User:Tash/grad project proposal3

Graduation Project Proposal Draft 3 – November 1st 2018

What do you want to make?

'Blind Carbon Copy' by Stephanie Vilayphiou, a series of hacks to circumvent copyright

I want to explore the way social and memetic media is used as a democratic tool in present-day Indonesia. One idea would be a research project which exposes or performs a particular aspect of the Indonesian social media environment. For example, a series of publications revealing self-censorhip trends on political platforms, or a collection of experiments in comment-section activism. Example: Stephanie Vilayphiou's project, Blind Carbon Copy.

Another idea would be to take the research from my thesis and use it to design a publishing platform or a tool which promotes the sharing of knowledges still considered precarious or taboo by mainstream Indonesian media. Or a social interaction which challenges current modes of knowledge production and gives young people the opportunity to circumvent or rally against censorship. Compared to the first idea, which is more about commentary and concept, this would mean a more practical intervention in the media landscape. Example: Politwoops which collects and displays deleted tweets from politician's accounts, or Ethira a social platform / mobile app which allowed users to post anonymous and ephemeral messages on a public forum.

Why do you want to make it? And relation to a larger context?
Being born and raised in Indonesia, my motivations for this project are both personal and political. After 8 years living and working here in the Netherlands, I plan to return to Indonesia next year to ultimately set up a publishing practice in the arena of politics and arts. But what makes the media landscape there so exciting, is also what makes it challenging: its fragility, its velocity, its continuous struggle with political control. With this project I would like to help build a more open media culture in Indonesia, especially as we navigate the current era of post-truth politics, radicalism, and digital censorship.

Today, Indonesia is at an interesting crossroads in its political and cultural evolution. In 1998, President Suharto’s military regime fell, making way for our first democratically elected government. At around the same time, we saw the rapid rise of networked media and Internet culture. As the country's economy strengthened, and its young democracy developed, tens of millions of Indonesians joined the new middle class. Mobile phone and internet usage skyrocketed, cinemas proliferated, and so did the consumption of alternative and pop culture. As a result, the first years of the new millenium felt like a moment of opening up, and of substantial advances in freedom of expression, and freedom of connection.

However, these extended freedoms did not immediately equal a more engaged and empowered civil society. Though we now have more access to knowledge, other forces, both national and trans-national, continue to impede meaningful and open discourse. A low level of media literacy outside of urban centres is one factor. Mainstream media control by political elites is another. But one of the most influential cultural forces in contemporary Indonesian society, is the rise of religious extremism. In the wake of the power vaccuum left by the fall of Suharto’s dictatorship, political Islam (and its conservative ideologies) flourished. Twenty years on, the democracy we fought so hard to achieve feels uneven at best, and deceptive at worst.

For me, one of the most acute symptoms of this volatile political climate is the spread of (self)-censorship. Throughout the last ten years, the state has intensified its censorship activities, drawing up legislations which inhibit freedom of speech and religion. These mechanisms play out both offline and online, with social media platforms becoming one of the most heated battlegrounds. Furthermore, these mechanisms are becoming internalized. The state has managed to outsource their censorship agenda to the people – creating an atmosphere of self-censorship and a mob mentality which suppresses debate and discussion. In this way, questioning Indonesia’s muslim identity has become taboo – and has even resulted in the 2016 incarceration of the incumbent governor of Jakarta, Ahok, for ‘blaspheming’ against the Qu’ran. While social media runs rampant with political memes about these kinds of situations, mainstream Indonesian media still struggles to image any kind of meaningful dissent.

This is where I would like to intervene. In a country which is becoming more and more sensitive to dissent, social media represents a valuable alternative space for young people to experiment and comment on their political identity. However, free and open discussion on these platforms need to be actively maintained – and defended. What if we could we troll the trollers, weaponize the silent majority, empower the ‘almost-spoken’? In a country where free speech is becoming a risk more than a right, we need more tools to and safe spaces to discuss, disagree and deconstruct what it means to be a modern Indonesian citizen.

I think this topic is also timely and relevant beyond the context of Indonesia, as politics becomes more polarised across the globe, and social media proves to be a vital force in public culture.

How do you plan to make it?
I would start by researching the current media landscape in my home country of Indonesia. In particular, I want to analyse the impact that digital media has had in the economic, cultural and political revolution of the country. How does it contrast to the way traditional media is produced and consumed? Where are the opportunities and barriers when it comes to (self-)censorship, technology, literacy and access? Then, I would like to research how other groups / artists / publishers have tackled this issue in other countries – what kind of tactics do they use? What kinds of reactions and outcomes did they have?

During this time I want to continue last trimester’s experiments of prototyping software that would allow for a) reading information and b) sharing information. For example, could I write a programme which helps me analyse the impact of certain political memes in Indonesia? What about a bot that provokes different modes of discussion? Could I make instances of local networks which allow for the ‘safe’ dissemination of information? What modes of sociality could I embed into a publishing platform – whether that be a political blog, a chat room or a peer-produced library? Once I have defined my goal and my audience I will work on the presentation of the project.

What is your timetable?
September - October: research and make an analysis of the current use of social media in Indonesia, find where the gaps are, specify what is really needed and where I could intervene. Contact relevant figures in Indonesia. Research existing media tactics, platforms and services which play in the same context.

November: Prototype / make sketches of possible outcomes. What kind of structure would it have technically? Who is the end user? When and where would it be useful? What is my role – editor, facilitator, gatekeeper? What are it’s specificities? Continue to develop my position while touching base with relevant figures in Indonesia. Finish project proposal.

December - March: Develop prototypes, define scope of the project (technically and theoretically). Will it be just a platform or tool? Will it be the beginning of a series? How will I present it in the final exhibition? Sketch this out and start organising the materials and help I’ll need. Complete thesis.

April - June: Finish practical project, prepare final presentation.

Who can help you and how?
Clara Balaguer, for her experience running an alternative publishing platform in the Philippines. Amy Wu, for her knowledge on censorship in China and the political use of new digital media (memes, social media etc.) Artist and WDKA tutor Reinaart Vanhoe, for his work with Indonesian institution RuangRupa. Other Indonesian designers / artists / publishing spaces currently working in the intersection of media, technology and culture, such as Forum Lenteng, Lifepatch, Taman Baca Kesiman and Magdalene Indonesia.

Relation to previous practice
Questions explored during the Poortgebouw project: What are the politics of representation and of erasure? The idea of the artist as an archivist (and vice versa). How to tell stories and create communities in precarious contexts?

Questions explored during the OuNuPo project: Technology is not a neutral practice. What cultures do we reproduce when we write programmes? How can we design platforms or tools with an attitude? Who is included / excluded in the process of knowledge production?

Questions explored during the XPPL / Interfacing the Law project: How do you engage with unstable information? Can we design reading / searching interfaces that are able to represent uncertainty, locate outsides, explore agonisms? How can we intervene during the process of ‘downloading’ and ‘uploading’ information? Where are the grey areas when it comes to accessing and distributing knowledge?