Portfolio Assignment #2: Mirroring and Its Connection to Digital Media & Online Relationships
The keyword that I chose is “mirror” and according to my article by Adam Fish, it can be defined as the practice of copying data. A quote from the reading that I found to be very helpful in understanding what mirroring means and its purpose is, “[…] computing mirroring keeps a copy of some or all of a particular content at another remote site, typically in order to protect and improve its accessibility” (Fish 218). Fish’s main point about mirroring is that it is more complex than just making copies of data. Copied data may not be exactly the same as the original and its meaning may change when used in different contexts. Additionally, mirroring can be political because it contributes to the control of information. Fish uses the example of Daniel Ellsberg leaking the Pentagon Papers, where the duplication of the information led to its visibility. He also describes how there is a front end and back end of mirroring, with the front end being what is visible to the public while the back end is what is invisible. Usually, the front end is what can be physically seen and the back end is hidden from the public, dealing with how information is captured and used. Fish argues that mirroring is a combination of both a realist and constructivist perspective, where it is important to consider the hidden complexities of mirroring in addition to what we can actually see.
Fish details how cloud computing and data activists, which he describes as the hegemonic and counterhegemonic, both use mirroring to preserve and protect their data integrity. Regarding data activism, Fish discusses WikiLeaks as an example, where they mirror content in places outside of the United States so that it is still protected if their private servers ever get shut down. He also talks about the power of visibility and how it legitimizes people and their ideas. Data activists can rely on mirroring to resist having their information controlled or censored. Another example used to illustrate this point is how the YouTube channel, Anonymous, mirrored their videos that criticized Scientology on YouTube when the Church of Scientology tried to get them taken down. Their mirrored videos allowed them and their ideas to stay visible, which helped them maintain their power and resist having their information controlled. However, mirroring for cloud computing companies, such as Microsoft, allows them to capture data about people when they put their information in the cloud. This contributes to issues of surveillance as these companies have access to our data and can capitalize on it.
The discussion about how mirroring can both be liberating for activists and a trap for capturing data is similar to Facebook and other social media platforms like it. Users can utilize these platforms to stand up to forces that try to control information, but at the same time, their data can be collected by the companies that own the platform. Part 1 of ‘The Facebook Dilemma’ gives insight into the consequences of using Facebook because people’s information are being collected and used in ways that Facebook may not even have control over. Facebook’s issues of surveillance are similar to the conflicts posed by mirroring, where people can rely on it for retrievable data but compromise their privacy in the process. These consequences are a result of the shift in audiences becoming more active instead of passively consuming content, as discussed by Simon Lindgren in Chapter 2 of ‘Digital Media and Society.’ Users can be creators of content, but at the same time, their content contributes more data that can be collected.
