Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This ethnographic study explores a civic-tech initiative that aims to reshape data work by collaboratively building safety datasets through a feminist lens, focusing on the voices of those most affected by online harms. The research highlights the tensions and challenges faced in achieving just compensation and collective governance within data work, arguing that true accountability requires a fundamental shift in how humans relate to the datasets and AI systems they influence. By advocating for a reparative approach, the authors propose a transformative vision for responsible data practices that prioritizes the needs of marginalized communities over traditional norms.
Redefining data work through a reparative lens reveals the urgent need to prioritize the voices of those harmed by online systems, challenging existing norms of accountability in AI.
We present an ethnographic study of an alternative approach to data work, developed by a civic-tech initiative that builds datasets for training and benchmarking online safety systems. They aim to respond to online safety concerns from a feminist perspective, by building safety datasets collaboratively with those most impacted by online harms. In this paper, we examine how this approach aims to reorient data work as a site for repair and redress, and trace the struggles they encounter in the process. Specifically, we draw attention to the challenges and tensions involved in advancing just reward for data work and collective governance of AI datasets. Examining these challenges through an STS-informed lens of reparative justice and repair, we argue that the work of repairing data work (and AI) lies, fundamentally, in resetting the ties of accountability. At a time heightened emphasis on efforts like safety evaluations and red teaming to make AI more responsible, we highlight the need to confront foundational questions about how the humans involved in these efforts relate to the datasets and systems they help produce. A reparative lens demands that we interrupt prevailing norms of data work and place at their centre, not AI or datasets, but those most harmed by the neglect, oversight and exclusion animated in the current modes of dataset production. This, we argue, offers a bold vision for responsibility and contributes towards a critical agenda for building alternative futures of data and AI practice.