Exclusion by design: intersections of social, digital and data exclusion

References

• Andrejevic, M. (2014). Big data, big questions the big data divide. International Journal of Communication, 8, 17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2018). Disability support services: Services provided under the National Disability Agreement 2016–17. Retrieved from https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/disability-services/disability-support-services-2016-17/formats
   Google Scholar
• Beer, D. (2017). The social power of algorithms. Information, Communication & Society, 20(1), 1–13. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2016.1216147
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bijker, W. E., & Law, J. (1992). Shaping technology/building society: Studies in sociotechnical change. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.
   Google Scholar
• boyd, d., & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical questions for big data: Provocations for a cultural, technological, and scholarly phenomenon. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 662–679. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2012.678878
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brandtzaeg, P., & Følstad, A. (2018). Chatbots: Changing user needs and motivations. Interactions, 25(5), 38–43. doi: 10.1145/3236669
   Google Scholar
• Broad, E. (2018). Made by humans: The AI Condition. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Campolo, A., Sanfilippo, M., Whittaker, M., & Crawford, K. (2017). AI now 2017 report. New York: AI Now Institute at New York University.
   Google Scholar
• Centre for Digital Business. (2018, August). Submission to the joint standing committee on the national disability insurance scheme senate inquiry. Retrieved from https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/National_Disability_Insurance_Scheme/NDISICTSystems/Submissions
   Google Scholar
• Chunn, D. E., & Gavigan, S. A. M. (2006). From welfare fraud to welfare as fraud: The criminalization of poverty. In G. Balfour & E. Comack (Eds.), Criminalizing women: Gender and (in)justice in neo-liberal times (pp. 217–235). Nova Scotia, Canada: Fernwoord Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Cook, D. (2006). Criminal and social justice. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Daniels, J. (2018). The algorithmic rise of the “alt-right”. Contexts, 17(1), 60–65. doi: 10.1177/1536504218766547
   Google Scholar
• Dencik, L., Hintz, A., & Cable, J. (2016). Towards data justice? The ambiguity of anti-surveillance resistance in political activism. Big Data & Society. doi: 10.1177/2053951716679678
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Digital Transformation Agenda, Australian Government Digital Transformation Agency. (2018). Retrieved from https://www.dta.gov.au/what-we-do/transformation-agenda/
   Google Scholar
• DiMaggio, P., & Hargittai, E. (2001). From the ‘digital divide’ to ‘digital inequality’: Studying internet use as penetration increases. Princeton: Center for Arts and Cultural Policy Studies, 4(1), 4–2.
   Google Scholar
• Easton, S. (2018, November 28). APS centre of excellence to develop the next generation of robot public servants. The Mandarin. Retrieved from https://www.themandarin.com.au/101922-aps-centre-of-excellence-to-develop-the-next-generation-of-robot-public-servants/
   Google Scholar
• Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• Følstad, A., & Brandtzæg, P. B. (2017). Chatbots and the new world of HCI. Interactions, 24(4), 38–42. doi: 10.1145/3085558
   Google Scholar
• Foucault, M. (2007). Security, territory, population: Lectures at the Collège de France 1977–1978. ( G. Burchell, Trans.). New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan.
   Google Scholar
• Foucault, M. (2008). The birth of Biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1978–1979. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Freeman, J., & Park, S. (2015). Rural realities: Digital communication challenges for rural Australian local governments. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 9(4), 465–479. doi: 10.1108/TG-03-2015-0012
   Google Scholar
• Friedman, B., & Nissenbaum, H. (1996). Bias in computer systems. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS, 14(3), 330–347. doi: 10.1145/230538.230561
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gillespie, T. (2014). The relevance of algorithms. In T. Gillespie, P. J. Boczkowski, & K. Foot (Eds.), Media technologies: Essays on communication, materiality, and society (Vol. 6, pp. 167–195). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goggin, G., Hollier, S., & Hawkins, W. (2017). Internet accessibility and disability policy: Lessons for digital inclusion and equality from Australia. Internet Policy Review, 6(1), 1–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haigh, T. (2006). Remembering the office of the future: The origins of word processing and office automation. IEEE Annals of the History of Computing, 28(4), 6–31. doi: 10.1109/MAHC.2006.70
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halford, S., & Savage, M. (2010). Reconceptualizing digital social inequality. Information, Communication & Society, 13(7), 937–955. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2010.499956
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hargittai, E., & Hsieh, P. (2010). Predictors and consequences of differentiated practices on social network sites. Information, Communication & Society, 13(4), 515–536. doi: 10.1080/13691181003639866
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hendry, J. (2018, December 10). NDIS’ great bot hope Nadia takes more time off for stress leave. ITNews. Retrieved from https://www.itnews.com.au/news/ndis-great-bot-hope-nadia-takes-more-time-off-for-stress-leave-516592
   Google Scholar
• Humphry, J. (2014, August). Homeless and connected: Mobile phones and the internet in the lives of homeless Australians (pp. 3–72). Sydney: Australian Communications Consumer Action Network.
   Google Scholar
• Humphry, J. (2016). Work and society. In J. Arvanitakis (Ed.), Sociologic: Analysing everyday life and culture (pp. 264–280). Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• International Telecommunication Union (ITU). (2017). ITU ICT facts and figures 2017. Retrieved from https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Pages/facts/default.aspx
   Google Scholar
• Laragy, C. (2016). Understanding the NDIS: How does the scheme work and am I eligible for funding? The Conversation. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/understanding-the-ndis-how-does-the-scheme-work-and-am-i-eligible-for-funding-58726
   Google Scholar
• Liberal Party of Australia and the Nationals. (2016, June). Better management of the social welfare system. The Coalition’s policy for better management of the social welfare system. Retrieved from https://www.liberal.org.au/coalitions-policy-better-management-social-welfare-system
   Google Scholar
• Lyon, D. (Ed.). (2003). Surveillance as social sorting: Privacy, risk and automated discrimination. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lyon, D. (2014). Surveillance, Snowden, and big data: Capacities, consequences, critique. Big Data & Society. doi: 10.1177/2053951714541861
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• McCarthy, M. T. (2016). The big data divide and its consequences. Sociology Compass, 10(12), 1131–1140. doi: 10.1111/soc4.12436
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLean, A. (2019, March 7). Government agrees that Australia’s NDIS needs a chatbot: Following a report into the IT problems plaguing the rollout of the National Disability Insurance Scheme, a chatbot has been flagged as a viable solution. ZDNet. Retrieved from https://www.zdnet.com/article/government-agrees-that-australias-ndis-needs-a-chatbot/
   Google Scholar
• Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. New York: NYU Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ombudsman, C. (2017, April). Centrelink’s automated debt raising and recovery system. A report about the Department of Human Services’ Online Compliance Intervention System for Debt Raising and Recovery, Australian Commonwealth.
   Google Scholar
• Park, S. (2017). Digital capital. London: Palgrave MacMillan.
   Google Scholar
• Pasquale, F. (2015). The black box society: The secret algorithms that control money and information. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ragnedda, M. (2017). The third digital divide: A weberian approach to digital inequalities. London, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, L., Cotten, S. R., Ono, H., Quan-Haase, A., Mesch, G., Chen, W., … Stern, M. J. (2015). Digital inequalities and why they matter. Information, Communication & Society, 18(5), 569–582. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2015.1012532
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roughgarden, T. (2017). Algorithms illuminated: Part 1: The basics (pp. 13). Wilmington, DE: Soundlikeyourself Publishing, LLC. Kindle Edition.
   Google Scholar
• Saunders, P., Naidoo, Y., & Griffiths, M. (2007). Towards new indicators of disadvantage: Deprivation and social exclusion in Australia. Sydney: Social Policy Research Centre, University of New South Wales.
   Google Scholar
• Selwyn, N. (2002). Defining the ‘digital divide’: Developing a theoretical understanding of inequalities in the information age (pp. 135). Cardiff, UK: Cardiff University, School of Social Sciences, Occasional Paper S.
   Google Scholar
• The Senate, Community Affairs References Committee. (2017, June 2017). Design, scope, cost-benefit analysis, contracts awarded and implementation associated with the better management of the social welfare system initiative. Commonwealth of Australia.
   Google Scholar
• SYZYGY. (2017). Sex, lies and A.I.: How Americans feel about artificial intelligence. New York, NY: A SYZYGY Digital Insight Report.
   Google Scholar
• Van de Poel, I. (2016). An ethical framework for evaluating experimental technology. Science and Engineering Ethics, 22(3), 667–686. doi: 10.1007/s11948-015-9724-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Deursen, A. J., & Helsper, E. J. (2015). The third-level digital divide: Who benefits most from being online? In Communication and information technologies annual (pp. 29–52). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Van Deursen, A. J. A. M., & Mossberger, K. (2018). Any thing for anyone? A new digital divide in internet-of-things skills. Policy & Internet, 10(2), 122–140. doi: 10.1002/poi3.171
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wacquant, L. (2009). Punishing the poor: The neoliberal government of social insecurity. Durham: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wick, D., & Denegri Knott, J. (2009). Manufacturing customers: The database as new means of production. Journal of Consumer Culture, 9(2), 221–247. doi: 10.1177/1469540509104375
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilcock, S. (2014). Official discourses of the Australian welfare cheat. Current Issues in Criminal Justice., 26, 177–194. doi: 10.1080/10345329.2014.12036014
   Google Scholar
• Yin, R. K. (2012). Applications of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Zuboff, S. (2015). Big other: Surveillance capitalism and the prospects of an information civilization. Journal of Information Technology, 30(1), 75–89. doi: 10.1057/jit.2015.5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar