Glitchy vignettes of platform urbanism

Abstract

‘Platform urbanism’ has recently gained traction as a designator for emergent dynamics and material configurations associated with the increasing presence of digital platform enterprises in cities. Initial scholarly engagements with platform urbanism have tended to coalesce around critiques of digital platforms as progenitors of inevitably dystopian urban futures. In this paper, I advance a counter-topographical minor theory of platform urbanism. I do so by drawing on Legacy Russell's notion of the glitch as a tendency toward both error and erratum (correction) in digital systems, mobilizing space/times where platforms appear ‘glitchy’—unexpectedly, otherwise than anticipated, or not at all—as the margins of platform urbanism. Through the narration of three specific platform/city interfaces from the minors of their glitchy margins, I capture the ways in which platform–urban configurations are demonstrably open to negotiations, reconfigurations, and diffractions through tactical maneuvers rooted in everyday digital practices of urban denizens. Theorized from the minor, platform urbanism is a phenomenon that may beget an array of possible outcomes that remain shapeable by mundane tactical interventions in the platform-mediated present. This ultimately underwrites possibilities for more hopeful digital urban politics, theory, and futures.

The Social Life of Robots: The Politics of Algorithms, Governance, and Sovereignty

“…Here, far from the smart city, automation, machine learning, and precision technology are transforming rural landscapes and relations, as agriculture becomes a new site for surveillance (Klauser ) and non‐human animal bodies enter into and adjust to novel relations with robots (see, for a discussion of bovine subjectivity and robotic milking technology, Holloway ). As human–environment relations become increasingly mediated by and refracted through robots and robotic technologies there is a need to consider technical glitches and slippages, where the unexpected and unanticipated arises, and the potentials positive and negative that they enable (Leszczynski ). Yet, attention to algorithmic human–environment relations remains limited.…”

Pandemic-Driven Technology Adoption

“…Before the pandemic, collectively we were already well aware that these same communities being disproportionately impacted by COVID-19 also faced barriers to access to hardware, software and Internet connectivity. These issues are compounded by the equity and inclusion challenges embedded in the platform tools themselves (Fields, Bissell, & Macrorie, 2020;Leszczynski, 2020). The last five years have seen a rise in research that robustly demonstrates that technology platforms are not neutral.…”

The three modes of existence of the pandemic smart city

“…Digital platforms such as Airbnb, Uber, Deliveroo produce and process big urban data to manage their services, related among others to food, tourism and mobility. Their control over data and code -which makes them very difficult to regulate -, their attractiveness and our banal use of them in our everyday lives are constitutive of what tends now to be called "platform urbanism" (Barns, 2018a;Leszczynski, 2019;Söderström & Mermet, 2020). Platform urbanism is the second mode of existence of the smart city, arguably more impactful than the first.…”