It has become increasingly common to talk about “digital traces”. The idea that we leak, drop and leave traces wherever we go has given rise to a culture of traceability, and this culture of traceability, I argue, is intimately entangled with a socio-economics of data disposability and recycling. While the culture of traceability has often been theorised in terms of, and in relation to, privacy, I offer another approach, framing digital traces instead as a question of waste. This perspective, I (...) argue, allows us to connect to, extend and nuance existing discussions of digital traces. It shows us that data traces raise questions about not only how data capitalism tracks individual and multiple data behaviours, but also how it links to social and environmental toxicities in the form of abuse and environmental pollution, which follow gendered and colonial structures of violence. (shrink)

Political campaigns increasingly rely on Facebook for reaching their constituents, particularly through ad targeting. Facebook’s business model is premised on a promise to connect advertisers with the “right” users: those likely to click, download, engage, purchase. The company pursues this promise by algorithmically inferring users’ interests from their data and providing advertisers with a means of targeting users by their inferred interests. In this study, we explore for whom this interest classification system works in order to build on conversations in (...) critical data studies about the ways such systems produce knowledge about the world rooted in power structures. We critically analyze the classification system from a variety of empirical vantage points—via user data; Facebook documentation, training, and patents; and Facebook’s tools for advertisers—and through theoretical concepts from a variety of domains. In this, we focus on the ways the classification system shapes possibilities for political representation and voice, particularly for people of color, women, and LGBTQ+ people. We argue that this “big data-driven” classification system should be read as political: it articulates a stance not only on what issues are or are not important in the U.S. public sphere, but also on who is considered a significant enough public to be adequately accounted for. (shrink)