Stuck With the Algorithm: Algorithmic Consciousness and Repertoire in Fridays for Future's Data Contention

By focusing on the transnational youth climate movement Fridays for Future, this article explores how activists understand algorithms and how they try to use them in their digital campaigns. A qualitative case study, this article provides insights from nine virtual in-depth semi-structured interviews with organizers in social media roles from Fridays for Future country collectives across the globe, giving youth activists the opportunity to tell stories about their understandings and experiences in working in datafied spaces. Four central themes emerge via a three-step qualitative data analysis: algorithmic consciousness (understanding, functions, issues, pitfalls, and misinterpretations), algorithm as stake (contentious importance, tactical politics), algorithm as repertoire (role in activism, algorithmic campaigning), and data contention (data analysis, digital contentious tactics, uncritical uses). The interviews show that activists are stuck with the algorithm in two ways: They have to engage with them but are often unsure how. In that sense, activists frame algorithms as a stakeholder in their campaign but are often unclear on how they work. While organizers recognize algorithmic dependency on campaign success, they lack specific mobilization strategies, which prevents them from leveraging algorithms as a contentious tactic. Data contention includes conducting analytics and tailoring strategies to platforms; yet, datafied spaces are used largely uncritically. This article prompts scholars to go beyond textual analyses of digital activism and conduct research that centers on the experiences and practices of activists in dealing with algorithms and data as structural conditions for digital activism

Hitler and humor: Coming to terms with the past through parody

Recent developments in German television programming represent Adolf Hitler and his Nazi regime through comedic entertainment. While these programs do not poke fun at the Holocaust itself, they are utilizing the image of Hitler for parodistic purposes. Similar to existing foreign media depicting Hitler as a foolish ruler with farcical mannerisms, newer programs such as the comedy show Switch Reloaded and the movie Hotel Lux show a clumsy and gullible Hitler. This essay argues that these recent representations of Hitler are contributing to the ongoing cultural conversation of the Holocaust, while also encouraging new ways in how Germans can culturally cope with their recent past. Drawing on parody and cultural trauma research, this essay offers evidence from German national media reviews and newspaper articles

ON DOMA: CRITICAL RHETORIC AND MARRIAGE EQUALITY

ResumoNa primavera de 2013, a Suprema Corte dos EUA decidiu em United States vs. Windsor declarar a inconstitucionalidade da Seção 3 da Lei de Defesa do Casamento (DOMA), que definiu o termo “casamento” como união entre um homem e uma mulher e “cônjuge” como parceiro do sexo oposto. Depois de quase quarenta anos em atividade, a DOMA demarcou o ápice de sucesso mais recente para o Gay Rights e sua subdivisão, o Marriage Equality Movement [Movimento de Igualdade no Casamento]. Este ensaio oferece uma análise retórica crítica de mensagens relevantes após a decisão da DOMA e sustenta que ela só pode ser vista como sucesso parcial para a comunidade de Lésbicas, Gays, Bissexuais e Transexuais (LGBT). O ensaio defende que, apesar da legislatura oficial, a derrubada da Seção 3 da DOMA contribuiu para a troca de ideias culturais apenas de modo limitado e que as discriminações contra a LGBT continuarão nas legislações locais. Utilizando a retórica crítica conforme apresentada por McKerrow (1989), este ensaio oferece uma crítica das principais mensagens empregadas pelos juízes da Suprema Corte que emitiram o veredito da DOMA, o Presidente e vários grupos de ativistas LGBT. Empregando a dupla taxonomia de McKerrow – a crítica da liberdade e a crítica da dominação – sustento que os retóricos críticos precisam enfocar esses tipos de eventos sociais para contribuir com o permanente intercâmbio de ideias sobe a subordinação cultural e social dos indivíduos e grupos LGBT.Palavras-chave: Retórica crítica, DOMA, Igualdade no Casamento, Casamento GayAbstractIn the spring of 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Windsor to declare the unconstitutionality of Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) that defined the term ‘marriage’ between one man and one woman, and ‘spouse’ as a partner of the opposite sex. After nearly forty years of activity, DOMA marked the most recent culmination of success for both the Gay Rights Movement and its subset, the Marriage Equality Movement. This essay offers a critical rhetoric analysis of key messages after the DOMA ruling and argues that DOMA can only be viewed as a partial success for the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) community. This essay argues that despite official lawmaking, the striking of Section 3 of DOMA has contributed to the cultural conversation only in limited ways and that LGBT discriminations will continue in local legislations. Utilizing critical rhetoric as brought forward by McKerrow (1989), this essay offers a critique of key messages employed by the Supreme Court Judges involved in the DOMA ruling, the President, and various LGBT activist groups. By employing McKerrow’s twofold taxonomy -- the critique of freedom and critique of domination -- I argue that critical rhetoricians must focus on these kinds of social events to contribute to ongoing conversations on the cultural and societal subordination of LGBT individuals and groups.ResumenEn la primavera de 2013, la Corte Suprema de EE. UU. falló en el caso United States v. Windsor a favor de la inconstitucionalidad de la Sección 3 de la Ley de Defensa del Matrimonio (DOMA) que definía el término “matrimonio” como aquél entre un hombre y una mujer y “esposo/a” como la pareja del otro sexo. Tras casi 40 años de actividad, la DOMA ha supuesto el éxito más reciente de los derechos de los homosexuales y de uno de sus defensores, el Movimiento para la Igualdad Matrimonial. Este ensayo presenta un análisis retórico crítico de los principales mensajes emitidos tras el fallo de la DOMA y defiende que la DOMA solo puede ser considerada un éxito parcial de la comunidad de Lesbianas, Gais, Bisexuales y Transexuales (LGBT, por sus siglas en inglés). Este ensayo defiende que, pese a la legislación oficial, el ataque a la Sección 3 de la DOMA solo ha realizado contribuciones limitadas al diálogo cultural y que la discriminación de LGBT continuará en las legislaciones locales. Haciendo uso de la retórica crítica en línea con la propuesta de McKerrow (1989), este ensayo incluye una crítica de los principales mensajes empleados por los jueces de la Corte Suprema involucrados en el fallo de la DOMA, el Presidente y varios grupos de activistas LGBT. Empleando la doble taxonomía de McKerrow, la crítica de la libertad y la crítica de la dominación, argumento que los retóricos críticos deben centrarse en este tipo de eventos sociales para contribuir al diálogo constante sobre la subordinación cultural y social de los individuos y grupos LGBT.Palabras clave: Retórica crítica, DOMA, Igualdad Matrimonial, Matrimonio Ga