TY - JOUR

T1 - Algorithms, governance, and governmentality

T2 - on governing academic writing

AU - Introna, Lucas

PY - 2016/1/1

Y1 - 2016/1/1

N2 - Algorithms, or rather algorithmic actions, are seen as problematic becausethey are inscrutable, automatic, and subsumed in the flow of daily practices.Yet, they are also seen to be playing an important role in organizingopportunities, enacting certain categories, and doing what David Lyon calls‘‘social sorting.’’ Thus, there is a general concern that this increasinglyprevalent mode of ordering and organizing should be governed moreexplicitly. Some have argued for more transparency and openness, othershave argued for more democratic or value-centered design of such actors.In this article, we argue that governing practices—of, and through algorithmicactors—are best understood in terms of what Foucault callsgovernmentality. Governmentality allows us to consider the performativenature of these governing practices. They allow us to show how practicebecomes problematized, how calculative practices are enacted as technologiesof governance, how such calculative practices produce domains of knowledge and expertise, and finally, how such domains of knowledgebecome internalized in order to enact self-governing subjects. In otherwords, it allows us to show the mutually constitutive nature of problems,domains of knowledge, and subjectivities enacted through governing practices.In order to demonstrate this, we present attempts to govern academicwriting with a specific focus on the algorithmic action of Turnitin.

AB - Algorithms, or rather algorithmic actions, are seen as problematic becausethey are inscrutable, automatic, and subsumed in the flow of daily practices.Yet, they are also seen to be playing an important role in organizingopportunities, enacting certain categories, and doing what David Lyon calls‘‘social sorting.’’ Thus, there is a general concern that this increasinglyprevalent mode of ordering and organizing should be governed moreexplicitly. Some have argued for more transparency and openness, othershave argued for more democratic or value-centered design of such actors.In this article, we argue that governing practices—of, and through algorithmicactors—are best understood in terms of what Foucault callsgovernmentality. Governmentality allows us to consider the performativenature of these governing practices. They allow us to show how practicebecomes problematized, how calculative practices are enacted as technologiesof governance, how such calculative practices produce domains of knowledge and expertise, and finally, how such domains of knowledgebecome internalized in order to enact self-governing subjects. In otherwords, it allows us to show the mutually constitutive nature of problems,domains of knowledge, and subjectivities enacted through governing practices.In order to demonstrate this, we present attempts to govern academicwriting with a specific focus on the algorithmic action of Turnitin.

KW - politics

KW - power

KW - governance

KW - academic disciplines and traditions

KW - other

U2 - 10.1177/0162243915587360

DO - 10.1177/0162243915587360

M3 - Journal article

VL - 41

SP - 17

EP - 49

JO - Science, Technology, and Human Values

JF - Science, Technology, and Human Values

SN - 0162-2439

IS - 1

ER -