Reimagining Activist Data: A Critique of the STOP AAPI HATE Reports through a Cultural Rhetorics Lens

Assembling a Cultural Rhetorics Methodology: Decolonial, Indigenous, and Feminist Theory

My methodology draws upon decolonial, Indigenous, and feminist theory to both critique and then reimagine STOP AAPI HATE’s data documentation initiative as a robust cultural rhetorics project. I include these three different theories because they all connect to the pillars of cultural rhetorics (and my work) in their own distinct ways. For instance, by factoring these three perspectives into my critique, I thoroughly detail the problematic limitations of the initiative’s data collection, storage, and presentation practices. Additionally, using this valuable three-part methodology, I describe how my cultural rhetorics-inspired reimagination of the STOP AAPI HATE initiative can provide marginalized AAPIs with more transparent story submission options (decolonial theory), engage in collaborative and relational practices with AAPI communities (Indigenous theory), and uncover more previously-silenced AAPI stories (feminist theory). In the following sections, I further explain how each theory connects back to my cultural rhetorics methodology, thus influencing my evaluations of the STOP AAPI HATE initiative and summative reports.   

Decolonial Theory

Recently, decolonial theory, which helps inform the cultural rhetorics pillar of decoloniality, has gained increasing prevalence within the broader technical communication field. For instance, Haas (2018) contends that decolonial theory must be factored into effective technical communication practices, stating that technical communicators “...must investigate how [they] may be complicit in, implicated by, or transgress the oppressive colonial and capitalistic influences and effects of globalization” (Cobos et al., p. 145). Importantly, Haas’s call for critical self-examination within the field includes technical communicators who are working on digital data collection projects, like the STOP AAPI HATE initiative. While STOP AAPI HATE aims to intervene in the xenophobic effects of a globalized pandemic, the project also needs to consider how its data collection and presentation practices silence marginalized AAPI perspectives, “…[functioning] as agents of oppression—albeit often unwittingly—for Others” (Cobos et al., 2018, p. 145). 

Inspired by Haas’s recommendation to examine technical communication projects through the lens of decoloniality, I use decolonial theory within my cultural rhetorics methodology to critically examine how the initiative’s technical communicators collect, store, and present the stories that the users (victims of AAPI racial violence) provide to the STOP AAPI HATE project. To reimagine the STOP AAPI HATE initiative as a project that works towards a more decolonially-minded future, I draw inspiration from decolonial theorists, such as Walter Mignolo. Mignolo (2011) states, “Decoloniality means decolonial options, confronting and delinking from coloniality, or the colonial matrix of power” (p. xxvii). Mignolo’s emphasis on “decolonial options'' ties into cultural rhetorics’ emphasis on the inclusion and equivalent value of all cultures, not just the cultures situated in the present colonial matrix of power: western, capitalist society. In my cultural rhetorics reimagination of STOP AAPI HATE, I suggest various “decolonial options” that aim to improve the project’s data collection and presentation methods, helping it become a more activist-oriented initiative in the process. By offering critical feedback and by suggesting an embrace of decolonial options, I offer hope that STOP AAPI HATE may function more successfully as “…[an agent] of knowledge-making and change” for their silenced user communities (Cobos et al., 2018, p. 145). 

Indigenous Theory

During my evaluation of the STOP AAPI HATE summative reports, I paid close attention to how the initiative engaged with the ideas of “reciprocity and collaboration,” two tenets of Indigenous research practices. Reciprocity and collaboration are two strategies that link back to the cultural rhetorics tenet of relationality, with both encouraging a “balancing of power” between both the researcher and the researched subject. By viewing the researcher and researched as equally valuable members of the knowledge-making process, these two moves also delink from traditional colonial ideas of research, in which one dominant party extracts information from an “othered” subject. Wilson (2008) states, “Respect, reciprocity, and responsibility are key features of any healthy relationship and must be included in an Indigenous methodology” (p. 77). Collaboration echoes relationality by fostering this sense of mutual respect and responsibility, encouraging the researcher to work with and alongside their research subjects to create meaningful projects for both parties. Additionally, Smith (1999) states that the idea of reciprocity implies that the researched subject is involved and informed in all stages of the research project, asserting that “... consent indicates trust and the assumption is that the trust will not only be reciprocated but constantly negotiated -- a dynamic relationship rather than a static decision” (p. 136).  In my own project, by characterizing the STOP AAPI HATE initiative as a research entity and AAPI victims as the researched, affected community, I am able to see if and how the initiative engages with the Indigenous research tenets of reciprocity, collaboration, and trust in its interactions with the vulnerable community of AAPI storytellers.

Feminist Theory

In my critique, I also use feminist rhetorics theory to explore how the STOP AAPI HATE initiative treats the stories told by previously silenced AAPI victims in these pandemic-stricken times. According to Jones Royster (2003), one of the main objectives of feminist rhetorics is the “... recovering, re-ordering, re-situating, re-visioning, and re-creating [of] the lives, experiences, contributions, and achievements of various non-normative subjects…” (p. 161). Feminist rhetorics aligns itself with cultural rhetorics, as both perspectives seek to elevate new voices and cultures as new options in the face of dominant, oppressive, and patriarchal systems of power. Additionally, Novotny and Gagnon (2019) further reinforce the connection between feminist rhetoric and story, stating that “... stories are sacred and must be honored as such once transcribed, analyzed, and revised” (p. 74). This concept of respect towards both individual storytellers and their stories, previously mentioned within Indigenous theory, discourages the presentation of story as numeric, generalized data. Informed by these perspectives, my methodology and ensuing critique interface with cultural rhetorics, positioning the STOP AAPI HATE initiative as the “center of power” while also drawing the concepts of reciprocity, collaboration, and respect to evaluate the initiative's treatment of vulnerable AAPI people and their stories in a pandemic-stricken global setting.  

In the sections that follow, I first draw from my cultural rhetorics methodology (incorporating decolonial, Indigenous, and feminist theory) to critique the STOP AAPI HATE initiative’s current data collection and presentation practices. Then, I use this methodology to suggest ways in which the STOP AAPI HATE initiative (and other similar activist-oriented documentation projects) could reimagine their aforementioned practices to fully empower their marginalized communities. Importantly, both my critiques and reimagination of the STOP AAPI HATE project are based on the May 2020 version of the initiative’s website.