Monthly Archives: October 2020
Close Reading Essay
Ana Canuto
Professor Carpenter
English 2150- Writing II
October 13, 2020
Within the book Algorithms of Oppression written by Safiya Noble, published in February 2018 by NYU Press, there are many claims that need tying together. The oppression and discrimination in our society never go away, not even when we simply search for something on the internet. Noble has touched upon the kind of discrimination that occurs within the technology we use and has displayed the importance of this issue to give us a better understanding of what goes on behind the scenes of algorithms, technology, and those who established it. She presents an array of evidence and explains the effects it has on marginalized groups. She even uses Google to prove this to her audience. More specifically she has claimed, “Part of the challenge of understanding algorithmic oppression is to understand that mathematical formulations to drive automated decisions are made by human beings” (Noble 1). How can I get closer to understanding the claims Noble makes? What are the important aspects Noble has done within her passage to display her purpose of the topic? Overall, I’ll be digging into more detail as to how Safiya Noble uses Google, her research, and tone to better understand the points she makes towards the topic she is trying to bring to light.
Safiya Noble’s purpose within her book was to expose the reality of the algorithm as well as the truth behind those that created it meaning that they are the ones responsible for making the algorithm the way it is. She begins by first stating it quite clearly. For example, she has written, “What this antidiversity screed has underscored for me as I write this book is that some of the very people who are developing search algorithms and architecture are willing to promote sexist and racist attitudes openly at work and beyond, while we are supposed to believe that these same employees are developing “neutral” or “objective” decision-making tools.” (Noble 2). Noble explains that she has uncovered the fact that humans are responsible for making these “decision-making tools”. When she uses words such as “neutral” or “objective” it further expands how we see the situation, when we see something as neutral or objective it would mean to be unbiased and to be equitable but that’s not the case here when it comes to the making of these tools. She goes about it when giving her reflection in the making of her book where people are actually creating these unneutral algorithms because they believe biased beliefs that could affect many marginalized groups. As it has been claimed, “women are systematically paid less than men in the company’s workforce, an “antidiversity” manifesto authored by James Damore went viral in August 2017,1 supported by many Google employees, arguing that women are psychologically inferior and incapable of being as good at software engineering as men, among other patently false and sexist assertions” (Noble 2). Noble starts using Google as her main evidence to support her claim as well as give us a better comprehension of what this is all about and how it comes to play in the reality of the kind of oppression that is being put against Women in addition to people of color. I understand how it makes sense to use Google because we get caught up on just knowing that we use it daily but not comprehending what Noble wants us to close read about Google and its algorithm in her book and how it creates the discrimination she explains about.
Furthermore, to what Noble does, she in fact also uses tone when it comes to writing something to give the audience the emotion the writer has. In this case, Noble displays how discontented she is with the way things are being run by those who establish the digital mechanisms we use. For instance, she has claimed, “Human beings are developing the digital platforms we use, and as I present evidence of the recklessness and lack of regard that is often shown to women and people of color in some of the output of these systems, it will become increasingly difficult for technology companies to separate their systematic and inequitable employment practices” (Noble 2). The tone of discontent from Noble comes from the word choice she decided on such as stating “recklessness and lack of regard” as that is how she perceives the situations she speaks upon. Becoming something we end up noticing for ourselves which gives us a better sense of why this should be significant to us and what it can lead to, to people who are being discriminated against.
Therefore, knowing the effects that were then seen shows us the measures that people take in order to create the change that is needed, and why, to acknowledge the issue. As the author wrote, “As this book was moving into press, many Google executives and employees were actively rebuking the assertions of this engineer, who reportedly works on Google search infrastructure. Legal cases have been filed, boycotts of Google” (Noble 2). Noble is direct with what is going on, and what I know stands out to me the most was how she used the tone she had towards the issue in an effective way that makes me see from her perspective of things making it easier to make her argument clear.
All in all, Safiya Noble uses ways to convey certain things to us to help us understand the issue she talks about in her book. As she has done much research, found evidence, gave her outlook on the topic, and used her tone through her writing to see the issue that comes with discrimination through algorithms and technology companies such as Google. Overall there is an importance to how authors execute their writing to engage the audience and read what they have to say about what they write and Noble did well when it came to presenting the situation of digital discrimination as well sexism in the workplace of technology companies through her writing style.
Work Cited
Noble, Safiya Umoja. Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. New York University Press, 2018.
Close Reading Essay
Ana Canuto
Professor Carpenter
English 2150- Writing II
October 13, 2020
Within the book Algorithms of Oppression written by Safiya Noble, published in February 2018 by NYU Press, there are many claims that need tying together. The oppression and discrimination in our society never seem to go away not even when we simply search something up on the internet. Safiya Noble has touched upon the kind of discrimination that goes within the technology we use and has displayed the importance of this issue to give us a better understanding of what goes on behind the scenes of algorithms, technology as well as those who established it. She presents an array of evidence as well as explains what digital redlining does and the effects it has on marginalized groups, she even uses Google as a big way of proving this to her audience. More specifically she has especially claimed, “Part of the challenge of understanding algorithmic oppression is to understand that mathematical formulations to drive automated decisions are made by human beings” (Noble 1). How does algorithmic oppression work? What are the outcomes that come from this? Overall, I’ll be digging into more detail as to how Safiya Noble uses Google, her research, and tone to support the points she makes and the importance of the issue being brought to light.
Safiya Noble’s purpose within her book was to expose the reality of the algorithm as well as the truth behind those that created it, and the way she has done that was by first stating it quite clearly. For example, she has written, “What this antidiversity screed has underscored for me as I write this book is that some of the very people who are developing search algorithms and architecture are willing to promote sexist and racist attitudes openly at work and beyond, while we are supposed to believe that these same employees are developing “neutral” or “objective” decision-making tools.” (Noble 2). Noble explains what she uncovered here, of the fact that you would think humans would be responsible for making these “decision-making tools” as neutral as they should be for those who use it. And she goes about it by giving her reflection from what she has received when making her book where people are actually creating these unneutral algorithms because they believe biased beliefs that could affect many marginalized groups. In addition, it has also been claimed, “in the midst of a federal investigation of Google’s alleged persistent wage gap, where women are systematically paid less than men in the company’s workforce, an “antidiversity” manifesto authored by James Damore went viral in August 2017,1 supported by many Google employees, arguing that women are psychologically inferior and incapable of being as good at software engineering as men, among other patently false and sexist assertions” (Noble 2). Noble starts using Google as her main evidence to support her claim as well as give us a better comprehension of what this is all about and how it comes to play in the reality of it all. We all know how big google is, we always use it and I understand how it makes sense to use Google because we get caught up on just knowing that we use it but not seeing the bigger picture of it all and that’s what noble wants us to know and see.
Tone matters when it comes to writing something to give the audience the emotion the writer has, in this case, Noble displayed how discontented she is with the way things are being run by those who establish the digital mechanisms we use. For instance, she has claimed, “Human beings are developing the digital platforms we use, and as I present evidence of the recklessness and lack of regard that is often shown to women and people of color in some of the output of these systems, it will become increasingly difficult for technology companies to separate their systematic and inequitable employment practices” (Noble 2). The tone of discontent becomes something we feel because of the discrimination that is going on in the workplace of technology companies as well as in the digital algorithms, which gives us a better sense of why this should be significant to us and what it can lead to, to people who are being discriminated against. Furthermore, knowing the effects that were then seen shows us the measures that people take in order to create the change that is needed, and why, to acknowledge the issue. As the author wrote, “As this book was moving into press, many Google executives and employees were actively rebuking the assertions of this engineer, who reportedly works on Google search infrastructure. Legal cases have been filed, boycotts of Google” (Noble 2). Noble is direct with what is going on, and the actions that are being taken to better see why they are being done. Therefore, Companies have a sense of responsibility to us to the things that they create to how they can affect others that use it, and Noble uses her tone and states the evidence she has to present it to us.
All in all, Safiya Noble uses various ways to convey certain things to us in order to help us understand the issue she talks about throughout her book. As she has done much research, found evidence, gave her outlook on the topic, as well as used her tone through her writing as a way to see the issue that comes with digital redlining as she has explained it. Overall there is an importance to how authors execute their writing to engage the audience and read what they have to say about what they write and Noble did exactly that when it came to presenting the situation of digital discrimination as well sexism in the workplace of technology companies.
Work Cited
Noble, Safiya Umoja. Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. New York University Press, 2018.
Close Reading Passage Identification
The passage I am choosing would be “Algorithms of Operations” by Safiya Noble because there is so much within this text that needs uncovering in terms of how it deals with discrimination and the technology or algorithm world and how they tie together and intersect. I would say it is complex in the sense that there is much to unpack and that there is more to it than what I was able to see when reading the text for the first time. It does seem to demand further interpretation for the fact that it is an important situation where others and I should be able to decode it the right way and enlighten others about it the way that she wants us to. I would say that although I got some points in the passage I did have more questions within the text that I would want to reread to get a better understanding of the text that’s why I would want to do this passage as one of those that I want to close read more into. There are moments in which I was surprised by some of the points of the passage as well as those where I might be a bit confused just cause I wasn’t able to tie one thing to another correctly. This passage doesn’t seem to go against the essay’s larger argument because they are more so focus on the main issue that there is but as I close read maybe there was a point in which they were and I was blind to see it. Therefore, I chose this text to better analyze it and how I wouldn’t have the problem of not being able to tie things together and how one thing causes another, and further see the details and points that make this text so important.
