Interface - Becoming a Keyword
The interface in the 21st century, I would argue, is still mainly understood in terms of computing and user interaction with technical structures serving as a basis hidden behind a functionally designed interface, which we actually interact with designed to serve the purpose of the web page or software intended by the developer. The understandable pen and paper are now interchanged with a #BLACK BOX covered by an interface showing us the version provided for the user. But what is behind it?
Even though interfaces dominate our digital encounter who does actually think of them as more than a facilitator? I would like to propose that the interface enables multiple phenomena of the digital and social sphere to interface with each other producing a common ground to look at issues encountered together at the level of the interface. How policies are displayed and protect our privacy or do they actually? What position towards privacy and equality does the platform or company present through the design of the interface? How does the transparency of the interface help the user understand his rights and responsibilities or even lack, therefore?
The interface does not simply ‘interface’ human and machine but is used in multiple ways by a variety of actors to communicate or to use this said communication in the digital realm. From marketing to politics or the art world the interface can be used to hide intentions like harvesting our data as well as reveal and play with the mechanisms usually hidden behind as artists did with works like Wooden Mirror6.
I think the keyword can bring multiple perspectives together and can serve as an anchor to rearrange discourse and meanings. Therefore, a multitude of questions exists that concern our everyday live, our political system or our social interactions and relationships to a depth that can be addressed through the keyword of the interface.
What is happening with our communication, our DATA TRAFFIC AND STORAGE hidden behind interfaces? Have you ever asked yourself what your user generated data is good for besides the obvious message to your friend? Money would be probably a surprising answer, but companies like Google, Facebook, Amazon and others nowadays have the means to exploit not just personal information that we recognize as such. The data industry booms.
How does the interface DESIGN have an impact on the TRANSPARENCY of the platform or even our PRIVACY rights in the digital sphere? Which PROTOCOL written in which CODE is telling us that 140 characters are all we can use on twitter?
Breaking it down to the first question again: To whom are we actually talking? Human, machines or both? Between whom does the interface MEDIATE or better to say who does it interface?
Having given those examples, there´s a list of concepts I think are not just related but highly important for the discourse of the interface to see beyond the technical infrastructure to the social phenomena occurring.
Even though interfaces dominate our digital encounter who does actually think of them as more than a facilitator? I would like to propose that the interface enables multiple phenomena of the digital and social sphere to interface with each other producing a common ground to look at issues encountered together at the level of the interface. How policies are displayed and protect our privacy or do they actually? What position towards privacy and equality does the platform or company present through the design of the interface? How does the transparency of the interface help the user understand his rights and responsibilities or even lack, therefore?
The interface does not simply ‘interface’ human and machine but is used in multiple ways by a variety of actors to communicate or to use this said communication in the digital realm. From marketing to politics or the art world the interface can be used to hide intentions like harvesting our data as well as reveal and play with the mechanisms usually hidden behind as artists did with works like Wooden Mirror6.
As Bruno Latour pointed out in his discussion about the technical mediation between the human and the object, he makes a great example in his article about the agency of an object. When a man shoots a person with a gun, who has agency? The man, the gun or both? Can the gun have agency in the moment of the shot, when we take into account that the actual shot cannot be influenced anymore by the shooter himself?7 The same exists when a photographer takes a picture. In the moment, the picture is taken the camera is the active part, not the human being standing behind it. Translating his logic to the human – interface – relation there should be the possibility to argue that the interface has a form of agency as it communicates for us. The message we create is prestructured by its design, the content is influenced by the way its displayed and the way it will be sent and it even decide to whom we talk or not. Of course, there is a multitude of mechanisms and protocols hidden behind the interface itself but the moment a user clicks enter there is no direct influence anymore on the messages content and its whereabouts or recipient for that matter. I want to argue, therefore, that the interface of the 21st century should not simply be seen as a technical tool, but as a social structure performing a certain form of control and power over its user and hereby can be seen as an agent for communication, human or machine.
I think the keyword can bring multiple perspectives together and can serve as an anchor to rearrange discourse and meanings. Therefore, a multitude of questions exists that concern our everyday live, our political system or our social interactions and relationships to a depth that can be addressed through the keyword of the interface.
What is happening with our communication, our DATA TRAFFIC AND STORAGE hidden behind interfaces? Have you ever asked yourself what your user generated data is good for besides the obvious message to your friend? Money would be probably a surprising answer, but companies like Google, Facebook, Amazon and others nowadays have the means to exploit not just personal information that we recognize as such. The data industry booms.
How does the interface DESIGN have an impact on the TRANSPARENCY of the platform or even our PRIVACY rights in the digital sphere? Which PROTOCOL written in which CODE is telling us that 140 characters are all we can use on twitter?
Breaking it down to the first question again: To whom are we actually talking? Human, machines or both? Between whom does the interface MEDIATE or better to say who does it interface?
Having given those examples, there´s a list of concepts I think are not just related but highly important for the discourse of the interface to see beyond the technical infrastructure to the social phenomena occurring.
(6) Bolter, J., & Gromala, D. (2004). Transparency and Reflectivity: Digital Art and the Aesthetics of Interface Design (p.372). In P. (. Fishwick, Aesthetic computing (S. 369-383). Cambridge: MIT Press.
(7) Latour,B. (n°2 . Vol.3, Fall 1994). 1994. In Common Knowledge (S. V3, N2, p.29-64.). Durham: Duke University Press.
| Previous page on path | Interface - Vanessa Richter, page 1 of 6 | Next page on path |
Discussion of "Interface - Becoming a Keyword"
Add your voice to this discussion.
Checking your signed in status ...