Algorithmic photography: a case study of the Huawei Moon Mode controversy

Abstract

Moon Mode, an algorithmic program pre-installed on Huawei’s flagship smartphone P30 Pro, intelligently detects and enhances images of the moon captured by the phone. A heated social media discussion was triggered after a Chinese tech critic interpreted Moon Mode as photoshopping/superimposing details onto the original shot. The controversy centered on the line between AI enhancement and superimposed alteration when black-boxed algorithms stand between the user/viewer and the world viewed. The controversy is analyzed, together with Huawei’s marketing materials. Drawing on MacKenzie and Munster’s idea of distributed invisuality, AI-enabled photography is examined as a multiplicative data-processing event that traverses hardware and software, eliding any singular, meta-observational position. The author argues that algorithmic photography can be understood as a dynamic event of algorithmic processuality, indicating a new form of human-nonhuman entanglement in meaning-making practices, which cannot be discussed under the rubric of indexical representation.

Reclaiming the human in machine cultures: Introduction

“…As discussed within this themed issue, the information that algorithms and AI applications are mediating may be generated by either humans or other automated technologies (or both) and flow across communication networks comprising entanglements of humans and machines (see articles in this issue by Bucher, 2022; Komarraju et al, 2021; Thylstrup, 2022). In addition, these technologies are capable of taking over mediating and curating functions previously performed by humans (see Gaw, 2021), as well as play an increasing agentic role in the formation of media (see Zhang, 2022). What some scholars identify as the most significant difference between communicative AI and other forms of media is the level of agency that AI and algorithms exert in the communication process that, ultimately, helps to facilitate the automation of communication (Hepp, 2020; Reeves, 2016; Zhao, 2006).…”

“…In fact, this themed issue was stimulated by our belief that the perspective of media and cultural studies can provide a crucial contribution to the lively debate on these topics both in the academy and in the public sphere. The essays collected here open several threads in this direction, from the relationship between algorithmic agency and digital labor (Komarraju et al, 2021) to the intertwining of machine cultures with visual cultures (Zhang, 2022), from the communicative implications of biometric technologies (Bucher, 2022) to the technical and social lives of data (Thylstrup, 2022) and the impact of algorithmic mechanisms in the cultural industries (Gaw, 2021). More broadly, the media and cultural studies tradition offers at least three important correctives to existing debates on the topic.…”

Ideal technologies, ideal women: AI and gender imaginaries in Redditors’ discussions on the Replika bot girlfriend

“…Based on a discourse analysis of users’ discussion in a subreddit focusing on Replika, we show that AI imaginaries become meaningful to users as they intertwine with other forms of representations, especially gender imaginaries. Building from recent calls in the Media, Culture & Society journal to consider the manifold cultural dimensions that underpin uses and implications of AI technologies and algorithms programmed to communicate with human users (see, among others, Hepp, 2020; Komarraju et al, 2022; Natale and Guzman, 2022; Zhang, 2022), the article contributes to efforts to employ the lens of media and cultural studies for critical understanding and framing of these emerging technologies as they become embedded in communication and meaning making. More specifically, the examined case illuminates how practical interactions with communicative AIs such as Replika become meaningful to users as they align with existing representations and perceptions of gender and technology; this confirms the importance of critical work exploring the intersections between gender, culture, and media in order to enhance ethical reflections as well as deeper understandings of these technologies (Lomborg and Kapsch, 2020).…”