Skip to content
1981
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Crossings: Journal of Migration & Culture
  4. Volume 15, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 15, Issue 2
  • ISSN: 2040-4344
  • E-ISSN: 2040-4352

Abstract

In the last few years, civil society groups working from below the established core of power have been acting as contestant parties in border sites, particularly in the Mediterranean zone, by repurposing technological devices traditionally utilized for state security and control. For their task, these groups engage through the development of networks and channels of communication to enable informal systems of knowledge, which imply technological affordances for purposes that contribute to the freedom of movement and anti-hegemonic claims. What emerges thus are forms of activism mobilized through subversive affordances, that is, the (re)appropriation of available technologies to serve as tools for the dissemination of know-hows, the organization of tactics for survival and the configuration of systems of information, mutual care and solidarity. Following the operation of a concrete network – the Alarm-Phone-Initiative – this article analyses the scope and reach of such subversive affordances in order to offer a critical interpretation of ‘disobedient’ civic practices that help indeed strengthen a democratic space of humanitarian engagement and dissent.

© 2024 Intellect Ltd
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/cjmc_00096_1
2025-03-12
2025-06-13
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alencar, Amanda (2020), ‘Mobile communication and refugees: An analytical review of academic literature’, Sociology Compass, 14:8, https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12802.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Alencar, Amanda, Kondova, Katerina and Ribbens, Wannes (2018), ‘The smartphone as a lifeline: An exploration of refugees’ use of digital communication technologies during their flight’, Media, Culture & Society, 41:6, pp. 828–44, https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443718813486.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Andrade, Antonio Díaz and Doolin, Bill (2019), ‘Temporal enactment of resettled refugees’ ICT-mediated information practices’, Information Systems Journal, 29:1, pp. 145–74, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/isj.12189.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Aptekar, Sofya (2016), ‘Constructing the boundaries of US citizenship in the era of enforcement and securitization’, in N. Stokes-DuPass and R. Fruja (eds), Citizenship, Belonging, and Nation-States in the Twenty-First Century, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 1–29.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Aradau, Claudia and Tazzioli, Martina (2020), ‘Biopolitics multiple: Migration, extraction, subtraction’, Millenium: Journal of International Studies, 48:2, pp. 198–220, https://doi.org/10.1177/0305829819889139.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bayer, Marion, Kopp, Hagen, Santer, Kiri and Stierl, Maurice (2019), ‘Introduction: Five years of alarm phone’, in M. Bayer, H. Kopp, K. Santer and M. Stierl (eds), From the Sea to the City: 5 Years of Alarm Phone, Berlin: Watch The Med, pp. 14–17.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bennet, Jane (2010), Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things, Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Certeau, Michel de (1988), The Practice of Everyday Life, Berkeley, CA and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Dijstelbloem, Huub (2021), Borders as Infrastructure: The Technopolitics of Border Control, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Essendorfer, Barbara, Morari, Eduardo and Wanning, Heiko (2009), ‘An integrated system for border surveillance’, Fourth International Conference on Systems, Bossier, France, 1–6 May.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. European Commission (2014), Technical Study on Smart Borders, Brussels: European Commission.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Evans, Sandra, Pearce, Katy, Vitak, Jessica and Treem, Jeffrey (2017), ‘Explicating affordances: A conceptual framework for understanding affordances in communication research’, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 22:1, pp. 35–52.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Foucault, Michel (1982), Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, New York: Vintage.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Gaver, William (1991), ‘Technology affordances’, SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, New Orleans, USA, 27 April–2 May.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Genova, Nicholas de (2018), ‘The “migrant crisis” as racial crisis: Do Black Lives Matter in Europe?’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 41:10, pp. 401–18, https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2017.1361543.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Gibson, James (1982), Reasons for Realism: Selected Essays, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Gillespie, Marie, Osseiran, Souad and Cheesman, Margie (2018), ‘Syrian refugees and the digital passage to Europe: Smartphone infrastructures and affordances’, Social Media + Society, 4:1, https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118764440.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Gülzau, Fabian, Mau, Steffen and Korte, Kristina (2021), ‘Borders as places of control: Fixing, shifting and reinventing state borders: An introduction’, Social Science Open Access Repository, 46:3, pp. 7–22.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Heller, Charles, Pezzani, Lorenzo and Stierl, Maurice (2016), ‘Acts of disobedient listening’, in M. Bayer, H. Kopp, K. Santer and M. Stierl (eds), From the Sea to the City: 5 Years of Alarm Phone, Berlin: Watch The Med, pp. 22–27.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Heller, Charles, Pezzani, Lorenzo and Stierl, Maurice (2017), ‘Disobedient sensing and border struggles at the Maritime Frontier of Europe’, Spheres Journal for Digital Cultures, 4, https://spheres-journal.org/contribution/disobedient-sensing-and-border-struggles-at-the-maritime-frontier-of-europe/. Accessed 29 September 2023.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Hutchby, Ian (2001), ‘Technologies, texts and affordances’, Sociology, 35:2, pp. 441–56, https://doi.org/10.1017/s0038038501000219.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Jacobsen, Katja (2015), The Politics of Humanitarian Technology: Good Intentions, Unintended Consequences and Insecurity, London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Larkin, Brian (2013), ‘The politics and poetics of infrastructure’, Annual Review of Anthropology, 42:1, pp. 327–43, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-092412-155522.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Leurs, Koen (2023), Digital Migration, London: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Martins, Bruno Oliveira, Lidén, Kristoffer and Jumbert, Maria Gabrielsen (2022), ‘Border security and the digitalisation of sovereignty: Insights from EU borderwork’, European Security, 31:3, pp. 475–94, https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2022.2101884.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Mcgrenere, Joanna and Ho, Wayne (2000), ‘Affordances: Clarifying and evolving a concept’, Proceedings of the Graphics Interface 2000 Conference, Montréal, Québec, 15–17 May, Canadian Human-Computer Communications Society, pp. 179–86, https://doi.org/10.20380/GI2000.24.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. McLeod, Jack and Pan, Zhongdang (2005), ‘Concept explication and theory construction’, in S. Dunwoody, L. Becker, D. McLeod and G. Kosicki (eds), The Evolution of Key Mass Communication Concepts: Honoring Jack M. McLeod, Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, pp. 13–76.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Molnar, Petra (2020), Technological Testing Grounds: Migration Management Experiments and Reflections from the Ground Up, Toronto: Refugee Law Lab.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Muller, Benjamin (2004), ‘(Dis)qualified bodies: Securitization citizenship and identity management’, Citizenship Studies, 8:3, pp. 279–94.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Nagy, Peter and Neff, Gina (2015), ‘Imagined affordances: Reconstructing a keyword for communication theory’, Social Media + Society, 1:2, https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305115603385.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Napieralski, Antoni (2019), ‘Collecting data at EU smart borders: Data protection challenges of the new entry/exit system’, Juridikum Zeitschrift für Kritik, Recht & Gesellschaft, 1:2, pp. 199–209, https://doi.org/10.33196/juridikum201902019901.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Norman, Donald (2002), The Design of Everyday Things, New York: Basic Books.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Parchoma, Gale (2014), ‘The contested ontology of affordances: Implications for researching technological affordances for collaborative knowledge production’, Computers in Human Behavior, 37, pp. 360–68, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.05.028.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Santos, Marcelo, Saldaña, Magdalena and Tsyganova, Ksenia (2021), ‘Subversive affordances as a form of digital transnational activism: The case of Telegram’s native proxy’, New Media & Society, 26:1, pp. 131–53, https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211054830.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Schrock, Andrew (2015), ‘Communicative affordances of mobile media: Portability, availability, locatability, and multimediality’, International Journal of Communication, 9, pp. 1229–46.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Singler, Samuel (2023), ‘Performativity, pragmatism and border control technologies: Democratizing the ontologies of border criminology’, International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, 12:2, pp. 13–24, https://doi.org/10.5204/ijcjsd.2893.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Stierl, Maurice (2016), ‘A sea of struggle: Activist border interventions in the Mediterranean Sea’, Citizenship Studies, 20:5, pp. 561–78, https://doi.org/10.1080/13621025.2016.1182683.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Thoreau, Henry David (1849), On the Duty of Civil Disobedience, New York: Elegant Books.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Trauttmansdorff, Paul (2022), ‘Borders, migration, and technology in the age of security: Intervening with STS’, Tecnoscienza – Italian Journal of Science & Technology Studies, 13:2, pp. 133–54, https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.2038-3460/17584.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Vuvok, Tamara and Sheller, Mimi (2013), ‘Border work: Surveillant assemblages, virtual fences, and tactical counter-media’, Social Semiotics, 23:2, pp. 225–41, https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2013.777592.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Walsh, James (2013), ‘Remapping the border: Geospatial technologies and border activism’, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 31:6, pp. 969–87, https://doi.org/10.1068/d18112.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Waters, Nick, Freudenthal, Emmanuel and Williams, Logan (2020), ‘Frontex at fault: European border force complicit in “illegal” pushbacks’, Bellingcat, 23 October, https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2020/10/23/frontex-at-fault-european-border-force-complicit-in-illegal-pushbacks/. Accessed 29 September 2023.
  43. Witteborn, Saskia (2018), ‘The digital force in forced migration: Imagined affordances and gendered practices’, Popular Communication, 16:1, pp. 21–31, https://doi.org/10.1080/15405702.2017.1412442.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Zijlstra, Judith and Ven Liempt, Ilse (2017), ‘Smart(phone) travelling: Understanding the use and impact of mobile technology on irregular migration journeys’, International Journal of Migration and Border Studies, 3:2–3, pp. 174–91, http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJMBS.2017.083245.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1386/cjmc_00096_1
Loading
  • Article Type: Article
Keyword(s): (re)appropriation of available technologies; anti-hegemonic claims; border sites; civil society groups; democratic space; disobedient civic practices; mutual care; the Alarm-Phone-Initiative

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test