If we accept that an information infrastructure is not about mapping an existing territory but about making map and territory converge - what does the EuroADAD do to social work with young drugs misusers, in terms of
In all 3 dimensions, can you think of negatives as well as positives (what is made invisible, incomparable, uncontrolled)?
And can you point to both pros and cons?
And for each of the levels in the “pyramid” in the information folder p.2?
Can the advantages of a standardised interview like the EuroaADAD outweigh
Have you any idea of the EuroADAD as a kind of
Clearance - erecting a barrier to past forms of knowledge? What do you think it replaces?
Erasure - making sure that certain informations are
Or are Bowker and Star’s concepts of “clearance” and “erasure” (p. 257) not really relevant to the EuroADAD?
Goffman (1990) links stigmatization to the everyday work of categorizing. Is
the EuroADAD perhaps working to stigmatize young people as “problem youth” and
drugusers with more or less "severity" of problems - rendering other dimensions
of their lives (as persons, as youngsters etc.) invisible, such as their
resources, strengths? Would some kind of clearance perhaps be a better strategy
towards their pasts?