What Price Free? Wikileaks & The Un-Morality of Information

Stewart Brand once said that “information wants to be free.” Most people leave the quotation just there, celebrating the fact that in a world made more natural, the stuff of knowledge, tax returns, and secrets would move unrestricted. But Brand’s statement on information did not stop there. Instead, he continued by adding “information also wants to be expensive” and he eventually admitted “this tension will not go away.”

Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks.org knows and understands what Brand was talking about. His site has not only become world (in)famous, it is done so by dealing in information. It makes “free” what others believe is quite “expensive.” It makes public what was private, problematicizing privacy in the already slippery age of cloud computing and trust in computer networks. So much of what was once physically kept personal has bee electronically made ubiquitous, and in the process privacy itself as become as easy to sneak around as the familiar command “copy-paste.”

Julian Assange has become a sort of villain. He does not photograph well, looking at once sad, sickly, and sinister. His motives unclear, most Americans take his actions at face value: in releasing hundreds of thousands of secret American documents, Assange alienates a fundamental American right to … what is it actually that he’s done illegally?

Remember Watergate? That was this historical episode when an American president tried to conceal illegal actions with intimidation, money, and aspirations to American patriotism. Two journalists stuck to the case and in the process became American heroes, far more patriotic than the “patriots” who had tried to protect the president with lies and threats. These men would be played by Dustin Hoffman and Robert Redford in a film that made their dogged sense of “freeing information” into a sort of patriotic virtue. The implications of the film and the event itself were that there is nothing to fear about the truth if you are among the just and responsible. Nixon wasn’t.

I met Julian Assange in Austria, at a digital festival in an opera house overlooking the Danube. It was the fall of 2009, and he was in Austria to receive an award from the Ars Electronica Festival for his contributions to public discourse. Assange gave a speech in which he never smiled and never laughed, but talked instead about the need to give people around the world a safe way to share information that the world needed to know. He saw himself and his organization as more of a technology of protecting those who would share secrets than a political statement on secrets.

But his ideology was powerful and unmistakable. A former journalist, inspired by Woodward and Bernstein, Assange had begun WikiLeaks to protect the “deep throats” of today and tomorrow. He expressed a hope that the information that wanted to be free could be. And of couse, that it should be. He was prepared to go to all lengths for this conviction.

A year later, we now know that Assange has gone to all lengths for this conviction. He has been labeled a “terrorist,” has been criticized by world governments, has been implicated in several court cases, and most sadly, attacked by journalists and news organizations themselves. Assange’s dour disposition is nothing more than the frank understanding that despite the freedom he has given information, we refuse to be liberated by it.

Zachary McCune will not stand for the witch trial of a man who actually forces accountability in the golden age of the unaccountable.

[ Printed in this week's Newport Mercury ]

Posted in copyfight, culture studies, data culture, free culture, politics, technology | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Remember, Remember, Cultural Relativism

It is the Fifth of November and my Oxford Dictionary of Sociology is dog-earred to “cultural relativism.” Perhaps I should add that I am in the United Kingdom. In Cambridge specifically. Studying, if you must know.

The connection between these two statements, if you had not surmised, is great. It is within one frame that I approach the other, and it is not necessarily the order or dynamic you may guess. To be sure, “cultural relativism” could be helpful to think through what this whole Guy Fawkes-British Monarchy-Terrorism and the State complex, but that might be too easy.

No, let’s invert the expectation. What does Cultural Relativism mean when framed by the Fifth of November?

People keep saying it to me. “Remember, Remember, The Fifth of November. Gunpowder, Treason, and Plot.” But what do you do when you can’t “remember” it, because you’ve never known it. You’ve no idea what you’re somehow already supposed to know.
Where I come from, the Fifth of November would be written the fifth of November, or just November 5th. And it certainly wouldn’t be included in a common piece of poetry. A ditty, as it were.

(Incidentally, do you need to know where I come from? Are you wondering about it? Does it matter so long as I imply, as I have, that it’s not here?)

The point is, around here, the Fifth of November is the Fifth of November. And that’s charged with a certain significance that is even evidenced in someone (from here) forgetting that it is the Fifth of November.

Because whenever someone does that, they are often forced to exclaim “I forgot it was the Fifth of November!” or “How could I have forgotten the Fifth of November?”

Both statements are ironic given the mantra of the day.

Remember, Remember.

Perhaps I have committed a logical sin. There has been an implication (mine) that because I don’t know enough about the Fifth of November to have forgotten something vital about it, I am somehow different than everyone else. This wasn’t meant to be and us vs. them game. Although, to some degree, it has to be. The fact is, there are some people who know something about the date and about “gunpowder, treason, and plot.” And there are those who do not. This division is not an accident. It is quite intentional and productive for society writ large.

This, briefly sketched, is the foundation of “cultural relativism.” Which, on the dog-earred page in front of me is defined as such:

Cultural Relativists assert that concepts are socially constructed and vary cross-culturally. These concepts may include such fundamental notions as what is considered true, morally correct, and what constitutes knowledge or even reality itself.

There will be a fireworks display later. I know what that is when a friend tells me of it. When I sit in the rain to watch the display, it looks like fireworks do anywhere else. If I described them to you, you would find them familiar and possibly unremarkable. That familiarity, that seeming universality, seems to fight back against the idea that ideas are somehow unique or different or situated within specific cultural boundaries.

But before we go all the way to concluding the ordinariness of the fireworks I would put it to you that you’ve never seen fireworks that were just fireworks. You may have seen explosions of color in the night sky a hundred times but they were always something- a summer holiday, New Year’s Eve, a crazy weekend, a college prank, or the Fourth of July (America’s own Fifth of November), or Bastille Day, or . And these fireworks meant something within those experiences and never were just fireworks. There value, in short, was connected (related as in relative) to the circumstances they were seen in.

I cannot conclude that the Fifth of November is about remembering anything other than remembering (memory) itself. Despite the history and the rhyme and the explanations I later receive, the importance of the day (evidenced by its title as just a date) is to mark from the ordinary something that is different.

And, in that process, mark those who are different as different.

And burn them on a bonfire as an enemy of the state, and its thinking.

Posted in culture studies, ideas, semiotics | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Worth a Read (news round-up for Mid October)

This week the world did not end, but it did change. In Germany, Chancellor Angela Merkl announced the failure of multiculturalism (“multikulti”) as a social/cultural policy. The implications are that a German language and culturally centered nationalism is essential for German politics going forward. This is particular interesting when considered alongside earlier news that Germany (and France) have “recovered” from the recession.

In technology, the Manchester (UK) police tweeted all of their incidents for a day in an effort share the quality and quantity of their work.

In sociology news, Sweden may be the best place to be a woman. Or at least, it used to be…

and Here in Cambridge, the big news is that recent road repairs have revealed mysterious underground chamber near Emmanuel College. The newspaper is calling it a “Chamber of Secrets” and the rumors are that it may have been used for student social activities (I mean, obviously).

Posted in Culture, education, free culture | Leave a comment

Kicking off a new pair of sneakers

I love the Nike Air Dunk Highs because Nike takes the consistent model and experiments a lot with it. Two years ago, I found an incredible pair with tweed sidewalls and an orange swoosh. I have since worn them into the ground, along with a pair of leather Marc Ecko sneaks. Bringing me to these latest shoes.

When I saw them in Philly on South Street two weeks ago, I knew they were what I was after. The seersucker sidewalls feel as though they were designed by Kanye West cuz the shoes feel hip hop and preppy at the same time. They didn’t have my size in Philly so I had to wait til I found them on Thayer Street in Providence this afternoon. This time they only had one pair left. In my size.

Posted in Culture, fashion, lifestyle, providence, rhode island | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Anthologize Now

or, the perpetual need for binding and boundaries in discourse

“You can’t win, Darth. If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.” – Obi-Wan Kenobi

The book has not, and will not, die. But it will shift forms. This is because a book is not wood pulp glued together or something that resides exclusively in leather clad coverings. The book is not the codex, for it has been the scroll, the manuscript, and the tablet far before it opened right to left (or left to right) in convenient sequential pagination. The codex, to be clear, has always been merely an avatar or a permutation of the book idea. The book is greater than the form it takes. The book is (or ought to be) defined as an object of boundaries, which is no doubt why books must always be “bound.”

At its most abstracted, the book is very much akin to the Saussurean sign. It is everything that it is not. It is this writing and not that writing, these maps not those charts, this writer not those writers, it is these ideas and not those ones. The book has always been defined by its aspiration to be discrete and differentiated from other objects, most importantly other books. This emphasizes the book’s boundaries (both conceptually and literally) as definitive of what the book is, or what it does/is about.

A book is bound, bounded, and bound up. It is made complete physically, complete in its arguments (discursive binding if you will), and complete in its existence as a discrete object in a world of objects/things. Because it is bounded in all of these ways, readers have learned to consume it in a certain way: they enter the book expecting that it is not a intellectual black hole from which there is not escape. They expect to move through it, as sojourners perhaps, or detectives on a case. The metaphors for reading always treat the book as a subject that somehow, somewhere has limits. And inventiveness and exploration within the limits define the pleasure of reading and writing as invention and play. Roland Barthes famously advocated for the re-invention of the “readerly” as a type of play activity. Like the playing fields of a sport, the limits of books are not to their detriment, but just the opposite: the boundaries beget a marked-off space of inquiry and play. Books are their own worlds and territories as we have celebrated for hundreds of years.

The warrior spirit of Anthologize is irrestible.

Now we have been incorrectly drawn into a great debate about books defined too narrowly. We have been warned of the death of books, by people who see books only as the codex, the woodpulp tome, the paperback novel. We have been led to see books as publishers see them. In the process, we have forgotten the “book idea” – the idea of binding a discourse or several discourses together, such that they become a bounded object.

People have not stopped writing. They may write differently and in new electronic environments, but they are still fundamentally attempting to produce the same sort of semi-permanent scribblings that form the “content,” which is to say, purpose of books. Born into electronic environments, “digital” writing proves flexible and fast. It can cross massive geographic gaps quickly, and can be manipulated/adjusted/truncated/distorted/improved with equal ease. Electronic writing seems to have no boundaries. It exists in a vast web of connections and discursive vectors. Movement is so easy between electronic texts that one can become lost in them, and can lose sight of the purpose or initiative. The readers of electronic/digital writing are accustomed to be sidetracked, misdirected, and lost. Electronic writing, in short, begs for binding. Not just to arrest and preserve digital content that can be easily lost, but also to chart a path through content. To curate and select and bind material together such that it becomes a new discrete object. Electronic writing, the loosest form of the book idea, can be given more defined edges.

Which is why the world needs Anthologize now. Anthologize, a new, FREE WordPress plugin, is fundamentally about binding that which has become unbound and unbounded: the shifting electronic content of the world wide web. Anthologize was created by a handful of scholars, librarians, and archivists who were gathered for just one week in Northern Virginia to develop a tool for work in the digital humanities (full disclosure here: I was one of the them).

It is not surprising that a publication tool that makes an intervention into the scattered world of digital writing should be the conclusion of such a gathering and such a fast-paced collaborative process. In fact, it is incredibly telling and significant that at this moment in history of literary, intellectual and cultural work, twelve humanists should motivated to build a thing they would call Anthologize. Motivated in equal parts by fears over digital decay (data loss), the need for light free and flexible book publishing interfaces, and the eternal need to actually curate and bind material together into anthologies, Anthologize must be read as a celebration and not a detournment of the book idea. Indeed, even while Anthologize promises new life to electronic writing, and progresses the coming age of the ebooks and ebook reader culture, Anthologize is fundamentally about binding. It is about allowing individuals to create their own boundaries and bindings, to delimit a world that has grown overcrowded with information. It is about marking out, if only for ourselves, the boundaries of what we know, want to know, and hope to know.

Posted in adventure, copyfight, education, free culture, ideas, Internet, media, news media, programming, technology | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Long Overdue American Soccer Fan

There were 36,218 people in a stadium East Hartford, Connecticut on May 25th, 2010. It was impossible to park, as thousands arrived with hours to spare before game time. Inside the stadium, almost everyone in attendance was wearing some form of official apparel. Jerseys, t-shirts, scarves, and goofy Uncle Sam hats attired the crowd to look something like a Memorial Day cook-out on Long Island. And when the first goal went in, off a corner kick in the 17th minute, there was no mistaking the deafening chant of an eager fanbase shouting USA! USA! USA!

This is what international soccer has become in the United States. Just four years ago, writing my second assignment for the Mercury, I traveled around Newport asking if bars, cafes, and restaurants intended to broadcast the upcoming World Cup tournament. Many of them told me no. Several mentioned that they would show the games only if there was not something else on: something like the Red Sox, or College Baseball. As a concession, some bartenders told me they would show the final.
Four years before that, I was in eighth grade. The tournament was being hosted by Korea and Japan meaning game time was only a bleary eyed 2 am. To make matters worse, few American channels were willing to broadcast the games. So I got up, at 2 am, and watched the World Cup on Telemundo and Univision, loosely improving my Spanish while watching the United States advance further than it had ever gone before. I could not afford a jersey, and even if I could, there was no one to purchase one. Falling asleep in class, my teachers demanded an explanation. When I told them I was up late watching the World Cup they either laughed in disbelief or asked what it was. Out of patronage, I printed a US Soccer shield and laminated it at a hardware store. I pinned it to my t-shirt every morning exhausted from watching soccer all night.
Eight years later, and the long promised enthusiasm for soccer has finally arrived in America. ESPN has promised unprecedented American coverage of the tournament, and I have countless chances to buy a US National Team Jersey. I bought their blue Away kit, the handsomest Jersey the team has ever worn, and wore it to East Hartford on May 25th.
I was not alone.
The first sport my parents ever let me play was soccer. Baseball happened two years later. Basketball happened a year after that. Like millions of my peers, soccer is neither odd nor foreign, but refreshingly familiar. On the US Men’s National Team, Jay DeMerit, Landon Donovan, and Clint Dempsey are all men of my generation. They have all played in Europe, where the competition is highest, but unlike previous generations they do not believe that soccer in America is an oxymoron.

And why should they?

When they scored in East Hartford on May 25th, a full stadium rose to salute them.
Shouting the name of the nation, these fans let the world hear that America has come to play soccer.

Posted in Culture, culture studies, soccer, Sports, world cup | Leave a comment

reviving the kino-eye

i will off to ireland it just a few days to shoot a documentary on gaelic games. the documentary is sponsored by an at&t “new media” fellowship and was organized by the watson institute at brown. i’m thrilled to be off to ireland (it is a birthright trip in many ways) but i am almost more excited to be a given a chance to dig into the practice of media humanism that i have been playing with on a personal philosophy/production side. inspired by that and the arrival of a sweet hd canon vixia, i decided to a shoot a ton of stuff in newport this past weekend and edit it all together. the result, i hope, reminds of both man with a movie camera, and jazz on a summer’s day, an underappreciated documentary on the newport jazz festival.

the kino-eye (an early soviet film collective) believed that the camera could supplement and augment the vision (and thus perception) of the human being. i found this to never be true in watching film, but in producing it, it does seem present. in reviewing my clips, i found my perception augmented and expanded. why? because captured in a reviewable format, the moment was given many lives and almost a certain immortality. barthes of course talks about this through camera lucida, but he did not stop to consider how much moving pictures complicate the capturing of time. siegfried kracaeur did. an his theory moves from the film as a photograph made several in tracing the cinema’s unique ability to vivify what is only promised as living in static photographs.

anyway, with these things swirling about, i captured a few days of video of newport life, then cut it all together. included is the newport bermuda race, a nice bonus!

newport, a summer day from Zachary McCune on Vimeo.

Posted in adventure, art, Culture, culture studies, film, media, media humanism, newport, rhode island, travel, video | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

11 outcomes from US – ENG, and what they would mean

there’s been a lot of smack (trash) talking going down over the upcoming USA – England match up in the soon to be started 2010 World Cup. fate would insist/force/require that i be in the midst of a wedding when the game kicks off, but i will be a living example of those commercials where men watch sports in inappropriate locations. but, in the spirit of loving (and living for) this game i now present the meaning of the game’s outcome in any of the the circumstances that should present themselves as reality when i check the game’s progress on an iphone during i-do’s.

0-0

f that.

1-0 Eng

we have learned nothing. england is supposed to win. they get it done. but there is nothing that says May Day for Team USA. a totally acceptable result.

1-1

american soccer ain’t nothing to mess with. prepare to see the british press start panicking. capello will call it a hiccup, and the english will crush the next game, but the us will be looking into the round of 16.

2-1 ENG

the most likely result. the three lions will have some confidence but the us will feel vindicated. nothing is in disarray for the americans. now they just need to win the next two.

2-1 US

totally possible. and it would be so glorious. the brits would start re-thinking their defense. maybe a goalkeeping change will be in order. and the pressure would build on the english. the americans meanwhile will have something to hang their hat on.

2-2

damn that would be a good game. i’d love it to be a 1-0, 1-1, 2-1, 2-2 progression. everyone (fans, players, coaches, pundits) would be content.

3-2 ENG

mmmmmm good. and acceptable for everyone. scoring won’t be the problem. the americans will be thinking about defense and endurance. so will team england.

3-2 US

capello will be flipping out. america will have some new offensive hero (even if it’s donovan/dempsey again). ratings for the rest of the american world cup games will be out of control.

ENG victory by 2 or more

ummm, ok, maybe england is a legit contender. everyone in the uk’s gonna be getting STOKED on that kinda result. buy your rooney jerseyz now.

US victory by 2 or more

england in roo-ins. the british press corps are about to go CRAZY. america will never let the british live this down. f*** bp. REVENGE OF THE GULF! t-shirts. tattoos. monuments. ESPN will be calling it an instant classic. i will call it SARATOGA 2 or SARATOGA IN SOUTH AFRICA.

3-3

well boys, that’s what we call soccer (unless ur british in which case that’s what you call football).

Posted in newport, rhode island, soccer, Sports, world cup | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

the problem of physical reality in the age of the iphone

the divide between physical reality and the “second,” virtual reality of cyberspace has been overexposed and polarized, constantly imagining the 21st century citizen at first one end of the spectrum and then dramatically shifted to the other. but this is hardly the  case in practical experience, by which i mean the experience of that same “21st century citizen” in an observed daily routine. instead of shifting between virtual identities and physical necessity, the 21st century citizen inhabits a compressed reality that is at once physical and virtual, lived and mediated, screened and viewed. it has become what some theorists have called augmented reality, and its key tool is the smart phone which makes the web mobile and in that mobility, ever-present.

a recent art projec by Schuyler Maclay, Al Urim and others foregrounds the impending crisis of augmented reality. in the project Maclay and a fellow artist build a 10 by 10 by 10 foot cube, open at the top that seals them in along with a host of raw (de)construction materials. two webcams survey the cube’s interior, streaming the artists live to the web.

theopencube.net

the cube was placed on Brown University’s Main Green on May 1st, 2010. it was a part of a broad curation of outdoor art pieces comprising a second student project called “Green Screen.” the cube was one of the most successful pieces on the green, because it was big, loud, and literally/figuratively opaque. when visitors drew near the cube, they often walked completely around it, looking for something to see. instead, they were directed to a computer monitor, forcing them uncomfortably to mediate their immediate physical experience of the cube. in their desire to see inside the cube, and understand the project, visitors were forced to look away from it, into an entire different object. theoretically, this was to keep access to the cube as an artistic site consistent across experiences (online and in person) as the project was offered for the two communities of physical and virtual reality.

in practice however, these tactic forced viewers to confront the growing mediation of physical events. it suggested the capitulation of society to mediation (what guy debord would have called his “society of the spectacle”) and forced visitors to live in the world they are creating- where direct access has become impossible because of our fascination with it being “everywhere” rather than “somewhere.” the global aspiration of local events like the cube erases and ignores their position as a locality at all. the artists in the open cube are neighbors you cannot speak to, or knock on the door and say hi.

because there is no door, and they won’t speak to you.

responding only to messages and instructirons posted live on their website, the open cube artists were compelled to not make a home of their cube, but to raucously destroy it. like a gamer who shoots up his environment, shooting friends to see if they will die, and throwing a grenade at his own feet to see if he can kill himself, the avatared-artists of the open cube were forced to rip up pillows, cut a couch in half, and graffiti the walls.

then some one (pretty sure it was me) told them to cut a whole in the wall so the spectators outside could see in. this proved a terrible mistake. for once the walls were rendered porous, attention shifted away from the problematic experience/foregrounding of mediation and instead became artists-as-zoo-animals. in the future, disallowing commands for interior views other than from the webcam should be added to the project’s instructions.

it’s been a few days since i was on the main green, typing commands to my friends in the cube. but the project is still working its way through my thoughts. i think its a wonderful project to have travel, for it seems to fight travel and local specificity by aspiring to just being somewhere in the non-space of the internet, but it is somewhere, and the people that comment on it will surely change depending on its location.

who knows, maybe some people won’t want the artists to destroy themselves or the interior space. maybe they’ll ask the artists to write poetry, or take a nap, or become home-makers. and that would be quite interesting.

Posted in art, brown university, Culture, culture studies, data culture, ideas, Internet, technology | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment