IEEE Technology and Society Magazine - March 2020 - 88

Last Word
Christine Perakslis

he term whitewash-
ing is a metaphor
derived from the
practice of applying
substances onto surfaces of walls to conceal unwelcome
elements, thereby giving the eye-gate
a false impression. Thus, the reality of
the situation is surreptitiously glossed
over. Greenwashing is a label for
an organization that creates a false
portrayal of environmentally friendly
practices or products. Redwashing
refers to an organization that claims
exemplary corporate citizenship;
yet such companies may sponsor
humanitarian programs for indigenous groups, while destroying the
lands of these same populations.
History is often whitewashed;
our peers reviewed literary works
and appropriately questioned unexplained omissions in otherwiseencyclopedic accounts of artificial
women. Our community also confronted the ableist rhetoric; we perceive far-reaching impacts when
historical narratives downplay or
omit the disabilities of men and
women. We can now better discriminate technoableism [1]; we recognize those with disabilities as
experts with unique perspectives
and invaluable input. We can better
forfend inequitable development
and deployment of technologies,
thus avoiding inadvertently disempowering those whose bodies and
minds run a wide gamut [1].

Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/MTS.2020.2967517
Date of current version: 2 March 2020

Exposing
Technowashing
To Mitigate Technosocial Inequalities
We exposed modes of techno-
washing, a far more convoluted and
imperceptible form of glossing over
reality in the digital realms. We addressed the way marketers, while
attempting to feign such constructs
as trust and loyalty, are concealing
processes to create digital depen-
dence. We tackled the airbrushed
realities of technosocial inequalities.
Our community brought to light digital exclusions; authors recommend
methodologies that would equitably
include favelas on the maps of Rio de
Janeiro, and those that would integrate Gender Equity and Social Inclusion (GESI) into system design [2].
Our colleagues also guided us to
recognize and avoid redwashing by
approaching projects with an ethical framework, and with publicly accessible governance toolkits. With
these methodologies, we can better
empower humanitarian actors to
achieve responsible innovation during such controversial projects as
the development and deployment of
drones [3].
As we pulled back the proverbial
veneers in this issue of T&S Maga-

IEEE TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY MAGAZINE

zine, we chose not to gloss over,
cover up, or conceal elements, but
rather courageously excavate, address, and appropriately value all
facets. We recognize the necessity of diverse parties in order to
construct veritable e-inclusion solutions for all in society. We thus
can better mitigate technosocial
inequalities.

Author Information
Christine Perakslis is Associate Professor in the MBA Program, College
of Management, Johnson & Wales
University, Providence, RI. Email:
christine.perakslis@jwu.edu.

References

[1] J. Pitt and A. Shew, Eds., Spaces for the
Future. New York, NY: Routledge, 2018; https://
doi.org/10.4324/97802037 35657.
[2] R. Mohideen, "Energy technology innovation
in South Asia: Implications for gender equality
and social inclusion" (ADB South Asia working
pap. series no. 61). Mandaluyong City, Philippines: Asian Development Bank, 2018.
[3] N. Wang, "A success story that can be sold"?:
A case study of humanitarian use of drones," in
Proc. 2019 IEEE Int. Symp. Technology
and Society (ISTAS), Medford, MA, U.S.A.,
2019, pp. 1-6.

∕

MARCH 2020

https://www.doi.org/10.4324/97802037 https://www.doi.org/10.4324/97802037

IEEE Technology and Society Magazine - March 2020

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of IEEE Technology and Society Magazine - March 2020