Research within the last fifteen years on global advocacy networks has often focused
on their accomplishments through the linking of similar groups. The majority of this
research while being useful to examine transnational political dynamics has two
deficiencies. The first is that there is little or no consideration of the network
infrastructure (from code to cables) that allows the aforementioned linkage to occur.
It is therefore important to investigate the politics of infrastructure, architecture and
design and the power and control thereof. Secondly, prior to Web 2.0. technologies,
advocacy networks were nodes of information distribution, rather than nodes to which
information was directed, and then subsequently collected, compiled and used for
political purposes. It is quite reasonable to argue that Web 2.0. technologies (again
due to considerations of code, digital architecture and design) have altered the manner
in advocacy networks interact with their supporters, other organizations and formal
political institutions. This change is located within the advocacy network’s technoorganizational
structure. Subsequently, as the digital architecture for the internet is an
inter-operable free/libre open source software (FLOSS) common to information
exchange, it stands to reason that as an infrastructure this technology is directly a
political landscape over which and in which friction and contestation can and does
occur. In regard to the methods of interaction, FLOSS technologies have greatly
expanded the pool of potential social activists and reduced the costs of engagement,
activism and highlighting issues. With these factors in mind it can be argued that
FLOSS has created opportunities for civil society to emerge and engage with society
at large in ways that are both new (in a digital medium) and similar (tackling issues of
social justice as constructed by the social activists). When considered at a systematic
level this process has several implications. These implications include the impact of
4
networking on identity, social relations, power relations and so on, which in turn
acknowledges that modern computer networking can act as a mechanism that
radically restructures various political relations. This itself acknowledges various
contests over modern computer networking (one position which is expressed by
various FLOSS proponents), and the physical infrastructure and the power and control
thereof which allows such networking to even exist in the first instance. Within this
context, which could be described as an information ecosystem, there is a recognition
that advocacy networks have emerged as new sources of power ready to exert
influence through networking that occurs in a) a non formal manner and b) ‘beneath
the radar’ as it were.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:wits/oai:wiredspace.wits.ac.za:10539/5909 |
| Date | 23 December 2008 |
| Creators | Timcke, Scott Neal |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis |
| Format | application/pdf |
Page generated in 0.0016 seconds