Challenging the Carceral Imaginary in a Digital Age: Epistemic Asymmetries and the Right to Be Forgotten

Author:

Pitts Andrea J.ORCID

Abstract

This paper argues that debates regarding legal protections to preserve the privacy of data subjects, such as those involving the European Union’s right to be forgotten, have tended to overlook group-level forms of epistemic asymmetry and their impact on members of historically oppressed groups. In response, I develop what I consider an abolitionist approach to issues of digital justice. I begin by exploring international debates regarding digital privacy and the right to be forgotten. Then, I turn to the long history of informational asymmetries impacting racialized populations in the United States. Such asymmetries, I argue, comprise epistemic injustices that are also implicated within the patterns of racialized incarceration in the United States. The final section brings together questions regarding the impact of such epistemic injustices on incarcerated peoples and focuses specifically on the public availability of criminal histories in online search databases as a fundamental issue within conversations regarding digital justice. I thus conclude by building from the work of contemporary abolitionist writers to argue that the underlying concerns of an individualized right to be forgotten should be transformed into a collective effort to undermine societal carceral imaginaries.

Publisher

Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM)

Subject

Sociology and Political Science,Philosophy

Reference62 articles.

1. Allen, Anita L (2008). Dredging up the past: Lifelogging, memory, and surveillance. The University of Chicago Law Review 75(1), 47-74.

2. Armstrong, Jesse (Writer) and Brian, Welsh (Director). (2011, December 18). The Entire History of You. [Television series episode]. In C. Brooker and A. Jones (Producers), Black Mirror. Netflix.

3. Avramides, Anita (2000). Other minds. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203870174

4. Ben-Moshe, Liat (2020). Decarcerating disability: Deinstitutionalization and prison abolition. University of Minnesota. https://doi.org/10.5749/j.ctv10vm2vw

5. Benjamin, Ruha (2019). Race after technology: Abolitionist tools for the new Jim Code. Polity. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soz162

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3