Between Lines: Cospeculation, Design Fiction & Designer Agency
Between Lines is a critical, speculative design project that envisions uses of location data through four, near-future, design fiction films, a publication, and an installation.
Project Overview
This is a condensed case study of my Master of Design thesis completed during my final year at the University of Washington. Between Lines is a critical investigation into how potentially harmful surveillant technologies are rationalized, produced, and deployed by technologists.
Simultaneously, it explores how designers can rapidly prototype future technologies to showcase their potential impacts. Combining my background in short film production and interaction design, I combined traditional forms of speculative design with co-speculation and design fiction. I was responsible for the project definition, scope, planning, approach, implementation, and execution of all research and design responses throughout the project.
This project was done in close collaboration with my thesis chair, James Pierce, and committee member, Dominic Muren.
The Problem
Behind the scenes of our digital world, there are an increasing number of highly complex, technologically advanced systems being used. Systems like apps, websites, and cloud infrastructure are becoming more complex with each passing day. This is both positive and negative–complex systems offer increased convenience for the user and are highly contextualized to their tastes and preferences, but they can also mean heightened data collection and tracking to build a user’s “algorithm.” Often, only the positive changes are announced, while the negative changes only enter the public eye under scrutiny and public outcry.
Designers and design researchers are well-positioned to help the public understand the negative consequences of these complex systems, but currently lack a clear and compelling way to communicate their impact.
Approach
Using location-based systems as my main case study, I combined my background in short film creation with design research to showcase the often-overlooked consequences of these systems in a visual and compelling way.
I created four short critical design fiction films in collaboration with my thesis chair, James Pierce. These films speculated about near-future interactions people could have with location-based recommendation systems in their everyday apps (e.g. maps, shopping, insurance, and running apps). I used these films to conduct 11 interviews with domain experts where we looked at the risks and ethics of the technology.
Process
With the understanding that multiple films would be produced, James and I decided that each film should address distinct critical themes—such as gentrification and corporate-state security collaborations (Avoidable Inconveniences)—that would complement one another.
A significant part of the project was generating broad, high-level critiques to ensure we were discussing different, yet common, themes across all the films. We referenced several key texts, such as “The Relevance of Algorithms,” “The Filter Bubble,” and “The Age of Surveillance Capitalism,” to help us identify the overarching themes that we wanted the films to discuss. Technological mediation, surveillance capitalism, and reductions in agency were highlighted as the three core critiques. Each film was inspired by current events, themes in fictional films, and research reports. For example, “December 26, 4:36 pm,” draws heavily on HCI research that addresses emotional sensitivity and recommender systems.
Once the framework was decided on, I developed the details of the films. I created twenty scenarios, each with a 1-2 sentence description of the plot, setting, and characters that overviewed the specific critiques and trends they were meant to address. These scenarios were critiqued by fellow researchers, designers, and one subject matter expert.
They noted that some scenarios offered "richer" sources of tension or addressed key concerns in their own research. These comments guided us in selecting which concepts to develop further. Ultimately, we balanced the subject matter, the manifestation of location-based recommenders, and the technological critiques alongside the comments from our colleagues and experts to make our final decisions. The final four scenarios were Avoidable Inconveniences, December 26th, 4:36 pm, Evidence of Insurability, and Routine Repetitions.
Deployment
I conducted eleven interviews with four professional developers, one professional designer, three PhD students, one professional artist whose previous work focused on surveillance, one community activist engaged in philanthropy and nonprofits, and one assistant city attorney dealing with public data. With their domain knowledge and expertise, our participants primarily served as evaluators of feasibility and plausibility and as collaborators in speculating, critiquing, and understanding possible futures.
Each interview was structured the same—we would start with a brief introduction describing the project's critical nature and informing participants of any key definitions they might not know (often simply a brief explanation of speculative and critical design), then give a two-sentence overview of the plot and the themes of a film, then play that film. Once the film had finished, we would wait for initial participant reactions or prompt them for their first thoughts, then work with questions from our discussion guide. We would spend roughly 20 minutes discussing the film, then move on to the next one. Once all films were viewed, we would then ask our closing questions, asking participants to reflect across all of the films as a whole. The interviews would last between 120 to 180 minutes.
Reflections on the method
While our study is unable to provide empirical data to measure the impact of speculative critical short films against other mediums, we find that there is sufficient, strong qualitative data to support this medium’s potential.
The high-fidelity speculative films were able to elicit meaningful reflection, sustained and high-interest engagement, and valuable personal insights and perspectives from all participants. At the conclusion of each film, the majority of participants immediately responded with little to no prompting from us. They shared personal connections to the fictional characters and scenarios.
The participants were also willing to engage more deeply and took a multifaceted approach to their reflections, oftentimes drawing on ideas from different parts of their identities (e.g. comparing their reactions from the perspective of their gender vs. their profession).
We found that the videos were excellent at evoking four types of participatory engagement: deep, personal, and intellectual reflections on the content; assessments of both the positives and negatives of the depicted technologies; empathetic connections to (fictional) strangers’ lives; and commentary on hidden “behind-the-scenes” technologies (e.g., algorithmic processes).
Outcomes
The methods proposed in this project and related publication are not cut-and-paste solutions nor are they necessarily tailored to industry-focused modes of design. While there are uses for high-fidelity design fiction films in industry, they remain niche. Our intended audience is other designers, technologists, and experts.
Our project lays out our approach and uncovered many potential benefits to the method. We then disseminate these insights through public exhibitions, research publications, and a dedicated project website.