TY - JOUR
T1 - Radical infrastructure
T2 - Building beyond the failures of past imaginaries for networked communication
AU - Paris, Britt S.
AU - Cath, Corinne
AU - West, Sarah Myers
N1 - Funding Information:
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Britt Paris’ research was supported by the School of Education and Information Dean’s Graduate Fellowship; Summer Graduate Research Fellowships; and an Assistantship at the Kleinrock Center for Internet Studies, all during her PhD in Information Studies at the University of California, Los Angeles (2014–2018).
Funding Information:
Corinne Cath’s research was supported by the Ford Foundation (grant number 136179, 2020) and the Alan Turing Institute for AI and Data Science (PhD studentship 2016–2020).
Funding Information:
Sarah Myers West’s research was supported through a Wallis Annenberg Graduate Fellowship at the Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism.
Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2023.
PY - 2023
Y1 - 2023
N2 - Ongoing political, environmental, and economic crises require infrastructures that can respond to crises in ways that do not replicate and reinforce inequality. To this end, we use a case study method of analysis that compares the authors’ previous work on Internet infrastructure at the levels of development, governance, and use to explore how these imaginaries promote or impede people-centered change in the development and maintenance of Internet infrastructure. This theoretical work puts the three existing cases in conversation to better understand how Internet infrastructure alternatives presented as radical, new, or non-hierarchical present shortcomings and opportunities, so that it might be more possible to imagine better, more truly radical, people-centered alternatives. From this comparison, we close our discussion with three heuristics for radical infrastructure: the need for pushing for alternative ensembles of support, busting the myth of technosolutionism, re-politicizing Internet infrastructure, and encouraging technical communities to build around cooperativity, not connectivity.
AB - Ongoing political, environmental, and economic crises require infrastructures that can respond to crises in ways that do not replicate and reinforce inequality. To this end, we use a case study method of analysis that compares the authors’ previous work on Internet infrastructure at the levels of development, governance, and use to explore how these imaginaries promote or impede people-centered change in the development and maintenance of Internet infrastructure. This theoretical work puts the three existing cases in conversation to better understand how Internet infrastructure alternatives presented as radical, new, or non-hierarchical present shortcomings and opportunities, so that it might be more possible to imagine better, more truly radical, people-centered alternatives. From this comparison, we close our discussion with three heuristics for radical infrastructure: the need for pushing for alternative ensembles of support, busting the myth of technosolutionism, re-politicizing Internet infrastructure, and encouraging technical communities to build around cooperativity, not connectivity.
KW - Cryptography
KW - ethics of care
KW - Future Internet Architecture
KW - IETF
KW - Internet infrastructure
KW - Internet Protocol
KW - science and technology studies
KW - sociotechnical imaginaries
KW - technosolutionism
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85147531763&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85147531763&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/14614448231152546
DO - 10.1177/14614448231152546
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85147531763
SN - 1461-4448
JO - New Media and Society
JF - New Media and Society
ER -