Balazka Dominik, Rodighiero Dario
Center for Information and Communication Technology (FBK-ICT) and Center for Religious Studies (FBK-ISR), Fondazione Bruno Kessler, Trento, Italy.
Comparative Media Studies/Writing, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, United States.
Front Big Data. 2020 Sep 18;3:31. doi: 10.3389/fdata.2020.00031. eCollection 2020.
Starting from an analysis of frequently employed definitions of big data, it will be argued that, to overcome the intrinsic weaknesses of big data, it is more appropriate to define the object in relational terms. The excessive emphasis on volume and technological aspects of big data, derived from their current definitions, combined with neglected epistemological issues gave birth to an objectivistic rhetoric surrounding big data as implicitly neutral, omni-comprehensive, and theory-free. This rhetoric contradicts the empirical reality that embraces big data: (1) data collection is not neutral nor objective; (2) exhaustivity is a mathematical limit; and (3) interpretation and knowledge production remain both theoretically informed and subjective. Addressing these issues, big data will be interpreted as a methodological revolution carried over by evolutionary processes in technology and epistemology. By distinguishing between forms of nominal and actual access, we claim that big data promoted a new digital divide changing stakeholders, gatekeepers, and the basic rules of knowledge discovery by radically shaping the power dynamics involved in the processes of production and analysis of data.
从对大数据常用定义的分析出发，本文认为，为克服大数据的内在弱点，用关系术语来定义该对象更为合适。当前对大数据的定义过度强调其体量和技术层面，同时忽视了认识论问题，由此产生了一种围绕大数据的客观主义修辞，即含蓄地认为大数据是中立、无所不包且无理论性的。这种修辞与包含大数据的经验现实相矛盾：（1）数据收集既非中立也非客观；（2）详尽无遗是一种数学极限；（3）解释和知识生产在理论上仍然是有依据的且具有主观性。针对这些问题，大数据将被解释为技术和认识论进化过程带来的一场方法论革命。通过区分名义访问和实际访问的形式，我们认为大数据引发了一种新的数字鸿沟，它通过从根本上塑造数据生产和分析过程中涉及的权力动态，改变了利益相关者、把关人以及知识发现的基本规则。
