofaproposalmadeonthatdaythataimedtocommemoratetheeventandto add to the growing pool of independent open accessjournals, and in particular, open access anthropologyjournals.JourneysinaglobaldomainThe editorial piece here is done in the practice of bloggingandcloudtagging.Itisashorterversionoftheeditorialideaslocated in a much longer editorial piece, elsewhere in thejournal. It follows an experimental altermodern style ofpublishing for our new online media. At this intersection Imust explain that the longer editorial piece of this firstjournal explores Bourriauds (2009) definition of thealtermodern and uses it in the context of anthropology. I(re)use the altermodern idea that anthropology, like art,ideas,media,andanyformofsocialandculturalproductionin our contemporary times, transverses many culturallandscapes, a vast electronic ocean that is saturated withsignsandonethatmovestowardcreatingnewandmultipleformats of expression (Bourriaud 2009) in contested anddissented public global domains. This volume aims toreproduce this journey through its content, strategies andauthors.Critical, Experimental,InterventionsARDAC, the journal, encourages broad, critical, speculativeand experimental interventions in discussions concerninganthropologyandculturalpoliticswithaparticularemphasison political voices and dissent, in any fields, fromcommunication technologies to social media, political topopularmovements,andfromengagementandinterventionin society to any broad topics on technologies andexperiencesofsocialengagementandrelatedness.

IssuesofContentTheauthorsinthisvolumehaveincommonasenseofradicalpositioningtowardstheirownresearch,whichforme,astheeditorofthisfirstissue,allowsformixingandexperimentingwith something that exemplifies the altermodern positionwhilst leavingeachoneof the authorswork independentlyframed from it. Veronica Barassi narrates complexunderstandingsofdissentthroughtheanalysesofdiscursivetechnologies and political action. Nick White looks at theculturalpoliticsofcopyandillegalityinmusicfilesharingontheInternet.HagaivanderHorstproducesafascinatingandcriticalreviewofthefilmAvatar,mirroringsomeoftheways

inwhichfilmmythologiescorrespondtoandmystifypoliticalrealities. The two opinion articles from Clare Perkins andStavroulaPipyroupointatthepossibilityofredirectingtheethnographiclense(inClarescaseofusinganthropologytothinkaboutgeneticallymodifiedproducts)andretellingthesocialappropriationofviolence(inStavroulascritiqueoftheCalabrianMafia).MariaPaulinadeAssisandMariaElizabethBianconcini de Almeida look at the relationship betweeneducationanddigitalexclusioninglobaleducationalcontextsconsolidatedthroughtheInternetandcollaborativelearning.The editorial position article elaborates on how theseauthorsandthisfirstjournalcametogetherandtothevisionunderlyingthiseditorspreoccupationwiththethemeofthevolume: a crossroad in the editorial journey, on the onehand, the context of open access as a kind of altermodernart/academic form; and on the other, to the role of openaccessandinternetmediatedsocialmediaforsocialsciences,education and anthropology. Each article has aword cloud,an electronically generated reordering of all the words inthearticle,aretoldvisualstoryprecedingtheirnarratives.SharingAccessInconcludingImustthankfortheirhelpandsupportallthepeoplewhoparticipatedinthecreationofthisjournal,AnnaCarlileforbeingoneofthefirstmembersoftheboardandforour joint altermodern venture in trying to answer thequestion what next after postmodernity?, what dowe call,this our now? To Keith Hart and the anthropology cooperativeandtheanthropologistsinthecoopthatdiscussedthe possibilities of the altermodern with me; and NickBourriaudwhocoinedandtheorisedtheinspirationalideaofthe altermodern; Michael Scriven, Director of iCES atRegents College and CSAP for supporting thisanthropological project and hosting it; most thankfully tonene fordesigning the electronicpassport and front coverofthisissue;andtoallthemembersofthecurrenteditorialboardandexternalboardforagreeingtocommittoaventurelikethisone,knowinginadvancethatthelifeofopenaccessanthropologyjournals,likethatofmanytypesofjournals,ismadeofmanymeetings (electronicones forus), dedicationtoethical,creativereviewingandpeerreviewing,andasenseof being immersed in a fleeting, always precarious, fairlyunacknowledged, electronically mediated, professionally felt,xperimental, shared publication, open accessed, networkedife.elngelsTriasiValls1stMay2010


3

LeadingArticle

ARDACAnthropologyReviews:DissentandCulturalPoliticsAltermodern>Journeys,GlobalCultures,Fragmentations4

PossibilitiesandAmbivalences:theDiscursivePowerofOnlineTechnologiesandtheirimpactonPoliticalActioninBritain

eronicaBarassiV

struggles longbeforetheadven

[email protected]

Abstract Drawing from ethnographic fieldwork amongstinternational solidarity campaigning organisations in the TradeUnion movement in Britain, this paper will discuss some of thebeliefs and experiences that people encounter in their use ofinternet technologies forpolitical action. Itwill be shown that thebelief in the opportunities and possibilities brought about by theWorldWideWebhasprofoundlyalteredtheeverydayexperienceofpoliticalactivism,andchangedpoliticalprioritiesandstrategies.Atthesametime,however, the frustrationsandanxietiesattachedtointernet technologies have transformedpeoples relationshipwithprinted media, as well as affected the internal politics ofoppositionalgroups.In considering these transformations, the paper will draw uponLatours actor network theory (2005) and uncover the role oftechnologies as agents. In contrast to Latour, however, the paperwillarguethatifwearetoperceivetechnologiesasagents,wemustbearinmindthattheyhavebecomesuchduetohumanagency.Thisis because technologies are embedded within human discoursesand imaginations, which by being naturalised in the technologyitselfprofoundlyaffecttheeverydaylayersofsocialexperience.Itis by looking at this dialectical relationship between the technicalandthesocial, thispaperwillargue, thatwecanbetterappreciatethe technohistorical transformations of the last two decades, andtheirimpactonpoliticalaction.

IntroductionCounterinformation1 practices and the mediationof political action have been part of the personalhistories of those involved in social and political

tof theWorldWide1 Counterinformation practices are here understood as thosepractices,usuallylinkedtothepoliticalrealitiesofsocialmovements,which are aimed at the dissemination of information that opposesthehegemoniccontenttransmittedthroughdominantandcorporatemedia.

Web. However, by enhancing the possibilities forcommunication and networking amongst politicalmovements, the technological developments of thelasttwodecadesandtheadventoftheInternethavedeeply affected peoples understanding of politicaland media action. Today online networks,connections, mediaspaces and practices have redefinedpeopleseverydayexperienceofpoliticsandpolitical opposition. But, how are we toconceptualise activists relationship to internettechnologies?Howarewetounderstandthebeliefsandfearsthattheytriggerinthepeopleinvolved?Inwhich way are new technologies transformingpoliticalaction?The aim of this paper is to address some of thesequestions,bylookingatthedatacollectedinayearlong ethnographic fieldwork amongst internationalsolidarity campaigns and the Trade Unions inBritain. In investigating the relationship betweenpolitical actionandnewtechnologies,myapproachis inspired by the understanding that research onthe social dimension of electronic technologies hasoften been constrained by assumptions of novelty,pervasiveness and agency (Woolgar, 2002, p.7). Incontrasttotechnodeterministicassumptionsontheempowering effects of the internet, therefore, thispaperhighlightsthehumanexperiencesandbeliefsthatareembedded inmediatedpoliticalactionandshedssomelightonthesocialcomplexitiesinvolvedinthetransformationsofthelastfifteenyears.

TradeUnionsandInternationalCampaignsOrganisation:theSocialWorldofthisResearchCrossingOxfordStreetonaSaturday,Ifeltsurprisedto find it completely deserted. The early morninganditsemptinessconferredasurrealatmospheretoone of Londons busiest streets. It was early June,andbeforeIrealisedit,IfoundmyselfonceagaininfrontofTradeUnionCongressHouse.Withits1960sarchitecture and the sculpture by Jacob Epstein inthecourtyarddedicatedtothedeadtradeunionistsof the twoworldwars , CongressHouse has beenone of the overlapping spaces of my multisitedethnographicresearch2(Marcus,1998).Ashappens

ing I knew exactly down the metal

in familiar spaces, that mornwhere to go. Thus I walked2 According to Marcus (1998), in the global context, the classicalunderstanding of anthropological fieldwork (as being confined to aparticularplaceorculture)hasbeenchallengedbytheneedtostudyculturebylookingatconnectionsandassociationsbetweendifferentsites. Therefore, he coined the term multisited fieldwork.Marcussuggests that there are a variety of ways in which one can domultisided ethnographic fieldwork, such as following the thing, thestory, the people or the metaphor (1998:19). For my research Idecided to follow the people involved in a networked socialmovement,andthemediatheyproduced.


5

staircase, looked at the TV screens which wereannouncing the SERTUC (South Eastern RegionTrade Union Congress) Conference on GlobalSolidarityandfoundmywaytotheplenaryhall.Theconferencehallwashalffull;mostofdelegateshad already made their way to the workshopsessions. The chairs in the middle of the roomoverlooked the main stage, with the SERTUC logoflashing on a screen. On the right hand side of themainhall, I could see the stallsof the internationalsolidarity campaignorganisations.At first sight thedifferentstallsoftheCubaSolidarityCampaign,theVenezuelan Information Centre, Justice forColombia, Banana Link or Palestine SolidarityCampaign looked all quite similar. All of them hadfairlyplain table covers, similarlydesigned leaflets,booksandTshirts forsale,andthe latestcopiesofthemagazinetheyproduced.Withinthesedifferentinternational campaign organisations the CubaSolidarity Campaign was my central field ofresearch.IhadchosenCSCasmymainsiteofresearchforitslong history and media involvement. Theorganisation previously known as BritishCubaResource Centre was born in 1978 out of agrassroots movement of individuals who weremostly members of the Labour Party3 and wereinterested in the political situation in Cuba. At theverybeginningoftheThatcheryears,theygatheredin a room of the Casa Latina in North London todiscuss Cubas achievements in terms of publichealth and education, and compare these with thepolitical and economic situation in Britain. At the

metheC atime, the group produced a newsletterwhich laterbeca ubaSmag zine.The fall of the Soviet block in 1989/1990 had aprofound impact on the BCRC; all members of theexecutive committee almost disappeared, andresources for producing the magazine were nolongeravailable.Despitestrugglingtheorganisationmanagedtosurvive,andin1992itwastransformedfrom a resource centre into the Cuba SolidarityCampaign. At the time, the group started to bindeffective political and economic networks with themajorTradeUnionsinBritain,andlargelyincreasedits membership size and political influence.Consisting of 4000 individualmembers, 450 TradeUnion branches affiliates, 28 local groups onnational territory and two sister organisations inNorthern Ireland and Scotland, CSC has become

3 Although the British Cuba Resource Centre was founded bymembers of the Labour Party, when the organisation was bornpeople emphasised on its grassroots origins and avoided anypolitical reference to theParty.This isprobablydue to thedelicatepoliticalclimateofthetimecharacterisedbytheColdWar.

today the leading campaigning organisation inBritainwithafocusonCubaandLatinAmerica.TheheadquartersofCSCarebasedinasmallofficeinNorthLondon.However,sincetheverybeginningoffieldworkitbecameevidentthattherealityoftheorganisation developed on a variety of differentlevels and was constructed by the juxtaposition ofmany networked spaces. As mentioned, Marcus(1998, p.19) suggests that there are a variety ofways inwhichone candomultisided ethnographicfieldwork,suchasfollowingthething,thestory,thepeopleor themetaphor.Formyresearch Idecidedto followthepeople, and themedia theyproduced.During fieldwork I thus spent an entire yearworking at CSCs national office on a daily basis; Ifollowed its organisers around Trade Unionconferences; I spent days in Parliament, andevenings at social gatherings and events; Iinterviewed members of networked campaigningorganisations and key figures in the Trade Unionmovement;IalsotravelledtoCuba,toparticipatetotheir work brigade at the Julio Antonio MellaInternationalCamp,40kmsfromHavana.ItwaswithinthesenetworkedrealitiesoffieldworkthatIrealisedthatCSCwasembeddedinacomplexsocialworld.Thisisaworldwhichencompassesallthose multilayered social relations that bringtogether Trade Unions, international solidaritycampaigning organisations, the Labour Party, theCommunist Party, theMorning Star and numerousother factions in Britain, which are commonlyidentified as British Left. In using the concept ofsocial world, however, I do not intend here toembrace categories such as the notion of BritishLeft, because these frameworks of analysis oftenimply a constructed unity to describe extremelyfragmented realities.When referring tomy contextof study as the expression of a social world, myapproach draws heavily from the debates withinanthropology that challenge essentialistunderstandings of the notion of community andidentity (Amit and Rapport, 2002), and from theworkofLatour(1988,2005)whoseesthesocialasbeing created by alliances and associations. Socialworldisthusintendedheremoreasamovement,assomething that it is constantly in the process ofbeingconstructedratherthanastructuredreality.Tomapthecomplexrealityofthissocialworld,itisimportant to consider the personal experiences,beliefs and understandings that bring these peopletogetherincollectiveformsofpoliticalaction.Thisisa world where, internationalism, solidarity,progressive policies, activism, workers rights,collectivism,andparticipatorydemocracyconstitutethemeansfortheconstructionofsharedmeanings.It is a world that is a profoundly British, white,middleaged,middleclassreality,wherepeoplehave


fought against the Thatcher government and haveseen the rise of New Labour hoping and prayingthatwhatTonyBlairwasdoingwas just talk togettheconservativesoutofpower.Shakenbydisbeliefin front of the New Labour Government and thecontinuousdeclineinTradeUnionMembershipand

apower, thisworld has been ffected by a profoundsenseofdisillusioninBritishpolitics.This sense of disillusion is often counteracted bypractices of international solidarity andidentification. In this framework, Latin Americarepresents a strong personal and political motif.Amongst international campaigns and the TradeUnions,LatinAmericaisanimage;animagethatitishighly evocative and has much more to say aboutpeoples relationship to British politics than theirrelationshiptocountriessuchasCubaorVenezuela.Forthepeopleinvolved,LatinAmericaisprincipallyan imagined space, one that is constructed incomparison to Britain through a powerful game ofmirrors.WithinCSC,forinstance,theimageofCubais constantly constructed in radical opposition toBritain through a set of ideologically powerfuldichotomies, such as collectivism vs. individualism,public interest vs. private interest, humanitarianpoliciesvs.marketledpolicies.ThegameofmirrorsbetweenCubaandBritainissustainedbythesharedidea amongst members and organisers that Cubarepresentsanexample,analternativerealitywhichhelps tohighlight thecontradictionsof thepoliticalsysteminBritain,andpossiblytransformthem.In order to construct these images, combat thenegative representations of Latin America, andpersuade the British public that countries such asCubaorVenezuelarepresentaviablealternative inthe current neoliberal global economy,international solidarity campaign organisationsfocus their actions largely on counterinformationstrategies and the production of alternative news.Inordertodosotheyrelyonthemediatedpoliticalspaces of theirmedia productions. Thesemediatedspaces have been part of the everyday life ofmostcampaigning organisations and the Trade Unionslong before the advent of the Internet. The CubaSolidarity Campaign, for instance, has beenpublishing the CubaS magazine for over 24 years.TheMorningStardailywasfoundedastheorganoftheCommunistPartyofGreatBritain in the1930s,and today has become a key coordinator of thesocial world of Trade Unions and single issuecampaignsinBritain.The long history of media productions within theLabour movement is not surprising. Historicallypolitical movements have often relied on mediatechnologies to diffuse their ideologies, createfeelings of association and belonging, harmoniseinternalconflictsandpromotetheirpoliticalcauses.

Tarrow (1998) who is a well known theorist ofsocial movements, suggested that the rise of thepopularpressinBritainandFranceattheendofthe18th century triggered the creation of newassociations that developed around the productionandexchangeofprintedmaterials.Accordingtohim,therefore, print and association werecomplementary channels in the development ofsocial movements (Tarrow, 1998, pp.4550). AsimilarunderstandingwassharedalsobyDowning(1995) who, by looking at the history ofmovements in the United States, has shown thatmedia activismhas been a central formof politicalaction from the ninetiethcentury womens pressand the suffragette movement to the civil rightsmovementsofthe1960s(1995,pp.180191).However, as many scholars have shown followingtheZapatista insurrection in1994and thecreationof the networked movements for global justice,media activism and online action has become aprivileged repertoire of political opposition (Atton,2002, 2004; Ribeiro, 1998; Slater, 1998; Castells,1997; Kowal, 2002; Kidd, 2003; McCaughey andAyers2003).Thisisbecause,followingtheZapatistaexample,differentpoliticalgroupsstartedtobelievethat theWorldWideWeb was a fundamental toolfor political action, because it enabled them totransmit their messages to a global scale (DellaPorta and Tarrow, 2005; Melucci, 1996; Ribeiro,1998; Slater, 1998). As the next part of the paperwill show, the beliefs in the possibilities broughtabout by new technologies have profoundlyinfluenced activists relationship to mediatechnologies and their understanding of politicalaction. As it will be argued, these transformationsare giving rise to a series of frustrations, anxietiesand ambivalences which are affecting the internalpoliticsofoppositionalgroups.

OnlineTechnologiesandtheTransformationofPoliticalActionThe social world of CSC has first become engagedwithinternettechnologiesthroughthecreationandextensionofthe internetservicePoptel.Poptelwasan internet and online service provider that wasrun by an employee cooperative (workercooperative). It became known as provider ofInternetservicestotheLabourParty,andlaunched

top level Internetthe successful bid to create a 44 The internet organises upon a Domain Naming System (DNS)whichishierarchicallystructured.TheTopLevelInternetDomainisone of the domains at the highest level of the hierarchical domainsystem.Wellknowntoplevelinternetdomainsare.com,.net,or.org. For the international labour movement and cooperativeorganisationsthecreationofatoplevelinternetdomainwasamajorsuccess.


7

domain for use exclusively by cooperatives andcommunities. The project was born out of a beliefthatnewtechnologieswerefundamentaltoolsinthestrengthening of the International Trade UnionMovement, and in the facilitation of networks ofcommunication and action between differentorganisations(Agaretal,2002).Intheyearsbetweentheadventofnewtechnologiesandthetimeofmyfieldworkthepoliticalstrategiesof CSC have undergone a profound transformation,and media action has become a privilegedcampaigning strategy. When the campaign wasfounded, solidarity was largely expressed throughthe collection and the shipping of aid material toCuba, to thepoint thatanarticleonCubaS reportsthat in 1995 CSC raised 20,000 worth of aidmaterial. In the latenineties, the situation radicallychanged. Today, the campaigns involvement withmaterial aid has decreased to the point that it islimited to the shipping of musical instruments orballetshoesthroughtheMusicFundforCuba.5Thistransformation has a clear political basis, which isgrounded in the transnational relations of theorganisation. Indeed, in the latenineties ICAP (TheCuban Institute of Friendship with the Peoples)6,which coordinates the global solidaritymovementfrom Cuba, explicitly asked CSC to stop sendingmaterialaidandto focus insteadoncountering thenegative representations of the island and itsgovernmentinglobalmediaAccordingtoICAPsrepresentatives,whichIhadthepleasuretointerviewduringmytriptoCuba,sucharequestneedstobecontextualisedinthebeliefthatmanywithinCubaareconvincedthatinaninternetconnected world where information flows freelyfrom one country to another and the message ofpolitical movements reaches a global scale,paradoxicallythewallofsilencebetweenCubaandtherestoftheworldseemstobestrongerthenever.InthemajorityofcasesCubaisnotamatteroffocus

iesandnewspapers.tdated issue. When

forglobalbroadcastingcompanIt is not news; it is an old, ou5TheMusic Fund for Cubawas first established inmemoryof thesingerKirstyMacCollwhobeforedyinginMexicohadbeeninvolvedwiththeCSC.TheMusicFundforCubawassetupasacharitywiththepolitical intentionof reaching thosepeoplewhowouldwant togetculturallyengaged,butnotpoliticallyengaged,withCuba.6TheCuba Instituteof Friendshipwith thePeoplewas founded in1960,followingthewaveofenthusiasmintheCubanRevolutionthataffecteddifferentpolitical groups across theworld, and since1967organises solidarity work brigades to Cuba. The work brigadeinvolves a 3 week programme where members of internationalsolidarityorganisationscantraveltoCubaandworkinthefieldsasagesture of solidarity to the Island. The brigade is also seen as anopportunity to achieve a first hand experience of Cuba and learnimportantaspectsofCubansculture,politicsandideology.TheroleofICAPintheinternationalsolidaritymovementistokeepincontactwithmorethan2050Cubasolidarityorganisationsacrosstheworld.Since the early days of CSC, ICAP represents an important politicalnetworkfortheorganisation,.

issues on Cuba are covered, these merely focuseither on Fidel Castro or on negativerepresentationsofthesocialistgovernment.Influenced by ICAP7, therefore, media action hasbeen charged with a new and fundamentalimportanceandhascometodominatetheagendaofthecampaign.Aproofofthiscanbefoundinthefactthat, in the 2007 Annual General Meeting, mediaaction was discussed as top priority and placedbeforeparliamentaryaction,whilstin1993sAGMitwasnot evenmentioned.This focusonmediahasnotonlybecomeoneofthefirstprioritiesofCSC,buthas also reshaped peoples understanding ofsolidarity in a fascinatingway.Today, people seemto link their understanding of political solidarityprimarily to processes which focus on counterinformation strategies. These processes havebecomeamatterofgreat importanceforthem;onethat shapes their understanding of political actionanddefineswhattheydo.Here, it is important tocontextualise this increasedfocusonmediainthelargerframeworkofinternetrelatedbeliefs and theeffect theyhaveonpeoplesunderstandingofoppositionalpolitics.Whentalkingabout the Net and everyday practices people oftenclaimed that new technologies had improved theirpoliticalactionandmediaactivism.Theinternethascertainlyenhancedactivistsconfidenceintheirownnetworkingandmediastrategies.Bydoingsoithas

edefin

empoweredmedia action and r ned activistspoliticalprioritiesa dstrategies.The possibility of constructing and consolidatingnetworks of communication and action is not theonly reason for which people believe that theinternet isanempowering tool.Asemergedduringconversations with other members and organisersin the socialworld of CSC, people also believe thattheInternethasgrantedthemeasieraccesstobothgovernmentalandnongovernmentalorganisations.Furthermore,peopleareconvincedtheinternethasmade the construction and dissemination ofalternativenewsmucheasier.Indeed,accordingtothem the advent of internet technologies hasmultipliedthespacesfortheproductionofnewsandinformation within the campaign. In the last 10years,themessagesproducedbythecampaignhavereachedalevelofdistributionandcirculationwhichcannotbecomparedtotheearlynineties.Therefore,by enhancing peoples confidence in their ownnetworking and media strategies, internettechnologies seem to have empowered media

emphasis on theaction and amplified the7HereitisimportanttopointoutthatalthoughICAPinfluencestoacertaindegreethestrategiesofCSC,thelattermaintainsagreatdealof independence and the relationship with the Institute is one ofmutualcollaborationandparticipation.


importance of strategies centred upon mediatechnologies. In this framework, they aretransforming the way in which political action isbeingimagined,experiencedandorganised.

TheDiscursivePoweroftheWorldWideWeb:ReThinkingLatoursActorNetworkTheoryInthesocialworldofCSC, the internethasaffectedactivists political practices and strategies insubstantialways.PeoplewithinCSCtodayprioritisemedia action over other more traditional forms ofpolitical solidarity, such as demonstrations orsending aid material. In this context, therefore, itseemsthatnewtechnologieshaveactedasagentsinthe transformation of political action. Theunderstanding of technologies as agents drawsheavilyuponLatours(2005)ActorNetworkTheory(ANT). Latour (1993, 2005) ctiticised sociology forignoring the natural and technical actors whichaffectsocialexperienceanddiscourses.Accordingtohim,thesocialasarealmorathingdoesnotexist,whatexistsisatypeofnetworkedmovement,whichis defined by the multiple interconnections ofdifferent human and nonhuman agents. In thisframework,he introduces the ideaofactants8.Therecognition of media technologies as actants is ofcentral importance, because it enables us to betterunderstand theway inwhichnew information andcommunication technologies are transformingpriorities, social relations, and understandings ofcontemporaryformsofpoliticalactioninsignificantways.Despitebeingcentraltothegeneralapproach

rof thisresea ch, therearesome limitationspresentwithinLatourstheorythatneedtobeaddressed.AsEdwardsetal. (2007,p.6)suggested,whenANTwas established as a theoretical approach in theeighties, its claims shared many lines of similaritywithanthropologicaltheories,andthisisspecificallytrueifweconsidertheworkofAppadurai(1986)onthe social life of things or if we look at Gellsanthropology of art and his analysis of things associal agents (1998). Yet, there was a difference

ce, technology andbetween the work of the scien8 The concept of actant derives from Latours earlier engagementwith actornetworktheory (Latour and Callon, 1981) and waslargely influenced by the narrative theorist Greimas. The scholarargued that the main unit in the analysis of narratives should beactants,units thatactorareactedupon. It isonlyat theendof thestudy that one can evaluatewhich units remain actants andwhichones become the actors. According to actornetwork theory socialexperiences and discourses are shapedby the constant negotiationand association between different actants. What observers see asmacroactors are usually networks of actants (Gabriel et al, 2009,p.355). Actants can be of various types, natural, technological, andsocial,andtheyallhaveanagencyonsocialexperience(Latour,1993,2005,p.4363).

society scholars (STS) and that of anthropologists.This is because, STS scholars were interested inshowing how networks of human and nonhumanagents created social discourses, and they wereespecially concerned with the construction ofscience and scientific facts. Anthropologists, on thecontrary, were interested in the human relationsthatmade networks and connections possible, andthey sought to uncover the meaning of theserelations (Edwards et al. 2007, pp. 57). In thisframework, as Knox et al. (2006) contended, theproblemwithmuch of thework of STS scholars isthat it maintains a distance from the lives of thepeople it is focused on, in such a way that peoplebecomeabstractionsinthedescriptionofascientificprocess(Knoxetal.2006,pp.127).Furthermore, by exploring the networkedmovementbetweenhumanandnonhumanagents,ANT seems to neglect the actual escalation withinwhich nonhuman agents have become powerful,andthepowerrelationsbetweenthehumanandthenonhuman.Hence,byemphasisingspace,andspaceof networks,ANT sufferswhat early ethnographieswithin anthropology used to suffer from, namelyahistoricity. Indeed, as Couldry suggested, thespatialvirtueofANTisconnectedwithalimitation:therelativeneglectoftime(2008,pp.163165).Itisfor this reason thatwe need to remember the factthat ANT is not well equipped to understand theconsequences of the representations thattechnologies embed, and the effects of theserepresentationsoneverydaylife(2008,p.165).Interestingly enough, in his ethnography ofLaboratory Life (1986) when Latour had alreadystartedworkingonarudimentaryversionofactornetworktheory (Callon and Latour, 1981) thedimension of time was present. Indeed, with theirwork, Latour and Woolgar (1986) show not onlythatscientificfactsaresociallyconstructed,butthatthe process of construction is extremely importantto analyse because it involves the use of certaindevices (networks of scientists, language, thedeletionofphasesoftheprocess)wherebyalltracesofproductionaremadeextremelydifficulttodetect(1986, p.176). By looking at the processes ofconstructionofthenonhuman,LatourandWoolgarseem to ascribe them with an historical andhierarchicaldimensionthatismissingfromLatourslatestwork(Latour,2005).Drawing from these critical observations, myunderstanding is that technologies are actants, andthus transform social processes, but have becomesuchbecausetheyareembeddedwithhumanvaluesand beliefs that are naturalised within thetechnology itself.Therefore theybecomeactants inthe moment in which the ideologies, which areattached to them, are presented as the natural


9

characteristics of the technology itself. In theunderstanding of technologies as social agents,hence, it is important to analyse the human socialrelationships and narratives which have producedthemandplacedthemintocontexts.Thisisbecause,as Agar, Green and Harvey (2002) suggested,technology is never separated from the socialconditions in which it exists; ICTs do not simplyappear in a place; they are made to appear, andmuch work has to go into accomplishing thisimpression.Thisentailsthat:

Howtheyappearwillbeassociatedwiththemotivationsandperceptionsofthosewhoworktoputthemintoplace,whichalsomeanstheywillbelocatedandperceivedasbeingconnectedwithspecificpeople,organisations,interestsandsoon(2002,p.272).

When CERN laboratories in 1990 announced thecreation of a hypertext system, named the WorldWide Web (www), they relied on systems ofnetworks which were already in place (http, html,uri etc.).Thesenetworkswerebornat theunlikelyintersection betweenmilitary research (ARPANET)bigscience(BellLaboratorieswhichreleasedUNIX)and grassroots libertarian movements9 (e.g.MODEM or LINUX). From the intersection of theseopposite networks a technology emerged, whichwas presented by CERN laboratories as thetechnologyofopennessandfreedom(Castells,2001,pp.1033).Inthisframework,therefore,asCastellshas shown, the internet was not merely a newtechnology but was an ideological construct that

owas based on ideas of penness, sharing andexchange.Looking at the discursive power of technologiesenables us to better contextualise technologies asagents by exploring the beliefs that are embeddedwithin them, and considering the impacts of thesebeliefs on political action and imaginaries. As hasbeenargued,thepossibilitiesandbeliefsattachedtothe structure of theWorldWideWeb have deeplyaffected the way in which people understandpolitical action and opposition. By improving thepossibility of networking and getting the messageacross, Internet technologies have empoweredactivists understanding of media action and havetransformed this into a privileged repertoire ofoppositionalpolitics.As the next part of this paper will show, far from

unproblematic andperceiving the internet as an9ParticularlyinterestinginthisregardistheworkofTurner(2006),whichtracesthehistoryofahighlyinfluentialgroupofSanFranciscoBayarea entrepreneurs: Stewart Brand and the Whole Earthnetwork.Between1968and1998, thegroupprofoundly influencedcounterculturalists and technologists in the understanding ofcomputersastoolsforpersonalliberation,thebuildingofvirtualanddecidedlyalternativecommunities,andtheexplorationofboldnewsocialfrontiers.

empowering force for social change, however,activistsrelationshiptonewtechnologiesisdefinedbyeverydayfrustrations,anxietiesandquestionsonwhat media action really means. This is notsurprising. Indeed, as Castells (2001) has noticed,the internet as the technology of openness andfreedom is an ambivalent construct which offersas many opportunities as challenges. Whosefreedom are we talking about? How are we tounderstand the contradictions between thedemocratic potential of new technologies and thecommercialone?(Castells,2001,p.275).Withinthesocial movements literature or the alternativemediaone,however,thereislittleexplorationofthechallengesandfrustrationspeopleencounterintheeveryday use of internet technologies for politicalaction.Whenthere is, it isnotethnographic(Atton,2004; Meikle, 2002). But what are the challenges,the fears and frustrations embedded in activistsrelationshiptointernettechnologies?Iftheinternetrelated beliefs have redefined the terrain forpolitical action, what are the effects of internetrelatedanxieties?

InternetTechnologiesandPoliticalAction:ContradictionsandAnxietiesinEverydayPracticeFortheirdiscursivepowerinternettechnologiesareredefining the terrain for political action. In doingso, however, they are giving rise to a series ofquestions, contradictionsand conflicts amongst thepeople involved. This is better expressed in thefollowing conversation between a young couple intheir early twenties.Matt and Sian have long beenpolitically involved with Labour politics. ComingformfamilieswhichwereactiveintheLabourParty,theyhavebeenengagingwithpolitical issues sincetheir early teenage years. They met at university,while theywere undertaking a BA in InternationalRelations, and were both involved with the 2003antiwarmovement.Whenthey leftUniversity theydecided to transform their political activism into aprofession, Sian became a researcher for the tradeunionAMICUS,whichwasthenmergedwithTGWUtoformUNITE.MattworkedforacoupleofyearsforCSC, and then left to become the only employee ofthe Venezuelan Information Centre (VIC). Theirworkandsocial livesat the timeof fieldworkwereorganised around trade union conferences andevents.

S: I think it isnoticeable in the last years, amongst thedifferent campaigns and theTradeUnions, things havechanged. Today people think that having a Facebookgroupisalevelofpoliticalactivity,andtheyconcentrateon online media action a lot. But then things aredeteriorating.Membersstarttothinkthatmerelyjoininga Facebook group shows that you are committed. But


actually it doesnt mean anything it doesnt changethings. There is too much information around, to beeffective.M:Youareright,butIthinkitsalsousefulS: I mean its useful in terms of advertising andpromotingwhatwedo.Butyoualsowantlobbying,youwantdemonstrations,youwantprotests.Facebookandother online spaces are useful in terms of promotingtheseactivities,butcannotbeperceivedasasubstitute.ButthatswhatshappeningnowM:Thatisaproblem.Ithinkitsamatterofbalance.Youknow blogs are important, and they are important insociety, but then people end upworking just on blogs.And thats so individual. Since theres lots of negativethingsonCubaandVenezuelainthepress,itisobviousthat for us theblogsphere andonline action in generalbecomesmoreimportant.Butifpeopleconcentrateonlyon the information side of things, they dont really getinvolvedinlobbying,demonstrating,gettingengagedoractivelychangingpeoplesminds.

ThediscussionbetweenMattandSianshowssomeoftheconflictsandtensionsthattheuseofinternettechnologies for political action is creating. Theexcessivefocusonmediaaction,accordingtothem,is detrimental for political activism, because itenables people to abandon other forms of politicalaction suchas lobbyingordemonstrations that arestillperceivedtobeimportant.Duringfieldwork,forinstance,IwitnessedaconflictbetweenthenationalofficeofCSCandtheCSCNorthLondonLocalGroupbecause the latter insisted on the importance oforganising demonstrations. The national office onthe contrary emphasised lobbying and mediapracticesasprivilegedmodesofpoliticalaction.The conversation betweenMatt and Sian does notonlyhighlighttheproblemofpriorities,andthefactthatbyfocusingonmediaactionmanyorganisationsareneglectingotherimportantpoliticalactivities. Italso raises theproblemof informationoverload. Infact, according to Sian, there is too muchinformation around to be effective. Duringfieldwork, I found that such an understandingwasquite commonwithin CSC and other organisations.Due to the technological developments of the lastfifteen years, the messages exchanged amongstnetworked organisations on a daily basis havereached an unprecedented and almostuncontrollable level.Oneday,Rob thedirectorofthe Cuba Solidarity Campaign complained abouttheamountofemailshereceivesandaboutthefactthatwithanincreasedworkloadheisnolongerableto properly followup the news and events of theother organisations, even though he would beinterested.Thiseverydayexperienceofinformationoverloadtypifiedbytheamountofemailsthatpassunnoticedand/orthenumberofmessagesthatarestoredintoseparate folderswithout being read is triggering

questionsontheworthoftheirowncommunicationstrategies, and thus the very nature of their ownpolitical choices and activities. A similar line ofreasoningcanbefoundintheworkofLebert(2003)who looked at the social context of AmnestyInternational and argued that although internettechnologies became a privilegedmode of politicalactionpeoplequestionedtheeffectivenessofonlineaction(Lebert,2003,pp.209233).Intheaboveconversationanotherimportantaspectemerges,whenMattmentioned that the internet istooindividuallybased.Duringfieldworkthiswasacommon frustration that I have encountered overand over again. Across different organisations,people feel profoundly frustrated by the too oftenindividualist logic of the Internet. According tosome, in an era of blogs, individual websites andsocial networking sites, individual messages areoften given the same importance as the messagesthathavearisenoutofthetensionsandnegotiationsofacollectiveofpeople.Inthiscontextsuffocatedbytheinformationoverloadoftheonlinespacethemessages produced by oppositional groups, whichare the product of negotiations and conflicts, getlost.Thissituationismakingthemquestiontheideathat internet technologies create a space in whichtheir voice canbeheard.Oneday, for instance, thedirectorofCSCtoldme: Wetryourbest.Butwhatshouldwe dowhen themessage of a single elevenyearoldcanachieveagreater importancethanourown?This reflection challenges understandings that seethe Internet merely as a politically empoweringmedium. As communication tool and networkconstructor, the Internet seems to be fundamental,but when referring to the construction andtransmission of political ideologies (and especiallymarginal collective voices) the Internet should beunderstood for its emphasis on individualism andindividual meanings. In fact as Natasha thecommunicationofficerofCSConcetoldme:

N: You know its so difficult out there [in the onlinespace]!Youhavesomewebsitesonwhichmoremoneywas spent that look more polished, more serious, andpeople might give them more credibility, and that isprobablyadanger,itwillbeadanger.Youknowsomeofh re

t emcanhaveanamazingonlinep esenceandactuallyb onlythreepeople.

The internetrelated frustration created by theinformationoverloadandtheindividualisticlogicoftheonlineworldseemstobetransformingpeoplesrelationshipwith theirprintedmedia,andaffectingthe connection between media practices andbelonging. The relationship between mediapracticesandpoliticalbelonginghasbeenexploredby Anderson (1991) in his book ImaginedCommunities. According to Anderson, newspapersand novels were the technical means for


11

representing the kind of imagined community thatthenationwas(1991:25).Andersoncontendedthatnewspapers conferred a sense of simultaneity, andthis sense of simultaneity created a feeling ofcollective participation. Drawing heavily from hiswork,therefore,whenIfirststartedfieldworkIwasnot surprised to notice that there was a strongconnectionbetweenpoliticalbelongingandmedia.Interviews and informal chats withmy informantsall highlighted this strong connection, wheredifferent activists contended that printed mediaenabled them to streghten the feeling of belongingto the group. As I have discussed in greater detailelsewhere (Barassi,2009) within thesocialworldofCSCwhilstprintedmediaareusuallyseenasthemain constructor of membership and belongingwithin the campaign, online media are perceivedoverallasmoreflexibleandasnotdirectlyrelatedtocollective feelings of political participation. DuringfieldworkandinterviewsIalmostreachedastageofdatasaturationwhereagreatmajorityofinformantsclaimed that they would never replace the CubaSwith an online version. What emerged from theinterviewscollected,andespeciallywithintheonesof younger members of the campaign, was that incontrast to the online newsletter, the printedmagazineconveyedpeoplewithagreateremotionalattachment and a feeling of affinity. Throughoutmy fieldwork, and through informal conversationwithmyinformantstheideaof afeelingofaffinityoften emerged in order to express a sense ofparticipationandbelongingtotheorganisation,andthe way in which this sense was linked to mediapractices and forms. According tomany the online

h didnotconveythemwit the samefeelingofaffinitythatwasprovidedbytheprintedmedia.The fascinating aspect that emerged through myresearchwas that in explaningwhy printedmediaconveyed themwithadeeper feelingofaffinitymyinformants,emphasisedontheideaofmaterialityinaddressing the importance of printed media. Mostimportantly they related understandings ofmateriality with notions of ownership, andbelonging. In fact according to them the feeling ofbelonging is given by the material nature of theirprintedpublication,bythefactthatitprovidesthemwithsomethingthattheycanown,archive,feelandsmell.Althoughthereisnotthespaceheretodiscussit,inanthropology the relationship betweenmateriality,ownership and identity is widely explored(Appadurai, 1986; Miller, 1998, Gosden andMarshall, 1999; Edwards and Hart, 2001).Throughout my fieldwork it emerged that myinformantsmadeanexplicitlinkbetweenthethree,and stressed the continuing importance of printedmedia in their lives because they were material

objects. The emphasis on materiality, needs to beunderstood in the larger framework of theambivalent relationship between activists and theInternet. This emerged particularly well in aninterviewwithCSCsdirector:

V: do you think that people really engage with onlinepublicationsastheydowithCubaSmagazine?R:what?Ingeneral?Ithinkcertainpeoplewouldratherlookthingsuponline.Buttheproblemisthattheonlineis so hard to associatewith a particular product. Youjust read it because its online, but you cant reallyassociate it with something. You cant really have anaffinitywithanythingreally.Yougotyourwebsitesandyournewslettersbutthanyoueasilycanreadsomethingelse.Youdontstickwithit.Nooneownstheonline.

Atthemomentit[theonline]itsnotareallygoodprojectforus.Imeanwearetryingtoimproveourwebsitebutwewouldntgiveup themagazine.Thats for our membership. You know people joinandtheyneedtogetsomethinginreturn,somethingthat they can touch and own. You know it meanssomethingtothemwhentheygetthatanditsquiteimportantforthem,theylookforwardtoit.AsRobsuggests,incontrasttotheonlinewhichnooneownsorfeelsarealaffinityto,theprintedmediacreateasenseofownershipwithintheorganisation.It is by looking at ownership that we can betterappreciatewhy people seem not to have the sameemotional involvement with their online media astheyhavefortheirprintedones.Thisunderstandingsheds some light on the continuing role of printedmedia in the everyday construction of politicalaction.Italsosuggeststhatnewmedia/digitalmediaare not replacing old/material ones but as the

b nemphasisonmaterialityand elo ginghasshowntheymaybetransformingtheirmeaning.Internet related frustrations can have a variety ofdifferentconnotations (at timesverypersonal)anddifferentscalesof intensity;dependingonpersonaland individual situations or on the history of aparticular organisation. However, exploring themanddescribingsomeoftheimpactstheyarecausingis a matter of central importance foranthropologists. Especially in relation to socialmovements, the pervasive use of the internettechnologies is modifying political action. Yet thetransformationsbroughtaboutbythetechnologyoffreedom (Castells, 2001) are not alwaysempowering or progressive.Within CSC, theNet isnot seenmerely as a spacewhere themessages ofcollectivesgetlost,theonlineworldisseenalsoasa space where thanks to Google messages areeasily tracked, decontextualised, and appropriatedby other media or political organisations forcounterprogressive purposes. The anxiety of thelack of control over the messages produced is astrongoneandhasaffectedpeoplesrelationshipto


alternativemediaproductionincounterprogressiveways.Ten years ago the CubaS magazine, represented similarly to Downings (1998) or Attons (2002)descriptions of radical and alternative media acollective space for debate, where memberscontributed freely and discussed controversialtopics concerning the island. In the last ten years,however,alternativemediaproductionhaschangeddramatically and has seen an ideological turn.Today, CSCs national office has reduced peoplesparticipationintheproductionofthemagazineandother media forms. Furthermore, editors andcontributors concentrate merely on thedisseminationofuncriticalandpositivenewsaboutCuba.The ideological turnand focusonpositivenews isgivingrisetodiscontentamongstmembersandlocalgroup leaders,whoat timescriticize theCubaS forbeing too ideological. Despite discontent, however,people seem to understandwhy thenational officeneeds to focus on such strategies. Indeed, peopleunderstandthefactthattoday,theCubaSmagazineisinterconnectedtotheCubaUpdatenewsletterandthewebsite ina fascinatingandnetworkedprocessof newsproduction forwhich allmedia texts enterthe online domain. In this context, debate is nolonger possible, because as the communicationofficerofCSCexplained anycritical stancecanbeappropriated from people of other mediaorganisationswhowoulduseCSCcriticismfortheirown agendas and claim that 'even the CubaSolidarityCampaignsaysthat...'.Consideringtheideologicalturnthathasaffectedalternative media production within CSC withreference to internet related anxieties, raisesimportantquestionsonaparadoxembeddedintherelationship between activists and newtechnologies. In fact, it seems interesting thattechnology of freedom and openness (Castells,2001) is actually provoking counterprogressiveprocesses that affect the internal politics of thepeopleinvolved.

ConclusionNew technologies always bring about socialtransformations.Thisisbecausetheytransformtheway in which people communicate, organise theirdailyroutines,redefinetheirpracticesandchoices.Yet, as this paper has shownwith reference to thecontext of political action in Britain, often it is notthe technology itself that brings about socialtransformations,butitisthehumandiscoursesandimaginations embedded in the technology, whichhave a profound effect on the everyday layers ofsocialexperience.Thisunderstandingenablesusto

mapnot only the core beliefs andpossibilities thatcomewithnewtechnologies,butalsotheanxieties,frustrations and ambivalences that are attached tothem.Inthisframework,therefore,itisimportanttounderstand that if internet technologies aretransforming social experience, they are doing sonot in a homogenising or disruptive way, butthrough complex andmultiple processes of humannegotiation. Highlighting these conflicts andnegotiations, I believe, is of central importance inorder to shed light on the social complexitiesinvolvedinthetechnohistorical transformationsofthelastdecades,anduncoverthedual,contradictorycharacter embedded in new informationtechnologies.I have argued that the possibilities and beliefsattached to the structure of the World Wide Webhave deeply affected the way in which peopleunderstand political action and opposition. Byimprovingthepossibilityofnetworkingandgettingthe message across, Internet technologies haveempoweredactivistsunderstandingofmediaactionandhavetransformedthisintoaprivilegedmodeofoppositional politics. However, it has been shownthat far from perceiving the Internet as anunproblematic and empowering force for socialchange,activistsrelationshiptonewtechnologiesisdefined by everyday frustrations, anxieties andquestionsonwhatmediaactionreallymeans.This ambivalence is not surprising. Indeed,ambivalence is always present within ideologicalconstructions, especially when they influenceeveryday practices and dynamics. Real lifeexperiencesalwaysclashwithidealunderstandings.As argued, internet related anxieties andfrustrationsarechallengingpeoplesunderstandingoftheeffectivenessoftheironlinemediaactionandtransforming their relationship towards printedmedia. Furthermore, as I have discussed withreference to informationoverload and the lackofcontrol over the messages produced, internetrelatedanxietiesaretransformingalternativemediapracticesinmanydifferentways.Inthisframework,if we want to address the question of whetherpolitical actionhasbeenempoweredby theadventof new technologies, we must find the answersomewhere inbetween. Itneeds tobe foundat theinterface between possibility and ambivalence; attheborderbetweentransformationandcontinuity.

References:AgarJ.,etal.,2002.CottontoComputers:FromIndustrialtoInformationRevolutionsinWoolgarS(Ed.),Virtualsociety?Technology,Cyberbole,Reality,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.264286


13

Amit,V.etal.,2002.TheTroublewithCommunity:AnthropologicalReflectionsonMovement,Identityand

PlutoPressCollectivity,London:Appadurai,A.,1986.TheSocialLifeofThings:CommoditiesinCulturalPerspective

ersityPress,Cambridge:

CambridgeUnivAlternativeMedia,London:SageAtton,C.,2002.

Atton,C.,2004.AnAlternativeInternet:RadicalMedia,PoliticsandCreativity,Edinburgh:EdinburghUniversityPressBarassi,V.,2009.Digitalvs.Material:TheEverydayConstructionofMediatedPoliticalActioninNetworkingKnowledge:JournaloftheMeCCSAPGNNetwork2(1)Callon,M.andLatourB.,1981.UnscrewingtheBigLeviathan:howActorsMacrostructureRealityandhowSociologistshelpthemtodosoinKnorrCetinaandCicourel(Eds.)AdvancesinSocialTheoryandMethodology:TowardanIntegrationofMicroandMacroSociologiesBoston,Mass:Routledge,pp.277303.

TheRiseoftheNetwoBlackwell

Castells,M.,1996. rkSociety,OxfordandMalden:WileyCastells,M.,1997.ThePowerofIdentity,Cambridge

ckwellMassachusetts:BlaCastells,M.,2001.TheInternetGalaxy:ReflectionsontheInternet,Business,andSociety,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPressCouldry,N.,2008.'ActorNetworkTheoryandMedia:DotheyConnectandonwhatTerms?inAndreasHepp(Ed.),Connectivity,NetworksandFlows:ConceptualizingContemporaryCommunications,NewJersey:HamptonPresspp.93111DellaPorta,D.andTarrow,S.,2005.TransnationalProtestandGlobalActivism,London:Rowman&Littlefield.Downing,J.,1995.AlternativeMediaandtheBostonTeaPartyinQuestioningtheMediaSreberneyMohammadiA&MohammadiA(Eds.)NewburyPark:

pp.238253SagePublications,Downing,J.,2001.RadicalMedia:thePoliticalExperienceofAlternativeCommunication,ThousandOaks:SageEdwards,E.,andHart,J.,2004.PhotographsasObjectsinPhotography,Objects,Histories:OntheMaterialityofImages,Edwards,E.andHart,J.(Eds.)London:RoutledgeEdwards,J.,etal,2007.Introduction:EpistemologiesinPracticeinAnthropologyandScience:EpistemologiesinPractice,EdwardsJ,HarveyPandWadeP,(Eds.)

p.119OxfordandNewYork:Berg,pFineman,S.,etal,2009.OrganizingandOrganizations,FourthEdition,London:Sage

Gell,A.,1998.Theory,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPressGosden,C.,andMarshall,Y.,1999.TheCultural

WorldArcheology

ArtandAgency:AnAnthropological

BiographyofObjectsin 31(2)pp.169178Kidd,D.2003.'Indymedia.org:ANewCommunicationsCommons'inCyberactivism:OnlineactivisminTheoryandPractice,McCaugheyMandAyersM,LondonandNewYork:Routledge,pp.4771Knox,H.,etal.,2006.'SocialNetworksandtheStudyofRelations:NetworksasMethod,MetaphorandForm',inEconomyandSociety,35(1)pp.113140Kowal,D.,2002.DigitizingandGlobalizingIndigenousVoices:theZapatistaMovementinElmerG(Ed.)CriticalPerspectivesontheInternet,LanhamRowmanandLeftfield,pp.105129Latour,B.,1988.ThePasteurizationofFrance,

achusettsandLondon:HarvardCambridge,MassUniversityPressLatour,B.,2005.ReassemblingtheSocial:anIntroductiontoActorNetworkTheory,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPressLatour,BandWoolgar,S,1986.LaboratoryLife:TheConstructionofScientificFactsPrinceton,NewJersey:PrincetonUniversityPressLebert,Joanne,2003.'WritingHumanRightsActivism:AmnestyInternationalandtheChallengesofInformationandCommunicationTechnologies'inMcCaugheyMandAyersM(Eds.)Cyberactivism:OnlineactivisminTheoryandPractice,London:NewYork

33Routledge,pp.2092Marcus,G.E.,1998.EthnographythroughThickand

tyPressThinPrinceton,NewJersey:PrincetonUniversiMelucci,A.,1996.ChallengingCodes:CollectiveActionintheInformationAge,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPressMcCaughey,MarthaandAyers,MichealD,2003.IntroductionCyberactivism:onlineactivismintheoryandpractice,McCaugheyMandAyersMD(Eds.)NewYork:Routledge,pp.125

FutureActive:MediaActivismandtheewYork:

Meikle,G.,2002.Internet,LondonandN RoutledgeMiller,D.,(Ed.)1998.Materiality,Durham,NC:DukeUniversityPressRibeiro,G.L.,1998.'CyberculturalPolitics:PoliticalActivismataDistanceinaTransnationalWorld',inAlvarezSE,EDagninoandA.Escobar(Eds.),CulturesofPolitics,PoliticsofCulture:RevisioningLatinAmericanSocialMovementsBoulder,ColoradoOxford:WestviewPress,pp.325353Slater,D.,1998.'RethinkingtheSpatialitiesofSocialMovements:Questionsof(B)orders,CultureandPoliticsinGlobalTimes',inAlvarezSE,EDagninoandA.Escobar(Eds.),CultureofPolitics,PoliticsofCultures:


RevisioningLatinAmericanSocialMovementsBoulderrd:WestviewPress,pp.380405ColoradoandOxfo

Tarrow,S.,1998.PowerinMovement:SocialMovementsandContentiousPolitics,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPressTurner,F.,2006.FromCounterculturetoCyberculture:StewartBrand,theWholeEarthNetwork,andtheRiseofDigitalUtopianismChicagoandLondon:UniversityofChicagoPressWoolgar,S.2002.FiveRulesofVirtuality.inWoolgar(Ed.),VirtualSociety?Technology,Cyberbole,Reality,xford:OxfordUniversityPress

SOThisworkislicensedundertheCreativeCommonsAttributionShareAlike3.0UnportedLicense.Toviewacopyofthislicense,visithttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/bysa/3.0/orsendalettertoCreativeCommons,171SecondStreet,Suite300,SanFrancisco,California,94105,USA.

Papers,Reports&Articles


15


CopyMe:TechnologicalChangendtheConsumptionaofMusicickWhite

N

For those who worry about the cultural, economic andpolitical power of the global media companies, thedreamedofrevolutionisathand.TheindustrymayrightnowbemakingajoyfulnoiseuntotheLord,butitiswe,

ho are about to enter the promised land.1)

not they, w(Moglen200

IntroductionTechnological changes have political implications.Changing the way we interact with thingsencourages a reconsideration of the rules andinstitutions that have governed previousinteractionswiththem.Thecurrentdebateaboutcopiesof recordedmusicusing the Internet is an excellent example of this,andbyexaminingitonemaybetterunderstandtherelations between people and recordedmusic, andbetween listeners and the traditional publishers ofmusic.Whileundoubtedlyagreatdealmaybeusefullysaidand examined in other technological changes inmusicrecordings,Iwillherefocusprimarilyonlesharing, as it is something I have been somewhatinvolved in myself, and hence I have signicantlymoreknowledgefromtheinside.I will begin by discussing traditional denitions ofcommodity, and then move on to a very briefoverview of historical trends in copying andmusicrecording. Iwill also touchupon theprintingpressinordertodiscussthecreationandrationalebehindcopyrightlaws,whichformamajorpartthepresentlesharingdebate. Iwill thengo intogreaterdepthintothecurrentpracticesofpeoplewhosharemusicon lesharing networks, and the response by therecordingindustry,beforeembarkingonananalysisof the meaning and signicance of some of thesenewpractisesanddialogues.It should be noted that Im speaking primarily ofEngland and the United States of America, and the

situationwill be somewhat dierent in other partsoftheworld.

TheMeaningofCommodity The word commodity has been used variously totalkaboutitemsofexchange.Inthecapitalistmarketa commodity is dened as having several key

features, fromwhich are derived appropriate rulesoftrade.Commoditiesarealsogenerallyassumedtoberivaland exclusive; that is in trading an item one losesaccesstoit.Themostimportantfeatureofacommodityisthatitbecomparabletoanothercommodity, inorderthattheirrelativevaluesmaybejudgedsothatonemayestablish an exchange value for the item. IndeedKopyto (1986) goes so far as to claim thatwhereverexchange technology is introducedwhichallows a greater range of things to be compared(such as for example money in newly colonisedregions),moreobjectsarecommodied.Twocommonly identiedmeansofdecidingontherelative value of a commodity are use value andexchangevalue.Use value is basedupon theutilityofthecommodity,whereasexchangevalueisbasedupontheamountof labourthatwent in tocreatingit.(Sterne2006:830)Dierentsystemsofexchangeweigh the relative merits of utility versusproductionlabourtovaluecommoditiesdierently.Assigning value toworks of art is of course a verydicult and personal task, revealing a great dealabout the valuer as well as what is being valued.Several commentators have arguedAdorno andHorkheimer (1972) perhaps most stronglythat toassignanartworkanagreeduponvalueinordertofacilitateitsexchangeunderminesboththepersonaland the transcendent nature of art, and inevitablydevaluesanddebasesit.

TheHistoryofRecordedMusicWhile such concepts of commodity appear to mapquite easily ontomost physical objects, using suchtermstotalkaboutrecordingsofonesortoranotherisgenerallylessstraightforward.Indeed the technology of the printing press, bydramatically reducing the production cost ofcreating copies of written works, was an earlyexample of the diculty of reconciling ideas ofcommodity with the new properties of exchangeenabled. To be more specic, by enabling nearperfectcopiesofaworktobemade,thequalitiesofrivalness and exclusivitywhichwere assumed of a

ARDACAnthropologyReviews:DissentandCulturalPolitics Altermodern>Journeys,GlobalCultures,Fragmentations

17

commoditywere altered.While the initial creationcosts of a work remained high, the cost ofsubsequent copies dropped dramatically,making iteconomically feasible to make and sell copies ofworksinafarlesscentralisedmanner.Inthefreemarketthecosttoproducesomethingisthemeansofdeterminingitsexchangevalue,whichbecomes more problematic when means ofmechanical reproduction become available. This isas the production cost diers very signicantlybetween the item produced and its copy.Whereastherstworkcostsperhapsoneyearssalaryforanauthor,plustheamountforthesetupofthebookinthe press, plus the materials needed, plus theworking of the press, a great many subsequentcopiesmaybemade for only the cost of additionalmaterials and working the press again. Theexchangevalueofallsubsequentcopiesisextremelylow, but does not take into account the authorssalary.Publishers chose to create a business model inwhichtheinitialproductioncostsofaworkcouldbecompensatedbysubsequentprintings,whichwouldbepricedalittleovertheexchangevaluewhichthefree market would assign. However such a modelwasunderminedifacompetitortookaworkwhichhad already been paidfor and produced their owncopies at a price closer to its exchange value. Inorderforpublisherstoensurethefeasibilityoftheirbusinessmodel concepts of copyright wereenshrined into law, removing the right of anybody

tbu the author (or more typically a publisherdesignatedbythem)toprintagivenwork.In so doing publishers legally repressed the neweconomicqualitiesprintingpressesbestowedonthewritten wordless exclusivityand insteadarticially mirrored the model of scarcity underwhichwhichthemajorityofthemarketoperated.Thisway of business worked reasonably well, andwhen it became feasible to produce of mechanicalreproductions of music, publishers adoptedessentiallythesamemodel,usingcopyright lawsto

eensureamonopolysuci nttopaybackthe initialcreationcosts.However this model was threatened somewhat bythe introduction of new technologies whichdramatically decreased the expense, size anddiculty of copying music to the point that manyprivateindividualscoulddosothemselves.Whereaspreviously making unauthorised copies had beenlimited to large operations, new technology nowenabledamuch largergroupofpeopletocopyandshare recordedmusic, independent of any externalorganisation. While such homecopied music wasgenerally of noticeably poorer quality than anocially sanctioned copy, widespread use made

od .

clearthat f rmanythevirtueofsharingmusicwasworthsomedegra ationinquality Publishers were unsurprisingly hostile towardshomecopyingoftheworkwhichtheyhadreleased,invoking the fact that such activitywas technicallybreaking copyright laws (though these laws hadbeen drafted with rival businesses in mind), andarguingthathomecopyingwascausingareductionin their sales of music which would result in asmaller number ofmusicians able to be supportedby them1.Over timehowever thepublishers foundthat there was no realistic way to stop homecopying, and resigned themselves to a position ofquietgrumbling.Peopleevidentlystillboughtcopiesofmusicproducedbypublishers,duetofactorssuchas increased sound quality and included coverartwork, and the belief that by doing so one wasensuring the continuance and success of themusician.With the new technologies of music compression,lesharingsoftwareandcheapinternetaccesscame

igafarmores nicantthreattothebusinessmodelofmusicpublishers.Computers on an electronically are primarilycopying machines of anything digitisablealmostany task performed on a computer requires thecopying of digital information across various partsof the computer. The measure of how quicklyinformationcanbecopiedbetweendierentpartsisasignicantmeasureofhowfastacomputerissaidto be. And so it is when networking computerstogether, and as such a primary focus of networkengineeringisensuringcopyingbetweencomputersis as fast and ecient as possible. Computernetworks at their core are no more thangeographicallyinsensitivecopyingsystems.Byallowinganybodywithaninternetconnectiontoshare music with anyone else with an internetconnection with no more eort than setting up alesharing program, a global network of availablemusic was created. Now anybody with internetaccess had free access to almost any piece ofrecorded music at nearor identical quality to theproducts of the publishers copies. Moreover theprocess of acquiring music copies using internetlesharingwasfasterandmoreconvenientthanthetraditionalvehiclesofferedbypublishers.Thestructureofthecomputernetworkswhichmake

decentralised andup the internet are by design1CommentatorssuchasAdornoandHorkheimer(1972)arguethatasmaller pool of musicians would make no real dierence to thequality of output from the publishers, as by their nature theyhomogeniseandwillonlysupportactswhichpropoundtheirworldiew.Seebelow.v


faulttolerant, and as such topdown control orrestrictionofinternetactivitiesisverydicult.Thisis further compounded by its transnational nature,which renders national legislation on acceptableuses largely ineective, as one may simply accessthe desired material on a computer in a countrywhichhasnosuchlegalrestrictions.Thuswegetthewellknown quote by John Gilmore: The netinterpretscensorshipasdamageandroutesaroundit.WhileearlylesharingnetworkssuchasNapsterwere centralised and hence could be easily shutdown by stopping a few computers,most are nowdesigned to take advantage of the decentralisednature of the internet, and thus remain activeregardlessof the statusof anyparticular computerinthenetwork.

Filesharing:IndividualsThe rst point to note regarding the practices ofindividualsistheenormouspopularityoflesharingasameansofacquiringrecordingsofmusic.Despiteappealsandthreatsfrommusicpublisherstheusageof lesharing networks is commonplace amongthosecomfortablewithtechnology.Includedamongthese are many artists signed to record labels,thoughmanyothersrejectlesharingcitingreliance

b n bona usinessmodelwhichwouldbeu dermined ytheirdoingso.The importance within lesharing networks ofmaking newly downloaded music available for atleast a few days is very frequently emphasised,though technically its very rarely enforced (notleastbecause itsverydicult technically todo asthe networks have been engineered from thegrounduptofacilitatethefreecopyingofdata).Theprocessofonlykeepingadownloadedleavailableuntil ones own download is complete and thenimmediately removing access to others is stronglyfrownedupon,andreferredtoasleeching.Some commentators have suggested that suchemphasescanleadonetofruitfullyconsidertreatinglesharing as a gift economy (Barbrook 1998), butas Zerva (2008: 16) points out, the typically verydiuse, vague and anonymous social connectionsbetweenexchangepartnersrenderssuchaframeofanalysisinappropriate.That copyright law is being broken is very widelyknownbyparticipants,butevidentlyisnotregardedas a valid reason to change their habits. Indeedmany who are more deeply involved in thelesharing community have vocally opposed (withvaryingdegreesofsophistication)currentcopyrightregimesasinappropriateandinapplicableintheeraoftheinternet.Probably the largest and best organised of suchoppositiongroups call themselves the free culture

movement. Inspired heavily by the free softwaremovementbeforethem,atthecentreoftheirbeliefsare that it is an ethical imperative to allow thesharing of digital work, and in many cases alsoexplicitly allow others to use ones work in theirowncreations.Thisisaccomplishedthroughaseriesofcopyrightlicences2,themostpopularofwhichareproducedbytheCreativeCommonsfoundation,andallowseveralchoicesas tohowonesworkmaybeused. Some of these licenses, referred to as sharealike licenses by creative commons, and morebroadlyascopyleftlicenses,activelyencouragethesharing of a work, by allowing one to modify orincorporatetheworkintotheirownworkhoweverthey choose, providing that the resultant work isalsoreleasedunderthesamesharablelicense3

Filesharing:ThePublishi IndustryThe response from the music publishers wasunsurprisingly less enthusiastic. After cutting thehead o Napster only to nd a hundred newnetworks spring up, the publishers started anaggressive campaign to sell the idea that musicrecordings ought to be treated as any physicalcommodity,andmoreoverthatcopyingarecordingwasnodierenttostealingfromashop.Indeedtherhetoric of stealing and theft was employed agreatdeal by the industry, in an attempt to ensurethat any discussion of lesharingwould be framed

ng

intermsimplyingthatrecordingswerenodierentfromphysicalitems.When it became clear that a signicant number ofpeople were not swayed by their advertisements,and lesharing networks were technically nighimpossible to dismantle, the Recording IndustryAssociationofAmerica(RIAA),soonfollowedbytheBritish Phonographic Industry (BPI), started thehighly controversial practise of suing individualswho made their copies available on lesharingnetworks for copyright infringement. Withestimatesofnumbersofpeoplesharingcopyrightedmaterial reaching themillions itwas clear that thelawsuits were not intended to directly target eachindividualoender,butratherscareenoughpeopleintostoppingtomakethelesharingnetworks lessattractiveanduseful.Indeeditappearsthatindustryhoped that by targeting prolic seeders (that ispeoplewho share a large amount of content) they

ituation to one invidual(accordingto

would change the economic swhichthebestpathfortheindi2 2This again is an innovation rst used in the free softwaremovement,bywhichoneallows redistributionof aworkprovidingcertainconditionsaremet.3Thiseectivelyturnscopyrightlawonitshead,andhashencebeenescribedasaformofintellectualjujitsu.(Williams2002)d


19

classical gametheory) would be to only downloadwhat they needed and share as little as possible,hence initiating the conditions for a tragedy of thecommons type scenario. Thus far however suchtacticshaveprimarilyservedtoprovokeresentmenttowards the industry, thus for many adding themotivationofghtingasystemseenasdestructive.Industry groups have also lobbied for and wonsignicantlymorestringentcopyright laws,suchastheDigitalMillenniumCopyrightAct(DMCA)intheUSA and the European Union Copyright Directive(EUCD) in the European Union. One of the majorfeatures of such laws is to make the breaking ofcopyprotection measures on digital copies illegal.Copyprotection is as mentioned above a verydicultthingtoinstituteoncomputers,whosebasicdesign is to copy data. As such the recordingindustry found that any copy protection schemethey added to their copieswasquickly dismantled,sotheyturnedinsteadtothecourtsinanattempttodissuade people from breaking the protectionmeasures. These too appear to have done little tostop the breaking of copy protection, but havefurther incensed and solidied many against therecordingindustryandtheirlobbyists.Intheirpublicstatementsrecordingindustrybodieshaverepeatedlyappealedtotheneedtobuycopiesonly from publishers, as otherwise musicians cannot be paid. Leaving aside debates about thepercentageofprotswhichmajorrecordpublisherspass on to theirmusicians, in repeatedly justifyingtheirpositionasenablingmusicianstobepaidtheystrongly implied that no other businessmodelwaspossible. Therefore, the argument went, if onewantedasocietywithfulltimemusicianstherewasno choice but to treat recorded music as acommodityandrejectlesharing.Suchlackofimaginationfromtherecordpublishersisnotverysurprising,asconservatismtowardsnewtechnologies is entirely natural, and of course theyhave a great vested interest in the system as itexistedbefore(Mokyr2002:220).Howevera largevariety of alternative business models have beensuggestedbyotherswhichattempttoworkwiththenew features of recorded music on the computernetwork, rather than against them, and as suchbecome more protable the more music is shared(atzerocost).Suggestionsincludevariousdonation/ microdonation schemes, embedded advertising,and using recordings as a lossleader for liveperformancesandmerchandise.

AnalysisAdorno and Horkheimer (1972) argued that thecultureindustryrepresentedamajorhomogenisingandpacifyingforcetoculture,thusforthersttime

in history neutralising the power of art to protestagainst the petried relations under which peoplelived (Adorno 1991: 2) and thus ensuring thecontinuance of the existing system of inequality.Moreover, they claimed, the power of the industrywasinescapable,asittendedtosubsumeandpacifyelementsofprotestanddenetheframeofculturaldiscussion,aswellasbymoredirectmeanssuchaswielding massive topdown power over theprocessesofproductionanddistribution.The argument follows that the primary role of theculture industry is to keep all members of societyaccepting of the political and economic systems ofinequalityor at least too apathetic to do anythingaboutthem.Itsrolethenwaslargelytofacilitatethesmoothrunningofothermajorareasofrepression,

eaderswith which its l are intimately connected(Adorno&Horkheimer1972:4).However if this were the case one would haveexpected the culture industry to respond verypositively to the phenomenon of lesharing, as itallowed for the farwider and easier disseminationof the normative ideologies embeddedwithin theirrecordings.Afterall,whilesuchtechnologymakesiteasyforanycopyofmusictobewidelydistributedregardless of source, in practise a signicantmajority of copies available were originallyproduced by the culture industry. (Sterne 2006:831)One must therefore conclude that while thewellbeing of thewider systems of powermaywellbe an agenda of the culture industry, of higherpriorityisitsownprotability.A point that should be emphasised is the politicalpower which the music industry still wields. Inbeing the source for the majority of music in aculture, with its inevitable ideological payload, theinuencetheindustryhasonthemindsoflistenersisstillenormouslysignicant,regardlessofwhethertheycontinuetoenjoyamonopolyoverdistribution.Kopyto(1986)denescommodityinoppositiontothe singular. Copies of music on a lesharingnetwork could then be considered perfectcommodities. However using the calculation ofexchange value based upon the level of sacricenecessary to acquire a copy one sees the exchangevaluedrop to zero, (Zerva2008:14) inwhich casecopiescouldbeconsideredtofallwelloutsideofthe

realm of commodities, which at their core aretradeable.What such denitional confusion ags up is theinappropriatenessoftryingtotmusiccopyingintocategories of commodity, which were created foritems with quite dierent economic properties. Inparticular, themeaningof exchangeof voluntarilylosingaccesstoonethinginordertogainaccessto


anotherischanged,asintheworldofthecomputernetwork one need not lose access to anything inordertogainaccesstoanother.So if exchange value drops to zero for recordedmusic in the age of lesharing, how may onedeterminerelativevalue?Aneasyansweristoturninstead to use value, that is the value derived byeach individual of actually listening to the musicrecording.Obviouslythenvalueswilldierforeach

elistener, which is no probl m as valuejudgementsarenolongernecessaryforsuccessfulexchange.One could then argue, as Sterne suggests (2006:831),thatmusicbeforerecordingtechnologieswereavailable was valued according to the eect on anindividualuponlistening,thatistosayonusevalue.As recordedmusic became easily available, tiedupin physical items tied to the wider market, musicwasvaluedmoreintermsofexchange.Andnowaslesharing once more removes music from therealmofthemarketbyvirtueofchangingtherulesof its exchange, focus again is on use value. Asomewhat analogous process is claimed byproponents of free software, where the process ofdecommoditisation is seen as more about clearingawaya temporary confusion, than it is about somestrange and amazing departure thats suddenlyoccurred.(Moglen2007)Oneshouldtakecarenottooverstatetheephemeralnature of digital copies of recorded music. Sternepoints to the continuance of collecting andstockpilingmoremusic thanone isable to listentoasevidenceofasenseofownershipandpossessionofonesmusicles,inthesamewasthatonedoesinthecaseofphysicalobjects.(2006:831832)Determiningtheextenttowhichthenewtechnologyassociatedwith lesharing is a factor behind newpolitical ideas isof course impossible,butonemayusefully discuss the political tendencies embeddedinthetechnologies.Earlierdistributiontechnologieshadquitedierentqualities. For example the limited bandwidthavailable to overtheair transmissions (e.g. radioand television) made the establishment of agoverning body to decide who could broadcast onwhich frequency (if at all) quite necessary andnatural.Decisions abouthow tomake such choicesofteninvolvedmoney,andassuchlargeentrenchedinterests had another advantage over smallerorganisationsindoingbusinessandspreadingtheirparticular viewpoints over the airwaves. Thedecentralisationandallowance formodulargrowthoeredbytheinternethassignicantlyreducedtheneed for such a governing body. Of course manyargue that stronger governance of the internet isimportant, the dierence being that it is not

ry ionecessa to the successful funct ning of thenetworkasawhole.4Central to general computing, compressiontechnologyandcomputernetworkinghaslongbeenthe striving for faster copying of anything digital,utterly regardless of concepts such as propertyrights over certain digital data. As Sterne puts itThe primary, illegal uses of the mp3 are notaberrantusesoranerrorinthetechnology;theyareits highest moral calling . . . These are theinstructionsencodedintotheveryformofthemp3.(2006:839)Howeveroneneeds tobe carefulwithsuchstatements,astheytendtocarryanairoftech

inological determinism which denies ndividualsagencyandignoresinstancesofdierence.When disembodied from their physical forms andinstead made to take digital forms, ideas ofcopyright and commodity have often beenquestioned.Therst industry to be exposed to thepower of computer networks as a distribution andindeed creation channel was computerprogramming, which was the sphere in which theradical take of copyright copyleft (see above)wasenvisioned.Theplaceofsoftwarewasreconsideredand concluded not to lie in the commodity realm,but somewhere quite dierent: The technologicalinformation about the terms onwhichwe and thedigital brains exist: thats not a product. Thats aculture.(Moglen2007)Inmanyquartersthesameisnowbeingsaidaboutmusic, and the place of the record publishingindustry is being recast by those engaged in lesharing, from the purveyors of culture to an entitywhich seeks to prot by restricting access to asharedculture.4Recent discussion of laws regarding network neutrality howeverillustrate the limits of such a view, as most people connect to theinternetviaaninternetserviceprovider,whocouldarticiallyaltertheoperationofpartsofthenetworktotheircustomers.

ReferencesAdorno,T.,1991.CultureIndustryReconsideredinTheCultureIndustry:selectedessaysonmassculture(Adorno,T),London:RoutledgeAdorno,T.,&Horkheimer,M.,1972.TheCultureIndustry:enlightenmentasmassdeceptionDialecticofEnlightenment(ed.Adorno,T&Horkheimer,M),NewYork:ContinuumBenjamin,W.,1936.TheWorkofArtintheAgeofMechanicalReproductionIlluminations(Benjamin,W)London:PimlicoBarbrook,R.,1998.TheHiTechGiftEconomy,FirstMonday3:12,Availableathttp://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/631/552


21

Kopyto,I.,1986.TheCulturalBiographyofThings:CommoditizationasProcessTheSocialLifeofThings(ed.Appadurai,A),Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPressMoglen,E.,2001.LiberationMusicology,TheNation:March12,Availableat

ation.com/doc/20010312/moglenhttp://www.thenMoglen,E.,2007.HowIdiscoveredFreeSoftwareandmetRMS,Linux.cominterview,Availableat

x.com/feature/114303http://www.linuMokyr,J.,2002.TheGiftsofAthena:HistoricalOriginsoftheKnowledgeEconomy,Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPressSterne,J.,2006.Themp3asculturalartifact,New

lifornia:SageMedia&Society,CaWilliams,S.,2002.FreeasinFreedom:RichardStallmansCrusadeforFreeSoftware,California:OReillyMediaZerva,K.,2008FileSharingversusGiftGiving:aTheoreticalApproach,Proceedingsof3rdInternationalConferenceonInternetandWebpplicationsandServicesA

ThisworkislicensedundertheCreativeCommonsAttributionShareAlike3.0UnportedLicense.Toviewacopyofthislicense,visithttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/bysa/3.0/orsendalettertoCreativeCommons,171SecondStreet,Suite300,SanFrancisco,California,94105,USA.


CollaborativeLearningintheDigitalLearningEnvironmentPeople,TechnologyandedagogicalPracticesP

[email protected]:Currculo

oPauloPUCSPPontifciaUniversidadeCatlicadeSSoPaulo,Brasil

MariaElizabethBianconcinideAlmeidabbalmeida@uol.com.brProgramadeEducao:CurrculoPontifciaUniversidadeCatlicadeSoPauloPUCSPSoPaulo,Brasil

Ab tractThis study outlines a threedimensional approach tocollaborative learning which embraces professionalsundergoingtraining,digital technologyandpedagogicalpractices in the Digital Learning Environment withineducational contexts for adult education, (in eitherformalorinformaleducation).ItshowstheresultsofanexploratorystudycarriedoutinaMastersandDoctoralcourse in education and the curriculum, with thesupportoftheopenvirtuallearningenvironment.Italsorecommendsundertakingafurtherstudy,toanalyzethestandardof thecontributions toonlinediscussions,bymeansoftheCriticalInquirymodeldevisedbyGarrison(2000). It argues that stress should be laid on thetheoretical constructivist approach (adopted by CSCLComputerSupported Collaborative Learning) tounderpin the pedagogical practices involved in thepreparation, planning and implementation ofeducational activities, whether in the academic orprofessional environment, or other kinds ofprofessionalizedactivitiesofalessformalnature.

s

IntroductionAnundertakingofanationalandinternationalscopeinvolvesaconcernwitheducationateverylevelandstresses factors regarding quality standards, anddigital and social inclusion. In 2000, on aninternational level, UNESCO (United Nations

Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization)expressed a commitment to Education for all by2015,duringtheWorldConferenceonEducationinDakar. The goals which were to be fulfilled bycountries (among them Brazil) included improvingeveryaspectofqualityineducation(UNESCO,2007)withaviewtoallowingthedevelopmentofthekindof skills required for citizens in the 21st Century(Cradleretal.,2002).Inthenationalsphere,awiderangeof initiativeshavebeen put into effect since2000, in particular, the launching of a project in2008which sought to connect all the public urbanschools in Brazil to Internet broadband by 2010(Ministry of Communications, 2008). AnotherimportantFederalGovernmenteducational schemeis UCA (One Computer for each Student anongoingprocess(MECSEED,2008).Ifthecurrentplansforeducationareputintoeffect,the21st Centurywillbecomethecenturyinwhichwehave radically changed the standardsandvalueofeducation(Laurillard,2008,p.319).Intheviewofthisauthor,sofarwehavefailedtofindouthowto achieve the most effective kind of educationeitherfortheexcludedorthosedissatisfiedwiththepresent system. In seeking a response to theeducational needs of the country and meeting thetargets set by UNESCO and its plans forimplementingtheminBrazil,onemustbeawareofthe importanceofpreparingeducationalists for thenew circumstances in which they find themselves.Researchers from the Center for Curriculum andTraining in thePostGraduateEducationalProgramat the Pontifical Catholic University of So Paulo,Brazil have carried out a number of extensionactivities, principally with a view to trainingteachers in the use of digital information andcommunicationtechnology.Theseactivitiescanalsobe applied to digital environments concernedwithresearch into methodology and new pedagogicalapproaches (Valente & Almeida, 2007). There areseveralproblems involved in introducingtheplans,one of which is ensuring the development ofpractices that are based on a particular kind oftechnologywhichisdefinedasthestartingpointforpedagogical aims (Almeida, 2009a, p. 276).However, attemptshavebeenmadewith regard totraining educational personnel, and making use ofvirtual learningenvironments,andthesehavebeenundertaken for the public education network(Almeida&Prado,2008).Inthebusinessenvironment,thedigitalInformationand Communication Technology supports thesuccess of modern companies and suppliesgovernmentswithanefficientinfrastructure.Atthesame

Documents

ARDAC Anthropology Reviews: Dissent and Cultural Politics