Cross-posted at Cyborgology.
The Human Microphone was created by Occupy Wall Street as a way to get around New York City’s ban on amplified sound in Zuccotti Park. In other words, it is a tool–and a form of non-digital technology–designed to facilitate communication and discussion in large crowds. But like any form of technology, its use isn’t confined to what it was originally created to do.
This is Karl Rove being “mic-checked” while delivering a speech at Johns Hopkins on November 14th. It starts about 1:48 in (be aware, there’s a huge jump in volume at that point).
The evolution of the techniques and technologies used by activists — their “repertoires of contention”, in the words of Charles Tilly — is a feature of any social movement. Clearly that’s happening to the Human Microphone now: what was a tool of communication is now also a tool for directed and targeted protest. Communication is still a huge part of this; it can’t not be, given that one grievance common to many members of the Occupy movement is a perceived lack of “voice” in politics. Communication, in this instance, is protest. And the technology and the protest itself are fundamentally intertwined.
This also stands against the fallacy that technology itself is neutral: in its very design the Human Microphone is imbued with the ideology of its makers — especially given that its components are actual human voices, used with intent and consent. It might be used for any number of things, but it is inseparable from the people who created it and the people who bring it into being every time it’s used.
It will be interesting to see if President Obama and his as-yet undecided GOP opponent find themselves mic-checked on the campaign trail next year.
——————————
Sarah Wanenchak is a PhD student at the University of Maryland, College Park. Her current research focuses on contentious politics and communications technology in a global context. She has also done work on the place of culture in combat and warfare, including the role of video games in modern war and meaning-making. More generally, she has long been interested in narrative and storytelling, and how stories work to shape wider social discourses. She is an occasional blogger at Cyborgology.
If you would like to write a post for Sociological Images, please see our Guidelines for Guest Bloggers.
Comments 28
JonCarter — November 19, 2011
In this instance, seems that the mic check is being used as a way to prevent communication and abridge an other's right to free speech. It's all rather fascist if you ask me.
Dahlmann — November 19, 2011
The truth is that Karl Rove is a criminal and should be in jail serving a very long sentence. He is co-responsible for many deaths and many acts of torture that violated US and international law. He encouraged a president to commit acts that violate the US Constitution.
In some countries, Karl Rove would have been assassinated by now. For that matter, if he were from a different country, the US or Israel might have long since engineered his assassination. Nobody should be paying such a man to speak at a respected institution, least of all Johns Hopkins. Every single person in that audience should have stood up in protest and demanded that he leave immediately.
Anon — November 20, 2011
If only Sociological Images presented The Tea Party in the same positive light as Ocupy...
CeeCee — November 20, 2011
Karl Rove has nerve asking them what gives them the right to occupy America. I believe it's the constitution, sir. If anyone is preventing freedom of speech, it's the Karl Rove's of the world that work very hard to make sure that we are never heard. He keeps his PR machine running 24/7.
Ethan K. — November 22, 2011
It's already happened to Obama:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWAqoB5Yib8
Anonymous — November 23, 2011
Would this be considered a cool form of protest if it were right wing activists shouting down the left's favorite politicians? What would the discourse surrounding such activism be? Would we be discussing "the evolving human microphone" or would we be hearing freaked out alarms being sounded about the chilling intimidatory effects of right wing activism on civil debate? Just curious. I'm seeing a double standard here.
fifine k669b — January 5, 2022
Windows has a short bit by bit wizard that will walk you through the cycle bit by bit. Over the long run, the fifine k669b framework ought to improve at perceiving your voice, and you can likewise prepare it by right-tapping on the Speech Recognition console, picking Configuration, and clicking Improve Speech Recognition.
Emma — August 6, 2022
There is no single component that makes up the evolving human microphone! The performance depends on many different factors: the ambient noise in your environment; the audio quality of your recording device; what other sounds you are hearing in the same direction; whether you are using a microphone mounted on your person or if you’re using one on a stand (and where); whether you use an audio interface, or if it is just attached to your computer via USB; how fast you move (or don’t move) between squeeze records taking and recording sounds; what else is happening around you at the same time — all these add together until it makes sense for your ears.
Anna — August 7, 2022
Humans are a very unique species; and unlike other species, we are all biologically wired to use our voices as a form of communication. This is something which is extremely useful for us, but which has led to certain phongleusa problems when it comes to designing software for the voice-based interface. We’ve come up with some solutions and there are reasons why we can’t get away with just ignoring that fact.