Exploring a controversy is not necessarily about proposing a solution to tackle the underlying issues, it is rather about exploring how the different actors. It is traditionnaly a really time consuming task, but digital methods give the possibility to aggregate massive amount of metadata to visualize who are the most influential actors in a particular field or topic.
The following maps are therefore following this logic of exploration, and therefore they do not have the pretention to provide an analytical framework to deal with concepts or theories. These maps are nothing more than maps. Even more specifically, as maps, they are here to explore and navigate through a controversy.
The sheer amount of data they tend to show highlights this characteristic : it is not about summing up complex networks of interactions by simplifying them to a basic figure; quite the contrary; it is about rendering the complexity of social reality thanks to digital methods.
Mapping is an invaluable tool to explore new territories and their inhabitants, not a theoretical artifact pretending to mirror reality and its fundamental dynamics. This precision explains why “mapping” gives its name to this methodology, and not simply “maps”, as it is a dynamic process, a starting point.
“From statements to litterature, from litterature to actors, from actors to networks”
This first map shows the relationship between authors and keywords out a dataset of approimatively 20.000 entries. The bigger is the word, the more often it is mentionned and refered to inside the dataset. The clusters, repreented by different colors, illustrate networks of authors and keywords presenting a great level of similiarity, and thus distinguishing them from the other clusters.
This map let us understand that data privacy (and related keywords used to constitute the database) can be perceived from different angles. As of it, some clusters translate an emphasis on the tecnical nature of data privacy (encryption) from computer science point of view. Other clusters represent an academic focus on the relationship between users and their data on social networks for example. Another cluser focuses more heavily on the economical stakes of data privacy when it comes to secure commerce transaction on the internet. Keywords are in red and Authors in Blue. The most frequent a node (either a key-word or an author) in the network, the bigger it appears.
Following picture is the illustration of relations betweens authors (left column), keywords (middle column) and conferences (right column).
The main keywords used to reference the conferences papers can highlight what are the major topics in related computer science literatture, such as “security” and “privacy” just to mention the biggest. On the other hand this highlights that data encryption an important concern from a purely technical point of view. Furthermore ensuring a sufficient level of encryption, implies challenges when confronted to cloud computing and embedded systems (as for example in mobile phones or RFID (Radio-Frequency IDentification)). At last the picture also shows that privacy is also a fruitful topic where both users and companies should have access to significant level of anonynimity when using the network and how to technically handle it. All in all data security, privacy or anonymity imply both technical, commercial and political considerations. In the following it has been further investigated how such before mentioned concept are percieved by a broader social context and what are the actors at stake defining how those concepts should be turned into concrete policies.
“From networks to cosmos”
In a controversy, it is hardly possible to distinguish what is technical and what is social or economical, all of these are more entangled than ever in the complexity of social reality, and what is at stake can not be fully mapped in one try to cut of one of those aspects from its hybrid environnement. The following diagram illustrates how civil society, politics, and economics, are producing actors and networks that try to define challenges about the internet, that try to make their concern sounded and prevalent. Here you can see the different actors involved in the controversy, such as Fight For The Future or The Open Media in connection with human right associations.
So in which topics do these cosmoeses and actors differ in oppinion in the controversy? The three main actors are in connection with each other. All three mayor cosmoses are having agreements and disagreements with each other. For example Politics is influencing Economics and Civil societies have debates with Politics many times in our controversy.
If the first map of this article gives us an overview of how the scientific litterature is structured around our themes, to get the full extent of a controversy it is required to dive into the myriad of concerns, voices, actors and networks composing society. The following mappings illustrate how, based on twittter accounts and tweets, some concerns are circulateing on social media.
Here is again an example of the keywords we used :
Mapping Twitter networks of actors according to different themes represented by hashtags.
Exploring by various keywords allows us to map different aspects of the controversy.
Each of the following maps are representing hashtag searches done on Twitter and visualized on Gephi. The headlines for the maps are the hashtag keywords we used and also the maps shows the different communities.
How to interpret the map: the relationship between different nodes follows a logic of emitters to receivers. The more often a Twitter account is mention by another Twitter account, the bigger appears on the map. The two colors helps to differentiate between emiters and receivers. Green translate a Twitter account mainly mentioning another Twitter account while red shows which accounts are more often mentioned by other users.
#Cyber security #Information security
Visualization of the network shows the most important actors on social networks are either of economical importance or press focusing on the current state of this field. It is assumed those companies and news agencies networks illustrate the economical dimension of cyber security and information security. This is echoing with what the first map (scientific litterature) showed, the importance of efficiently securing digital infrastructures. Hence why the biggest nodes are companies or websites focusing on these topics.
#cyber security
We can see on the right map that IPACSO is a major actor mentioning other actors in the network. Quick overview on project IPACSO: “The project IPACSO will develop a structured knowledge and decision-support framework for identifying, assessing and exploiting market opportunities across the PACS (Privacy and Cyber Security) industry domain. For this, the project will identify existing market drivers, inhibitors, environmental influencers, different applicable innovation models from other industries and develop materials and bootcamps to support the developments. The project will reach out to PE markets (Private Equity) and support organizations (existing innovation support companies, brokers, …) to facilitate the process for development.” http://ipacso.eu/index.php/about/project-ipasco
One can see that TheHackerNews is one of the most cited name in the network. It is understandable as this website is often considered as the main news outlet regarding cybersecurity and computer science. Privatelocknet appears to be a proactive blogger, even though it does not say anything about his qualitative importance in the network, he is quantitatively one of the biggest nodes. We also see clusters of top digital companies like Google, nixCraft or Microsoft that are grouped on the map, which shows they are fairly often mentioned together by the network, which can translate that people considered them important actors regarding cyber security. We also have influencal bloggers or writers in the network that can be considered as specialists, such as Dan Gillmor (@dangillmor).
#information security
The following map about information security follows the same scheme and color as the maps about cyber security. NorseCorp, TripwireInc and CyberExaminer are communicating intensively on the network. It can be so because as companies they are looking for visibility and to attract more audience. SecMash and gmillard are also important actors has specialists or newsfeed on the topic of information security.
#net neutrality
The same logic stands for the color of the net neutrality map. FCC (Federal Communications Commision) appears to be the central node, it is massivelly mentioned by a huge amount of individuals that are not linked to any particular communities, which translate global political concerns. We can also see that close to FCC account there is a cluster of politican Twitter accounts, who are part of the commission. They are really often mentioned in the network, hence they are red. Other influencal actors are TheOpenMedia and FightForTheFuture, community based activists who are also mentioned by many individuals. All in all one can assume that concerning internet neutrality (overall internet future) there is a hugely influencal political aspect where poeple are putting pressure on their representatives to influence in one way or another laws and regulations. All4NetralNet is a big node because it is a really important emitter quantitavely wise but we don’t know it’s qualitative impact on the network. (164K Tweets and 64 followers)
“From cosmoses to cosmopolitics”
If cosmoses are groups of narratives formulated by different network of actors then cosmopolitics is to be considered as how those different visions are made into society. This society is composed of choices, directions, compromises, negotiations between all those different cosmoses, hence why we could speak about cosmopolitics.
Exploratory findings:
Through the exploration by mapping the research question “What is at stake when dealing with internet privacy in a broader social context?” has been investigated. Here you can find the results of the investigation.
The most influential (as they are the ones most often reffered on the network) actors are:
-Governments (FCC, Politicans)
-Economical research groups (IPACSO),
-Companies (Google, nixCraft, Microsoft, NorseCorp, TripwireInc and CyberExaminer),
-Human association groups(TheOpenMedia and FightForTheFuture),
-News (TheHackerNews, All4NetralNet),
-Bloggers (Privatelocknet, Dan Gillmor),
-Social websites (Reddit, GooglePlus)
The main cosmos that has been discovered consists of two poles:
This cosmos is is more on a political level.
One pole where people stand for an open network where their data are secured and confidential and where the internet traffic is evenly priced without considering having to pay more to access a particular website.
Another pole where companies state that they need to develop a model where you pay more to access a particular website and where your data can be monetized.
Another cosmos:
This cosmos is more on a economical level.
Consists of companies for which cyber security and information security is a market. We also discovered influential bloggers and newswebsites that maintain a stream of news inside the network.
The two mayor directions that seems to exist is decentralized technology and private network belonging to private companies, which enables to monitor costumers and gather information. A network where information would be a commodity that you would have to pay differently according to who is your internet providers or which websites are one visits. Decentralized (or “dumb”) network is the opposite option, which would allow more transparency and neutrality for the user. In this kind of network the users now what is going on behind his or her screen and how data being handled by the network. Decentralized network only carries data without extracting information.
We have seen there is also a huge economical field as nowadays data encriptions and data security is done by private companies. Politics is appears the field where directions will be settled. For example we can see on the map dealing with net neutrality, people were actively tweeting their deputies and senators to influence their vote concerning the law about net neutrality.
Summarize cosmopolitics:
Nowadays internet is a technology which changed the face of the world but all thechnology is always embedded into social political and economical considerations. What can we learn form this controversy. As fregmanted as society is as many different discourses will be sounded by network of actors that try to make their visions prevale. How the internet evolved is dependend on choices made by society. Society shapes internet as much as internet shapes society.
internetprivacycontroversy 
