This past week President Donald Trump announced, in an interview with Fox News Host Laura Ingraham, that he had intelligence about masked men, dressed in black, who travelled on a plane to Washington DC to disrupt the Republican convention.
Shortly after this interview aired it was discovered, like so many other of his stories (e.g. Muslims in New Jersey cheering when the World Trade Center was hit, Caravans of illegal immigrants coming to the United States, etc.), that these so-called Thugs were a fabrication. It simply was not true. Trump (or one of his enablers) must of have picked it up on Facebook, and Trump thought that it was important to share.
Trump, as it turns out, is a master-in-chief in orchestrating and disseminating conspiracy theories of all manner, especially ones that argue that there is a so-called “deep state” or shadow government, a group of government bureaucrats and politicians who dominate policy debates and make laws in this country that undermine his power and authority. Trump is known to continuously lie, but yet this does not seem to affect the loyalty of a large proportion of his followers (i.e., his base).
Trump has assisted individuals like Alex Jones, who runs InfoWars, a website and radio show that traffics in conspiracy stories of all shapes and kind to maintain a feedback loop of sorts. There is also the growth of the QAnon movement that alleges that a group of journalists and politicians are actually pedophiles that are operating a global sex trafficking organization that Trump will eventually arrest. The Trumpian conspiracy theories did not simply come out of the blue, he has been engaging in them for the majority of his public career.
The situation of the President spreading conspiracy theories has only been exacerbated by the promotion of terms and characterizations, originating from the White House, like “fake news,” and “alternative facts,” buzzwords that have been popularized during 45’s presidency to gain legitimacy, among people who are prone to distrust news media and properly qualified experts.
It’s easy for most highly educated people to dismiss conspiracy mongers and the people who believe them as gullible fools who are easily taken in. Conspiracy theories are objectionable for ethical, moral, philosophical and political reasons. They are bad because they may force the public and politicians to make important decisions (e.g., laws) that have widespread negative implications. This could lead to mishaps in public policy and practice.
American public discourse is littered with numerous claims about individuals, places, and events. So much so that the public is overwhelmed by these communications. Some of these messages are true, while others are simply embellishments, misinformation, myths, and/or blatant attempts to mislead. This situation has been exacerbated with the advent of the Internet, social media, and 24-hour cable news stations. Many of these platforms let wild conspiracies take root. Questions about what is true and what is false are continuously raised and sometimes answered.
Increasingly, in this media and pundit saturated globalized world, few people have the energy, knowledge, and skills to critically analyze complicated situations and discrepancies in facts and events. Similarly the public rarely has neither the patience nor the stomach for the cool, rational, and detached work of scholars and qualified experts who subject their ideas and analyses to peer review, the gold standard of medical, social, and hard sciences.
What is the effect of information overload, and the publics’ inability or unwillingness to separate fact from fiction? Some of the dominant reactions are alienation, disengagement from the political process, and the growth of misrepresentations, myths, and conspiracy theories to fill the void. A number of questions about conspiracy theories can be asked and have been handled well by others like Barkun, Hofstadter, and Pipes, and most recently by Nichols in his book The Death of Expertise. The more important question to answer is, why do conspiracy theories develop and persist and why does the public believe them? These questions can be answered by a number of interrelated reasons.
First, the obsession with celebrity culture, falsehoods, misleading information, and scandals, and the public’s and other actors frequent inability or lack of desire to question these truth claims as false or based on questionable evidence and assumptions has fostered conspiracy theories. This is why magazines like The National Enquirer, that were prominently displayed and sold in supermarket check outlines used to be so popular and successful.
Second, there’s a virtual army of professional communication officers, crisis managers, public relations specialists and spin doctors whose primary job is to shape and disseminate plausible narratives to an information hungry public via the media. These individuals and the organizations they work for are typically powerful. The goal of this information is to have maximum impact and/or respond to organizational misdeeds, or when bad news is released or comes to public attention. Not all of their objectives are a search for the truth or to set the record straight.
Third, there is an overabundance of experts and quasi experts. Their reputation may be enhanced when the communicator works at or lays claim to a connection with an institution with a legitimate sounding name, or has a social media platform with a significant number of followers, and a willingness of news hungry journalists and reporters look for the next big story to file. Many times the audience cannot distinguish the differences among the experts (and their affiliations) and are often susceptible to believe those with fancy sounding credentials. These people appear credible or in the past have achieved positions that would bestow credibility. What’s more important is that they are perceived by some members of the public and/or their colleagues to be experts. In particular, these individuals may have firsthand experience, be insiders, or have an advanced degree. For example, some of the JFK conspiracists were well-respected M.D.s or even held Ph.D.s. They were not simply a bunch of crackpots.
Fourth, there are an exhaustive number of communication channels that the public has access to, more so than at any point in time in human history. It is not simply through the written word, but there are movies, television series, and radio broadcasts that can disseminate conspiracy theories. There is literally a channel of communication for everyone.
Fifth, and most importantly, conspiracy theories are intellectually cost effective to believe. It’s resource intensive to sift through the evidence, claims and counter claims about the questionable activity of a person, what actually took place, or how did it unfold. That is why conspiracy theories are also attractive to those with a superficial knowledge of history.
How do we remedy the situation? How do we force people to not take conspiracy theories at face value?
Although we have experts who can rebut knowledge claims, and websites like Snopes that specialize in, and whose primary function is the debunking of myths, rumors and urban legends, this is not sufficient enough to be a bulwark against misinformation and conspiracy theories.
If you don’t like hearing conspiracy theories, then one course of action might be turning off the radio, television, computer, or stop listening to the news or reading social media. But this retreatist approach, appears to be simplistic and defeatist in attitude.
Instead, understand that discerning fact from fiction is resource intense. It’s not sufficient to just get a GED, or a bachelor’s degree. The American culture needs to encourage higher education. Encouraging literacy and higher education, particularly in the fields of critical thinking, history, logic, philosophy and political science is woefully needed. Although knowledge for knowledge sake may seem like a luxury, it has numerous secondary benefits like enabling individuals to confront conspiracy theories. Government and private foundations should be encouraged to support these kinds of initiatives. An informed citizenry is a bulwark against misinformation and skullduggery.
Furthermore, analyses of conspiracy theories must be comprehensive, detailed, and thoughtful in order to give those willing to listen a dispassionate analysis of the competing explanations for all sorts of human behavior and natural disasters. We also need to systematically, critically, and successfully analyze the most prominent interpretations of conspiracies, the actors involved, and their respective motivations.
Conspiracy theories undermine the sort of civilized public discourse required for a democracy to properly function. If we value a democracy that is based on fact, reason and empirical research, then it is important to challenge conspiracies regardless of their origins and the message, and for government (big and small), and private foundations to encourage the public to be educated in subjects that will help them in this quest.
https://jeffreyianross.com/wp-content/uploads/Screen-Shot-2020-09-06-at-10.41.10-PM.png362641Jeffrey Ian Rosshttps://jeffreyianross.com/wp-content/uploads/jeffrey-ian-ross-logo-04.pngJeffrey Ian Ross2020-09-07 03:22:102024-09-22 12:24:42Lies, Damn Lies and Thugs on a plane: Why do Conspiracy Theories exist and what to do about them?
For peaceful protestors, the majority of those out in the streets exercising their first amendment rights, this moment in American history cannot be overlooked. It’s pivotal. We care about living in cities and a country where African-American citizens are killed by police officers under questionable circumstances, a criminal justice system that is slow to investigate and prosecute these incidents, and racial, social and economic inequality that is too deeply rooted in the fabric of our country.
For looters their decision to engage in violence and arson is also born out of long held frustration with police, the criminal justice system and a society where racism is pervasive and never ending. Looting can also be motivated by the benefit of anonymity, opportunism, and getting caught up in the moment. But some people came to the protests (in cities such as Minneapolis, Portland, and Washington, D.C, to name a few) with the primary purpose of committing or encouraging violence: smashing windows, throwing items at police, and physically confronting police officers. Others with questionable motives drove cars and trucks into protestors. Some of these individuals were undoubtedly agent provocateurs (e.g., umbrella man in Minneapolis, ex-seal in Portland placing pipe bombs, etc.). In some cases the violence prone and looters were quickly identified by peaceful protestors, chased or handed over to the police. The presence of these individuals escalated the already tense situations and cast a negative light on the peaceful protests.
To this mix, enter armed right-wing militia. This is a dangerous but not unexpected development. The presence of vigilantes throughout American history is not something new, but under the Trump presidency (especially because of his appeals and rhetoric), and the power of news media outlets such as Fox News, controversial political commentators such as Rush Limbaugh and Alex Jones, QAnon, and social media, these individuals are organizing like never before. The recent killing of two men and the injuring of a third who were simply exercising their first amendment rights to peaceful protest and free speech, in Kenosha, by 17 year old pro-Trump Kyle Rittenhouse, is a case in point.
Peaceful protestors, organizers and law enforcement must guard against looters, agent provocateurs, right wing militia, and officers in their ranks who engage or encourage property destruction and violence. We need to be careful that peaceful protests don’t get hijacked by looters or right wing militia. Peaceful protestors need to continue to document via smart phones what they see, and upload this information to social media as soon as possible. Organizers of street protests need to establish rational plans to deal with looters and vigilantes.
As unpalatable at it may sound, peaceful protesters are probably going to require formal co-operation with law enforcement. These efforts should be formally documented in case there are later disagreements. It also means that law enforcement, from senior administrators down to the officers manning the barricades, must do their job to uphold and protect the right to peaceful protest and condemn the looters and vigilantes’ actions. Law enforcement must be appropriately trained in how to protect people in protests, including attending accredited riot control training, learning de-escalation techniques, and reminding them that they are there to serve and protect, not bash heads and ask questions later.
Law enforcement must send clear signals to their rank and file not to engage in violence, to protect the first amendment rights of the protestors, and be on the lookout for agent provocateurs, looters, and right-wing militia who will use these events as opportunities to flex their muscles. If rank and file do not follow these policies and practices they should be appropriately sanctioned and not simply given a slap on the wrist. And if governors send out the national guard, then they must sure that the individuals who are in their ranks follow the same protocols.
If these steps are not taken seriously and immediately, the outcomes will be a message translated to the American public that all protesters are violent, and this will only play into the hands of Trump, his enablers and supporters.
https://jeffreyianross.com/wp-content/uploads/49976054052_75538297db_o-scaled.jpg17072560Jeffrey Ian Rosshttps://jeffreyianross.com/wp-content/uploads/jeffrey-ian-ross-logo-04.pngJeffrey Ian Ross2020-08-31 16:51:342024-09-22 12:24:42Preventing peaceful protests from being hijacked by people engaging in violence
If I have time or I’m doing research, I explore neighborhoods of large urban environments, and if I feel safe the back streets and alleys located there.
For me the back alley, in particular, is place to escape, to experience distraction and possible danger, for reflection, and inspiration for creative activities; a place that might provide a shortcut, an opportunity.
Back alleys are also important to me because many of the individuals and the activities that they engage in that I study spend considerable time in these public spaces. In particular, important social actors transit through, work and occasionally live in the back alley including the homeless, dumpster divers, police officers, graffiti writers and street artists.
What do back alleys look like; how would I describe them?
There is a different sense of order in the back alley as compared to the front or façade of the buildings that line the alley.
In addition to the road which might be constructed out of asphalt, stone or brick, drainage is less important in back alleys as it is in the front of the buildings. Because of poor or nonexistent drainage, there are often puddles of water located there, alongside vehicles parked in the back alley, some of which are abandoned. We might also see rodent bait stations, that are used for rat abatement.
Back alleys typically have lots of doors leading to apartment buildings or businesses. The brick or concrete at the back of buildings is frequently a different color than at the front. Why? It’s cheaper to use these kinds of materials in these places. Often pieces of brick and concrete at the lower levels of the buildings are missing because over time, all types of vehicles have hit the structures. Sometimes the walls have graffiti or street art or both placed on them. We may see graffiti on the walls and on the garage doors on the loading docks. We may also see electrical poles that are hidden from the main streets.
Look further up the walls and depending on the city and the age of the building, you might also see metal fire escapes typically painted black. There are also signs with messages like no trespassing, no soliciting, no loitering, and violators will be prosecuted that are posted, and sometimes CCTV cameras strategically located on the buildings.
It’s typically dirtier in back alleys than in the front of the building. Garbage, waste and other sorts of debris in addition to metal dumpsters, of all different sizes, are frequently laden with graffiti, and sometimes with stickers at the back of buildings in the alley are visible. The smell of sewage and rotten trash is often noticeable.
People are often unhappy in the back alley. Sometimes homeless people sleep in the shelter of a door well at the back of buildings. If they’re not resting, they may have left their personal belongings there, hoping no one will steal them, while well they panhandle or forage for food on the street.
Not only is the back alley often a repository of human waste, the cast offs, and the wreckage, but a place of commerce and consumption (beyond informal, and illegal transactions, the sale of stolen goods, the practice of “forbidden” and illicit sex, and the use and sale of illegal drugs), and temporary residence (for the down and out).
Finally we may find animals that are rummaging for food or taking shelter. I’ve encountered stray cats and dogs. Dogs that homeless people may have as company might be hiding. Rats, raccoons, and mice too numerous to mention are located in these areas.
Not all cities have back streets and alleys, but most large urban centers do. The back alley is a subset of a larger whole (the city and neighborhood), and it is deserving of scholarly attention.
In urban planning, urban geography, and street crime, one of the frequently neglected aspects of the urban setting are the back alleys of our large urban environments, and what takes place there.
In many respects, the back alley conforms to what sociologist Erving Goffman in his book The Presentation of Everyday Life, said about the back stage; that physical area that is hidden to most people where a different language, behaviors and norms are engaged in and activities displayed.
The public frequently neglects the back streets alleys and tends to concentrate their activities on the façades of buildings. That’s understandable because important sources of commerce, are typically located on the main streets (or front stages). Rarely acknowledged, however, is that the front stage would not be able to properly function without the backstage (i.e., the back streets and alleys).
Some cities, due to urban development, have more back alleys than others, and over time back alleys change, sometimes transformed into livable or green spaces. We see this happening in locations where the property prices are very high, and property developers are willing to construct alternative housing arrangements. Occasionally back alleys are turned into cute enclaves where hipster businesses are located like technology or media companies, cafés, and music venues use them as entrances to clientele.
Part of the back alley phenomenon has to do with how the city grew and/or was originally laid out.
There is complexity and diversity in back alleys, to be explored, to be digested, to be categorized, and from which social scientists can draw connections to traditional scholarship.
https://jeffreyianross.com/wp-content/uploads/IMG_9741-rotated.jpg640480Jeffrey Ian Rosshttps://jeffreyianross.com/wp-content/uploads/jeffrey-ian-ross-logo-04.pngJeffrey Ian Ross2020-08-22 23:59:462023-02-01 11:05:29Back alleys as spaces of urban exploration
Lies, Damn Lies and Thugs on a plane: Why do Conspiracy Theories exist and what to do about them?
/by Jeffrey Ian RossThis past week President Donald Trump announced, in an interview with Fox News Host Laura Ingraham, that he had intelligence about masked men, dressed in black, who travelled on a plane to Washington DC to disrupt the Republican convention.
Shortly after this interview aired it was discovered, like so many other of his stories (e.g. Muslims in New Jersey cheering when the World Trade Center was hit, Caravans of illegal immigrants coming to the United States, etc.), that these so-called Thugs were a fabrication. It simply was not true. Trump (or one of his enablers) must of have picked it up on Facebook, and Trump thought that it was important to share.
Trump, as it turns out, is a master-in-chief in orchestrating and disseminating conspiracy theories of all manner, especially ones that argue that there is a so-called “deep state” or shadow government, a group of government bureaucrats and politicians who dominate policy debates and make laws in this country that undermine his power and authority. Trump is known to continuously lie, but yet this does not seem to affect the loyalty of a large proportion of his followers (i.e., his base).
Trump has assisted individuals like Alex Jones, who runs InfoWars, a website and radio show that traffics in conspiracy stories of all shapes and kind to maintain a feedback loop of sorts. There is also the growth of the QAnon movement that alleges that a group of journalists and politicians are actually pedophiles that are operating a global sex trafficking organization that Trump will eventually arrest. The Trumpian conspiracy theories did not simply come out of the blue, he has been engaging in them for the majority of his public career.
The situation of the President spreading conspiracy theories has only been exacerbated by the promotion of terms and characterizations, originating from the White House, like “fake news,” and “alternative facts,” buzzwords that have been popularized during 45’s presidency to gain legitimacy, among people who are prone to distrust news media and properly qualified experts.
It’s easy for most highly educated people to dismiss conspiracy mongers and the people who believe them as gullible fools who are easily taken in. Conspiracy theories are objectionable for ethical, moral, philosophical and political reasons. They are bad because they may force the public and politicians to make important decisions (e.g., laws) that have widespread negative implications. This could lead to mishaps in public policy and practice.
American public discourse is littered with numerous claims about individuals, places, and events. So much so that the public is overwhelmed by these communications. Some of these messages are true, while others are simply embellishments, misinformation, myths, and/or blatant attempts to mislead. This situation has been exacerbated with the advent of the Internet, social media, and 24-hour cable news stations. Many of these platforms let wild conspiracies take root. Questions about what is true and what is false are continuously raised and sometimes answered.
Increasingly, in this media and pundit saturated globalized world, few people have the energy, knowledge, and skills to critically analyze complicated situations and discrepancies in facts and events. Similarly the public rarely has neither the patience nor the stomach for the cool, rational, and detached work of scholars and qualified experts who subject their ideas and analyses to peer review, the gold standard of medical, social, and hard sciences.
What is the effect of information overload, and the publics’ inability or unwillingness to separate fact from fiction? Some of the dominant reactions are alienation, disengagement from the political process, and the growth of misrepresentations, myths, and conspiracy theories to fill the void. A number of questions about conspiracy theories can be asked and have been handled well by others like Barkun, Hofstadter, and Pipes, and most recently by Nichols in his book The Death of Expertise. The more important question to answer is, why do conspiracy theories develop and persist and why does the public believe them? These questions can be answered by a number of interrelated reasons.
First, the obsession with celebrity culture, falsehoods, misleading information, and scandals, and the public’s and other actors frequent inability or lack of desire to question these truth claims as false or based on questionable evidence and assumptions has fostered conspiracy theories. This is why magazines like The National Enquirer, that were prominently displayed and sold in supermarket check outlines used to be so popular and successful.
Second, there’s a virtual army of professional communication officers, crisis managers, public relations specialists and spin doctors whose primary job is to shape and disseminate plausible narratives to an information hungry public via the media. These individuals and the organizations they work for are typically powerful. The goal of this information is to have maximum impact and/or respond to organizational misdeeds, or when bad news is released or comes to public attention. Not all of their objectives are a search for the truth or to set the record straight.
Third, there is an overabundance of experts and quasi experts. Their reputation may be enhanced when the communicator works at or lays claim to a connection with an institution with a legitimate sounding name, or has a social media platform with a significant number of followers, and a willingness of news hungry journalists and reporters look for the next big story to file. Many times the audience cannot distinguish the differences among the experts (and their affiliations) and are often susceptible to believe those with fancy sounding credentials. These people appear credible or in the past have achieved positions that would bestow credibility. What’s more important is that they are perceived by some members of the public and/or their colleagues to be experts. In particular, these individuals may have firsthand experience, be insiders, or have an advanced degree. For example, some of the JFK conspiracists were well-respected M.D.s or even held Ph.D.s. They were not simply a bunch of crackpots.
Fourth, there are an exhaustive number of communication channels that the public has access to, more so than at any point in time in human history. It is not simply through the written word, but there are movies, television series, and radio broadcasts that can disseminate conspiracy theories. There is literally a channel of communication for everyone.
Fifth, and most importantly, conspiracy theories are intellectually cost effective to believe. It’s resource intensive to sift through the evidence, claims and counter claims about the questionable activity of a person, what actually took place, or how did it unfold. That is why conspiracy theories are also attractive to those with a superficial knowledge of history.
How do we remedy the situation? How do we force people to not take conspiracy theories at face value?
Although we have experts who can rebut knowledge claims, and websites like Snopes that specialize in, and whose primary function is the debunking of myths, rumors and urban legends, this is not sufficient enough to be a bulwark against misinformation and conspiracy theories.
If you don’t like hearing conspiracy theories, then one course of action might be turning off the radio, television, computer, or stop listening to the news or reading social media. But this retreatist approach, appears to be simplistic and defeatist in attitude.
Instead, understand that discerning fact from fiction is resource intense. It’s not sufficient to just get a GED, or a bachelor’s degree. The American culture needs to encourage higher education. Encouraging literacy and higher education, particularly in the fields of critical thinking, history, logic, philosophy and political science is woefully needed. Although knowledge for knowledge sake may seem like a luxury, it has numerous secondary benefits like enabling individuals to confront conspiracy theories. Government and private foundations should be encouraged to support these kinds of initiatives. An informed citizenry is a bulwark against misinformation and skullduggery.
Furthermore, analyses of conspiracy theories must be comprehensive, detailed, and thoughtful in order to give those willing to listen a dispassionate analysis of the competing explanations for all sorts of human behavior and natural disasters. We also need to systematically, critically, and successfully analyze the most prominent interpretations of conspiracies, the actors involved, and their respective motivations.
Conspiracy theories undermine the sort of civilized public discourse required for a democracy to properly function. If we value a democracy that is based on fact, reason and empirical research, then it is important to challenge conspiracies regardless of their origins and the message, and for government (big and small), and private foundations to encourage the public to be educated in subjects that will help them in this quest.
Preventing peaceful protests from being hijacked by people engaging in violence
/by Jeffrey Ian RossWe’ve seen the peaceful protests, the looters, the police use of excessive force, and now the vigilantes.
For peaceful protestors, the majority of those out in the streets exercising their first amendment rights, this moment in American history cannot be overlooked. It’s pivotal. We care about living in cities and a country where African-American citizens are killed by police officers under questionable circumstances, a criminal justice system that is slow to investigate and prosecute these incidents, and racial, social and economic inequality that is too deeply rooted in the fabric of our country.
For looters their decision to engage in violence and arson is also born out of long held frustration with police, the criminal justice system and a society where racism is pervasive and never ending. Looting can also be motivated by the benefit of anonymity, opportunism, and getting caught up in the moment. But some people came to the protests (in cities such as Minneapolis, Portland, and Washington, D.C, to name a few) with the primary purpose of committing or encouraging violence: smashing windows, throwing items at police, and physically confronting police officers. Others with questionable motives drove cars and trucks into protestors. Some of these individuals were undoubtedly agent provocateurs (e.g., umbrella man in Minneapolis, ex-seal in Portland placing pipe bombs, etc.). In some cases the violence prone and looters were quickly identified by peaceful protestors, chased or handed over to the police. The presence of these individuals escalated the already tense situations and cast a negative light on the peaceful protests.
To this mix, enter armed right-wing militia. This is a dangerous but not unexpected development. The presence of vigilantes throughout American history is not something new, but under the Trump presidency (especially because of his appeals and rhetoric), and the power of news media outlets such as Fox News, controversial political commentators such as Rush Limbaugh and Alex Jones, QAnon, and social media, these individuals are organizing like never before. The recent killing of two men and the injuring of a third who were simply exercising their first amendment rights to peaceful protest and free speech, in Kenosha, by 17 year old pro-Trump Kyle Rittenhouse, is a case in point.
Peaceful protestors, organizers and law enforcement must guard against looters, agent provocateurs, right wing militia, and officers in their ranks who engage or encourage property destruction and violence. We need to be careful that peaceful protests don’t get hijacked by looters or right wing militia. Peaceful protestors need to continue to document via smart phones what they see, and upload this information to social media as soon as possible. Organizers of street protests need to establish rational plans to deal with looters and vigilantes.
As unpalatable at it may sound, peaceful protesters are probably going to require formal co-operation with law enforcement. These efforts should be formally documented in case there are later disagreements. It also means that law enforcement, from senior administrators down to the officers manning the barricades, must do their job to uphold and protect the right to peaceful protest and condemn the looters and vigilantes’ actions. Law enforcement must be appropriately trained in how to protect people in protests, including attending accredited riot control training, learning de-escalation techniques, and reminding them that they are there to serve and protect, not bash heads and ask questions later.
Law enforcement must send clear signals to their rank and file not to engage in violence, to protect the first amendment rights of the protestors, and be on the lookout for agent provocateurs, looters, and right-wing militia who will use these events as opportunities to flex their muscles. If rank and file do not follow these policies and practices they should be appropriately sanctioned and not simply given a slap on the wrist. And if governors send out the national guard, then they must sure that the individuals who are in their ranks follow the same protocols.
If these steps are not taken seriously and immediately, the outcomes will be a message translated to the American public that all protesters are violent, and this will only play into the hands of Trump, his enablers and supporters.
Back alleys as spaces of urban exploration
/by Jeffrey Ian RossIf I have time or I’m doing research, I explore neighborhoods of large urban environments, and if I feel safe the back streets and alleys located there.
For me the back alley, in particular, is place to escape, to experience distraction and possible danger, for reflection, and inspiration for creative activities; a place that might provide a shortcut, an opportunity.
Back alleys are also important to me because many of the individuals and the activities that they engage in that I study spend considerable time in these public spaces. In particular, important social actors transit through, work and occasionally live in the back alley including the homeless, dumpster divers, police officers, graffiti writers and street artists.
What do back alleys look like; how would I describe them?
There is a different sense of order in the back alley as compared to the front or façade of the buildings that line the alley.
In addition to the road which might be constructed out of asphalt, stone or brick, drainage is less important in back alleys as it is in the front of the buildings. Because of poor or nonexistent drainage, there are often puddles of water located there, alongside vehicles parked in the back alley, some of which are abandoned. We might also see rodent bait stations, that are used for rat abatement.
Back alleys typically have lots of doors leading to apartment buildings or businesses. The brick or concrete at the back of buildings is frequently a different color than at the front. Why? It’s cheaper to use these kinds of materials in these places. Often pieces of brick and concrete at the lower levels of the buildings are missing because over time, all types of vehicles have hit the structures. Sometimes the walls have graffiti or street art or both placed on them. We may see graffiti on the walls and on the garage doors on the loading docks. We may also see electrical poles that are hidden from the main streets.
Look further up the walls and depending on the city and the age of the building, you might also see metal fire escapes typically painted black. There are also signs with messages like no trespassing, no soliciting, no loitering, and violators will be prosecuted that are posted, and sometimes CCTV cameras strategically located on the buildings.
It’s typically dirtier in back alleys than in the front of the building. Garbage, waste and other sorts of debris in addition to metal dumpsters, of all different sizes, are frequently laden with graffiti, and sometimes with stickers at the back of buildings in the alley are visible. The smell of sewage and rotten trash is often noticeable.
People are often unhappy in the back alley. Sometimes homeless people sleep in the shelter of a door well at the back of buildings. If they’re not resting, they may have left their personal belongings there, hoping no one will steal them, while well they panhandle or forage for food on the street.
Not only is the back alley often a repository of human waste, the cast offs, and the wreckage, but a place of commerce and consumption (beyond informal, and illegal transactions, the sale of stolen goods, the practice of “forbidden” and illicit sex, and the use and sale of illegal drugs), and temporary residence (for the down and out).
Finally we may find animals that are rummaging for food or taking shelter. I’ve encountered stray cats and dogs. Dogs that homeless people may have as company might be hiding. Rats, raccoons, and mice too numerous to mention are located in these areas.
Not all cities have back streets and alleys, but most large urban centers do. The back alley is a subset of a larger whole (the city and neighborhood), and it is deserving of scholarly attention.
In urban planning, urban geography, and street crime, one of the frequently neglected aspects of the urban setting are the back alleys of our large urban environments, and what takes place there.
In many respects, the back alley conforms to what sociologist Erving Goffman in his book The Presentation of Everyday Life, said about the back stage; that physical area that is hidden to most people where a different language, behaviors and norms are engaged in and activities displayed.
The public frequently neglects the back streets alleys and tends to concentrate their activities on the façades of buildings. That’s understandable because important sources of commerce, are typically located on the main streets (or front stages). Rarely acknowledged, however, is that the front stage would not be able to properly function without the backstage (i.e., the back streets and alleys).
Some cities, due to urban development, have more back alleys than others, and over time back alleys change, sometimes transformed into livable or green spaces. We see this happening in locations where the property prices are very high, and property developers are willing to construct alternative housing arrangements. Occasionally back alleys are turned into cute enclaves where hipster businesses are located like technology or media companies, cafés, and music venues use them as entrances to clientele.
Part of the back alley phenomenon has to do with how the city grew and/or was originally laid out.
There is complexity and diversity in back alleys, to be explored, to be digested, to be categorized, and from which social scientists can draw connections to traditional scholarship.