[iDC] Mining the Military-Academic-Industrial Complex in a Poetic-Serious Fashion

[Anna Munster]

HI Brian, Nick etc

I take your point Brian about the 'open' flaunting of science-military  
research etc. I too have been similarly amazed to see detailed  
descriptions of various data mining projects linked to homeland  
security concerns but which are funded via agencies such as NSF as  
'good' almost 'neutral' projects 'advancing' knowledge. (see, for  
example, http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=103047).

I seriously wonder what the hell academics think they are doing - but  
then again, what's new huh? Hasn't this been an ongoing problem of/for  
the academy always...ie the always imbricated and evolving links  
between knowledge and power....

Nick - found your responses v. interesting and considered and thanks  
for pointing me toward further reading spots around your project -  
I'll have a much closer look.
On 21/04/2009, at 2:33 PM, nick knouf wrote:

>  To take another example: I have colleagues of mine who work
> with proprietary datasets of web access logs, social network info, and
> the such, who present results that can never be questioned or  
> "verified"
> (in the Popperian sense, which is the only sense for many of them)
> because no one else can access their data and produce an alternative
> interpretation.  Most people see this as not a problem in the least;  
> for
> them it's their way of protecting "privacy" (instead of questioning
> whether these logs should exist in the first place).

Yes, indeed - the relations between privacy and propriety...I actually  
think this might be an area we all need to spend a lot more time  
considering in terms of the increasing constraints upon research  
within the academy. One area I see this affecting the humanities is  
where humanities academics are increasingly being pushed into taking  
on external private consultancies to make up shortfalls in research  
funding. (this is happening quite a bit now in Australia - not sure  
about elsewhere).

While I am not trying to say outright 'no' to these kind of  
arrangements, nondisclosure agreements are obviously an issue and one  
which many of us just don't know enough about. At a recent workshop at  
my uni on codes of conduct for research (which one would hope  
addressed issues concerning the building of a supportive ethical  
environment), I was totally horrified to hear what my university's  
research office had to say about a particular scenario. We were told  
that if we had signed a contract with an external party but had come  
across research that was of potential harm to the public - (eg  
discovered toxic waste in a public playground) - the university would  
not support us making that information public ie for the public good,  
if this meant contravening a nondisclosure agreement.

The reason? No prizes for guess the university is scared of litigation  
of course. AS it turns out there were law faculty in the room who got  
on their judicial high horses and said that a researcher had legal  
rights to disclose information in the public good even if they had  
signed a nondisclosure agreement. Thank god for the long arm of law!!

My point here is: what kind of interests are determining how research  
is conducted as well as what research is done? And how do we actually  
gain access to that information if it is locked behind nondisclosure  
or proprietorial doors?

Nick - I like the idea of you working to design the display of data  
into a page in order to bring to light thee kind of issues - there  
should be more of it but there should also be more discussion about  
the constraining of knowledge generally by the kinds of agreements and  
protocols researchers are acquiescing to...

cheers
Anna

A/Prof. Anna Munster
Assistant Dean, Grant Support
Acting Director Centre for Contemporary Art and Politics
School of Art History and Art Education
College of Fine Arts
UNSW
P.O. Box 259
Paddington
NSW 2021
612 9385 0741 (tel)
612 9385 0615(fax)
a.munster at unsw.edu.au