Shareveillance: Subjectivity between open and closed data

This article attempts to question modes of sharing and watching to rethink political subjectivity beyond that which is enabled and enforced by the current data regime. It identifies and examines a ‘shareveillant’ subjectivity: a form configured by the sharing and watching that subjects have to withs...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Clare Birchall
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SAGE Publishing 2016-11-01
Series:Big Data & Society
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716663965
id doaj-7d7f9a75d2724eaeb9eca59068d09ab5
record_format Article
spelling doaj-7d7f9a75d2724eaeb9eca59068d09ab52020-11-25T02:53:52ZengSAGE PublishingBig Data & Society2053-95172016-11-01310.1177/205395171666396510.1177_2053951716663965Shareveillance: Subjectivity between open and closed dataClare BirchallThis article attempts to question modes of sharing and watching to rethink political subjectivity beyond that which is enabled and enforced by the current data regime. It identifies and examines a ‘shareveillant’ subjectivity: a form configured by the sharing and watching that subjects have to withstand and enact in the contemporary data assemblage. Looking at government open and closed data as case studies, this article demonstrates how ‘shareveillance’ produces an anti-political role for the public. In describing shareveillance as, after Jacques Rancière, a distribution of the (digital) sensible, this article posits a politico-ethical injunction to cut into the share and flow of data in order to arrange a more enabling assemblage of data and its affects. In order to interrupt shareveillance, this article borrows a concept from Édouard Glissant and his concern with raced otherness to imagine what a ‘right to opacity’ might mean in the digital context. To assert this right is not to endorse the individual subject in her sovereignty and solitude, but rather to imagine a collective political subjectivity and relationality according to the important question of what it means to ‘share well’ beyond the veillant expectations of the state.https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716663965
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Clare Birchall
spellingShingle Clare Birchall
Shareveillance: Subjectivity between open and closed data
Big Data & Society
author_facet Clare Birchall
author_sort Clare Birchall
title Shareveillance: Subjectivity between open and closed data
title_short Shareveillance: Subjectivity between open and closed data
title_full Shareveillance: Subjectivity between open and closed data
title_fullStr Shareveillance: Subjectivity between open and closed data
title_full_unstemmed Shareveillance: Subjectivity between open and closed data
title_sort shareveillance: subjectivity between open and closed data
publisher SAGE Publishing
series Big Data & Society
issn 2053-9517
publishDate 2016-11-01
description This article attempts to question modes of sharing and watching to rethink political subjectivity beyond that which is enabled and enforced by the current data regime. It identifies and examines a ‘shareveillant’ subjectivity: a form configured by the sharing and watching that subjects have to withstand and enact in the contemporary data assemblage. Looking at government open and closed data as case studies, this article demonstrates how ‘shareveillance’ produces an anti-political role for the public. In describing shareveillance as, after Jacques Rancière, a distribution of the (digital) sensible, this article posits a politico-ethical injunction to cut into the share and flow of data in order to arrange a more enabling assemblage of data and its affects. In order to interrupt shareveillance, this article borrows a concept from Édouard Glissant and his concern with raced otherness to imagine what a ‘right to opacity’ might mean in the digital context. To assert this right is not to endorse the individual subject in her sovereignty and solitude, but rather to imagine a collective political subjectivity and relationality according to the important question of what it means to ‘share well’ beyond the veillant expectations of the state.
url https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716663965
work_keys_str_mv AT clarebirchall shareveillancesubjectivitybetweenopenandcloseddata
_version_ 1724723859335151616