technological determinism… on being read and labeled out of context

The main reason that i love blogging is because it forces me to write down some random things without trying to formalize them, contextualize them or operate explicitly reflexive. The structure of academic writing requires so much framing that i get writing hang-ups. Given the lack of formality and the laziness with which i spat out random thoughts, i should not be surprised when i’m misread. All the same, it always takes me for a loop and i immediately go into introspective mode asking myself if i should be far more careful about what i blog. Of course, i know that this would mean far fewer (if any) blog entries about ideas. Still, i find myself gulping and needing to respond. Right now is one of those moments.

Amidst holiday festivities, i shot off a response to cory’s call. Apprently, it spiraled around other people and made them think. This morning, i got labeled a technological determinist. The big joke about technological determinism is that anyone who knows what the term means would never identify as such. In fact, it’s like the canonical insult amongst academics in this field.

In rereading my entry, i can see how my call can be read in that way, even though that is a precisely inaccurate reading of my views. This made me wonder how many other people misread my commentary to fit their structure of thought. Thus, i feel the need to clarify my position, if only for myself to be a bit more coherent.

First, for the academics, i certainly distance myself from technological determinism, although i also quibble with social constructivism. In many ways, i feel as though a pure social constructivist stance dismisses any role that technology creators have in shaping society based on their design decisions. In many ways, i feel as though this is because social constructivism is used as a retrospective framework, not a projective one. In other words, retrospectively, we can consider the vast array of relevant social groups and thus pull responsibility out of the picture. Yet, this is not a tool that many technologists know how to utilize going forward.

For those who aren’t aware of social constructivism, one aspect of the process is to consider all of the relevant social groups (users, creators, non-users, politicians, etc.) and how they played a role in the production and dissemination of a technology. The classic piece on this method is Bijker’s “King of the Road: The social construction of the Safety Bicycle.”

If you look at how technology is created, there is a consideration of one’s market, or target market. Technology is designed for a perceived audience. This is good! What is missing is an extensive consideration of all of the different players who may come to participate. In other words, we don’t consider how our non-target groups might engage with our creation. We simply hope that they engage with the same behavior as the target. Furthermore, we tend to target a behavior, not just a group (if academic, think configuring the user).

From where i stand, there are some amazing tools for social scientists to use to study technology, but rarely are they used to help create technology. This is foolish. Technology creators are not idiots. Their work is certainly affected by the social environment. Yet, their creations also do affect the social culture. It is a bi-directional, non-deterministic process. Unfortunately, i feel as though too many science studies folks just wait to see what will be created before studying it, rather than helping the creators think through the environment in which they are creating.

Thus, to clarify. My call to technologists is to actually flesh out the relevant social groups, not just the target markets. When people have contradictory use scenarios, you cannot simply hope that the one you want will play out. Nor should you try to constrain the allowed behavior to that one alone. You must consider both types of users, how they will affect one another and what the consequences might be. This is not an exact science because there are plenty of non-deterministic paths that the technology can take, but being awake to the different groups and their interplay is key. Furthermore, this approach makes the technologist far more aware of the emergence of new, unexpected behavior and more prepared to determine how to move forward now that new, unexpected relevant social groups come into play.

Hindsight is fantastic for understanding a technology’s path to stabilization. Unfortunately, though, technology creators do not have that retrospective privilege. Thus, it should not be surprising that deterministic philosophies emerge from this group. They want their technology to solve a problem and they see a direct link from technology to problem solution. Yet, the perspective from those studying technology retrospectively and those moving it forward would do the other quite well. Understanding how to be aware of relevant social groups as one moves forward is exceptionally valuable and will prevent the feelings of frustration as users “refuse to behave.” They aren’t refusing… they are just challenging the projected path of use.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

12 thoughts on “technological determinism… on being read and labeled out of context

  1. lago

    Thanks for the more detailed explanation. It’s tough, especially for social scientists, to include all of the backstory behind the short idea-based blog entries, and I appreciate your willingness to flesh out the discussion with this post.

  2. Joi Ito

    BTW, I hope you don’t slow down your blogging because of things like this. People like you are an important bridge between academica and “our world”. Blog early, blog often and correct along the way works fine I think. Sure, people can quote you out of context, but you can continue to define the context for most of us. I for one am fascinated by the edge of the academic world meeting my world through blogs.

  3. Joi Ito's Web

    We are not technological determinists

    First of all, I’m glad I’m not an academic. I wouldn’t have known what a technological determinist was or how…

  4. hakank.blogg

    Teknisk/teknologisk determinism

    Hittade zephorias kommentar technological determinism… on being read and labeled out of context till Technological Determinism. zephoria skriver bland annat: From where i stand, there are some amazing tools for social scientists to use to study techn…

  5. Free Wisdom Online

    Between Technical and Social Determinism

    Danah and Joi Ito got accused of being a technical determinist, but denied this charge (and again). It seems, however, that all the parties in this debate were looking at technical determinism and social constructionism as if they were the…

  6. Free Wisdom Online

    Between Technical and Social Determinism

    Danah and Joi Ito got accused of being a technical determinist, but denied this charge (and again). It seems, however, that all the parties in this debate were looking at technical determinism and social constructionism as if they were the…

  7. Adina Levin

    “What is missing is an extensive consideration of all of the different players who may come to participate.”

    There’s a good amount of software development conventional wisdom that does recommend taking these considerations into account.

    In the design phase, conventional user interaction methods (Constantine and Lockwood) recommend modeling several types of users.

    Agile development methods recommend minimizing the time spent developing without customer feedback, and putting customers in charge of defining when a product works well enough to release.

    Technologists who sell stuff respond to user feedback that affects the customer’s willingness to pay. Though this sometimes has perverse effects when the buyers aren’t the main users.

    What’s worthy of consideration is heavily influenced by culture — Apple puts a greater-than-average amount of consideration into design and usability.

    One of the positive effects of the economic downturn has been to give developers time for “extensive consideration.” In a rapidly moving tech market, practitioners don’t have enough time to think.

  8. Mark Federman

    Two books by the person who has been (falsely) accused of being a technological determinist, on this issue of creators being able to “think things out before putting them out:” Understanding Media and Laws of Media: The New Science by Marshall McLuhan. His quintessential aphorism on technological determinism and social constructivism – “We shape our tools and thereafter our tools shape us.”

  9. Brayden King

    Are blogs transforming society?

    Dave Pollard lists his ten most important ideas about blogging from 2003. Apparently one of the best ideas of 2003 was Pollard’s own how-to flowchart of blogging (at the bottom of this post). Strangely, the linear flowchart bears no resemblance…

  10. TyrantBuilts blog

    New grass roots FREE blog service looking to take a big ite out of Blogger, blogspot, and others.

    Conviniblogs.com offers many progressive blogging feautees found no where else for FREE such as podcasting and blog torrents! Now is a good time to sign up as many good subdomains are still available. see you there!

Comments are closed.