Summary of "Do Artifacts Have Politics?" by Langdon Winner

Brief overview and summary of the influential academic article, "Do Artifacts Have Politics?" by Langdon Winner, first published in 1980. In the paper, Winner argues that technological artifacts do indeed have political properties: They may inherently require a certain kind of political arrangement, or they may be flexible and allow choice. He gives many examples, a couple of which I discuss in this video.
See also this great introduction to the paper by Jill Rettberg: • Introduction to Langdo...

[@danieldomijan1528]

Great summary. Thank you for helping me finish my finals exam/essay!

[@Emma98Hato]

Thanks for the summary. Appreciate it!

[@squidsword0]

incredibly underrated

[@atlasquan3210]

I believe facial recognition technology has politics. But it's by decision or by necessities? The decision to design that technology seems not so political, which is simply to recognize objects automatically. It sounds not so political. In case of necessities, it is compatible with large centralized authorities, but not necessary to be compatible with that. In this case, how to evaluate the politics of facial recognition technology.

[@atlasquan3210]

Thanks for you excellent video!

[@niteshchilwal1439]

Very great explanation! Thanks dude

[@sravyagurram5885]

Great explanation! Would you mind sharing what software you used to make this lecture video?

[@max.bittker]

good video tim

[@abby2338]

What would you say the main theme of the article was?

[@christianmichaels9915]

Ur the man.

[@partydoge9173]

I love Stuzin

[@SanguineBlackBlood]

Video starts at

[@marcv2648]

Artifacts don't have politics. People do. He is projecting human behavior onto inanimate objects. You are reading the musings of a man desperate to found his own field of study, and therefore somehow become noteworthy.