Cited By
View all- Daus Z(2025)Distribution, Recognition, and Just Medical AIPhilosophy & Technology10.1007/s13347-025-00842-338:1Online publication date: 27-Jan-2025
The Digital Faces of Oppression and Domination: A Relational and Egalitarian Perspective on the Data-driven Society and its Regulation
Pages 701 - 712
Abstract
Drawing from Iris Marion Young's politics of difference and democratic theory, this contribution formulates a relational and egalitarian account of digital justice to understand and help counter, the social and technical conditions under which data-driven decision-making systems are liable to reinforce and introduce social injustice. To do so, this contribution is structured alongside three axes. First, I present data-driven decision-making systems as socio-technical systems that both take meaning from and co-shape people's relationships and the social structures they are part of. Due to this relational push and pull, I argue, data-driven systems have the potential to restructure society and, consequently, the conditions that govern people's exposure to, and experience of, injustice therein. Second, I transpose Young's ideation of oppression and domination onto the digital ecosystem. Both notions are used to locate within complex, dynamic and automated environments, a series of social and technological conditions that unjustifiably limit people's actions and behaviours. Third, I build on Young's model for an inclusive democracy to propose a series of institutional and procedural practices to ensure that, within the digital ecosystem, each person has the effective opportunity to pursue the life projects they value and to communicate their needs, concerns and experiences in ways that are heard and recognized by others.
References
[1]
Amy Allen. 2008. Power and the Politics of Difference: Oppression, Empowerment, and Transnational Justice. Hypatia 23, 3 (2008), 156–172. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2008.tb01210.x
[2]
Elizabeth S. Anderson. 1999. What Is the Point of Equality? Ethics 109, 2 (1999), 287–337. https://doi.org/10.1086/233897
[3]
Sherry R. Arnstein. 1969. A Ladder Of Citizen Participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners 35, 4 (July 1969), 216–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225
[4]
Agathe Balayn and Seda Gurses. 2021. Beyond Debiasing: Regulating AI and its inequalities. EDRi.
[5]
Solon Barocas. 2019. Machine Learning Is a Co-opting Machine. Public Books. Retrieved February 15, 2023 from https://www.publicbooks.org/machine-learning-is-a-co-opting-machine/
[6]
Siri Beerends and Ciano Aydin. 2021. Negotiating Authenticity in Technological Environments. Philos. Technol. 34, 4 (December 2021), 1665–1685. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-021-00480-5
[7]
Marvin van Bekkum and Frederik Zuiderveen Borgesius. 2021. Digital welfare fraud detection and the Dutch SyRI judgment. European Journal of Social Security (August 2021), 13882627211031257. https://doi.org/10.1177/13882627211031257
[8]
Reuben Binns, Max Van Kleek, Michael Veale, Ulrik Lyngs, Jun Zhao, and Nigel Shadbolt. 2018. “It's Reducing a Human Being to a Percentage”; Perceptions of Justice in Algorithmic Decisions. In Conference on Computer-Human Interaction, 2018. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173951
[9]
Abeba Birhane. 2021. Algorithmic injustice: a relational ethics approach. Patterns (N Y) 2, 2 (February 2021), 100205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2021.100205
[10]
Abeba Birhane, William Isaac, Vinodkumar Prabhakaran, Mark Díaz, Madeleine Clare Elish, Iason Gabriel, and Shakir Mohamed. 2022. Power to the People? Opportunities and Challenges for Participatory AI. https://doi.org/10.1145/3551624.3555290
[11]
Abeba Birhane, Vinay Uday Prabhu, and Emmanuel Kahembwe. 2021. Multimodal datasets: misogyny, pornography, and malignant stereotypes. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2110.01963
[12]
Albert Borgmann. 1984. Technology and the Character of Contemporary Life: A Philosophical Inquiry. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
[13]
Anna Carastathis. 2013. Basements and Intersections. Hypatia 28, 4 (2013), 698–715.
[14]
Mark Coeckelbergh. 2011. Human development or human enhancement? A methodological reflection on capabilities and the evaluation of information technologies. Ethics Inf Technol 13, 2 (June 2011), 81–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-010-9231-9
[15]
Patricia Hill Collins. 1990. Black feminist thought: knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. Unwin Hyman, Boston.
[16]
Patricia Hill Collins. 1998. Fighting Words: Black women and the search for justice. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis. Retrieved February 7, 2022 from https://www.upress.umn.edu/book-division/books/fighting-words
[17]
Nick Couldry and Ulises A. Mejias. 2019. Data Colonialism: Rethinking Big Data's Relation to the Contemporary Subject. Television & New Media 20, 4 (May 2019), 336–349. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476418796632
[18]
Kate Crawford. 2013. The Hidden Biases in Big Data. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved October 14, 2019 from https://hbr.org/2013/04/the-hidden-biases-in-big-data
[19]
Kate Crawford. 2021. Atlas of AI: Power, Politics, and the Planetary Costs of Artificial Intelligence. Yale University Press. https://doi.org/
[20]
Kate Crawford and Trevor Paglen. 2021. Excavating AI: the politics of images in machine learning training sets. AI & Soc 36, 4 (December 2021), 1399–1399. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01301-1
[21]
Kathleen Creel and Deborah Hellman. 2021. The Algorithmic Leviathan: Arbitrariness, Fairness, and Opportunity in Algorithmic Decision Making Systems. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT ’21), March 03, 2021. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 816. https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445942
[22]
John Danaher. 2022. Freedom in an Age of Algocracy. In The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Technology, Shannon Vallor (ed.). Oxford University Press, 249–272. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190851187.013.16
[23]
Sylvie Delacroix and Michael Veale. 2020. Smart technologies and our sense of self: Going beyond epistemic counter-profiling. Life and the Law in the Era of Data-Driven Agency (January 2020). Retrieved April 5, 2020 from https://www.elgaronline.com/view/edcoll/9781788971997/9781788971997.00011.xml
[24]
Emily Denton, Alex Hanna, Razvan Amironesei, Andrew Smart, and Hilary Nicole. 2021. On the genealogy of machine learning datasets: A critical history of ImageNet. Big Data & Society 8, 2 (July 2021), 20539517211035955. https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517211035955
[25]
Catherine D'Ignazio and Lauren F. Klein. 2020. 4. “What Gets Counted Counts.” Data Feminism (March 2020). Retrieved December 8, 2023 from https://data-feminism.mitpress.mit.edu/pub/h1w0nbqp/release/3
[26]
Catherine D'Ignazio and Lauren F. Klein. 2020. Data feminism. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Retrieved from https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/data-feminism
[27]
Virginia Dignum. 2022. Relational Artificial Intelligence. arXiv:2202.07446 [cs] (February 2022). Retrieved February 17, 2022 from http://arxiv.org/abs/2202.07446
[28]
Taylor Dotson. 2014. Authentic Virtual Others? The Promise of Post-Modern Technologies. AI and Society 29, 1 (2014), 11–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-012-0435-x
[29]
W. E. B. Du Bois. 2007. The souls of Black folk. Oxford University Press, Oxford [England] ; New York.
[30]
Ronald Dworkin. 1977. Taking Rights Seriously. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
[31]
Ronald Dworkin. 1983. Comment on Narveson: In defense of equality: Ronald Dworkin. Social Philosophy and Policy 1, 1 (1983), 24–40.
[32]
Virginia Eubanks. 2018. Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor. St. Martin's Press, New York. Retrieved from https://dl.acm.org/doi/book/10.5555/3208509
[33]
Angelina Fisher and Thomas Streinz. 2021. Confronting Data Inequality. Social Science Research Network, Rochester, NY. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3825724
[34]
Carina Fourie, Fabian Schuppert, and Ivo Wallimann-Helmer (Eds.). 2015. Social equality: on what it means to be equals. Oxford University Press, Oxford ; New York.
[35]
Nancy Fraser. 1997. Justice Interruptus: Critical Reflections on the “Postsocialist” Condition. Routledge, New York.
[36]
Marilyn Frye. 2000. Oppression. In Encyclopedia of Feminist Theories, Lorraine Code (ed.). London & New York: Routledge, 370.
[37]
Iason Gabriel. 2022. Towards a Theory of Justice for Artificial Intelligence. Daedalus 151, 2 (forthcoming spring 2022), 12.
[38]
Raphaël Gellert, Marvin van Bekkum, and Zuiderveen Borgesius. 2021. EU Law Analysis: The Ola & Uber judgments: for the first time a court recognises a GDPR right to an explanation for algorithmic decision-making. EU Law Analysis. Retrieved December 22, 2023 from http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2021/04/the-ola-uber-judgments-for-first-time.html
[39]
Eileen Geo and Adi Renaldi. Deception, exploited workers, and cash handouts: How Worldcoin recruited its first half a million test users. MIT Technology Review. Retrieved December 21, 2023 from https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/04/06/1048981/worldcoin-cryptocurrency-biometrics-web3/
[40]
Janneke Gerards and Frederik Zuiderveen Borgesius. 2022. Protected Grounds and the System of Non-Discrimination Law in the Context of Algorithmic Decision-Making and Artificial Intelligence. Colorado Technology Law Journal 20, (June 2022), 56.
[41]
Eike Gräf. 2017. When Automated Profiling Threatens Our Freedom: European Data Protection Law Review 3, 4 (2017), 441–451. https://doi.org/10.21552/edpl/2017/4/6
[42]
Blayne Haggart and Natasha Tusikov. 2023. The New Knowledge: Information, Data and the Remaking of Global Power. Rowman & Littlefield, London. Retrieved February 15, 2024 from https://rowman.com/ISBN/9781538160879/The-New-Knowledge-Information-Data-and-the-Remaking-of-Global-Power
[43]
Lelia Marie Hampton. 2021. Black Feminist Musings on Algorithmic Oppression. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, March 03, 2021. ACM, Virtual Event Canada, 1–1. https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445929
[44]
Alex Hanna, Emily Denton, Andrew Smart, and Jamila Smith-Loud. 2020. Towards a Critical Race Methodology in Algorithmic Fairness. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT* ’20), 2020. Association for Computing Machinery, Barcelona, Spain, 501–512. https://doi.org/10.1145/3351095.3372826
[45]
Natali Helberger, Marijn Sax, Joanna Strycharz, and Hans-Wolfgang Micklitz. 2022. Choice Architectures in the Digital Economy: Towards a New Understanding of Digital Vulnerability. J Consum Policy (Dordr) 45, 2 (2022), 175–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10603-021-09500-5
[46]
Mireille Hildebrandt. 2008. Defining Profiling: A New Type of Knowledge? In Profiling the European Citizen: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives, Mireille Hildebrandt and Serge Gutwirth (eds.). Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 17–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6914-7_2
[47]
Kashmir Hill. 2020. Another Arrest, and Jail Time, Due to a Bad Facial Recognition Match. The New York Times. Retrieved May 12, 2022 from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/29/technology/facial-recognition-misidentify-jail.html
[48]
Anna Lauren Hoffmann. 2022. Rawls, Information Technology, and the Sociotechnical Bases of Self-Respect. The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Technology. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190851187.013.15
[49]
Charlotte Huisman. 2019. SyRI, het fraudesysteem van de overheid, faalt: nog niet één fraudegeval opgespoord. de Volkskrant. Retrieved January 22, 2020 from https://www.volkskrant.nl/gs-b789bc3a
[50]
Elle Hunt. 2016. Tay, Microsoft's AI chatbot, gets a crash course in racism from Twitter. The Guardian. Retrieved July 5, 2023 from https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/24/tay-microsofts-ai-chatbot-gets-a-crash-course-in-racism-from-twitter
[51]
Atoosa Kasirzadeh. 2022. Algorithmic Fairness and Structural Injustice: Insights from Feminist Political Philosophy. In Proceedings of the 2022 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, July 26, 2022. 349–356. https://doi.org/10.1145/3514094.3534188
[52]
Nicolas Kayser-Bril. Using ChatGPT for (re)search is a philosophical break – Automated Society. AlgorithmWatch. Retrieved January 22, 2024 from https://r.algorithmwatch.org/nl3/q_7P5fwseQoWIpcLRde4Kw
[53]
Os Keyes. 2019. Counting the Countless. Retrieved January 5, 2024 from https://ironholds.org/counting-writeup/
[54]
Tarunabh Khaitan. 2015. A Theory of Discrimination Law. Oxford University Press. Retrieved June 1, 2020 from http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199656967.001.0001/acprof-9780199656967
[55]
René Kladzyk. 2023. Policing Gender: How Surveillance Tech Aids Enforcement of Anti-Trans…. POGO. Retrieved December 21, 2023 from https://www.pogo.org/investigations/policing-gender-how-surveillance-tech-aids-enforcement-of-anti-trans-laws
[56]
Will Kymlicka (Ed.). 1992. Justice in Political Philosophy: Volume 1. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Cambridge.
[57]
Paddy Leerssen. 2023. Seeing what others are seeing: Studies in the regulation of transparency for social media recommender systems.
[58]
Sam Levin. 2016. A beauty contest was judged by AI and the robots didn't like dark skin. The Guardian. Retrieved August 3, 2022 from https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/sep/08/artificial-intelligence-beauty-contest-doesnt-like-black-people
[59]
Antony Loewenstein. 2023. The Palestine Laboratory: How Israel Exports the Technology of Occupation Around the World. Verso Books.
[60]
Noëmi Manders-Huits. 2010. Practical versus moral identities in identity management. Ethics Inf Technol 12, 1 (March 2010), 43–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-010-9216-8
[61]
Surya Mattu, Jeff Larson, Lauren Kirchner, and Julia Angwin. 2016. How We Analyzed the COMPAS Recidivism Algorithm. ProPublica. Retrieved August 8, 2020 from https://www.propublica.org/article/how-we-analyzed-the-compas-recidivism-algorithm?token=e3k6mE9frXgAOt3zvKfhyLDrUGgrhmOb
[62]
Lucas Waldron Medina Brenda. TSA's Body Scanners Are Gender Binary. Humans Are Not. ProPublica. Retrieved February 7, 2022 from https://www.propublica.org/article/tsa-transgender-travelers-scanners-invasive-searches-often-wait-on-the-other-side?token=7bjY-MRzWk5Ed4DCZRvFVYwt2HBrAFXd
[63]
Milagros Miceli and Julian Posada. 2022. The Data-Production Dispositif. Retrieved April 4, 2023 from http://arxiv.org/abs/2205.11963
[64]
Milagros Miceli, Tianling Yang, Laurens Naudts, Martin Schuessler, Diana Serbanescu, and Alex Hanna. 2021. Documenting Computer Vision Datasets: An Invitation to Reflexive Data Practices. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, March 03, 2021. ACM, Virtual Event Canada, 161–172. https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445880
[65]
Brent Daniel Mittelstadt, Patrick Allo, Mariarosaria Taddeo, Sandra Wachter, and Luciano Floridi. 2016. The ethics of algorithms: Mapping the debate. Big Data & Society 3, 2 (December 2016), 205395171667967. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716679679
[66]
Chantal Mouffe. 1999. Deliberative Democracy or Agonistic Pluralism? Social Research 66, 3 (1999), 745–758.
[67]
James Muldoon and Paul Raekstad. 2022. Algorithmic Domination in the Gig Economy. European Journal of Political Theory (February 2022), 14748851221082078. https://doi.org/10.1177/14748851221082078
[68]
Laurens Naudts and Ana Maria Correa. forthcoming. Data-Driven Inequality and Discrimination: Challenges and Opportunities for Regulating AI-systems in the COE and EU. In The Legal Consistency of Technology Regulation in Europe, Inge Graef and Bart van der Sloot (eds.). Hart Publishing, 9–42.
[69]
Laurens Naudts, Natali Helberger, Marijn Sax, and Michael Veale. 2024. Toward Constructive Optimisation: a new perspective on the regulation of recommender systems and the rights of users and society. In Digital Fairness for Consumers, Natali Helberger, Betül Kas, Hans-W Micklitz, Monika Namysłowska, Laurens Naudts, Marijn Sax and Michael Veale (eds.). BEUC - The European Consumer Organisation, Brussels, 280.
[70]
Laurens Naudts and Anton Vedder. Forthcoming. Fairness and Artificial Intelligence. In Cambridge Handbook on the Law, Ethics and Policy of AI, Nathalie A. Smuha (ed.). Cambridge University Press.
[71]
Safiya Umoja Noble. 2018. Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. NYU Press, New York. Retrieved August 6, 2019 from https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1pwt9w5
[72]
Safiya Umoja Noble. 2018. Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. New York University Press. https://doi.org/10.18574/9781479833641
[73]
Jonathan A Obar. 2015. Big Data and ’The Phantom Public’: Walter Lippmann and the fallacy of data privacy self-management. Big Data & Society 2, 2 (December 2015), 205395171560887. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951715608876
[74]
Billy Perrigo. 2023. The $2 Per Hour Workers Who Made ChatGPT Safer. Time. Retrieved July 5, 2023 from https://time.com/6247678/openai-chatgpt-kenya-workers/
[75]
Philip Pettit. 1980. Judging Justice. An Introduction to Contemporary Political Philosophy. Routlegde & Kegan Paul, London, Boston and Henley.
[76]
Philip Pettit. 1999. Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and Government. Oxford University Press. Retrieved February 29, 2020 from https://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/0198296428.001.0001/acprof-9780198296423
[77]
Philip Pettit. 2012. On The People's Terms: A Republican Theory and Model of Democracy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, Sao Paolo, Delhi, Mexico City.
[78]
Bernhard Rieder and Jeanette Hofmann. 2020. Towards platform observability. Internet Policy Review 9, 4 (December 2020). Retrieved July 19, 2023 from https://policyreview.info/articles/analysis/towards-platform-observability
[79]
Eryk Salvaggio. 2024. LAION-5B, Stable Diffusion 1.5, and the Original Sin of Generative AI | TechPolicy.Press. Tech Policy Press. Retrieved January 3, 2024 from https://techpolicy.press/laion5b-stable-diffusion-and-the-original-sin-of-generative-ai
[80]
Marijn Sax. 2021. Between empowerment and manipulation: The ethics and regulation of for-profit health apps. Retrieved September 18, 2023 from https://dare.uva.nl/search?identifier=52225d37-e7e1-4883-9dab-a3f5d3a063d8
[81]
Kevin Schaul, Szu Yu Chen, and Nitasha Tiku. Inside the secret list of websites that make AI like ChatGPT sound smart. Washington Post. Retrieved January 22, 2024 from https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/interactive/2023/ai-chatbot-learning/
[82]
Samuel Scheffler. 2003. What Is Egalitarianism? Philosophy & Public Affairs 31, 1 (2003), 5–39.
[83]
Christian Schemmel. 2011. Distributive and relational equality: Politics, Philosophy & Economics (September 2011). https://doi.org/10.1177/1470594X11416774
[84]
Fabian Schuppert. 2015. Non-domination, non-alienation and social equality: towards a republican understanding of equality. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 18, 4 (July 2015), 440–455. https://doi.org/10.1080/13698230.2015.1033863
[85]
Mona Sloane, Emanuel Moss, Olaitan Awomolo, and Laura Forlano. 2022. Participation Is not a Design Fix for Machine Learning. In Equity and Access in Algorithms, Mechanisms, and Optimization, October 06, 2022. ACM, Arlington VA USA, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1145/3551624.3555285
[86]
David Thiel. 2023. Identifying and Eliminating CSAM in Generative ML Training Data and Models. (2023). https://doi.org/10.25740/kh752sm9123
[87]
Tommy Tobin. 2018. Health Insurance Coverage For Healthy Groceries? More Food-Based Interventions May Be Coming. Forbes. Retrieved January 3, 2024 from https://www.forbes.com/sites/tommytobin/2018/05/24/health-insurance/
[88]
Sherry Turkle. 2007. Authenticity in the age of digital companions. (2007).
[89]
Anton Vedder. 1999. KDD: The challenge to individualism. Ethics and Information Technology 1, 4 (1999), 275–281.
[90]
Peter-Paul Verbeek. 2006. Materializing Morality: Design Ethics and Technological Mediation. Science, Technology, & Human Values 31, 3 (May 2006), 361–380. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243905285847
[91]
Tim Verheyden. 05:22+02:00. Is het echt zo dat enkel een chatbot een man heeft aangezet tot zelfdoding? vrtnws.be. Retrieved December 20, 2023 from https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2023/04/04/chatbot/
[92]
Koen Vervloesem. 2020. How Dutch activists got an invasive fraud detection algorithm banned. AlgorithmWatch. Retrieved October 16, 2020 from https://algorithmwatch.org/en/story/syri-netherlands-algorithm/
[93]
Salomé Viljoen. 2021. A Relational Theory of Data Governance. the yale law journal (2021), 82.
[94]
Sandra Wachter. 2023. The Theory of Artifical Immutability: Protecting Algorithmic Groups Under Anti-Discrimination Law. Tulane Law Review 97, 2 (March 2023), 149.
[95]
Iris Marion Young. 1990. Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Yersey.
[96]
Iris Marion Young. 2001. Equality of Whom? Social Groups and Judgments of Injustice. Journal of Political Philosophy 9, 1 (March 2001), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9760.00115
[97]
Iris Marion Young. 2002. Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/0198297556.001.0001
[98]
Iris Marion Young. 2003. Political Responsibility and Structural Injustice. May 05, 2003. The University of Kansas, 25.
[99]
Iris Marion Young. 2006. Taking the Basic Structure Seriously. PPS 4, 01 (March 2006). https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592706060099
[100]
[100] Iris Marion Young. 2011. Responsibility for Justice. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195392388.001.0001
[101]
[101] Annette Zimmermann and Chad Lee-Stronach. 2021. Proceed with Caution. Canadian Journal of Philosophy (2021), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1017/can.2021.17
Index Terms
- The Digital Faces of Oppression and Domination: A Relational and Egalitarian Perspective on the Data-driven Society and its Regulation
Recommendations
Black Feminist Musings on Algorithmic Oppression
FAccT '21: Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and TransparencyThis paper uses a theory of oppression to ground and extend algorithmic oppression. Algorithmic oppression is then situated through a Black feminist lens part of which entails highlighting the double bind of technology. To reconcile algorithmic ...
Rethinking “digital”: a genealogical enquiry into the meaning of digital and its impact on individuals and society
AbstractIn the current social and technological scenario, the term digital is abundantly used with an apparently transparent and unambiguous meaning. This article aims to unveil the complexity of this concept, retracing its historical and cultural origin. ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
June 2024
2580 pages
ISBN:9798400704505
DOI:10.1145/3630106
Copyright © 2024 Owner/Author.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 05 June 2024
Check for updates
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Funding Sources
Conference
FAccT '24
FAccT '24: The 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency
June 3 - 6, 2024
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- View Citations1Total Citations
- 425Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)425
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)67
Reflects downloads up to 31 Jan 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
Cited By
View all- Daus Z(2025)Distribution, Recognition, and Just Medical AIPhilosophy & Technology10.1007/s13347-025-00842-338:1Online publication date: 27-Jan-2025
View Options
View options
View or Download as a PDF file.
PDFeReader
View online with eReader.
eReaderHTML Format
View this article in HTML Format.
HTML FormatLogin options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in