The goal of this exploratory paper is to begin to explicate the concept of epistemicide and articulate its function within the information field. We define epistemicide as the killing, silencing, annihilation, or devaluing of a knowledge system. It is not that we are unaware of the injustices happening within our field, but rather, that we are not in discussion across sub‐fields considering the idea that the collective injustices exist and are problematic on individual and systemic levels. We believe epistemicide happens when several epistemic injustices, such as hermeneutical or testimonial injustices, occur collectively reflecting a structured and systemic oppression of particular ways of knowing. We present epistemicide and epistemic injustice as a concept for understanding and addressing ways knowledge systems are silenced, devalued, or annihilated within library and Information Science (LIS).

The information professions need a paradigmatic shift to address the epistemicide happening within our field and the ways we have systematically undermined knowledge systems falling outside of Western traditions. Epistemicide is the killing, silencing, annihilation, or devaluing of a knowledge system. We argue epistemicide happens when epistemic injustices are persistent and systematic and collectively work as a structured and systemic oppression of particular ways of knowing. We present epistemicide as a conceptual approach for understanding and analyzing ways knowledge systems are silenced or devalued within Information Science. We extend Fricker's framework by: (a) identifying new types of epistemic injustices, and (b) by adding to Fricker's concepts of Primary and Secondary Harm and introducing the concept of a Third Harm happening at an intergenerational level. Addressing epistemicide is critical for information professionals because we task ourselves with handling knowledge from every field. Acknowledgement of and taking steps to interrupt epistemic injustices and these specific harms are supportive of the social justice movements already happening. This paper serves as an interruption of epistemic injustice by presenting actions toward justice in the form of operationalized interventions of epistemicide.

This research examines gendered surveillance on Instagram. The hashtag serves as an affordance across platforms, and this work expands on the literature of the rhetorical functions of hashtags. Rather than focusing on the hashtag itself as the problem, I instead use it as a lens to examine an extant social issue that is beginning to receive attention from the growing body of feminist surveillance research. When Instagram allows certain terms and hashtags to flourish for weeks, months, and even years without removal, this type of rhetoric and image combination functions to socially isolate a particular group in a heteronormative and nonconsensual way that reproduces existing inequalities. Instagram (and also Facebook who owns it) has the opportunity to promote whatever content it chooses and to put forth whatever narrative or rhetorical formation of the world it wants to see. What world does Instagram want?

Here we present findings of a needs validation study of 18-25 year old women and their wardrobes. Based on their feedback, we developed a prototype system that allows for borrowing and sharing of information about clothing via Facebook. The novelty of our interface lies in its combining RFID tags and social networking. In doing so we bridge the material and virtual realms and demonstrate the importance of material culture for ubiquitous computing.

No abstract