Re: Has net-art lost political significance?

[Future Tense]

+1

I wanted to contribute that the recent scholarly work of HCI researchers such 
as Os Keyes et al’s “A Mulching Proposal” and  AI researcher Joy Buolamwini et 
al’s “Gender Shades,” etc., exist in the space of serious research and savvy 
presentation that contains inherent critiques of their subjects in a way that 
is reminiscent of some of the art projects mentioned in various threads.

What is interesting there is that these projects are also very specific to a 
highly-engaged community that already prizes knowledge sharing and gets a lot 
of press attention, so I’d argue that these researchers  are well-positioned to 
affect the fields that they critique. I’m not sure how engaged net-artists are 
by comparison, as I am woefully ignorant of the current state of things there. 
:)

Maybe artists can also carve out more space for themselves in academic/industry 
networks so they can radicalize- I mean reach- more people?

-S

On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 9:38 AM, Rachel O' Dwyer  wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> I really appreciate all the replies both on and off the list.
>
> I hadn't made a connection between this post and the very popular discussion 
> of net-time and I’m very interested to hear that Transmediale is exploring 
> the persistence of networks.
>
> One of the most inspiring books I've read in the past few years was [Anna 
> Tsing's A Mushroom at the end of the world: on the possibility of life in 
> capitalist ruins.](https://press.princeton.edu/titles/10581.html) It might 
> seem odd that an anthropological text on supply chains and Matsutake 
> mushrooms changed how I thought about the politics of networks, but the book 
> also explores the limits and possibilities of political agency from a 
> position of ecological ruin, hopelessness and precarity. A brilliant chapter 
> ‘some problems with scale’ also helped me to articulate criticisms I had of a 
> lot of peer-to-peer and network activist projects. I’m also re-reading some 
> work from people like the late [Mark 
> Fisher](http://www.zero-books.net/books/capitalist-realism) and [Rebecca 
> Solnit](https://www.amazon.com/Hope-Dark-Untold-Histories-Possibilities/dp/1608465764)
>  on politics and hope.
>
> A few things have come up in conversations over the past few weeks (I’ve 
> mostly been talking to and emailing people instead of writing).
>
> 1. There also seems to be a shift towards a feminist politics of networks. 
> Maybe I’m using the term ‘feminist’ incorrectly here because I don’t mean 
> work that’s particularly concerned with identity politics. But if we say that 
> people like 
> [Butler](https://www.amazon.co.uk/Gender-Trouble-Routledge-Classics-Judith/dp/0415389550)
>  and [Haraway](https://www.dukeupress.edu/staying-with-the-trouble) and 
> [Barad](https://www.dukeupress.edu/meeting-the-universe-halfway) disrupt 
> binary thinking around gender and materiality, this kind of 
> transdisciplinary, non-binary thinking coupled with an ethics of care (i.e. 
> someone like [Maria Puig de la 
> BellaCasa](https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/cross_fac/cim/people/maria-puig-de-la-bellacasa/))
>  provides us with a set of tools for thinking through new kinds of resistance 
> as well as new ways of relating to ourselves with and through networked 
> communications infrastructure. There seems to be more of an emphasis on 
> localized and situated interventions for example rather than things that 
> scale. There seems to be a greater emphasis on pedagogical practices than on 
> technical implementation. If anything is starting to emerge as a kind of 
> pattern for me, this is it. I think that’s also reflected in the 
> sensibilities of projects like [Platform 
> Cooperativism](https://platform.coop/) and the [Decode 
> Project](https://decodeproject.eu/what-decode).
>
> 2. Techniques that can be identified as part of first and second wave 
> ‘tactical media’ such as reverse-engineering/ circuit bending/ hacking; the 
> exploit; commoning/DIY; obfuscation; visualization/mapping; and speculative 
> imagining are still used and are still necessary.  And I think some of these, 
> particularly reverse-engineering and obfuscation, seem to be particularly 
> significant in the context of platforms. Not to mention being able to imagine 
> alternatives in the face of overwhelming odds.
>
> These are some of my own thoughts coming out of returning to the book I’m 
> writing on the politics of wireless networks and the EM spectrum, from 
> students while teaching an undergraduate elective on network politics and art 
> with undergraduate students in NCAD and recent conversations mostly over 
> networks with Rosa Menkman, Geert Lovink, Jussi Parikka, Surya Mattu, Patrick 
> Bresnihan, Brian Holmes, Nate Tkacz, Nora O Murchu and Sarah Grant, the OMG 
> collective in Dublin and C-Node (Paul O’Brien) in the past few weeks.
>
> On Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 3:05 PM Minka Stoyanova  
> wrote:
>
>> Hello Rachel,
>>
>> I love your questions. Personally, I just submitted my PhD 

Re: Has net-art lost political significance?

[tacira]

tredi digitofagico~ estao capturados pela ubiquidade das ferramentas,
estao cada vez mais nas ruas, estao de maos dadas com o software livre
chorando pitombas, estao germinando apos digeridas :)


Em 2019-06-27 07:27, Rachel O' Dwyer escreveu:
> What characterises media art interventions in the context of
> ‘surveillance capitalism’, platforms and the gig economy? Are
> these practices still meaningful or, as F.A.T. Lab claimed in 2015, 
> have they lost political significance in the face of global platforms?
> 
>  Can we still speak about ‘tactical media’ or ‘the exploit’,
> and if not is this because 
> 
> a) network activism has transformed so that these older descriptions
> no longer accurately describe net art and ‘hacktivist’ practices,
> or 
> 
> b) these art practices have stayed much the same, but they are no
> longer effective in the current political and economic context?
> 
> I’m wondering if anyone knows of any writing that attempts to
> theorise/frame media art activist work post 2012? Perhaps to speak
> about it as a set of practices discrete from theories of ‘tactical
> media’ or ‘the exploit’ that go before? Perhaps something on
> post-internet art and activism?
> 
> Or is it a case of looking at writing about activism in the face of
> defeat and what seems like a hopeless cause?
> 
> If you've read or written anything that you think might be interesting
> I'd love to hear about it,
> 
> Best,
> 
> Rachel
> 
> A bit more detail about why I'm asking this question: 
> 
> I’m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices
> in the wireless space, including artistic interventions,
> software-defined radio communities who are reverse-engineering,
> hacking, sniffing and jamming signals, communities and activists who
> are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks and artists making
> work in or about the politics of the wireless spectrum – who owns
> it, how it’s controlled and so on. 
> 
> But I’m feeling a bit paralysed. 
> 
> I love these works; I love their inventive materiality and the ways
> that they exploit and reverse-engineer existing systems, but I don’t
> know what claims I can make for their political impact. And yet I feel
> that this work is still very worthwhile. 
> 
> -- 
> 
> http://www.rachelodwyer.com/
> 
> +353 (85) 7023779
> #  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
> #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Has net-art lost political significance?

[Francis Hunger]

  
  
Hi Rachel,


  

  

  

  

  

  
A bit more
  detail about why I'm asking this
  question: 
  
I’m
  currently writing about various
  tactical and activist practices in
  the wireless space, including
  artistic interventions,
  software-defined radio communities
  who are reverse-engineering,
  hacking, sniffing and jamming
  signals, communities and activists
  who are building communal Wi-Fi
  and cellular networks and artists
  making work in or about the
  politics of the wireless spectrum
  – who owns it, how it’s controlled
  and so on. 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

I think exceptional work in the early 2000s was
done in the Acoustic Ecologies and Acoustic Space series by
rixc.org and Rasa and Raitis http://rixc.org/en/acousticspace/all/.
HMKV Dortmund saw the Waves exhibition 
  https://www.hmkv.de/programm/programmpunkte/2008/Ausstellungen/Waves.php

  

  

  

  

  

  

  
But I’m
  feeling a bit paralysed. 
I love
  these works; I love their
  inventive materiality and the ways
  that they exploit and
  reverse-engineer existing systems,
  but I don’t know what claims I can
  make for their political impact.
  And yet I feel that this work is
  still very worthwhile. 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

It may simply be the case that artists have
notoriously overstated the possible impact of their
works/research. Which makes sense against the historical
context: During the late 1990s and early 2000s "Internet" was
still something new and not part of overall discourse and
academic discourse, so it was relatively easy for artists
tapping in or creating a certain discursive field that appeared
to be "avant-garde" at that time. This possibility to create and
direct discourse slowly evaporated with capital on the one hand
and academia on the other joining in, and re-shaping the
discoursive field towards "the digital" as we know it today.
Claims of impact may also have been made to simply
get funding, since one of the tactics of tactical media was
getting public or private funding, since the works were not
being sold on the art market. So no income from Basel.
  
Already early on there has been internal critique
against certain claims that (some) media art made. Personally
for me the most important intervention was Alexei Shulgins 1997
proposal against "interactive art".
https://twitter.com/databaseculture/status/1136256115652603904
and I wonder, if similar critique of tactical media was around
at that time. I think so.
All in all it never has been an undisputed field,
and you feeling paralysed may be just worth to follow. One of
the results of this kind of critical inquiry may be to look more
precisely into the claims that AI based art makes today.
best
Francis
  
-- 

http://www.irmielin.org
http://nothere.irmielin.org

Re: Has net-art lost political significance?

[Rachel O' Dwyer]

Hi everyone,


I really appreciate all the replies both on and off the list.

I hadn't made a connection between this post and the very popular
discussion of net-time and I’m very interested to hear that Transmediale is
exploring the persistence of networks.



One of the most inspiring books I've read in the past few years was *Anna
Tsing's A Mushroom at the end of the world: on the possibility of life in
capitalist ruins. * It might
seem odd that an anthropological text on supply chains and Matsutake
mushrooms changed how I thought about the politics of networks, but the
book also explores the limits and possibilities of political agency from a
position of ecological ruin, hopelessness and precarity. A brilliant
chapter ‘some problems with scale’ also helped me to articulate criticisms
I had of a lot of peer-to-peer and network activist projects. I’m also
re-reading some work from people like the late Mark Fisher
 and Rebecca Solnit

on politics and hope.



A few things have come up in conversations over the past few weeks (I’ve
mostly been talking to and emailing people instead of writing).



1. There also seems to be a shift towards a feminist politics of networks.
Maybe I’m using the term ‘feminist’ incorrectly here because I don’t mean
work that’s particularly concerned with identity politics. But if we say
that people like Butler

and Haraway  and Barad
 disrupt binary
thinking around gender and materiality, this kind of transdisciplinary,
non-binary thinking coupled with an ethics of care (i.e. someone like Maria
Puig de la BellaCasa
)
provides us with a set of tools for thinking through new kinds of
resistance as well as new ways of relating to ourselves with and through
networked communications infrastructure. There seems to be more of an
emphasis on localized and situated interventions for example rather than
things that scale. There seems to be a greater emphasis on pedagogical
practices than on technical implementation. If anything is starting to
emerge as a kind of pattern for me, this is it. I think that’s also
reflected in the sensibilities of projects like Platform Cooperativism
 and the Decode Project
.



2. Techniques that can be identified as part of first and second wave
‘tactical media’ such as reverse-engineering/ circuit bending/ hacking; the
exploit; commoning/DIY; obfuscation; visualization/mapping; and speculative
imagining are still used and are still necessary.  And I think some of
these, particularly reverse-engineering and obfuscation, seem to be
particularly significant in the context of platforms. Not to mention being
able to imagine alternatives in the face of overwhelming odds.



These are some of my own thoughts coming out of returning to the book I’m
writing on the politics of wireless networks and the EM spectrum, from
students while teaching an undergraduate elective on network politics and
art with undergraduate students in NCAD and recent conversations mostly
over networks with Rosa Menkman, Geert Lovink, Jussi Parikka, Surya Mattu,
Patrick Bresnihan, Brian Holmes, Nate Tkacz, Nora O Murchu and Sarah Grant,
the OMG collective in Dublin and C-Node (Paul O’Brien) in the past few
weeks.

On Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 3:05 PM Minka Stoyanova 
wrote:

> Hello Rachel,
>
> I love your questions. Personally, I just submitted my PhD thesis which
> had some similar research goals. While I love the construct of "the
> network" and "the exploit" -- I feel they are dated/need revision in
> today's landscape of platform politics. In addition I think the flat
> hierarchy of the network is a bit utopian and doesn't recognize the power
> of some individuals in the overall structure. Moreover, I feel the
> discourse around tactical works needs to be expanded to include works that
> engage technology (broadly) in a critical way as, for me, technology and
> the internet are (at this point) part of a single continuum. The idea that
> we can talk about work 'on the web' singularly and separate from work that
> is about the web, that is of the web, or that is simply *of *our current
> techno-social condition is stifling, I believe.
>
> I think you can apply whatever theoretical model you want; the discourse
> (as your research question recognizes) is ripe for new frameworks.
> Personally, I used my own kind of cyborg theory (a blend of Heidegger,
> McLuhan, Latour, Haraway, Bratton, and Terranova... among others) to
> discuss these types of works in terms of challenging our relationship to
> 

Re: Has net-art lost political significance?

[Minka Stoyanova]

Hello Rachel,

I love your questions. Personally, I just submitted my PhD thesis which had
some similar research goals. While I love the construct of "the network"
and "the exploit" -- I feel they are dated/need revision in today's
landscape of platform politics. In addition I think the flat hierarchy of
the network is a bit utopian and doesn't recognize the power of some
individuals in the overall structure. Moreover, I feel the discourse around
tactical works needs to be expanded to include works that engage technology
(broadly) in a critical way as, for me, technology and the internet are (at
this point) part of a single continuum. The idea that we can talk about
work 'on the web' singularly and separate from work that is about the web,
that is of the web, or that is simply *of *our current techno-social
condition is stifling, I believe.

I think you can apply whatever theoretical model you want; the discourse
(as your research question recognizes) is ripe for new frameworks.
Personally, I used my own kind of cyborg theory (a blend of Heidegger,
McLuhan, Latour, Haraway, Bratton, and Terranova... among others) to
discuss these types of works in terms of challenging our relationship to
technology as both a global system we are embedded in and distributed
across and as something which has embedded itself in us. Maybe that will
help you with your approach.

Certainly, there are artists making work that is interesting, important,
and political in this landscape. Many are mentioned in other responses.
Goodness, what the alt-right did was straight out of the handbook of
Tactical Media, very effective, and not *not *art -- although it might
terrify some of us. That has been discussed here, in fact -- and I was
again discussing it last week at a conference.

~Minka

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 11:38 AM  wrote:

> So interesting.
> I also find this so interesting because in the light of fakeness, Tactical
> Media is harder, in the sense of the intervention/provocation to response
> that was done  with RTMark/YesMen back in the time I was active. I think
> that the new Washington Post, after the Times and NY Post ones that were
> done in the late 2000's, was powerful because I heard about it in the UAE.
>
> However, in the Eastern hemisphere, I have been working with AR as a
> "local" discourse (meaning that anyone can get the app, but the message is
> pretty limited to them), as well as working with artists in Kazakhstan
> about messages AR as tactical media, such as overlaying messages over works
> in the National Mueum (based on the Manifest.AR We AR MoMA intervention I
> was part of around 2010) and the "Modernization of Consciousness" (Ruhani
> Zhangru) posters in 2018.  These are some interestign ways in which one can
> laterally engage networks for critical discourse.
>
> In addition, I am working with David Guillo with his independent web
> router galleries as a sort of TAZ in regions that employ firewalls and
> net.filtering. This follows from my setting up occupy.here routers as wifi
> "islands" for collaboration without using VPN, and therefore staying
> technically within local regulations.
> While not so much "Tactical" media, I consider that in the era of
> increasing firewalling, and in the case of threatened net.separation in
> Russia and Iran, I feel hang autonomous server art is a critical space for
> exploration of these topics as well.
>
> On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 15:28:58 -0700, Molly Hankwitz wrote:
>
> Hi Rachel,
> snip -
>
> I’m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the
> wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio
> communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming
> signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and
> cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the
> wireless spectrum – who owns it, how it’s controlled and so on
>
> snip
>
>
>
> Great. So needed. I wrote a dissertation on WiFi practices - a bit earlier
> history than what you are looking for. I write about “warchalking” and
> other kinds of social media based information spaces, hacks. From that
> experience I’d bet you will be best off in the arts. If there is writing
> being done it would be from groups like the then - headman - Knowbotics
> Research, etc. But the best project - utilizing mobile tools and being both
> tactical and poetry and human rights - Transborder Tool b.a.n.g. Lab.
> Ricardo Dominguez’s and Brett Stalbaum from virtual sit-in days behind it
> as well as Micha Cardenas. We programmed this into our project - City
> Centered: Locative Media and Wireless Festival - 2010. I think TBT is
> having a re-release. (Smile)
>
>
>
> Molly
>
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 3:40 AM Rachel O' Dwyer 
> wrote:
>
>> What characterises media art interventions in the context of
>> ‘surveillance capitalism’, platforms and the gig economy? Are these
>> practices still meaningful or, as F.A.T. Lab claimed in 

Re: Has net-art lost political significance?

[Tom Keene]

Hi Rachel, 

I've written a contribution to an upcoming Critical Makers Reader for the 
Institute of Network Cultures that may be of interest. It relates to my PhD 
artist and activist led research (in final year of write-up) of local authority 
databases, processes of urban regeneration, and an ongoing fight to prevent the 
demolition of 306 homes, including my own. I employ art as a method of enquiry 
where the space between art, activism, academia, theory, programming, and my 
personal life is frequently blurred. Its not a treatise on early media art, 
though Its definitely a different approach to tactical media etc. so may be of 
interest? 

I've a live 'sketchbook' of this work that can be viewed at 
http://db-estate.co.uk Its filled with images, video, notes, code, and lots of 
half-formed text and errors! I wrote some code to automatically (and 
periodically) generate the website from a project/activist folder on my laptop 
that I work from - hence the live and error prone aspect that imparts a sense 
of an unfolding process and attempts to show the mess of this kind of work that 
is frequently hidden from view. There's a 'hidden menu' within a light grey box 
to the top right of the website that shows the directory structure and links to 
even more mess Though it feels slightly scary to mention this on Netime!!

Tom 


On Thu, 27 Jun 2019, at 11:40 AM, Rachel O' Dwyer wrote:
> What characterises media art interventions in the context of ‘surveillance 
> capitalism’, platforms and the gig economy? Are these practices still 
> meaningful or, as F.A.T. Lab claimed in 2015, have they lost political 
> significance in the face of global platforms?

> 

>  Can we still speak about ‘tactical media’ or ‘the exploit’, and if not is 
> this because 

> a) network activism has transformed so that these older descriptions no 
> longer accurately describe net art and ‘hacktivist’ practices, or 

> b) these art practices have stayed much the same, but they are no longer 
> effective in the current political and economic context?

> 

> I’m wondering if anyone knows of any writing that attempts to theorise/frame 
> media art activist work post 2012? Perhaps to speak about it as a set of 
> practices discrete from theories of ‘tactical media’ or ‘the exploit’ that go 
> before? Perhaps something on post-internet art and activism?

> Or is it a case of looking at writing about activism in the face of defeat 
> and what seems like a hopeless cause?

> 

> If you've read or written anything that you think might be interesting I'd 
> love to hear about it,

> 

> Best,

> 

> Rachel

> 

> A bit more detail about why I'm asking this question: 

> I’m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the 
> wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio 
> communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming 
> signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and 
> cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the 
> wireless spectrum – who owns it, how it’s controlled and so on. 

> But I’m feeling a bit paralysed. 

> I love these works; I love their inventive materiality and the ways that they 
> exploit and reverse-engineer existing systems, but I don’t know what claims I 
> can make for their political impact. And yet I feel that this work is still 
> very worthwhile. 

> 

> 

> 
> -- 
> http://www.rachelodwyer.com/
> 
> +353 (85) 7023779
> # distributed via : no commercial use without permission
> #  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Has net-art lost political significance?

[voyd]

So interesting.
I also find this so interesting because in the light of fakeness, Tactical 
Media is harder, in the sense of the intervention/provocation to response that 
was done with RTMark/YesMen back in the time I was active. I think that 
the new Washington Post, after the Times and NY Post ones that were done in the 
late 2000's, was powerful because I heard about it in the UAE.

However, in the Eastern hemisphere, I have been working with AR as a "local" 
discourse (meaning that anyone can get the app, but the message is pretty 
limited to them), as well as working with artists in Kazakhstan about messages 
AR as tactical media, such as overlaying messages over works in the National 
Mueum (based on the Manifest.AR We AR MoMA intervention I was part of around 
2010) and the "Modernization of Consciousness" (Ruhani Zhangru) posters in 
2018. These are some interestign ways in which one can laterally engage 
networks for critical discourse.

In addition, I am working with David Guillo with his independent web router 
galleries as a sort of TAZ in regions that employ firewalls and net.filtering. 
This follows from my setting up occupy.here routers as wifi "islands" for 
collaboration without using VPN, and therefore staying technically within local 
regulations.

While not so much "Tactical" media, I consider that in the era of increasing 
firewalling, and in the case of threatened net.separation in Russia and Iran, I 
feel hang autonomous server art is a critical space for exploration of these 
topics as well.

On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 15:28:58 -0700, Molly Hankwitz  wrote:


Hi Rachel,



snip -

I’m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the 
wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio 
communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming signals, 
communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks 
and artists making work in or about the politics of the wireless spectrum – who 
owns it, how it’s controlled and so on

snip



Great. So needed. I wrote a dissertation on WiFi practices - a bit earlier 
history than what you are looking for. I write about “warchalking” and other 
kinds of social media based information spaces, hacks. From that experience I’d 
bet you will be best off in the arts. If there is writing being done it would 
be from groups like the then - headman - Knowbotics Research, etc. But the best 
project - utilizing mobile tools and being both tactical and poetry and human 
rights - Transborder Tool b.a.n.g. Lab. Ricardo Dominguez’s and Brett Stalbaum 
from virtual sit-in days behind it as well as Micha Cardenas. We programmed 
this into our project - City Centered: Locative Media and Wireless Festival - 
2010. I think TBT is having a re-release. (Smile)



Molly



On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 3:40 AM Rachel O' Dwyer rachel.odw...@gmail.com 
wrote:





What characterises media art interventions in the context of ‘surveillance 
capitalism’, platforms and the gig economy? Are these practices still 
meaningful or, as F.A.T. Lab claimed in 2015, have they lost political 
significance in the face of global platforms?



Can we still speak about ‘tactical media’ or ‘the exploit’, and if not is 
this because

a) network activism has transformed so that these older descriptions no longer 
accurately describe net art and ‘hacktivist’ practices, or

b) these art practices have stayed much the same, but they are no longer 
effective in the current political and economic context?



I’m wondering if anyone knows of any writing that attempts to theorise/frame 
media art activist work post 2012? Perhaps to speak about it as a set of 
practices discrete from theories of ‘tactical media’ or ‘the exploit’ that go 
before? Perhaps something on post-internet art and activism?

Or is it a case of looking at writing about activism in the face of defeat and 
what seems like a hopeless cause?



If you've read or written anything that you think might be interesting I'd love 
to hear about it,



Best,



Rachel



A bit more detail about why I'm asking this question:

I’m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the 
wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio 
communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming signals, 
communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and cellular networks 
and artists making work in or about the politics of the wireless spectrum – who 
owns it, how it’s controlled and so on.

But I’m feeling a bit paralysed.

I love these works; I love their inventive materiality and the ways that they 
exploit and reverse-engineer existing systems, but I don’t know what claims I 
can make for their political impact. And yet I feel that this work is still 
very worthwhile.














--



http://www.rachelodwyer.com/

+353 (85) 7023779





# distributed via nettime: no commercial use without 

Re: Has net-art lost political significance?

[Molly Hankwitz]

Hi Rachel,
snip -

I’m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the
wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio
communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming
signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and
cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the
wireless spectrum – who owns it, how it’s controlled and so on

snip


Great. So needed. I wrote a dissertation on WiFi practices - a bit earlier
history than what you are looking for. I write about “warchalking” and
other kinds of social media based information spaces, hacks. From that
experience I’d bet you will be best off in the arts. If there is writing
being done it would be from groups like the then - headman - Knowbotics
Research, etc. But the best project - utilizing mobile tools and being both
tactical and poetry and human rights - Transborder Tool b.a.n.g. Lab.
Ricardo Dominguez’s and Brett Stalbaum from virtual sit-in days behind it
as well as Micha Cardenas. We programmed this into our project - City
Centered: Locative Media and Wireless Festival - 2010. I think TBT is
having a re-release. (Smile)


Molly

On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 3:40 AM Rachel O' Dwyer 
wrote:

> What characterises media art interventions in the context of ‘surveillance
> capitalism’, platforms and the gig economy? Are these practices still
> meaningful or, as F.A.T. Lab claimed in 2015,  have they lost political
> significance in the face of global platforms?
>
>
>
>  Can we still speak about ‘tactical media’ or ‘the exploit’, and if not is
> this because
>
> a) network activism has transformed so that these older descriptions no
> longer accurately describe net art and ‘hacktivist’ practices, or
>
> b) these art practices have stayed much the same, but they are no longer
> effective in the current political and economic context?
>
>
>
> I’m wondering if anyone knows of any writing that attempts to
> theorise/frame media art activist work post 2012? Perhaps to speak about it
> as a set of practices discrete from theories of ‘tactical media’ or ‘the
> exploit’ that go before? Perhaps something on post-internet art and
> activism?
>
> Or is it a case of looking at writing about activism in the face of defeat
> and what seems like a hopeless cause?
>
>
> If you've read or written anything that you think might be interesting I'd
> love to hear about it,
>
>
> Best,
>
>
> Rachel
>
>
>
> A bit more detail about why I'm asking this question:
>
> I’m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the
> wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio
> communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming
> signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and
> cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the
> wireless spectrum – who owns it, how it’s controlled and so on.
>
> But I’m feeling a bit paralysed.
>
> I love these works; I love their inventive materiality and the ways that
> they exploit and reverse-engineer existing systems, but I don’t know what
> claims I can make for their political impact. And yet I feel that this work
> is still very worthwhile.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> http://www.rachelodwyer.com/
>
> +353 (85) 7023779
> #  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
> #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Re: Has net-art lost political significance?

[Gary Hall]

Hi Rachel,

I'm not sure it's exactly what you have in mind. But just in case it 
helps, you could take a look at some of the artists and art activist 
projects that made up the second day of the Pirate Care conference last 
week:


https://www.coventry.ac.uk/research/about-us/research-events/2019/pirate-care-conference/

Hopefully, we should be able to make some recordings available in the 
not too distant future.


Best, Gary


On 27/06/2019 11:27, Rachel O' Dwyer wrote:


What characterises media art interventions in the context of 
‘surveillance capitalism’, platforms and the gig economy? Are these 
practices still meaningful or, as F.A.T. Lab claimed in 2015,  have 
they lost political significance in the face of global platforms?


 Can we still speak about ‘tactical media’ or ‘the exploit’, and if 
not is this because


a) network activism has transformed so that these older descriptions 
no longer accurately describe net art and ‘hacktivist’ practices, or


b) these art practices have stayed much the same, but they are no 
longer effective in the current political and economic context?


I’m wondering if anyone knows of any writing that attempts to 
theorise/frame media art activist work post 2012? Perhaps to speak 
about it as a set of practices discrete from theories of ‘tactical 
media’ or ‘the exploit’ that go before? Perhaps something on 
post-internet art and activism?


Or is it a case of looking at writing about activism in the face of 
defeat and what seems like a hopeless cause?



If you've read or written anything that you think might be interesting 
I'd love to hear about it,



Best,


Rachel

A bit more detail about why I'm asking this question:

I’m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in 
the wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined 
radio communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and 
jamming signals, communities and activists who are building communal 
Wi-Fi and cellular networks and artists making work in or about the 
politics of the wireless spectrum – who owns it, how it’s controlled 
and so on.


But I’m feeling a bit paralysed.

I love these works; I love their inventive materiality and the ways 
that they exploit and reverse-engineer existing systems, but I don’t 
know what claims I can make for their political impact. And yet I feel 
that this work is still very worthwhile.



--
http://www.rachelodwyer.com/

+353 (85) 7023779

#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
















#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Has net-art lost political significance?

[Rachel O' Dwyer]

What characterises media art interventions in the context of ‘surveillance
capitalism’, platforms and the gig economy? Are these practices still
meaningful or, as F.A.T. Lab claimed in 2015,  have they lost political
significance in the face of global platforms?



 Can we still speak about ‘tactical media’ or ‘the exploit’, and if not is
this because

a) network activism has transformed so that these older descriptions no
longer accurately describe net art and ‘hacktivist’ practices, or

b) these art practices have stayed much the same, but they are no longer
effective in the current political and economic context?



I’m wondering if anyone knows of any writing that attempts to
theorise/frame media art activist work post 2012? Perhaps to speak about it
as a set of practices discrete from theories of ‘tactical media’ or ‘the
exploit’ that go before? Perhaps something on post-internet art and
activism?

Or is it a case of looking at writing about activism in the face of defeat
and what seems like a hopeless cause?


If you've read or written anything that you think might be interesting I'd
love to hear about it,


Best,


Rachel



A bit more detail about why I'm asking this question:

I’m currently writing about various tactical and activist practices in the
wireless space, including artistic interventions, software-defined radio
communities who are reverse-engineering, hacking, sniffing and jamming
signals, communities and activists who are building communal Wi-Fi and
cellular networks and artists making work in or about the politics of the
wireless spectrum – who owns it, how it’s controlled and so on.

But I’m feeling a bit paralysed.

I love these works; I love their inventive materiality and the ways that
they exploit and reverse-engineer existing systems, but I don’t know what
claims I can make for their political impact. And yet I feel that this work
is still very worthwhile.





-- 
http://www.rachelodwyer.com/

+353 (85) 7023779
#  distributed via : no commercial use without permission
#is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: