We can’t count our way out: Rethinking quantification amidst digital authoritarianism

As digital infrastructures become increasingly central to statecraft, so too do the quantitative techniques that animate them. In this commentary, we contend that digital infrastructure, authoritarian politics, and postpositivist thinking coalesce in authoritarian counting, or ways of making evidence that couch projects of exclusion, expulsion, austerity, and violence in the aesthetics of objectivity. We argue that the ascent of authoritarian counting requires that we re-envision the goals, audience, and character of quantification. Confronting an antagonistic state forces us to reconsider who the audience for counter-data is and what its goals are. A core contribution of critical quantitative work must therefore be to conceptualize, as a central measure of quantification's efficacy, whether counting with each other can engender forms of counting on each other.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Dialogues on Digital Society
Published
2025-09-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/29768640251375903
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Social Media and Politics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.86
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

We can’t count our way out: Rethinking quantification amidst digital authoritarianism

Emory Shaw, Dillon Mahmoudi, Ian Spangler, Scott Markley
1 citations
Dialogues on Digital Society
Social Media and Politics
3.86
article

We can’t count our way out: Rethinking quantification amidst digital authoritarianism

Emory Shaw, Dillon Mahmoudi, Ian Spangler, Scott Markley
article en
1 citations

Abstract

As digital infrastructures become increasingly central to statecraft, so too do the quantitative techniques that animate them. In this commentary, we contend that digital infrastructure, authoritarian politics, and postpositivist thinking coalesce in authoritarian counting, or ways of making evidence that couch projects of exclusion, expulsion, austerity, and violence in the aesthetics of objectivity. We argue that the ascent of authoritarian counting requires that we re-envision the goals, audience, and character of quantification. Confronting an antagonistic state forces us to reconsider who the audience for counter-data is and what its goals are. A core contribution of critical quantitative work must therefore be to conceptualize, as a central measure of quantification's efficacy, whether counting with each other can engender forms of counting on each other.

Dialogues on Digital SocietyVol. 1(3)
Boston Public Library (US), Institut National de la Recherche Scientifique (CA), Centre National pour la Recherche Scientifique et Technique (CNRST) (MA), National Zoological Park (US), Institute of Geography of the Slovak Academy of Sciences (SK), University of Maryland, College Park (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Social Media and Politics
3.86
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

We can’t count our way out: Rethinking quantification amidst digital authoritarianism — Emory Shaw, Dillon Mahmoudi, et al. · Dialogues on Digital Society (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS