Black Boxes as Capacities for and Constraints on Action: Electoral Politics, Journalism, and Devices of Representation

Abstract

Actor-Network Theory, as a theoretical and methodological approach, is particularly insightful when applied to domains of social activity that are in flux, thus making it particularly useful for ethnographic research about unsettled socio-technical systems. Drawing from field research conducted over the last decade, this paper presents two empirical cases that reveal how ANT enables researchers to trace the associations that form the socio-technical objects of political and journalistic practice. We focus on “black-boxed” technical objects, exploring two distinct, yet complementary, analytical moments that emerged during our respective fieldwork. First, we detail the work that an electoral map performs in stabilizing networks of political representation and creating new capacities to act. We then go inside a journalistic organization to reveal a moment of breakdown when the black box of a content management system unravels and fails to do what it is seemingly supposed to do, throwing news production into a tenuous state. The paper concludes by interrogating our empirical findings through the lens of cultural practices, highlighting a few ways sociologists might need to supplement ANT-analysis with a more robust understanding of culture and symbolic belief systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Notes

  1. 1.

    The very definition of culture and its causal capacities is still the subject of active debate within sociology and psychology. For an excellent recent review of these debates see Vaisey 2009.

  2. 2.

    We thank Fenwick McKelvey for this insight. This applies to states with a history of discrimiation. The specific formula for doing so was found unconstitutional in 2013 by the U.S. Supreme Court.

  3. 3.

    Quandt (2008) formally defines newsroom content management systems as “central production tools, offering (sometimes limited) word processing functionality, and access to archived information in a database … layout, and some publishing functionality” (84).

References

  1. Alexander, Jeffrey C. 2010. The performance of politics: Obama’s victory and the democratic struggle for power. New York: Oxford University Press.

  2. Alexander, Jeffrey C., Bernhard Giesen, and Jason L. Mast (eds.). 2006. Social performance: Symbolic action, cultural pragmatics, and ritual. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  3. Anderson, C.W. 2013. Rebuilding the news: Metropolitan journalism in the digital age. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Anderson, Benedict. 1983/2006. Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. New York: Verso

  5. Asdal, Kristin. 2012. Context in Action—And the Future of the Past in STS. Science Technology Human Values 37(4): 379–403.

  6. Barry, Andrew. 2001. Political machines: Governing a yechnological Society. London: The Athlone Press.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Becker, Howard. 1982/2008. Art worlds. Berkeley: University of California Press.

  8. Bennett, Tony. 2007a. Making culture, changing society: The perspective of culture studies. Culture Studies 21(4): 10–629.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bennett, Tony. 2007b. The work of culture. Cultural Sociology 1(1): 31–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Boczkowski, Pablo J. 2004. Digitizing the news: Innovation in online newspapers. Boston: MIT Press.

  11. Brennen, Steve. 2013. Culturing Latour: Reconstructing culture in Latour’s Actor-Network Theory. Paper presented at the 2013 International Commnications Association Conference. London, UK

  12. Callon, Michel. 1991. Techno-economic networks and irreversibility. In A sociology of monsters? Essays on power, technology and domination, ed. J. Law, 132–161. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Callon, Michel, John Law, and Arie Rip (eds.). 1986. Mapping the dynamics of science and technology: Sociology of science in the real world. London: Macmillan.

  14. Citypaper. 2000. A bad case of Hermes. Last modified March 2, 2000. Accessed on February 17, 2012 from http://archives.citypaper.net/articles/022400/cb.onmedia.shtml?print=1

  15. Cofax. 2006. Last modified December 12, 2006. Accessed on February 18, 2012 from http://www.cofax.org/content/cofax/home/

  16. De Laet, Marianne, and Mol, Annemarie. 2000. The Zimbabwe bush pump: Mechanics of a fluid technology. Social Studies of Science 30: 225–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ganz, Marshall. 2010. Personal communication, September 20.

  18. Grofman, Bernard, and Davidson, Chandler. (eds.). 1992. Controversies in minority voting: The Voting Rights Act in perspective. Washington: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Harman, Graham. 2009. Prince of networks: Bruno Latour and metaphysics. Re.Press. Available online at: http://re-press.org/books/prince-of-networks-bruno-latour-and-metaphysics/

  20. Heller, Karen. 2008. Anne d’Harnoncourt. Philly.com June 2, 2008. Accessed February 17, 2012 from http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/populist/19455984.html

  21. Hemmingway, Emma, and Loon, Joost van. 2011. We’ll always stay with a live, until we have something better to go to: The chronograms of 24-hour television news. Time and Society 20: 149.

  22. Jones, Douglas W. 2006. Technologists as political reformers: Lessons from the early history of voting machines. Presented at the Society for the history of technology annual meeting Las Vegas, October 13, 2006.

  23. Kreiss, Daniel. 2012. Taking our country back: The crafting of networked politics from Howard Dean to Barack Obama. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  24. Latour, Bruno. 1987. Science in action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Latour, Bruno. 1991. Technology is society made durable. In A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination, ed. J. Law, 103–131. Routledge: London.

  26. Latour, Bruno. 1993. The pasteurization of France. Cambridge: Harvvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Latour, Bruno. 1994. Pragmatogonies: A mythical account of how humans and nonhumans swap properties. The American Behavioral Scientist 37: 791–808.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Latour, Bruno. 1999. Pandora’s hope. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Latour, Bruno. 2004. The politics of nature: How to bring the sciences into democracy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

  30. Latour, Bruno. 2005. From realpolitik to Dingpolitik or how to make things public. In Making things public: Atmospheres of democracy Cambridge, ed. B. Latour and P. Weibel, 1–32. MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Latour, Bruno. 2006. Reassembling the social. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Latour, B., G. Harman, and P. Erdelyi. 2010. The prince and the wolf. Washington: Zero Boorks.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Lievrouw, Leah, and Livingstone, Sonia. 2006. The handbook of new media. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Mansfield, Matt. 2012 Interview with author, January 25.

  35. Marres, Noortje. 2012. Material participation: Technology, the environment and everyday publics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

  36. Moah.org. 2011. Printer’s Jargon. Last modified September 30, 2011. Accessed February 17, 2012 from http://www.moah.org/exhibits/virtual/printing2.html

  37. Nielsen, Rasmus. 2012. Ground wars. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Plouffe, David. 2008. The audacity to win. New York: Viking.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Quandt, Thorsten. 2008. News tuning and content management: An observation study of old and new routines in German online newsrooms. In Making online news: The ethnography of new media production, ed. D. Domingo and C. Paterson. New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Schudson, Michael. 1999. The good citizen. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Schudson, Michael. 2001. Politics as a cultural practice. Political Communication 18(4): 421–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Shapiro, Michael 2006. Looking for light. Columbia journalism review March/April 2006.

  43. Stackoverflow.com. 2009. In django, what is a “slug”? Last modified August 15, 2009. Accessed February 17, 2012 from http://stackoverflow.com/questions/427102/in-django-what-is-a-slug

  44. Stark, David. 2009. The sense of dissonance: Accounts of worth in economic life. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.

  45. Turner, Fred. 2005a. Where the counterculture met the new economy: Revisiting the WELL and the origins of virtual community. Technology and Culture 46(3): 585–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Turner, Fred. 2005b. Actor-Networking the news. Social Epistemology 19(4): 321–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Vaisey, Stephen. 2009. Motivation and justification: A dual-process model of culture in action. American Journal of Sociology 114(6): 1675–1715.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Wark, McKenzie K. 2002. To the vector the spoils. In CTRL (SPACE) Rhetorics of surveillance from Bentham to Big Brother, ed. T.Y. Levin, U. Frohne, and P.W. Weibel. Cambridge: MIT Press.

  49. Weiss, Amy Schmitz, and Domingo David, 2010. Innovation processes in online newsrooms as actor-networks and communities of practice. New Media and Society 12(7): 1156–1171.

  50. Wikipedia.org. 2011. Slug (production). Last modified September 21, 2011. Accessed February 17, 2012 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slug_(production)

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Fenwick McKelvey and the participants of the 2013 Objects of Journalism pre-conference at the International Communication Association annual meeting for their comments on earlier drafts of this article.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. W. Anderson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Anderson, C.W., Kreiss, D. Black Boxes as Capacities for and Constraints on Action: Electoral Politics, Journalism, and Devices of Representation. Qual Sociol 36, 365–382 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11133-013-9258-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • Actor-Network Theory
  • Black-boxes
  • Campaigns
  • Communications
  • Ethnography
  • Journalism
  • Politics
  • Social theory
  • Technology