End-of-Year Reflections
January 24, 2021
The overall thread connecting the issues we discussed in the podcast was how COVID-19 is exacerbating inequalities that are a legacy of a colonial past and a present that thrives on racial capitalism. I think our future episodes should encourage people through participatory praxis in addition to providing accurate information from a scientific journalism angle and guiding questions for critical reflection. I’m confident that a longer run time will allow us to include more information with the allowance of different segments. Part of the KZSC mission statement is to serve the community. To accomplish this maybe we can include local resources in future episodes. We can more fully advertise where we can be reached so that we can get feedback on what we are doing well and what can be improved. With a longer run time we can use what we learned from scholars as a lens through which to see what organizers are doing at the present moment, creating the possibility of including two interviews per podcast. I think in terms of communities, a lot of the scholars we interviewed were white so in the future we should be more thoughtful of including more folks from the BIPOC community. I think interviewing only scholars limits us. There are many people doing important work and although they haven’t been validated by the academy, their voices should be heard.
There is no one solution in creating an agenda for social justice. That’s the beauty of this podcast: everybody is able to find their own solution in their respective fields. I think collaborators can be found through the SJRC network and through folks in the organizing scene. One question to ask future interviewees is: is there anyone else you think we should talk to? For funding we could apply for grants in science journalism or even include a donation button on the website. My goal as part of the SJRC team is to make scientific information accessible and engaging. It’s to arm people with information that makes a difference and provides tools for critical thinking. As News and Talk Director, my goal is to forge an ongoing connection with the SJRC, since it provides opportunities for students and people interested in communication to work with a team and fine tune their skills. It also provides a space for possible funding opportunities. As someone who comes from a lower income background, this is important. One of the reason’s I wasn’t able to participate in certain media groups on campus is their unrealistic time demands for someone who needed to work to afford schooling. Providing a career guiding space, especially for first gen folks is important. A new institutional practice needed is validating people’s knowledge and community knowledge even if they haven’t been in higher education. Furthermore, being ok with asking for clarification. Talking to scholars can sometimes feel intimidating and admitting lack of knowledge is hard. Yet, knowing that people listening would also have your same question may make asking for clarification easier. Also, sometimes our language can get very abstract because we have learned that this is how we get our ideas recognized as worthy. It’s important to be mindful when this is happening and bringing it back so that the information discussed is accessible to more folks. Sometimes as researchers in a certain field we get so hung up on details that we forget the why. In the All My Relations Podcast (shout out to Isa* for the listening recommendation), Kim TallBear** said, “the goal of research is social change” and I couldn’t agree with that more.
*Isa Ansari is a core team member of our Pandemicene Project and is a recent graduate from the sociology department at UCSC.
**Dr. Kim TallBear is Associate Professor on the Faculty of Native Studies at the University of Alberta and is a co-founder and principal investigator of Indigenous STS.
Exposure Notifications, Digital Contact Tracing, and the Burden of Responsibility
June 2, 2020
Apple and Google have rolled out mockups of what they are coining “Exposure Notifications.” The goal of Exposure Notifications is similar to digital contact tracing in that their goal is to curb exposure to the public from a suspected or confirmed patient. The type of tracing proposed by Apple and Google is Proximity Tracking, which would use Bluetooth to track an individual’s exposure to cases. As noted by the CDC, bluetooth digital contact tracing needs to be widespread for it to be effective. The shift from naming the technology Digital Contact Tracing to Exposure Notification is interesting to note. The friendlier sounding “Exposure Notifications” suggests that Apple and Google understand many Americans’ feelings towards privacy and are trying to appeal to the general population to promote widespread usage of this API. Furthermore, whereas digital contact tracing is part of a multi-pronged approach and requires resources with which to follow up, Exposure Notifications can be free of these expectations.
Digital contact tracing is part of a series of steps to help curb exposure and Exposure Notifications shouldn’t be understood as a stand-alone solution. We recently conducted an interview with Professor Joan Donovan, faculty at Harvard and Director of the Technology and Social Change Research Project at the Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy. Prof. Donovan expressed concerns that: “Contact tracing is another one where technology isn’t going to be effective without humans who can explain to you what it means to be exposed and what your risk is, and can talk you through where it might have happened.” Here Prof. Donovan outlines the importance of human labor in the functionality of digital contact tracing. According to the CDC, in order for contact tracing to be effective it “will need to be linked with timely testing, clinical services, and agile data management systems to facilitate real-time electronic transmission of laboratory and case data for public health action.” Yet, Exposure Notifications end at alerting someone they may have been exposed to COVID-19 and includes only minimal follow up. While alerting an individual of potential COVID-19 exposure is important, the question becomes what resources will be provided for someone exposed and who will be responsible for the follow up? Exposure Notifications shift this responsibility on the individual.
Prof. Donovan went on to explain that digital contact tracing, if not done effectively, may further deteriorate public trust in experts during a pandemic. Since cell phones can detect Bluetooth signals through walls, with Exposure Notifications people may be alerted despite not having been exposed, giving rise to false positives. This may lead to further skepticism of the immediacy and danger of the virus. Prof. Donovan expressed concerns about the implementation of digital contact tracing without the proper follow up, “Without a robust infrastructure for talking to people about what you’re getting notified about, it’s going to be in a huge disaster…We also know the other part of this, which is that to have been in the same place and someone doesn’t necessarily automatically lead to infection, there’s going to be a lot of questioning. There’s going to be again another round of skepticism and inquiry that we need to be ready for and we need to be prepared for and we need to be able to answer people’s questions.” Looking over the Apple and Google’s Exposure Notification Blueprint it becomes obvious where the limitations lie: in the follow up. Exposure Notifications place the burden of responsibility on the individual. This is a myopic fix because lowering infection rates goes beyond the individual, it requires many parts of the public health system working successfully in conjunction.
Privacy During a Pandemic: Digital Contact Tracing and Technosolutionism
May 13, 2020
Early last month Google and Apple announced a joint effort to use digital contact tracing to aid in slowing the spread of COVID-19. They’ve recently announced a mock-up of what the digital contact tracing software would look like and are optimistic about being able to roll out this new technology later this month. According to the CDC, Contact tracing is meant to support a patient with confirmed or suspected illness through tracing the people who they’ve had contact with. The people who have been in contact with the patient are alerted, advised to maintain social distance, and track their symptoms for 14 days after last contact with the patient.
So far, the CDC has proposed two types of tracking using digital devices. The first is Case Management, which will capture data on cases and contacts. The goal is to use contact information to notify and follow-up with an individual who may have been exposed. Secondly, they’re proposing Proximity Tracking which would use Bluetooth or GPS to track an individual’s exposure to cases. It would require community wide adoption for proximity tracking to work effectively.
Yet many are weary of digital contact tracing as part of a“technosolutionsim” which places a tremendous amount of faith in technological solutions without considering repercussions on the most marginalized. “Efficient” has become a dog whistle word which allows Silicon Valley to operate without traditional checks. There are several obstacles facing the implementation of digital contact tracing.The most pressing is the effectiveness of contact tracing given the lack of testing available. The CDC has outlined contact tracing as a multi-pronged approach, and without widespread testing digital contact tracing is a meandering in the direction of a solution instead of a coordinated approach toward controlling the spread of COVID-19. Furthermore, there’s the issue of false positives. The proposed apps will be using Bluetooth, and because cell phones can detect Bluetooth signals through walls, people may be alerted despite not having been exposed. Lastly, given recent debates staking market vs lives, will contact tracing be used to provide a false sense of security providing justification to open up the economy before it is safe to do so?
In an upcoming blog post, we will take a deeper look at the app proposed by Apple and Google to understand the merits and pitfalls of adopting digital contact tracing into our daily lives. We will further explore the “why” in the creation of this app. Is digital contact tracing an effective solution, or is it Silicon Valley guilt appeasement? More information on understanding the logistics of this app, as well as the importance of balancing public safety and privacy during a pandemic will be available in forthcoming blog posts.