Data extraction stabilizes only when naturalized as a normal social form.

Evidence

To be an effective foundation for a new type of social order, data relations need not have the solidity we imagine in many work contracts. Indeed, Zuboff plausibly argues that much data extraction today is not a contract or relation at all, in that data just seems to get extracted at a distance. But the wider set of arrangements on which data colonialism relies would be ineffective unless they operated as something like a social form that seems both natural and normal, quite unlike an arbitrary act of theft or extraction. It is this social form we call data relations; data relations enable the basic processes of social construction on which the stabilization of data colonialism depends for the long term. — Nick Couldry & Ulises A. Mejias, The Costs of Connection, 134

Categorization

  • XREF: Refining the data-colonialism rival frame; ‘data relations’ as naturalized social form parallels Bourdieu’s habitus and Couldry’s own ordering-as-totalitarian-form claims. — connects to: Data acquires extractability only through socially constructed relations, not as a natural given — Nick Couldry & Ulises A. Mejias, The Costs of Connection: How Data Is…, 133; Data extraction needs to feel natural and normal, not like theft, to stabilize — Nick Couldry & Ulises A. Mejias, The Costs of Connection: How Data Is…, 134; Data relations are the social form that makes data extraction seem natural and normal — Nick Couldry & Ulises A. Mejias, The Costs of Connection: How Data Is…, 132 (+4 more)
  • DEFINE: Introduces the book’s core construct ‘data relations’ and distinguishes it from Zuboff’s surveillance-capitalist extraction-as-distance.

Broader Connections