Re: [-empyre-] contesting the netopticon
Simon all, Thank you for inviting me to be part of this discussion. I enjoyed it immensely... Unfortunately, I was unable to jump back into the discussion last week due to being too busy. I will reread all contributions rethink my own assumptions :-) wishing you all well. marc www.furtherfield.org So, we come to the end of the month of January and our discussion on the theme of the Netopticon. To remind us where we began, abstracted from the original post setting out the theme: The Panoptic structures innate in social space are often cited in relation to the internet and its governance. The term Netopticon suggests a mesh-work structure of how a socially networked Panoptic apparatus can operate. Malkit Shoshan describes how the social technologies that characterise Web 2.0 facilitate the emergence of the internet as a Panoptic space, where individuals are complicit in their own surveillance. The internet is pervasive in how people construct their social lives. If we accept that people are emergent, through social activities that are a process of becoming, issues around net neutrality, Web 2.0 and surveillance have implications reaching into the psycho-social. Within a Foucauldian appreciation of the social, where the Panopticon (nee: super-ego) is manifest at the heart of our social relations, the Netopticon engages our entwined individual and social ontologies. How will the codification of individual and collective relations develop? Over the past month invited guests and members of empyre have addressed this theme from a range of perspectives. I am not going to summarise the various viewpoints here as I fear my attempt would be inadequate. The empyre archive is accessible and makes an excellent read, organised by date, thread and author. https://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/ I would like to thank everybody who contributed to the discussion; our guest discussants Joseph Delappe, Marc Garrett, Davin Heckman, Patrick Lichty, Heidi May, Christina Spiesel, Jon Thompson and Alison Craighead, all of whom gave generously of their time to post provocative and inspiring texts. I would like to thank Renate Ferro and Tim Murray for inviting me to moderate the discussion and for continuing to host and maintain empyre. We can present the netoptic as automatic social formation but sites for debate like empyre are precious and survive because of the efforts of individuals. I would also like to thank all those members of empyre who contributed to the discussion and also all those members who participated silently. Whilst lurking should be seen as a public good it is perhaps this silent reading, the nitrogen (as distinct to the oxygen) of listservs, which presents the most appropriate image for the netopticon. By having our conversations in public we can render our inter-subjectivities as a performative instance of the netopticon in play. Best Simon Simon Biggs si...@littlepig.org.uk http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ s.bi...@eca.ac.uk http://www.elmcip.net/ http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ Edinburgh College of Art (eca) is a charity registered in Scotland, number SC009201 ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
Re: [-empyre-] contesting the netopticon
Yes, thank you for having me as a part of this discussion. It is always a good group. If anyone wants to pick anything up off list, I am always happy to talk. Davin On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 8:29 AM, marc garrett marc.garr...@furtherfield.org wrote: Simon all, Thank you for inviting me to be part of this discussion. I enjoyed it immensely... Unfortunately, I was unable to jump back into the discussion last week due to being too busy. I will reread all contributions rethink my own assumptions :-) wishing you all well. marc www.furtherfield.org So, we come to the end of the month of January and our discussion on the theme of the Netopticon. To remind us where we began, abstracted from the original post setting out the theme: The Panoptic structures innate in social space are often cited in relation to the internet and its governance. The term Netopticon suggests a mesh-work structure of how a socially networked Panoptic apparatus can operate. Malkit Shoshan describes how the social technologies that characterise Web 2.0 facilitate the emergence of the internet as a Panoptic space, where individuals are complicit in their own surveillance. The internet is pervasive in how people construct their social lives. If we accept that people are emergent, through social activities that are a process of becoming, issues around net neutrality, Web 2.0 and surveillance have implications reaching into the psycho-social. Within a Foucauldian appreciation of the social, where the Panopticon (nee: super-ego) is manifest at the heart of our social relations, the Netopticon engages our entwined individual and social ontologies. How will the codification of individual and collective relations develop? Over the past month invited guests and members of empyre have addressed this theme from a range of perspectives. I am not going to summarise the various viewpoints here as I fear my attempt would be inadequate. The empyre archive is accessible and makes an excellent read, organised by date, thread and author. https://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/ I would like to thank everybody who contributed to the discussion; our guest discussants Joseph Delappe, Marc Garrett, Davin Heckman, Patrick Lichty, Heidi May, Christina Spiesel, Jon Thompson and Alison Craighead, all of whom gave generously of their time to post provocative and inspiring texts. I would like to thank Renate Ferro and Tim Murray for inviting me to moderate the discussion and for continuing to host and maintain empyre. We can present the netoptic as automatic social formation but sites for debate like empyre are precious and survive because of the efforts of individuals. I would also like to thank all those members of empyre who contributed to the discussion and also all those members who participated silently. Whilst lurking should be seen as a public good it is perhaps this silent reading, the nitrogen (as distinct to the oxygen) of listservs, which presents the most appropriate image for the netopticon. By having our conversations in public we can render our inter-subjectivities as a performative instance of the netopticon in play. Best Simon Simon Biggs si...@littlepig.org.uk http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ s.bi...@eca.ac.uk http://www.elmcip.net/ http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ Edinburgh College of Art (eca) is a charity registered in Scotland, number SC009201 ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
Re: [-empyre-] contesting the netopticon
I'm not sure what the topic is for February. I expect that Renate or Tim will be emailing us all about this shortly. However, although I have signed off the discussion for this month, it doesn't mean the netopticon discussion must cease. I think it can continue until the new theme is announced. There are some tantalising threads still left hanging... Best Simon On 31/01/2011 16:15, davin heckman davinheck...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, thank you for having me as a part of this discussion. It is always a good group. If anyone wants to pick anything up off list, I am always happy to talk. Davin On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 8:29 AM, marc garrett marc.garr...@furtherfield.org wrote: Simon all, Thank you for inviting me to be part of this discussion. I enjoyed it immensely... Unfortunately, I was unable to jump back into the discussion last week due to being too busy. I will reread all contributions rethink my own assumptions :-) wishing you all well. marc www.furtherfield.org So, we come to the end of the month of January and our discussion on the theme of the Netopticon. To remind us where we began, abstracted from the original post setting out the theme: The Panoptic structures innate in social space are often cited in relation to the internet and its governance. The term Netopticon suggests a mesh-work structure of how a socially networked Panoptic apparatus can operate. Malkit Shoshan describes how the social technologies that characterise Web 2.0 facilitate the emergence of the internet as a Panoptic space, where individuals are complicit in their own surveillance. The internet is pervasive in how people construct their social lives. If we accept that people are emergent, through social activities that are a process of becoming, issues around net neutrality, Web 2.0 and surveillance have implications reaching into the psycho-social. Within a Foucauldian appreciation of the social, where the Panopticon (nee: super-ego) is manifest at the heart of our social relations, the Netopticon engages our entwined individual and social ontologies. How will the codification of individual and collective relations develop? Over the past month invited guests and members of empyre have addressed this theme from a range of perspectives. I am not going to summarise the various viewpoints here as I fear my attempt would be inadequate. The empyre archive is accessible and makes an excellent read, organised by date, thread and author. https://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/ I would like to thank everybody who contributed to the discussion; our guest discussants Joseph Delappe, Marc Garrett, Davin Heckman, Patrick Lichty, Heidi May, Christina Spiesel, Jon Thompson and Alison Craighead, all of whom gave generously of their time to post provocative and inspiring texts. I would like to thank Renate Ferro and Tim Murray for inviting me to moderate the discussion and for continuing to host and maintain empyre. We can present the netoptic as automatic social formation but sites for debate like empyre are precious and survive because of the efforts of individuals. I would also like to thank all those members of empyre who contributed to the discussion and also all those members who participated silently. Whilst lurking should be seen as a public good it is perhaps this silent reading, the nitrogen (as distinct to the oxygen) of listservs, which presents the most appropriate image for the netopticon. By having our conversations in public we can render our inter-subjectivities as a performative instance of the netopticon in play. Best Simon Simon Biggs si...@littlepig.org.uk http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ s.bi...@eca.ac.uk http://www.elmcip.net/ http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ Edinburgh College of Art (eca) is a charity registered in Scotland, number SC009201 ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre Simon Biggs si...@littlepig.org.uk http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ s.bi...@eca.ac.uk http://www.elmcip.net/ http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ Edinburgh College of Art (eca) is a charity registered in Scotland, number SC009201 ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
Re: [-empyre-] contesting the netopticon
I've had flu too - an example of another very effective network that is everywhere and nowhere at the same time. Best Simon On 31/01/2011 16:42, Jon Thomson j.thom...@ucl.ac.uk wrote: And thanks too from us -we're both currently in Rotterdam for the film festival but have managed to get the flu, so we've been lurking these last few days in particular from our hotel ill-beds using the barest whisper of public wi-fi. What's been so much fun for us during this month's topic has been how the discussion has permeated our day to day activities, but also how much it has given us to think about. Thanks again to Simon for inviting us to participate. best wishes, Jon Alison -- thomson craighead archive: http://www.thomson-craighead.net blog: http://thomson-craighead.blogspot.com/ ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre Simon Biggs si...@littlepig.org.uk http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ s.bi...@eca.ac.uk http://www.elmcip.net/ http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ Edinburgh College of Art (eca) is a charity registered in Scotland, number SC009201 ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
[-empyre-] contesting the netopticon
So, we come to the end of the month of January and our discussion on the theme of the Netopticon. To remind us where we began, abstracted from the original post setting out the theme: The Panoptic structures innate in social space are often cited in relation to the internet and its governance. The term Netopticon suggests a mesh-work structure of how a socially networked Panoptic apparatus can operate. Malkit Shoshan describes how the social technologies that characterise Web 2.0 facilitate the emergence of the internet as a Panoptic space, where individuals are complicit in their own surveillance. The internet is pervasive in how people construct their social lives. If we accept that people are emergent, through social activities that are a process of becoming, issues around net neutrality, Web 2.0 and surveillance have implications reaching into the psycho-social. Within a Foucauldian appreciation of the social, where the Panopticon (nee: super-ego) is manifest at the heart of our social relations, the Netopticon engages our entwined individual and social ontologies. How will the codification of individual and collective relations develop? Over the past month invited guests and members of empyre have addressed this theme from a range of perspectives. I am not going to summarise the various viewpoints here as I fear my attempt would be inadequate. The empyre archive is accessible and makes an excellent read, organised by date, thread and author. https://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/ I would like to thank everybody who contributed to the discussion; our guest discussants Joseph Delappe, Marc Garrett, Davin Heckman, Patrick Lichty, Heidi May, Christina Spiesel, Jon Thompson and Alison Craighead, all of whom gave generously of their time to post provocative and inspiring texts. I would like to thank Renate Ferro and Tim Murray for inviting me to moderate the discussion and for continuing to host and maintain empyre. We can present the netoptic as automatic social formation but sites for debate like empyre are precious and survive because of the efforts of individuals. I would also like to thank all those members of empyre who contributed to the discussion and also all those members who participated silently. Whilst lurking should be seen as a public good it is perhaps this silent reading, the nitrogen (as distinct to the oxygen) of listservs, which presents the most appropriate image for the netopticon. By having our conversations in public we can render our inter-subjectivities as a performative instance of the netopticon in play. Best Simon Simon Biggs si...@littlepig.org.uk http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ s.bi...@eca.ac.uk http://www.elmcip.net/ http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ Edinburgh College of Art (eca) is a charity registered in Scotland, number SC009201 ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
[-empyre-] Contesting the Netopticon
First off I want to say thank you to Simon for organizing this most interesting conversation and for inviting me to participate. I would also like to thank all those who have participated in this discussion of the netopticon. I must admit that I have been keeping one eye slightly on the postings back and forth over the past two weeks as this has been the start of a very busy term - my ability to focus upon anything in specific has proven to be more challenging than usual. Yesterday I spent 6 hours reading straight through the entirety of the postings regarding the topic of the Netopticon. I have found the discussion to be fascinating in substance yet maddeningly disjointed in structure. This is the first time I have actively participated in such an email based conversation. I put this in quotes as it seems fascinating that, in the same manner we denote friends on facebook we seem to willingly embrace this type of forum as a discussion or dialog when in reality what we are doing might be more similar to a very smart chain letter or perhaps an exquisite corpse of theoretical discourse. This may sound like a criticism yet I do not necessarily intend it as such - it would seem a good place to start commenting on the notion of the netopticon by noting perhaps how readily we come to embrace such seemingly benign alterations of words such as friends on Facebook or discussion in this context. Simon's consideration of the Stockholm Syndrome is perhaps relevant in this regard. Honestly I am not entirely sure where I am going with this but I am thinking of this bit of dialogue from Woody Allen's Annie Hall: This guy goes to a psychiatrist and says, Doc, uh, my brother's crazy; he thinks he's a chicken. And, uh, the doctor says, Well, why don't you turn him in? The guy says, I would, but I need the eggs. One might consider this forum to provide an effective metaphor for the larger issues we are attempting to address. We are at once appropriately concerned by the potentially invasive role of the internet which has rapidly transformed so many aspects of our daily lives, while at the same time we seem willing, dare I say even eager to embrace such as they provide something equivalent to the aforementioned eggs. While reading through the posts I have been taking notes and copying segments upon which to comment - by the end of yesterday I had five pages of text! Rather that go through all of this, I will try here to put some of my thoughts in order. After reading through the posts yesterday, my thinking went towards the consideration of Chatroulette - as I am typing these words I am live on Chatroulette for the first time. I thought it might be interesting, in light of the multilayered, interventionist nature of much of my work on the internet, to attempt to formulate my post whilst engaged in this online experiment in shared surveillance. I see you, you see me! Multitasking the netopticon! In regards to artworks that explore this issue, I would first suggest Hasan Elahi's ongoing work to Tracking Transience (http://elahi.umd.edu/) as perhaps a seminal example of an artist creating a work that ultimately examines and questions our rush towards embracing the expression and spread of me across the internet while at the same time providing a critique of our government's overreach since the 9/11 attacks. Hasan, if you don't know of his work, was detained by Homeland Security on returning from an exhibition of his work in Africa. Some months earlier, Elahi had emptied out his storage unit in Tampa, Florida some weeks after the 9/11 attacks and was later interrogated for several months after his detention to prove that he was not a terrorist (the owner of the storage unit had apparently turned him in for looking Middle Eastern - he is actually of Bangledeshi lineage). After clearing his name he asked his FBI interrogator how he might once again travel abroad wi thout being detained on his return. The FBI suggested that he stay in contact with them while he travelled so that they might insure that he would not be further detained. What started as text email communications to the FBI eventually included photographs of his travels - which eventually evolved into an extensive conceptual project on the web that obsessively documents Elahi's every movement, every meal, every toilet used, waiting rooms at airports and a live tracking feature pinpointing his location on a satellite map. Another work I would like to site is that of Wafaa Bilal. His most recent project 3rdi involves the implantation of a functioning web camera into/onto the back of Bilal's head actively streaming still shots at one-minute intervals. What I find fascinating in regard to both of these works is that they both take our growing fascination and use of the internet to effectively express the digital me to certain extremes. These are perhaps also the pathologies mentioned
Re: [-empyre-] contesting the netopticon
On 01/23/2011 04:24 PM, marc garrett wrote: There is already a backlash by various groups and individuals critiquing Twitter and Facebook, saying that these social networking facilities/platforms do not connect people but isolate them from reality.A behaviour that has become typical may still express the I think it depends how socially connected one is to start with. For me, any social contact is an improvement over just sitting at home and the internet has been a benefit for me in this respect. But I'm definitely a pathological case. ;-) problems that once caused us to see it as pathological, Sherry Turkle. Social networking under fresh attack as tide of cyber-scepticism sweeps US. http://tinyurl.com/4suzj94 And: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/23/books/review/Lehrer-t.html Turkle is the latest recanting cyberprophet after Lanier and Rushkoff. I wonder if this is a generational thing, or possibly a class thing - technology is more available than ever to kids and non-academics. The fragmention of cultural and social experience that Turkle and others blame social network users for is part of the successful operation of the netopticon rather than any kind of personal failure on the part of users. - Rob. ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
Re: [-empyre-] contesting the netopticon
On behalf of Marc Garrett Hello Johannes all, First I would like to make clear (even though everyone probably knows this) that, neoliberlism is now an intrinsic part of the shift and creep of the panoptican, as well as what (Shoshan) suggests as Netopticon, a socially networked Panoptic apparatus, as mentioned by Simon in his introduction. One of the most clearest definitions I have read on neoliberalism so far, is by Pierre Bourdieu. And yet the world is there, with the immediately visible effects of the implementation of the great neoliberal utopia: not only the poverty of an increasingly large segment of the most economically advanced societies, the extraordinary growth in income differences, the progressive disappearance of autonomous universes of cultural production, such as film, publishing, etc. through the intrusive imposition of commercial values, but also and above all two major trends. First is the destruction of all the collective institutions capable of counteracting the effects of the infernal machine, primarily those of the state, repository of all of the universal values associated with the idea of the public realm. Second is the imposition everywhere, in the upper spheres of the economy and the state as at the heart of corporations, of that sort of moral Darwinism that, with the cult of the winner, schooled in higher mathematics and bungee jumping, institutes the struggle of all against all and cynicism as the norm of all action and behaviour. The essence of neoliberalism. UTOPIA OF ENDLESS EXPLOITATION. Pierre Bourdieu. http://www.homme-moderne.org/societe/socio/bourdieu/varia/essneoUK.html Combining this with Foucault's comments from Discipline and Punish ...'Discipline' may be identified neither with an institution nor with an apparatus; it is a type of power, a modality for its exercise, comprising a whole set of instruments, techniques, procedures, levels of application, targets; it is a 'physics' or an 'anatomy' of power, a technology. The structures in place, show us that there is a mixture of engineered composites, and they have been entwined within our individual states or nations for a long time. Yet, because of the various ingredients already in place and the behaviours around managerial functionalities, producing and supporting these mechanised processes, whether consciously or not; we are left with a networked administration that sits seperate of governments and even some smaller businesses, but at the same time it is an international non-regulated tool, which can bring about powerful shifts and changes in everyday life, through systems connecting to surveillance and the Netopticon. A rather complex mix of objects, agents and networks exploiting and connecting via functional means with mediums such as digital networks, social media and the Internet across the board. A form of meta-power that only respects itself and the languages and facilities which abide and respect its functions. The ingredients that contribute to this are (I am sure there are more), as Foucault says 'discipline', as Christina astutely mentions 'efficiency' and the ever expansive networked lurker in the background, watching us all 'the all seeing eye', with data collection and active and general digital surveillance. Technology is becoming more advanced and the administration of this technology is becoming more sophisticated and soon, every car in the street will be considered and treated as persons, with human rights. This is not a conspiracy to enslave human beings, it is a result of having to develop usable administration systems for complex relationships. Slaves were not liberated because their owners felt sorry for them, slaves were given more rights as a way to manage them more productively in a more technologically advanced society. Heath Bunting. From an interview - The Status Project: Data-Mining Our Identities. http://www.furtherfield.org/displayreview.php?review_id=402 It is also interesting that you mention PCSO Watch's statement We are all Police now. In light of the recent and outragous US demands that Twitter hand over data on Wikileaks and multiple Wikileaks supporters. Mr Assange condemned the court order on Saturday, saying it amounted to harassment. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12141530 This tactic of scaring everyday people not to support Wikileaks, is not a new approach. In fact, the UK used similar attacks on the unemployed, by asking anyone who suspects that someone is 'working on the side' as well as receiving unemployment benefits, should inform the authorities. This tactic of harassment and exploiting the public's situation, of being connected with others; grass root groups and individuals, helps in creating divides, confusion and fear between them. This is where a reference to Foucault's 'Discipline and Punish' is worth considering, an exercise of power ...is not conceived as property, but as a strategy; its effects of domination are attributed not to
Re: [-empyre-] Contesting the Netopticon
Hi Simon, Christina all, Firstly, Thank you for inviting me to be part of the 'Contesting the Netopticon' discussion on Empyre. At the end of Simon's concise and well written introduction. Wikileaks is mentioned as turning the Panoptic gaze back upon the observer [...] significant counter-attack in what might be considered an asymmetric info-war. Before we settle in with exploring the most recently known news and spectacle of Wikileaks. I want to delve into a mix of art, legality, privatization of public space and surveillance, online and in physical space. I am writing some examples right now and will post it up a bit later. Wishing you well. marc ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
[-empyre-] Contesting the Netopticon
January on empyre soft-skinned space Contesting the Netopticon http://www.subtle.net/empyre Moderated by Simon Biggs (UK/Australia) with invited discussants Joseph Delappe, Marc Garrett, Davin Heckman, Patrick Lichty, Heidi May, Christina Spiesel and Jon Thomson Alison Craighead. Dear empyre subscribers, Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) described an apparatus he termed the Panopticon, intended to condition the behaviour of subjects by disallowing them knowledge of whether they were being observed or not, causing them to fear they were. The space Bentham sought to control was the prison, seeking to replace capital punishment with a penal system focused on rehabilitation. Janet Semple's study (Semple) evidences Bentham's correspondence, suggesting an intent to establish for-profit penal institutions based on his Panoptic model. George Orwell, in his novel 1984 (1949), evoked a state of perpetual government surveillance designed to crush deviation from mandated behaviour, seeking to implant the self-governing mechanism within the psyche of the individual. Michel Foucault employed Bentham's conceptual framework as a motif for social order in an interpretation that has become an intellectual touchstone. In Foucault's vision, mapped out in his seminal 1975 text Discipline and Punish (Foucault), the Panopticon extends far beyond the prison and manifests as a pervasive property of social space and relations, the dark matter of power relations. The Panoptic structures innate in social space are often cited in relation to the internet and its governance. The term Netopticon (Shoshan) suggests a mesh-work structure of how a socially networked Panoptic apparatus can operate. Malkit Shoshan describes how the social technologies that characterise Web 2.0 facilitate the emergence of the internet as a Panoptic space, where individuals are complicit in their own surveillance, echoing Tim Lenoir and Henry Lowood's analysis of the computer game as a platform for the seduction of the individual into the military-entertainment complex (Lenoir Lowood). The internet is pervasive in how people construct their social lives. If we accept that people are emergent, through social activities that are a process of becoming, issues around net neutrality, Web 2.0 and surveillance have implications reaching into the psycho-social. Within a Foucauldian appreciation of the social, where the Panopticon (nee: super-ego) is manifest at the heart of our social relations, the Netopticon engages our entwined individual and social ontologies. How will the codification of individual and collective relations develop? In the deluge of information released through Wikileaks, and the political and legal fall-out from that, the metaphor of the Netopticon appears especially pertinent. Wikileaks has sought to turn the gaze of the Panoptic eye back upon itself, revealing those who would seek to remain invisible behind a one way mirror. When the observer becomes visible the Panopticon can no longer function. The Wikileaks affair foregrounds how Panoptic space can be a contested space. As events unfold we witness the lengths that governments will go to in order to protect their cover. States, such as the UK, Australia, Sweden, Zimbabwe and the USA, have sought to constrain or render Julian Assange and compromise the Wikileaks operation. Corporations, many with media interests, are visible conspirators. At the same time there are those operating from the other side, seeking to preserve freedom of speech, an open internet and access to information. Wikileaks has, by turning the Panoptic gaze back upon the observer, struck a significant counter-attack in what might be considered an asymmetric info-war. During the month of January we will discuss issues concerning the internet, identity, surveillance and tactics of resistance. Our guests are: Joseph Delappe (USA), an artist and Associate Professor at the University of Nevada, Reno. His recent projects, often inflected with humour and political import, have included re-enacting Ghandi's 240 mile Salt March in Second Life and sponsoring the first Second Life avatar to run for the United States Senate. Marc Garrett (UK), an activist, artist and writer and co-director and co-founder (with artist Ruth Catlow) of internet arts collectives and communities furtherfield.org, netbehaviour.org and HTTP Gallery in London. Through these platforms various contemporary media arts exhibitions and projects are presented nationally and internationally. Marc also hosts a weekly media arts radio programme on Resonance FM and last year co-edited the publication Artists Re: thinking games. He is currently undertaking a PhD at Birkbeck University, London. Davin Heckman (USA), the author of A Small World: Smart Houses and the Dream of the Perfect Day (Duke UP, 2008). He is Supervising Editor of the Electronic Literature Directory (directory.eliterature.org) and Associate Professor of English at Siena Heights University, where
