Reconsidering Technical Labor in Information Institutions: The Case of Analog Video Digitization

Abstract

Technical labor is still typically made invisible in the functioning of academic libraries and other information institutions even as they begin to disseminate technical and craft knowledge through makerspaces and other sites of library innovation. This paper seeks to recover one type of technical labor, digitization, as information work that embodies mental and manual activities and is both materially and intellectually productive. This paper draws on findings from an empirical study conducted by the author from 2015-2017 that used qualitative-interpretive methods to study the discursive and material practices of professional media preservationists as they worked to digitize analog video recordings in small-scale, high-quality ("artisanal") digitization projects. One key finding of this research is that in order to produce "legitimate" digital copies within their institutional contexts, media preservationists must coordinate their physical and mental activities to develop understanding of the invisible electrical signals that carry the encoded video information, blending objective and subjective modalities of knowledge. These findings have implications for understanding how the invisible labor of digitization has significant mental as well as manual dimensions, contributing to ongoing debates in information studies and the digital humanities on the relationship between "doing" and "signifying" in terms of knowledge work.

Invisible Labour of Book Digitization Projects

“…Because it is built upon a flawed base system which seeks efficiency and high output over knowledge creation and the value of the work, the labour of digitization can be considered inherently flawed. It is mirroring the same problems that have existed in other types of labour, such as the production of clothing and fast fashion, which wrestle with the same issues and limitations (Lischer-Katz, 2019;Star & Bowker, 2002). Regardless of the project's scale, the work can be twisted to lead those who are performing the labour to be paid less and valued less (Lischer-Katz, 2019, p. 214).…”

The emergence of digital reformatting in the history of preservation knowledge: 1823–2015

“…Similar to other cultural products of human activity, preservation knowledge emerges within particular cultural and historical contexts. Existing research in information studies has touched upon the cultural and historical dimensions of preservation knowledge, including qualitative studies of the social construction of the values of document formats (Yakel, 2001), ethnographic studies of preservation practices (Gracy, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2007a, b), surveys of the adoption of archival standards across and within institutions (Donaldson and Conway, 2010; Donaldson and Yakel, 2013), studies of the quality of digital copies (Conway, 2013, 2015), and studies on the social aspects of the adoption of digital file formats for the preservation of archival video formats (Jones, 2019; Lischer-Katz, 2014, 2019). Taken together, these studies help to articulate a more reflexive approach to preservation technologies and practices that problematizes how preservation knowledge becomes institutionalized and accepted as established fact, emphasizing its particular cultural and historical contingencies.…”

Feasibility documents as critical structuring objects: An approach to the study of documents in digital research production

“…In collaborative projects conducted by people representing different disciplines, it is particularly important to ensure that each contribution is visible and credited. Technical practices, such as the RSE work, are perceived as a non-intellectual set of tasks (Lischer-Katz, 2019); therefore, it has become critical for people to learn more about each other’s practices to both challenge this kind of perception and establish collaborations ‘on an equal footing’, as the lab highlights. In another comment, the team noted that ‘the PI understands the KDL SDLC processes and is receptive to our working methodology.…”

“…In digital practices, we can observe similar ways of technical work being rendered invisible as a result of the aforementioned juxtaposing of intellectual and practical work. The latter tasks with their focus on engineering objects, producing digital artefacts and maintaining digital systems are often obfuscated and go unrecognised (Lischer-Katz, 2019). It is therefore necessary to improve the understanding of RSE work as research-driven engineering that constitutes an articulation of Agre's critical technical practice whereby the craftwork is integrated with and informed by the reflexive work of critique (1997).…”