This is a reminder that abstracts for the special issue of Law & Social Inquiry on the theme of “Visual Data as Accountability, Resistance, and Surveillance” are due August 10.
The full CFP follows: *(with apologies for cross-posting)* > > > *Call for Papers (abstracts due August 10, 2016)* > > *Visual Data as Accountability, Resistance, and Surveillance* > For a special issue of *Law & Social Inquiry* (Journal links: Wiley > <http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1747-4469> *|* American > Bar Foundation > <http://www.americanbarfoundation.org/publications/lawsocialinquiry.html>) > > > Edited by: Sarah Brayne (UT-Austin), Karen E. C. Levy (Cornell), and Bryce > Clayton Newell (Tilburg) > > *Overview* > > The capture, analysis, and dissemination of visual data—including video > (with or without audio), photographs, and other visual recordings—has > become ubiquitous. Facilitated by digitization, globalization, and the > proliferation of mobile media, visual data is transforming the > documentation of activities in a wide range of contexts, including > policing, legal adjudication, war, human rights struggles, and civic > action. Visual data is being collected by state actors and individual > citizens, each often documenting the actions of the other. The use of this > data as evidence (both inside and outside formal legal proceedings) raises > significant issues related to privacy and ethics, authentication and > credibility, interpretation, inequality, power, and legibility. Law is > implicated at both the point of recording (or documentation) and during > downstream activities, such as when recordings are shared or posted online, > publicly disclosed under freedom of information laws, or introduced into > evidence during legal proceedings. > > Different technologies afford different viewpoints. Visual data > constitutes a unique form of information that presents emergent legal and > policy questions because of its technical form and social effects. The > mobilization of visual data can shape and reshape public opinion, > representation, suppression, visibility, inequality, and admissibility of > evidence; it can serve to incriminate or exonerate. Visual evidence can > legitimize certain accounts of events while calling others into question. > And, thanks to the proliferation of mobile devices, more people can capture > video and photographs than ever before, at a moment’s notice, simply by > pulling out their phones—and can distribute them instantaneously, creating > visual records of all types of behaviors and conflicts, from confrontations > between citizens and police to political gaffes, from sex tapes to > dashboard camera footage of traffic-related events. The recent adoption of > police body cameras and the use of video by bystanders as a tool for > inverse surveillance demonstrate our increasing reliance on video as a > check on power, as well as a source of ostensible authority when accounts > about “what really happened” are in conflict. At the same time, the crucial > role of interpretation suggests video is not as much of an “objective > observer” or independent witness as it is sometimes claimed to be, and > visual evidence may have unforeseen implications for weighing evidence in > civil or criminal cases—or in the court of public opinion. > > Permissive freedom of information laws in some jurisdictions have also led > to recordings made by the police ending up on websites like > YouTube—alongside myriad channels of police misconduct videos filmed by > citizens. All of this footage increases the secondary visibility of those > captured in recordings, and the video itself can also be analyzed as > (potentially) a new form of big data. Audio and video streams contain > biometric information that can be detected, analyzed, and compared against > existing databases—while also adding new data to these databases in the > process. > > The creation, dissemination, mediation, interpretation, and quantification > of visual data are all fundamentally social processes. From citizen video > of police (mis)conduct to the visual documentation of human rights abuses, > the process of transforming material experience into digital evidence can > facilitate accountability or resistance. These citizen-led forms of > surveillance also function as forms of resistance to more panoptic forms of > state-sponsored video collection and surveillance (e.g. camera-enabled > drones, CCTV cameras). On the other hand, police-worn body cameras also act > as an accountability mechanism, even though they face away from officers > and collect evidence about—and document the conduct of—civilians. These > forms of mobile, user-controlled cameras significantly alter earlier > reliance on more static and passive video collection. > > As technological developments far outpace empirical research on—and legal > regulation of—visual data, this special paper symposium in Law & Social > Inquiry will provide an opportunity to highlight new empirical work with > connections to law and policy, serve as a venue to build theory about a > rapidly changing subject, and showcase research relevant to a variety of > stakeholders—including lawyers, judges, law enforcement, legislators and > policymakers, activists and civil and human rights organizations, > technologists, and academics in a variety of fields. > > We welcome contributions that present original empirical research; offer > conceptual, critical, or theoretical analyses; or address the unique legal, > ethical, and policy questions implicated by visual documentation. We > welcome scholarly contributions that come from—or that cross—academic > disciplines such as sociology, law, information science, anthropology, > science and technology studies, criminology, geography, communications and > media studies, and computer science. > > > *We encourage submissions addressing (but not limited to) such subjects > as:* > > - Body-worn cameras, dashcams, policing practices > - Citizen video/video as human rights advocacy > - Covert and overt recording > - Video as surveillance and sousveillance > - Resistance to and avoidance of audio or visual surveillance > - Design and regulation of audio or visual surveillance systems > - Unanticipated consequences of audio or visual records > - Use and interpretation of audio or video as evidence in legal > proceedings > - Data storage, access, and retention policies > - Algorithmic practices of metadata extraction from video content > - Image processing > - Technical means of privacy preservation and authentication > - Audio and video analytics and forensics > - Audio and video redaction and privacy concerns > - Live streaming > - Video/audio and public opinion > - Voyeurism, victimhood, and the ethics of viewing > - Affective aspects of video > - Embedding human values into the design of video-related technologies > or systems (e.g. value sensitive design or privacy by design) > - Implications for inequality > - Facial recognition or other forms of biometrics enabled by audio or > visual documentation and recording > > *Deadlines and anticipated timeline:* > > - > *Initial abstract submission deadline (~ 500 words): August 10, 2016 * > - Authors notified of (tentative) acceptance: August 30, 2016 > - Full papers due (based on accepted abstracts): December 1, 2016 > - Papers sent out for peer-review: mid-December, 2016 > - Reviews returned to authors (with editorial decisions): expected, > Feb.-Mar. 2017 > - Publication in 2017 > > > *Specifics about submissions:* > Initial abstracts should contain approximately 500 words. Subsequent full > paper submissions should contain fewer than 10,000 words (including > footnotes and citations), and should contain a 200-word abstract and > biographical information about the authors on a cover page. Invited full > paper submissions will undergo formal double-blind peer review, which is > expected to take between 1 and 3 months (submissions that are not selected > for peer-review will be released back to the authors quickly). All > submissions should be submitted in editable Word (*.doc/x) or *.rtf > formats, and should adhere to the formatting and citation requirements of > Law & Social Inquiry (available at http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/pdf/ > lsi_author_guidelines.pdf). > > All submissions should be sent to the editors via email to > lsivisualdataspecialis...@gmail.com. Please do not submit to this special > call via the regular Law & Social Inquiry journal submission portal. > > Additional questions may be sent to the editors at the same address. > > > *--* > *Bryce Clayton Newell, Ph.D., J.D.* > Post-Doctoral Researcher > Tilburg Institute for Law, Technology, and Society (TILT) > Tilburg University, Faculty of Law > b.c.new...@uvt.nl | SSRN <http://ssrn.com/author=1576462> | @newmedialaw > <http://twitter.com/newmedialaw> > www.bcnewell.com | www.humanitarianfilm.org >
-- Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
