Accounting for Power in the Big Data Era: The Meaning of Collectivity in Datafied Societies

The increasing availability of data and software tools to gather, process and utilize information by the organized civil society has prompted the emergence of digital activism that takes data and information as the main currency of engagement. One instance of digital activism is represented by the ‘civic tech’ movement, hereby individuals and groups utilizing the new abundance of data and digital means to directly engage and intervene in governance processes. The freedom of information request tool Alaveteli, which supports citizens willing to exert power over under-­‐performing institutions, and the community issue reporting platform SeeClickFix are two out of many examples of what can be labelled as civic technologies. These platforms—and the relative communities that maintain and use them— point to what data generation and deployment can mean in fostering direct governance participation processes. This paper presents the preliminary findings of a research project on civic tech as activism. Combining social movement studies and democracy research with communication and media studies and a qualitative approach with digital methods, it explores the genealogy and fabrics of civic tech. By doing so, the paper exposes the new power dynamics emerging on the data, governance, social movement nexus, and discusses why a new analytical framework is necessary in order to account for the aspects of context and power. As my data reveal (see also Wissenbach et al 2016), the civic technology scene spans from “new” social and political activist groups and organisations to a rapidly engaging business start-­‐up scene eager to capitalize on the same grounds. At its core stands the potential of information and communication technology (ICTs) and data at civil society’s disposal to better execute their civic role within the core democratic realm. However, a digital activism community creating tools and tactics to hold their governments to account and support each other across borders intrinsically differs from tech start-­‐ups selling their open data tools to governments. We are witnessing a “power race” in the open governance environment between capitalization on the data hype and more genuine interests to utilize the potential of data to advance governance in the democratic realm (Wissenbach et al. 2016). Simultaneously, pervasive data and platform-­‐enthusiasm overshadows the question of what information is actually made available and in how far citizens are enabled in their democratic role. The initial “hard political edge” of open governance has gradually blurred towards open data and technology, which allows for governments to call themselves open or transparent without actually contributing to any accountability agenda. The race of governments to be part of the hype has created ambiguity regarding the true nature of most efforts. Thus, what sounds promising at first sight turns out to be a complex endeavor with competing agendas. Consequently, the civic tech scene, I argue, risks losing its ideological grounds if it does not succeed in strengthening a value driven collective. The notion of “civic tech activism” can offer a solution to these problems.