Presented at the DMI mini-conference, University of Amsterdam, day 2.

Introduction to my paper on Identity 2.0
Yesterday we talked about the web having technological eras, or periods of the web that have specific providers, software and templates. This is also what I indirectly undertake in my study into the reconfiguration of identity in the era of search engines. By studying different software platforms for presenting the self online through their medium specific qualities we see what Fuller calls “digital subjectivity – that software constructs sensoriums, that each piece of software constructs ways of seeing, knowing and doing in the world that at once contain a model of that part of the world it ostensibly pertains to and that also shape it every time it is used” (2003: 19)

The reconfigured relationship between the user, the platform and the search engine is studied from what Manovich calls ‘cultural software,’ a genre of software that is cultural through its use and because it carries atoms of our culture. It is an undertaking that looks at the different software platforms that have been developed over time to allow us to understand how the configuration of the ecology the software is embedded is in has changed with the advent of the search engines. The platforms: the homepage, the blog, the social networking profile, the micro-blog and the lifestream are not presented in a chronological order in order to create a teleological account, rather they are presented in more or less the order in which they came into being. All platforms for presenting the self online still exist, while one may argue that the homepage is slowly disappearing, and some platforms even co-exist in the hands of the user who integrates her Twitter account into her blog.

In general, the Digital Methods Initiative researches society through the online, however, what I aim to do is research online web culture through the online software and devices that shape it. How is this research placed within digital methods? At first it seems an ethnographical account of my Web 2.0 being placed within the studies into identity but what it aims to do is to look at the medium specific qualities of the platforms and determine their web native elements, such as the permalink or the status update, in order to see how these tie up to search-engines. In a first small casestudy, it was shown that platforms relate to each other and that some platforms are closer together than others through their entanglement of structuring natively digital objects such as site feeds and embed codes. The question then is, how to operationalize the relationship between the platforms and their distance (topological).

This paper is based on the Networked book chapter ‘Lifetracing’¹ commissioned by Turbulence. Rewritten for the Digital Methods Initiative mini-conference January 20-22, 2010 at the University of Amsterdam.

Identity 2.0: Constructing identity with cultural software.

ABSTRACT: This essay deals with the change of identity on the web as a result of the assemblage of social software platforms, engines and users. It can be stated that major platforms for presenting the self online have developed over time: the homepage, the blog, the social networking profile, the micro-blog and the lifestream. They each have their own specific way for presenting the self online. The advent of the search engine has had a major impact on both the construction and the presentation of the online identity. Search engines not only index the platforms on which identity is performed, but they also organize and construct identity online. They act as a central point where identity performance is indexed. Since identity construction and identity performance have significantly changed with the advent of these engines, identity must be reconsidered. It can be argued that the assembly of platform, engine and user has constructed a new type of identity: Identity 2.0. This type of identity, placed within the period of Web 2.0, is always under construction, never finished, networked, user-generated, distributed and persistent.

Download PDF: Identity 2.0: Constructing identity with cultural software.

1. Helmond, Anne. “Lifetracing. The Traces of a Networked Life.” Networked: a (networked_book) about (networked_art). 2 July 2009. Available online: http://helmond.networkedbook.org/[↩]

Blogging is often seen as a new form of journalism, an online diary or a democratising medium which potentially gives every citizen a voice. However, what can we say about blogging and the blogosphere if we look at blogs from within the medium? In other words, what is blogging when we look at the software blogs are made with?

Anne Helmond graduated from the University of Amsterdam with a study on WordPress, the leading blog software. This research focuses on how blog software and search engines arose at the same time (1999) and have since established a tight relationship. What does this mean for bloggers, blogs and the blogosphere if we look beyond search engine optimization?

Anne Helmond – The blog as database from Vileo on Vimeo. (Thanks Vileo for the video!)

My slides are available in a previous post: “Slides from my presentation at the first WordCampNL.”

My chapter for Networked: a (networked_book) about (networked_art), Lifetracing. The Traces of a Networked Life,  is now officially online and open to comments. Thanks to Turbulence.org and and the National Endowment for the Arts for supporting my research.

Lifetracing. The Traces of a Networked Life

Identity on the web has changed by the assemblage of social software platforms, engines and users. Four major platforms for presenting the self online have developed over time: the homepage, the blog, the social networking profile and the lifestream. They each have their own specific way for presenting the self online. It should be mentioned that the shift has taken place from the centralized identity on the homepage to the distributed identity on a website with the lifestream.

The homepage is a self-secluded manually coded website containing its content on its own server. With the introduction of blog software the act of self publishing was made available to the public and the blog shows that it is part of a larger network with the embedding of external content from other services and platforms. In this era of the social web, the social networking profile has become a popular way to present the self online. The latest trend is the website containing a lifestream serving as an aggregation point for the distributed identity across various social media platforms.

The advent of the search engines has had a major impact on both the construction and the presentation of the online identity. Search engines do not only index the platforms identity is performed on, but they also organize and construct identity online. They act as a central point where identity performance is indexed. Since search engines have become the main entry point to the web, the idea of identity management has become very important. The case of Nina Brink, for example, shows how Search Engine Reputation Management tactics have been used to adjust online presence for the search engines.

The networked identity has proliferated as a result of the social media user recording the self online. Once content has been published online it becomes part of a larger network in which platforms can automatically exchange data and search engines can index data. The role of the user in this new situation is such that the user has become both content provicer and data provider. User data is used by the search engines for commercial gain but ironically it is also offered to the users in exchange for a ‘free’ account. Users gain access to their own statistics by providing their statistics. These statistics are used to measure the self and to show off the self on the social web.

Identity construction and identity performance have significantly changed since the advent of the engines, which calls for a reconsideration of identity. It can be argued that the assembly of platform, engine and user has constructed a new type of identity: Identity 2.0. This type of identity, placed within the period of Web 2.0, is always under construction, never finished, networked, user-generated, distributed and persistent.

Read the whole chapter of Lifetracing. The Traces of a Networked Life.

Official press release:
WE INVITE YOU TO PARTICIPATE . comment, revise, translate, submit a chapter http://networkedbook.org

Two years in the making, Networked: a (networked_book) about (networked_art) is now open for comments, revisions, and translations. You may also submit a chapter for consideration.

Please register and then Read | Write:

THE IMMEDIATED NOW: NETWORK CULTURE AND THE POETICS OF REALITY
Kazys Varnelis
http://varnelis.networkedbook.org

LIFETRACING: THE TRACES OF A NETWORKED LIFE
Anne Helmond
http://helmond.networkedbook.org

STORAGE IN COLLABORATIVE NETWORKED ART
Jason Freeman
http://freeman.networkedbook.org

DATA UNDERMINING: THE WORK OF NETWORKED ART IN AN AGE OF IMPERCEPTIBILITY
Anna Munster
http://munster.networkedbook.org

ART IN THE AGE OF DATAFLOW: NARRATIVE, AUTHORSHIP, AND INDETERMINACY
Patrick Lichty
http://lichty.networkedbook.org

TAGS: active, aethetics, aggregators, authenticity, authorship, BEN FRY, BEN RUBIN, BURAK ARIKAN, collaborative, communication, data, data mining, digital traces, distributed, DIY, EDUARDO NAVAS, everyday life, flow, GOLAN
LEVIN, identity, improvisation, Internet, JANET CARDIFF, JASON FREEMAN, JODI.ORG, JONATHAN HARRIS, latency, lifelogging, lifetracing, MANIK, mapping, MARK HANSEN, MARTIN WATTENBERG, MAX NEUHAUS, Mechanical Turk,
mediation, memory, music, narrative, NastyNets, NATHANIEL STERN, net art, network, NICK KNOUF, nonlinear, OLIVER LARIC, participation, performative, persistance, PETER TRAUB, platform, postmodernism, presentational, privacy,
prosumer, prosurfer, ranking, realism, reality, real-time, relational, remix, representation, research, RYBN, SCARLET ELECTRIC, SCOTT KILDALL, search engine, self, self-exposure, SHIFTSPACE.ORG, social networks, software, sousveillance, STEVE LAMBERT, storage, surveillance, tactical media, telepresence, THE HUB, THEY RULE, TrackMeNot, transmission, TV,
user-generated, visualization, web 2.0, webcam, widget, Wikipedia Art, YES MEN

BACKGROUND

“Networked” proposes that a history or critique of interactive and/or participatory art must itself be interactive and/or participatory; that the technologies used to create a work suggest new forms a “book” might take.

In 2008, Turbulence.org and its project partners — NewMediaFix, Telic Arts Exchange, and Freewaves – issued an international, open call for chapter proposals. We invited contributions that critically and creatively rethink how networked art is categorized, analyzed, legitimized — and by whom — as norms of authority, trust, authenticity and legitimacy evolve.

Our international committee consisted of: Steve Dietz (Northern Lights, MN) :: Martha Gabriel (net artist, Brazil) :: Geert Lovink (Institute for Network Cultures, The Netherlands) :: Nick Montfort (Massachusetts Institute for Technology, MA) :: Anne Bray (LA Freewaves, LA) :: Sean Dockray (Telic Arts Exchange, LA) :: Jo-Anne Green (NRPA, MA) :: Eduardo Navas
(newmediaFIX) :: Helen Thorington (NRPA, NY)

Built by Matthew Belanger (our hero!), http://networkedbook.org is powered by WordPress, CommentPress and BuddyPress.

Networked was made possible with funds from the National Endowment for the Arts (United States). Thank you.

We are deeply grateful to Eduardo Navas for his commitment to both this project and past collaborations with Turbulence.org.

Jo-Anne Green and Helen Thorington
jo at turbulence dot org
newradio at turbulence dot org

In February I graduated cum laude with a thesis on blog software and search engines titled ‘Blogging for Engines. Blogs under the Influence of Software-Engine Relations.’ It aims to add the study of software-engine relations to the emerging field of Software Studies, which may open up a new avenue in the field by accounting for the increasing entanglement of the engines with software thus further shaping the field.

This thesis wishes to contribute to the understanding of blogs by approaching blogs as both a medium and bi-product of practice that are both entangled in software-engine relations. In the history of blogging both the medium and practice are constantly being shaped by the search and indexing engines. Not only did the introduction of the ‘nofollow’ attribute have a major impact on the construction of the blogosphere, it also points to how the blogger is (un)willingly entangled in a relationship that the blog software establishes with the engines. The common blog practices of tagging, social bookmarking and the obsessive checking of blog statistics raise the question if we are now blogging to feed the engines. Continue to read an excerpt of my PhD proposal to continue my research on software-engine relations, or download the PDF ‘Blogging for Engines. Blogs under the Influence of Software-Engine Relations.’ (4,2 Mb)

Excerpt PhD Proposal on Software-Engine Relations

Google as the number one search engine is regarded by many to be “the start page for the Internet” (Dodge, 2007) and “Google has become such a commonly used resource that people are beginning to regard it as synonymous with the Web.” (Searls in Gudrais, 2007). What is missing from the current studies into software is the recognition of the central role that the engines play on the web. The engines are considered to be the starting point of the web and play an important editorial role on the web. Introna and Nissenbaum (2000) describe the politics of search engines with the engines

[...] determining any systematic inclusions and exclusions, the wide-ranging factors that dictate systematic prominence for some sites, dictating systematic invisibility for others. These, we think, are political. They are important because what people (the seekers) are able to find on the Web determines what the Web consists of for them. And we all —individuals and institutions alike— have a great deal at stake in what the Web consists of.

The politics of inclusion and exclusion in the search engines, which may also be described as the drama of search engines (Govcom.org, 2007), is clearly visible in the case of the website 911truth.org which suddenly disappeared from Google results. These issues raise the question if and how the web is structured by search engines. Rogers (2008) describes how the engines are demarcating different spheres on the Web. Previous research done with the Digital Methods Initiative (2007) not only showed how the engines construct different spheres but also how these spheres are constructed differently by different engines.  What role does the software play in the construction of these different spheres?

Previous research into the role of software and the engines in the blogosphere showed that there is an increasing symbiotic relationship between the two (Helmond, 2008). In this study into the most prevailing blog software, WordPress, it appeared that is is establishing strong ties with Google, Google Blog Search and Technorati. The blog software and blog engines determine the nature and construction of the blogosphere through co-construction. These software-engine relations enforce a steady regime in the blogosphere that puts the blogger in a position where the politics of inclusion and exclusion are played out in the game of search engine optimization and spam.

(Excerpt from my PhD proposal)

Download the hi-resolution Quicktime movie from the SoftWhere08 website.

| View | Upload your own

Software-engine relations in the blogosphere

Thank you very much for inviting me. My name is Anne Helmond and I am currently a New Media Lecturer at the Media Studies department at the University of Amsterdam. I also work at the Institute of Network Cultures, an Amsterdam based media research center. I am focusing my current research on software-engine relations, analyzing the entanglement of the engines into software.

I would like to propose to redefine the current perception we have of the blogger because people might think of the blogger as a pajama clad revolutionary or the lonely writer who sits in the dark in his room. However, the blogger is an active researcher. One would have to admit that the main amount of this activity is engine based. A lot of research is done via engines, it is engine work.

Then one starts to think about engines and bloggers and how are the software-engine relations are build into the medium and practice of blogging. Then one would have to think about the engines:

1. What is missing from the current studies into software is the recognition of the central role that the engines play in blogging. How one actively blogs with the engines in mind.
2. And also increasingly how engines are playing a role in how the blog software is continually being optimized for the engines.
3. The engines have a particular idea of what the blogosphere is, namely that the blogosphere of the indexable which is posts.

Let’s examine these three points in reverse chronological order.

The blog software feeds the engines for the engines’ indexing and thereby creating what you might call a symbiotic relationship. In some specificity: The engines index the blogosphere through site feeds and ping. The WordPress default site feeds only syndicates the five most recent posts which reinforces the distinct unit of the post as the native format of the blog. Comments are offered in a separate feed and pages are not syndicated at all. What is the blogosphere? According to the engines, that what is indexible namely the five latest posts. The engines see the blogosphere as posts only. The blogroll, pages and comments are not part of the blogosphere as seen by engines. This means that the comments actually form a different part of the blogosphere, the commentosphere.

Blog standards have also enabled the engines to construct a blogosphere in which the bloggers are subject to a software-engine regime. The daily blogging practice brings users directly into the disarray of software-engine politics as illustrated in the case of spam and nofollow. The nofollow attribute as an example of the political implications of the software-engine relations on the blogosphere. Spam is one of the practices that exploit the software-engine relations within the blogosphere.

What is nofollow?

Nofollow is an HTML attribute value used to instruct some search engines that a hyperlink should not influence the link target’s ranking in the search engine’s index. It is intended to reduce the effectiveness of certain types of search engine spam, thereby improving the quality of search engine results and preventing spamdexing from occurring in the first place. (Wikipedia)

Nofollow is a default setting in all the major blog software and it is important because it is a visible intervention, unlike other indexing decisions, by the software makers and the search engines and not the blogger. It has an impact on the meaning and value of links and it influences ranking and indexing which is different per search engine.

Blog software is optimized for the engines. This symbiotic relationship between the software and the engines is not without consequences. The engines are increasingly entangled in both the medium and practice of blogs which has implications on several levels. The influence of the engines on the medium and practice of blogs asks for a critical examination of this relationship.

A WordPress blog notifies ping servers by default which means that a WordPress blog is almost automatically included in the engines. The relationship between the software and the engines is two-fold: the software embraces the engines and the engines embrace the protocols within the software. WordPress implicitly acknowledges this relationship by implementing features that connect to the engines but it also explicitly states that “WordPress, straight out of the box, comes ready to embrace search engines.” The default settings in WordPress, such as providing feeds and pinging the engines, feed your blog to the engines.

Google is seen as the entry point to the web. Google as the number one search engine is regarded by many to be “the start page for the Internet” (Dodge, 2007) and “Google has become such a commonly used resource that people are beginning to regard it as synonymous with the Web.” (Searls in Gudrais, 2007). The main entry into the blogosphere is also provided by the engines which is why we need to critically examine their role. On top of that the different engines seem to create different blogospheres.

In a previous case study done with the Digital Methods Initiative of the University of Amsterdam we asked “To what extent do search engines not only map the blogosphere but also construct it?” Google, Google Blog Search and Technorati all construct different parts of the blogosphere with a small overlap.The engines seem to segregate the web by demarcating different web spheres, for example the blogosphere, the newssphere and the tag-o-sphere and different blogospheres.

By using the RSS protocol for indexing the engines duplicate the distinction between blog posts and other blog content and segregate the web by just indexing posts. According to Google blog search the blogosphere consists of blog posts. The question is whether software-engine relations contribute to the
construction of different web spheres?

The blog is not a closed environment but a dynamic entity due to its dispersive nature. This graphic by Wired Magazine illustrates the symbiotic relationship between the blogger, blog software and the engines.

So my research concerns the radical idea that bloggers do not so much blog for a public, but for engines, with the aid of blog software.

Here are the slides of the lecture I gave at Mediamatic in Amsterdam yesterday titled ‘The Widgetized Self. Distributed identity and the role of software-engine relations in blogging.’

| View | Upload your own

Easy embedding of the slideshow thanks to Joost de Valk’s great SlideShare WordPress plugin.