On 2 April 2010 the Associated Press reported that the United States Department of Homeland Security was revising their airline security policies, moving away from physical, corporeal screening, to procedures based on intelligence.'It is a more intel -or intelligence-based -way to screen,' said Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. 'It is a stronger way to determine whether passengers should go through secondary examination and not just primary examination.' (Associated Press, 2010)

Canada's no-fly list is examined here as a biopolitical plot line of the "war on terror": one that is constructed on techno-scientific language and practices that authorize and legitimize "us" versus "them" discriminatory dichotomies and thinking. Given that the misidentification of "normal" people on no-fly lists is a rampant story in media reporting, this analysis also reveals that the "truth" of the efficient and effective policing of high-risk milieus of circulation, like airports, through discriminatory logics is a precarious one at best. The author argues that the no-fly list plot line of the "war on terror" masks the techno-deterministic and discriminatory thinking behind these post-9/11 security measures-that the right technological arrangement, deployed in the right way, can invariably solve any governmental problem, including terrorism.Keywords: Security; Surveillance; Biopolitics; No-fly list Résumé : Cet article examine la liste canadienne d'exclusion aérienne comme élément biopolitique de la « guerre contre la terreur », élément qui emploie un langage et des pratiques technoscientifiques autorisant et légitimant une dichotomie et une manière de penser discriminatoires fondées sur le « nous » contre « eux ». Étant donné que l'inclusion de gens « normaux » sur cette liste est un fait fréquemment médiatisé, cette analyse met en question l'idée que la surveillance de milieux à haute circulation comme les aéroports au moyen de logiques discriminatoires soit pratique ou efficace. L'auteur soutient que de telles listes d'exclusion aérienne qui font partie des mesures de sécurité prises après le 11 septembre pendant la « guerre contre la terreur » recèlent un mode de pensée techno-déterministe et discriminatoire où l'on croit à tort qu'il est possible de résoudre n'importe quel problème national, y compris le terrorisme, en recourant à une technologie quelconque qu'on pourrait utiliser de manière appropriée.

In the 2010 book The Facebook Effect by David Kirkpatrick, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg made the claim that ‘users have one identity’. Through a critical theoretical analysis of a series of case studies of people being outed by Facebook, this article argues that ‘one identity’ and Facebook’s use of algorithms to drive profits are fundamentally incongruous with prevailing intersectional scholarship. The case studies articulate a theoretical framework that ties intersectional conceptions of gender and sexuality to social media and privacy. By aligning intersectional and privacy theories, the article argues that ‘one identity’ constitutes a violation of privacy norms as conceptualized by Helen Nissenbaum’s framework of contextual integrity. The article concludes that Facebook is anathema to the privacy and real life experiences of its users, which cannot fit into static categories and which change over time, mitigating the potential for the performance of fluid and intersectional identities.

No abstract

In the last years, a series of automated self-representational social media sites have emerged that shed light on the information ethics associated with participation in Web 2.0. Sites like Zoominfo.com, Pipl.com, 123People.com and Yasni.com not only continually mine and aggregate personal information and biographic data from the (deep) web and beyond to automatically represent the lives of people, but they also engage algorithmic networking logics to represent connections between them; capturing not only who people are, but whom they are connected to. Indeed, these processes of ‘auto-biography’ are ‘secret’ ones that for the most part escape the user’s attention. This article explores how these sites of auto-biography reveal the complexities of the political economy of Web 2.0, as well as implicate an ethics of exposure concerning how these processes at once participate in the erosion of privacy, and at the same time, in the reinforcement of commodification and surveillance regimes.