Podcast appearances and mentions of austin choi fitzpatrick

In this episode, we're joined by Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick as he delves into the dynamic relationship between technology, social innovation, and ethical considerations. From reimagining existing systems with negative externalities to envisioning a future driven by creativity and agency for positive change, Austin's insights challenge traditional perspectives and encourage listeners to reflect on their role in shaping a more equitable and inclusive world.

Patricia interviews her former professor, Dr. Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick. They dive into the concept of gestation within social movements and the elements involved in creating them, as well as his personal journey as a mid-career academic considering how to add a new challenge or adventure in his life. Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick is an author, speaker, and educator. His work focuses on social change as it relates to society, politics, and technology. He holds academic positions in the United States and England and speaks regularly about human rights, social movements, slavery, trafficking, and new technology. Connect with Austin: http://www.austinchoifitzpatrick.com/ ****   Ready to make a change? Book your free Explore Call with Patricia.   Patricia's 1:1 and group coaching programs are about becoming the active designer of your life through any transitional phase. Learn more at https://www.patriciacosulich.com.   Share this episode and tag us on social media! @patricia.cosulich & @the_transitions_podcast

What are the ethical contradictions within creating social change? Are peace studies going in a meaningful direction, or are we just reinventing the wheel endlessly? In this episode, Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick talks with host Mackoy Turpen about how changemaking is evolving and where he sees the future of peace studies.

In this episode, co-editors Associate Professor Ernesto Verdeja, Douglas Irvin-Erickson, Assistant Professor at George Mason University, and Austin Choi Fitzpatrick, University Professor, at the University of San Diego discuss their new book, Wicked Problems: The Ethics of Action for Peace, Rights, and Justice. "Wicked Problems" argues that the field of peacebuilding and conflict transformation needs a stronger and more practical sense of its ethical obligations. Contributors in this book examine the trade-offs, dilemmas, and compromises they encounter in their daily work with peacebuilding and justice. To learn more and purchase a copy of the book, go to go.nd.edu/WickedProblemsPod and use code "ASFLYQ6" for 30% off your purchase.

The ethics of changemaking and peacebuilding may appear straightforward: advance dignity, promote well-being, minimize suffering. Sounds simple, right? Actually acting ethically when it really matters is rarely straightforward. If someone engaged in change-oriented work sets out to "do good," how should we prioritize and evaluate whose good counts? And, how ought we act once we have decided whose good counts? Practitioners frequently confront dilemmas where dire situations may demand some form of response, but each of the options may have undesirable consequences of one form or another. Dilemmas are not merely ordinary problems, they are wicked problems: that is to say, they are defined by circumstances that only allow for suboptimal outcomes and are based on profound and sometimes troubling trade-offs.  Wicked Problems: The Ethics of Action for Peace, Rights, and Justice (Oxford UP, 2022) argues that the field of peacebuilding and conflict transformation needs a stronger and more practical sense of its ethical obligations. For example, it argues against posing false binaries between domestic and international issues and against viewing violence and conflict as equivalents. It holds strategic nonviolence up to critical scrutiny and shows that "do no harm" approaches may in fact do harm. The contributors include scholars, scholar practitioners in the field, and activists on the streets, and the chapters cover the role of violence in conflict; conflict and violence prevention and resolution; humanitarianism; community organizing and racial justice; social movements; human rights advocacy; transitional justice; political reconciliation; and peace education and pedagogy, among other topics. Drawing on the lived experiences and expertise of activists, educators, and researchers, Wicked Problems equips readers to ask--and answer--difficult questions about social change work. Stephen Pimpare is director of the Public Service & Nonprofit Leadership program and Faculty Fellow at the Carsey School of Public Policy at the University of New Hampshire. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

The ethics of changemaking and peacebuilding may appear straightforward: advance dignity, promote well-being, minimize suffering. Sounds simple, right? Actually acting ethically when it really matters is rarely straightforward. If someone engaged in change-oriented work sets out to "do good," how should we prioritize and evaluate whose good counts? And, how ought we act once we have decided whose good counts? Practitioners frequently confront dilemmas where dire situations may demand some form of response, but each of the options may have undesirable consequences of one form or another. Dilemmas are not merely ordinary problems, they are wicked problems: that is to say, they are defined by circumstances that only allow for suboptimal outcomes and are based on profound and sometimes troubling trade-offs.  Wicked Problems: The Ethics of Action for Peace, Rights, and Justice (Oxford UP, 2022) argues that the field of peacebuilding and conflict transformation needs a stronger and more practical sense of its ethical obligations. For example, it argues against posing false binaries between domestic and international issues and against viewing violence and conflict as equivalents. It holds strategic nonviolence up to critical scrutiny and shows that "do no harm" approaches may in fact do harm. The contributors include scholars, scholar practitioners in the field, and activists on the streets, and the chapters cover the role of violence in conflict; conflict and violence prevention and resolution; humanitarianism; community organizing and racial justice; social movements; human rights advocacy; transitional justice; political reconciliation; and peace education and pedagogy, among other topics. Drawing on the lived experiences and expertise of activists, educators, and researchers, Wicked Problems equips readers to ask--and answer--difficult questions about social change work. Stephen Pimpare is director of the Public Service & Nonprofit Leadership program and Faculty Fellow at the Carsey School of Public Policy at the University of New Hampshire. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

The ethics of changemaking and peacebuilding may appear straightforward: advance dignity, promote well-being, minimize suffering. Sounds simple, right? Actually acting ethically when it really matters is rarely straightforward. If someone engaged in change-oriented work sets out to "do good," how should we prioritize and evaluate whose good counts? And, how ought we act once we have decided whose good counts? Practitioners frequently confront dilemmas where dire situations may demand some form of response, but each of the options may have undesirable consequences of one form or another. Dilemmas are not merely ordinary problems, they are wicked problems: that is to say, they are defined by circumstances that only allow for suboptimal outcomes and are based on profound and sometimes troubling trade-offs.  Wicked Problems: The Ethics of Action for Peace, Rights, and Justice (Oxford UP, 2022) argues that the field of peacebuilding and conflict transformation needs a stronger and more practical sense of its ethical obligations. For example, it argues against posing false binaries between domestic and international issues and against viewing violence and conflict as equivalents. It holds strategic nonviolence up to critical scrutiny and shows that "do no harm" approaches may in fact do harm. The contributors include scholars, scholar practitioners in the field, and activists on the streets, and the chapters cover the role of violence in conflict; conflict and violence prevention and resolution; humanitarianism; community organizing and racial justice; social movements; human rights advocacy; transitional justice; political reconciliation; and peace education and pedagogy, among other topics. Drawing on the lived experiences and expertise of activists, educators, and researchers, Wicked Problems equips readers to ask--and answer--difficult questions about social change work. Stephen Pimpare is director of the Public Service & Nonprofit Leadership program and Faculty Fellow at the Carsey School of Public Policy at the University of New Hampshire. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/public-policy

The ethics of changemaking and peacebuilding may appear straightforward: advance dignity, promote well-being, minimize suffering. Sounds simple, right? Actually acting ethically when it really matters is rarely straightforward. If someone engaged in change-oriented work sets out to "do good," how should we prioritize and evaluate whose good counts? And, how ought we act once we have decided whose good counts? Practitioners frequently confront dilemmas where dire situations may demand some form of response, but each of the options may have undesirable consequences of one form or another. Dilemmas are not merely ordinary problems, they are wicked problems: that is to say, they are defined by circumstances that only allow for suboptimal outcomes and are based on profound and sometimes troubling trade-offs.  Wicked Problems: The Ethics of Action for Peace, Rights, and Justice (Oxford UP, 2022) argues that the field of peacebuilding and conflict transformation needs a stronger and more practical sense of its ethical obligations. For example, it argues against posing false binaries between domestic and international issues and against viewing violence and conflict as equivalents. It holds strategic nonviolence up to critical scrutiny and shows that "do no harm" approaches may in fact do harm. The contributors include scholars, scholar practitioners in the field, and activists on the streets, and the chapters cover the role of violence in conflict; conflict and violence prevention and resolution; humanitarianism; community organizing and racial justice; social movements; human rights advocacy; transitional justice; political reconciliation; and peace education and pedagogy, among other topics. Drawing on the lived experiences and expertise of activists, educators, and researchers, Wicked Problems equips readers to ask--and answer--difficult questions about social change work. Stephen Pimpare is director of the Public Service & Nonprofit Leadership program and Faculty Fellow at the Carsey School of Public Policy at the University of New Hampshire. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The ethics of changemaking and peacebuilding may appear straightforward: advance dignity, promote well-being, minimize suffering. Sounds simple, right? Actually acting ethically when it really matters is rarely straightforward. If someone engaged in change-oriented work sets out to "do good," how should we prioritize and evaluate whose good counts? And, how ought we act once we have decided whose good counts? Practitioners frequently confront dilemmas where dire situations may demand some form of response, but each of the options may have undesirable consequences of one form or another. Dilemmas are not merely ordinary problems, they are wicked problems: that is to say, they are defined by circumstances that only allow for suboptimal outcomes and are based on profound and sometimes troubling trade-offs.  Wicked Problems: The Ethics of Action for Peace, Rights, and Justice (Oxford UP, 2022) argues that the field of peacebuilding and conflict transformation needs a stronger and more practical sense of its ethical obligations. For example, it argues against posing false binaries between domestic and international issues and against viewing violence and conflict as equivalents. It holds strategic nonviolence up to critical scrutiny and shows that "do no harm" approaches may in fact do harm. The contributors include scholars, scholar practitioners in the field, and activists on the streets, and the chapters cover the role of violence in conflict; conflict and violence prevention and resolution; humanitarianism; community organizing and racial justice; social movements; human rights advocacy; transitional justice; political reconciliation; and peace education and pedagogy, among other topics. Drawing on the lived experiences and expertise of activists, educators, and researchers, Wicked Problems equips readers to ask--and answer--difficult questions about social change work. Stephen Pimpare is director of the Public Service & Nonprofit Leadership program and Faculty Fellow at the Carsey School of Public Policy at the University of New Hampshire.

Once a week we're featuring a fascinating San Diegan, and this week my guest is Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick. Austin is a professor at University of San Diego who studies politics, culture, technology and social movements. His work is impressively varied — his last two books were about drones and human trafficking. Austin is really energetic and curious and has a unique outlook on life. In this interview we talk about sociology, parenting, a few unpopular opinions and more.

In Episode 1 of Series 7 of The Rights Track, Todd is in conversation with Ben Lucas, Managing Director of the University of Nottingham's Data-Driven Discovery Initiative (3DI).  Together they discuss the threat to human rights posed by aspects of a digital world and the opportunities it can create for positive change.  Transcript Todd Landman  0:00  Welcome to The Rights Track podcast which gets the hard facts about the human rights challenges facing us today. In series seven, we're discussing human rights in a digital world. I'm Todd Landman, in our first episode of the series, I'm delighted to be joined by Ben Lucas. Ben is Managing Director of 3DI at the University of Nottingham. A hub for world class data science research, and a funder for this series of The Rights Track. To kick off the series, we're talking about some of the challenges and opportunities created in a data driven society, and particularly what all that means for our human rights. So welcome on this episode of The Rights Track. Ben Lucas  0:37 Thank you so much for having me.  Todd Landman  0:38  It's great to have you here, Ben. And I guess I want to start with just to kind of broad open question. We've been living with the internet for a number of years now. When I first came to United Kingdom, we barely had the internet and suddenly the web exploded, and it is a wonderful thing. It's transformed our lives in so many different ways. But it's also created major challenges for human rights, law and practice around the world. So my first question really is, what are the key concerns? Ben Lucas  1:04 I think that the internet is perhaps not bad in and of itself, and in that regard, it's very similar to any other new and emerging technology. We look at something like the automobile there's obviously dangers that having cars on roads introduced into society, but there's also a lot of good as far as a boost in quality of life and economic productivity and so forth. I think the central challenge and one that's perhaps getting exponentially more challenging is the fact that often more now than ever, digital technologies are moving a lot faster than what the regulatory environment can keep up with. And also very importantly, humankind's ability to fully understand the potential consequences of misuse or what happens when things go wrong. Todd Landman  1:50  So in some ways, it is interesting, you could look at Moore's Law for example, technology increases exponentially and this point you're making about the inability for the regulatory environment to keep up with that. I think that's a crucial insight you've given us because human rights in a way is a regulatory environment. We have international standards; we have domestic standards. Ben Lucas  2:08  Correct. Todd Landman  2:09  We have de jure protection of rights, de facto enjoyment of rights, but oftentimes, there's a great tension or gap between those two things. And when new issues emerge, we either need a new standard, or we need a new interpretation of those standards to be able to apply to that new thing. So, we're going to call the Internet a new thing for now and it actually, this dual use of technology is also interesting to me. When barbed wire was invented it's a great thing because you can suddenly close off bits of land and keep animals in one place. And it's wonderful for agriculture, but it's also a way to control property. And as we know, the enclosure laws in this country led to quite a lot of political conflict. But if we get back to the questions then about, you know, positive and negative aspects of the Internet, what else can you share with us? Ben Lucas  2:50 There are examples such as work that colleagues in the Rights Lab are doing, for example, on the use of the Internet and in particular social media, for exploitation. So, child exploitation, for example. There's also terrible examples of migrant exploitation. People who join groups thinking it's going to be a community to help them to get a job in another place. And that turns out to be quite dodgy, so that there's examples that are just blatantly you know, bad and terrible and terrible things that happen on the internet. But then there are other examples that are, I think, much more complicated, especially around the transmission of information and new emergent keywords we're seeing around misinformation and disinformation. The power that user generated content can have to help mobilise activists and protests for good for example, to get information out when journalists can't get in. Then the flip side of that is the potential exploitation by nefarious actors who are obviously spreading information that potentially damages democracies and otherwise stable and important institutions around the world. The other thing I would sort of cite here would be work by our colleague, Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick with his book, The Good Drone. That's a really interesting contrast here. So, a book about the use of UAVs and where on the one hand, if we think about a UAV that's armed. Todd Landman  4:12  That's an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle for our listeners. Ben Lucas  4:14 Yeah, Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. And if we think about one of those drones that's armed and also potentially autonomous moving forward to some that's potentially you know, very, very scary. On the other hand, this same basic sort of technology platform could provide cheap and accessible technology to help mobilise social movements to help journalists for example. And so I think any debate around the good and bad of technology, that there's some really interesting and very complicated contrast involved. Todd Landman  4:43   And you know, you see drones being used for beautiful visual displays over you know, presidential inaugurations, for example. Ben Lucas  4:48 Exactly. Todd Landman  4:49  You see this big, colourful display, but that same swarm technology of UAVs can actually be used for combat for warfare, etc. And we know from the work on human rights, modern slavery and human trafficking that, you know, taking pictures of the Earth using satellites with swarms of satellites is very good, but then that can also be used for for ill as well and I think that challenge of the dual use of technology will always be with us. I wonder now if we could just turn to another set of questions, which is, is the difference between life online and life offline. Do we think that human rights rules are different for online and offline life or roughly the same? Ben Lucas  5:25  A lot of people argue that online is a mirror of offline, although there are those potentially really negative amplification effects involved in the bad stuff that happens in the real world so to speak, when you move it online because you can take something that's very small and suddenly make it very big. I think there's a degree of it really just being a mirror and potentially an amplifier for the offline. Again, I think the central problem when we talk about human rights and the general protection of users of the Internet, is again really this fact that the technology is just moving so fast. That regulation both it's you know, how it's developed, initiated, interpreted going forward, the tech just moves so much faster. And then I think what we're seeing now is really kind of a shock that internet users get after the fact but it's maybe the sort of Newton's third law effect. You know, tech moved so fast was so aggressive and so free in the way it kind of there was sort of a wild west of how we, you know, captured and used data. And now we're just sort of experiencing the backlash that you would expect. One other sort of complicated dimension here is that we really need regulation to protect users of the internet but of course, that's then balanced against examples we see around the world of the way the internet's regulated being used to oppress and suppress populations. There's a really important balance that we need to achieve there. We need to protect everybody online. We need to preserve freedom of access to information, freedom of speech. We don't want people to get hurt online, but we also don't want to do that in an oppressive way. Maybe one thing that's really different as far as human rights online and offline, will emerge in the future around artificial intelligence. The big question I think that researchers in artificial intelligence are dealing with be they folks who are working on the algorithmics or be they the colleagues in law who are working on the ethics and the legal side of it. The really big question is around sort of transparency and tractability what's actually happening in this magic algorithmic box? Can we make sure that people can have appropriate checks and balances on what these you know this this new class of machines is doing? Todd Landman  7:32  Well, it's interesting because there is this observation about people who, who who use AI and design those algorithms that the AI solution and the algorithm that's been designed reflects many of the biases of the coder in the first place. Ben Lucas  7:44 Exactly. Todd Landman  7:425 And who are these coders? Well, they come from a particular social demographic and therefore you're replicating their positionality through AI, yet AI is presented as this neutral machine that simply calculates things and gives you the best deals on whatever platform you might be shopping. Ben Lucas  7:58  Precisely. And a lot of these you know, if we think about machine learning in general, where we're training an algorithm, essentially a type of machine to do something it involves a training set that involves a training data set. Where is that coming from? Who's putting it together? Exactly what biases are present in that? And now, and this is probably one of the most pronounced differences when we think about sort of human rights offline and online. I think a really big issue going forward is going to be that of AI discrimination, basically, and we're seeing that in everything from financial services - you know a machine is making a decision about does somebody get a loan, does somebody get a good credit score, applications and facial recognition technology. Who are they trying to find? What are they trying to do with that tech? And this AI discrimination issue is going to be one of the, one of the key things about that online/offline contrast. Todd Landman  8:50  Yeah, you know running right through all of our human rights law discourses, one about you know no discrimination, right that there should not be discrimination by type of person. Ben Lucas  8:59  Correct. Todd Landman  9:00  And yet, we know in practice, there's law discrimination already. And in a way AI can only amplify or maybe accelerate some of that discrimination. So it's a good cautionary tale about you know, the, the, shall we say, the naive embrace of AI as a as a solution to our problems. I wonder if I might just move forward a little bit about the cross-border nature of the internet, one of the promises of the internet is that nation state boundaries disappear, that people can share information across space and time we've just lived through a pandemic, but we're able to talk to each other in meetings all around the world without having to get in any kind of form of transport. But what sort of things should we thinking about in terms of the cross-border nature of the internet? Ben Lucas  9:38  I think that I would encourage all listeners today to go back to Alain de Botton's book, The News; a User's Manual, and also some of the talks he gave around that period, I think around 2014. We can have a totally new interpretation of some of those very relevant ideas, where we are now in the present and I'm talking about what some people are calling the threat of the post truth era. We've seen a completely unprecedented explosion in the information that we have access to the ability to suddenly take somebody's very small idea, good or bad, and project to a massive audience. But with that comes, you know, the vulnerabilities around misinformation and disinformation campaigns and the threat that that leads to, you know, potentially threatening democracies threatening, you know, various populations around the world. And another important branch of work that we're doing is studying campaigns and user generated content, and actually studying what's being said, at scale within these large audiences. We've done quite some work, Todd and I are with the Rights Lab for example, looking at analysing campaigns on Twitter. And this really comes down to trying to get into, exactly as you would study any other marketing campaign, looking at how do you cut through clutter? How do you achieve salience? But then also through to more practical functional matters of campaigns such as you know, driving guaranteed region awareness, policy influence donations, but we're just doing that at a much larger scale, which is facilitated, obviously, by the fact that we have access to social media data. Todd Landman  11:16  It's unmediated supply of information that connects the person who generates the content to the person who consumes it. Ben Lucas  11:23  Yeah. Todd Landman  11:24  Earlier you were talking about the media you're talking about academia and others, you know, there's always some sort of accountability peer review element to that before something goes into the public domain. Whereas here you're talking about a massive democratisation of technology, a massive democratisation of content generation, but actually a collapse in the mediated form of that so that anybody can say anything, and if it gains traction, and in many ways, if it's repeated enough, and enough enough people believe it's actually true. And of course, we've seen that during the pandemic, but we see it across many other elements of politics, society, economy, etc, and culture. And yet, you know, there we are in this emerging post truth era, not really sure what to do about that. We see the proliferation of media organisations, the collapse of some more traditional media organisations, like broadsheet newspapers and others have had to change the way they do things and catch up. But that peer review element, that kind of sense check on the content that's being developed is gone in a way. Ben Lucas  12:18  Yep and it's potentially very scary because there's no editor in chief for, you know, someone's social media posts. On top of that, they probably have or could potentially have a far greater reach than a traditional media outlet. And I think the other thing is, I mean, we were kind of for warned on many of these issues. The NATO Review published quite some interesting work on Disinformation and Propaganda in the context of hybrid warfare, I think around sort of starting in 2016, or ramping up in 2016, which is, you know, also very fascinating read. And then the flip side again of this connectivity that we have now, I guess the good side, you know, is when user generated content is used in a good way. And again, that's examples like, you know, examples we've seen around the world with the mobilisation of protests for good causes or fighting for democracy, grassroots activism, and in particular, that ability to get information out when journalists can't get in. Todd Landman  13:15  You know it's interesting we did a study years ago, colleagues and I, on the the mobilisation against the Ben Ali regime in Tunisia, and we were particularly interested in the role of social media and Facebook platform for doing that. And it turned out that a. there was a diaspora living outside the country interested in the developments within the country but within the country, those who were more socially active on these platforms more likely to turn up to an event precisely because they could work out how many other people were going to go so it solves that collective action problem of you know, my personal risk and cost associated protesting is suddenly reduced because I know 100 other people are going to go. And you know, we did a systematic study of the motivations and mobilisation of those folks, you know, try, trying to oust the Ben Ali regime, but it gets to the heart of what you're saying that this this you know, user generated content can have a tech for good or a social good element to it. Ben Lucas  14:08  Exactly. And I think another important note here, that's maybe some sort of upside is that, you know, there are a lot of academics in a lot of different fields working on understanding this massive proliferation of connectivity as well. In a kind of, I guess, strange silver lining to many of the new problems that this technology may or may not have caused is that it's also given rise to the emergence of new fields like so we're talking about Infodemiology, now we've got some amazing studies happening on the subjects of echo chambers and confirmation bias and these types of type of themes and I think it's really given rise to some really interesting science and research and I have some some confidence that we've got, even if we don't have those, again, editors in chief on social media, I have confidence because we certainly have some, you know, wonderful scientists coming at this scenario from a lot of different angles, which I think also helps to sort of moderate and bring some of the downsides to the public attention. Todd Landman  15:04  Yeah, and let me jump to research now, because I'm really interested in the type of research that people are doing in 3DI here at the university. Can you just tell us a little bit about some of the projects and how they're utilising this new infodemiology as you call it, or new grasp and harnessing of these technologies? Ben Lucas  15:23  Yeah, so 3DI as the data driven discovery initiative, we're basically interested in all things applied data science. We have, I think, quite a broad and really wonderful portfolio of activity that we represent here at the University of Nottingham, in our Faculty of Social Science. Faculty of Social Sciences. This is everything from economics, to law, to business, to geography, and everything in between. We take a very broad exploratory approach to the kinds of questions that we're interested in solving, I would say. But we do tend to focus a lot on what we call local competitive advantage. So we're very interested in the region that we operate - Nottinghamshire - sectors and industry clusters where they have questions that can be answered via data science. Todd Landman  16:08  What sort of questions? What sort of things are they interested in? Ben Lucas  16:11  This is everything from the development of new financial services to really driving world class, new practice in digital marketing, developing and sort of advancing professions like law, where there is a very big appetite to bring in new sort of tech and data driven solutions into that space but a need to achieve those new sort of fusions and synergies. So that, that side is obviously very, you know, commercially focused, but very importantly, a big part of our portfolio is SDG focus. So Sustainable Development Goal focused, and we've got, I think, some really fascinating examples in that space. My colleagues in our N-Lab, which is a new demographic laboratory, based in the business school, are working on food poverty, for example. And they're doing this in what I think is really exciting way. They've teamed up with a food sharing app. So, this is very much driven by the start-up world. It's very much a marketplace offering. The platform is set up to combat, hopefully both hunger, but also food waste. So, we're talking SDG 2, and we're talking SDG 12, sustainable production and consumption. And they've then been able to expand this work not just from understanding the platform - how it works, not just helping the platform, how it can work and function better. But they've been able to take that data from the private sector and apply it to questions in the public sector. So, they are doing a lot of wonderful work. Todd Landman  17:37  So, people have a bit of surplus food, and they go on to the app and they say I've got an extra six eggs, and someone else goes on the app and says I need six eggs and then there's some sort of exchange, almost like an eBay for food. Ben Lucas  17:47  Exactly. Todd Landman  17:48  But as you say, people who are hungry get access to food for much less than going to the shop and buying it and. Ben Lucas  17:55  Or free. Todd Landman  17:56  And people with the extra six eggs don't chuck them out at the end of the week. They've actually given them to somebody right? Ben Lucas 18:01  Exactly. Todd Landman 18:02  And then from that you generate really interesting data that can be geo-located and filled into Maps, because then you can work out where the areas of deprivation then where people have, say, a higher probability of seeking less expensive food. Ben Lucas  18:15  Precisely. Yeah. And I think that's also a good segue into you know, so one of the other flagship projects we have is 3DI, which is tracktheeconomy.ac.uk where we've been looking at, again, taking data from the private sector, but also government data and looking at how economic deprivation might have been exacerbated or not or how it changed. In particular focused on COVID and what sort of shocks that brought about, but with the intention of taking that forward. And the biggest sort of revelations that we've had working on that project have been really around the need for better geographical granularity. The fact that a lot of our national statistics or you know, marketing research assessments that are made by companies are based on you know, bigger geographical chunks. Actually, if we can get more granular and get into some of that heterogeneity that might exist at smaller geographical levels, you know, that's that's really, really important. That really, really changes a lot of policy formulation, sort of scenarios and questions that policy makers have.  Todd Landman  19:19 One of the big problems when when you aggregate stuff, you lose that specificity and precisely the areas that are in most need. So I wonder in this research that your your colleagues been doing and that you've been doing, you know, what's the end game? What are we working towards here? And how is that going to help us in terms of it from a human rights perspective? Ben Lucas  19:41  I think speaking from a personal perspective, when I was a student when I was first taught economics, I was taught in a way that really highlighted that this is you know, economics was was just something that everyone as a citizen should know even if you don't want to become an economist or an econometrician, you need to know it as a citizen. The same now very much applies when we talk about technologies that might not be familiar to all folks like AI data science. I think there's a lot to be said, as far as what I would say is a big sort of mission for 3DI is to really boost the accessibility of technical skills to really benefit people in terms of prosperity, but also just in terms of understanding as citizens what's actually going on. You know, if machines are going to be making decisions for us in the future, that we have a right to understand how those decisions are made. Also, if we think about other challenges, in the sort of AI and automation space around, you know, potentially people losing jobs because it's become automated. I think we have a right to know how and why that is. I think another big sort of an extension of that point is really in learning and getting technical skills out there to people for you know, potentially benefiting prosperity and the labour market. We really need to keep that very tightly paired with critical thinking skills. You know, we're very good as academics, thinking about things and breaking them down and analysing them especially you know, we as social scientists, you know, coding is probably going to be language of the future to borrow your quote Todd, but who's going to use that coding and what for? So I think we need to keep people in a good mindset and be using this this this technology and this power for good. And then the last point would be as something that's been done very well on this podcast in the past, is getting people to think both researchers and again, definitely citizens to think about the inextricably intertwined nature of the Sustainable Development Goals. You know, so for us at 3DI we're looking for those problems at scale, where we have measurements at scale, where we can do data science and crack big challenges, but I think whether you're doing you know, much more focused work or work with the SDGs at scale, it's all really interconnected. An obvious example, what is climate change going to do for you know, potentially displacing populations and the flow on, the horrible flow on effects that's going to have? So I really, I think that's yes, sort of our our mission, I would say, moving forward. Todd Landman  22:07  That's fantastic. So you've covered a lot of ground, Ben, it's been fascinating discussion, you know, from the dual use of technology and this age old question of the good and the bad of any kind of new technological advance. You've covered all things around the, you know, the mobilizational potential problems with post truth era. The expanse and proliferation of multiple sources of information in a sense in the absence of of that mediated or peer reviewed element. And this amazing gap between the speed of technology and the slowness of our regulatory frameworks, all of which have running right through them major challenges for the human rights community. So we're really excited about this series because we're going to be talking to a lot of people around precisely the issues you set out for us and many more. In the coming months we've got Martin Sheinin who is a great human rights expert, former UN Special Rapporteur, but now a global, British Academy global professor at the Bonavero Institute at the University of Oxford working on precisely these challenges for human rights law, and this new digital world. And that's going to be followed by a podcast with Diane Coyle, who's the Bennett Professor of Economics, University of Cambridge. It's interesting because she wrote a book in 1997 called The Weightless World, which is about this emerging digital transformation coming to the economy, and has now written a new book called Cogs and Monsters. It's a great take on the modern study of economics and the role of digital transformation. But for now, I just want to thank you, Ben, for joining us. It's exciting to hear about the work of 3DI. We appreciate the support of 3DI for this series of The Rights Track. We look forward to the guests and I think by the end of the series we would like to have you back on for some reflections about what we've learned over this series of the Rights Track. Ben Lucas  23:50  Happy to. Thank-you for having me. Christine Garrington  23:53  Thanks for listening to this episode of The Rights Track, which was presented by Todd Landman and produced by Chris Garrington of Research Podcasts with funding from 3DI. You can find detailed show notes on the website at www.RightsTrack.org. And don't forget to subscribe wherever you listen to your podcasts to access future and earlier episodes.      

In this second of two special episodes of The Rights Track, Todd reflects on what has been learned about modern slavery from our podcast and its contribution towards UN Sustainable Development Goal 8.7 to end global modern slavery by 2030. This episode features interviews from Series 3-5 of The Rights Track, which together form a library of 26 fascinating episodes and some 13 hours of insightful conversations with researchers from the University of Nottingham's Rights Lab, and a stellar line-up of people working on the ground to combat slavery from NGOs, campaigners and activists, authors, historians, economists, businesses and policymakers. Episodes featured Blueprint for Freedom: ending modern slavery by 2030  Zoe Trodd, Rights Lab Slavery-free cities: why community is key Alison Gardener, Rights Lab Life after slavery: what does freedom really look like? Juliana Semione, Rights Lab Forced marriage and women's rights: what connects SDGs 5 and 8.7? Helen McCabe Rights Lab and Karen Sherman, Author Voices of slavery: listen and learn Minh Dang and Andrea Nicholson, Rights Lab The useable past: what lessons do we learn from history in the fight to end slavery? David Blight and John Stauffer Face to face: researching the perpetrators of modern slavery Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, Rights Lab How is the UN working to end modern slavery?  James Cockayne, Rights Lab and Lichtenstein Initiative for Finance against Slavery and Trafficking Strengthening laws and ending modern slavery: what connects SDGs 16 and 8.7?  Katarina Schwarz, Rights Lab  Fast fashion and football: a question of ethics Baroness Young of Hornsey, All Party Parliamentary Group on Ethics and Sustainability in Fashion, and the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Sport, Modern Slavery and Human Rights Unchained supply: eradicating slavery from the supply chain Alex Trautrims, Rights Lab The business of modern slavery: what connects SDG 8.7 with its overarching SDG8? John Gathergood, University of Nottingham and Genevieve LeBaron, University of Sheffield Walking the supply chain to uphold human rights: what connects SDGs 12 and 8.7 Elaine Mitchel-Hill, Marshalls plc Bonded labour: Listening to the voices of the poor and marginalised Anusha Chandrasekharan and  Pradeep Narayanan, Praxis Fighting slavery on the ground: what does it look like? Dan Vexler, Freedom Fund Creating stronger places for child rights: what connects SDGs 8.7 and 11? Ravi Prakash, Freedom Fund consultant  Health and slavery: what connects SDG 3 and SDG 8.7? Luis Leão,  Federal University of Mato Grosso, Brazil Global partnerships to end modern slavery: what connects SDGs 8.7 and 17? Jasmine O'Connor, Anti Slavery International  The Congo, cobalt and cash: what connects SDGs 9 and 8.7? Siddharth Kara, Carr Center for Human Rights Policy, Harvard University

The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (MIT Press), by Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, demonstrates that this technology – which is mostly associated with covert surveillance and remote warfare – has also served as a vital tool for activists, social movements, and defenders of human rights to effect pro-social campaigns. Through stories of exemplar initiatives and analyses of thousands of civil uses of drones, Choi-Fitzpatrick argues that scholars and others interested in the implications of emergent technologies for democracy need to look beyond the networks of social media and consider as well the material devises that populate our world. Despite the risks and the nefarious (and obnoxious) applications of drones, these machines also have the capacity to “democratize surveillance,” putting a preeminent tool of statecraft in the hands of civil society. By tracing such uses, The Good Drone is an inspiring call for creativity, experimentation, and optimism regarding the humanitarian possibilities of emerging material technologies. Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick is Associate Professor of Political Sociology at the Kroc School of Peace Studies at the University of San Diego and concurrent Rights Lab Associate Professor of Social Movements and Human Rights at the University of Nottingham's School of Sociology and Social Policy. Lance C. Thurner teaches history at Rutgers Newark. His research and writing address the production of knowledge, political subjectivities, and racial and national identities in eighteenth and nineteenth-century Mexico. He is broadly interested in the pedagogical applications of the digital humanities and the methods and politics of applying a global perspective to the history of science and medicine. More at http://empiresprogeny.org. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (MIT Press), by Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, demonstrates that this technology – which is mostly associated with covert surveillance and remote warfare – has also served as a vital tool for activists, social movements, and defenders of human rights to effect pro-social campaigns. Through stories of exemplar initiatives and analyses of thousands of civil uses of drones, Choi-Fitzpatrick argues that scholars and others interested in the implications of emergent technologies for democracy need to look beyond the networks of social media and consider as well the material devises that populate our world. Despite the risks and the nefarious (and obnoxious) applications of drones, these machines also have the capacity to “democratize surveillance,” putting a preeminent tool of statecraft in the hands of civil society. By tracing such uses, The Good Drone is an inspiring call for creativity, experimentation, and optimism regarding the humanitarian possibilities of emerging material technologies. Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick is Associate Professor of Political Sociology at the Kroc School of Peace Studies at the University of San Diego and concurrent Rights Lab Associate Professor of Social Movements and Human Rights at the University of Nottingham's School of Sociology and Social Policy. Lance C. Thurner teaches history at Rutgers Newark. His research and writing address the production of knowledge, political subjectivities, and racial and national identities in eighteenth and nineteenth-century Mexico. He is broadly interested in the pedagogical applications of the digital humanities and the methods and politics of applying a global perspective to the history of science and medicine. More at http://empiresprogeny.org. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (MIT Press), by Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, demonstrates that this technology – which is mostly associated with covert surveillance and remote warfare – has also served as a vital tool for activists, social movements, and defenders of human rights to effect pro-social campaigns. Through stories of exemplar initiatives and analyses of thousands of civil uses of drones, Choi-Fitzpatrick argues that scholars and others interested in the implications of emergent technologies for democracy need to look beyond the networks of social media and consider as well the material devises that populate our world. Despite the risks and the nefarious (and obnoxious) applications of drones, these machines also have the capacity to “democratize surveillance,” putting a preeminent tool of statecraft in the hands of civil society. By tracing such uses, The Good Drone is an inspiring call for creativity, experimentation, and optimism regarding the humanitarian possibilities of emerging material technologies. Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick is Associate Professor of Political Sociology at the Kroc School of Peace Studies at the University of San Diego and concurrent Rights Lab Associate Professor of Social Movements and Human Rights at the University of Nottingham's School of Sociology and Social Policy. Lance C. Thurner teaches history at Rutgers Newark. His research and writing address the production of knowledge, political subjectivities, and racial and national identities in eighteenth and nineteenth-century Mexico. He is broadly interested in the pedagogical applications of the digital humanities and the methods and politics of applying a global perspective to the history of science and medicine. More at http://empiresprogeny.org. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (MIT Press), by Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, demonstrates that this technology – which is mostly associated with covert surveillance and remote warfare – has also served as a vital tool for activists, social movements, and defenders of human rights to effect pro-social campaigns. Through stories of exemplar initiatives and analyses of thousands of civil uses of drones, Choi-Fitzpatrick argues that scholars and others interested in the implications of emergent technologies for democracy need to look beyond the networks of social media and consider as well the material devises that populate our world. Despite the risks and the nefarious (and obnoxious) applications of drones, these machines also have the capacity to “democratize surveillance,” putting a preeminent tool of statecraft in the hands of civil society. By tracing such uses, The Good Drone is an inspiring call for creativity, experimentation, and optimism regarding the humanitarian possibilities of emerging material technologies. Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick is Associate Professor of Political Sociology at the Kroc School of Peace Studies at the University of San Diego and concurrent Rights Lab Associate Professor of Social Movements and Human Rights at the University of Nottingham's School of Sociology and Social Policy. Lance C. Thurner teaches history at Rutgers Newark. His research and writing address the production of knowledge, political subjectivities, and racial and national identities in eighteenth and nineteenth-century Mexico. He is broadly interested in the pedagogical applications of the digital humanities and the methods and politics of applying a global perspective to the history of science and medicine. More at http://empiresprogeny.org. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The need to move from a rescue and restore paradigm to a human rights paradigm is ever present. Early on in the U.S. the human trafficking movement began as a white movement made up of second wave feminists and evangelicals who saw criminal justice as allies in an attempt to solve the problem of slavery. This led to a doubling down of white privilege, enforcement, and patrol of people of color. To end human trafficking, we need to address root causes and create sustainable emancipation. In asking the question “What are we not looking at?” and “Who are we arresting?”, Dr. Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick enables us to focus on structural barriers related to the movement and asks us to look at the larger issues associated with modern slavery and forced labor. As a scholar focused on social movements, Dr. Choi-Fitzpatrick discusses his book “What Do Traffickers Think”, and in doing so, provides us with a deeper understanding of labor traffickers and the realities of blocked opportunities and unrealized equality. Most importantly he focuses us on the need to adopt goals and a vision that sets the movement on a course to end modern day slavery.

Do drones have a place in supporting social movements? Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick is an author, educator, and speaker. Austin’s work focuses on politics, culture, technology, and social change. He holds concurrent academic appointments at the University of San Diego and University of Nottingham and has been a visiting scholar at Oxford, University of California at San Diego, and Yale.  He is the author of several books and commentaries on social movements.  His recent book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance shows how small-scale drones, satellites, kites, and balloons are used by social movements for the greater good.  Politics and technology have always had a complicated relationship. Social media has upended assumptions about how politicians, voters, and protestors communicate. In this episode of the Drone Radio Show, Austin talks about The Good Drone, and demonstrates the importance of technology to politics. But argues we mustn't stop with social media. New technology in the air (drones, for example) changes politics on the ground, and democratizes surveillance along the way. 

In Episode 5 of Series 4, we talk to Pradeep Narayanan Director-Research & Capacity Building and Anusha Chandrasekharan (Senior Programme Manager - Communications) from Praxis, an India-based not-for-profit organisation which works to democratise development processes and institutions in order to ensure that the voices of the poor are heard and acted upon.  00.00 – 3.39 Praxis is a development organisation based in India, aimed at supporting poor and marginalised communities. It works with the most marginalised communities who would otherwise be excluded such as the “dalit”communities, and particularly dalit women, on matters which are important to them. 17% of the Indian population are dalit(untouchables), which is the lowest category of people in the Indian caste system. Although it is easy to gain access to these communities in both rural hamlets and urban slums, the challenge is to how to get their concerns in front of policy makers. Referred to as ground level planning, a range of methods are used; participatory video, digital media and face to face meetings with policy makers.  3.40 – 12.10 The discussion moves on to describe the relationship between the dalit and higher caste groups in relation to bonded labour and forms of modern slavery.  Modern forms of slavery in India have emerged from the caste system where high caste landowners engaged dalit as bonded labour. The dalit were effectively indentured to landowners, working on the land and receiving various forms of payment. This practice was abolished by The Bonded Labour Act 1976. Urbanisation has led to significant numbers of dalit living in underserved settlements or slums, seeking work in manufacturing industry in the city. They are vulnerable to exploitation and a system has evolved very similar to traditional bonded labour whereby money is advanced to the poor and marginalised, who then are obliged to work to pay off the debt. The very poor are vulnerable because they do not have easy access to cheap or safe credit and so cannot cope with emergencies that may arise, for example ill health, or other expenses such as weddings, funerals, and at festival times. Employers' agents take advantage of the situation to advance money to vulnerable families who are then required to “work off” the loan. This involves long hours, bad working conditions, physical and sometimes sexual abuse of women. There are also instances of people not being paid for their work; e.g. the brick industry. The workers are not free to leave. Employers operate via a climate of fear and intimidation which is used to control the workers. Working with the labourers is challenging because they are in fear of the employers, and unwilling to speak about their situation or even to accept that they are in bondage.  09.55 – 14.20.  At this point a link is made with  research by Austin Choi Fitzpatrick, who writes of a cultural acceptance of debt bondage in the villages, which is also borne out by the experience of the speakers. This acceptance on the part of the labourers creates a situation whereby labour exploitation can occur. The question is how to change the labourer's awareness of their situation. Praxis is working with Freedom Fund on a programme which involves;  The formation of an action research group within a community which collects case study information, identifies what drives debt bondage, for example health, and works with the group to understand the link between poor health and bondage. The collection of evidence within and outside the group leads on to discussion, and the group are able to define what they understand by the term bonded labour and to relate it to examples of bonded labour within their local community. Once the group have identified examples of bonded labour the next step is to encourage action at the local level, which may be in terms of questioning traditional attitudes and practices and raising petitions.  14.20 – 17.17 The discussion now moves on to review the outcomes of the interventions made by Praxis. The main outcomes are: At the local level the development of action groups and raising community awareness is moving people out of debt bondage. However, on its own this does not offer the poor a viable alternative. There is very little data on bonded labour. Consequently, it is difficult to get policy makers to address the issue. Work with the Freedom Fund initiative feeds into this issue and is helping to raise awareness. They are seeking to re-open the discussion on the Bonded Labour Act 1976 to develop discourse with the government. They also want the focus to move away from citizen – state, and to broaden the focus to include major businesses and in particular the supply chains of those businesses. Praxis is a partner in Corporate Responsibility Watch which monitors the top 100 Indian businesses looking a number of indicators including their supply chains to see how compliant they are with labour laws, whilst at the same time influencing government policy. This is, however, a slow, incremental process.  17.17 – end  Todd reflects on the work of Amartya Sen on democracy and famineand wonders whether in the world's largest democracy whether a similar argument could be applied to debt bondage and bonded labour. The situation in India presents a number of constraints. The democratic process, although not broken, is flawed. Whilst current laws list basic entitlements which should be open to all this is not the case Two related issues are; getting the government to look seriously at the links between poverty, social rights, and bonded labour, and also to be able to hold government to account. A further constraint is that, in this multi-cultural society, development is not yet seen as the sole issue to be addressed. Removing the barriers to achieving basic rights is the key because it is the barriers which cause vulnerable communities to become trapped into bonded labour in the first place.

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the information age, knowledge is power. Hence, facilitating the access to knowledge to wider publics empowers citizens and makes societies more democratic. How can publishers and authors contribute to this process? This podcast addresses this issue. We interview Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, whose book, The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance (forthcoming with MIT Press) is undergoing a Massive Online Peer-Review (MOPR) process, where everyone can make comments on his manuscript. Additionally, his book will be Open Access (OA) since the date of publication. We discuss with him how do MOPR and OA work, how he managed to combine both of them and how these initiatives can contribute to the democratization of knowledge. You can participate in the MOPR process of The Good Drone through this link: https://thegooddrone.pubpub.org/ Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

According to the Walk Free Foundation, there are currently 46 million slaves in the world. Despite being against international law, slavery is not yet culturally condemned everywhere. Despite being human rights violators, many perpetrators are respected members of their communities. In his new book, What Slaveholders Think: How Contemporary Perpetrators Rationalize what They Do (Columbia University Press, 2017), Professor Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick, from the University of San Diego and the University of Nottingham, explores how slaveholders rationalize what they do and how they deal with the social changes that confront the status quo from which they benefit. Looking from the lenses of social movement theories, Professor Choi-Fitzpatrick, interviews slaveholders on how they feel about being targets of contention and how they react to it. In this way, he provides an original contribution both to social movement and antislavery studies. From a social movement perspective, he emphasizes the behavior of social movement targets and how they interact with challengers. Additionally, he proposes innovative ways to understand and confront slavery. Felipe G. Santos is a PhD candidate at the Central European University and Visiting Research Fellow at the University of California, Irvine. His research is focused on how activists care for each other and how care practices within social movements mobilize and radicalize heavily aggrieved collectives.

In Episode 7 we talk about the perpetrators of slavery with Austin Choi - Fitzpatrick, author of What Slave Holders Think - How Contemporary perpetrators rationalise what they do. 00.00 - 06.06  Discussion of what drew Austin to research the perpetrators of slavery: not enough known about them and their relationship with the people they hold in slavery. Also important to consider the role perpetrators play both in the enslaving and freeing of people Explanation of bonded labour in India, a practice where perpetrators are violating human rights but not local norms and where they don't see themselves as criminals, so the practice is in plain view Todd refers to the well known Star Trek Prime Imperative (Directive) to suggest a possible metaphor for how how Austin approached interviewing the perpetrators of slavery Austin says going in and labelling people immediately would have conversations to an abrupt end and explains how he took account of people's own experiences and lives in his approach. Using open ended questions about local issues: the climate, government, local law enforcement and relationships with local labour and advocacy groups in the community, helped him develop a picture of the nature of modern slavery He avoided the use of abolitionist language and tried to learn more about how perpetrators see themselves  06.06 - 10.30  Todd asks how Austin came to be accepted by the local community and built trust and rapport Austin explains how he discounted snowball sampling as a method and instead used a Leapfrog method - when he found people he believed to be perpetrators he got them to refer him on to others who were also involved with bonded labour It was a challenge to work out if perpetrators were telling the truth Austin did by triangulating what he was told ‘on the fly' to see which bits added up and which bits didn't. Austin describes how he grew his beard because that seemed to confer additional spiritual status within the community and shared his own family experiences as a grandson of a farmer to establish his credibility Todd summarises this as a rapport and empathy approach  10.30 – 17.20  Austin explains he interviewed 40 perpetrators and 20 victims/survivors for his research and describes the main insights he gained were around A sense of lost relationships with their workers who they felt earlier had been members of their family A sense of lost respect of their workers that they had earned from relationships.                                                                Austin says it may have been a façade but found the choice of language was really interesting and what he was least prepared for Todd then asks Austin to say more about the relationship between perpetrator and slave He says that commonly the exploiter would be on the edge of the community or circle not separate from it (as for example a trafficker) and that then raises the issue of how people live together post emancipation Todd makes a comparison with community courts called Gacaca in Rwanda which leads on to a discussion about issues surrounding reconciliation within communities, and what restorative justice looks like Todd then asks if, once uncovered, perpetrators stop the practice Austin says in some cases that depends on access to capital and cash either, to go into legitimate business or to use their status and connections with the police as a credible threat to the labour force and to carry on as before  17.20 - 19.60  Discussion around what motivated the perpetrators and how they rationalised what they were doing Austin explains in many cases perpetrators had inherited the situation of control but were asking themselves why they would continue given the negative political impacts and whether they wanted to be seen as perpetrators of slavery - there is also a suggestion that for many there are few alternatives to the status quo Austin then makes the point that there is not enough known about what it takes to come out of abusive relationships not least of all for the perpetrators – he adds it needs both victims and perpetrators to work together to reach some form of attributive justice Todd references the work of Bill Simmons discussed in Series 1 of The Rights Track and his upcoming book Joyful Human Rights which raises the idea that human rights abuse victims also have a normal side to the lives they lead and comments that this is also the case for perpetrators or abusers  19.60 - 24.52  Todd wonders if Austin's research in India is applicable elsewhere Austin suggests that it applies where labour exploitation is embedded in cultural practices e.g. India, Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh In broader terms he says he is dealing with violation of human rights but not social norms and in stepping outside of the slavery context he recognises that social change means that current behaviours can become unacceptable - one question he raises is how we deal with behaviour that was once acceptable, and no longer is He makes a final point about the way we all find ways to excuse exploitive Todd highlights how our view of Human Rights principles is evolving, and how human rights terminology isn't necessarily recognised by local communities He closes by focussing on Gramsci's notion of false consciousness in which people didn't know they were being exploited or accepted they were perpetrators   Further links and resources   Watch a You Tube video of Austin talking about his research