furtherandfaster

Digital anthropology - for digital and not so digital natives

Thanks to Jon Howard for this link. I have been luckly enough to work with an anthropologist on hotels. Anthropology is now a long way from its '"et's go out and study primitive peoples" roots. Any cultural human endeavour is fair game. And the web is one the biggest and fastest growing social artefact every created. Microsoft and Intel employ anthropologists to make their products usable. So keep your eyes open for signs of an anthropologist working. They may be watching you right now. That's what they just did for Talk Talk.  Download the pdf. Take the quiz and find out what tribe YOU are in.

Embedding anthropology in the US Army (and embedded comms planners)

I urge you to wrap your ears round the Radio 4 programme about the embedding of anthropologists in front line combat battalions in Iraq and Afghanistan for a highly controversial half hour about the use of humanities specialims to further military means. The initiative is chillingly called the Human Terrain System.  The US Army uses specialists to help them deal with geographical terrain. Now they want specialists to help them deal with human geography. Two claims are made here which are open to challenge. The first from the anthropologist community in the USA says that anthropologists shouldn't use their skills to further operations which may be directly oppposed to the interests of those they are studying. (Tell that to a criminal psychologist). The second is that according to the lead anthropologist, the work of the Human terrain initiative has nothing to do with "the targeting and neutralisation of hostiles" (ie killing people) a rather arbitrary distincition. How come the map maker gets used for targeting and the anthropologist doesn't? Enjoy the programme and make up your own minds.

I mention the programme because there is a strong connection to the work communication planners do.  The Human Terrain System has outraged Islamics experts because the anthropologists who work on the programme don't speak Arabic so work through an interpreter, have no special understanding of Iraqui or Afghan culture, and dress in army uniform, are often armed - to all intents indistinguishable from the combat troops with whom they are embedded. How can anyone seriously claim that an anthropologist can understand the nuances of the culture they have been sent to study when they have been (and I quote) "parachuted in"?

  A fascinating analogy and a fair question. At present I am working on healthcare. I've not worked in this sector for some years and would never claim to be a specialist.  I have had no formal induction in NHS systems. From month to month I have no idea what I am going to be working on. The skillset enables me to ask naive questions and to get up to speed very very quickly having worked across tens of different markets continually for decades. That's what planners do. We are parachuted in. We also wear uniform. That is to say we don't look or sound lik the people we are studying nor can we always be sure that what we are doing is in their interest.

I am challenged by the ideal that the specialist who only works with youf, or old people is better placed than a generalist because of the depth of their knowledge. Its a fair challenge. I am also challenged by the axiom that in the humanities you are supposed to be working in the interests of those you are studying. This axiom is so universal it seems absurd to challenge it but there's no reason why this should be necessary. Nor may it be true in practice.  Its all too easy for marketers to parrot Everything we do is driven by you. And carry on with their own selfserving agenda  The embedding of anthropogists in an invading army is provocative and sinister. But it isn't that different from the embedding of humanities generalists and specialists in every other part of society. I think the academics have high ideals. But they are kidding themselves and the students they are training to fill these many and varied roles.