Starosielski’s research is significant because of her focus on a distinctly specific media infrastructure: fiber-optic cable systems. Reading through her arguments, I found myself nodding at her persistent acknowledgement of cultural and social implications of this obscure yet pervasive system in shaping power dynamics and perpetuating certain imbalances.
What grabbed me, though, was her brief introductory description of cable systems as “part of a feedback loop,” which “users activate and inhabit” through their own practices (56). That is, by engaging with content mediated through such infrastructures, the users themselves unknowingly become a part of the infrastructural development. To me, this clearly marks a neoliberal argument, one grounded in the notion of effaced labor and the invisible integration of user practices within a commercial system.
With this perspective established earlier on in the article, I was a bit disappointed by Starosielski’s description of media temporality and the “aesthetics of lag.” Entirely missing from this discussion was the notion of competition, which is a fundamental aspect of communications practices that necessitate faster signals. She refers to it implicitly in her discussion of Counter-Strike and the players’ preference to play individually rather than with a community — but to me, the choice here not to explicitly unpack the driving notions of neoliberal competition and individualism appears to be a missed opportunity. While Starosielski explains the aesthetics and effects of speed (or lack thereof), she does not expand on why speed is constructed as a crucial function for cables systems and machines in the first place.
I admit I'm personally invested in this topic because I hail from South Korea, a culture notoriously famous for its constant need for speed in all aspects of life, and one that boasts one of the fastest average Internet connections in the world. Culture shapes technology, and vice versa. I think about this all the time, even as I "activate and inhabit" this kind of culture, anxiously waiting for a ticket server to open at a high-speed PC Cafe to get good seats for a musical.
But then again, temporality was just a short section in a relatively short article about undersea cables as media infrastructure… So I guess there were other, more technical mechanisms to address. I just happened to spot a quite clear and interesting through line that I wish had been developed further (and to be completely transparent, probably because I’ve been reading so much about neoliberalism for Dr. Imre’s class).
But then again, temporality was just a short section in a relatively short article about undersea cables as media infrastructure… So I guess there were other, more technical mechanisms to address. I just happened to spot a quite clear and interesting through line that I wish had been developed further (and to be completely transparent, probably because I’ve been reading so much about neoliberalism for Dr. Imre’s class).
I also with Starosielski spent a bit more time unpacking the aesthetics of lag and competition, as I think a discussion of lag opens up space to look at all the services and things lag might affect. For example, we might think about how some online games are designed around the infrastructural assumption of high speed internet. Here, I'm thinking of a game like League of Legends, which times player abilities in increments of quarter-seconds. Split-second decisions make or break teams, especially at expert/professional levels of play. We might also think of the speed-run as a game aesthetic that taps into similar logics of speed and works by testing and often breaking the infrastructure of the game world. Further, The desire for speed then is wrapped up in notions of neoliberal competition, but also the functioning of a wide range of technologies: drones, online gaming, live-streaming on Twitch, facial recognition software.
ReplyDeleteThese concerns around the "temporalities" of infrastructures are really interesting. While I think that the gamers' section of Starosielski's article was the least interesting, I wonder if Mattern's concerns around the deep time of infrastructures (historical but also the layering of infrastructures) and Starosielski's (short) analysis of the lag can be understood together. If the lag can be attributed to older, smaller, less efficiently routed cables (the layering of media's older forms of socialites), can we understand the new layering infrastructures, our speedy infrastructures, in another way than from a technological standpoint?
ReplyDeleteRecent discussions about the expansion of a 6G network in the US (Donald Trump tweeted in February 2019: "I want 5G, and even 6G, technology in the United States as soon as possible. It is far more powerful, faster, and smarter than the current standard. American companies must step up their efforts, or get left behind. There is no reason that we should be lagging behind on.........") is a clear response from "threats" from China's dominant position in the manufacture and operation of network infrastructure. This "lagging" behind that "scares" Trump is surely also related to the way that China has, in recent years, started to invest a massive amount of money into a nation-wide infrastructural re-haul (belt and roads initiative). I'd be interested in discussing, just like Jennifer's concerns around neoliberalism as one of the socio-economic structure to influence infrastructural development, how global political conflicts might affect development.
Delete