User:Marie Wocher/Draft Proposal
Tentative Title
The Web cheated on me
General Introduction
Throughout my time at PZI I want to investigate how we experience knowledge on the web. I am interested in the way users of the Web act in popular structures, such as Wikipedia, Facebook and Google. By means of surveys and Cultural Probes I want to find out how we acquire, participate and process knowledge on the web. The outcome of these studies will lead into a visual essay. In my practical work I often find visual answers to the questions I have. I am looking for possibilities to reorganize information and make the consumption of knowledge on the Web tangible. I would like to make use of cultural probes because I think it is a good method to reach a more impressionistic view of peoples web behavior. Statistics often only tell a complete picture of the most viewed websites for example or how much time people spend on a particular website. But they don't make a statement about how we produce and restructure knowledge by browsing the web. The probes and surveys should cover several generations because I suspect that different generations behave differently and looking for different information on the Web.
Why?
For my part, I grew up believing that the web knows everything. I believed that the web would help me in finding answers to all questions I have. But I start realizing that the knowledge on the Web is very limited and I don't get my questions answered which leads to disappointment. I would like to find out where this promise, that the Web knows everything, has its origin and from whom I adapted this belief.
Practical steps
Probably I was unclear about the 'cultural probes' in my presentation. It was never my intention to replicate the job of a data analyst, I use it more as a source to find the content I want to use for the visual essay.
The visual essay should be a film essay or audio material because this feels like a logical step for me to take. Because of my Background in graphic design, my projects lead usually into printed publications. But since I am studying at the Piet Zwart Institute, the outcome of my projects lead recently into two films, one of them was an animation and the other a visual essay including a script. I would like to develop my skills in this direction.
A very good example for what I would like to achieve with my graduation project is the film 'I love Alaska' from Lennert & Sander. I like the way Lennert & Sander are telling something about our time by zooming into one personal story. This film is telling on the one hand a very personal story about a women, and on the other hand something general about using a search engine.
Work in progress
Looking for people
I asked two people who didn't know each other from before to meet and have a conversation for 30 minutes. They were allowed to talk about everything except their last names. After the meeting I asked them to goole each other and to find out the full name of the other person. I recorded the conversation and received their web-browser histories afterward, that I could understand how they were searching for each other.
One day in December
On December 14, 2012, Adam Lanza, age 20, fatally shot twenty children and six adult staff members and wounded two at Sandy Hook Elementary School in the village of Sandy Hook in the town of Newtown, Connecticut. Before driving to the school, Lanza had shot and killed his mother, Nancy Lanza, at their Newtown home. After killing students and staff members, Lanza committed suicide by shooting himself in the head as first responders arrived.
This is the first sentence of the Wikipedia entry Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.
It was created by a user called MoRsE on 14 December 2012 at 18:05. This day (last edit was at 23:59) there were made 769 edits in 5h and 54 minutes by xx different users.
This is my webbrowser-history the same day during 18:05 and 23.59 Media:Webbrowser_history.pdf
Relation to previous practice
In my previous practice recurring questions and topics are: how we exchange and organize knowledge on the web, if the Web mirrors our own expectations or if it is a preexisting set of technologies that we simply follow and adapt, what truth and lies mean in the digital world and the question of identity/authenticity.
Previous projects that deal with these issues are, for example, Vincent my Graduation project, where I ask the Question how do we read on the internet and is it possible to design a printed publication that offers the same kind of non-hierachial experience as browsing through an internet website? I researched our reading behavior at the Web, by analyzing peoples web-browser histories. The source I chose for showing my research is the novel Vincent by Joey Goebel. Using the text of this book, I designed two A4 printed publications of the same book, entitled Vincent I and Vincent II. I restructured the Text of the novel and added a marginal column that consists of references that help the reader to navigate through the structure of the book. All Characters in the book are identified as a »Link«, that the reader can look up by turning to the indicated page. What is the »click« on a web page is in my version of Vincent, a system of footnotes, cross-links and different paper choices that navigates the reader through The book. I was interested if I can offer the same kind of dynamic experience to a generation of readers used to Google and Wikipedia, but in reading printed books. Like on the internet I don't offer my reader anything more than choices, in my specific case visual choices. The reader of the book has the possibility to become his or her own editor, make the decision of how he or she wants to read the book, by him or herself. The reader can still read the novel as it was Joey Goebel's intention, but he or she can also read broader, start reading a chapter, browsing to a highlighted name and go on reading all information of the character and than reading further external links in Wikipedia or Twitter. There is even a link backwards that functions as a virtual »back button« should you get lost and want to find your way back.
Another project, that is dealing with the boundaries of Web 2.0 is the Libya-Project. For this project I have chosen Google as the medium upon which I formulated questions, such as „How does Google help me to form an opinion?“ and „Where are the borders of Google?“ In depth, I concerned myself with the topic of the NATO operation in Libya. I decided to choose this issue, because I realized that I faced some difficulties when it came to terms of forming a clear opinion and taking an own position concerning the NATO operation in Libya. Therefore, I asked myself whether or not Google would help me to find a personal opinion on this subject. I developed a questionnaire, which consists of skill questions as well as of matters of conscience. Those ideas resulted in a book, which is divided into three parts. The first part of the book consists of questions, such as “When did the military operation in Libya start? How long does this NATO operation will take? Which nations take part in this operation? How are the citizens of Libya called? Where is Libya located?” - questions which can be easily answered by using Google and whose answers are often taken for granted due to their fact-based nature. No one needs to worry when asking awkward questions, which everybody would expect one to know, since they are considered as general knowledge. Google does not recognize shame. It is all about “fact check” – catching up on information – a habit which has taken greater significance since the Internet is almost always available. It has become increasingly important to be “up to date” and to possess knowledge.
Part two concentrates on questions where it is possible to find an answer, but where one must be aware of the fact that this answer might only be one out of many. Questions, such as “Why do NATO operations always take longer than thought in the first place?" or "Is libyan society able to build a democratic state after Gaddafi is removed?"… I realized that the opinion people develop for a certain topic depends widely on the scope of information Google provides. To a certain degree, Google dictates the way people think about a topic, due to the fact that Google simply reproduces or collects different press articles, blogs, etc. However, I did not find a sufficient response to every question. Therefore, I had to be satisfied with the answers Google proposes. The final third part consists of questions which can not be answered by using Google, such as “What is it like to lose a person?" "What is it like to lose someone for the ‘good cause’?" "Will it be easier to cope with the death of people when they sacrificed themselves for the good cause?" Questions which are so personal that in the end everyone has to find answers on their own. The three parts of the book and its content illustrate the limits of Google. What is the difference between facts and opinion? By using Google you acquire factual knowledge, true or not but an opinion (or a moral valuation) will never be formed because you do not have answers to all questions you have.
The fascination for the structure of Wikipedia and Knowledge exchange in general lead into a recent project this year: Whitney/Postmodernism/Libyan Civil War
Whitney/Postmodernism/Libyan Civil War is an installation that consist of three different animations, each shown on a separate screen. The screen of each animation is split into two and shows all edits being made on the same Wikipedia page on two different days. The WIkipedia pages I chose are the pages of Whitney Houston, Libyan civil war and Postmodernism. I compared the Libya civil war page on the day the NATO intervened (03-18-11) with the 11th of february 2012, the day Whitney Houston died. The second animation shows all edits of the Whitney Houston page on the day she died and the day, I run the script, that was the 29th of march 2012 (ideally it would be the current day). The amount of edits varies strongly in these two animations. The third animation (Postmodernism page) compares the same days like the Whitney Houston animation. This is a page that is not dependent on current events and media attention. The amount of changes are on both days almost the same. All edits are shown as black text on white background. Each entry is seen as long as a new edit was made. 24 hours has been compressed to 15 minutes, whereas the proportions are correct. I saved all edits from a script that can scrape all edits that have been made on one particular wikipedia page in one day. For this project I was interested in the question "How do we remember?" And rather I was interested in the moment, when the mass media lose interest to a topic and therefor the public attention is stagnating and a topic gets no longer any attention anymore. I decided to research this phenomenon within the structure of Wikipedia. When a topic is particular current and gets a lot of media attention, the activity on Wikipedia clearly increase what means that the edits of a page will increase. But after a while the amount of edits on a Wikipedia page will fall to a lower level again.
Relation to a larger context
I am impressed by the work of Rimini Protokoll, a german performance group who was recognized as being among the leaders and creators of the theatre movement known as "Reality Trend" (Theater der Zeit), which has exerted a powerful influence on the alternative theatre scene. They do dramatic works, which take place in that "colorful zone between reality and fiction." Since 2000, Rimini Protokoll has brought its "theatre of experts" to the stage and into city spaces, interpreted by non-professional actors who are called "experts" for that very reason. Their work focuses on the development of the center of the theater, allowing unusual perspectives on our reality. Both in "An Enemy of the People in Oslo" and "100% London" / "100 PERCENT MELBOURNE" / "100 PROZENT BERLIN" …, Rimini Protokoll ask what happens when statistics suddenly gets a face. If 100 women and men are not numbers, but individuals with individual stories.
And also »50 Aktenkilometer« (an audio walk) is a work that breaks down a huge amount of anonymous data to individual stories. "More than 50 kilometers of files are stored in the Stasi records office central archive; records of actions, meetings, conversations. Rimini Protokoll developed a radio drama out of this material in which former observers and the formerly observed engage with their files, delving into »assessment reports«, intercepted letters and photos never seen before. They are bemused, disgusted or they laugh, and wonder at the diary that the state was keeping on them in parallel to their own lives."
I also really like the collaborative work of Anouk van Dijk, a dancer/choreographer and Falk Richter, a theater author and director working together for more than 10 years, Their last three pieces »Trust«, »Protect me« and »Rausch« are based on the feeling of fear and insecurity and the unpredictability of financial markets. It's about the relationship between the economic situation and personal relationships. The pieces do believe that the collapse of the financial markets transfers to individuals and shape the general mood of distrust. Richter says about »Trust«: "I am interested in the relationship between the volatility in the money market to the fluctuations in relationships. How could a society function without trust? How to build intimacy without trust? He also draws parallels between Facebook (the associated personal value) and the stock market. Information on Facebook is nothing at all, it is just as unreal as speculative bubbles, it is not linked to anything of substance, merely an exchange of an image.
Van Dijk and Richter work on a complex issue from the perspective of individuals. They look at this subject from a different angle. They don't need to explain the financial crisis in detail, but want to make it tangible. They change the lens on this specific topic, the audience experience knowledge in a different way than reading the newspaper.
References
Falk Richter & Anouk van Dijk »Trust« http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkP_vP64Gks&feature=relmfu
Falk Richter & Anouk van Dijk »Protect Me«
Falk Richter & Anouk van Dijk »Trust«
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bb3c1XZu-gU
Oliver Kluck "Das Prinzip Meese"
CARDIFF & MILLER ALTER BAHNHOF VIDEO WALK
http://www.cardiffmiller.com/artworks/walks/alterbahnhof_video.html
CARDIFF & MILLER FOREST (for a thousand years...)
http://www.cardiffmiller.com/artworks/inst/forest_video.html
THE SYSTEM OF SOCIAL COMMUNICATION FAILED COMPLETELY A conversation between Falk Richter and Richard Sennett
http://www.falkrichter.com/logic/article.php?cat=82&id=20070
50 Aktenkilometer - Ein begehbares Stasi-Hörspiel
http://www.rimini-protokoll.de/website/de/project_4969.html
An Enemy of the People in Oslo
http://www.rimini-protokoll.de/website/de/project_5757.html
Is Google Making Us Stupid? By Nicholas Carr
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us-stupid/306868/
Manuel Castells - The Theory of the Network Society
Michel Serres
Jean-Francois Lyotard – The Postmodern Condition
Lernert & Sander – I love Alaska
http://www.lernertandsander.com/index.php?/projects/search-queries-77139/