 So our first speaker then is Chow Deana Minor and Chow is a Kenyan Digital Heritage Specialist and Digital Humanities Scholar working at the intersection of culture and technology. HUBBOK focuses on the application of technology in the preservation, engagement and dissemination of African heritage. Chow is founder of African Digital Heritage and a co-founder of the Museum of British Colonialism and a co-founder of the Open Restitution Africa project. Chow is also a recipient of the Google Anita Borg Scholarship for Women in Technology and we're absolutely delighted and honoured that she's joining us today. Chow, I'd invite you to turn your camera on, unmute yourself and I shall hand over to you. Thank you very much for the wonderful introduction. My name is Chow Deana Minor as you've heard. I am joining you from Nairobi, Kenya. I am a Black woman. I have braids and I'm wearing a very colourful top which is brown and black because valet stones are my favourite colour. And it's wonderful to be here today. I'm just going to go ahead and share my screen. If at all you have any problems viewing it, do let me know kindly. Today I'm going to be talking about digital infrastructure and how it relates both to digital innovation in an inclusive and community-centred way. The material that I will be sharing is mostly rooted on several projects that I have done here in Kenya and in the wider kind of African cultural landscape as a digital heritage specialist, as a historian and someone who's passionate about cultural representation, particularly in the digital age. I'm going to start off with this quote by Ikiyos that says that fighting for the future has always been an act of persistence of the desire to live. Now I start my keynote lecture with this because I do believe strongly that the work of digital technologies, particularly in relation to cultural heritage, to history and memory work, is not just about rooting ourselves in an understanding of the past, but actually allowing or envisioning ways in which this digital technology can itself be a path towards alternative futures and new imaginations of what our future could look like. In 2019, 2018, I founded African digital heritage, which is a non-profit organization that looks to provide critical holistic and knowledge-based approaches to digital heritage in Africa. Now the inspiration for this was coming from the point of view of looking at the ways in which digital heritage is rapidly changing cultural engagement, particularly outside kind of dominant forms of colonial representation, access to physical infrastructure, such as archives and museums being very inequitable, but also looking at the ways in which younger generations of Africans, of Kenyans, are pushing for models and engagement and frameworks of historical representation that suit them and that are more defined and essentially designed to cater for their humanity instead of the lack thereof. Now the numbers, by any chance, are quite astounding and intimidating. By 2050, two in every five children born will be born in Africa and by 2100, half of the world's youth will be African. Now what does this mean when kind of cultural representations, historical representations are not equitable in a digital age and we are expecting kind of digital technologies and the internet to be our primary source of information? So African information really steps in to kind of understand how are we going to make this cultural data accessible? How are we going to make it equitable? How are we going to make it sustainable? And finally, how are we going to make it cater for the audience? Not just in form of access, but also in form of challenging misrepresentations and bias that have existed within history. Our core forms of work are digitization, research, innovation and capacity building. And some of the major projects that we've worked on inform the work that I'm going to speak about today are a digital museum, no physical location and it's a volunteer run initiative called the Museum of British Colonialism, a project around mapping restitution data across the African continent, how many objects have come back? How many requests have been initiated? What are the responses to this request? And what are the cultural shifts in terms of data access? How is that affecting restitution and return of cultural heritage? And finally kind of major projects, which is one of my earliest projects to document rail infrastructure or the history of rail infrastructure here in Kenya. Now, through this kind of very wide rating projects, I have had both the privilege and the opportunity to really understand what digital innovation could do for cultural heritage, but also kind of what are the challenges and critical questions that we need to be thinking of. The first thing, rather the first thing I will look at is memory. If therefore we are going to sing, then we must sing quietly. This is a quote from the former attorney general of Kenya in the 1950s in a letter where he notes that human rights are being breached in the struggle for independence in Kenya, yet we must sing quietly. So he's talking about particularly the period of 1952 to 1960 in which the colonial government set up wide scale network of camps across Kenya to detain people who were suspected of being part of the Mao Mao freedom movement, which was an uprising calling for the return of freedom and land here in Kenya. Now, what happens after Kenya gains independence is that a lot of the information about these camps on the left, you can see kind of where they're located, sort of banishes out of national memory. I say banish, but banish is kind of abstracting the fact that the erasure of this history was very deliberate both on the part of the colonial government and the newly independent Kenyan government. Within the scale of detention camps, there were almost 800 villages set up in central Kenya, one million women and children detained and roughly kind of 150,000 people in detention camps, so outside the concentrated villages. As a Kenyan who was grown up in Kenya and who has experienced a public education system, it was very shocking for me to come across this information much later in my late 20s. What is more interesting is that these structures of detention, the archives surrounding the spirit of time are not accessible here in Nairobi and are very hard to access in the UK themselves. And so we began kind of challenging ourselves to imagine ways of curating and preserving memory and disseminating this history through digital technologies. Through this, we have begun creating digital reconstructions in 2D and 3D of how this detention camps looked or how the villages looked. Now, this process is not just about making information accessible. You see the colonial imagination says that we should be grateful for the knowledge that we have and we should not challenge it and we should not go beyond and ask questions. In this project, we are going to the communities we are traveling to the sites of these detention camps and we're interviewing veterans and people who experienced this site's first hand to help us imagine what they look like. Now, remember that we have very limited access to archives and we have very limited access to kind of the visual representation of what this site would have looked like. And so we are creating these digital reconstructions to enable canyons to, one, understand that this is very much a part of Kenyan history, two, be able to have a visual narrative and visual element to this particular period. And three, to be able to use this data, which often come with licensing and copyright restrictions in film, in education, in gaming and the like. These are examples of 3D reconstructions of concentrated villages in central Kenya, many of which were either brought down or burnt down or destroyed when Kenyan came independence. This is a trail surrounding the village and you can see kind of the spikes that surround it. This is another visual representation of what the detention villages look like. Here you can see the progression from archive to visual imagery or 3D reconstruction. And we also see this as a form of learning to enable audiences, students who are working in different disciplines to be able to take part in this kind of virtual reconstruction. What's interesting about this work is that I think it really shows that memory does not exist because archives and museums and libraries exist. Memory exists because memory is embodied in human beings. It is persistent, it is living. And therefore the work of archives and galleries and museums is not to constrain memory, but to enable memory to live, to be accessible, to grow into something else, to be challenged and to be useful to different populations and different generations. What you see here on the left is a picture of one of the detention camps in central Kenya when it was still in use. And on the right you can see some of its structures which exist today because the detention camp was turned into a school, but some of the structures exist. And so we're kind of breaking down the linearity of time to show that memory work, digital work, innovation is really about growing connections. It's really about understanding how spaces and memory and history and archives have evolved. For this project which I have talked about very, very briefly, kind of raises questions for me around digital infrastructure. When we think of digital infrastructure, a lot of the times we think of the server, the software, the content management system, the Excel sheet, the laptop. But I want to challenge us in it and I'd like to challenge myself as well to think about digital infrastructure being more than the technology, more than the equipment, and that this practice of building sustainable digital futures and sustainable digital projects is also about digital thinking and digital practice and digital futures. And these questions all come into play when we decide to start a digitization project. Me, digital infrastructure also embodies kind of four main things. Viewing communities as part of infrastructure. Viewing knowledge systems and indigenous knowledge as part of digital infrastructure. We have the tech and we kind of have the policies and the resources that are allocated to support digital infrastructure. And this is informed largely by work that I have done, but also kind of the gaps that I am witnessing when I work with museums, when I work with libraries around how we envision the place of digital technology for our societies, for our audiences, for our students, researchers, etc. And some of the questions that I feel we should be asking ourselves within this kind of practice of digital thinking is why do we digitize really? What is the intention of all the tons of data and gigabytes that we are generating? Who are we digitizing for? How do they access it? How do they know that this material is online? How do they use it? How do they challenge it? How do they generate conversation between themselves, but also between collections? Who are we digitizing for? And finally, how can digitization, digital work, digital practice really enhance our understanding of the path, but also give us the opportunity to challenge and to imagine kind of digital thinking as a freedom to look at the past in several ways. And of course, at this point in time, it's also important to note that digital collections also bear with them the same complexities, nuances, biases and inequalities that physical collections have. And so this is also a vital part of innovating for communities or rather I would say innovating with communities to understand what it takes. So this is a project that we did here in Nairobi and we're still currently kind of digitizing in a project to digitize over 100,000 archival records from one of Kenya's oldest libraries. And you can see in the video, we kind of looked at what does this work take? And sometimes I think we also need to be transparent about the resource, both the mental resource, the infrastructural resource, the social resources, or digital work. You know, how many rows of twine, how many face mats, how many workouts, how many kilometers of travel, how many gloves, how many interns, how many tribals. And all this is I think the very beautiful way of seeing that the infrastructure of digital work is not just the technology, it's the time, it's the capacity, it's the items that supplement the work that we're doing. What does it take to sustain this work, particularly from an innovation standpoint? One of the things that I hear often when I work with museums and libraries is that there is a fear that time is running out, you know, that somehow, somewhere, if as an institution, we don't digitize everything now, then we will forever be left behind and condemned kind of to the dark corridors of history. But I like to take this kind of fear and also challenge myself as well. Think of digitization and digital work as more about quantity and quality, not so much about speed around asking, it's about asking questions, asking the right questions, about having a freedom to fail and get something wrong, to iterate, to improve and to innovate and to collaborate across disciplines, across teams, across departments. We have just launched a podcast where I will share the link that looks at this kind of core questions around digitization and what we need to be thinking about, as well as how do we make this ethical, how do we make this equitable, and how do we make this sustainable for future perspectives. And so I do see innovation as an opportunity to challenge, to dialogue, to reframe and to represent. And in essence, from a practical infrastructural standpoint, I think there's a great opportunity to reevaluate metadata and cataloging systems, specifically for collections from the colonial period, to look at licensing and copyright and how does this fit into indigenous knowledge systems in which people own material collectively. Individual ownership is not something that you can assign to a particular object, to look at archiving and storage practices and funding and kind of regulations for that. And lastly, the curatorial and dissemination decisions that go into digital work I think are very crucial parts. Now I know I have probably squeezed a lot into this short presentation and I hope to have the opportunity to handle and answer more questions in future. I will share the links to all the work that I have mentioned. But as I summarize, I think it's important to say that the kind of ways in which we prioritize infrastructure, we prioritize the technology can be very dangerous. I recently came across a project in which they were digitizing material from the colonial, I think the early 1900s and the collections had a lot of derogatory, racially charged terms. And the dynamic was should we digitize this material and just put it online as it is, or should we redact kind of the material that is derogatory and mention this to our audiences. And I think in this kind of dilemma, it really shows that our curatorial, our humanness, our humanity is very essential to digital work that we are still making decisions that, as I said, the data that we are collecting and we are generating and innovating is not just about coalescing or mobilizing certain views of the past, but it's very integral to building futures. And therefore we have a responsibility both to our ancestors and to our peers and to our descendants to be making decisions around digitization that are holistic and that are centered on community-based human, humanity's kind of model. So thank you very much. I think I will end there and I look forward to the next presentation as well as the questions. Chow, thank you so much for such a rich, fascinating presentation. We already have questions coming in, which as I mentioned, we'll turn to after the second presentation. But anyone listening at home or wherever you are, do please keep the questions coming. I can see how many of you were also found that enormously thought-provoking and excellent presentation. So now we turn to our second speaker. Una Murphy is a lecturer of Arts Management at the Institute for Creative and Cultural Entrepreneurship at Goldsmiths University of London. Una's work helps museums, arts organizations, and cultural businesses to take a more efficient, effective, and creative approach to management with a particular focus on digital culture and capacity building. We're delighted that Una is joining us today to share her expertise as well and honored to have you with us. Una, I shall invite you to turn your camera on and unmute and I will hand over to you. So as Pip said, my name is Una Murphy and I am a lecturer at Goldsmiths University. I am a mid-30s white female. I'm currently wearing a bright green dress and some green and pink earrings as I embrace the heatwave that is London. In today's presentation, I want to do something slightly different. Normally, I talk about key studies that I've worked on, but I think looking at the program and knowing that Cha was speaking before me, what I really wanted to do was to take this kind of time and space to almost press pause and get us to think about some of those kind of wider digital culture narratives that we often have in the back of our heads but don't really have time to focus on because we're quite product-focused in developing, delivering new digital services and tools for our users. And so what I really want to focus on is asking this question, what does digital innovation really look like? Quite often, we think of digital innovation as flying cars and robots. And I think when it comes to digital innovation, we have these really interesting contradictory narratives, flying cars, robots, artificial intelligence, these kind of utopian visions. I like to call this the Jetsons view of digital innovation. And these utopian dreams serve a useful purpose in providing aspiration to what's possible with these technologies. But the utopian dream where work is carried out by machines as we enjoy a constant life of leisure feels somewhat of a stretch in reality to the work that we're doing. So in contrast to that utopian vision, we have this really interesting dystopian narrative, a narrative of disasters where freedom and creativity have completely vanished and we become screen-addicted zombies as shown in this illustration. So again, not an accurate representation, but there are elements of truth within that. If we extend that further, we look towards the Chinese government's social credit model, and this kind of totalitarian robot state where social credit and civic control are really intertwined in terms of technology. So it's quite a high level analysis of some of the digital culture narratives that exist within popular culture. And I think it's useful to frame our work in terms of digital innovation in this wider conversation about the power and impact. And I think as Chao said there, technology can be very dangerous. So picking up on her work and this rush to digitize, what I'm going to encourage you to do today in this presentation is to really press pause and to think about the impact that technology has on our users and on the data archives and collections that we have as institutions. So I'll give you those two extremes, one where we all quit work and live in cartoon flying cars and the other where we're screen-addicted zombies. I think the reality is likely to be more nuanced and exists somewhere between that utopian and dystopian fiction that prevails in popular culture. Indeed, if we look today, Neela utopian or dystopian narratives fully depict the impact of digital innovation as we experience it in our daily lives. So if we look through some examples of the more mundane uses of technology in our daily lives, as you can see in this image, this is a picture of Gmail, Google's email provider. And the picture shows how machine learning helps to filter spam from my inbox, but it also helps me to structure emails. So we're all familiar with this approach now. You're writing an email and Google or Outlook helps you to complete sentences. It's really an advanced form of spell check, but it's quite functional and useful. One of the problems I have with this technology is that it wants me to be polite and more professional in my tone, which I like to resist at all opportunities. Next, we can see here a picture from the travel app CityMapper. CityMapper is another great example. Google Maps also works. Both of these help me to travel in the most efficient way possible. They respond to live conditions and recalibrate my journey as I move. And my final example then is Google search. On the web, my search results are improved, meaning that I find what I'm looking for more quickly, but this quite often also limits any serendipitous opportunity for discovery, that joy of finding things in the archive. So whether that's finding an article about an unknown female scientist or a local hairdresser who doesn't pay to advertise online, we can begin to see here how digital innovation can curtail how we see and experience the world in our everyday lives. The thousands of photos I take on my phone, you can see an example of some of them on the screen here, are neatly tagged and categorized by computer vision technologies. So I can search for pictures of my birthday or look for the picture I took of her receipt during my last work trip. But as you can see in this search, the technology lacks cultural knowledge and infrastructure. So here I've searched for birthday and at the bottom of the screen you can see a picture of my granny and my great aunt. The computer has decided that this is a birthday because there's candles, but it's actually Christmas because you can have candles at more events than just birthdays. So this is just some top level insights into what digital innovation versus the mundanity of digital technology looks like in our everyday lives. We turn then to Alexa, as you can see in this gif of somebody shouting at a voice-operated system. Alexa and the extension Amazon employees are listening to users' conversations, but she and Alexa can't understand my Irish accent and so my arguments with her seem to outweigh any useful assistance it provides. Often we become frustrated and end up shouting at these technologies. What these examples show is that for me, cultural organizations sit below the line. So if we think about the examples I've shown you, what we see is a form of efficiency. Information is provided quickly, but efficiency often comes as a has a negative impact on issues of representation, creativity and accuracy. Digital technologies built in my life and my experience is more efficient, but the trade-off for an efficient life is less opportunity for discovery and also it's a life viewed through the prism of those that program the machine. So I think we can agree the landscape is complicated, but for me one way we can develop more accurate representative and creative approaches to digital innovation is by going underground to fall down the rabbit hole and the embrace the difficult journeys. So jumping onto my next analogy, we can talk about falling down the rabbit hole, but we can also start to think about digital innovation as an iceberg. So at this point in my presentation, this is where I would normally show you some really shiny examples of cool projects that people have done, but I'm not going to do that today. Instead I'm going to look below the line and I want us to start to focus and value the hard work that no one sees that doesn't get mentioned on the press relief. It's often slow, complicated, difficult and stressful, but it is the foundational work that creates inclusive, accessible, engaging, representative and diverse digital products, tools and services. And for me, these conversations should really happen at the initial concept stage. When we're thinking about applying for funding or seeking resources internally for a project, that's where we need to have the conversations about creativity, access and representation. So in this very brief talk, I want to introduce free tools to you that I think can help you to develop your work in a way that provides opportunities for creativity, access and representation. The free tools that I'm going to introduce are well documented and I'll ask that we'll share the links in the chat so that you can go and look at them yourselves. Each of these tools follows a similar format, but essentially it allows for the facilitation of questions around data ethics across the life cycle of product development. The first tool I want to introduce to you is the data ethics canvas, and this has been developed by the Open Data Institute. And what you can see here is a linear process that asks you to consider the implications of the data that you're collecting, the data that you're processing and the output data. And it frames it not simply in a legal framework, so what are the legal requirements and responsibilities, but it also asks you to think about the negative impacts on people, the positive impacts of people and wider conversations that I think are particularly important for cultural organizations and public service organizations such as libraries. So communicating your purpose, engaging with people, openness and transparency and sharing data with others. By working through this canvas, we can start to develop more robust approaches to using digital technologies in libraries and archives. What I think is really interesting here is that it takes a macro view of the impact of our work. It looks much beyond product development or project development and instead places our work into a wider context of the institution and its values and the wider impact the projects can have in society. The next tool I want to introduce is the consequence scanning. And so I should say all of these tools are tools that I have used in my own work to develop projects with museums and cultural organizations. The consequence scanning toolkit provides helpful prompts that allow you to facilitate conversations that situate the work that you're developing in a range of different contexts and environments, but also allows you to think about your users, both not and potential future users. And the final tool I want to introduce you to is one that I developed myself. My work over the last number of years has focused quite heavily on artificial intelligence. And working with museums and cultural organizations in the United Kingdom and America, we realized that while some interesting work was happening on a project by project basis in museums, there was no industry-wide accepted ethics policies, practices or processes to using artificial intelligence. And whilst we found consequence scanning and the data ethics canvas useful foundational tools, they lacked the nuance needed for publicly funded and social purpose organizations such as museums, libraries and archives. So we developed this free open access toolkit, which is available in English, German and Spanish. And in it, we have a series of case studies, a glossary and some theoretical questions around ethics and bias. But crucially, we have a series of free worksheets that are designed to encourage people to develop ethics and examine the social impact of projects from the initial concept stage. So ideally, we think that the AI capabilities frameworks worksheet should be completed at initial concept stage when an idea is being developed. And you can see on the left hand side, a series of prompts to help you to complete this framework. We then have our next worksheet, which is the AI ethics workflow. So again, on the right hand side, we have this worksheet that you can use in projecting team meetings to help you work through the prompt questions on the left hand side. So here you can see we're examining issues of data input. Where is the data coming from? What bias is already in that original data set? So that was something that Chao mentioned in her talk. A lot of collections data is problematic, quite often racist, and quite often issues of homophobia, class, disability. And so one of the challenges when we think about ethics in digital innovation is how do we mitigate bias? How do we document bias? And how do we use our platform as cultural and social purpose organizations to unpick bias and data that commercial organizations are less likely to do? And finally, we think that this work should be situated within stakeholders. So stakeholders may be service users, but they may be also people who are negatively impacted by data that is being processed that has historical biases. Engaging with stakeholders is a way to ensure that we deliver digital products and services in a manner that is creative, accessible and inclusive. So in conclusion, I would like you to think about how we value the process, how we engage stakeholders. I'm a big advocate that we should have less launches. We should take the money for those drinks receptions and we should use them for stakeholder meetings. And I'm a big advocate of pre-development meetings. How can you embed ethics at the initial concept rather than simply at project planning stages? Thank you very much. Inna, thank you so much. A second absolutely brilliant presentation and really helpful both of them with helpful prompts for where to go for more information and more things that we all ought to be considering, as well as fascinating insights into your own work. Chao, could I invite you to turn your camera on again and unmute and join us for the discussion. We've got about 20 minutes, just over 20 minutes. So we've got time to address some of these wonderful questions. If you haven't yet asked your question that you'd like to do, please put it in the Q&A. I can see there's a lot of activity in chat as well that Chao's been engaging into. A lot of love for the presentation and admiration for your work and the presentations there. But if we could start with the questions that have come in, as I say, to keep them coming if you'd like to. So question for Chao to start with. Is there a danger that funding bodies will dictate what will be digitized or when and if it will be digitized? And could you speak, if that's the case, could you speak to the implications of that? Absolutely. I would say one of the biggest challenges that we're facing is a lack of resources, especially financial resources to cater for this work. A lot of the work that we have and that is currently being done is funded externally, which is great because it does give us the opportunity to do this work. But at the same time, without policy, without government regulations, without support from public institutions here in Kenya or in the wider region, this work is very hard to do outside kind of external funding. And the danger that that comes with as well is the kind of restrictions or restrictions or implications on licensing and copyright. So you will find some funds that say you have to make all the material open access. And as we know, in as much as open access is a good thing in terms of conceptually giving everyone access, not everything should be made open access. Some material is sensitive. Some material belongs to the source communities that have never even had a chance to interact with this data in the first place before the world sees it. And so we have to kind of ask those questions around what it means to make all this material available without asking the right questions. So I would say yes, funding is a big challenge. External funding does come with different funders have different restrictions on how you should use the data. And it also gets tricky because a lot of this material is let's say national collections. Yeah, so I always bring this question up when the National Museum of Kenya works with Google Arts and Culture, who owns the data? Like what does it mean for national collections to be only accessible through kind of like private companies? And you know, the access question is great because all this material that was even basements or inaccessible physically is now online. But we're also talking about heritage community heritage. And so how do you navigate this very complex questions without stopping at and just assuming that all access is good access. So I'm not against access. I'm not against private partnerships and private public collaborations. I'm not against against funding. But I do feel that people, especially institutions and people working in institutions need to be equipped with the questions they should ask. So that the power dynamic of we want to digitize all your data here is the money is also met with the critical questions of well, what do you use this data for? How long will you keep it? Where will you store it? Do we still own the copyright? We need to be equipping people, especially museum workers, galleries and libraries, to ask and to feel that they have a right to ask these questions without shying away. Thank you very much. We've got a question for Una now. Also compliments on a great presentation and thanks. And it's a question about how transferable the museum AI toolkit is to non-museum contexts. So specifically the question that says for digital archives held in libraries, archives, universities and so on. Yeah. So I think it is very applicable to. So for me, I think the wider application is to data repositories of social purpose. So whilst the museums and AI network that I led looked at AI from two sides. So we looked at collections data, but we also looked at it from a management perspective. So ticket sales, social media, those type of things. The toolkit is very much designed to work for both sides of that. And so I think because we've designed it around collections, I think a lot of the questions that we raise and the framework that we've created is useful for libraries. And so I know that the Library of Congress cited it in one of their publications for developing machine learning strategy. So I think from my perspective, it would be very applicable. And I hope that it is. But I also really encourage anyone we're really keen to have more use cases of how it's been used. So if anyone does want to embed it in a project, please do reach out to me. It's free and open access. But I'm more than happy to get involved if people need somebody to come in and facilitate that conversation using the toolkit. We're really excited to keep getting new use cases. And it actually it was translated to German and Spanish this year because we had run a number of workshops using the toolkit for German museums. And we had a number of libraries there and a number of university collections that used it. And so we're kind of slowly building up our use cases off this toolkit. So I'd say very applicable, I hope. But if you'd like to use it and if you have any questions, just drop me an email. And I'm more than happy to kind of give you some advice on that. Sorry, Zima is playing up slightly. Thank you. And gosh, what an enormously generous offer. I suspect you're about to be inundated. And basically, as our chair also shared her email address in the chat. So thank you for your generosity, your collegiality. Tau, there's a question for you about whether you're also involving early career researchers in your projects. And perhaps, given the audience, the participants in this conference are also from the GLAM sector, Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums. Perhaps you could speak to early career people in those organizations as well as researchers. Absolutely. I do feel that ways of supporting this work are not just financial and also in terms of skills and time. All the interesting work, like the work around the documentation of the camps is volunteer work. So that's kind of the work that gets the most interest, but it's harder in terms of facilitating that work. So we do accept early career researchers. We accept interns. We accept people who want to use our platforms to share their work, to disseminate their materials. So yes, we do. And please get in touch. Thank you. Thank you very much. I'm really taken by how both of you are focused so much on people in communities in what is headlined as digital innovation in GLAM and really underlining that there is no digital without the people and the people are the ones who create it and implement it and have such a huge part to play in it. So it was really wonderful hearing you both talk about that, just the people in the technology. Una, could you speak to how people could help build up their ethics facilitation skills? I think that's an enormously rich area and people are clearly interested in this. Yeah, so I think it is a real challenge in terms of people's confidence in this area and being able to represent and facilitate diversity points can be quite challenging. I think particularly in the UK context we're kind of in this weird, woke kind of culture war situation at the minute. And I think that actually that is really kind of curteals our ability to have difficult questions in meetings. And so I think for me, I've been doing some training with the Open Dabba Institute over the last couple of months because whilst I developed this toolkit it was very much sector focused and I think it's really useful as professionals that we look at different disciplines and we look at different approaches to how ethics conversations are happening. So a really good example for me is Google a couple years ago fired one of their ethics researchers because she said that their approach wasn't ethical and she published a paper outlining issues with some of their data. And I think that for me is a really good starting point about how cultural organisations have a space where they can have these conversations because they're not commercially driven. But I actually think that in terms of ethics facilitation, libraries and archives actually have the potential to serve really important public conversations about ethics. And by documenting those conversations that we have, whether it's blog posts, whether it's sharing at community events, we can encourage members of the public to develop their digital literacy so that they can be more critical of how they use digital technologies and the data that they share in their everyday lives. Thank you, thank you very much. Tau, we have a question here for you which it's quite a big one. So how do we ensure that the biases that the questioner would say were inevitable, the inevitable biases held by GLAM professionals who are involved in acquisition, cataloging and so on are recorded? That's a good question. How do we ensure the biases that the professionals have, not the data? Well, that's a good question because it's not something that I think I haven't answered for. But I've later been thinking about kind of objects, biographies and data, that kind of the biography of the data sets, like the one image that you take, and yes, there's the kind of contextual material and cultural material or physical kind of attributes. But also how do we kind of embed the different biographies that this artifact or this image has been through or contains? I don't know, I do think that there's ways of kind of looking at this from opening up the collection standpoint. But it is also a lot of self-reflection work that I think you cannot necessarily, how do I say, turn it into like a clinical method. And therefore the work of self-reflection also has to be organic for it to be effective. And perhaps like something that come up with either as an institution or as a department and what is the responsibility around communicating that, but not just communicating, but also addressing how it has been. Now that you know that there's bias, how is it dealt with? I think I'll ask more questions, but yeah. And I think just to pick up on that, I think one of the things that I find really interesting in this kind of thinking about how we kind of, yeah, like object biographies and how we kind of document approaches to data creation metadata around objects and archives. One of the things that I always think is really interesting is we have to remember that while we think that the work we're doing now is correcting historical biases, the likelihood is in a hundred years people will look back at what we have done. We thought we were really woke and they'll be going, oh my god, that was so racist. That was like so gendered or like culture and society changes. So I think as much as whilst I kind of in my work look a lot of bias and approaches to mitigating bias, I think it's really important reality check to remember that what we're doing is right for now. And whilst we might think that the people from a hundred years ago were awful and what they said and did and recorded, the likelihood is in a hundred years people will also think that everything we've did is awful. So I think there's a good reality check and we're mitigating biases so that the data we hold is more appropriate for now. But I think knowing that we're probably doing it wrong takes a bit of pressure and risk off and actually recognising that we're doing the best that we can with the information we currently have. And I think documenting that process so that when somebody comes to unpick our hard fought work in a hundred years, we've made that process a bit easier for them than the process that we're going through to try and mitigate biases now. Thank you. They're both really interesting and insightful approaches to a really difficult question. I think the answer of how do we record them is we don't know them all. But hooray, we are not at least we hope we are not the end point of history. We hope we're a point in a continuum. So other people may be able to come and clear up our mess after us. Chao, could I wrap two questions together? One is about the main challenges. So what are the main challenges with the African digital heritage work that you do and with your other work? In fact, and if you could possibly address that alongside this other question which I think chimes with it well, which is what kind of collaborations or partnerships are useful to your work? It seems to me that perhaps collaborations and partnerships might be part of the answer to the challenges. So in terms of challenges, I would say the biggest challenge we have is just financial resources. And my financial resources, I mean the money to pay people to do this work comfortably, the money to buy infrastructure, the money to have service space, the money to train. I don't necessarily think we have a big skills problem. I think the innovation and skills capacity, both technical skills, cultural, curatorial skills are great. But we don't have kind of the resource to enable people to focus on this effectively. And so someone will say, but I don't even have money to pay my staff to do the work they're supposed to do. How can I have money to think of digital technologies? And I think this is also a problem of thinking about innovation and this kind of digital space as the other thing. So we know when we're allocating funds for conservation and curation and marketing and engagement, we think of digital as the thing that's like the side piece and the extra thing. It's not a core part of how an institution sees itself. And so I think there's also challenges around the perception of what technology could do. One, that it's an additional thing, but also there's a challenge around feeling that digital technology is a threat, you know, that it's going to take away jobs. It's going to make people redundant. It's going to prevent audiences from coming to the museum because everything is online. So I think there's a big challenge around also demystifying and also rightfully acknowledging that while those challenges may be valid and may be real within the context of these institutions or these roles, that there are also ways of inviting people, organizations, communities that have not seen themselves as part of being the digital ecosystem into the space and asking them, what does your role look like with this technology in place, you know? So I would say the financial resource kind of the alienation of digital technology and alienating people and finally kind of the barrier in which people think that digital technology is not for me or it's too far for me to access even conceptually or mentally. In terms of collaboration and partnerships, I think the things that would be most helpful for us are one, collaborating with institutions that have possessed collections, particularly of African heritage and what we envision ourselves as also being a kind of a way to connect people to collections to help facilitate engagement, to ask questions around dissemination and so collaboration around collections, collections, engagement, collection, dissemination and dialogue, making collections accessible are very important to us. Collaboration around skills and capacity building. I think that's one of the big challenges that we have that there's a lot of need for capacity building and digital training and thinking and we're still quite small an organization and it's hard to kind of meet the demand for that resource and so I was so glad to see Una on the call because I've been such a big fan of the toolkit of the AI museum toolkit and now I get to actually see how it came into into being so what I would like to see is hopefully the development of such two kids that we can develop two kids on digital thinking, planning for digitization, digital ethics, I think would go a long way not just within the African heritage space but also globally. If we can be able to democratize and and demystify a lot of the skills, it would be very crucial as well. Thank you for such a very rich answer and wonderful to see admiration. I think mutual admiration for your work and certainly for me for both of yours. We've got so many wonderful questions that I'm afraid we're not going to have time to get to about audiences and about ground truth and data sets and all sorts but so with huge apologies to people whose questions we're not going to get to and thanks very much for all of them. They've been really stimulating and lovely to see this live engagement with with both of our speakers work. Can I just ask could I ask you for as a way of summing up we've had a specific question about advice that you might give to someone who wants to pursue a master's program in your field but perhaps while absolutely addressing the master's one other master's question could you also give a couple of words of advice to anyone who wants to take their first steps in the field professionally or or as part of a community as on a volunteer basis. So how do you get involved but if you could also speak to the master's question that would be excellent. Unesh I'm going to turn to you first. Okay so I'm not I'm not going to recommend the specific masters. What I would say is I'm a really big fan of recommending that students complete a master's part time because it provides you with time and space to basically milk the university for all its resources for two years and but it also gives you two years to utilize networks and contacts and but also to work part time and embed your skills. So it's not always possible but financially it can be helpful for some students because you can work part time ideally in the sector that you want to work in but it also means you have two years of access to resources and databases and guest lectures and all of those things and so I think that would be my recommendation of completing a master's. It doesn't really tell you what master's to do but I think it's a useful way of developing your skills quickly on how to get involved in things. I'm a big fan of digital networking. Chow is also very engaged in online communities. I did my research. I started my career in Belfast in Northern Ireland at a time when nobody was that interested in digital and I did a lot of networking with museums in London and New York Free Twitter and but I think also now in terms of development skills you've great crowd sourcing platforms like Zoo Universe so you can develop those kind of digital practical skills at the time and place at Sotu. Thank you very much. Chow, the same question to you. Well I don't know if I have much to add. I would say that I think the work of being innovative is also exposing yourself to the risk of failure and by failure I mean things not going your way. I don't mean that you have failed. I mean that something has taken a different turn from what you expected it to be and I think that both for masters and kind of community work, volunteer work, a lot of times things will go a different way but I think that is also kind of allowing yourself to innovate in the direction of what you find, whether it's community needs, whether it's within the history, whether it's the questions that you're asking yourself when you encounter the archives. I also think that sometimes it is good to empathize with the subject, with the material, with what you're doing and it kind of brings a more human nuance even in the digital space.