Harwood

Whilst working away at this technical issue of open data, data in the public realm, access and accessibility there is something at the back of my mind which I am uncomfortable with. Its sort of generated by the embrace of 'openess' within Open data at a governmental level. How it is portrayed as an inherently good thing to push all this data into the public realm, which seems like an act of disavowal, kinda 'here take it, so I don't have to be responsible for it any longer'. This unease is amplified in an essay by artist Harwood,

Government data produced under this notion of transparency can be viewed
as operating the ventricles of an enlightened power, interconnecting the
domains of government and population. The relative openness of the data
can be seen as an attempt to unfold ârationalistâ attempts to evidence
decisions. This transparency debate creates a protocol between
government and non-government Database Management System administrators
and ethical statistical analysts who summon the latent energies
contained in the new knowledge to power their differing political
factions. This is a data exchange between those who can already perceive
data from its modes of representation or to put it another way
understand the construction of the data and wish to exploit it as a form
of self-reflexive critique of government.

There is then a sense that this 'Openess' masks some other forms of systematic manipulation. In reading about Matta-Clarkes engagement with durational works, such as window blow out  there seems some connection between the robust, irrefutable logic of 'Open Data' and the need to make works which are anything but, and in this way perhaps
some of this instrumental logic is exposed.