More Like this

1. Examining Collaborative Support for Privacy and Security in the Broader Context of Tech Caregiving

   https://doi.org/10.1145/3479540  

   Kropczynski, Jess; Ghaiumy Anaraky, Reza; Akter, Mamtaj; Godfrey, Amy J.; Lipford, Heather; Wisniewski, Pamela J. (October 2021, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction)

   Managing digital privacy and security is often a collaborative process, where groups of individuals work together to share information and give one another advice. Yet, this collaborative process is not always reciprocal or equally shared. In many cases, individuals with more expertise help others without receiving help in return. Therefore, we studied the phenomenon of "Tech Caregiving" by surveying 20 groups (112 individuals) comprised of friends, family members, and/or co-workers who identified at least one member of their group as a someone who provides informal technical support to the people they know. We found that tech caregivers reported significantly higher levels of power use and self-efficacy for digital privacy and security, compared to tech caregivees. However, caregivers and caregivees did not differ based on their self-reportedcommunity collective-efficacy for collaboratively managing privacy and security together as a group. This finding demonstrates the importance of tech caregiving and community belonging in building community collective efficacy for digital privacy and security. We also found that caregivers and caregivees most often communicated via text message or phone when coordinating support, which was most frequently needed when troubleshooting or setting up new devices. Meanwhile, discussions specific to privacy and security represented only a small fraction of the issues for which participants gave or received tech care. Thus, we conclude that educating tech caregivers on how to provide privacy and security-focused support, as well as designing technologies that facilitate such support, has the potential to create positive networks effects towards the collective management of digital privacy and security. 

   more » « less
2. Pitching agri-food tech: performativity and non-disruptive disruption in Silicon Valley

   https://doi.org/10.1080/17530350.2022.2085142  

   Fairbairn, Madeleine; Kish, Zenia; Guthman, Julie (June 2022, Journal of Cultural Economy)

   Food and agriculture have recently become focal points of tech sector innovation and financing. Rapidly multiplying agri-food tech startups are promising to import the tech sector’s trademark disruptive innovation into an industry they deem sclerotic, inefficient, and unsustainable. This paper interrogates the cultural and market frictions attending Silicon Valley’s foray into food and agriculture through the lens of what is perhaps the tech sector’s most prominent narrative genre: the public investment pitch. Building on scholarship that views pitching as a performative practice, we show how pitches serve to mediate the tech sector’s entrée into this established industry. Our analysis of four key moments of the agri-food tech pitch reveal how carefully curated framings of agri-food problems and solutions work to reconcile the world-changing ambition and profit-making potential demanded by Silicon Valley investors with the deeply entrenched political economic realities of food and agriculture. Our analysis also suggests a tendency towards ‘non-disruptive disruption’ (Goldstein, J., 2018. Planetary improvement: Cleantech entrepreneurship and the contradictions of green capitalism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press). Despite nods to disrupting the established industry, the tech sector primarily offers incremental improvements on existing technologies, often developed or marketed in partnership with industry incumbents, underscoring the distinction between technological disruption on the one hand and genuine systemic transformation on the other. 

   more » « less
3. Weaving Privacy and Power: On the Privacy Practices of Labor Organizers in the U.S. Technology Industry

   SAYASH KAPOOR, MATTHEW SUN (May 2022, Computer supported cooperative work CSCW)

   We investigate the privacy practices of labor organizers in the computing technology industry and explore the changes in these practices as a response to remote work. Our study is situated at the intersection of two pivotal shifts in workplace dynamics: (a) the increase in online workplace communications due to remote work, and (b) the resurgence of the labor movement and an increase in collective action in workplaces— especially in the tech industry, where this phenomenon has been dubbed the tech worker movement. The shift of work-related communications to online digital platforms in response to an increase in remote work is creating new opportunities for and risks to the privacy of workers. These risks are especially significant for organizers of collective action, with several well-publicized instances of retaliation against labor organizers by companies. Through a series of qualitative interviews with 29 tech workers involved in collective action, we investigate how labor organizers assess and mitigate risks to privacy while engaging in these actions. Among the most common risks that organizers experienced are retaliation from their employer, lateral worker conflict, emotional burnout, and the possibility of information about the collective effort leaking to management. Depending on the nature and source of the risk, organizers use a blend of digital security practices and community-based mechanisms. We find that digital security practices are more relevant when the threat comes from management, while community management and moderation are central to protecting organizers from lateral worker conflict. Since labor organizing is a collective rather than individual project, individual privacy and collective privacy are intertwined, sometimes in conflict and often mutually constitutive. Notions of privacy that solely center individuals are often incompatible with the needs of organizers, who noted that safety in numbers could only be achieved when workers presented a united front to management. Based on our interviews, we identify key topics for future research, such as the growing prevalence of surveillance software and the needs of international and gig worker organizers. We conclude with design recommendations that can help create safer, more secure and more private tools to better address the risks that organizers face. 

   more » « less
4. Weaving Privacy and Power: On the Privacy Practices of Labor Organizers in the U.S. Technology Industry

   https://doi.org/10.1145/3555574  

   Kapoor, Sayash; Sun, Matthew; Wang, Mona; Jazwinska, Klaudia; Watkins, Elizabeth Anne (November 2022, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction)

   We investigate the privacy practices of labor organizers in the computing technology industry and explore the changes in these practices as a response to remote work. Our study is situated at the intersection of two pivotal shifts in workplace dynamics: (a) the increase in online workplace communications due to remote work, and (b) the resurgence of the labor movement and an increase in collective action in workplaces-especially in the tech industry, where this phenomenon has been dubbed the tech worker movement. The shift of work-related communications to online digital platforms in response to an increase in remote work is creating new opportunities for and risks to the privacy of workers. These risks are especially significant for organizers of collective action, with several well-publicized instances of retaliation against labor organizers by companies. Through a series of qualitative interviews with 29 tech workers involved in collective action, we investigate how labor organizers assess and mitigate risks to privacy while engaging in these actions. Among the most common risks that organizers experienced are retaliation from their employer, lateral worker conflict, emotional burnout, and the possibility of information about the collective effort leaking to management. Depending on the nature and source of the risk, organizers use a blend of digital security practices and community-based mechanisms. We find that digital security practices are more relevant when the threat comes from management, while community management and moderation are central to protecting organizers from lateral worker conflict. Since labor organizing is a collective rather than individual project, individual privacy and collective privacy are intertwined, sometimes in conflict and often mutually constitutive. Notions of privacy that solely center individuals are often incompatible with the needs of organizers, who noted that safety in numbers could only be achieved when workers presented a united front to management. Based on our interviews, we identify key topics for future research, such as the growing prevalence of surveillance software and the needs of international and gig worker organizers.We conclude with design recommendations that can help create safer, more secure and more private tools to better address the risks that organizers face. 

   more » « less
5. Ag-tech, agroecology, and the politics of alternative farming futures: The challenges of bringing together diverse agricultural epistemologies

   https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-023-10454-2  

   Sullivan, Summer (April 2023, Agriculture and Human Values)

   Abstract Agricultural-technology (ag-tech) and agroecology both promise a better farming future. Ag-tech seeks to improve the food system through the development of high-tech tools such as sensors, digital platforms, and robotic harvesters, with many ag-tech start-ups promising to deliver increased agricultural productivity while also enhancing food system sustainability. Agroecology incorporates diverse cropping systems, low external resource inputs, indigenous and farmer knowledge, and is increasingly associated with political calls for a more just food system. Recently, demand has grown for the potentially groundbreaking benefits of their convergence, with the University of California, Santa Cruz (UCSC) attempting just such a union. Building on its combined expertise in engineering and agroecology, as well as a longstanding reputation as a socially progressive institution, university administrators believe that UCSC could produce a unique, socially just form of ag-tech designed for small, low-resource farmers—a rare contribution given ag-tech’s tendency to cater primarily to large-scale agribusiness. This paper examines the complexities of uniting agroecology and ag-tech through interviews with agroecologists, engineers, and social scientists involved in UCSC’s ag-tech initiative. Within the setting of a historically radical yet neoliberalizing university, I find that significant epistemic and structural barriers exist for agroecology and ag-tech to come together on an even playing field. This case study contributes to broader discussions of the future of food and farming by focusing on the contours and challenges of a widely called-for agricultural collaboration, highlighting its difficulty but also areas of possibility in a particularly rich, contested context. 

   more » « less