Synopsis7Feb

Abstract (50 words) Synopses (500 words)

back to base:

https://pzwiki.wdka.nl/mediadesign/Calendars:Networked_Media_Calendar/Networked_Media_Calendar/24-01-2018_-Event_1

Reading – Tash

The Digital Universal Library and the myth of chaos
by Sanne Koevoets, in Webs of Feminist Knowledge Online

Abstract (50)

In this essay, Sanne Koevoets offers the FRAGEN database as an example of a feminist digital library which, through transparent processes and inclusive interfaces, is questioning and rejecting the biased structures of online knowledge spaces as we know them.

Synopses (500)

This essay is a feminist critique on digital libraries written by Sanne Koevoets (NL); who is a researcher and lecturer on new media cultures and gender studies.

It begins with an excerpt from Jose Luis Borges’ pivotal work ‘The Library of Babel’ (1941, English translation 1962), a short story which figures a vast library that consists of an infinite number of hexagonal spaces, holding an unlimited number of books. But the promise of a ‘Universal Library’, which would hold all of human knowledge, has always been a problematic one. Even with the rise of digital technologies, with its capacity for storage and its sophisticated search tools, Koevoets argues that the reality is both more complex and more mundane than the dream. Introducing her first criticism, she explains that “While the fantasy of a (digital) Universal Library may be philosophically or metaphysically compelling, the politics of selection and access – and thus of ordering techniques – are ever present on the Web.”

Next to the fundamental fact that every library is by definition selective in its collection of texts, Koevoets points out that technology is a social construct and thus not value-neutral. Our interactions with online spaces are governed by algorithms, which often conform to market forces and increasingly define and dominate how information is presented to us. In this way, largely invisible processes like ranking algorithms are becoming co-producers of authority, and to some, “the most pervasive source of bias in the history of research.” She ends this section with the essential question of the essay: “Under such conditions, how can webs of feminist knowledge be represented online?”

With the problems exposed, Koevoets brings forward a case study called FRAGEN: The FRAmes on GENder in Europe project, a digital feminist library constructing an online database of core feminist texts from all 27 EU countries, and Croatia and Turkey. The first, key difference between this project, and say, that of the Google Books project, is that FRAGEN tends towards specificity rather than totalizing inclusivity. The second, is the issue of transparency. FRAGEN’s approach to selection does not pretend to be neutral nor exhaustive. The library openly shares the identity of its librarians: key feminist figures from each of the 29 states, all chosen by committee. It also shares insights into the criteria by which these key figures were asked to select texts for a “longlist,” then on how “longlists” were pared down into “shortlists" of ten texts per country. Koevoets argues that “the combination of transparency and the way in which different local views and conceptualizations were used to provide access to the database via multiple route of entry (for instance by country, author, topic: etc.) lends the database a certain fluidity.”

The last section of the essay focuses on the website of the database, an interface which allows and invites other researchers to reflect and comment on the library texts in a comparative way. This is another way in which the FRAGEN database and website are set up to actively eschew claims to objectivity, and to represent the constellations of feminist knowledge in all their partiality.

In conclusion, Koevoets posits that it is the responsibility of every digital librarian, and feminist researcher, to take seriously the implications and assumptions that are built into the very structure of online knowledge spaces. “In order to make feminist knowledge accessible online, not only the politics of selection, but also the politics of the index must be addressed.”

Opinion / notes

Sanne Koevoets brings together issues of archive politics, bias in technology, and feminist methodology in a clear and concise way. I am especially interested by her critique on ranking algorithms and how it ties into her rejection of the ‘universal’ anything, which is also a key pillar in the understanding of situated knowledge.