Just ticking the box: A social informatics model of the consequences of consent

Given the societal diffusion, proliferation and ubiquity of computerised systems and platforms, it is generally perceived by consumers that systems and eBusiness platforms often pose a threat to the privacy of their supplied information (Srnicek, 2017; Andreotti et al., 2018). Furthermore, as we see the replacement of systems that were once manual and paper-based migrate to digital processes and information systems (Lunt et al., 2019), consent in the information era is reduced to ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ option, often in the form of a tick box. Additionally, despite the arrival of the General Data Protection Regulation in 2018 as means to provide protection in relation to data processing, we argue that there is a lack of transparency in relation to the intention of this data processing and secondary data use for the purposes of research and marketing, for example. In light of this, we argue that there exists an increasingly difficult challenge to establish a mutual understanding of what consent actually is and what the wider permutations of it represents and comprehends. The lack of mutual understanding, in a digital world that is becoming increasingly reliant on the perceived benefits of acquiring and processing large sets of data (Kitchin, 2014; Breidbach et al., 2019) is deeply problematic. It is not only problematic for the consumer, but also to system developers, platform owners, and data processors alike. To this end, this paper presents a model, derived from action research, which positions the concept of consent within a socio-technical framing. This model approaches consent, in the context of digital platforms and eBusiness and how it comes to be represented in information systems, as a socio-technical construct of moral orders that imbues the feelings, convictions and aspirations of the consumer as they are engaged in the use of digital systems. We offer that consent is merely approached as an attribute in a data model, rather than relaying the communicative understanding of the consumer. This model introduces the areas of information processing systems and information communication systems as two differing interpretations within which digital platforms can be perceived. We offer these two distinctions as a mechanism to explain and, more importantly, explore the notion of the governance of consent and how this comes to be manifested in information systems

Taking the Field: the everyday stories of cricketing folk

Between 2010 and 2012 researchers at Falmouth and Glamorgan Universities in the UK collaborated with the Marylebone Cricket Club at Lord’s to explore the potential of producing digital artefacts for the Lord’s Museum that focussed on the oral histories and everyday narratives of people involved in local cricket clubs. ‘Taking the Field’ was a Knowledge Transfer Partnership (a programme designed to support collaboration between universities and business and/or non-academic organisations in the UK) and supported by the Arts and Humanities Research Council It worked with a large number of local cricket clubs across England, Wales and Sri Lanka to create digital stories based upon the memories and personal photographic archives of their members

Revisiting Brecht: Preparing Galileo for Production

The article describes the preparation of a new translation of Brecht's Galileo, and the issues that arose in the practical process of retranslating this onto the stage. The research imperative of the project was to investigate the questions that arise when exploring epic theatre in a postmodern context. The pedagogical aim was to engage undergraduate students as fully as possible in the complexities of Brecht's poetics. Galileo is Brecht's most reworked text, and also one of his least performed plays in Britain

Greening the national accounts for Scotland

Our main finding is that according to green accounting measures, Scotland's development over much of the past 20 years has not, on the whole, matched up to the standards of sustainability. However, the national picture seems to have improved in the recent past

\u3cem\u3eState v. White\u3c/em\u3e: Does Critical Mean Contested?

Mark White, Appellant, and the State of Montana, Appellee, argue whether White received the due process rights afforded to him under the Montana Constitution. White claims that (1) his absence during a critical stage of his trial caused him prejudice; and (2) the State’s failure to afford him an initial appearance constituted plain error and violated his Constitutional rights. The State argues that this is not an appropriate case for the Court to invoke discretionary power of plain error review because White had no right to be present during the proceeding in question, and White invited or acquiesced to any error that may have occurred by his absence from the initial appearance