Radical Transparency?

Abstract

This article considers the cultural positioning of transparency as a superior form of disclosure through a comparative analysis with other forms. One, as yet under-examined appeal of transparency lies in its promise to circumvent the need for, and usurp the role of, narrative-interpretive forms of disclosure such as scandal, gossip, and conspiracy theories. This growing preference for transparency as a more enlightening, honorable mode of disclosure is not just a result of the positive qualities that are seen to be intrinsic to transparency (particularly e-transparency) itself, but a response to the perceived negative characteristics of other forms of disclosure. After questioning the opposition between transparency and narrative-interpretive disclosures, we can see the preference for the former to be, at least partly, ideological: Transparency reinforces neoliberal tenets as much as democratic ideals. WikiLeaks is invoked in this article as a case which draws on both e-transparency and narrative-interpretive forms of disclosure in a move that wrests transparency from the clutches of neoliberalism and refuses the traditional hierarchy between forms of disclosure. This hybrid form helps us explore the possibility and implications of non-ascendant, radical forms of transparency or, in other words, disclosure without political foreclosure.