From adi_kuntsman at yahoo.com Wed May 1 01:12:36 2013 From: adi_kuntsman at yahoo.com (Adi Kuntsman) Date: Wed, 1 May 2013 01:12:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Air-L] Social media and Political Horizons: Israel/Palestine, the Middle East and Beyond Message-ID: <1367395956.72563.YahooMailNeo@web161901.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Social media and Political Horizons: Israel/Palestine, the Middle East and Beyond 14 June 2013? 1-5pm? Venue TBC Organised by: Adi Kuntsman, The University of Manchester and Rebecca L. Stein, Duke University At the core of this workshop is a rethinking of the so-called ?digital democracy? proposition ? that is, an argument about the ways that digital technologies, chiefly social media, can advance pro-democracy politics.? In the last few years, this popular proposition has come under increasing criticism from scholars who have reminded us of the flexible nature of digital technologies, including the ways they have been employed by dictators and police states as public relations platforms, tools for tracking and monitoring political dissidents, and means of counter-insurgency more generally. What has emerged in the scholarly literature is something of a dichotomy ? digital democracy posited against digital dictatorship.? The event takes a more complex approach to the politics of digital technology, through a discussion of the ways that social media can be employed on both sides of this political divide.? More specifically, the discussion will approach social media both as tools of warfare, military occupation, and authoritarian rule, and as means to subvert and resist such political regimes. Contra most of the literature on digital democracy and digital dictatorship alike, our discussion will focus on questions of everyday culture and language as they emerge where politics and social media meet. Programme 9.30 -10.00 Registration ? 10.00-12.00 Roundtable discussion Simon Faulkner, Manchester Metropolitan University Adi Kuntsman, The University of Manchester and Rebecca L. Stein, Duke U? Miriyam Aouragh, Oxford University Yasmin Ibrahim, Queen Mary Farida Vis, Sheffield University ? 12.00-1.00 Lunch ? 1.00-2.30? Public lecture Theresa Senft, NYU ?My Body Belongs to Me? On Global Spheres, Networked Nudity and Feminist Activism? ? ? Attendance is free but registration is required. Please email naveeda.raoufi at student.manchester.ac.uk ??to register Registration deadline: 1 June 2013 ? --- Dr Adi Kuntsman https://sites.google.com/site/adikuntsman/ From christian.fuchs at uti.at Wed May 1 02:19:08 2013 From: christian.fuchs at uti.at (Christian Fuchs) Date: Wed, 01 May 2013 10:19:08 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] CfP Critical Visual Theory - Deadline June 15 Message-ID: <5180DE0C.5000409@uti.at> Call for Papers for a special issue of tripleC (http://www.triple-c.at/index.php/tripleC/index): Communication, Capitalism & Critique: Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society on the general topic of Critical Visual Theory Detailed Information/CfP: http://fuchs.uti.at/wp-content/CfP_VisualCommunication.pdf Edited by Peter Ludes, Mass Communication, Jacobs University Bremen, Kathrin Fahlenbrach, Media Studies, Hamburg University, and Winfried N?th, Cognitive Semiotics, S?o Paulo Catholic University. The overall task of this special issue is to combine critical insights into current economic, technical, political, cultural, and ecological dimensions of transnational and global visual communication. The papers to be included in this issue should make use of critical theories to advance a better understanding of visual information technologies in general and of strategies of veiling financial, military, economic, religious interests in particular. A special focus will be on current forms of surveillance of public and private life. The editors invite contributions to topics such as: * Visual humanities and social sciences: concepts, methods, and theories * Visual data and semiotics: networks and analyses * Visual hegemonies: image- and profit-making * Veiling: Key Invisibles * Visual culture zones: Africa, Arab countries, China, Europe, India, Japan, Latin and North America Preliminary time schedule June 15, 2013: Abstract submission, via email to p.ludes at jacobs-university.de, kathrin.fahlenbrach at uni-hamburg.de, and noeth at uni-kassel.de . July 15, 2013: Feedback to authors about acceptance or rejection of abstract September 15, 2013: Submission of full papers to the editors via http://www.triple-c.at via the electronic submission system: http://www.triple-c.at/index.php/tripleC/about/submissions#onlineSubmissions . Guidelines for formatting and style: http://www.triple-c.at/index.php/tripleC/about/submissions#authorGuidelines http://fuchs.uti.at/wp-content/tripleC_2013.dot tripleC ? Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society is a journal that is specialising in publishing articles that focus on critical studies of media, communication and digital media in the context of the information society. It is indexed in Scopus and Communication & Mass Media Complete. From kaw522 at york.ac.uk Wed May 1 02:54:39 2013 From: kaw522 at york.ac.uk (Kim Witten) Date: Wed, 1 May 2013 10:54:39 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Air-L Digest, Vol 105, Issue 32 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4667F735-F3A6-4D33-B95C-1EF280D443F9@york.ac.uk> Articles like this make me cringe. People engaging in social activity with their friends feel less inhibited and enjoy cookies more than granola bars at that time? Why is this so surprising? To me, it goes back to that technological determinism/digital dualist argument that SNSs and the like are Doing Things To Our Brains. Danger point! Seriously though, the framing of this Wired story suggests something of the deterministic sort, even though the published article title ("?Are Close Friends the Enemy?...) and a statement by the author (1) say otherwise. Still, the Wired article title ("Does Facebook Praise Kill Self-Control?") and other statements (2,3) frame it differently. 1. "Wilcox cautions that those findings do not necessarily mean that spending time on social networks causes any of those things." 2. "the ?likes? prompted by your status updates and photo posts might also have a negative impact, especially on your waistline and pocketbook." ("likes" being the cause here, not the content of the update, the social engagement or the people participating in it.) 3. "those people who reported higher self-esteem and lower self control *from* browsing Facebook happen to have a higher body mass index and more credit card debt." (emphasis mine) Also, people are fat, have debt, read CNN, or like/dislike granola bars for various reasons. The latter two are not good controls. Thoughts? -Kim > ----------------- > > Message: 5 > Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 09:16:19 -0400 > From: nativebuddha > To: Deanya Lattimore > Cc: "air-l-aoir.org at listserv.aoir.org" > > Subject: Re: [Air-L] Facebook, cookies and self-control? > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > that was my impression as well. > > -robert > > > On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Deanya Lattimore > wrote: > >> Here'e the study itself, downloadable - >> http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2155864 >> >> It's hard to say anything about a study that doesn't say anything. >> The researchers do everything that researchers do these days who want >> their studies to become public and picked up by the media; in this way, the >> media draws its own conclusions that the researchers themselves are too >> cautious to draw. >> >> I think this one deserves to be put up for an Ig Nobel. >> :-) >> Deanya >> >> >> On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 9:20 PM, nativebuddha wrote: >> >>> Wondered what others thought about the validity of these findings: >>> >>> http://www.wired.com/business/2013/01/self-control-and-facebook/ >>> >>> -Robert >>> _______________________________________________ >>> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >>> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >>> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >>> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >>> >>> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >>> http://www.aoir.org/ From wellman at chass.utoronto.ca Wed May 1 17:10:11 2013 From: wellman at chass.utoronto.ca (Barry Wellman) Date: Wed, 1 May 2013 20:10:11 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] never, ever Message-ID: colleagues, judge research by the media account read the original article and make a judgement. over and out ps; funny example - a close friend heard on TV today that everyone should buy Chrome laptops. really over and out Barry Wellman _______________________________________________________________________ S.D. Clark Professor FRSC NetLab Director Faculty of Information (iSchool) 611 Bissell Building 140 St. George St. University of Toronto Toronto Canada M5S 3G6 http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman twitter: @barrywellman NETWORKED:The New Social Operating System. Lee Rainie & Barry Wellman MIT Press http://amzn.to/zXZg39 Print $22 Kindle $16 Old/NewCyberTimes http://bit.ly/c8N9V8 ________________________________________________________________________ From demy.mail at gmail.com Thu May 2 05:06:54 2013 From: demy.mail at gmail.com (dem) Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 14:06:54 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] Summer schools in quantitative Internet research? Message-ID: Dear AOIRists, I am looking to apply to a summer research program for 2013 in Internet research, my background is in media studies (I have graduated with an MA in New Media in 2012) and Computer Science (currently studying towards a Bsc) and my main research interests are: online social networks, studying online politics with online data, network science, machine learning, data mining and data analysis. If you know of any summer schools (or research projects/groups at universities) that are currently accepting applications in these areas, then please let me know! Thank you! Best, Demet Dagdelen From ik at mgovernment.org Thu May 2 05:18:47 2013 From: ik at mgovernment.org (Prof. I. Kushchu) Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 13:18:47 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] PhD / Research programs - linguistics and social media Message-ID: <81F82700-1D56-45EC-97B3-0E3BAFA5164E@mgovernment.org> Dear Colleagues A bright student, (a linguist by training and currently completing a Masters thesis about socio-linguistics approaches to the use of language on Facebook), asked me for research and PhD programs for further studies -Not very much related to my expertise, unfortunately. Any suggestions for such programs in the intersection of linguistics and social media? Bests wishes Kushchu ------- IBRAHIM KUSHCHU, MBA, MSC., PHD Associate Professor and Founding Director, Mobile Government Consortium International, UK http://www.mgovernment.org ik at mgovernment.org +44 1273 777853 - Visit mLife Conferences http://www.m4life.org From j.unger at lancaster.ac.uk Thu May 2 05:32:46 2013 From: j.unger at lancaster.ac.uk (Unger, Johann) Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 12:32:46 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] PhD / Research programs - linguistics and social media In-Reply-To: <81F82700-1D56-45EC-97B3-0E3BAFA5164E@mgovernment.org> References: <81F82700-1D56-45EC-97B3-0E3BAFA5164E@mgovernment.org> Message-ID: <14D4EABD43B0994BB954328FDA1F50F701F8BD2C@EX-0-MB1.lancs.local> Dear Kushchu, Language at Internet is an open access journal that regularly has good articles that take a sociolinguistic approach to Facebook data (though last year their output seems to have dipped a bit). At Lancaster we have several staff researching in the area of language and digital media (David Barton, Julia Gillen, Karin Tusting, Mark Sebba, myself) and also a number of PhD students already looking at facebook and other social networks - and we have a new MA in Digital Literacies, which means there are also research training opportunities for PhD students working in this area. Further information is available here: http://www.ling.lancs.ac.uk/study/phd/ Best, Johnny. Dr J W Unger Lecturer and Academic Director of Summer Programmes Department of Linguistics and English Language Lancaster University LA1 4YL e-mail: j.unger at lancaster.ac.uk tel: +44 1524 592591 Follow me on Twitter @johnnyunger On 2 May 2013, at 13:18, "Prof. I. Kushchu" > wrote: Dear Colleagues A bright student, (a linguist by training and currently completing a Masters thesis about socio-linguistics approaches to the use of language on Facebook), asked me for research and PhD programs for further studies -Not very much related to my expertise, unfortunately. Any suggestions for such programs in the intersection of linguistics and social media? Bests wishes Kushchu ------- IBRAHIM KUSHCHU, MBA, MSC., PHD Associate Professor and Founding Director, Mobile Government Consortium International, UK http://www.mgovernment.org ik at mgovernment.org +44 1273 777853 - Visit mLife Conferences http://www.m4life.org _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From imgershon at gmail.com Thu May 2 06:50:01 2013 From: imgershon at gmail.com (Ilana Gershon) Date: Thu, 02 May 2013 09:50:01 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] PhD / Research programs - linguistics and social media In-Reply-To: <81F82700-1D56-45EC-97B3-0E3BAFA5164E@mgovernment.org> References: <81F82700-1D56-45EC-97B3-0E3BAFA5164E@mgovernment.org> Message-ID: <51826F09.7000300@gmail.com> Dear Kushchu, Indiana University would also be a good place to study this -- either in the linguistics department or in the Dept. of Communication and Culture. Regards, Ilana Ilana Gershon Dept. of Communication and Culture Indiana University On 5/2/2013 8:18 AM, Prof. I. Kushchu wrote: > Dear Colleagues > > A bright student, (a linguist by training and currently completing a Masters thesis about socio-linguistics approaches to the use of language on Facebook), asked me for research and PhD programs for further studies -Not very much related to my expertise, unfortunately. > > Any suggestions for such programs in the intersection of linguistics and social media? > > Bests wishes > Kushchu > > ------- > IBRAHIM KUSHCHU, MBA, MSC., PHD > Associate Professor and Founding Director, > Mobile Government Consortium International, UK > http://www.mgovernment.org > ik at mgovernment.org > +44 1273 777853 > > - Visit mLife Conferences http://www.m4life.org > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > . > From matti.nelimarkka at hiit.fi Thu May 2 07:10:36 2013 From: matti.nelimarkka at hiit.fi (Matti Nelimarkka) Date: Thu, 02 May 2013 17:10:36 +0300 Subject: [Air-L] Workshop on Backchannels and Live participation tools @ ECSCW 2013 Message-ID: Call for Participation: Workshop on Backchannels and Live participation tools, including: * Examples and demos of prototypes, experiments and system descriptions of and for backchanneling and other forms of audience participation * Research methods for analysis * Case studies and empirical findings * Exploration of new ideas Part of ECSCW 2013 (Sep 21st - Sep 25th @ Paphos, Cyprus) Workshop date: Sep 21st Submission deadline: June 28th Teaser: Backhannels and live participation tools are used e.g. in education, conferences and TV shows to increase the interactivity and participation of learners, participants and viewers. Research-wise the domain is scattered across different fields, such as HCI, CSCW and education. This workshop aims to draw together researchers, developers and practitioners in this area to consider (1) how to conduct high quality research and (2) how to make research with impact on the larger society. More details: http://lead.aalto.fi/activities/ecscw-2013-workshop/ From mail at ratcliffe.ca Thu May 2 07:40:45 2013 From: mail at ratcliffe.ca (Tony Ratcliffe) Date: Thu, 02 May 2013 08:40:45 -0600 Subject: [Air-L] New MSc in Learning Innovation by distance learning In-Reply-To: <14D4EABD43B0994BB954328FDA1F50F701F8BD2C@EX-0-MB1.lancs.local> Message-ID: Hello everyone, We have a new MSc in Learning Innovation starting October at the Institute of Learning, University of Leicester. It will be delivered through distance learning. Professor Gr?inne Conole is director of the Institute. You can contact my supervisor, Dr Palitha Edirisingha, to discuss the offering. His contact information is shown on the page: http://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/education/distance-learning/mscli/course-de tails Of course, I am always prepared to talk about my distance experiences! Tony A.E. (Tony) Ratcliffe PhD Research Student University of Leicester (residing in Canada) http://linkedin/in/tonyratcliffe From gurstein at gmail.com Thu May 2 08:54:40 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 08:54:40 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] [JoCI] New Special Issue: Community Informatics and Co-Creation of Innovation In-Reply-To: <02eb01ce474c$7caa5f70$75ff1e50$@gmail.com> References: <20130502153552.AE192101EBA@php5.vcn.bc.ca> <02eb01ce474c$7caa5f70$75ff1e50$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <02f301ce474d$63e7c2b0$2bb74810$@gmail.com> The Journal of Community Informatics has just published its latest issue at http://www.ci-journal.net/index.php/ciej. We invite you to review the Table of Contents here and then visit our web site to review articles and items of interest. Thanks for the continuing interest in our work, Michael Gurstein Editor in Chief: Journal of Community Informatics, Vancouver CANADA Phone 604-602-0624 gurstein at gmail.com The Journal of Community Informatics Vol 9, No 3 (2013): Special Issue: CI and the Co-Creation of Innovation Table of Contents http://www.ci-journal.net/index.php/ciej/issue/view/47 Editorial Introduction HTML Susana Finquelievich, Mariana Salgado Community Innovation and Community Informatics HTML Michael Gurstein Articles The Emergence and Development of a Regional Living Lab: The Case of San Luis, Argentina HTML Susana Finquelievich The ecology of linking technologies: toward a non-instrumental look at new technological repertoires HTML Roc?o G?mez Facilitating community innovation: The Outils-R?seaux Way HTML Lorna Heaton, Florence Millerand, Serge Proulx Are the Users Driving, and How Open is Open? Experiences from Living Lab and User Driven Innovation projects HTML Kari-Hans Kommonen, Andrea Botero Communities, Crowds and Focal Sites: Fine-Tuning the Theoretical Grounding of Collaboration Online HTML Azi Lev-On The Emergence of Converging Communities via Twitter HTML Cecilia Loureiro-Koechlin, Tim Butcher Collaborative Knowledge Creation in Development Networks: Lessons Learned from a Transnational Programme HTML Fabio Nascimbeni RLABS: A SOUTH AFRICAN PERSPECTIVE ON A COMMUNITY-DRIVEN APPROACH TO COMMUNITY INFORMATICS HTML Marlon Parker, Julia Wills, Gary Brian Wills Museums as Living Labs Challenge, Fad or Opportunity? HTML Mariana Salgado Reviews Digital Habitats ? stewarding technology for communities HTML Joanna Saad Sulonen Case Studies Appropriation of ICTs by informal communities in metropolitan cities. The case of the ?La Salada? market in the Latin American context HTML Ester Schiavo, Sergio Rodr?guez, Paula Vera From bury417 at yahoo.ca Thu May 2 09:38:56 2013 From: bury417 at yahoo.ca (Rhiannon Bury) Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 09:38:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Air-L] ethics and listservs Message-ID: <1367512736.98490.YahooMailNeo@web140603.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Hi everyone There has been a? development on an internal Faculty Association listserv at my university that I thought those of you interested in research ethics may wish to advise or comment on. First a little background. The provincial government hasdpromised to increase funding by 2% to postsecondary educaton sector last year. They reneged on that promise and slashed the budget by 7%. Our university Administration responded almost instantly by using a "financial stringency" clause in our collective agreement, giving lay off notices to about 25 academic and professional staff, included tenured faculty. We are a small university and so we have a faculty association listserv set up specifically for discussion of university issues. Tensions as you can imagine are running high and the listserv is very active. Like at most universities, there is tension between the Faculty of Business and the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences. Yesterday one member sent around an spreadsheet with what he described as "research" on how representative the discussion list was of the total membership. It included a list of the names of those who had contributed and ranked them in terms of the number of posts. He never stated his reasons for conducting such "research", although he did say that it is was an "internal document" for membership. Reaction was swift and explosive. Some people were outraged, claiming he had misused the list and their information. The list shows that majority of frequent posters were from one Faculty, leading some to state that this member, from the other faculty,? was really trying to demonstrate that their opinions, almost all critical of the university administration, were overrepresented. Others expressed fear that this information could be forwarded on to the Administration (the member is apparently tight with the Acting VPA) and then used to shape the next round of lay offs (ie get rid of the "trouble makers.") Still others thought there was nothing wrong with sharing such "data", some suggesting that it could be useful information to encourage more diverse opinion. My feeling that it is completely unethical though because it is not formal research, it probably falls outside the purview of the Research Ethics Board. Still it does name names--had he just presented aggregated data grouped by Faculty, I don't think anyone would have said much of anything.? It would be like me collecting data on everyone's posts here and then presenting my findings with your names here out of the blue Interested in your thoughts. Rhiannon Rhiannon Bury Associate Professor Women's and Gender Studies Athabasca University rbury at athabascau.ca @television2pt0 From listserv.aoir.org at elkears.com Thu May 2 11:59:37 2013 From: listserv.aoir.org at elkears.com (Joshua Treadway) Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 14:59:37 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] ethics and listservs In-Reply-To: <1367512736.98490.YahooMailNeo@web140603.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> References: <1367512736.98490.YahooMailNeo@web140603.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I don't see the problem with it. It is a compilation of data you all had access to and he released that data back to the same group. If he didn't release the names, it would be of no difficulty to figure out the outliers as, again, you all have access to the same source data. If all of you were in sitting in a circle, taking turns talking. And this 'researcher' took notes and said that 'Prof. Smith' is over representing his argument and I have the statistics, would that be objectionable? Again, it wasn't privileged information and from your information it wasn't released to outside sources. All it did was add clarity to the arguments represented (and pseudonyms in this case would offer no real protection, only weaken data). I think is situation sheds light on a problem with Computer-Mediated-Communications, there is often a false sense of distance between the speakers and the computer acts as shield when that simply is not the case. On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 12:38 PM, Rhiannon Bury wrote: > Hi everyone > > There has been a development on an internal Faculty Association listserv > at my university that I thought those of you interested in research ethics > may wish to advise or comment on. > > > First a little background. The provincial government hasdpromised to > increase funding by 2% to postsecondary educaton sector last year. They > reneged on that promise and slashed the budget by 7%. Our university > Administration responded almost instantly by using a "financial stringency" > clause in our collective agreement, giving lay off notices to about 25 > academic and professional staff, included tenured faculty. We are a small > university and so we have a faculty association listserv set up > specifically for discussion of university issues. Tensions as you can > imagine are running high and the listserv is very active. Like at most > universities, there is tension between the Faculty of Business and the > Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences. > > > Yesterday one member sent around an spreadsheet with what he described as > "research" on how representative the discussion list was of the total > membership. It included a list of the names of those who had contributed > and ranked them in terms of the number of posts. He never stated his > reasons for conducting such "research", although he did say that it is was > an "internal document" for membership. Reaction was swift and explosive. > Some people were outraged, claiming he had misused the list and their > information. The list shows that majority of frequent posters were from one > Faculty, leading some to state that this member, from the other faculty, > was really trying to demonstrate that their opinions, almost all critical > of the university administration, were overrepresented. Others expressed > fear that this information could be forwarded on to the Administration (the > member is apparently tight with the Acting VPA) and then used to shape the > next round of > lay offs (ie get rid of the "trouble makers.") Still others thought there > was nothing wrong with sharing such "data", some suggesting that it could > be useful information to encourage more diverse opinion. > > My feeling that it is completely unethical though because it is not formal > research, it probably falls outside the purview of the Research Ethics > Board. Still it does name names--had he just presented aggregated data > grouped by Faculty, I don't think anyone would have said much of anything. > It would be like me collecting data on everyone's posts here and then > presenting my findings with your names here out of the blue > > > Interested in your thoughts. > > > Rhiannon > > > Rhiannon Bury > Associate Professor > Women's and Gender Studies > Athabasca University > rbury at athabascau.ca > > @television2pt0 > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > From charles.ess at gmail.com Thu May 2 12:51:12 2013 From: charles.ess at gmail.com (Charles Ess) Date: Thu, 02 May 2013 21:51:12 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] ethics and listservs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: This response makes a technical sense - especially if there were no clear terms of service / ethical requirements, etc. that needed to be agreed to before an account was given. But if there were such a ToS, then it might contain provisions that would apply one way or another? Moreover, the AoIR guidelines (in both 2002 and 2012) point to the importance of researchers taking into consideration the _sensitivity_ of information and whether or not release of sensitive information would possibly / likely result in harm. In general, the greater likelihood of harm, the more the burden lies on the researcher to ensure protection of anonymity, etc. What's interesting to me, after more than a decade of reading various ethical sections in diverse research reports, dissertations, etc. are the number of times researchers will in fact "go the extra mile" (a good Samaritan ethics) to do what they believe / feel / think to be the right thing - protecting their subjects from disclosure of potentially damaging information - even where extant policies and practices make no such requirement. FWIW: based on that reading and affiliated discussions with scores of researchers from a variety of cultures and traditions - I think it fair to say most of them would _not_ do something like this as so very likely to result in serious damage to those named, etc. A more minimalist approach - intended as a descriptive, not normative statement - might go along the lines suggested here; but again, there might be one or more statements in a ToS that would shed important light on that. But finally, it seems clear that this is not "research" in the sense we are usually interested in and that would thus fall under the guidelines and suggestions of the relevant research communities. Rather, it seems clearly politically motivated and designed to serve as a form of intimidation, which in my tiny little mind disqualifies it as research in the sense I'm interested in and that the research communities we have worked with are concerned with. Whether or not the collector of the data has a right to disseminate this sort of data - e.g., in the name of freedom of speech - is another complication. Hope these are useful reflections in some way or another. - charles Associate Professor in Media Studies Department of Media and Communication Director, Centre for Research on Media Innovations University of Oslo P.O. Box 1093 Blindern NO-0317 Oslo Norway email: charles.ess at media.uio.no On 02.05.13 20:59, "Joshua Treadway" wrote: > I don't see the problem with it. It is a compilation of data you all had > access to and he released that data back to the same group. If he didn't > release the names, it would be of no difficulty to figure out the outliers > as, again, you all have access to the same source data. > > If all of you were in sitting in a circle, taking turns talking. And this > 'researcher' took notes and said that 'Prof. Smith' is over representing > his argument and I have the statistics, would that be objectionable? > > Again, it wasn't privileged information and from your information it wasn't > released to outside sources. All it did was add clarity to the arguments > represented (and pseudonyms in this case would offer no real protection, > only weaken data). > > I think is situation sheds light on a problem with > Computer-Mediated-Communications, there is often a false sense of distance > between the speakers and the computer acts as shield when that simply is > not the case. > > > On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 12:38 PM, Rhiannon Bury wrote: > >> Hi everyone >> >> There has been a development on an internal Faculty Association listserv >> at my university that I thought those of you interested in research ethics >> may wish to advise or comment on. >> >> >> First a little background. The provincial government hasdpromised to >> increase funding by 2% to postsecondary educaton sector last year. They >> reneged on that promise and slashed the budget by 7%. Our university >> Administration responded almost instantly by using a "financial stringency" >> clause in our collective agreement, giving lay off notices to about 25 >> academic and professional staff, included tenured faculty. We are a small >> university and so we have a faculty association listserv set up >> specifically for discussion of university issues. Tensions as you can >> imagine are running high and the listserv is very active. Like at most >> universities, there is tension between the Faculty of Business and the >> Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences. >> >> >> Yesterday one member sent around an spreadsheet with what he described as >> "research" on how representative the discussion list was of the total >> membership. It included a list of the names of those who had contributed >> and ranked them in terms of the number of posts. He never stated his >> reasons for conducting such "research", although he did say that it is was >> an "internal document" for membership. Reaction was swift and explosive. >> Some people were outraged, claiming he had misused the list and their >> information. The list shows that majority of frequent posters were from one >> Faculty, leading some to state that this member, from the other faculty, >> was really trying to demonstrate that their opinions, almost all critical >> of the university administration, were overrepresented. Others expressed >> fear that this information could be forwarded on to the Administration (the >> member is apparently tight with the Acting VPA) and then used to shape the >> next round of >> lay offs (ie get rid of the "trouble makers.") Still others thought there >> was nothing wrong with sharing such "data", some suggesting that it could >> be useful information to encourage more diverse opinion. >> >> My feeling that it is completely unethical though because it is not formal >> research, it probably falls outside the purview of the Research Ethics >> Board. Still it does name names--had he just presented aggregated data >> grouped by Faculty, I don't think anyone would have said much of anything. >> It would be like me collecting data on everyone's posts here and then >> presenting my findings with your names here out of the blue >> >> >> Interested in your thoughts. >> >> >> Rhiannon >> >> >> Rhiannon Bury >> Associate Professor >> Women's and Gender Studies >> Athabasca University >> rbury at athabascau.ca >> >> @television2pt0 >> _______________________________________________ >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> http://www.aoir.org/ >> > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ From wallace at autistici.org Thu May 2 13:12:57 2013 From: wallace at autistici.org (wallace) Date: Thu, 02 May 2013 22:12:57 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] Fantomton release [FT006] Radarstation 2 Message-ID: <5182C8C9.2050803@autistici.org> Out now!!: the new Fantomton release [FT006] Radarstation 2 Download here for free: http://fantomton.de/ft006-radarstation-2/ The abandoned listening station on the Teufelsberg Berlin has a magical atmosphere. The industrial area with its rusty metal surfaces, broken glass and the unique acoustic in the domes provide a rich repertoire of fascinating sounds which reflect the area?s ambience. We could not resist the attraction of the place and visited it in 2009, equipped with microphones and recording devices. Subsequently the recordings were given to some musicians in order to get different interpretations of the sound material. The goal was to translate the impressions of the place into music. Recently more artists decided to work with our sound material to produce new tracks for this second Radarstation album, thus creating more versatile perspectives of that soundscape. From mumageed at yahoo.com Thu May 2 15:59:58 2013 From: mumageed at yahoo.com (Muhammad Abdul-Mageed) Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 15:59:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Air-L] PhD / Research programs - linguistics and social media In-Reply-To: <51826F09.7000300@gmail.com> References: <81F82700-1D56-45EC-97B3-0E3BAFA5164E@mgovernment.org> <51826F09.7000300@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1367535598.80398.YahooMailNeo@web140702.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Dear Kushchu, Like Ilana, I also recommend our very own Indiana University, Bloomington. Prof. Susan Herring, the former editor of JCMC and the current editor of Language at Internet, is based in IU's School of Library and Information Science (soon to become the Department of Information and Library Science as we merge with the School of Informatics and Computing) and also the Department of Linguistics. We also have a host of?scholars working within the area of social informatics, etc. IU also has the Rob Kling Center for Social Informatics. We have courses on Computer-Mediated Communication, Computer-Mediated Discourse Analysis, Gender and Computerization, Social Media Mining, and Content Analysis for the World Wide Web. You could checkProf. Herring's as well as my own Webpages (especially the research and teaching sections of each) for more about these courses. I also recommend checking other courses we have. In linguistics, we also have faculty interested in overlapping areas.? Please feel free to email me off the list at "mabdulma at indiana.edu" should you need further related information. Good luck with your search! Cheers, Muhammad --? Muhammad Abdul-Mageed,? Adjunct Lecturer and Ph.D. Candidate, School of Library and Information Science & Department of Linguistics Indiana University, Bloomington Mailing Address: School of Library and Information Science? 10th St. and Jordan Ave.? Indiana University? Bloomington, IN 47405-3907 USA mabdulma at indiana.edu,?mageed at ccls.columbia.edu http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~mabdulma "You can't lead the people, if you don't love the people.? You can't save the people, if you don't serve the people."?~ Cornel West ________________________________ From: Ilana Gershon To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2013 9:50:01 AM Subject: Re: [Air-L] PhD / Research programs - linguistics and social media Dear Kushchu, Indiana University would also be a good place to study this -- either in the linguistics department or in the Dept. of Communication and Culture. Regards, Ilana Ilana Gershon Dept. of Communication and Culture Indiana University On 5/2/2013 8:18 AM, Prof. I. Kushchu wrote: > Dear Colleagues > > A bright student, (a linguist by training and currently completing a Masters thesis about socio-linguistics approaches to the use of language on Facebook),? asked me for research and PhD programs for further studies -Not very much related to my expertise, unfortunately. > > Any suggestions for such programs in the intersection of linguistics and social media? > > Bests wishes > Kushchu > > ------- > IBRAHIM KUSHCHU, MBA, MSC., PHD > Associate Professor and Founding Director, > Mobile Government Consortium International, UK > http://www.mgovernment.org > ik at mgovernment.org >? +44 1273 777853 > > - Visit mLife Conferences http://www.m4life.org > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > . > _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From bury417 at yahoo.ca Thu May 2 19:44:06 2013 From: bury417 at yahoo.ca (Rhiannon Bury) Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 19:44:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Air-L] ethics and listservs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1367549046.42439.YahooMailNeo@web140602.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Thanks to both of you for your thoughts. This does help clarify in my mind thatsharing of the so-called "data" was a political and ideological strategy done under theguise of "objective research." The Faculty union who administers the listserv stated later today that they will be discussing a moderation policy at the next Executive meeting. They recognize freedom of speech and open debate need to be balanced with the? desire for an inclusive community and safe space and that such a balance? is a difficult one to strike. Rhiannon ________________________________ From: Charles Ess To: Joshua Treadway ; Rhiannon Bury ; Air list Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2013 1:51:12 PM Subject: Re: [Air-L] ethics and listservs This response makes a technical sense - especially if there were no clear terms of service / ethical requirements, etc. that needed to be agreed to before an account was given. But if there were such a ToS, then it might contain provisions that would apply one way or another? Moreover, the AoIR guidelines (in both 2002 and 2012) point to the importance of researchers taking into consideration the _sensitivity_ of information and whether or not release of sensitive information would possibly / likely result in harm.? In general, the greater likelihood of harm, the more the burden lies on the researcher to ensure protection of anonymity, etc. What's interesting to me, after more than a decade of reading various ethical sections in diverse research reports, dissertations, etc. are the number of times researchers will in fact "go the extra mile" (a good Samaritan ethics) to do what they believe / feel / think to be the right thing - protecting their subjects from disclosure of potentially damaging information - even where extant policies and practices make no such requirement.? FWIW: based on that reading and affiliated discussions with scores of researchers from a variety of cultures and traditions - I think it fair to say most of them would _not_ do something like this as so very likely to result in serious damage to those named, etc. A more minimalist approach - intended as a descriptive, not normative statement - might go along the lines suggested here; but again, there might be one or more statements in a ToS that would shed important light on that. But finally, it seems clear that this is not "research" in the sense we are usually interested in and that would thus fall under the guidelines and suggestions of the relevant research communities.? Rather, it seems clearly politically motivated and designed to serve as a form of intimidation, which in my tiny little mind disqualifies it as research in the sense I'm interested in and that the research communities we have worked with are concerned with. Whether or not the collector of the data has a right to disseminate this sort of data - e.g., in the name of freedom of speech - is another complication. Hope these are useful reflections in some way or another. - charles Associate Professor in Media Studies Department of Media and Communication Director, Centre for Research on Media Innovations University of Oslo P.O. Box 1093 Blindern NO-0317 Oslo Norway email: charles.ess at media.uio.no On 02.05.13 20:59, "Joshua Treadway" wrote: > I don't see the problem with it. It is a compilation of data you all had > access to and he released that data back to the same group. If he didn't > release the names, it would be of no difficulty to figure out the outliers > as, again, you all have access to the same source data. > > If all of you were in sitting in a circle, taking turns talking. And this > 'researcher' took notes and said that 'Prof. Smith' is over representing > his argument and I have the statistics, would that be objectionable? > > Again, it wasn't privileged information and from your information it wasn't > released to outside sources. All it did was add clarity to the arguments > represented (and pseudonyms in this case would offer no real protection, > only weaken data). > > I think is situation sheds light on a problem with > Computer-Mediated-Communications, there is often a false sense of distance > between the speakers and the computer acts as shield when that simply is > not the case. > > > On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 12:38 PM, Rhiannon Bury wrote: > >> Hi everyone >> >> There has been a? development on an internal Faculty Association listserv >> at my university that I thought those of you interested in research ethics >> may wish to advise or comment on. >> >> >> First a little background. The provincial government hasdpromised to >> increase funding by 2% to postsecondary educaton sector last year. They >> reneged on that promise and slashed the budget by 7%. Our university >> Administration responded almost instantly by using a "financial stringency" >> clause in our collective agreement, giving lay off notices to about 25 >> academic and professional staff, included tenured faculty. We are a small >> university and so we have a faculty association listserv set up >> specifically for discussion of university issues. Tensions as you can >> imagine are running high and the listserv is very active. Like at most >> universities, there is tension between the Faculty of Business and the >> Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences. >> >> >> Yesterday one member sent around an spreadsheet with what he described as >> "research" on how representative the discussion list was of the total >> membership. It included a list of the names of those who had contributed >> and ranked them in terms of the number of posts. He never stated his >> reasons for conducting such "research", although he did say that it is was >> an "internal document" for membership. Reaction was swift and explosive. >> Some people were outraged, claiming he had misused the list and their >> information. The list shows that majority of frequent posters were from one >> Faculty, leading some to state that this member, from the other faculty, >> was really trying to demonstrate that their opinions, almost all critical >> of the university administration, were overrepresented. Others expressed >> fear that this information could be forwarded on to the Administration (the >> member is apparently tight with the Acting VPA) and then used to shape the >> next round of >>? lay offs (ie get rid of the "trouble makers.") Still others thought there >> was nothing wrong with sharing such "data", some suggesting that it could >> be useful information to encourage more diverse opinion. >> >> My feeling that it is completely unethical though because it is not formal >> research, it probably falls outside the purview of the Research Ethics >> Board. Still it does name names--had he just presented aggregated data >> grouped by Faculty, I don't think anyone would have said much of anything. >> It would be like me collecting data on everyone's posts here and then >> presenting my findings with your names here out of the blue >> >> >> Interested in your thoughts. >> >> >> Rhiannon >> >> >> Rhiannon Bury >> Associate Professor >> Women's and Gender Studies >> Athabasca University >> rbury at athabascau.ca >> >> @television2pt0 >> _______________________________________________ >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> http://www.aoir.org/ >> > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ From ekoltsova at hse.ru Thu May 2 23:50:03 2013 From: ekoltsova at hse.ru (=?koi8-r?B?68/M2MPP18Eg5czFzsEg4NLYxdfOwQ==?=) Date: Fri, 3 May 2013 06:50:03 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] HA: Summer schools in quantitative Internet research? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Demet, try this one: http://sna.hse.ru/2013 International Summer School 2013 "Social Network Analysis: Internet Research". Best, Olessia Koltsova ________________________________________ ??: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] ?? ????? dem [demy.mail at gmail.com] ??????????: 2 ??? 2013 ?. 16:06 ????: air-l at listserv.aoir.org ????: [Air-L] Summer schools in quantitative Internet research? Dear AOIRists, I am looking to apply to a summer research program for 2013 in Internet research, my background is in media studies (I have graduated with an MA in New Media in 2012) and Computer Science (currently studying towards a Bsc) and my main research interests are: online social networks, studying online politics with online data, network science, machine learning, data mining and data analysis. If you know of any summer schools (or research projects/groups at universities) that are currently accepting applications in these areas, then please let me know! Thank you! Best, Demet Dagdelen _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From kdancheva at gmail.com Fri May 3 00:19:34 2013 From: kdancheva at gmail.com (Kalina Dancheva) Date: Fri, 3 May 2013 09:19:34 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] Summer schools in quantitative Internet research? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Demet, >From experience, I can recommend the Digital Methods Initiative in Amsterdam University : https://wiki.digitalmethods.net/Dmi/SummerSchool2013 . It's a great opportunity for exploring online phenomena with specially developed research tools. You can check the blogposts on the site from previous years in order to get an idea about the kind of research that has been done. Lots of success, Kalina 2013/5/2 dem > Dear AOIRists, > > I am looking to apply to a summer research program for 2013 in Internet > research, my background is in media studies (I have graduated with an MA in > New Media in 2012) and Computer Science (currently studying towards a Bsc) > and my main research interests are: online social networks, studying online > politics with online data, network science, machine learning, data mining > and data analysis. > > If you know of any summer schools (or research projects/groups at > universities) that are currently accepting applications in these areas, > then please let me know! > > Thank you! > > Best, > Demet Dagdelen > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Kalina Dancheva | MA student in New media and Digital Culture at Utrecht University *[E]* kdancheva at gmail.com *[F]* facebook.com/kalina.dan *[T]* @kalinadan *[L]* linkedin.com/in/kalinadancheva From sian.bayne at ed.ac.uk Fri May 3 01:54:20 2013 From: sian.bayne at ed.ac.uk (Sian Bayne) Date: Fri, 03 May 2013 09:54:20 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Two post-doctoral Fellowships in Digital Humanities at Edinburgh University Message-ID: <51837B3C.20608@ed.ac.uk> Applications are invited for two postdoctoral fellowships in digital humanities to be held at the Institute for Advanced Studies in the Humanities, The University of Edinburgh from 1 September 2013 to 30 April 2014. The fellowships are being funded by the College of Humanities and Social Science and are to be focused on any aspect of Digital Humanities research. Applicants should be scholars at an early stage of their career who have completed their doctorate within the last three years. A bursary of ?10k will be offered to each Fellow and office accommodation will be provided within the Institute. The fellows will be expected to make contact with others in the College working in this area, and to arrange at least one seminar or workshop during the fellowship. They will also contribute to the planning and organisation of a digital humanities conference for the College in Spring 2014. We warmly welcome applications from both within and beyond the University of Edinburgh. Closing date for applications is 3 June 2013. http://www.iash.ed.ac.uk/dighums.html -- Dr Sian Bayne Associate Dean (digital scholarship) College of Humanities and Social Science The University of Edinburgh sian.bayne at ed.ac.uk +44 (0)131 651 6337 The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336. From maxigas at anargeek.net Fri May 3 10:07:04 2013 From: maxigas at anargeek.net (maxigas) Date: Fri, 03 May 2013 19:07:04 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [Air-L] ethics and listservs In-Reply-To: <1367512736.98490.YahooMailNeo@web140603.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> References: <1367512736.98490.YahooMailNeo@web140603.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20130503.190704.694912677201902281.maxigas@anargeek.net> From: Rhiannon Bury Subject: [Air-L] ethics and listservs Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 09:38:56 -0700 (PDT) > My feeling that it is completely unethical though because it is not > formal research, it probably falls outside the purview of the > Research Ethics Board. Still it does name names--had he just > presented aggregated data grouped by Faculty, I don't think anyone > would have said much of anything.? It would be like me collecting > data on everyone's posts here and then presenting my findings with > your names here out of the blue integrity of data was not harmed, no data breach happened -- before and after the event the same people can access the same data. if the person released findings outside the mailing list, that could be problematic. but just to show what can be done with the data that all members have access to is a good thing. it's also something that can be called research, although not professional. if some people find the results surprising, it could have a positive educational effect. if you don't like that the data you produce can be digested in this way, you should refine your data handling / security / etc. policies, not shoot the messenger! ps: maybe you are trying to use 'ethics' here just to disqualify the arguments of another person in a debate? (just a hunch.) maxigas, kiberpunk When people say ?society? i usually ask myself who the fuck is this society. ~ Angelo Lucia -- * * |metatron * * |research * * |unit FA00 8129 13E9 2617 C614 0901 7879 63BC 287E D166 From christian.fuchs at uti.at Fri May 3 10:11:51 2013 From: christian.fuchs at uti.at (Christian Fuchs) Date: Fri, 03 May 2013 18:11:51 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Website of the EU COST Action Dynamics of Virtual Work Message-ID: <5183EFD7.6080703@uti.at> We are proud to announce the launch the website of the EU COST Action "Dynamics of Virtual Work": http://dynamicsofvirtualwork.com/ The network is funded by COST: European Cooperation in Science and Technology and led by the University of Hertfordshire. With 28 European countries and two non-European ones already signed up, this COST Action is already marking out and consolidating an important new field of research on the dynamics of virtual work, bringing together scholars from different disciplinary backgrounds. Over the next four years, we will be holding a series of conferences and workshops http://dynamicsofvirtualwork.com/events/ addressed by leading international experts. Training workshops will be held for PhD students and new researchers who can apply for funding to attend. New researchers can also apply for grants to visit institutions in other signed-up COST countries: http://dynamicsofvirtualwork.com/new-researchers/ We will also be organising workshops and briefings for policymakers: http://dynamicsofvirtualwork.com/policy/ News of forthcoming events: http://dynamicsofvirtualwork.com/events/ News on new publications: http://dynamicsofvirtualwork.com/documents/ Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/costis1202 -- Christian Fuchs Professor of Social Media University of Westminster Communication and Media Research Institute c.fuchs at westminster.ac.uk Tel +44 (0) 20 7911 5000-extension 67380 http://fuchs.uti.at From amarkham at gmail.com Fri May 3 13:13:19 2013 From: amarkham at gmail.com (Annette Markham) Date: Fri, 3 May 2013 15:13:19 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] submission deadline extension: IR14 doctoral colloquium Message-ID: Hi All, Apparently we had some contradictory information on the AOIR website for the submission deadline for the doctoral colloquium. So we've decided to extend the deadline to *May 31, 2013.* Sorry for any confusion, annette * * * Announcing the Doctoral Colloquium at the IR14.0 conference in Denver, October 23, 2013 *Submission deadline: Friday, May 31, 2013 ** * * In keeping with its commitment to students? scholarship in the Association of Internet Researchers, the IR14.0 Doctoral Colloquium offers PhD students working in internet research or a related field a special forum on October 23, 2013. For many years, this pre-conference event has provided students with the opportunity to spend some hours with senior scholars talking about their research projects, addressing methodological and theoretical challenges, and getting informal advice on juggling the multiple pressures associated with job searching, publishing, and finishing the dissertation. This year, Annette Markham will coordinate the Doctoral Colloquium and will be joined by colleagues including: Tom Boellstorf, University of California, Irvine Steve Jones, University of Illinois at Chicago Mia Consalvo, Concordia University Charles Ess, University of Oslo Alice Marwick, Fordham University Michele Jackson, University of Colorado, Boulder Adrienne Russell, University of Denver Lori Kendall, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Klaus Bruhn Jensen, University of Copenhagen Michael Zimmer, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee ....Others to be announced later. Details forthcoming on the IR14 conference website: http://ir14.aoir.org/ SUBMISSION/PARTICIPATION If you're an interested student, you should prepare a brief application including: a) a two-page summary of your research. This should provide a context for the research, describe the methods being used, the progress to date, and primary concerns and issues; and b) A brief statement indicating why you want to participate in this doctoral colloquium and what you?d like to get out of it. Submission format: Single PDF document Submission address: amarkham at gmail.com *Submission deadline: Friday, May 31, 2013 * Applicants will be notified of acceptance by July 1, 2013. Successful applicants will be asked to prepare a four-page paper on their research and the issues they wish to discuss by August 31, 2013. Feel free to contact me with questions, annette ****************************** Annette N. Markham, Ph.D. Guest Professor, Department of Informatics, Ume? University, Sweden Guest and Affiliate Professor, School of Communication, Loyola University, Chicago amarkham at gmail.com http://markham.internetinquiry.org/ Twitter: annettemarkham From ptimusk at sympatico.ca Sat May 4 10:55:41 2013 From: ptimusk at sympatico.ca (Peter Timusk) Date: Sat, 4 May 2013 13:55:41 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Readings on Data Brokers Message-ID: I am being asked to become a "Data Broker" in government. This seems an old mid 1990's term yet I see nothing in the list archive around this concept or role. While I know service behaviour I am looking to read something in the nature of a business book or deeper study with a social science or technical foundation that can help me move along to get into this role. The boss asking this is also a former Internet Studies scholar so he may be lifting this term "Data Broker" from the 1990's. I work in a national statistics agency where sometimes I write about internet use statistics but this is only a sometime job that I am allowed because I have read the work of many A o IR scholars. My real in demand skills are statistical programming not my knowledge of the Internet. So do you have any references to studies talking about "Data Brokers"? From netcrit at gmail.com Sat May 4 17:07:12 2013 From: netcrit at gmail.com (Matthew Allen) Date: Sun, 5 May 2013 10:07:12 +1000 Subject: [Air-L] Internet studies news from Curtin University Message-ID: Dear all While I am now Head of School and Professor of Internet Studies, School of communication and creative arts, Deakin University, I remain in touch with my former colleagues at Curtin University in the Department of Internet Studies. The information on this website about the future of the department's course might be of interest to AOIR members ... http://savenetstudies.net Thanks Matthew Allen -- Sent from Gmail Mobile From jhunsinger at wlu.ca Sat May 4 20:14:37 2013 From: jhunsinger at wlu.ca (Jeremy hunsinger) Date: Sat, 4 May 2013 22:14:37 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Internet studies news from Curtin University In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: one word: crap! my official letter on letterhead will be in the mail monday. On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Matthew Allen wrote: > Dear all > > While I am now Head of School and Professor of Internet Studies, School > of communication and creative arts, Deakin University, I remain in touch > with my former colleagues at Curtin University in the Department of > Internet Studies. > > The information on this website about the future of the department's course > might be of interest to AOIR members ... http://savenetstudies.net > > Thanks > Matthew Allen > > > -- > Sent from Gmail Mobile > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > From stephanie.betz at anu.edu.au Sun May 5 16:49:26 2013 From: stephanie.betz at anu.edu.au (Stephanie Betz) Date: Sun, 5 May 2013 23:49:26 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Keeping and Cataloging Online and Multi-Media Material Message-ID: <13DB92E31E010342AC2EE6CE9FD87EB20F212917@HKXPRD0610MB389.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com> Good morning everyone, I'm hoping to draw from the brains trust of internet researchers some tips for keeping and cataloging vast quantities of online multi-media materials. I'm doing a project that involves looking at Tumblr content, and am having difficulties coming up with an efficient and useful method for storing and retrieving material for later content analysis. Does anyone have any tried and true methods for content storage and retrieval? High or low-tech, I'm open to both - just some way to make sure I'm across this material, and will be able to retrieve it when I desperately need an example during my writing phase. Thanks all, Stephanie Betz. --- Stephanie Betz PhD Candidate, Anthropology School of Archaeology & Anthropology College of Arts and Social Sciences The Australian National University A.D. Hope Building #14 Canberra, ACT 0200 AUSTRALIA From sanaz.raji at gmail.com Sun May 5 17:13:45 2013 From: sanaz.raji at gmail.com (Sanaz Raji) Date: Mon, 6 May 2013 01:13:45 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Internet studies news from Curtin University In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Jeremy: I hope that you can also endorse this petition *"Racism is a part of everyday life in higher education institutions in Britain. We face a future where university racisms are likely to be highly durable protean and impervious to intervention."* -- From Institutional Racism in Higher Education by Ian Law, Deborah Phillips and Laura Turney Please sign and share: https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/vice-chancellor-university-of-l eeds-stop-treating-international-students-like-2nd-class-citizens-2Thank you. Sanaz On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 4:14 AM, Jeremy hunsinger wrote: > one word: crap! > > my official letter on letterhead will be in the mail monday. > > > On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Matthew Allen wrote: > > > Dear all > > > > While I am now Head of School and Professor of Internet Studies, School > > of communication and creative arts, Deakin University, I remain in touch > > with my former colleagues at Curtin University in the Department of > > Internet Studies. > > > > The information on this website about the future of the department's > course > > might be of interest to AOIR members ... http://savenetstudies.net > > > > Thanks > > Matthew Allen > > > > > > -- > > Sent from Gmail Mobile > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Sanaz Raji +44 (0) 780 7873 550 Web: http://leeds.academia.edu/SanazRaji From marc at codeforamerica.org Mon May 6 13:44:36 2013 From: marc at codeforamerica.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Marc_H=E9bert?=) Date: Mon, 6 May 2013 13:44:36 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] Data Brokering Message-ID: Hello Peter, Could you give us more details about your new role as a "data broker?" What are the expectations of your manager in this position? Are you being asked to look for patterns in the data to inform policy implementation? If so, then will you also be tasked to think about how these statistical data integrate/could be informed by more qualitative data? Let me know if these sorts of reports overlap with your new position/responsibilities. Kind regards, Marc --------------------- Marc Hebert, Ph.D. UX/Ethnographic Researcher 2013 Code for America Fellow Collaborating with the City & County of San Francisco On May 4, 2013, at 3:00 PM, air-l-request at listserv.aoir.org wrote: > Send Air-L mailing list submissions to > air-l at listserv.aoir.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > air-l-request at listserv.aoir.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > air-l-owner at listserv.aoir.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Air-L digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Readings on Data Brokers (Peter Timusk) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sat, 4 May 2013 13:55:41 -0400 > From: Peter Timusk > To: "aoir list" > Subject: [Air-L] Readings on Data Brokers > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > I am being asked to become a "Data Broker" in government. This seems an old > mid 1990's term yet I see nothing in the list archive around this concept or > role. While I know service behaviour I am looking to read something in the > nature of a business book or deeper study with a social science or technical > foundation that can help me move along to get into this role. The boss > asking this is also a former Internet Studies scholar so he may be lifting > this term "Data Broker" from the 1990's. I work in a national statistics > agency where sometimes I write about internet use statistics but this is > only a sometime job that I am allowed because I have read the work of many A > o IR scholars. My real in demand skills are statistical programming not my > knowledge of the Internet. > > > > > > So do you have any references to studies talking about "Data Brokers"? > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > > End of Air-L Digest, Vol 106, Issue 4 > ************************************* From Noella.Edelmann at donau-uni.ac.at Tue May 7 01:40:32 2013 From: Noella.Edelmann at donau-uni.ac.at (Noella Edelmann) Date: Tue, 07 May 2013 10:40:32 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government 22-24 May 2013, Danube University Krems, Austria Message-ID: <5188DA20020000DA000470EA@gwgwia.donau-uni.ac.at> Apologies for Cross-posting! ****************************** Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government 22-24 May 2013, Danube University Krems, Austria! Hope to see you at the CeDEM13! We have lots of wonderful presentations, workshops, reflections, networking opportunities, a fab social dinner on 22. May...... .... and we proudly present the following keynotes: - John Carlo Bertot from the University of Maryland - Karine Nahon from the University of Washington - Beth Noveck from New York University and MIT, and former United States Deputy Chief Technology Officer. - Tiago Peixoto from the World Bank, Washington For the programme and registration please go to: http://www.amiando.com/cedem.html Or see the programme here: http://www.donau-uni.ac.at/imperia/md/content/department/gpa/zeg/dokumente/cedem13_programv0.1_3.pdf Find us on facebook: https://www.facebook.com/120470071343471/posts/156758537834321 Kind regards Noella Noella Edelmann BA, MSc, MAS Researcher CeDEM13 Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government www.donau-uni.ac.at/cedem JeDEM eJournal of eDemocracy and Open Government www.jedem.org Digital Government Blog http://digitalgovernment.wordpress.com/ Centre for E-Government Danube University Krems Dr.-Karl-Dorrek-Strasse 30 3500 Krems Austria www.donau-uni.ac.at/egov From irsh at itu.dk Tue May 7 04:50:42 2013 From: irsh at itu.dk (Irina Shklovski) Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 11:50:42 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] 2nd CFP: CSCW 2014, Papers due May 31st Message-ID: [Please forward to those who might be interested -- Apologies for cross-posting] CALL FOR PAPERS, COMPUTER-SUPPORTED COOPERATIVE WORK AND SOCIAL COMPUTING 2014 (CSCW 2014) Baltimore, MD, Feb 15-19, 2014 http://cscw.acm.org CSCW is an international and interdisciplinary conference focused on how technology intersects with social practices. To support diverse and high-quality contributions, CSCW employs a two-phase review process and does not impose an arbitrary length limit on submissions. IMPORTANT DATES * May 31, 5:00pm PDT, 2013: Submission due * July 6: First-round notification (Revise & Resubmit or Reject) * July 26, 5:00pm PDT: Revised papers due * August 23: Final notifications We invite submissions that detail existing practices or inform the design or deployment of systems or introduce novel systems, interaction techniques, or algorithms. The scope of CSCW includes, but is not limited to, social computing and social media, technologically-enabled or enhanced communication, education technologies, crowdsourcing, multi-user input technologies, collaboration, information sharing, and coordination. It includes socio-technical activities at work, in the home, in education, in healthcare, in the arts, for socializing and for entertainment. New results or new ways of thinking about, studying or supporting shared activities can be in these and related areas: - Social and crowd computing. Studies, theories, designs, mechanisms, systems, and/or infrastructures addressing social media, social networking, user-generated content, wikis, blogs, online gaming, crowdsourcing, collective intelligence, virtual worlds, collaborative information seeking, etc. - System design. Hardware, architectures, infrastructures, interaction design, technical foundations, algorithms, and/or toolkits that enable the building of new social and collaborative systems and experiences. - Theories and models. Critical analysis or organizing theory with clear relevance to the design or study of social and collaborative systems. - Empirical investigations. Findings, guidelines, and/or ethnographic studies relating to technologies, practices, or use of communication, collaboration, and social technologies. - Methodologies and tools. Novel methods or combinations of approaches and tools used in building systems or studying their use. - Domain-specific social and collaborative applications. Including for healthcare, transportation, gaming (for enjoyment or productivity), ICT4D, sustainability, education, accessibility, collective intelligence, global collaboration, or other domains. - Collaboration systems based on emerging technologies. Mobile and ubiquitous computing, game engines, virtual worlds, multi-touch technologies, novel display technologies, vision and gesture recognition systems, big data infrastructures, MOOCs, crowd labor markets, SNSes, sensor-based environments, etc. - Crossing boundaries. Studies, prototypes, or other investigations that explore interactions across disciplines, distance, languages, generations, and cultures, to help better understand how to transcend social, temporal, and/or spatial boundaries. Papers should detail original research contributions. Papers must report new research results that represent a contribution to the field. They must provide sufficient details and support for their results and conclusions. They must cite relevant published research or experience, highlight novel aspects of the submission, and identify the most significant contributions. Evaluation is on the basis of originality, significance, quality of research, quality of writing, and contribution to conference program diversity. SUBMISSIONS Paper submissions must be made via the Precision Conference System. A link to the submission site will be made available by early May. Papers will be presented at the CSCW conference and will be included in the conference proceedings archived in the ACM Digital Library. CSCW does not accept submissions that were published previously in formally reviewed publications or that are currently submitted elsewhere. Send queries about Paper submissions to papers2014 at cscw.acm.org. ============================================== Irina Shklovski Associate Professor Interaction Design Research Group (ID) Digital Media & Communication Research Group (DMC) IT University of Copenhagen Rued Langgaards Vej, 7 2300, K?benhavn S. Danmark http://www.itu.dk/people/irsh/ ============================================== From kontakt at renekoenig.eu Tue May 7 07:38:22 2013 From: kontakt at renekoenig.eu (=?UTF-8?B?UmVuw6kgS8O2bmln?=) Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 16:38:22 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] Call for contributions: Society of the Query reader on search, search engines and alternatives Message-ID: <00cf01ce4b30$868b42b0$93a1c810$@renekoenig.eu> Dear colleagues, Please consider contributing to our reader on search (engines). Deadline for abstracts is June 15th, 2013. See below. Best, Ren? Ren? K?nig, Dipl.-Soz. Karlsruhe Institute of Technology Institute for Technology Assessment and Systems Analysis (ITAS) P.O. Box 3640 76021 Karlsruhe Germany Tel.: +49 (0) 721 / 608-22209 Web/Skype: renekoenig.eu Twitter: r_koenig CALL FOR CONTRIBUTIONS Society of the Query Reader See also: http://networkcultures.org/wpmu/query/2013/05/07/call-for-contributions-society-of-the-query-reader/ The INC Reader Series, edited by Geert Lovink, give an overview of the present day research, critique, and artistic practices in a thematic research field at once broad and limited. The set up is multidisciplinary, with academic (humanities, social sciences, software studies etc.), artistic, and activist contributors. Following the success of the previous INC readers we would like to put together an anthology with key texts considering online search and search engines. In parallel with the second Society of the Query conference which will take place in Amsterdam on November 7-8 2013, the Institute of Network Cultures is devoted to produce a reader that brings together actual theory about the foundation and history of search, the economics of search engines, search and education, alternatives, and much more. This publication is edited by Ren? K?nig and Miriam Rasch, and produced by the Institute of Network Cultures in Amsterdam, to be launched early 2014. It will be open access and available in print and various digital formats (see below for information on the INC reader series). POSSIBLE TOPICS Theory and Foundations of Search // Googlization: Mapping Google?s Dominance // Search Engines and Education // Searching Elsewhere: Non-Western Perspectives // Personalization: Testing the Filter Bubble // Regulation in a Globalizing World // Localization as the New Paradigm // Software Matters: Sociotechnical and Algorithmic Cultures // Showcasing Alternative Search Engines WE INVITE: Internet, visual culture and media scholars, researchers, artists, curators, producers, lawyers, engineers, open-source and open-content advocates, activists, conference participants, and others to submit materials and proposals. FORMATS : We welcome interviews, dialogues, essays and articles, images (b/w), email exchanges, manifestos, with a maximum of 8,000 words, but preferably shorter at around 5,000 words. For scope and style, take a look at the previous INC Readers and the style guide (pdf). WANT TO JOIN? Send in your proposal (500 words max.) before June 15th, 2013. You may expect a response before July 15th, 2013. DEADLINE FOR CONTRIBUTIONS: September 15th, 2013. EMAIL TO: Miriam Rasch (publications Institute of Network Cultures) at miriam[at]networkcultures[dot]org MORE INFORMATION Society of the Query: http://networkcultures.org/query INC readers: http://networkcultures.org/publications ABOUT THE READER SERIES The INC reader series are derived from conference contributions and produced by the Institute of Network Cultures in Amsterdam. They are available (for free) in print and pdf; check http://networkcultures.org/publications. INC Reader #8: Geert Lovink and Miriam Rasch (eds), Unlike Us Reader: Social Media Monopolies and Their Alternatives, Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2013. INC Reader #7: Geert Lovink and Nathaniel Tkacz (eds), Critical Point of View: A Wikipedia Reader, Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2011. INC Reader #6: Geert Lovink and Rachel Somers Miles (eds), Video Vortex Reader II: moving images beyond YouTube, Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2011. INC Reader #5: Scott McQuire, Meredith Martin, and Sabine Niederer (eds.), Urban Screens Reader, Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2009. INC Reader #4: Geert Lovink and Sabine Niederer (eds.), Video Vortex Reader: Responses to YouTube, Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2008. INC Reader #3: Geert Lovink and Ned Rossiter (eds.), MyCreativity Reader: A Critique of Creative Industries, Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2007. INC Reader #2: Katrien Jacobs, Marije Janssen and Matteo Pasquinelli (eds.), C?Lick Me: A Netporn Studies Reader, Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2007. INC Reader #1: Geert Lovink and Soenke Zehle (eds.), Incommunicado Reader, Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2005. CONTACT Miriam Rasch Ren? K?nig Publications Institute of Network Cultures ITAS, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology miriam[at]networkcultures[dot]org kontakt[at]renekoenig[dot]eu t: +31 (0)20 595 1865 t: +49 (0)721 608 22209 From ajk407 at nyu.edu Tue May 7 12:29:05 2013 From: ajk407 at nyu.edu (AJ Kelton) Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 15:29:05 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] ELD13 Early Bird Registration Expires Friday Message-ID: The Emerging Learning Design (ELD) Conference is pleased to introduce the nearly two dozen amazing presentations at this year's conference. ELD13 will take place on Friday, June 7th, 2013 here at Montclair State University. Early Bird Pricing is schedule to expire on Friday, May 10th, so take advantage of the lower pricing. http://eld.montclair.edu/registration/ For the full schedule, times, and descriptions, please see http://eld.montclair.edu/schedule/ The titles of our sessions this year are: - Keynote - The Death Of Content:Why Universities and Schools are (and aren?t) being replaced by the Internet by Dr. Christopher Hoadley from New York University - Big Data Thinking and Learning 3.0 as Guides for Online Textbook Development - Choosing Effective Multimedia Simulations for Chemistry Learning - Design Rationale and Implications for Cultural Heritage Gaming: A Case Study of a Jewish Game for Learning - Digital Education, MOOCs and the Specter of the Cyberteacher - Does your institution suffer from dissociative identity disorder? - Emerging Technologies, Education, Exploration ? and Ethics - Etextbook with Google Earth Development: Integrating SOA Technologies for Learning with Research - Making student Wikipedians: Encouraging disruptive scholarly communication - Mindfulness: Emerging Mobile Tools and the Potential to Help Learners - Navigating a Literacy Rich World: Untethering English Language Learners From the Classroom - PowerPoint: The Rules of Engagement - Technology and 21st Century Literacy in a Time of Accountability - The Design of RPGs to Teach Ethics and Empathy - The Scratch Disruption: Video Game Design with Scratch - Virtual Enhancements to Physical Spaces: A QR Code Based Orientation Game - Virtual Instructor ? Student Interaction in an Asynchronous Learning Network - Visualizing American Literature with Pinterest - Where does 3D printing fit into your pedagogical thinking ? Select proceeding will appear in the Journal of Emerging Learning Design ( http://eldj.montclair.edu) scheduled to be published in early 2014. The Inaugural Issue of the ELDJ is online, with two invited articles, one from each of the keynote speakers for ELD11 (Using the Tool Adoption and Alignment Model to Assess Pedagogical Fit of Social Communication Tools by Sarah Smith-Robbins, PhD) and ELD12 (Designing for Technology Enhanced Activity to Support Learning by Joshua A. Danish, PhD.) Visit the ELDJ site and subscribe (URL) to receive an email when new articles and announcements are posted. -- -- ----- AJ Kelton Director of Emerging & Instructional Technology College of Humanities and Social Sciences Montclair State University http://eit.montclair.edu ---------- Emerging Learning Design 2013 http://eld.montclair.edu Twitter: @ELDConf Hashtag: #ELD13 Journal of Emerging Learning Design http://eldj.montclair.edu ---------- From luca.rossi at uniurb.it Tue May 7 15:52:57 2013 From: luca.rossi at uniurb.it (Luca Rossi) Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 18:52:57 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Symposium on Multiple Network Modeling, Analysis and Mining Message-ID: I hope you might find this interesting: Call for participation: Symposium on Multiple Network Modeling, Analysis and Mining DTU - Technical University of Denmark Monday, June 3rd, 2013 Multiple networks have been studied in several disciplines including computer science, physics, social network analysis, statistics and sociology, under various names like multilayer, multiplex, multidimensional, multimodal networks and labeled graphs. The Symposium on Multiple Network Modeling, Analysis and Mining, that will be held as a satellite event of the NetSci conference (the primary conference on Network Science), will provide a detailed view over some recent results and open problems in this field, presented by leading experts, and will consitute a starting point for the emergence of an interdisciplinary community focused on the study of multiple networks. Participation is free, including lunch and coffee-breaks (limited places available: please register ASAP). All the details including the preliminary program are available at: http://multiplenetworks.netsci2013.net -- Luca Rossi LaRiCA - Advanced Communication Laboratory Faculty of Sociology - "Carlo Bo" University, Urbino luca.rossi at uniurb.it T. +39 0722 305726 F. +39 0722 305727 http://larica.uniurb.it/redline From jhuns at vt.edu Tue May 7 18:56:50 2013 From: jhuns at vt.edu (jeremy hunsinger) Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 21:56:50 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Fwd: [cpsr-global] CPSR dissolution and Gary Chapman, Winner of CPSR's Norbert Wiener Award References: Message-ID: Begin forwarded message: > From: Doug Schuler > Subject: [cpsr-global] CPSR dissolution and Gary Chapman, Winner of CPSR's Norbert Wiener Award > Date: May 7, 2013 9:49:57 PM EDT > To: cpsr-global at lists.cpsr.org > Reply-To: cpsr-global at lists.cpsr.org > > > Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility Dissolution and > Gary Chapman, Winner of CPSR's Norbert Wiener Award for Social and Professional Responsibility > > > It is my unenviable task to announce that Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR), a non-profit educational corporation, has been dissolved. > > CPSR was launched in 1981 in Palo Alto, California, to question the computerization of war in the United States via the Strategic Computing Initiative to use artificial intelligence in war, and, soon after, the Strategic Defense Initiative ? ?Star Wars?. Over the years CPSR evolved into a ?big tent? organization that addressed a variety of computer-related areas including workplace issues, privacy, participatory design, freedom of information, community networks, and many others. > > Now, of course, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of organizations and movements that are concerned not only about the misuses of ICT by governments and corporations (and others) but also about trying to develop approaches that help communities work together to address issues related to economic and other inequalities and environmental degradation ? as well as broader issues such as war and peace. > > CPSR to me provided a vital link to important ideas and to inspirational and creative people. These people believed that positive social change was possible and that the use of ICT could play a significant role. For example, in 1993, CPSR developed a document designed to help shape the National Information Infrastructure (NII) program promoted by the Clinton/Gore administration to help guide the evolution of networked digital communication. Through a variety of conferences, workshops and reports, CPSR encouraged conversations about computers and society that went beyond hyperbole and conventional wisdom. > > Although in many ways the issues that CPSR helped publicize have changed forms they generally still remain. The ethical and other issues surrounding the computerization of war, for one thing, have not gone away just because they?re not prominent on the public agenda. CPSR?s original focus on the use of artificial intelligence in ?battle management? etc. and the possibility of launch on warning is probably still pertinent. The advent of ubiquitous and inexpensive drones definitely is. > > Apparently, as many people know, the age of the participatory membership organizations is over ? their numbers are certainly way down ? and we in CPSR had certainly noticed that trend. I personally suspect that this development is not necessarily a good thing. I certainly would welcome another membership organization with CPSR?s Big Tent orientation. > > On the occasion of CPSR?s dissolution we?ve developed two small projects for keeping CPSR?s spirit alive. > > The first is that it would be a good opportunity to catalog the groups and organizations around the world that would be natural allies to CPSR if it still existed. We?ve started this cataloging (see http://www.publicsphereproject.org/civic_organizations) but presumably have only captured a small fraction of these organizations. Please open an account on the Public Sphere Project site and add the information about your organization. > > The second is less concrete but probably no less important. To help the current and future generation of activists as we envision possible futures and interventions, we?d like to put these two related questions forward: What applications of ICT are the most important to human development and sustainability? And, on the other hand, What are the strongest challenges to these applications? Please email me your thoughts on this and I will do my best to compile the thoughts and make them public. > > ********* > > With this note I also want to announce that CPSR?s final Norbert Wiener Award for Social and Professional Responsibility winner is Gary Chapman, who served as CPSR?s first executive director from 1985 to 1992. The award recognizes outstanding contributions for social responsibility in computing technology. Named for Norbert Wiener (1894-1964), who, in addition to a long and active scientific career that brought the word "cybernetics" (and, hence, cyberspace) into the language, was also a leader in assessing the social implications of computerization. Writing in Science (1960) Wiener reminds us that, ?...even when the individual believes that science contributes to the human ends which he has at heart, his belief needs a continual scanning and re-evaluation which is only partly possible. For the individual scientist, even the partial appraisal of the liaison between the man and the historical process requires an imaginative forward glance at history which is difficult, exacting, and only limitedly achievable...We must always exert the full strength of our imagination.? > > Gary who died in 2010, spent nearly three decades working towards peace and social justice as it related to information technology. As Marc Rotenberg of the Electronic Privacy and Information Center (EPIC) stated, Gary ?made many people stop and ask hard questions about technology. Not just ?Is it cool?? but ?Does it make our lives better, or more just? And does it make our world more secure?? ? > > Gary?s technology column, "Digital Nation," was carried in over 200 newspapers and websites. He taught and lectured all over the world, most recently as a guest faculty member at the University of Porto in Porto, Portugal. Since his time at CPSR he had been involved in a multitude of related projects including the International School for Digital Transformation (ISDT) that he and others at the University of Texas convened annually in Porto, Portugal. > > Gary was on the faculty of the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas, Austin. On the local level, he also worked to bridge the digital divide, the gulf between those with access to technology and those without. In 1995, for example, he worked on the successful grant application that led to the establishment of Austin Free-Net (www.austinfree.net), which installed the first public access Internet stations in Austin, and continues today as a national model for bringing digital opportunities to low-income and digitally challenged residents. And in 2010, Gary co-founded Big Gig Austin (www.biggigaustin.org), which anchored the successful community campaign to bring the Google gigabit fiber network to Austin. > > Gary was a principled and untiring advocate for the use of the Internet a tool for collaboration and other means to bring people together. Also, as a former medic with the Army Special Forces, Gary was especially concerned about the uses of computing in warfare. In his articles in the CPSR Newsletter, he warned that ?Automating our ignorance of how to cope with war will produce only more disaster.? With David Bellin he co-edited ?Computers in Battle: Will They Work??, a book on the implications of computer technology in war, and was involved for many years in a rich collaboration with the Pugwash-USPID (Unione Scienziati Per Il Disarmo)-ISODARCO (International School on Disarmament and Research on Conflicts) community in Italy and elsewhere. > > Gary contributed chapters to several books that I was involved with. Most recently, he contributed The Good Life, one of the patterns (publicsphereproject.org/patterns/lv) in Liberating Voices, a book that I wrote (with the help of 85 others). The verbiage from the pattern card abridged from the full text reminds us of Gary's humane values, and serves as an important challenge for all of us: > > People who hope for a better world feel the need for a shared vision of the "good life" that is flexible enough for innumerable individual circumstances but comprehensive enough to unite people in optimistic, deliberate, progressive social change. This shared vision of The Good Life should promote and sustain conviviality and solidarity among people, as well as feelings of individual effectiveness, self-worth and purpose. A shared vision of The Good Life is always adapting; it encompasses suffering, loss and conflict as well as pleasures, reverence and common goals of improvement. An emergent framework for the modern "good life" is based on some form of humanism, particularly pragmatic or civic humanism, with room for a spiritual dimension that does not seek domination. Finally, the environmental crises of the planet require a broad vision of a "good life" that can harmonize human aspirations with natural limits. All this needs to be an ongoing and open-ended "conversation," best suited to small geographic groups that can craft and then live an identity that reflects their vision of a "good life." > > Although this will be CPSR's final Weiner award, the work that Gary and other activists from CPSR and other organizations helped launch over two decades ago is now being carried forward by scores of organizations and thousands of activists all over the world, as digital information and communication systems have assumed such a central location on the world's stage. > > Several projects including a Festschrift or other book project or event related to CPSR and social responsibility have been discussed although no firm plans have been made. > > Gary Chapman was patient but persistent in his pursuit of progressive goals and a better life for all. Sadly, Gary left us before he could see his vision brought to fruition. He'll be missed but we all must push forward with his vision. > > > ********* > > CPSR?s Norbert Wiener Award for Social and Professional Responsibility Winners > > > 2013 - Gary Chapman > For his tireless efforts to promote human values within an increasingly computerized world. > > > 1987 - David Parnas > For his work to promote software reliability and his campaign to raise public awareness of the technical infeasibility of the Strategic Defense Initiative. > > 1988 - Joe Weizenbaum > For his work to promote the human side of his computing, as expressed in his book Computer Power and Human Reason. > > 1989 - Daniel D. McCracken > For his work in the late 1960s to organize computer professionals against the deployment of ABM systems. > > 1990 - Kristen Nygaard > For his pioneering work in Norway to develop "participatory design," which seeks the direct involvement of workers in the development of the computer-based tools they use. > > 1991 - Severo Ornstein and Laura Gould > For their tireless energy to guide CPSR through its early years. > > 1992 - Barbara Simons > For her work on human rights, military funding, and the U.C. Berkeley reentry program for women. > > 1993 - Institute for Global Communication > For using network technology to empower previously disenfranchised individuals and groups working for progressive change. > > 1994 - Antonia Stone > For her work in founding the Playing To Win organization, which has brought computer skills to many people who have long been technologically disadvantaged. > > 1995 - Tom Grundner > For his pioneering work in establishing the Free Net movement, which has provided access to network technology to entire communities who would otherwise be unrepresented. > > 1996 - Phil Zimmermann > Inventor of Pretty Good Privacy (PGP). PGP allows the average person to encode his or her email. Previously, only governments or large corporations could make their email secure. > > 1997 - Peter Neumann > Editor of the RISKS Digest, for his outstanding contributions to the field of Risk and Reliability in Computer Science. Read his Notes on Receiving CPSR's Norbert Wiener Award > > 1998 - The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) > A large open international community of individuals, engaged in the development of new Internet standard specifications, for its tremendously positive technical and other contributions to the evolution and smooth operation of the Internet. > > 1999 - The Free Software & Open Source Movements > This movement profoundly challenges the belief that market mechanisms are always best-suited for unleashing technological innovation. This voluntary and collaborative model for software development is providing a true alternative to proprietary, closed software. > > 2000 - Marc Rotenberg > For his ongoing efforts through CPSR and the Electronic Privacy Information Center to protect the loss of public's privacy through technological innovation. > > 2001 - Nira Schwartz and Theodore Postol > For their courageous efforts to disclose misinformation and falsified test results of the proposed National Missile Defense system. > > 2002 - Karl Auerbach > For pioneering democratic Internet governance. > > 2003 - Mitch Kapor > For being a role model for anyone seeking to succeed in the cut-throat world of high tech business without sacrificing integrity and conscience. > > 2004 - Barry Steinhardt > For being a prominent advocate for privacy and other civil liberties in the face of technologically-oriented threats. > > 2005 - Douglas Engelbart > For being a pioneer of human-computer interface technology, inventor of the mouse, and social-impact visionary. > > 2008 - Bruce Schneier > For his technical achievements and passionate advocacy for privacy, security, and civil liberties. > > > > Douglas Schuler > douglas at publicsphereproject.org > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Public Sphere Project > http://www.publicsphereproject.org/ > > Creating the World Citizen Parliament > http://interactions.acm.org/archive/view/may-june-2013/creating-the-world-citizen-parliament > > Liberating Voices! A Pattern Language for Communication Revolution (project) > http://www.publicsphereproject.org/patterns/lv > > Liberating Voices! A Pattern Language for Communication Revolution (book) > http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=11601 > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > cpsr-global at lists.cpsr.org > To be removed from the list, send any message to: > cpsr-global-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org > > For all list information and functions, see: > http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/cpsr-global Jeremy Hunsinger Communication Studies Wilfrid Laurier University Center for Digital Discourse and Culture Virginia Tech Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. --Pablo Picasso From carmelv at gmail.com Tue May 7 23:36:39 2013 From: carmelv at gmail.com (Carmel Vaisman) Date: Wed, 8 May 2013 09:36:39 +0300 Subject: [Air-L] News websites that allow both anonymous and FB/TW identified comments Message-ID: Dear IRs, I'm working with a colleague on a project of hate vs. support rhetoric in news commentary and we would like to look at both anonymous and identified users. Israeli news websites allow both the old system of anonymous commentary and Facebook identified one and it makes for an interesting comparison, however, it is a challenge finding similar sites in English. We would appreciate any recommendation you have for news websites that allow both sorts of commentary. Thank you, Carmel Vaisman, PhD. The Interdisciplinary Program in the Humanities Tel Aviv University carmell at post.tau.ac.il @carmelva From slavka.karakusheva at gmail.com Wed May 8 08:31:17 2013 From: slavka.karakusheva at gmail.com (Slavka Karakusheva) Date: Wed, 8 May 2013 18:31:17 +0300 Subject: [Air-L] Seminar_BG journal - special issue # 2 Cultural Shortcuts: Popular, Digital, Wonderful, National Message-ID: Dear all, Seminar_BG is an online journal for cultural studies, situated at the borderlines of disciplines such as cultural anthropology, aesthetics, sociology, and media analysis and publishished within the Deprtment of History and Theory of Culture, Sofia University "St. Kliment Ohridski". The new *special issue with selected papers # 2: **Cultural Shortcuts: Popular, Digital, Wonderful, National *(in English) is available online. Weber?s ?steel-hard cage of modernity? (*stahlhartes Geh?use*) seems out of sight today. The very metaphor of steel, so dear to the times of industrialization, seems hopelessly out of date in the age of optic fibre, silicone and flexibility. It is as if the call to *change the world* has mutated into the program to *change communications*, and respectively, at the centre of this second modernity we no longer find the dirty, noisy, majestic steel-plant, but something dreamlike the kindergarten-style offices of Google. To turn away from the real world and concentrate on its representation, on networks, ratings, data bases, avatars, and the like - this tends to bring us back the wonderful. Rigorous taxonomy is replaced by clouds of tags that change their shape whenever you look at them from a different angle; the simplicity of plan and progress - by the infinite task of reflexive self-monitoring; ideological purity ? by emotional complexity. The old coordinates no longer seem operational in this new, gaseous stage of culture. There is no ?high? vs. ?popular?, as there is no legitimate distinction between expertise and amateurism; creation and consumption tend to become indistinguishable, and the separation line between public and private interests is constantly challenged and redefined. That all has become culture seems to be the logical result of moving the centre of interest from the outer world towards culture itself. The present texts have been selected from the three last issues of * Seminar_BG* in an attempt to reflect on the cultural situation through the media lens. Over-production of information, brought about by the expansion of commercial agents, was boosted in the last years even further by the ascent of the interactive Web 2.0. There are no institutions ready to harness the unprecedented flow of cultural content. We do not know who is an author, what is original, and to what extent interaction develops or destroys the work of art. Even traditional figures as doctors or religious leaders find themselves challenged; modern constructs like the nation and political representation ? re-enchanted. The varied research perspectives towards the wonderful world of media-cultures might leave the reader with the question: what if we were in some new, *wired cage* of the second modernity? Ivaylo Ditchev, editor *Content:* - Dessislava Lilova - Literature Online: The Subversive Practices of Fan Fiction - Orlin Spassov - A Change in the Canon: Television and Its Audience as Co-authors - Krassimir Terziev - Maneuvers of the Good Old Aura: The Artwork in the Culture of Convergence - Ivaylo Ditchev - The Culture of Flows: Authors, Users, Pirates - Todor Hristov - Publishing on the Internet and the Abduction of Copyright - Julia Rone - *Fegelein's Views on Folklore * - Mila Mineva - The Importance of Being Enslaved - Galina Goncharova - Providers?Users of Medical Knowledge on the Bulgarian Net - Nikela Daskalova - The Monopoly over Magical Thinking Enjoy the reading! The Seminar_BG Team www: http://www.seminar-bg.eu/ @: seminar_bg at yahoo.com fb: ???????_BG From robert.ackland at anu.edu.au Wed May 8 09:38:47 2013 From: robert.ackland at anu.edu.au (Robert Ackland) Date: Wed, 8 May 2013 16:38:47 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Social Media Analysis course: Sydney 1-5 July In-Reply-To: References: <1367512736.98490.YahooMailNeo@web140603.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <518A7F95.7@anu.edu.au> Dear List, I'm running a course in Social Media Analysis in Sydney, 1-5 July. This course will provide students with an introduction to social media analysis in the context of social research. The course is designed for social researchers interested in social media, and covers methods of accessing and analysing digital trace data from websites, blogsites, Twitter and Facebook. While there is emphasis on social networks (e.g. WWW hyperlink networks, follower networks in Twitter, friendship networks in Facebook), analysing text content from social media is also covered. There will also be an introduction to using Virtual Worlds (e.g. Second Life and Massively Multiplayer Online Games) and online experiments for social research. Analytic approaches include social network analysis and text content analysis. The course also provides practical training in two software tools that can be used for social research using social media data: VOSON (for hyperlink network construction and analysis) and NodeXL (an Excel 2007/2010 template for social media network analysis). You can find out more about the course and how to book here: https://www.acspri.org.au/node/1080 Regards, Rob -- Dr Robert Ackland Associate Professor, Australian Demographic and Social Research Institute, The Australian National University e-mail: robert.ackland at anu.edu.au homepage: https://researchers.anu.edu.au/researchers/ackland-rj project: http://voson.anu.edu.au Information about the Master of Social Research (Social Science of the Internet specialisation): http://adsri.anu.edu.au/graduate-study/msr CRICOS No: 061772F My book Web Social Science (SAGE) will be in bookstores in July -- From lpotts at msu.edu Wed May 8 18:05:04 2013 From: lpotts at msu.edu (Liza Potts) Date: Wed, 8 May 2013 21:05:04 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] SIGDOC Deadline Extension Message-ID: Greetings Fellow AoIR members! We are extending the deadline for SIGDOC 2013 conference submissions (SIGDOC is a special interest group within the Association for Computing Machinery focused on the design of communication). Here are the new dates: June 1: Manuscripts are due. June 30: Acceptance notices go out. If your submission is accepted as-is, you can upload it for publication in the proceedings. Work begins on your conference presentation. July 20: If your submission was accepted pending revisions, the revisions are due. Aug 7: Your final date to upload your manuscript to Sheridan Printing for inclusion in the proceedings. In addition to our usual papers, reports, and poster briefs, this year, we've launched a new kind of submission type: Panels! There are three different panel types, including ones that have full papers and ones that do not. We are trying out this new format to encourage newcomers and those of you who have new research you are ready to talk about, but maybe you haven't baked it into a full paper yet. See more details here: http://sigdoc.acm.org/2013/?page_id=34 Please encourage your colleagues, students, and industry partners to join us at SIGDOC this year. We are planning an awesome conference for you down at East Carolina University. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the conference chairs directly: Michael Albers (albersm at ecu.edu) and Nina Wishbow (nina.wishbow at gmail.com). Best, Liza Vice Chair of SIGDOC _________________________________________ Liza Potts, Ph.D. Michigan State University Director of User Experience Projects, WIDE @ MATRIX Assistant Professor Department of Writing, Rhetoric, & American Cultures 434 Farm Lane (Bessey Hall) Room 291, East Lansing, MI 48824 Gtalk: LKPotts | Skype: LKPotts From mjohns at luther.edu Wed May 8 18:12:07 2013 From: mjohns at luther.edu (Mark D. Johns) Date: Wed, 8 May 2013 20:12:07 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Final Call: Carl J. Couch Internet Research Award 2013 Message-ID: CALL FOR AWARD APPLICATIONS Carl J. Couch Internet Research Award 2013 Sponsored by the Carl Couch Center for Social and Internet Research http://www.cccsir.com/ The Carl Couch Center issues an international call for student-authored papers to be considered for Carl J. Couch Internet Research Award. The Couch Center welcomes both theoretical and empirical papers that apply symbolic interactionist approaches to internet studies. According to basic symbolic interactionist premises, what we understand as self, identity, relationship, and cultural formations are constructed dialogically and interactively. While the works of George H. Mead, Georg Simmel, Erving Goffman and other leading symbolic interactionists have been integral to the study of social interaction, Carl Couch was among the first from this tradition to suggest the importance of engaging in the study of mediated interaction. It is critical that symbolic interactionists move boldly forward, beyond Couch's initial suggestion, to study what has become for many a dominant form of communication in their everyday life. Whether we research identities, emotion, memory, family, work, career, presentations of self, deception, love, loss or other areas, the impact of mediated communication is felt by those interacting within it. As internet-related media continue to influence our everyday interactions--not only with other people but also with technologies, devices, algorithms, platform parameters, and so forth--it becomes crucial for symbolic interactionists to attend to the role of these mediating factors in the interaction process. We encourage any paper that uses a symbolic interactionist approach in internet studies. We also encourage papers that explore the interface between deliberate social interaction and structured (or automated) interactions sponsored or enacted by various technological features, exploring not only how identities, relations, and social formations are negotiated through social interactions, but also how these interactions are mediated further through the use or capacities of various technologies. Papers will be evaluated based on the quality of (1) mastery of symbolic interactionist approaches and concepts, (2) originality, (3) organization, (4) presentation, and (5) advancement of knowledge. Those contemplating entering should note that an interactionist approach demands thoughtful analysis, and not mere description, of social interactions. Evaluation will be administered by a Review Committee of four: Mark D. Johns, Luther College, Decorah, Iowa Jennifer Dunn, Texas Tech University, Lubbock Annette Markham, University of Wisconsin?Milwaukee Lois Ann Scheidt, Indiana University, Bloomington Competition is open to graduate or undergraduate students of all disciplines. Works that are published or accepted for publication are not eligible for award consideration. Entries should be in English and not exceed 30 pages (approximately 7500 words) in length, including references and appendices. Limit of one entry per student per year. The top paper will receive Couch Award to be presented at the 2013 meeting of the Association of Internet Researchers (aoir.org) at the University of Denver. The top paper will be awarded a certificate and a cash prize of $300 US and the author will be invited to present their work at a session of the AoIR conference, October 24-27, 2013 in Denver, Colorado, USA. Candidates should send a copy of their paper, with a 100-word abstract, electronically to Mark Johns at mjohns at luther.edu Application deadline is May 15, 2013. Notification of award will be sent by June 15. Those with questions or comments about Couch Award application, please contact: Mark D. Johns Communication Studies Luther College, Decorah, Iowa Phone: 563-387-1347 E-mail: mjohns at luther.edu From alexleavitt at gmail.com Wed May 8 18:43:08 2013 From: alexleavitt at gmail.com (Alex Leavitt) Date: Wed, 8 May 2013 18:43:08 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] Scales for social media participation akin to "experience"? Message-ID: Hi AoIR-ers! Does anyone know of any scales that measure the "experience" of a user that participates in social media platforms (this could also cover things like older online communities and online MMOs). By experience, I'm talking about familiarity with a platform/community's technical features, social norms, folk history, etc. This might cover things like relative skill on the site, but I'm not interested in use in a general or beginner sense (but perhaps use of advanced features as a marker of being experience). If you email me off-list, I can compile everyone's references. Thanks for the help! Alex --- Alexander Leavitt PhD Student USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism http://alexleavitt.com Twitter: @alexleavitt From gabriella.coleman at mcgill.ca Thu May 9 05:38:01 2013 From: gabriella.coleman at mcgill.ca (Gabriella Coleman) Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 08:38:01 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Fwd: Deadline EXTENDED - May 29: Research Delegations, The Participatory Condition Colloquium (Media@McGill, Nov. 14-16) In-Reply-To: <20211_1368031403_518A80AB_20211_99_12_1499E9B85801D444B8C456DEDBE08C361BD82BE3@exmbx2010-9.campus.MCGILL.CA> References: <20211_1368031403_518A80AB_20211_99_12_1499E9B85801D444B8C456DEDBE08C361BD82BE3@exmbx2010-9.campus.MCGILL.CA> Message-ID: <518B98A9.2050607@mcgill.ca> *** In preparation for The Participatory Condition, an international colloquium we will be hosting on campus and at the Mus?e d'Art Contemporain next November, Media at McGill welcomes expressions of interest to participate in Colloquium Research Delegations from graduate students and postdoctoral scholars in the Dept. of Art History and Communications Studies. You are invited to participate in one of two ways: 1) as a research relegate, heading a team of colleagues assigned to a particular colloquium section 2) as a team member of the research delegation Research delegates and team members will be assigned to one of the following sections: Publics and Participation; Surveillance and Legislation; The Participatory Condition; Gaming; Art and Design As part of their responsibilities, research delegates will: - Put together a team of graduate and postdoctoral researchers who will participate in the delegate's activities for the assigned section. The team can be composed of both AHCS and non-AHCS researchers, primarily at the PhD or postdoctoral level. - Contribute informed postings to the colloquium website, blog and social media sites before, during, and after the colloquium (from c. Oct. 15 to Dec. 10, 2013). - Attend the colloquium in its entirety, and take detailed notes of the assigned sessions. - Pose the first formal question(s) to the panelists during the Q&A session with the public. - Present a critical account of the assigned section in a post-colloquium seminar to be held with fellow team members, research delegates and members of the colloquium committee (early December 2013). - Following the colloquium, research delegates are also invited to submit a text (c. 5000 words), potentially co-authored with their team members, for a peer-reviewed publication on Media at McGill's website. Expressions of interest to become a colloquium research delegate or team member should be sent to tamar.tembeck at mcgill.ca by May 29th, 2013. Please give a first and second choice for the colloquium section to which you would like to be assigned, and specify if you would like to be a research delegate or a delegation team member. If you would like to get involved as research delegate, please include the following in your email: - A short biography (100 words), the title of your research project, and the name of your supervisor(s) - A brief description of how the colloquium relates to your research - A list of potential team members (optional) Up to 5 research delegates will be nominated for the colloquium, and each delegate will be awarded a $250 honorarium. -- Tamar Tembeck, Ph.D. Academic Associate Media at McGill media.mcgill.ca tamar.tembeck at mcgill.ca McGill University Ferrier Building, room 231 840 Dr. Penfield Montreal, QC H3A 0G2 Canada Tel: (514) 398-5003 Fax: (514) 398-8763 Want to be removed from this listserver? Please email Maureen Coote at maureen.coote at mcgill.ca and SPECIFY WHICH LIST YOU WANT TO BE REMOVED FROM. From rforno at infowarrior.org Thu May 9 05:59:30 2013 From: rforno at infowarrior.org (Richard Forno) Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 08:59:30 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] NSA's 2007 "Internet Research" guide Message-ID: This little nugget is showing up in my various newsfeeds today. It's the unclassified "Internet Research" guide put together by the US National Security Agency in 2007 entitled "Untangling The Web". (The fact that it was (to use my term) 'faux-classified' and took a FOIA request by someone to obtain it pathetically amuses me, but that's a different discussion for a different venue.) It's not a scholarly text, but it's interesting to see the various examples/resources listed within its 650 pages. At the very least, it might be a useful historical item for fellow AOIR'ers. 12MB PDF download: http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/Untangling_the_Web.pdf --rick --- Just because i'm near the punchbowl doesn't mean I'm also drinking from it. From erika.darics at port.ac.uk Thu May 9 06:38:36 2013 From: erika.darics at port.ac.uk (Erika Darics) Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 14:38:36 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Digital Business Discourse CFP Message-ID: --Apologies for cross-posting-- Dear Colleagues, I invite chapter proposals for a volume entitled Digital Business Discourse, to be published by Palgrave in the series *Palgrave Studies in Professional and Organizational Discourse*. *Digital Business Discourse* Proposal submission deadline* 26 May 2013* Recent scholarship on business discourse either only scarcely registers computer-mediated discourse, or struggles to meaningfully combine the findings of the scholarship of organizational studies and linguistic/ computer-mediated discourse studies. The proposed volume of *Digital Business Discourse* is aimed to fill this gap by bringing together research addressing the interactional practices enabled by the various mediated communication modes currently used in the professional workplace or virtual work teams. The main aim of the volume is to bring together research on computer-mediated or digital business discourse, specifically studies that include language or discourse-focussed analysis of naturally occurring digital business interactions. The manuscripts sought are about 9,000 words long, containing original, previously unpublished research. For further details please visit: http://erika.darics.co/currentprojects.php or contact me at dbd at darics.co.uk Warmest wishes, *** Dr Erika Darics University of Portsmouth tel: +44 (0) 23 9284 6155 e-mail: erika.darics at port.ac.uk From amnewell at utexas.edu Thu May 9 06:56:57 2013 From: amnewell at utexas.edu (Angela Newell) Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 08:56:57 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] NSA's 2007 "Internet Research" guide In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Wired's Take: Use These Secret NSA Google Search Tips to Become Your Own Spy Agency - By Kim Zetter - 05.08.13 - 2:37 PM - There?s so much data available on the internet that even government cyberspies need a little help now and then to sift through it all. So to assist them, the National Security Agency produced a book to help its spies uncover intelligence hiding on the web. The 643-page tome, called *Untangling the Web: A Guide to Internet Research*(.pdf), was just released by the NSA following a FOIA request filed in April by MuckRock , a site that charges fees to process public records for activists and others. The book was published by the Center for Digital Content of the National Security Agency, and is filled with advice for using search engines, the Internet Archive and other online tools. But the most interesting is the chapter titled ?Google Hacking.? Say you?re a cyberspy for the NSA and you want sensitive inside information on companies in South Africa. What do you do? Search for confidential Excel spreadsheets the company inadvertently posted online by typing ?filetype:xls site:za confidential? into Google, the book notes. Want to find spreadsheets full of passwords in Russia? Type ?filetype:xls site:ru login.? Even on websites written in non-English languages the terms ?login,? ?userid,? and ?password? are generally written in English, the authors helpfully point out. Misconfigured web servers ?that list the contents of directories not intended to be on the web often offer a rich load of information to Google hackers,? the authors write, then offer a command to exploit these vulnerabilities ? intitle: ?index of? site:kr password. ?Nothing I am going to describe to you is illegal, nor does it in any way involve accessing unauthorized data,? the authors assert in their book. Instead it ?involves using publicly available search engines to access publicly available information that almost certainly was not intended for public distribution.? You know, sort of like the ?hacking? for which Andrew ?weev? Aurenheimer was recently sentenced to 3.5 years in prisonfor obtaining publicly accessible information from AT&T?s website. Stealing intelligence on the internet that others don?t want you to have might not be illegal, but it does come with other risks, the authors note: ?It is critical that you handle all Microsoft file types on the internet with extreme care. Never open a Microsoft file type on the internet. Instead, use one of the techniques described here,? they write in a footnote. The word ?here? is hyperlinked, but since the document is a PDF the link is inaccessible. No word about the dangers that Adobe PDFs pose. But the version of the manual the NSA released was last updated in 2007, so let?s hope later versions cover it. Although the author?s name is redacted in the version released by the NSA, Muckrock?s FOIA indicates it was written by Robyn Winder and Charlie Speight. A note the NSA added to the book before releasing it under FOIA says that the opinions expressed in it are the authors?, and not the agency?s. Lest you think that none of this is new, that Johnny Long has been talking about this for years at hacker conferences and in his book Google Hacking, you?d be right. In fact, the authors of the NSA book give a shoutout to Johnny, but with the caveat that Johnny?s tips are designed for cracking ? breaking into websites and servers. ?That is not something I encourage or advocate,? the author writes. http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/05/nsa-manual-on-hacking-internet/?cid=7829534 On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 7:59 AM, Richard Forno wrote: > > This little nugget is showing up in my various newsfeeds today. It's the > unclassified "Internet Research" guide put together by the US National > Security Agency in 2007 entitled "Untangling The Web". (The fact that it > was (to use my term) 'faux-classified' and took a FOIA request by someone > to obtain it pathetically amuses me, but that's a different discussion for > a different venue.) > > It's not a scholarly text, but it's interesting to see the various > examples/resources listed within its 650 pages. At the very least, it > might be a useful historical item for fellow AOIR'ers. > > 12MB PDF download: > http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/Untangling_the_Web.pdf > > --rick > > --- > Just because i'm near the punchbowl doesn't mean I'm also drinking from it. > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Angela Newell, Ph.D. University of Texas at Austin LBJ School of Public Affairs amnewell at gmail.com amnewell at utexas.edu From sarina.chen at uni.edu Thu May 9 09:24:45 2013 From: sarina.chen at uni.edu (Shing-Ling (Sarina) Chen) Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 11:24:45 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] 2013 Steve Jones Internet Research Lecture Series Features Jeremy Silver Message-ID: The 2013 Steve Jones Internet Research Lecture Series will feature Jeremy Silver. Silver will deliver his lecture, ?The Digital Medieval?, at 12:30 pm (London time) on Thursday, June 20 in Hilton Metropole, Board Room 1, during the International Communication Association?s 63rd Annual Conference, in London, UK, June 17-21. Jeremy Silver is an entrepreneur, adviser and digital media thought-leader, focused on innovation and growth in creative businesses. He advises on the creative industries at the UK Technology Strategy Board. He is Chairman of Semetric, a real time analytics company providing actionable data to the entertainment business and Chairman of MusicGlue, an artist?s services company providing direct to consumer online ticketing to bands (including for example, Mumford & Sons, Marillion, Enter Chikari). He is a non executive director of the Bridgeman Art Library. He is Chairman of Gollant Media Ventures. Silver was CEO of Sibelius Software (a music notation software company) which he led for six years and sold to Avid Technology, securing an exit for the Founders and investors, Quester VCT. During the first internet bubble, Silver was worldwide Vice President of New Media for EMI Music Group in London and then in Los Angeles. He went on to run the playlist-sharing, social music service, Uplister Inc, based in San Francisco, backed by August Capital. Silver began his music industry career at the BPI as director of press & PR, and went on to become director of media affairs at the Virgin Music Group, working closely with many artists including Genesis, Meat Loaf, Brian Eno, Massive Attack and the Future Sound of London. Silver has presented and spoken on music and digital media at conferences and seminars around the world including TEDx, Midem, Thinking Digital, and In The City. Silver has a PhD in English Literature. Silver?s intermittent blog appears at www.mediaclarity.com This event is co-sponsored by the Carl Couch Center for Social and Internet Research (www.cccsir.com), University of Illinois, Chicago, and the International Communication Association. For more information about this event, please contact Shing-Ling Sarina Chen, sarina.chen at uni.edu. From sherylgrant at gmail.com Thu May 9 09:59:02 2013 From: sherylgrant at gmail.com (Sheryl Grant) Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 12:59:02 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Now accepting proposals: Project:Connect -- Summer Youth Programming Competition Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~PLEASE CIRCULATE WIDELY. Apologies for cross-posting.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ *HASTAC/MacArthur Foundation Digital Media and Learning Competition 5 * *Project:Connect -- Summer Youth Programming Competition* The fifth Digital Media and Learning Competition, the Project:Connect -- Summer Youth Programming Competition, *is now accepting applications*. The Project:Connect -- Summer Youth Programming Competition calls for summer event and programming proposals to excite and enable youth to engage the web in civil, collaborative, productive, safe, and confidence-building ways. The Competition supports single or multi-day participatory and hands-on learning experiences (labs, hackathons, pop-up events) that support youth working with peers, mentors, and educators on learning and creating experiences toward a better web for all. Based on the principles of Connected Learning?learning that is equitable, social, and participatory ? Project:Connect Summer Youth Programs will give young people hands-on experience creating, testing, and investigating ways to make using the web a better place to learn, connect, make, contribute, and share. The Project:Connect -- Summer Youth Program Competition is administered by HASTAC and supported by the MacArthur Foundation, in collaboration with the Born This Way Foundationand Mozilla . A related Open International Competition focused on Project:Connect will be announced on May 28th. For the latest news, connect with us in one of the ways listed below. *For full information: *dmlcompetition.net *Awards*: Up to $10,000 per institution (winners to be announced in early July) *Deadline*: Online applications are due June 10, 2013, at 5pm PST. How to apply . *Timeline*: Project:Connect -- Youth Summer Programs will be held July-September, 2013. Full timeline . Who is eligible to apply: U.S.-based non-profit learning development and civic engagement institutions and organizations (including learning development organizations such as museums, libraries, after school and summer programs). Additional eligibility requirements . Winning proposals will create: - Social Tools for Social Good ? Enabling people to create a culture of kindness, respect, and safety that enhances civic participation for youth. - Social Tools that Enable Control of Information ? Helping youth understand how to control their information, and manage privacy and security. - Social Tools that Enable Literacy ? Helping youth build, access, and understand the web in ways that support interest-driven learning, and empower learners to connect in safe ways with resources, mentors, and peers. Program participants may design or create: - Social apps ? Create apps, including mobile apps, that promote and enable civic engagement with peers, community building, and kindness to others. - Badging programs ? Create apps, including mobile apps, that leverage badging and other recognition and feedback methods to inspire youth to develop civic engagement with peers and community building in connected, cooperative, collaborative, safe, and respectful ways. - Learning content ? Create learning content, curricula, media promotions, and other approaches about how to foster a more engaged, egalitarian, safe, and sharing internet. Project:Connect -- Summer Youth Programs may include: - Hackathons, that involve youth in connection with mentoring developers and educators in designing, prototyping, and/or coding software; or developing learning programs that promote a better web for learning through connecting and connecting through learning. - Digital learning labs, that provide hands-on experience using digital tools for connecting safely, collaborating purposefully, and communicating effectively via the web. - Testing labs, that involve young people in evaluating software and online learning programs that promote good web citizenship, or a better web for learning and sharing. - Mentoring or leadership workshops, that identify potential peer instructors and mentors, and provide them with opportunities to learn how to support and mentor others effectively and respectfully in web-based connected learning programs and applications. - Journalism and communications labs, where young people ? acting as reporters, bloggers, and podcasters ? participate in the creation of public media that engages questions of equity, good citizenship, privacy, collaboration, and sharing on the web. - Badge development workshops, that provide youth with the tools to develop badges for recognizing and rewarding effective digital citizenship, promoting privacy, effective web participation, and connected learning opportunities. Connect with the Digital Media and Learning Competition: Web: www.dmlcompetition.net Twitter: www.twitter.com/dmlComp Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/DMLcomp G+: https://plus.google.com/u/0/103047964663117398536/ LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Digital-Media-Learning-Competition-3935137 List-serv: Send an email to dmlcompnews-request [at] duke.edu with "subscribe" in the subject line From david at davidlgates.com Thu May 9 13:56:15 2013 From: david at davidlgates.com (David L. Gates) Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 15:56:15 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] doctoral research project Message-ID: <439E7D85855E46C0A4F0DCA4872FD84F@Gates> I am an experienced marital/family therapist who has dealt with infidelity in my practice for decades. At this moment, I am a doctoral student conducting an online survey on the interaction of guilt, shame, and forgiveness on the security of a relationship when there has been infidelity. I need at minimum 64 individuals who are in a committed relationship where there has been infidelity. The survey is, of course, completely confidential...no personal identifiers are sought and all info is coded. The link to the survey is https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/6JPW7RB. Participants can simply log on and complete the survey. I can be contacted by phone at 847-525-0877 or by e-mail at david at davidlgates.com From jsalmons at vision2lead.com Thu May 9 16:15:37 2013 From: jsalmons at vision2lead.com (Janet Salmons, Ph.D.) Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 17:15:37 -0600 Subject: [Air-L] Scales for social media participation akin to "experience"? Message-ID: The "Social Technographics Ladder" is a couple of years old, and somewhat simplistic, but it does illustrate a progression from passive "spectators" to "creators": http://blogs.forrester.com/f/b/users/JROUSSEAUANDERSON/blog--st.gif. (from Li, C., & Bernoff, J. (2011). *Groundswell: Winning in a world transformed by social technologies* (2nd ed.). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.) I'll look forward to seeing what others on the list contribute to answer your question! Best, Janet *Janet Salmons Ph.D.* *Capella University School of Business and Vision2Lead, Inc. *Site- http://www.vision2lead.com Follow Twitter at #einterview Now available as Kindle e-books: Cases in Online Interview Research and Online Interviews in Real Time PO Box 943 Boulder, CO 80306-0943 jsalmons at vision2lead.com From andymcstay at gmail.com Thu May 9 22:27:43 2013 From: andymcstay at gmail.com (Andy) Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 06:27:43 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Social media as therapy Message-ID: Hi all, This does feel a little like cheating (it is really OK to just ask people?!), but can any of you fine people suggest readings and papers detailing where social media has been used in a therapeutic manner to aid in overcoming addictions? If you have anything involving involving images (such as Instagram), all the better. Thanks hive mind! Cheers, Andy From nielshendriks at gmail.com Thu May 9 23:59:31 2013 From: nielshendriks at gmail.com (Niels Hendriks) Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 08:59:31 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] Second Call: Participatory Design for Persons with Cognitive or Sensory Impairments @ Interact2013 Message-ID: * Are you interested in participatory design and do you work with users with impairments? We organize a workshop on participatory design for persons with cognitive or sensory impairmentsat Interact 2013 in Cape Town, South Africa. This workshop will be held on Tuesday September 3rd. Workshop on participatory design for users with impairments Involving people with impairments in the design process is very challenging, especially when impairments affect cognitive functions or communication. People with such impairments may have substantial problems with thought processes and communication, including understanding abstractions, sequencing thoughts and actions, understanding symbols, and interpreting social cues. Many participatory design techniques are based on these processes and are therefore not usable, or need to be adjusted for people with impairments. Workshop aims This workshop aims to exchange experiences with participatory design techniques that were designed for, or adapted to people with impairments. Since many of these techniques are highly focused on specific target groups, a further aim is to extract general principles and to generate guidelines for involving users with impairments in the design process. Who should attend? Researchers and designers who have been involved in one or more design-oriented project(s) involving users with impairments are invited to participate. After this workshop, a call for papers will be launched for a special issue (on the topic of the workshop) of the journal CoDesign. Important dates - May 15: application deadline - May 24: notification of acceptance - September 3: workshop date - September 4 to 6: Interact main conference Further information & contact Please visit our project website for the workshop's programme and to apply for the workshop: http://interact2013impairmentsworkshop.wordpress.com/. For more information and questions, please contact Karin Slegers: karin.slegers at soc.kuleuven.be We hope to see you in Cape Town in September!* From ftmarchese at yahoo.com Fri May 10 14:13:58 2013 From: ftmarchese at yahoo.com (Frank Marchese) Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 14:13:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Air-L] CFP: Digital Art and the Urban Environment: a Symposium, Art Exhibition, and Scholarly Volume Message-ID: <1368220438.96446.YahooMailNeo@web125806.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> First Call for Participation Digital Art and the Urban Environment: a Symposium, Art Exhibition, and Scholarly Volume Location:????????? Pace University, Downtown Manhattan, New York City ? Date:??????????????? Friday, October 4, 2013 ? Sponsors: ??????? Pace Digital Gallery, Seidenberg School of Computer Science and Information Systems, and the Pace Academy for Applied Environmental Studies ? Digital and new media artists utilize innovations in locative media, tracking technologies, telecommunication networks, and novel computer interfaces to craft artworks that create new ways to connect with the city. Just as their predecessors transformed urban neighborhoods, such as New York?s SoHo and Chelsea, through their energy and imagination, today?s artists are altering our perceptions of, and relationships with, urban space though their digital inventions and interventions. Thus, it is the purpose of this symposium, art exhibition, and scholarly volume to formally appraise the ways new media and digital artists engage urban ecology. It seeks to gather together contributions from artists, architects, computer scientists, designers, urban planners, social scientists, critical theorists, and others to consider these new modes of seeing, representing, and connecting within the urban setting. ? There are three possible ways to participate: ? 1.??? Symposium. Propose an oral presentation, dialog, panel, or other form of audience engagement for the symposium. Topics can range from reviews of how technology supports digital artistic practice to social studies of how a group or community is engaged by the work of digital and new media artists ? and everything in between. ? The proposal should be approximately 300 words in length, include a very short list of important references, the names and affiliations of the presenters, along with a brief bio of each. Papers related to all accepted presentations will be considered for the edited scholarly volume (see below). ? 2.???? Edited Scholarly Volume. The goal of the scholarly volume is to define and contextualize the ways new media and digital artists engage the urban environment and its population. It seeks chapter proposals that describe theories, applications, analyses, case studies, reviews, histories, and manifestos that include, but art not limited to: ? ????????? Artistic and design practices for the urban setting ????????? Artist, designer, scientist, technologist collaborations ????????? Artistic creations and practice based on scientific/technological models and simulations ????????? Virtual and physical information artifacts related to, or created through, artistic and design processes ????????? Artistic mapping of information within the urban setting ????????? The relationship between information spaces and urban spaces ????????? The role of the viewer in urban art ????????? How digital artistic practice engages communities within the urban setting ????????? Technological advances supporting urban art ????????? User interfaces supporting urban art ? As with the symposium proposal, a chapter proposal should be approximately 300 words in length, include a very short list of important references, the names and affiliations of the presenters, along with a brief bio of each. It is anticipated that the scholarly volume will be published by a major international publisher. ? 3.????? Art Exhibition. Artists are invited to submit artwork related to the symposium theme for display either within the Pace Digital Gallery or through its website (http://csis.pace.edu/digitalgallery/index.html ). Artists should submit a short proposal describing their artwork, a brief biography, and the URL of their websites. All artwork in the show will be documented in the show?s catalog. ? Important Information: Due Date: All submissions are due by Sunday, July 13, 2012. ? All proposals for symposia presentations, book chapters, artwork, and any other inquiries should be emailed to: ? Dr. Francis T. Marchese Pace Digital Gallery & Department of Computer Science Pace University 163 William Street, 2nd Floor NY, NY10038 Email: fmarchese at pace.edu Academic Web page: http://csis.pace.edu/~marchese Pace Digital Gallery Web page: http://csis.pace.edu/digitalgallery/ From binark at baskent.edu.tr Sat May 11 02:44:31 2013 From: binark at baskent.edu.tr (F. Mutlu Binark) Date: Sat, 11 May 2013 12:44:31 +0300 Subject: [Air-L] (no subject) In-Reply-To: <1368220438.96446.YahooMailNeo@web125806.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1368220438.96446.YahooMailNeo@web125806.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Here the declaration made by the academicians and the NGO particpants, following the 1st National New Media Conference in Turkey: https://yenimedya.wordpress.com/2013/05/10/final-decleration-of-1st-national-new-media-conference-was-published/ -- Prof.Dr. Mutlu Binark Baskent Universitesi Iletisim Fakultesi Radyo-Tv. ve Sinema Blm. Bagl?ca Kampusu Eskisehir Yolu 20.km. 06530 Ankara Tel: (312) 246 6652-53 Fax: (312) 246 66 57 www.yenimedya.wordpress.com www.dijitaloyun.wordpress.com alternatifbilisim.tv -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. From binark at baskent.edu.tr Sat May 11 02:45:52 2013 From: binark at baskent.edu.tr (F. Mutlu Binark) Date: Sat, 11 May 2013 12:45:52 +0300 Subject: [Air-L] Declaration of 1st National New Media Conference In-Reply-To: References: <1368220438.96446.YahooMailNeo@web125806.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: sorry for cross posting... > Here the declaration made by the academicians and the NGO particpants, > following the 1st National New Media Conference in Turkey: > > https://yenimedya.wordpress.com/2013/05/10/final-decleration-of-1st-national-new-media-conference-was-published/ > > -- > Prof.Dr. Mutlu Binark > Baskent Universitesi > Iletisim Fakultesi > Radyo-Tv. ve Sinema Blm. > Bagl?ca Kampusu > Eskisehir Yolu 20.km. > 06530 Ankara > Tel: (312) 246 6652-53 > Fax: (312) 246 66 57 > www.yenimedya.wordpress.com > www.dijitaloyun.wordpress.com > alternatifbilisim.tv > > > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean. > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. From geneloeb at gmail.com Sat May 11 08:59:39 2013 From: geneloeb at gmail.com (gene loeb) Date: Sat, 11 May 2013 10:59:39 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] need help with project Message-ID: I have tried to have an informal site about use of internet to help elderly. Increasing creative uses of internet have been occuring and I want to emphasize uses of internet, and use of technology to help communities-community informatics. I am not good in designing a site so my work has been by word of mouth. the name I have used is "center for technoloogy and cognitive health of older persons" I need help-other sites emphasize technology in general. I want to redo my site to emphasize research, where researchers and those with ideas can share. There is a great lack of sharing of research. I would like to share this activity with others-a researcher and or a university or foundation. I woulld rename it to something like "Institute for Technology and Cognitive (or Mental ) Health of Older Persons. Please help. And thanks for get well greetings for my pneomonia hospitalization. I am out of the hospital now and with a little pain. Now I want to help others. Thanks, wonderful people Gene Gene Loeb, Ph.D. -- With Sincerest Best Wishes , Gene Gene Loeb, Ph.D. From editor at connexionsjournal.org Sat May 11 11:13:35 2013 From: editor at connexionsjournal.org (connexions journal) Date: Sat, 11 May 2013 12:13:35 -0600 Subject: [Air-L] =?windows-1252?q?Publication_of_inaugural_issue_of_connex?= =?windows-1252?q?ions_=95_international_professional_communication?= =?windows-1252?q?_journal?= Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, I am delighted to announce the publication of the first issue of connexions at http://connexionsjournal.org/special-isues/1-1/ I hope you enjoy the issue. Ros?rio Ros?rio Dur?o Editor *www.connexionsjournal.org **connexions on facebook , LinkedIn, twitter * *connexions ?** international professi****onal communication journal *(ISSN 2325-6044) *Department of Communication, Liberal Arts, and Social Sciences - **New Mexico Tech ** *** From lists at catherinemiddleton.ca Sun May 12 08:14:56 2013 From: lists at catherinemiddleton.ca (Catherine Middleton) Date: Sun, 12 May 2013 11:14:56 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] AoIR election: Candidates Message-ID: <0E93DEED-0439-4973-B6EB-9AE3531BE413@catherinemiddleton.ca> Hello all, I'm very pleased to announce the slate of candidate for the upcoming AoIR Executive committee election. Candidates' position statements and details on the voting process will be posted soon. Candidates for Vice President Ruth Deller Jeremy Hunsinger Jennifer Stromer-Galley Secretary Andrew Herman (acclaimed) Treasurer Michael Zimmer (acclaimed) Candidates for Open Seats Daren Brabham Sun Sun Lim Annette Markham Kelly Quinn Dylan Wittkower Candidates for Graduate Student Representative Stacy Blasiola Anthony Hoffmann Catherine Middleton AoIR Secretary From vmayer at tulane.edu Sun May 12 15:16:08 2013 From: vmayer at tulane.edu (Mayer, Vicki A) Date: Sun, 12 May 2013 22:16:08 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] badges for undergrad writing and presentation skills? Message-ID: Hi all, I've been searching for any institutions that use badges or some other flex new media system to assess undergrad writing and/or presentation skills. So far, the best I've found is a badge for wikipedia entry writing. I'm just trying to get the lay of the land on this. Thanks, Dr. Vicki Mayer Editor, Television & New Media Director, MediaNOLA, http://medianola.org Professor Communication Department 205 Newcomb Hall Tulane University New Orleans, LA 70118 From geneloeb at gmail.com Sun May 12 20:25:06 2013 From: geneloeb at gmail.com (gene loeb) Date: Sun, 12 May 2013 22:25:06 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Fwd: Vol 8 Issue 1 In-Reply-To: <20130508125007.1012.25952@chaiten.ccurico.local> References: <20130508125007.1012.25952@chaiten.ccurico.local> Message-ID: This is an interesting publication which may have some content- of interest to Air members.--- thank you, gene geneloeb at gmail.com Forwarded message ---------- From: Daete: Wed, May 8, 2013 at 7:50 AM Subject: Vol 8 Issue 1 To: geneloeb at gmail.com Dear JTAER Reader, The volume 8, issue 1 (April 2013) of the Journal of Theoretical andApplied Electronic Commerce Research (ISSN 0718-1876) is now available online. This issue includes the following papers: Special Issue on Use and Impact of Social Networking Guest Editors? Introduction Frantisek Sudzina, Hans-Dieter Zimmermann and Sherah Kurnia Research Social Identity for Teenagers: Understanding Behavioral Intention to Participate in Virtual World Environment Heikki Karjaluoto and Matti Lepp?niemi pp. 1-16 Shopping and Word-of-Mouth Intentions on Social Media Patrick Mikalef, Michail Giannakos and Adamantia Pateli pp. 17-34 Social Networks, Interactivity and Satisfaction: Assessing Socio-Technical Behavioral Factors as an Extension to Technology Acceptance Belinda Shipps and Brandis Phillips pp. 35-52 What Drives Consumers to Pass Along Marketer-Generated eWOM in Social Network Games? Social and Game Factors in Play Sara Steffes Hansen and Jin Kyun Lee pp. 53-68 Electronic Word of Mouth and Knowledge Sharing on Social Network Sites: A Social Capital Perspective Jae Hoon Choi and Judy E. Scott pp. 69-82 We would like to invite you to consider the Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research to publish the results of your research projects in the field of Electronic Commerce. We also encourage you to participate as a referee, giving your time and expertise to the research community of which you are an important member. To become a referee for the Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, please email the Editor-in-Chief (ncerpa at utalca.cl) offering your expertise in specific areas of e-Commerce. Please read the editorial from December 2012 to learn about the new Research Network and Alert System. It may be accessed at the following address: http://www.jtaer.com/network/index.php. If you are already an author, reviewer or member of the editorial board, you may use your current login and password to access the new system. Otherwise, you may register and obtaing a login and password Warm regards, Dr. Narciso Cerpa Editor-in-Chief Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research www.jtaer.com jtaer at utalca.cl We are pleased to provide you with information that might be of interest to you. Would you like to stop receiving these valuable messages in your inbox? Click here. Would you like to update your information and continue receiving these messages? Click here . -- With Sincerest Best Wishes , Gene Gene Loeb, Ph.D. From T.Markham at bbk.ac.uk Mon May 13 03:40:30 2013 From: T.Markham at bbk.ac.uk (Tim Markham) Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 11:40:30 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] ICA Pre-conference: Conditions of Mediation - 17 June 2013 at Birkbeck, University of London Message-ID: CALL FOR LISTENERS/PARTICIPANTS Conditions of Mediation: Phenomenological Approaches to Media, Technology and Communication 2013 International Communication Association (ICA) Preconference ICA Theory, Philosophy and Critique Division 17 June 2013, Birkbeck, University of London Conference website (includes full conference programme and registration details): http://conditionsofmediation.wordpress.com Confirmed keynote speakers: * Dr David Berry, Swansea University * Professor Nick Couldry, Goldsmiths, University of London * Professor Graham Harman, American University of Cairo * Professor Shaun Moores, University of Sunderland * Professor Lisa Parks, University of California Santa Barbara * Professor Paddy Scannell, University of Michigan Conference Outline: Media theory seems to have reached a moment in which it is effectively orthodox to presume we must pay attention first and foremost to the intricacies of everyday experience. Ethnographic audience studies, for example, have attacked assumptions that there is a discrete relationship between media content and audiences, arguing that media forms, content and technologies have indeterminate and multifaceted significance within the daily rhythms and spaces of their everyday lives. Studies of digital and networked media, meanwhile, have put into question the very notion of 'audiences' as the starting point for understanding mediated experience. For some, accounting for the intricacies of everyday mediated experience has implied asking people what they actually do with media. But for others this is not enough: instead, the question is what constitutes the conditions of media experience in the first place. How do political configurations of discourses and inherited dispositions prefigure mediated action? How do material arrangements themselves constitute environments for mediated experience? How might we account for nonhuman agency, for example the ways in which software objects interact not only with human perceptions but also each other? Such questions point to a renewed confidence in explaining not just how but also why media, technology and communication are experienced as they are - all the while resisting a reversion to functionalism. These interests in the very conditions of mediation suggest, if sometimes only implicitly, an emerging interest in a phenomenology of media. Indeed, phenomenology - broadly the structuring of perception - has seemingly obvious relevance for recent academic interests in media experience. Yet its use or invocation in media studies has been scattered. While this might simply reflect the considerable diversity of phenomenological philosophies and their applications, there have also been concerted efforts recently to rethink phenomenology across the social sciences and humanities. Paired with recent interests in mediated experience, the time seems apt to reassess what it might mean to theorize media phenomenologically. Conditions of Mediation seeks to bring together scholars from a very wide range of perspectives - such as media history, media archaeology, audience studies, political theory, metaphysics, software studies, science and technology studies, digital aesthetics, cultural geography and urban studies - to reflect explicitly on the phenomenological groundings of their work on media. The phenomenological thinking to which participants might connect will be broad-based, ranging from core thinkers such as Husserl, Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty and Sartre to those with looser affiliations to phenomenology per se, for example Arendt, Bergson, Bourdieu, Deleuze, Garfinkel, Ingold, Latour, Whitehead and Harman. In short, the overall aim is that this conference goes beyond a mere congregation of media phenomenologists. Instead, it will encourage critical reflection on what various readings of phenomenology might offer media and technology studies that other approaches cannot. Conversely, it will also welcome reflections on the limits of phenomenological approaches in philosophical, theoretical, political and empirical terms. If you have any inquiries, please email both: Scott Rodgers (s.rodgers at bbk.ac.uk) and Tim Markham (t.markham at bbk.ac.uk) -- Dr Tim Markham Reader in Journalism and Media Head of Department, Media and Cultural Studies Programme Director, MA/PGCert Journalism, BA Media and Business Applications Director of Graduate Research, Media and Cultural Studies Assistant Dean for Recruitment and Retention, School of Arts Birkbeck, University of London 43 Gordon Square London WC1H 0PD tel: (020) 3073 8380 t.markham at bbk.ac.uk http://www.bbk.ac.uk/culture/our-staff/tim_markham From j-laprise at northwestern.edu Mon May 13 05:38:34 2013 From: j-laprise at northwestern.edu (John Paul Laprise) Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 12:38:34 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] CFP 8th GIGANET Symposium Message-ID: Please circulate: CALL FOR PAPERS 8th Annual Symposium 21 October 2013 Bali, Indonesia Deadline for abstract submission: July 1 2013 The Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet) is seeking research submissions about Internet Governance to be presented at its Eighth Annual Symposium, held on 21 October 2013, one day before the United Nations Internet Governance Forum (IGF) in Bali, Indonesia. GigaNet is a scholarly community that promotes the development of Internet Governance as a recognized, interdisciplinary field of study and facilitates informed dialogue on policy issues and related matters between scholars and governments, international organizations, the private sector and civil society. http://giga-net.org/ Since 2006, GigaNet has organized an Annual Symposium to showcase research about Internet Governance, bringing together researchers from a wide range of disciplines and fields. As in previous years, the symposium will provide room to discuss current and future questions as well as the challenges encountered and results achieved in global Internet governance. Conference themes GigaNet is interested in receiving abstracts related to Internet Governance themes, especially those containing innovative approaches and/or emerging research areas. This year, we are especially encouraging submissions on two interwoven themes: * Cybersecurity, cybersurveillance, cyberespionage and cyberwarfare and * State and non-state actor efforts to control the Internet The program committee welcomes proposals on any other topics related to global Internet governance. This year, one panel will be especially devoted to emerging scholars in the field. We define emerging scholars as doctoral students working on an approved proposal through scholars who have received their PhD within the past three years. Accepted papers from senior scholars will be presented and discussed in a roundtable format involving business, government and technical community representatives, while emerging scholars will present their work in a more traditional academic panel. In both cases, presenters should expect to have conversations about their work with people from a wide range of stakeholder groups. Submissions Interested scholars should submit abstracts of their research paper at the Easy Chair platform: https://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=giganet2013 The deadline for submission is July 1, 2013! Paper proposals should be submitted following these requirements: ? An abstract of 800-1000 words, in English, where it is mandatory to describe the main research goal(s) and the methodological background of the paper ? A short bio note focused on institutional affiliations, advanced degrees, scholarly publications and work in the field of Internet Governance and related issues (for example ICTs). Please include a link to a more detailed CV. ? Authors of accepted abstracts must submit their final papers by 30 September 2013. Those unable to do so will be removed from the program. Process and publication The Program Committee will evaluate submitted abstracts and inform proposal authors of acceptance decisions by email before 29 July 2013. Accepted submissions and final papers will be published on the GigaNet website. An online publication with selected papers on the main challenges of Internet Governance is also planned for the Bali IGF. Registration The GigaNet Annual Symposium is free of charge. However, registration will be required to gain entry to the event venue. Please continue visiting our website for further information about registration, venue and accommodation. If you have any question related to the submission or the symposium activities, please e-mail the Program Committee Chair: j-laprise at northwestern.edu. Best regards, John Laprise, Ph.D. Visiting Fellow Oxford Internet Institute Oxford University Assistant Professor of Communication in Residence Northwestern University in Qatar Northwestern University From joly at punkcast.com Mon May 13 09:22:05 2013 From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie) Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 12:22:05 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] CALLS for PAPERS and PROPOSALS / MAY 2013 deadlines Message-ID: Ana Isobel is a member of the Internet Society based in Sao Paulo, Brazil. She is regularly contributes to our linked in group, which I moderate. I thought this collection might be of interest, although some of the deadlines are already past. I wonder if she ia already on this list? If not, I should perhaps invite her. CALLS for PAPERS and PROPOSALS / MAY 2013 deadlines 1) The IADIS Multi Conference on Computer Science & Information Systems (MCCSIS 2013) aims to address subjects like Computer Science, Information Systems & other emergent related fields: e-Learning 2013 - eL2013: http://www.elearning-conf.org/ Intelligent Systems & Agents 2013 - ISA2013: http://www.isa-conf.org/ Theory & Practice in Modern Computing 2013 - TPMC2013: http://www.tpmc-conf.org/ Game & Entertainment Technologies 2013 - GET2013: http://www.gaming-conf.org/ ICT, Society, & Human Beings 2013 ? ICT2013: http://www.ict-conf.org/ Web Based Communities & Social Media 2013 - WBC2013: http://www.webcommunities-conf.org/ Interfaces & Human Computer Interaction 2013 - IHCI2013: http://www.ihci-conf.org/ Data Mining 2013 - DM2013: http://www.datamining-conf.org/ e-Commerce 2013 - EC2013: http://www.ecommerce-conf.org/ Computer Graphics, Visualization, Computer Vision & Image Processing 2013 - CGVCVIP2013: http://www.cgv-conf.org/ e-Health 2013 - eH2013: http://www.ehealth-conf.org/ Collaborative Technologies 2013 - CT2013: http://www.collaborativetech-conf.org/ Information Systems Post-implementation & Change Management 2013 - ISPCM2013: http://www.ispcm-conf.org/ Submission Deadline (2nd call): May 1st Source: http://www.mccsis.org/ 2) 2013 Technology4Good Awards The Awards celebrate the hard work of people of all ages who use the power of computers & the internet to make the world a better place. It is open to any UK-based individual, business, charity or public body who can show how they are using digital technology to help an individual or group of people to overcome their disabilities. It is free to enter & there are eight categories: Accessibility BT Get IT Together Community Impact Digital Giving Digital Skills Grow Your Charity Online IT Volunteer of the Year Local Digital Champion Nominations close 5pm, May 3. Source: http://www.technology4goodawards.org.uk/accessibility-award-2013/ 3) Girls Transform the World Digital Action Campaign / World Pulse When girls are heard, they will transform the world. Now is the time for every girl to have the education & boundless opportunities she needs to unleash her potential. You are invited to join us in speaking out for the rights of girls as we showcase the voices & solutions of grassroots women around the world. Why Participate? Your voice will be heard ? You will connect ? Your voice will be elevated Make Like-Minded Connections: Share your story & connect with others in similar situations. Learn & Be Inspired: Read others? stories, learn about other experiences, & gain inspiration. Explore Solutions: Find out how others climbed over, dug under, or broke through their barriers, & hear their visions for the future. Transform: Watch your story find its way to places you never thought imaginable. Watch it make impact. Tell us your own story & perspective on girls?either personally experienced or witnessed in your community?& outline your vision for change. Deadline: May 10. Learn how to participate at http://tinyurl.com/c96mjrg 4a) DRT4all 2013: V Intl Congress on Design, Research Networks, & Technology for All (Sep 23- 25; Madrid, Spain) It is a window to the future. Its main goal is getting to know about the latest advances in ICT supporting independent living of people with functional limitations, & to demonstrate how these technologies can work together in order to help people with disabilities & the elderly lead a better life, & to achieve a full integration into society. DRT4all is above all a scientific conference where we hope to showcase the different characteristics of assistive technologies, with user experience as the key aspect. Industry stakeholders & public administration officials, who also play a central role in the development of these technologies, will be a prominent part of this event. Call for papers (extended): May 15th Source: http://tinyurl.com/caccjsz 4b) 2013/2014 Elizabeth Neuffer Fellowship The International Women's Media Foundation (IWMF) is now accepting applications for the 2013/2014 Elizabeth Neuffer Fellowship, designed for a woman journalist working in print, broadcast or digital news media to spend seven months in a tailored program that combines access to MIT?s Center for International Studies and media outlets including The Boston Globe and The New York Times. Journalists working in the print, broadcast and Internet media, including freelancers, are eligible to apply. Applicants must have a minimum of three years of experience in journalism. Applications will be accepted until May 1st, and the fellowship will run from Sep 2013 ? Mar 2014. To apply, visit iwmf.org/2013neuffer to start the online application process. For more information about this fellowship, go to iwmf.org/2013neuffer, contact Ann Marie Valentine (202-496-1992, neuffer at iwmf.org) and follow @IWMF on Twitter. Source: http://iwmf.org/neufferfellowship/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/2013-03-12 5) W3C Workshop - Referencing and Applying WCAG 2.0 in Different Contexts: Intl Standard Accessibility Policies, Web Applications, Mobile Web (May 23; Brussels, Belgium) This is a W3C Workshop and is open to policy-makers, users, developers, accessibility experts, researchers, and others interested in adopting, referencing, and applying WCAG 2.0. We invite you to: - Discuss approaches for referencing and adopting WCAG 2.0 - Exchange experiences with implementing policies that reference WCAG 2.0 - Share resources that support the implementation of WCAG 2.0 - Identify priorities for further developing resources and support material. Participation in this Workshop is free; spaces are limited. Registration will close on 7 May, or when spaces are filled. Source: http://www.w3.org/WAI/ACT/workshop 6) International Development Journalism Competition "Entries are invited for The Guardian International Development Journalism competition which focuses to search enthusiastic writers who want to demonstrate their journalistic abilities by examining crucial issues. The challenge is to write a feature of 650 to 1,000 words on an aspect of global poverty that deserves greater media exposure. Eligibility & Criteria: Those working at any of the following are all eligible; people writing for national magazines, journals, radio + TV stations, websites and local newspapers. The Competition is open to UK residents aged 18. Deadline application: May 12 Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development-professionals-network/2013/mar/27/international-development-journalism-competition-about-the-awards 7) "Supporting public procurement for innovative solutions (PPI) in eHealth, active and healthy ageing and assisted living" - Call for proposals The objective of PPI pilots is to reinforce early deployment of innovative ICT solutions by enabling trans-national buyers groups of public procurers possibly together with other types of procurers - to overcome the fragmentation of demand for innovative ICT solutions in Europe, and to share the risks and costs of acting as early adopters of innovative solutions. Access the presentations done by the European Commission at the workshop of 15 January 2013: PPI explanation of the instrument: http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/cf/dae/document.cfm?action=display&doc_id=1562 European Innovation Partnership on Active & Healthy Ageing Obj 3.2 content focus: http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/cf/dae/document.cfm?action=display&doc_id=1565 eHealth Action Plan - Obj 3.2.a content focus: http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/cf/dae/document.cfm?action=display&doc_id=1566 The video of the workshop is available for viewing at http://scic.ec.europa.eu/streaming/index.php?es=2&sessionno=8abfe8ac9ec214d68541fcb888c0b4c3 For further details please read the guide for applicants is available on the participant portal, in which you can find further detailed information regarding the PPI instruments, conditions, specificities, etcetera. Contact: infso-ict-psp at ec.europa.eu Deadline:May 14 Source: http://www.age-platform.eu/en/call-for-proposals 8) Programme: CIP - ICT Policy Support Programme - Call for proposals: theme 3 (ICT For Health, Ageing Well and Inclusion) It will support: 3.1 a) Telehealth programmes for the management of mental disorders - Pilot A 3.1 b) Wide deployment of integrated care - Pilot B 3.2.a) eHealth - PPI pilot (more details on PPI objectives below) 3.2 b) Active & healthy ageing and assisted living - PPI pilots (more details on PPI objectives below) 3.3 a) Innovation for age friendly cities, buildings and environments - Thematic Network 3.3 b) Assessing impact and raising awareness on benefits of innovative eHealth tools and services - Thematic Network 3.3 c) Sustainability of EU wide info-structure and collaborative governance - Thematic Network 3.3 d) Clinical practice guidelines for eHealth services - Thematic Network This theme contributes to the implementation of the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing (EIP on AHA) and supports the enactment of the Digital Agenda for Europe Key Action 13 promoting patient empowerment and the wider deployment of telemedicine to enhance deployment of innovation in health and empower patients. For additional info see: - http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/news-redirect/9332/ - http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/page/call_CIP?callIdentifier=CIP-ICT-PSP-2013-7&specificProgram=ICT-PSP Deadline: May 14 Source: http://www.age-platform.eu/en/call-for-proposals 9) ICMI 2013 - Intl Conference on Multimodal Interaction (Dec 9 - 13; Sydney, Australia) It is the premier intl forum for multidisciplinary research on multimodal human-human & HCI, interfaces, & system development. The conference focuses on theoretical & empirical foundations, component technologies, & combined multimodal processing techniques that define the field of multimodal interaction analysis, interface design, & system development. Topics of interest include but are not limited to: - Multimodal interaction processing; - Interactive systems & applications; - Modeling human communication patterns; - Data, evaluation & standards for multimodal interactive systems. Long & short paper submission: May 24th (11:59pm PDT). Source: http://icmi.acm.org/2013/index.php?id=home -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- - From eardevol at uoc.edu Mon May 13 11:26:32 2013 From: eardevol at uoc.edu (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Elisenda_Ard=E8vol?=) Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 20:26:32 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] Last minute: CfP Dicital Culture and Communication Ecrea Workshop Message-ID: Digital Culture: Promises and Discomforts In this workshop we want to critically discuss the promises and discomforts of digital culture taking into account the tensions raised by different material practices, understandings and social orders around the role of digital media in performing social change. Special focus lies on the three aspects of Digital Culture: (1) Digital imaginations and narratives The images of future are drawn in tecno-scapes, like in science-fiction films, artificial intelligence designs, virtual worlds or metaverses. What kinds of individuals, societies and environments are imagined through the growing pervasiveness of Digital Culture into our lives? How digital imaginaries shape our experience and relate to our ways of narrating ourselves and our creative practices? What are the role of innovation, creative industries and urbanlabs in the design of the future and in the different kinds of social intervention? How digital imagination is performing new narrative forms as well as transforming knowledge production and sharing? (2) Digital Neighbourhoods and Citizenship Among the existing networked digital technologies it is smartphones and tablet computers, which are becoming increasingly popular at an extraordinary pace. These devices not only make digital media applications truly ubiquitous but also create an abundance of digital location-sensitive information, which saturates local places, social relations, and the perception and organisation of neighbourhoods. The concept of space turns into a mash-up of material and digital places, creating new forms of the social while at the same time renegotiating the cultural and political logics of local/global or private/public. How does the use of digital media trigger new social phenomena, such as altered forms and modes of communication, collaboration, consumption, infrastructure, mobility or public service? (3) Digital Engagement and Social Change Digital engagement manifests itself in a broad range of digital practices. People discursively engage through and with digital media and thus dissolve spatial, temporal and social boundaries. Especially a few popular commercial social networks, like Facebook and Twitter, are presumed to play a crucial role in the process of social change by means of interaction and connectivity. On a political dimension, citizens and activists voice their opinions, discuss political issues, organize and mobilize for protest in new or alternative public spheres. However, it remains unclear, whether and in which differentiations digital media engagement affects established power relations and thus promotes social change. Which diverse forms of political engagement unfold in digital media environments? How can underlying technological and power structures of media be rendered visible and to what extent do they affect the possibilities and boundaries of digital engagement? We welcome papers picking up any of the described issues and topics and we will also consider contributions related with digital forms of social intervention, art projects or urbanlabs proposals. Extended abstracts should be no longer than 700 words, written in English and contain a clear outline of the argument, the theoretical framework, methodology and results (if applicable). Participants may submit more than one proposal, but only one paper by the same first author might be accepted. Panel and paper proposals from PhD students and early career scholars are particularly welcome. All proposals should be submitted by May 15, 2013 to ecreadigitalculture at gmail.com. Notifications of acceptance will be sent out after June 13, 2013. Keynote Speakers We are delighted to announce the following two keynote speakers: Annette Markham (Ume? University, Sweden) ? topic to be announced Jakob Svensson (Karlstad University, Sweden) will give a lecture on ?New Media for Development? The workshop will take place at the Department of Media Studies of the University of Bonn, Germany, Poppelsdorfer Allee 47, 53115, Bonn. The conference date is October 2nd ? 5th, 2013. More information on the conference venue and registration will be published here and at dccecrea2013.uni-bonn.de Elisenda Ardevol http://dccecrea.wordpress.com/ From gciampag at indiana.edu Mon May 13 12:51:36 2013 From: gciampag at indiana.edu (Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia) Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 15:51:36 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] 2nd Call for Contributions: Collective Behaviors and Networks, satellite @ ECCS'13, (Barcelona, September 19, 2013) Message-ID: <51914448.7020907@indiana.edu> ***** Apologies for multiple copies ***** You are cordially invited to submit a contribution to "Collective Behaviors and Networks", a one-day satellite event of the 2013 European Conference on Complex Systems (ECCS'13), to be held in Barcelona, September 19, 2013. Goal of this workshop is to provide a discussion venue about advances in the study of networks applied to the dynamics of social collective behaviors. Particular attention will be devoted, but not limited to, the following topics: - Group formation, evolution and group behavior analysis. - Modeling, tracking and forecasting dynamic groups in social media. - Community detection and dynamic community structure analysis. - Social simulation, cultural, opinion, and normative dynamics. - Empirical calibration and validation of agent-based social models. - Models of social capital, collective action, social movements. - Coevolution of network and behavior. More information on COVEnANT2013 can be found here: http://covenant2013.com More information on ECCS'13 can be found here: http://eccs13.eu Requirements Participants are invited to submit their contributions via the EasyChair system at the following link: https://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=covenant2013 Contributions must be at most 2 pages long, and must provide the following information: title, list of authors with affiliations, and abstract. Accepted format is PDF only. More information, about selection, registration, etc., can be found here: http://www.covenant2013.com/?page_id=25 Important Dates May 17, 2013 Abstract submission deadline June 19, 2013 Notification of acceptance September 19, 2013 Satellite meeting Data Challenge In order to encourage the development of predictive, data-driven models of collective phenomena, a link prediction competition will be held as part of the meeting. Monetary prizes will be awarded to the best contributions, which will be evaluated according to rigorous scientific criteria by the program committee of the event. 1st prize: US$800, 2nd prize: US$200. Further information (task, data set, dates) to be released soon. Keynote Speakers Yong-Yeol Ahn, Indiana University, US J. Doyne Farmer, University of Oxford, UK Dirk Helbing, ETH Z?rich, Switzerland Jure Leskovec, Stanford University, US Alessandro Vespignani, Northeastern University, US Special Issue The best original contributions will be invited to submit an extended version for inclusion in a special issue of EPJ Data Science (Springer). Organizing Committee Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia, Indiana University, US Emilio Ferrara, Indiana University, US Alessandro Flammini, Indiana University, US Filippo Menczer, Indiana University, US Program Committee Luca M. Aiello, Yahoo Research Barcelona, Spain Andrea Baronchelli, Northwestern University, US Pasquale De Meo, University of Messina, Italy Santo Fortunato, Aalto University, Finland Jacob Foster, University of Chicago, US Matteo Gagliolo, Universit? Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium Bruno Gon?alves, Aix-Marseille Universit?, France Andrea Lancichinetti, Northwestern University, US Michael M?s, ETH Z?rich, Switzerland Tam?s Nepusz, E?tv?s Lor?nd University, Hungary Orion Penner, IMT Lucca, Italy Nicola Perra, Northeastern University, US Filippo Radicchi, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Spain Jos? J. Ramasco, IFISC, Spain Carlos Roca, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Spain Giancarlo Ruffo, University of Turin, Italy Daniel Villatoro, Barcelona Digital Technology Centre, Spain -- Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia Postdoctoral fellow Center for Complex Networks and Systems Research Indiana University ? 910 E 10th St ? Bloomington ? IN 47408 ? http://cnets.indiana.edu/ ? gciampag at indiana.edu From joly at punkcast.com Mon May 13 12:51:58 2013 From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie) Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 15:51:58 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Internet Policy Review (IPR), a news and analysis service about internet regulation in Europe Message-ID: (Another one from Ana) Internet Policy Review (IPR), a news and analysis service about internet regulation in Europe The IPR, a project of the Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society located in Berlin, Germany, tracks public regulatory changes as well as private policy developments which are expected to have long lasting impacts on European societies. The service?s main platform and its complementary channels of communication are to form an authoritative resource on internet governance for academics, civil society advocates, entrepreneurs, the media and public policy makers alike. The idea is that the IPR offers resources and research that will add a layer of knowledge to current debates on internet policy. In a word, IPR?s expertise resides in its clear and independent analysis of inter-European digital policy changes. At the intersection of academia and journalism, the IPR is driven by a small editorial team and a group of authors. More information is available at http://policyreview.info/about Source http://www.hiig.de/en/introducing-the-internet-policy-review/ -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- - From artur.lugmayr at tut.fi Mon May 13 14:30:20 2013 From: artur.lugmayr at tut.fi (artur.lugmayr at tut.fi) Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 00:30:20 +0300 (EEST) Subject: [Air-L] CfP :: ACADEMIC MINDTREK CONFERENCE 2013 :: Extended Deadline- 2nd June 2013 :: 1st-4th October :: Tampere, Finland :: Message-ID: <6596721.15.1368480620469.JavaMail.lugmayr@HLO45-TC> ========================================================================================= ACADEMIC MINDTREK CONFERENCE 2013 ?Making Sense of Converging Media? 1st-4th October, 2013 Tampere, Finland **** Call for Papers, Extended Abstracts, Posters, Demonstration, Workshops, Tutorials http://www.academicmindtrek.org, http://www.mindtrek.org Long and short papers, posters, demonstrations, and extended abstracts due on 2nd June 2013 (EXTENDED DEADLINE !) Tutorials and Workshops due on 2nd June 2013 (EXTENDED DEADLINE !) In cooperation with ACM, ACM SIGMM, and ACM SIGCHI Contributions will be published in the ACM digital library and selected set of high-level work will be published as book chapters or in journals ========================================================================================= ========================================================================================= CALL FOR PAPERS, ABSTRACTS, POSTERS, DEMOS, WORKSHOPS & TUTORIALS ========================================================================================= We are pleased to invite you to the Academic MindTrek conference, 1st ? 4th October 2013, which brings together a cross-disciplinary crowd of people to investigate current and emerging topics of media in many facets. The conference explores academically the emerging and frontier-breaking applications of new media in everyday contexts of leisure, business and organizational life. October 2nd will be the main Academic MindTrek day with other sessions on the preceding and following days. Due to increasing popularity of the conference, we are extending the scope of Academic MindTrek 2013! The academic conference features six major themes: * Social Media * Ambient & Ubiquitous Media * Business & Media * Human-Computer Interaction (new track!) * Open Source * Digital Games * ICT & E-Government ========================================================================================= Why to Participate? ========================================================================================= The MindTrek Association hosts MindTrek as a yearly conference, where the Academic MindTrek conference has been a part of this unique set of events comprising competitions, world famous keynote speakers, plenary sessions, media festivals, and workshops since 1997. It is a meeting place where researchers, experts and thinkers present results from their latest work regarding the development of Internet, interactive media, and the information society: * Real chance for media enthusiasts to think outside the box * Brings together researchers and practitioners from diverse disciplines that are involved in the development of media in various fields, ranging from sociology and the economy to technology * The highest ranked papers will be published in academic journals (e.g. in 2012 we published a selected set of articles in ACM Computers in Entertainment, Electronic Markets ? The International Journal on Networked Business, and the International Journal of Ambient Computing and Intelligence. * Provides a chance to learn from the vast media genre at large * Allows participants to exchange views with cross-disciplinary experts * Aims to provide insights about the convergence of the various media and the future of media * High-level keynote speakers. A few examples from previous years: Keith Partridge, Tomi T. Ahonen (Consultant), Latif Ladid (IPV6 Forum), Beat Schwegler (Microsoft), Cinzia dal Zotto (Univ. of Neuchatel), Ari Ojansivu (Google), Ramine Darabiha (Rovio), Molly R?nge (Crowdculture), Slava Kozlov (Philips Design), Dave Nielsen (CloudCamp), Janne J?rvinen (F-Secure), Olavi Toivainen (Nokia), Herbert Snorrason (OpenLeaks), Tuija Aalto (YLE), Juha Kaario (Varaani), among many others. Also this year we are preparing a wide set of invited speakers & keynotes. Social Media ========================================================================================= ?Get social!? Social media and Web 2.0 technologies are applied in ever diverse practices both in private and public communities. Totally new business models are emerging, traditional communication and expression modalities are challenged, and new practices are constructed in the collaborative, interactive media space. Ambient and Ubiquitous Media ========================================================================================= ?The medium is the message!? ? This conference track focuses on the definition of ambient and ubiquitous media with a cross-disciplinary viewpoint: ambient media between technology, art, and content. The focus of this track is on applications, location based services, ubiquitous computation, augmented reality, theory, art-works, mixed reality concepts, the Web 3.0, and user experiences that make ubiquitous and ambient media tick. Media Business, Media Production and Media Management ========================================================================================= Media business and media management face the challenges of the emergence of new forms of digital media and focuses on leadership practices, business models and value chains. It discusses competition, patterns of media usage, advertising models, and how traditional media can cope with the challenges coming from digital media focusing on media business and media management issues. Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) ========================================================================================= The wide field of HCI is to discuss issues around human computer interaction modalities, consumer experience, design of computer systems, human aspects, universal media access, ergonomics, communication, novel interaction modalities, privacy, trusted systems, interaction theories, and sociological and psychological factors. This theme of devotes to several of these aspects, and is targeted to the scientific community dealing with several applied and theoretical aspects of HCI and user experience. Open Source ========================================================================================= The last decade has seen a significant increase in open source initiatives such as open source software, open standards, open content, open media, or even open source hardware. On the one hand, the open movement has created new kinds of opportunities such as new business models and development approaches. On the other hand, it has introduced new kinds of technical and non-technical challenges. Digital Games ========================================================================================= The culture and business of digital games is becoming increasingly varied. The current trends range from novel interface innovations and digital distribution channels to social game dynamics and player-generated content. The games track is open for theoretical works, empirical case studies and constructive projects. ICT & E-Government ========================================================================================= In recent years, ICT has played a pivotal role in the development of digital economy. This technology facilitates the rapid accumulation and dissemination of information, group interaction, communication, and collaboration. ICT has become one of the core elements of managerial reform around the world. Since the launch of web 2.0 and emergence of ICT infrastructure, processes and policies many governments and public officials use new online tools to communicate among themselves, and with organizations and citizens. Demonstrations ========================================================================================= The aim is to gather demonstrations from researchers and professionals from the communities related to the topics of MindTrek. The objective for the demonstrations is to provide a forum for exchanging experiences, practical projects, or media demonstrators. The target audience includes members of the academic community, industry, or laboratories who can demonstrate the results of their research projects with a practical implementation. Special academic sessions (e.g. tutorials, demonstrations, workshops, and multidisciplinary sessions) will be held parallel to the MindTrek business conference. Academic speakers and authors are warmly welcome to register for the business conference tracks as part of the academic conference with our special registration rate. The Academic MindTrek registration includes full service such as coffees, lunches, and social gatherings. The organizing committee invites you to submit original high quality full papers, long or short, addressing the special theme and the topics, for presentation at the conference and inclusion in the proceedings. ========================================================================================= Conference Publications ========================================================================================= The scientific part of the conference is organized in cooperation with ACM SIGMM, and ACM SIGCHI. Conference proceedings will be published in the ACM Digital Library, which includes short and long papers, workshop proposals, demonstration proposals, and tutorial proposals. Extended abstracts will be published in the adjunct conference proceedings; however, they will not be published within the ACM Digital Library. Selected high quality papers will be published in international journals, as book chapters, edited books, or via open access journals. There will also be a reward for the overall best paper from the academic conference. All the papers should follow the style guidelines of the conference. Short and Long Paper Proposals ========================================================================================= All submissions will be peer-reviewed double blinded, therefore please remove any information that could give an indication of the authorship. Short papers should be between 2-4 pages long and the paper presentation will be 15 minutes plus 5 minutes discussion within a session; long papers should be 6-8 pages and will be presented in 20 minutes slots, plus 5 minutes discussion. Workshop Proposals ========================================================================================= Feel free to suggest workshops which are co-organized with the Academic MindTrek. Workshop proposals should include the organizing committee, a 2 page description of the theme of the workshop, a short CV of organizers, duration, the proceedings publisher, and the schedule. Workshop organizers also have the possibility to add publications to the main conference proceedings. Depending on the attracted number of papers for each workshop, we provide space for either half-day or full-day workshops. Previous examples include e.g. a workshop on eLearning. Nevertheless, feel free to suggestion your own. Demonstrations Proposals ========================================================================================= Demonstration proposals shall be 2-3 pages and include: a) a description and motivation of the demonstration; b) general architecture of the demonstration; c) description of the main features; d) a brief comparison with other existing related demonstrations; e) audio-visual materials to illustrate the demonstration (if applicable); f) the type of license, and g) the Internet address of the demonstration (if applicable). It is strongly recommended that the authors make the demonstration (or a suitable version or movie) on the Internet during the evaluation. Tutorial Proposals ========================================================================================= Tutorial proposals should include a 2-page description of the tutorial, intended audience, a short CV, timetable, required equipment, references, and a track record of previous tutorials. The target length of tutorials is 2-4 hours. Previous examples include a tutorial on audio based media. However, feel free to suggest your own. Extended Abstracts ========================================================================================= Extended abstracts should be between 1-2 pages long and contain 500-800 words. They should describe the research problem, background, research questions, and the contribution to the conference. Extended abstracts will not be published within the ACM digital library. Poster Presentations ========================================================================================= Posters should be between 2-3 pages long and a poster should be presented during the conference. Attendees have the possibility to exhibit their posters on a A0 poster wall d uring the conference. ========================================================================================= Submission Deadlines ========================================================================================= - 2nd June 2013 (EXTENDED DEADLINE !) deadline for long papers (6-8 pages), short papers (3-4 pages), extended abstracts (1-2 pages), posters (1-2 pages) and demonstrations (2-3 pages) - 2nd June 2013 (EXTENDED DEADLINE !) deadline for tutorial proposals and workshop proposals - 30th June 2013: notification of acceptance/rejection for papers, extended abstracts, posters, and demos, tutorials - 20th July 2013: camera ready papers and copyright forms - 5th August 2013: submission of camera ready papers - 1st-4th October 2013: Academic MindTrek and MindTrek Business Conference Suggested key-dates for workshop organizers ========================================================================================= - 15th August 2013: deadline for workshop papers - 10th September 2013: deadline for camera-ready papers ========================================================================================= Conference Themes ========================================================================================= 1. Social Media - Business models, service models, and policies - Social media in innovation and business - Intra and inter organizational use of social media - Questions related to identity, motivation and values - Blogs, wikis, collaboration and social platform designs in practice - Knowledge management and learning with social media - Experience management with social media - Crowdsourcing, user-created content and social networks - Enterprise 2.0 and social computing in work organizations - Evaluation and research methods of social media - Social media and community design - Benefits and limitations of social media applications 2. Ambient and Ubiquitous Media - between Technology, Services, and Users - Applications and services utilizing ubiquitous and pervasive technology - Ubicom in eLearning, leisure, storytelling, art works, advertising, and mixed reality contexts - Next generation user interfaces, ergonomics, multimodality, and human-computer interaction - Art works for smart public or indoor spaces, mobile phones, museums, or cultural applications - Context awareness, sensor perception, context sensitive Internet, and smart daily objects - Personalization, multimodal interaction, smart user interfaces, and ergonomics - Ambient human computer interaction, experience design, usability, and audience research - Software, hardware, middleware, and technologies for pervasive and ubiquitous - Theoretical methods and algorithms in ubiquitous and ambient systems - Business models, service models, media economics, regulations, x-commerce, and policies - User positioning, location awareness - Augmented reality in ubiquitous applications - Device interoperability, remote user interfaces, inter-device connections 3. Media Business, Media Studies, and Media Management - Media politics: policy, practices, conception, and media regulation - Production technology: processes, and optimization - Business models: value chain/value net, revenue models, and product architecture - Strategic and operational Management of TIME Industries: Technology, Information, Media, Entertainment - Key data analytics: balanced scorecard, competition analysis, performance indicators, social media monitoring, google analytics, ? - Media use: patterns, engagement, and consumer experiences - Customer relationship management: communities & engagement 4. Human-Computer Interaction - User experience and experience design - Interaction design techniques and methods - User interaction and HCI design - Creativity, practices and innovation in HCI - Analysis, theories, and procedures in interaction design - Methods, systems, and toolkits supporting HCI - Human centered computing and understanding interaction - Interactivity methods - Designing for experience and interactivity - Design, evaluation, and implementation of interactive systems - Phenomena surrounding interactivity 5. Open Source - Forms of openness: open source software, open standards, - Open content, open media, open source hardware, and open access - Establishment of an open source community - Practices on developing open source systems - Practices for maintaining a successful project - Open source processes and techniques - Differences on open source and closed source systems - Using open source in commercial context - Challenges of open source development - Teaching open source in academia and industry 6. Digital Games - Theoretical and analytical approaches on games and play - Analysis of player experience - Game design research - Economy and business models in the game industry - Innovation in and around games - Digital distribution of games - Online, mobile and cross-platform games - Social and casual games - Pervasive and ubiquitous games - augmented and altered reality games - Mobile and cross-media games - Gamification, fun ware and playful design - Player-created content 7. ICT & E-Government - M-government - Web 2.0 and e-government social network - E-government obstacles and challenges - E-government project failure - Future of e-government - Improving the public service efficiency and effectiveness - E-government in developing countries - Citizen?s technological limitations - ICT and democracy (e-Democracy agenda at e-government level) - Citizens' education and accessibility to ICT - exploiting the learning and communicative potential of emerging online tools - new media forms (games, blogs, wiki, G3 mobile communications ========================================================================================= Paper Submission ========================================================================================= - Please follow the style guidelines on http://www.acm.org/sigs/publications/proceedings-templates for formatting your paper - Note that since the papers will be published by the ACM digital library all authors need to sign an ACM copyright form. (For further guidelines see: http://www.acm.org/pubs/copyright_form.html) - Submit papers here: http://www.tut.fi/emmi/Submissions/2013mindtrek/ ========================================================================================= Organizing Committee ========================================================================================= General Chair Artur Lugmayr, Tampere Univ. of Technology (TUT), FIN Program Chairs Helj? Franssila, Tampere Univ. (UTA), FIN Track chair: Social Media Hannu K?rkk?inen, Tampere Univ. of Technology (TUT), FIN Track chair: Ambient Media Moyen Mustaquim, Uppsala University, SE Track chair: Media Business, Media Studies, and Media Management Johanna Gr?blbauer, St. P?lten University of Applied Sciences (FH), AT Track chair: Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) Pauliina Tuomi, University of Turku, FIN Track chair: Digital Games Janne Paavilainen, University of Tampere (UTA), FIN Track chair: ICT & E-Government Fatemeh Ahmadi Zeleti, Tampere Univ. of Technology (TUT), FIN Track chair: Open source Imed Hammouda, Tampere Univ. of Technology (TUT), FIN Panel Chair Jari Jussila, Tampere Univ. of Technology (TUT), FIN Demonstrations & Poster Chair Paul Coulton, Lancaster University, UK Workshop & Tutorial Chair Andreas Meiszner, UNU, Netherlands Conference Management Consultant Yuan Fu, TUT, FIN Conference Manager and Local Arrangements Subodh Agnihotri, Tampere Univ. of Technology (TUT), FIN Lester Lasrado, Tampere Univ. of Technology (TUT), FIN Program Committee (from Academic Mindtrek 2012 - to be confirmed) Alexander Eichhorn, Simula Research Laboratory, Norway Anders Larsson, Uppsala University, Sweden Andreas Sackl, Telecommunications Research Center Vienna (FTW), Austria Annika Waern, Stockholm University, Sweden Antti Salovaara, Aalto University, Finland Antti Syv?nen, University of Tampere, Finland Ben Kirman, University of Lincoln, United Kingdom Bj?rn Von Rimscha, University of Zurich, Switzerland Conor Linehan, University of Lincoln, United Kingdom Corinna Ogonowski, University of Siegen, Germany Cumhur Erkut, Aalto University, Finland Eija Kaasinen, VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Finland Elina Ollila, Knight Wish, United States Hannu K?rkk?inen, Tampere University of Technology, Finland Hannu Korhonen, University of Tampere, Finland Hannu Paunonen, Metso Automation, Finland Helj? Franssila, University of Tampere, Finland Jaakko Stenros, University of Tampere, Finland Jaakko Suominen, University of Turku, Finland Jan Krone, University of Applied Sciences St. Poelten, Austria Janne Paavilainen, University of Tampere, Finland Jan-Niklas Antons, Technische Universit?t Berlin, Germany Jari Jussila, Tampere University of Technology, Finland Jeff McCarthy, Manchester Metropolitan University, United Kingdom Joerg Niesenhaus, University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany Juho Hamari, HIIT, Finland Jukka vanhala, Tampere University of Technology, Finland Jussi Holopainen, Independent, Germany Jussi Okkonen, University of Tampere, Finland Karin Puehringer, University Salzburg, Austria Katrin Schoenenberg, T-Labs, TU-Berlin, Germany Kristina Kunze, Fraunhofer Institute for Digital Media Technology, Germany Leena Arhippainen, Center for Internet Excellence / University of Oulu, Finland Mark Lochrie, Lancaster University, United Kingdom Paul Murschetz, University of Westminster, United Kingdom Per Backlund, University of Sk?vde, Sweden Peter Haric, Leitbetriebe Institut, Austria Sara Kepplinger, Ilmenau University of Technology, Germany Sebastian Egger, Telecommunications Research Center Vienna (FTW), Austria Sonja Kangas, Souplala, Finland Staffan Bj?rk, Gothenburg University, Sweden Sujan Shrestha, Towson University, United States Svenja Hagenhoff, University Erlangen, Germany Teija Vainio, University of Tampere, Finland Thomas Olsson, Tampere University of Technology, Finland Tobias Nystr?m, Uppsala University, Sweden Veikko Ikonen, VTT, Finland Yuan Fu, EMMi Lab. Finland Yue Dai, University of Eastern Finland, Finland Zhiwen Yu, Northwestern Polytechnical University, China ========================================================================================= Contact ========================================================================================= Questions concerning academic content, papers, tutorials, workshops, scientific contributions: Email: academic-mindtrek-chairs at listmail.tut.fi General questions concerning payments, administration, copyright forms, local arrangements, and the venue: Email: academic-mindtrek-info at listmail.tut.fi ========================================================================================= Submit papers here ========================================================================================= http://www.tut.fi/emmi/Submissions/2013mindtrek/ ========================================================================================= Further Information ========================================================================================= http://www.academicmindtrek.org Supported by MindTrek Association, City of Tampere, Tampere University of Technology (TUT), Tampere University (UTA), Tampere University of Applied Sciences (TAMK), Ambient Media Association (AMEA) From artur.lugmayr at tut.fi Mon May 13 14:48:34 2013 From: artur.lugmayr at tut.fi (artur.lugmayr at tut.fi) Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 00:48:34 +0300 (EEST) Subject: [Air-L] CfP :: INTERACT :: WORKSHOP ON (RE)CREATING LIVELY CITIES THROUGH AMBIENT TECHNOLOGIES: ARTS, CULTURE AND GASTRONOMIC EXPERIENCES (CLCAT) :: EXTENDED DEADLINE 21st MAY 2013 Message-ID: <31470479.15.1368481714963.JavaMail.lugmayr@HLO45-TC> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CALL FOR PAPERS, DEMONSTRATIONS, AND POSTERS IN CONJUCTION WITH INTERACT 2013, CAPE TOWN, SOUTH AFRICA - 6th-9th September 2013 2ND INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP ON (RE)CREATING LIVELY CITIES THROUGH AMBIENT TECHNOLOGIES: ARTS, CULTURE AND GASTRONOMIC EXPERIENCES (CLCAT) http://www.tut.fi/emmi/WWW/ameamain/relci2013 Deadline for 2-5 pages position papers: 21st May 2013 (EXTENDED DEADLINE!) Artur Lugmayr (Tampere Univ. of Technology), Tampere, Finland, lartur at acm.org Jaz Hee-jeong Choi, Urban Informatics Research Lab, QUT, Brisbane Australia, h.choi at qut.edu.au Kirralie Houghton, Urban Informatics Research Lab, QUT, Brisbane Australia, kirralie.houghton at qut.edu.au --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Digital and interactive technologies are becoming increasingly embedded in everyday lives of people around the world. Application of technologies such as real-time, context-aware, and interactive technologies; augmented and immersive realities;, social media; and location-based services has been particularly evident in urban environments where technological and sociocultural infrastructures enable easier deployment and adoption as compared to non-urban areas. There has been growing consumer demand for new forms of experiences and services enabled through these emerging technologies. We call this ambient media, as the media is embedded in the natural human living environment. This workshop focuses on ambient media services, applications, and technologies that promote people?s engagement in creating and re-creating liveliness in urban environments, particularly through arts, culture, and gastronomic experiences. The workshop takes a multidisciplinary and future oriented approach, and welcomes participants from diverse disciplinary domains for open discussions about technological, sociocultural, and content-related aspects of ambient media services that support people?s engagement in (re)creating their urban environments into a livelier place through art, cultural, and gastronomic experiences. Within this context, we welcome submissions relating to (but not limited to) the following: ? case-studies (successful, and especially unsuccessful ones); ? speculative and innovative concepts or design; ? demonstrations of services and applications; ? user-experience studies and evaluations; ? artistic installations and contents; ? social and/or economic studies, businesses models, and marketing ? technological novelties, evaluations, and solutions; The following topics fit within the scope of the workshop: ? Analysis of videos related to art, culture, and gastronomy ? Ubiquitous environments and interfaces in lively city environments ? Intelligent appliances and gadgets supporting art, culture and gastronomy ? Multimedia learning for activities around smart city environments ? Locative media and context sensor technologies ? Artistic, cultural, and gastronomic services and applications; ? Socio-economic studies, business models, advertising, and marketing; ? Applied ambient media technologies in city environments (e.g. P2P, 3D, augmented reality, QoE, protocols, networks, security, and privacy); ? Engagement and persuasion in smart environments; ? QoE and for ambient urban city applications. PUBLICATIONS ? Submit your contribution by using the INTERACT template: [--> http://www.interact2013.org/Interact2013/media/Store/documents/Paper%20formats/Word-2007-2010-Technical-Instructions.zip] ? To the following submission syste: [--> http://webhotel2.tut.fi/emmi/Conferences/2012same/ (!!!) NOTE (!!!): PLEASE DON'T FORGET TO TICK RELCI 2013 AS SUBMISSION TYPE!!! SUBMISSION DEADLINE 21st May 2013 (EXTENDED DEADLINE!) MORE INFORMATION http://www.ambientmediaassociation.org/relci2012 From benallenmorton at gmail.com Mon May 13 16:39:22 2013 From: benallenmorton at gmail.com (Ben Morton) Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 18:39:22 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Journals Related to 'Free Labor' in the Online Economy Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, I need some help finding a Journal suitable for my work. I recently completed a manuscript that critiques the usage of "free labor," "exploitation," and other such terms when studying the collective and often crowdsourced work of individuals within online networks. I am engaging with critical research of online economies, mostly by Tiziana Terranova, Mark Andrejevic, Jonathan Zittrain, and Nancy Baym. Although I am happy to be finished with the manuscript I need some help finding a Journal that might be suitable for this type of research. If I could exploit your free labor for a moment (see what I did there?), could you recommend any journals you think may benefit? Best, Ben Morton From info at webuse.org Tue May 14 08:59:01 2013 From: info at webuse.org (Eszter Hargittai) Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 10:59:01 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] CFP Doctoral Workshop on Digital Tools to Study Human Behavior in Online Environments Message-ID: Please help spread the word. And if you're eligible, please consider applying. (If you're not eligible, but interested, see below, we have a form for you, too.:) Thanks! Eszter Eszter Hargittai Delaney Family Professor, Communication Studies Department, Northwestern University Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society, Harvard University CALL FOR PARTICIPATION: DOCTORAL WORKSHOP Developing Best Practices for Using Digital Tools to Study Human Behavior in Online Environments http://webuse.org/workshop2013/ We invite doctoral students who study human behavior in digital environments, and who are at the beginning stages of their dissertation work, to apply to a workshop focusing on methodological issues in this kind of research. (At a different stage in your work, but still interested? See below.) WHEN: August 18-20, 2013 WHERE: Evanston, Illinois, USA (just north of Chicago) COST: None, the workshop will cover participants' lodging and meals, and in most cases the full cost of their travel HOST: Web Use Project, School of Communication, Northwestern University The goal of the workshop is to bring together about a dozen junior and half-a-dozen senior scholars to discuss methodological best practices for the in-depth study of human behavior in digital environments. So-called "big data" offer lots of opportunities to study the social world, but may miss insights that methods such as in-person observations and interviews can discover. Bringing different types of data and methods together can help address challenges, such as biased data sets, and can help glean new insights. Workshop participants will discuss tools that exist and tools that need to be developed for sharable, sustainable, and scalable approaches to collecting, coding, and analyzing comparable data about human behavior in digital environments. The workshop welcomes applications from full-time doctoral students, regardless of citizenship. Ideally, applicants will not yet have begun data collection for their dissertation, or will be in the early stages of that process. Applicants should, however, have a well-defined dissertation research question. We welcome students from a variety of disciplines, including but not limited to anthropology, communication, demography, economics, human computer interaction, information and library sciences, media studies, political science, science and technology studies, and sociology. Students need not be enrolled at a university in the U.S. to participate. NOT ELIGIBLE, BUT INTERESTED? We ask scholars working on related projects, but either not yet at the dissertation data collection stage or well into their projects to get in touch with us so that we can keep them posted of future meetings and funding opportunities. We welcome hearing from senior scholars as well. http://bit.ly/wupform13 Review of applications for the workshop will begin May 29, 2013. For full consideration, please send application materials before that date. TO APPLY: 1. Fill out and submit this online form: http://bit.ly/wrkshp13 2. Fill out the Application Form linked at http://webuse.org/workshop2013/ 3. Send the Application Form and a copy of your CV (with your last name, first name initial in the file name, e.g., HargittaiE-CV.pdf) as attachments to workshop2013 at webuse.org . Questions? Please email workshop2013 at webuse.org with any questions related to the workshop. Funding for the workshop is provided by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. http://sloan.org From difusion at medialab-prado.es Tue May 14 09:35:05 2013 From: difusion at medialab-prado.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Medialab-Prado_Comunicaci=F3n?=) Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 18:35:05 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] CFP Solid Interfaces & Urban Games: Digital Games in the Public Space Message-ID: <519267B9.20503@medialab-prado.es> Please spread! //////////////////////////////////////////// *Solid Interfaces & Urban Games: Digital Games in the Public Space. Call for Projects* Open Call for project proposals to be developed during a production workshop for the creation of video games related to public space and the city as an interface (July 1-7, 2013) in Medialab-Prado (Madrid, Spain). During seven days of intensive work, ideas will be tested and prototypes developed by working with partners and technical assistants. Deadline: May 31, 2013. More information and submissions: http://medialab-prado.es/article/convocatoria_interfaces_solidas _Framework_ In recent years, the video game experience has outgrown TV screens, game consoles and laptops, becoming increasingly ubiquitous. The availability of mobile devices, tablets, sensors, geolocation services, augmented realities and media facades has allowed the development of new game ideas experimentally and as a prototype. At the forefront of these game forms, which take place in some cases without the screen as an interface, is the interaction with other users and with the environment. Moreover, commercial controllers like Wiimote or Kinect have popularized the idea of the game away from the traditional game controller, transforming the game into a complete physical experience. This workshop proposes to think about games in the public space as an opportunity to generate other uses of the city and connections among its citizens. _Lines of Work_ The selection will consider ideas and projects that are already taking place and address one of the following elements: ? The use of urban furniture as an interface for the game ? Media Fa?ade ? Non-random Games ? Interaction with the space ? Place specific ? Networked City _Methodology_ A maximum of 4 projects will be selected and developed collaboratively in this intensive workshop with the support of tutors, technical assistants and partners. Once projects are selected, there will be an open call for collaborators, who will be fairly selected by the organization and the project promoters. Open Call for collaborators. June 6 - 30, 2013 From amit at coursolve.org Tue May 14 17:29:46 2013 From: amit at coursolve.org (Amit Jain) Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 20:29:46 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Resource: Data analytics support from students Message-ID: *An education researcher at Oxford is organizing an opportunity for researchers and nonprofits to receive free data analytics support from students in a massively open online course. Anyone can join the course and post real-world projects for tens of thousands of students to attempt to solve. Please read below and forward widely!* // *Calling all professors, researchers, and nonprofits* -- harness student learning to get free data analyses from the University of Washington's Introduction to Data Science course! Sign up now to recruit from tens of thousands of students to take on your organization's projects in data visualization, analysis, or predictive modeling. You may not need an internal store of data to benefit -- your organization can learn volumes through publicly available datasets. For details and project ideas, please visit: http://coursolve.org/courses/datascience/ Questions? Contact amit at coursolve.org. -- Amit Jain Coursolve (http://coursolve.org) Twitter: @coursolve | Facebook: Coursolve amit at coursolve.org | +1 617-752-2673 From jwallis at csu.edu.au Tue May 14 17:53:44 2013 From: jwallis at csu.edu.au (Wallis, Jacob) Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 10:53:44 +1000 Subject: [Air-L] Journals Related to 'Free Labor' in the Online Economy In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Ben, This sort of piece sounds like a great fit for either "Information, Communication & Society" or "The Information Society". Good luck! Jake Jake Wallis Lecturer | School of Information Studies Boorooma Street Wagga Wagga, NSW 2650 Australia Tel: +61 2 6933 4397 Fax: +61 2 6933 2733 Email: jwallis at csu.edu.au www.csu.edu.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 18:39:22 -0500 From: Ben Morton To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: [Air-L] Journals Related to 'Free Labor' in the Online Economy Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Dear Colleagues, I need some help finding a Journal suitable for my work. I recently completed a manuscript that critiques the usage of "free labor," "exploitation," and other such terms when studying the collective and often crowdsourced work of individuals within online networks. I am engaging with critical research of online economies, mostly by Tiziana Terranova, Mark Andrejevic, Jonathan Zittrain, and Nancy Baym. Although I am happy to be finished with the manuscript I need some help finding a Journal that might be suitable for this type of research. If I could exploit your free labor for a moment (see what I did there?), could you recommend any journals you think may benefit? Best, Ben Morton Charles Sturt University | ALBURY-WODONGA | BATHURST | CANBERRA | DUBBO | GOULBURN | MELBOURNE | ONTARIO | ORANGE | PORT MACQUARIE | SYDNEY | WAGGA WAGGA | LEGAL NOTICE This email (and any attachment) is confidential and is intended for the use of the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must not copy, distribute, take any action in reliance on it or disclose it to anyone. Any confidentiality is not waived or lost by reason of mistaken delivery. Email should be checked for viruses and defects before opening. Charles Sturt University (CSU) does not accept liability for viruses or any consequence which arise as a result of this email transmission. Email communications with CSU may be subject to automated email filtering, which could result in the delay or deletion of a legitimate email before it is read at CSU. The views expressed in this email are not necessarily those of CSU. Charles Sturt University in Australia http://www.csu.edu.au The Grange Chancellery, Panorama Avenue, Bathurst NSW Australia 2795 (ABN: 83 878 708 551; CRICOS Provider Numbers: 00005F (NSW), 01947G (VIC), 02960B (ACT)). TEQSA Provider Number: PV12018 Charles Sturt University in Ontario http://www.charlessturt.ca 860 Harrington Court, Burlington Ontario Canada L7N 3N4 Registration: www.peqab.ca Consider the environment before printing this email. Disclaimer added by CodeTwo Exchange Rules 2007 http://www.codetwo.com From venkatraman.shriram at gmail.com Tue May 14 20:12:57 2013 From: venkatraman.shriram at gmail.com (Shriram Venkatraman) Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 08:42:57 +0530 Subject: [Air-L] Journals Related to 'Free Labor' in the Online Economy (Ben Morton) Message-ID: Have seen articles on Digital Labor in http://nms.sagepub.com/ (New Media and Society) Thanks, Shriram Venkatraman www.gsmis.org http://www.ucl.ac.uk/social-networking @UCLSocNet From pmgazz at gmx.co.uk Wed May 15 08:05:57 2013 From: pmgazz at gmx.co.uk (Paula Graham) Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 16:05:57 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Flossie 2013 CfP In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5193A455.3070201@gmx.co.uk> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- CfP: FLOSSIE 2013, 8/9 November, QMUL, London, UK -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flossie 2013 is a two-day event for women who are interested in any aspect of open technology, open knowledge, digital arts, and social innovation. Whether you code, tinker, use FLOSS in your projects, or want to explore open alternatives, all women are welcome - from expert to novice, or anywhere in between. Flossie 2013 is a chance to showcase your project, share skills, or talk about something which really interests you. We're also scheduling plenty of time to network, share and build on ideas, and to meet new friends and old. Call for proposals: We?re inviting proposals for all aspects of the day. 1. Talk about your current project or a project you?d like to set up 2. Skills sharing workshops on any aspect of Free/Libre Open Source software, hardware, data ? anything open! 3. Talk about social innovation and diversifying technology design 4. Send us your idea for an activity ? as long as it's open! Even if you don?t feel you have the expertise yourself, and just have an idea, let us know. Deadline: 19 July 2013 Submit your proposal here: http://www.flossie.org/openconf/ If you have any questions, please email conf at flossie.org or find more information on our website at www.flossie.org -- From pmgazz at gmx.co.uk Wed May 15 08:17:41 2013 From: pmgazz at gmx.co.uk (Paula Graham) Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 16:17:41 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Flossie 2013 CfP In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5193A715.40104@gmx.co.uk> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- CfP: FLOSSIE 2013, 8/9 November, QMUL, London, UK -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flossie 2013 is a two-day event for women who are interested in any aspect of open technology, open knowledge, digital arts, and social innovation. Whether you code, tinker, use FLOSS in your projects, or want to explore open alternatives, all women are welcome - from expert to novice, or anywhere in between. Flossie 2013 is a chance to showcase your project, share skills, or talk about something which really interests you. We're also scheduling plenty of time to network, share and build on ideas, and to meet new friends and old. Call for proposals: We?re inviting proposals for all aspects of the day. 1. Talk about your current project or a project you?d like to set up 2. Skills sharing workshops on any aspect of Free/Libre Open Source software, hardware, data ? anything open! 3. Talk about social innovation and diversifying technology design 4. Send us your idea for an activity ? as long as it's open! Even if you don?t feel you have the expertise yourself, and just have an idea, let us know. Deadline: 19 July 2013 Submit your proposal here: http://www.flossie.org/openconf/ If you have any questions, please email conf at flossie.org or find more information on our website at www.flossie.org -- From purplepooka at blueyonder.co.uk Wed May 15 08:40:38 2013 From: purplepooka at blueyonder.co.uk (Emma Pooka) Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 16:40:38 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Bad Influences: Invitation to read and participate in a blog fiction PhD project In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <002f01ce5182$8cde99c0$a69bcd40$@co.uk> I want to announce my PhD project on this list, as I hope that it will be relevant to some researchers here. Please do pass on the details to any colleagues or students who you think would be interested in reading or participating. Bad Influences (http://badinfluences.org.uk) is a multi-character, real-time, interactive blog fiction. It began in January and will continue until November. The purpose of the project is to explore the poetics of blog fiction, especially those relating to the narrative time effects of real-time serialisation, a feature of epistolary fiction using a blog or social network as its platform. It is also an interactive creative writing project that I hope will be enjoyable to read and to participate in whether you have an academic interest in digital literatures and narratology or not! Bad Influences is set in 2026 and tells the story of a global pandemic flu virus through the blogs of four characters, based in London, New Jersey, Beijing and Canberra. The blogs are pre-written and are being posted in real-time (i.e., each post or comment goes up precisely 13 years before the event it relates). The comments sections of the blogs are open for reader participation (upon filling in a participation agreement http://badinfluences.org.uk/take-part/participation-agreement/), and the commentary is a mixture of pre-written character interaction and improvised interaction between reader-participants and characters. This project could be of interest to anybody teaching or researching digital literatures, interactive storytelling, narrative time, disaster fiction or creative writing. Please feel free to contact me on purplepooka at badinfluences.org.uk for more information, or explore the site and the story at http://badinfluences.org.uk. Questions and feedback are very welcome, and I'd love to hear about any use you make of the project in your own research or teaching. Many thanks, Emma Segar (Edge Hill University) purplepooka at badinfluences.org.uk From scroeser at gmail.com Wed May 15 09:27:04 2013 From: scroeser at gmail.com (Sky Croeser) Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 19:27:04 +0300 Subject: [Air-L] Resource: Data analytics support from students In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am a little skeptical about this. While I think it has the potential to be very useful, outsourcing data analysis (a key aspect of research, presumably), seems potentially problematic both in terms of the quality of research and in terms of the academic labour market (why hire a skilled research assistant when you can get students to do it for free)? I'm curious - are these issues being addressed within the project at all? On 15 May 2013 03:29, Amit Jain wrote: > *An education researcher at Oxford is organizing an opportunity for > researchers and nonprofits to receive free data analytics support from > students in a massively open online course. Anyone can join the course and > post real-world projects for tens of thousands of students to attempt to > solve. Please read below and forward widely!* > > // > > *Calling all professors, researchers, and nonprofits* -- harness student > learning to get free data analyses from the University of Washington's > Introduction > to Data Science course! Sign > up > now to recruit from tens of thousands of students to take on your > organization's projects in data visualization, analysis, or predictive > modeling. You may not need an internal store of data to benefit -- your > organization can learn volumes through publicly available datasets. > > For details and project ideas, please visit: > http://coursolve.org/courses/datascience/ > > Questions? Contact amit at coursolve.org. > > -- > Amit Jain > Coursolve (http://coursolve.org) > Twitter: @coursolve | Facebook: > Coursolve > amit at coursolve.org | +1 617-752-2673 > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > From Tim.Hutchings at open.ac.uk Wed May 15 11:33:14 2013 From: Tim.Hutchings at open.ac.uk (Tim.Hutchings) Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 19:33:14 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Registration Open: Digital Media and Sacred Text, June 17 (Open University, London) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9317489861278C419F4BB340B120C8DF0445273EBE@SALCEYCMS1.open.ac.uk> DIGITAL MEDIA AND SACRED TEXT Monday 17 June 2013, Open University Camden Town, London, UK 9am - 6pm This one-day Open University conference will bring together academics interested in the study of digital sacred texts and religious e-reading, including sociologists, anthropologists, media scholars, computer scientists, historians and digital humanists. We also welcome religious practitioners and publishers engaged in creating digital sacred texts. We are delighted to announce that the keynote speaker will be Professor Heidi Campbell (Texas A&M University). Attendance at this event will cost ?20. Thanks to generous funding from the Arts and Humanities Research Council, 30 free places are available for the first delegates to register. A full programme and online registration page can be accessed here: http://www.mediatingreligion.org/events/digital-media-and-sacred-text - Tim Hutchings, Centre for Research on Socio-Cultural Change, Open University -- The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC 038302). From amit at coursolve.org Wed May 15 16:11:19 2013 From: amit at coursolve.org (Amit Jain) Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 19:11:19 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Resource: Data analytics support from students In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks - skepticism is a healthy impulse! Regarding your concern about quality, part of the intention of the course is to determine whether students can indeed create solutions of enough merit to have an impact. We believe they can, but the results either way will help us investigate the efficacy of such co-creative, collaborative networks over the internet. Along those lines, this resource* *is *not* intended to replace the work of paid research assistants. Instead, it should be seen as an opportunity to expand capacity by having students from around the world take on projects that might otherwise remain unfulfilled. Please feel free to email me directly with any additional questions, or visit http://coursolve.org/courses/datascience for more details. On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Sky Croeser wrote: > I am a little skeptical about this. While I think it has the potential to > be very useful, outsourcing data analysis (a key aspect of research, > presumably), seems potentially problematic both in terms of the quality of > research and in terms of the academic labour market (why hire a skilled > research assistant when you can get students to do it for free)? > > I'm curious - are these issues being addressed within the project at all? > > > On 15 May 2013 03:29, Amit Jain wrote: > > > *An education researcher at Oxford is organizing an opportunity for > > researchers and nonprofits to receive free data analytics support from > > students in a massively open online course. Anyone can join the course > and > > post real-world projects for tens of thousands of students to attempt to > > solve. Please read below and forward widely!* > > > > // > > > > *Calling all professors, researchers, and nonprofits* -- harness student > > learning to get free data analyses from the University of Washington's > > Introduction > > to Data Science course! Sign > > up > > now to recruit from tens of thousands of students to take on your > > organization's projects in data visualization, analysis, or predictive > > modeling. You may not need an internal store of data to benefit -- your > > organization can learn volumes through publicly available datasets. > > > > For details and project ideas, please visit: > > http://coursolve.org/courses/datascience/ > > > > Questions? Contact amit at coursolve.org. > > > > -- > > Amit Jain > > Coursolve (http://coursolve.org) > > Twitter: @coursolve | Facebook: > > Coursolve > > amit at coursolve.org | +1 617-752-2673 > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Amit Jain Coursolve (http://coursolve.org) Twitter: @coursolve | Facebook: Coursolve amit at coursolve.org | +1 617-752-2673 From tomoore at deloitte.com Wed May 15 16:16:21 2013 From: tomoore at deloitte.com (Moore, Tony A (US - Glen Mills)) Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 23:16:21 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Resource: Data analytics support from students In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0225CA701B21C94AA4D5C6CB823B7E762D9B5F1A@USNDC1423.us.deloitte.com> Sounds rather interesting for someone in industry. While we clearly can't share any client or private data, this course could help an organization identify potential talent for the data science / analytics shortage. Sounds like a good interview to me. Tony Moore Strategy, Brand & Innovation | Knowledge Manager | Deloitte Analytics This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, by you is strictly prohibited. v.E.1 -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Amit Jain Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 7:11 PM To: Sky Croeser; Air-L Subject: Re: [Air-L] Resource: Data analytics support from students Thanks - skepticism is a healthy impulse! Regarding your concern about quality, part of the intention of the course is to determine whether students can indeed create solutions of enough merit to have an impact. We believe they can, but the results either way will help us investigate the efficacy of such co-creative, collaborative networks over the internet. Along those lines, this resource* *is *not* intended to replace the work of paid research assistants. Instead, it should be seen as an opportunity to expand capacity by having students from around the world take on projects that might otherwise remain unfulfilled. Please feel free to email me directly with any additional questions, or visit http://coursolve.org/courses/datascience for more details. On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Sky Croeser wrote: > I am a little skeptical about this. While I think it has the potential to > be very useful, outsourcing data analysis (a key aspect of research, > presumably), seems potentially problematic both in terms of the quality of > research and in terms of the academic labour market (why hire a skilled > research assistant when you can get students to do it for free)? > > I'm curious - are these issues being addressed within the project at all? > > > On 15 May 2013 03:29, Amit Jain wrote: > > > *An education researcher at Oxford is organizing an opportunity for > > researchers and nonprofits to receive free data analytics support from > > students in a massively open online course. Anyone can join the course > and > > post real-world projects for tens of thousands of students to attempt to > > solve. Please read below and forward widely!* > > > > // > > > > *Calling all professors, researchers, and nonprofits* -- harness student > > learning to get free data analyses from the University of Washington's > > Introduction > > to Data Science course! Sign > > up > > now to recruit from tens of thousands of students to take on your > > organization's projects in data visualization, analysis, or predictive > > modeling. You may not need an internal store of data to benefit -- your > > organization can learn volumes through publicly available datasets. > > > > For details and project ideas, please visit: > > http://coursolve.org/courses/datascience/ > > > > Questions? Contact amit at coursolve.org. > > > > -- > > Amit Jain > > Coursolve (http://coursolve.org) > > Twitter: @coursolve | Facebook: > > Coursolve > > amit at coursolve.org | +1 617-752-2673 > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Amit Jain Coursolve (http://coursolve.org) Twitter: @coursolve | Facebook: Coursolve amit at coursolve.org | +1 617-752-2673 _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From dscaraboto at gmail.com Thu May 16 06:32:14 2013 From: dscaraboto at gmail.com (Daiane Scaraboto) Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 09:32:14 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Collaborative Innovation Networks Conference - CFP deadline May 31 Message-ID: This conference may be of interest to some AOIR members:* -----------------------------------------------* *COINS13: Call for Submissions* *When: *August 11-13, 2013 *Where:* Santiago de Chile, Pontificia Universidad Cat?lica de Chile *Papers:* Paper submission deadline May 15, 2013 (*extended to May 31*) *Workshops:* Proposal submission deadline May 15, 2013 (*extended to May 31* ) *Artifacts:* Proposal submission deadline June 1, 2013 *Web:* http://www.coinschile.com The Collaborative Innovation Networks Conference (COINS) invites you to submit your papers, workshop proposals, and artifacts to the 4th annual international conference to be held in Santiago de Chile, hosted by Pontificia Universidad Cat?lica de Chile from August 11 to August 13, 2013. COINS13 brings together practitioners, researchers and students of the emerging science of collaboration to share their work, learn from each other, and get inspired through creative new ideas. Conference activities will take place throughout the historic cities of Santiago and Valparaiso. Attendees will be encouraged to engage with the community, meet local entrepreneurs, artists, and designers, take a guided tour of the city, and participate in hands-on workshops and interactive sessions. Where science, design, business and art meet, COINS13 looks at the emerging forces behind the phenomena of open-source, creative, entrepreneurial and social movements. Through interactive workshops, professional presentations, and fascinating keynotes, COINS13 combines a wide range of interdisciplinary fields such as social network analysis, group dynamics, design and visualization, information systems, collective action and the psychology and sociality of collaboration. The best papers will be selected for a special issue of the International Journal of Organisational Design and Engineering (IJODE; http://www.inderscience.com/jhome.php?jcode=IJODE). Program Chairs: Marisa Von B?low (UC) & Cristobal Garcia (UC) Proceedings Chair: Peter Gloor (MIT) *Learning from the Swarm* The COINS13 conference committee seeks original paper submissions, creative workshop ideas and concepts, unique artifacts or installations, and engaging rapid-fire presentations celebrating the theme ?Learning from the Swarm?. This year we are asking what is relevant with regard to the innovative powers of creative and civic swarms, what are the observable qualities of virtual collaboration and mobilization, and how does the quest for global cooperation affect local networks. We invite both theoretical and practice-based dialogues, case studies, scientific papers, technological solutions, research studies, and interactive artifacts that thoroughly reflect this year?s conference theme. We invite researchers and designers to submit their latest scientific results and experimental design solutions as full research papers, workshop proposals, and artifact demonstrations in the following conference themes: ? Networks & Collaboration in a Global Context: Optimization through Collaboration | Teamwork through virtually enhanced Collaboration | Measuring the performance of COINs | Patterns of swarm creativity ? Group Dynamics, Social Movements & Net Activism: Collaborative Learning | Collaborative Leadership | Design & visualization of interdisciplinary collaboration | Virtual Teaming ? Individual & Social Learning: The psychology and sociality of collaboration and collective action | Social Behavior Modeling | Social Intelligence and Social Cognition ? Tools and Methods: Social System Design and Architectures | Dynamic Social Network Analysis | Semantic Social Network Analysis | Actor Network Theory The increase of online social network communication opens up unprecedented opportunities to read the collective mind, revealing trends while they are still being hatched by small groups of creative individuals. The Web has become a mirror of the real world, allowing researchers, in fields of social & behavioral science as well as design, to study and better understand why some new ideas change our lives, while others never make it from the drawing board of the innovator. Collaborative Innovation Networks, or COINs, are cyberteams of self-motivated people with a collective vision, enabled by technology to collaborate, challenge the status-quo and innovate by sharing ideas, information, resources and work. COINs are powered by swarm creativity, wherein people work together in a structure that enables a fluid creation and exchange of ideas. ?Coolhunting? ? the discovering, analyzing, and measuring of trends and trendsetters as well as movers and shakers ? puts COINs to productive use. Below are the details and deadlines for the submission of Papers, Workshops, and Artifacts sessions. For up to date information and additional details please visit our website: www.coinschile.com To engage with the broader COINs community, follow us on twitter @coinschile and join our Facebook page (Collaborative Innovation Networks: COINs Conference). *Papers:* Submission Deadline May 15, 2013 (extended to May 31) COINS13 seeks original, high-quality papers that reflect the full breadth and scope of collaboration science and design including: bold research ideas, conceptual developments, research investigations, methodological & theoretical advances, design ideas, development experiences and more. Submissions should report original research, reflections on theoretical concerns, methodological advances, or other insights that contribute to our understanding of all aspects of collaboration and help advance the state of knowledge for the community. We encourage perspectives from diverse disciplinary backgrounds. Papers should be submitted in .doc or .pdf format. Authors are required to attend the conference to present their work. Submit papers by May 31, 2013 on EasyChair: https://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=coins13 Important Dates: May 15, 2013 | Deadline for Paper Submissions (extended to May 31) June 30, 2013 | Author(s) will be notified of provisional acceptance of the paper July 30, 2013 | Final copy for conference to publications chair August 11-13 | Paper presentations at COINS13, Santiago, Chile *Workshops:* Proposals Submission Deadline May 15, 2013 (extended to May 31) Workshops will take place during the conference and will form part of the main program. This year we are accepting proposals for both two-hour and four-hour sessions. Workshops are intended to provide a forum for exchanging ideas, sharing experiences, fostering conversation and research communities, learning from each other, exploring controversies, engaging in debate, envisioning future directions and elaborating new methods and perspectives. Workshop activities can range from open forum discussion, to demonstrations or presentations with discussion, to collaborative activities such as structured brainstorming, illustrative games or role-plays. Whatever the focus or format, organizers will be required to schedule time for conversation, reflection, discussion, and debate. Although we envision most workshop activities to take place in one setting, let us know if your workshop will venture out into other sites in Santiago. Workshop proposals should include: ? a summary of 500 words describing the theme(s) of the workshop ? a longer detailed description of the workshop structure, activities and goals ? the names, contact information and background of the organizer(s) ? the maximum number of participants you'd like to attend the workshop ? anticipated A/V requirements. Please be as specific as possible as it helps us in selection, and in helping you plan the workshop. Workshop participants will be registered on a first come first served basis by the conference committee, so the workshop organizers will not be able to select their participants. Accepted workshops will be publicized via the COINS13 website within a month after organizers are notified. Workshop organizers will also be encouraged to promote COINS13 and their workshops to potential attendees. Submit proposals by May 15, 2013 to:https:// www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=coins13. Additionally, please include your email address and other contact details. Important Dates: May 15, 2013 | Deadline for workshop submissions (extended to May 31) June 30, 2013 | Author(s) will be notified of provisional acceptance of the workshop August 11-13 | Workshop at COINS13, Santiago, Chile *Artifacts:* Proposals Submission Deadline June 1, 2013 The artifacts category seeks to provide participants with an opportunity to present work in a forum that facilitates open discussion and enables direct interaction with conference attendees. A dedicated session will be held during the conference to present the artifacts. Artifacts can be anything from design sketchbooks, to reformed organizational processes, to ads you?ve produced, to products you?ve made, to short films, to conceptual objects, etc. We encourage submissions that are thought provoking and visually engaging, and which cover exploratory/speculative work, smaller projects, unusual representations of ethnographic work, and so on. The form of the presented materials is open. In keeping with the category title artifacts though, we encourage submissions based on some material instantiation that can be exhibited at the conference. Our hope is that it will be the ?thinginess? of the artifacts that will, in part, prompt interaction with and between conference attendees. Submissions should include a single page describing or illustrating the proposed submission (the one page inclusive of any and all figures and references, where appropriate). This page should convey to reviewers what the artifact being submitted is and how it is hoped to provoke discussion. The page will also be included in the published conference proceedings. Also included in the submissions should be a paragraph and image (no more that 150 words) that can be displayed on the conference website. Please submit these submission materials by June 1, 2013 to: https://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=coins13 Additionally, please include your email address and other contact details. *Important Dates:* June 1, 2013 | Deadline for artifacts submissions June 30, 2013 | Author(s) will be notified of provisional acceptance of the artifact. Accepted submissions will have their 150 word descriptions posted on the COINS13 website. Descriptions (including images) of accepted artifacts will be published in the COINS13 Proceedings. July 30, 2013 | Final papers due August 11-13 | artifacts presentations at COINS13, Santiago, Chile. The artifact itself should be transported to Santiago for the conference. *Academic Committee:* Jose Allard, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile Jana Diesner, UIUC Jorge Fabrega, Universidad Adolfo Iba?ez Kai Fischbach, Bamberg University Karin Frick, GDI Sebasti?n Gatica - Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile Takashi Iba, Keio University Emmanuel Lazega, Paris Dauphine Ionna Likorenzu, INRIA Takis Metaxas, Wellesley & Harvard Meghan Pierce, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile Alvaro Pina-Stranger, Ecole des Mines Johannes Putzke, University of Cologne Carlos Rodriguez-Sickert, Universidad del Desarrollo Erica Salvaj, Universidad del Desarrollo Daiane Scarboto, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile Detlef Schoder, Cologne University Yang Song, University of Amsterdam Ruth Stock-Homburg, Technical University of Darmstadt Marisa Von B?llow, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile *Steering Committee:* Cristobal Garcia, PUC Peter Gloor, MIT Julia Gluesing, Wayne State University Casper Lassenius, Aalto University Christine Miller, SCAD Maria Paasivaara, Aalto University Ken Riopelle, Wayne State University More information: http://www.coinschile.com Daiane Scaraboto Assistant Professor of Marketing Escuela de Administraci?n Pontificia Universidad Cat?lica de Chile T:+56 2354-4340 ext. 1594 http://uc-cl.academia.edu/DaianeScaraboto 2013/5/15 > Send Air-L mailing list submissions to > air-l at listserv.aoir.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > air-l-request at listserv.aoir.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > air-l-owner at listserv.aoir.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Air-L digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Resource: Data analytics support from students (Amit Jain) > 2. Journals Related to 'Free Labor' in the Online Economy > (Wallis, Jacob) > 3. Re: Journals Related to 'Free Labor' in the Online Economy > (Ben Morton) (Shriram Venkatraman) > 4. Flossie 2013 CfP (Paula Graham) > 5. Flossie 2013 CfP (Paula Graham) > 6. Bad Influences: Invitation to read and participate in a blog > fiction PhD project (Emma Pooka) > 7. Re: Resource: Data analytics support from students (Sky Croeser) > 8. Registration Open: Digital Media and Sacred Text, June 17 > (Open University, London) (Tim.Hutchings) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 20:29:46 -0400 > From: Amit Jain > To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org > Subject: [Air-L] Resource: Data analytics support from students > Message-ID: > < > CAOfkNix1+wJNeppcpxTrqvYp2n-A3H_wu0bjcYNfqBFBut7g4w at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > *An education researcher at Oxford is organizing an opportunity for > researchers and nonprofits to receive free data analytics support from > students in a massively open online course. Anyone can join the course and > post real-world projects for tens of thousands of students to attempt to > solve. Please read below and forward widely!* > > // > > *Calling all professors, researchers, and nonprofits* -- harness student > learning to get free data analyses from the University of Washington's > Introduction > to Data Science course! Sign > up > now to recruit from tens of thousands of students to take on your > organization's projects in data visualization, analysis, or predictive > modeling. You may not need an internal store of data to benefit -- your > organization can learn volumes through publicly available datasets. > > For details and project ideas, please visit: > http://coursolve.org/courses/datascience/ > > Questions? Contact amit at coursolve.org. > > -- > Amit Jain > Coursolve (http://coursolve.org) > Twitter: @coursolve | Facebook: > Coursolve > amit at coursolve.org | +1 617-752-2673 > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 10:53:44 +1000 > From: "Wallis, Jacob" > To: "air-l at listserv.aoir.org" > Subject: [Air-L] Journals Related to 'Free Labor' in the Online > Economy > Message-ID: > < > E826490A65E1C240BB38D3B9E767DAA738D896FD37 at MAIL01.CSUMain.csu.edu.au> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Hi Ben, > > This sort of piece sounds like a great fit for either "Information, > Communication & Society" or "The Information Society". > > Good luck! > Jake > > Jake Wallis > Lecturer | School of Information Studies > Boorooma Street > Wagga Wagga, NSW 2650 > Australia > Tel: +61 2 6933 4397 > Fax: +61 2 6933 2733 > Email: jwallis at csu.edu.au > www.csu.edu.au > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 18:39:22 -0500 > From: Ben Morton > To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org > Subject: [Air-L] Journals Related to 'Free Labor' in the Online > Economy > Message-ID: > < > CAEKywwYs9uvV4Kre0rFM_CUq5mk+GK-cV_rttB4V8geFBT8LbQ at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Dear Colleagues, > > I need some help finding a Journal suitable for my work. > > I recently completed a manuscript that critiques the usage of "free labor," > "exploitation," and other such terms when studying the collective and > often crowdsourced work of individuals within online networks. I am > engaging with critical research of online economies, mostly by Tiziana > Terranova, Mark Andrejevic, Jonathan Zittrain, and Nancy Baym. > > Although I am happy to be finished with the manuscript I need some help > finding a Journal that might be suitable for this type of research. If I > could exploit your free labor for a moment (see what I did there?), could > you recommend any journals you think may benefit? > > Best, > Ben Morton > Charles Sturt University > > | ALBURY-WODONGA | BATHURST | CANBERRA | DUBBO | GOULBURN | MELBOURNE | > ONTARIO | ORANGE | PORT MACQUARIE | SYDNEY | WAGGA WAGGA | > > LEGAL NOTICE > This email (and any attachment) is confidential and is intended for the > use of the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient of this > email, you must not copy, distribute, take any action in reliance on it or > disclose it to anyone. Any confidentiality is not waived or lost by reason > of mistaken delivery. Email should be checked for viruses and defects > before opening. Charles Sturt University (CSU) does not accept liability > for viruses or any consequence which arise as a result of this email > transmission. Email communications with CSU may be subject to automated > email filtering, which could result in the delay or deletion of a > legitimate email before it is read at CSU. The views expressed in this > email are not necessarily those of CSU. > > Charles Sturt University in Australia http://www.csu.edu.au The Grange > Chancellery, Panorama Avenue, Bathurst NSW Australia 2795 (ABN: 83 878 708 > 551; CRICOS Provider Numbers: 00005F (NSW), 01947G (VIC), 02960B (ACT)). > TEQSA Provider Number: PV12018 > > Charles Sturt University in Ontario http://www.charlessturt.ca 860 > Harrington Court, Burlington Ontario Canada L7N 3N4 Registration: > www.peqab.ca > > Consider the environment before printing this email. > > Disclaimer added by CodeTwo Exchange Rules 2007 > http://www.codetwo.com > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 08:42:57 +0530 > From: Shriram Venkatraman > To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org > Subject: Re: [Air-L] Journals Related to 'Free Labor' in the Online > Economy (Ben Morton) > Message-ID: > < > CAEqTNUZcLm74Y2PBrkQJ+4a8h8vSp5O+MjWkn+96vRs4jkyqRQ at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Have seen articles on Digital Labor in http://nms.sagepub.com/ (New Media > and Society) > > > Thanks, > Shriram Venkatraman > > www.gsmis.org > http://www.ucl.ac.uk/social-networking > @UCLSocNet > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 16:05:57 +0100 > From: Paula Graham > To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org > Subject: [Air-L] Flossie 2013 CfP > Message-ID: <5193A455.3070201 at gmx.co.uk> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > CfP: FLOSSIE 2013, 8/9 November, QMUL, London, UK > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Flossie 2013 is a two-day event for women who are interested in any > aspect of open technology, open knowledge, digital arts, and social > innovation. Whether you code, tinker, use FLOSS in your projects, or > want to explore open alternatives, all women are welcome - from expert > to novice, or anywhere in between. > > Flossie 2013 is a chance to showcase your project, share skills, or talk > about something which really interests you. We're also scheduling plenty > of time to network, share and build on ideas, and to meet new friends > and old. > > Call for proposals: > > We?re inviting proposals for all aspects of the day. > 1. Talk about your current project or a project you?d like to set up > 2. Skills sharing workshops on any aspect of Free/Libre Open Source > software, hardware, data ? anything open! > 3. Talk about social innovation and diversifying technology design > 4. Send us your idea for an activity ? as long as it's open! Even if you > don?t feel you have the expertise yourself, and just have an idea, let > us know. > > Deadline: 19 July 2013 > > Submit your proposal here: http://www.flossie.org/openconf/ > > If you have any questions, please email conf at flossie.org or find more > information on our website at www.flossie.org > > -- > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 16:17:41 +0100 > From: Paula Graham > To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org > Subject: [Air-L] Flossie 2013 CfP > Message-ID: <5193A715.40104 at gmx.co.uk> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > CfP: FLOSSIE 2013, 8/9 November, QMUL, London, UK > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Flossie 2013 is a two-day event for women who are interested in any > aspect of open technology, open knowledge, digital arts, and social > innovation. Whether you code, tinker, use FLOSS in your projects, or > want to explore open alternatives, all women are welcome - from expert > to novice, or anywhere in between. > > Flossie 2013 is a chance to showcase your project, share skills, or talk > about something which really interests you. We're also scheduling plenty > of time to network, share and build on ideas, and to meet new friends > and old. > > Call for proposals: > > We?re inviting proposals for all aspects of the day. > 1. Talk about your current project or a project you?d like to set up > 2. Skills sharing workshops on any aspect of Free/Libre Open Source > software, hardware, data ? anything open! > 3. Talk about social innovation and diversifying technology design > 4. Send us your idea for an activity ? as long as it's open! Even if you > don?t feel you have the expertise yourself, and just have an idea, let > us know. > > Deadline: 19 July 2013 > > Submit your proposal here: http://www.flossie.org/openconf/ > > If you have any questions, please email conf at flossie.org or find more > information on our website at www.flossie.org > > -- > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 16:40:38 +0100 > From: "Emma Pooka" > To: > Subject: [Air-L] Bad Influences: Invitation to read and participate in > a blog fiction PhD project > Message-ID: <002f01ce5182$8cde99c0$a69bcd40$@co.uk> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > I want to announce my PhD project on this list, as I hope that it will be > relevant to some researchers here. Please do pass on the details to any > colleagues or students who you think would be interested in reading or > participating. > > Bad Influences (http://badinfluences.org.uk) is a multi-character, > real-time, interactive blog fiction. It began in January and will continue > until November. The purpose of the project is to explore the poetics of > blog fiction, especially those relating to the narrative time effects of > real-time serialisation, a feature of epistolary fiction using a blog or > social network as its platform. It is also an interactive creative writing > project that I hope will be enjoyable to read and to participate in whether > you have an academic interest in digital literatures and narratology or > not! > > Bad Influences is set in 2026 and tells the story of a global pandemic flu > virus through the blogs of four characters, based in London, New Jersey, > Beijing and Canberra. The blogs are pre-written and are being posted in > real-time (i.e., each post or comment goes up precisely 13 years before the > event it relates). The comments sections of the blogs are open for reader > participation (upon filling in a participation agreement > http://badinfluences.org.uk/take-part/participation-agreement/), and the > commentary is a mixture of pre-written character interaction and improvised > interaction between reader-participants and characters. > > This project could be of interest to anybody teaching or researching > digital > literatures, interactive storytelling, narrative time, disaster fiction or > creative writing. Please feel free to contact me on > purplepooka at badinfluences.org.uk for more information, or explore the site > and the story at http://badinfluences.org.uk. Questions and feedback are > very welcome, and I'd love to hear about any use you make of the project in > your own research or teaching. > > Many thanks, > Emma Segar (Edge Hill University) > purplepooka at badinfluences.org.uk > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 19:27:04 +0300 > From: Sky Croeser > To: Air-L > Subject: Re: [Air-L] Resource: Data analytics support from students > Message-ID: > DBGYt-5X2HcjFchw at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > I am a little skeptical about this. While I think it has the potential to > be very useful, outsourcing data analysis (a key aspect of research, > presumably), seems potentially problematic both in terms of the quality of > research and in terms of the academic labour market (why hire a skilled > research assistant when you can get students to do it for free)? > > I'm curious - are these issues being addressed within the project at all? > > > On 15 May 2013 03:29, Amit Jain wrote: > > > *An education researcher at Oxford is organizing an opportunity for > > researchers and nonprofits to receive free data analytics support from > > students in a massively open online course. Anyone can join the course > and > > post real-world projects for tens of thousands of students to attempt to > > solve. Please read below and forward widely!* > > > > // > > > > *Calling all professors, researchers, and nonprofits* -- harness student > > learning to get free data analyses from the University of Washington's > > Introduction > > to Data Science course! Sign > > up > > now to recruit from tens of thousands of students to take on your > > organization's projects in data visualization, analysis, or predictive > > modeling. You may not need an internal store of data to benefit -- your > > organization can learn volumes through publicly available datasets. > > > > For details and project ideas, please visit: > > http://coursolve.org/courses/datascience/ > > > > Questions? Contact amit at coursolve.org. > > > > -- > > Amit Jain > > Coursolve (http://coursolve.org) > > Twitter: @coursolve | Facebook: > > Coursolve > > amit at coursolve.org | +1 617-752-2673 > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 19:33:14 +0100 > From: Tim.Hutchings > To: "air-l at listserv.aoir.org" > Subject: [Air-L] Registration Open: Digital Media and Sacred Text, > June 17 (Open University, London) > Message-ID: > <9317489861278C419F4BB340B120C8DF0445273EBE at SALCEYCMS1.open.ac.uk> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > DIGITAL MEDIA AND SACRED TEXT > > Monday 17 June 2013, Open University > Camden Town, London, UK > 9am - 6pm > > This one-day Open University conference will bring together academics > interested in the study of digital sacred texts and religious e-reading, > including sociologists, anthropologists, media scholars, computer > scientists, historians and digital humanists. We also welcome religious > practitioners and publishers engaged in creating digital sacred texts. > > We are delighted to announce that the keynote speaker will be Professor > Heidi Campbell (Texas A&M University). > > Attendance at this event will cost ?20. Thanks to generous funding from > the Arts and Humanities Research Council, 30 free places are available for > the first delegates to register. > > A full programme and online registration page can be accessed here: > http://www.mediatingreligion.org/events/digital-media-and-sacred-text > > - Tim Hutchings, Centre for Research on Socio-Cultural Change, Open > University > > -- > The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an > exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC > 038302). > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > > End of Air-L Digest, Vol 106, Issue 16 > ************************************** > From c.haythorn at ubc.ca Thu May 16 08:25:58 2013 From: c.haythorn at ubc.ca (Caroline Haythornthwaite) Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 08:25:58 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] CFP Networked Learning conference References: Message-ID: CFP: Networked Learning Conference Chairs: Maarten de Laat & Thomas Ryberg http://www.networkedlearningconference.org.uk/ Papers Due: Friday 4th October, 2013. Conference: April 7-9, 2014, Edinburgh, UK -------------------- Dear Colleague We are pleased to announce the Call for papers for the Ninth International Conference on Networked Learning in Higher Education, Lifelong Learning and Professional Development. The conference is hosted by the University of Edinburgh, at the John McIntyre Conference Centre in Edinburgh, on the 7th. 8th & 9th April 2014. Keynote Speakers: Professor Neil Selwyn & Professor Steve Fuller This conference is considered a major event in the international 'technology enhanced learning' conference circuit, and provides a friendly, collegiate context for meeting researchers and practitioners in networked learning All submissions are peer reviewed, and accepted papers published in conference proceeding Further details on submission at: www.networkedlearningconference.org.uk/documents/call.pdf NOTE: Full papers must be submitted for peer review by Friday 4th October, 2013. PRE-CONFERENCE ONLINE HOT SEATs will run from September 2013 to March 2014: Details of Hot Seat hosts can be found at: http://networkedlearningconference.ning.com/ Full Conference Details can be found at: http://www.networkedlearningconference.org.uk/ Maarten de Laat, Open University, Netherlands & Thomas Ryberg, Aalborg University, Denmark From rawbird at gmail.com Thu May 16 09:29:26 2013 From: rawbird at gmail.com (Adam Fish) Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 17:29:26 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Internet Historiography Message-ID: Dear AOIRers, Anybody know of articles or books analysing 1) the political historiography of the internet. Who has criticized the historiography of the internet as being written for political gain? Secondly, any research on 2) the space shared by classic liberalism, technology, and history? I am writing this piece on how Obama?s statement on ?the internet? you didn?t build that,? celebrating social liberal federal investments in technology, has been (mis)interpreted by various political actors. Any leads? Best, Adam Fish, PhD Media and Cultural Studies Department of Sociology Lancaster University, UK LA1 4YT p. 01524592699 a.fish2 at lancaster.ac.uk @mediacultures, mediacultures.org http://www.research.lancs.ac.uk/portal/en/people/adam-fish(10a5067e-a828-497b-95ae-e35ed07f9ba1).html From glovi002 at umn.edu Thu May 16 10:53:03 2013 From: glovi002 at umn.edu (Peter Gloviczki) Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 12:53:03 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Internet Historiography In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Adam, Niels Brugger's work might be helpful to you, including his book Web History: < http://www.amazon.com/History-Digital-Formations-Niels-4gger/dp/1433104687>. Best wishes, Peter On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Adam Fish wrote: > Dear AOIRers, > > Anybody know of articles or books analysing 1) the political historiography > of the internet. Who has criticized the historiography of the internet as > being written for political gain? > > Secondly, any research on 2) the space shared by classic liberalism, > technology, and history? > > I am writing this piece on how Obama?s statement on ?the internet? you > didn?t build that,? celebrating social liberal federal investments in > technology, has been (mis)interpreted by various political actors. > > Any leads? > > Best, > > > Adam Fish, PhD > > Media and Cultural Studies > > Department of Sociology > > Lancaster University, UK > > LA1 4YT > > p. 01524592699 > > a.fish2 at lancaster.ac.uk > > @mediacultures, mediacultures.org > > > http://www.research.lancs.ac.uk/portal/en/people/adam-fish(10a5067e-a828-497b-95ae-e35ed07f9ba1).html > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Peter Joseph Gloviczki, Ph.D. http://petergloviczki.com From hrosenba at indiana.edu Thu May 16 11:05:56 2013 From: hrosenba at indiana.edu (Howard Rosenbaum) Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 14:05:56 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] CFP> HICSS 2014 Minitrack: Crowdsourcing content production and online knowledge repositories Message-ID: Apologies for cross-posting HICSS 2014 Minitrack: Crowdsourcing content production and online knowledge repositories January 6-9, 2014 Big Island, Hawaii, USA Track: Digital and social media We are pleased to invite you to submit a paper to the Crowdsourcing mini-track for HICSS 2014 taking place at the Hilton Waikoloa on the Big Island of Hawaii from Jan. 6-9th, 2014. In line with the track emphasis on promoting digital and social-media-related research, this minitrack aims to expand the scope of research in HICSS and bring to the conference researchers interested in cutting edge topics involving socio-technical issues of mass knowledge production and crowdsourcing online knowledge repositories. As various forms of collaboration are enabled (and constrained) by the affordances available in social media, researchers are investigating a range of issues including: 1) the diverse ways in which people collaborate to create, manage, curate and manipulate online content and how these activities affect digital repositories; 2) how those who manage these repositories are responding to the dynamics of online co-creation of content; 3) the dynamics of crowdsourced online collaborations and online communities of practice; and 4) the ways in which we can best describe the socio-technical interaction networks that facilitate and inhibit mass knowledge production. In this mini track we are interested in empirical and theoretical work that addresses these and related socio-technical issues. Papers of interest will examine communities of online knowledge repositories such as YouTube, Yahoo!Answers, Wikipedia, and others and may address in this context topics such as: . The socio-technical dynamics of crowdsourcing and mass knowledge production sites . Vandalism and trolling in online mass knowledge production sites . Conflict and cooperation in content production sites . Issues of gender in collaborative content production sites . Global, cross-cultural and international aspects of content production and online intercultural collaborations in online content creation communities . Managing ethics in online mass knowledge production communities . Building, maintaining and ending social relationships on online repositories sites . Social question answering and collaborative information seeking behaviors . Challenges and opportunities of digital curation . Standards and quality of digital content online Detailed information about the conference can be found here http://www.hicss.hawaii.edu/hicss_47/apahome47.htm Information for potential authors can be found here http://www.hicss.hawaii.edu/hicss_47/47cfp.pdf Due date for submission of full papers is: June 15, 2013 Minitrack organizers Pnina Fichman Informatics West #301 901 East 10th Street SLIS, Indiana University Bloomington Indiana 47408 812 856 1587 Noriko Hara 1320 East 10th Street SLIS, Indiana University Bloomington Indiana 47405 812 855 1490 Howard Rosenbaum 1320 East 10th Street SLIS, Indiana University Bloomington Indiana 47405 812 855 3250 From arussell at stevens.edu Thu May 16 13:18:35 2013 From: arussell at stevens.edu (Andrew Russell) Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 16:18:35 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Internet Historiography In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Adam - For your first question, I presented a paper last fall called "Histories of Networking vs. the History of the Internet" that took political misinterpretations of the Internet's history (by Steven Johnson and Gordon Crovitz) as a point of departure. You can find it at http://arussell.org/papers/russell-SIGCIS-2012.pdf. In late 2013 Cambridge University Press will publish my book, _An Open World: History, Ideology, and Network Standards_ which has some critical comments on the historiography of the Internet, although perhaps not quite in the way you have framed it. On the second question, it's tough to know where to start since your question is one of the major questions that scholars in STS, the history of technology, and business history have been pursuing for decades (assuming you mean New Deal-style liberalism, as we call it in the US): Sheila Jasanoff, Langdon Winner, Richard John, Steve Usselman, Lou Galambos, Brian Balogh, Michael Dennis, Dominique Tobbell, etc. If you mean American federal policies that have promoted technological innovation, Norberg & O'Neill's "Transforming Computer Technology" has a richly detailed history of ARPA's IPTO - which sounds directly on point for you. I'm happy to be more specific or otherwise share cites, etc if you think it would be helpful; and in any case please let us know when you finish what you're working on! Cheers, Andy On May 16, 2013, at 12:29 PM, Adam Fish wrote: > Dear AOIRers, > > Anybody know of articles or books analysing 1) the political historiography > of the internet. Who has criticized the historiography of the internet as > being written for political gain? > > Secondly, any research on 2) the space shared by classic liberalism, > technology, and history? > > I am writing this piece on how Obama?s statement on ?the internet? you > didn?t build that,? celebrating social liberal federal investments in > technology, has been (mis)interpreted by various political actors. > > Any leads? > > Best, > > > Adam Fish, PhD > > Media and Cultural Studies > > Department of Sociology > > Lancaster University, UK > > LA1 4YT > > p. 01524592699 > > a.fish2 at lancaster.ac.uk > > @mediacultures, mediacultures.org > > http://www.research.lancs.ac.uk/portal/en/people/adam-fish(10a5067e-a828-497b-95ae-e35ed07f9ba1).html > --------------------------------------------------------------------- Andrew L. Russell, Ph.D. Director, Program in Science & Technology Studies Assistant Professor, History College of Arts & Letters Stevens Institute of Technology Hoboken, New Jersey 07030 t. 201-216-5400 f. 201-216-8245 arussell at stevens.edu http://www.stevens.edu/cal/sts http://www.arussell.org From meta.sj at gmail.com Thu May 16 14:31:34 2013 From: meta.sj at gmail.com (Samuel Klein) Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 17:31:34 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Fwd: [Wiki-research-l] Research analyst opening at Wikimedia In-Reply-To: <7ADC5900-A893-4D1F-BA2C-121F0CC41E66@wikimedia.org> References: <7ADC5900-A893-4D1F-BA2C-121F0CC41E66@wikimedia.org> Message-ID: For the community-dataminers and researchers out there: SJ ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Dario Taraborelli Date: Tue, May 7, 2013 at 3:59 PM Subject: [Wiki-research-l] Research analyst opening at Wikimedia To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities , "A mailing list for the Analytics Team at WMF and everybody who has an interest in Wikipedia and analytics." Cc: Heather McAndrew , Ion Vazquez The Wikimedia Foundation is looking to hire a full-time Research Analyst to join our product research and analytics team: http://hire.jobvite.com/j/?cj=oTqrXfwr&s=wiki-research-l This opening is focused on research on editor engagement features and experiments developed by the Foundation's product team. Get in touch off-list if you have any questions on this opening (you can also contact Heather and Ion from our recruitment team, cc'ed). Dario _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l at lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l -- Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266 From kedrisco at usc.edu Thu May 16 15:36:40 2013 From: kedrisco at usc.edu (Kevin Driscoll) Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 15:36:40 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] Internet Historiography Message-ID: Hi Adam, On Thu, 16 May 2013 17:29:26 +0100, Adam Fish wrote: > > Anybody know of articles or books analysing 1) the political historiography > of the internet. Who has criticized the historiography of the internet as > being written for political gain? These are really interesting questions. Back in 1998, Roy Rosenzweig wrote a round up of recently published histories of the internet (including Hafner & Lyon, Norberg & O'Neill, and Edwards.) Not only is it an excellent integrative review but I found it helpful for reconstructing the stakes of telling different stories about the internet at that particular moment. Rosenzweig, Roy. "Wizards, bureaucrats, warriors, and hackers: Writing the history of the Internet." The American Historical Review 103, no. 5 (1998): 1530-1552. You might also look into the various documents produced by the FCC regarding the National Broadband Plan: http://www.broadband.gov/ I'm tracing some similar ground in my diss research right now. Looking forward to hearing more about what you turn up. Kevin Driscoll PhD candidate Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism University of Southern California From Julie.Freeman at canberra.edu.au Thu May 16 17:04:37 2013 From: Julie.Freeman at canberra.edu.au (Julie.Freeman) Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 00:04:37 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] CFP - Emerging Issues in Communication Research & Policy, Canberra, Australia Message-ID: Call for Papers: Emerging Issues in Communication Research and Policy News & Media Research Centre, University of Canberra, Australia 18-19 November 2013 www.canberra.edu.au/nmrc-conference-2013 Building on the success of the 2012 symposium on the future of the Australian National Broadband Network, the News & Media Research Centre (N&MRC) at the University of Canberra will be hosting its inaugural conference on 'Emerging Issues in Communication Research and Policy'. The aim of this forum is to bring together academic researchers, media practitioners and government professionals working in the media, Internet and telecommunications fields to facilitate analysis and critique of the impact of the changing media landscape and regulatory frameworks on the public. The full call for papers can be downloaded from www.canberra.edu.au/nmrc-conference-2013 Key Dates: Abstract / Full Paper Submission: 1 August 2013 Notification of Outcome: 1 October 2013 Revised Paper Deadline: 1 November 2013 Final Date for Registration: 1 November 2013 Accepted full papers will be published in the conference proceedings, which will have an ISBN and be made publicly available via the N&MRC website. Selected papers presented at the conference will be invited for publication in the Telecommunications Journal of Australia, vol. 64, no. 1 (March 2014) (see www.tja.org.au). Contact: Further information is available on the conference website: www.canberra.edu.au/nmrc-conference-2013 Please direct enquiries to Julie Freeman at NMRC.Conference at canberra.edu.au Dr Julie Freeman Postdoctoral Research Fellow News & Media Research Centre www.canberra.edu.au/nmrc Faculty of Arts & Design University of Canberra ACT 2601 Australia Email: NMRC.Conference at canberra.edu.au From jwallis at csu.edu.au Thu May 16 18:30:08 2013 From: jwallis at csu.edu.au (Wallis, Jacob) Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 11:30:08 +1000 Subject: [Air-L] Air-L Digest, Vol 106, Issue 17 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Adam, You might be interested in Matthew Allen's paper on the 'versioning' of the web: Allen, M. (2013). What was Web 2.0? Versions as the dominant mode of internet history. New Media & Society, 15(2), 260-275. Sounds like you're writing an interesting piece. Regards, Jake Jake Wallis Lecturer | School of Information Studies Boorooma Street Wagga Wagga, NSW 2650 Australia Tel: +61 2 6933 4397 Fax: +61 2 6933 2733 Email: jwallis at csu.edu.au www.csu.edu.au Twitter | Facebook | LinkedIn | YouTube ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 17:29:26 +0100 From: Adam Fish To: AoIR mailing list Subject: [Air-L] Internet Historiography Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Dear AOIRers, Anybody know of articles or books analysing 1) the political historiography of the internet. Who has criticized the historiography of the internet as being written for political gain? Secondly, any research on 2) the space shared by classic liberalism, technology, and history? I am writing this piece on how Obama?s statement on ?the internet? you didn?t build that,? celebrating social liberal federal investments in technology, has been (mis)interpreted by various political actors. Any leads? Best, Adam Fish, PhD Media and Cultural Studies Department of Sociology Lancaster University, UK LA1 4YT p. 01524592699 a.fish2 at lancaster.ac.uk @mediacultures, mediacultures.org http://www.research.lancs.ac.uk/portal/en/people/adam-fish(10a5067e-a828-497b-95ae-e35ed07f9ba1).html Charles Sturt University | ALBURY-WODONGA | BATHURST | CANBERRA | DUBBO | GOULBURN | MELBOURNE | ONTARIO | ORANGE | PORT MACQUARIE | SYDNEY | WAGGA WAGGA | LEGAL NOTICE This email (and any attachment) is confidential and is intended for the use of the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must not copy, distribute, take any action in reliance on it or disclose it to anyone. Any confidentiality is not waived or lost by reason of mistaken delivery. Email should be checked for viruses and defects before opening. Charles Sturt University (CSU) does not accept liability for viruses or any consequence which arise as a result of this email transmission. Email communications with CSU may be subject to automated email filtering, which could result in the delay or deletion of a legitimate email before it is read at CSU. The views expressed in this email are not necessarily those of CSU. Charles Sturt University in Australia http://www.csu.edu.au The Grange Chancellery, Panorama Avenue, Bathurst NSW Australia 2795 (ABN: 83 878 708 551; CRICOS Provider Numbers: 00005F (NSW), 01947G (VIC), 02960B (ACT)). TEQSA Provider Number: PV12018 Charles Sturt University in Ontario http://www.charlessturt.ca 860 Harrington Court, Burlington Ontario Canada L7N 3N4 Registration: www.peqab.ca Consider the environment before printing this email. Disclaimer added by CodeTwo Exchange Rules 2007 http://www.codetwo.com From netcrit at gmail.com Thu May 16 23:26:44 2013 From: netcrit at gmail.com (Matthew Allen) Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 16:26:44 +1000 Subject: [Air-L] Air-L Digest, Vol 106, Issue 17 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks for the pointer to my article. The are some related pieces which you can google up on history and the web or go to http://netcrit.net for pre prints or links. On Friday, 17 May 2013, Wallis, Jacob wrote: > Hi Adam, > > You might be interested in Matthew Allen's paper on the 'versioning' of > the web: > > Allen, M. (2013). What was Web 2.0? Versions as the dominant mode of > internet history. New Media & Society, 15(2), 260-275. > > Sounds like you're writing an interesting piece. > > Regards, > Jake > > Jake Wallis > Lecturer | School of Information Studies > Boorooma Street > Wagga Wagga, NSW 2650 > Australia > Tel: +61 2 6933 4397 > Fax: +61 2 6933 2733 > Email: jwallis at csu.edu.au > www.csu.edu.au > > Twitter | Facebook | LinkedIn | YouTube > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 17:29:26 +0100 > From: Adam Fish > > To: AoIR mailing list > > Subject: [Air-L] Internet Historiography > Message-ID: > SxDjuF23DFCJHz6Q7hOQ5JQ5rws-wzFMZVBbfF7Uts8Mw at mail.gmail.com > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 > > Dear AOIRers, > > Anybody know of articles or books analysing 1) the political historiography > of the internet. Who has criticized the historiography of the internet as > being written for political gain? > > Secondly, any research on 2) the space shared by classic liberalism, > technology, and history? > > I am writing this piece on how Obama?s statement on ?the internet? you > didn?t build that,? celebrating social liberal federal investments in > technology, has been (mis)interpreted by various political actors. > > Any leads? > > Best, > > > Adam Fish, PhD > > Media and Cultural Studies > > Department of Sociology > > Lancaster University, UK > > LA1 4YT > > p. 01524592699 > > a.fish2 at lancaster.ac.uk > > @mediacultures, mediacultures.org > > > http://www.research.lancs.ac.uk/portal/en/people/adam-fish(10a5067e-a828-497b-95ae-e35ed07f9ba1).html > Charles Sturt University > > | ALBURY-WODONGA | BATHURST | CANBERRA | DUBBO | GOULBURN | MELBOURNE | > ONTARIO | ORANGE | PORT MACQUARIE | SYDNEY | WAGGA WAGGA | > > LEGAL NOTICE > This email (and any attachment) is confidential and is intended for the > use of the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient of this > email, you must not copy, distribute, take any action in reliance on it or > disclose it to anyone. Any confidentiality is not waived or lost by reason > of mistaken delivery. Email should be checked for viruses and defects > before opening. Charles Sturt University (CSU) does not accept liability > for viruses or any consequence which arise as a result of this email > transmission. Email communications with CSU may be subject to automated > email filtering, which could result in the delay or deletion of a > legitimate email before it is read at CSU. The views expressed in this > email are not necessarily those of CSU. > > Charles Sturt University in Australia http://www.csu.edu.au The Grange > Chancellery, Panorama Avenue, Bathurst NSW Australia 2795 (ABN: 83 878 708 > 551; CRICOS Provider Numbers: 00005F (NSW), 01947G (VIC), 02960B (ACT)). > TEQSA Provider Number: PV12018 > > Charles Sturt University in Ontario http://www.charlessturt.ca 860 > Harrington Court, Burlington Ontario Canada L7N 3N4 Registration: > www.peqab.ca > > Consider the environment before printing this email. > > Disclaimer added by CodeTwo Exchange Rules 2007 > http://www.codetwo.com > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Sent from Gmail Mobile From soates at umd.edu Fri May 17 11:40:17 2013 From: soates at umd.edu (Sarah Ann Oates) Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 18:40:17 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Search Engines and Social Science: A Revolution in the Making Message-ID: <4D173A5B6FCE2D44BEB003A158461C250A5CC303@OITMX1006.AD.UMD.EDU> If you research and/or teach on issues relating to internet search, you may be interested in: Search Engines and Social Science: A Revolution in the Making By Filippo Trevisan at the University of Glasgow. This policy paper covers main points and presents additional research out of the Google Forum meetings in London. It was funded as part of a UK Economic and Social Research Council Knowledge Exchange Grant (Civic Consumers or Commercial Citizens?: Social Scientists Working with Google to Better Understand Online Search Behaviour). Download here: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2265348 Key points: n Google Trends is an especially promising tool that could enable academics to explore new questions. n Ever since the internet became commercially available in the mid-1990s, search engines have played a crucial role in orienting online traffic, distributing content and constructing knowledge. n While in the past scholars had been more interested in talking about the role of search engines themselves in shaping society, this approach is being increasingly complemented by work that focuses on how search engines can augment academic research in general. n It is crucial that academics investigate opportunities and challenges in the centrality of search engines in contemporary informational patterns and social interaction. n Emerging strands of research using search-engine tools/data productively include politics and public opinion studies; economics and business; public health and epidemiology; and response/reaction to natural disasters. n Google Trends data offers advantages over traditional social-science methods such as public opinion surveys. It provides enhanced opportunities to study crisis situations as well as the general relationship between offline events and online behaviour. n Applications such as Google Trends could provide unprecedented opportunities for examining the connections between new and old media. n The global dimension of Google Trends as well as the geographical filters that can be applied to its output can facilitate international research by providing comparable data at virtually no cost, thus substantially expanding the scope for social-science research across country boundaries. n Scholars should be aware of the potential drawbacks associated with this emerging methodology, including doubts over data representativeness when generalising from search engine users to an entire population; language differences and ?country effects? in relation to search; as well as limited flexibility afforded by Google Trends. Sincerely Sarah Oates ESRC Grant Principal Professor and Senior Scholar Philip Merrill College of Journalism University of Maryland 2100L Knight Hall College Park, MD 20742 Phone: 301-405-4510 Email: soates at umd.edu www.media-politics.com See an excerpt from my new book -- Revolution Stalled: The Political Limits of Internet in the Post-Soviet Sphere, 2013, Oxford University Press at http://goo.gl/HTcDd From nativebuddha at gmail.com Sun May 19 03:48:11 2013 From: nativebuddha at gmail.com (nativebuddha) Date: Sun, 19 May 2013 06:48:11 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Google goggles privacy privates References: <273D7480-3DF3-469B-A54D-6EC54C590F09@gmail.com> Message-ID: Techno phobia or really creepy? Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: > From: nativebuddha > Date: May 19, 2013, 6:43:22 AM EDT > To: nativebuddha at gmail.com > Subject: Link from Twitter > > bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/17/at-google-conference-even-cameras-in-the-bathroom?smid=tw-share > > Download the official Twitter app here > > > Sent from my iPhone From denrall at yahoo.com Sun May 19 18:02:16 2013 From: denrall at yahoo.com (Denise N. Rall) Date: Sun, 19 May 2013 18:02:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Air-L] Internet Historiography References: Message-ID: <1369011736.32088.YahooMailNeo@web160904.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Ah - Campbell-Kelly, M., & Aspray, W. (1996). Computer: A history of the information machine. New York: Basic Books. 2nd edition 2004. Is pretty clear about the industrial-military precedents. Likewise? Abbate, Janet. (2000). Inventing the internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. In particular, technological advances during WWII were then harnessed to commercial enterprises (see histories of IBM) My own modest contribution in this area: Rall, Denise N. 2006. ?The ?house that Dick built?: Constructing the team that built the bomb? Research Note: Social Studies of Science 36: 943-957. ?Cheers, Denise Dr Denise N. Rall, Adjunct Lecturer, School of Arts & Social Sciences Chair of Textiles stream,?Secretary-in-Waiting, Popular Culture Australia-New Zealand Currently in Lismore, NSW, Australia Phones - Mobile +(61)(0)438 233344 Fax +(61)(0)2 6624 5380 ________________________________ From: Kevin Driscoll To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org; rawbird at gmail.com Sent: Friday, 17 May 2013 8:36 AM Subject: Re: [Air-L] Internet Historiography Hi Adam, On Thu, 16 May 2013 17:29:26 +0100, Adam Fish wrote: > > Anybody know of articles or books analysing 1) the political historiography > of the internet. Who has criticized the historiography of the internet as > being written for political gain? These are really interesting questions. Back in 1998, Roy Rosenzweig wrote a round up of recently published histories of the internet (including Hafner & Lyon, Norberg & O'Neill, and Edwards.) Not only is it an excellent integrative review but I found it helpful for reconstructing the stakes of telling different stories about the internet at that particular moment. Rosenzweig, Roy. "Wizards, bureaucrats, warriors, and hackers: Writing the history of the Internet." The American Historical Review 103, no. 5 (1998): 1530-1552. You might also look into the various documents produced by the FCC regarding the National Broadband Plan: http://www.broadband.gov/ I'm tracing some similar ground in my diss research right now. Looking forward to hearing more about what you turn up. Kevin Driscoll PhD candidate Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism University of Southern California _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From rocofem at gmail.com Sun May 19 18:56:01 2013 From: rocofem at gmail.com (Michelle Rodino-Colocino) Date: Sun, 19 May 2013 21:56:01 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] my post from mlr31@psu.edu was rejected Message-ID: Can you please post this? It was rejected from my mlr31 at psu.edu address. I am a member of the air list from mlr31 at psu.edu. Thanks, Michelle We welcome the following proposals emailed to udcpc2013 at gmail.com by June 1, 2013: 1. 500-word abstracts that describe the purpose and significance of your research and/or activist projects, especially those that address the issues outlined in the call. 2. Full papers (up to 25 pages including references) from graduate and undergraduate students. The top student paper will be considered for the Top Student Paper Award. Student papers should be indicated as such and also contain a 500-word abstract. Students may apply for funding to cover some of their travel expenses through the Jeanne Hall Memorial Fund. To be considered for such funding, please include a one-line request for consideration of such funding on the top of your proposal. 3. Presentations of Media Literacy projects, including films and multimedia related to the call. 4. Finally, we welcome proposals for pre-constituted panels. Please include 500-word abstracts for each participant (4-5 participants) and one panel rationale of 200-350 words that articulates the connections between the projects and the overall significance of the panel. Sponsored in part by the Department of Media Studies at the University of San Francisco Michelle Rodino-Colocino, Ph.D. "Enjoy the process" --my mother Associate Professor "Mangia" --my grandmother Film/Video, Media and Women's Studies "Say it" --my daughter Chair, Steering Committee UDC (Union for Democratic Communications) http://www.democraticcommunications.net/ http://comm.psu.edu/people/mlr31 rocofem at gmail.com (work and personal) michelle at psu.edu (work) Michelle Rodino-Colocino, Ph.D. "Enjoy the process" --my mother Associate Professor "Mangia" --my grandmother Film/Video, Media Studies & Women's Studies "Say it" --my daughter 117 Carnegie, University Park, 16802 Chair, Steering Committee, Union for Democratic Communications/UDC http://www.democraticcommunications.net/ *http://comm.psu.edu/people/mlr31* rocofem at gmail.com (work and personal) michelle at psu.edu (work) From kathleen.kuehn at cnu.edu Sun May 19 20:30:31 2013 From: kathleen.kuehn at cnu.edu (Kathleen Kuehn) Date: Sun, 19 May 2013 23:30:31 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] CFP: Union for Democratic Communications/Project Censored 2013 Conference (Deadline June 1) Message-ID: CFP: The Point is to Change It: Media Democracy and Democratic Media in Action UDC/Project Censored Conference At the University of San Francisco, November 1-3 We invite submissions for the Union for Democratic Communication and Project Censored conference November 1-3, 2013 at the University of San Francisco. Submission deadline is June 1, 2013. Sponsored in part by the Department of Media Studies at the University of San Francisco With increasingly precarious employment, accelerating ecological degradation, gulfs between the 1% and the 99%, as well as dramatic booms and busts, we need a global media responsive to the 99%. We need rigorous critique of corporate media?s commodification of social life. We need critique of all forms of censorship, systematic information exclusion, and propaganda. We need grounded ideas for democratizing media in all formats and genres. We need media justice. To revitalize and retool media democracy in today?s media landscape, the Union for Democratic Communications (UDC) and Project Censored are teaming up for our 2013 conference. UDC, which held its first conference in 1981, has worked to overcome concentrated political-economic power in order to contribute to a world based on economic justice, equality, and peace. Project Censored, founded in 1976, has made its mission to expose and counteract modern-day censorship. Together, UDC and Project Censored hope to contribute to a more democratic society and world by sharing our scholarly and activist projects. We invite research, activist & artistic proposals from critical perspectives interrogating media institutions and technologies, political/economic structures, media practices, cultural practices & audiences; we invite studies in critical pedagogy and research on media activism. Proposals that address pro-democratic media reform or outline efforts to expand citizen access to media are particularly welcome. We welcome the following proposals emailed to udcpc2013 at gmail.com by June 1, 2013: 1. 500-word abstracts that describe the purpose and significance of your research and/or activist projects, especially those that address the issues outlined in the call. 2. Full papers (up to 25 pages including references) from graduate and undergraduate students. The top student paper will be considered for the Top Student Paper Award. Student papers should be indicated as such and also contain a 500-word abstract. Students may apply for funding to cover some of their travel expenses through the Jeanne Hall Memorial Fund. To be considered for such funding, please include a one-line request for consideration of such funding on the top of your proposal. 3. Presentations of Media Literacy projects, including films and multimedia related to the call. 4. Finally, we welcome proposals for pre-constituted panels. Please include 500-word abstracts for each participant (4-5 participants) and one panel rationale of 200-350 words that articulates the connections between the projects and the overall significance of the panel. Sponsored in part by the Department of Media Studies at the University of San Francisco Thanks -- Kathleen M. Kuehn, PhD Assistant Professor Christopher Newport University Department of Communication kathleen.kuehn at cnu.edu From delwarif at siu.edu Sun May 19 21:59:58 2013 From: delwarif at siu.edu (Delwar Hossain) Date: Sun, 19 May 2013 23:59:58 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Help for literature Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, I am going to conduct a study on the uses of social media among the South Asian diaspora in the U.S. Specifically, I will focus on some issues: online community, uses of native languages on social media. I really appreciate your suggestions regarding relevant literature on this area. -- .............................................................................................................................. Delwar Hossain || Ph.D. Candidate || College of Mass Communication and Media Arts Southern Illinois University Carbondale || IL-62901,USA || _________________________________________________________________________ Assistant Professor & Former Chairman || Department of Communication & Journalism|| University of Chittagong || e-mail: delwarif at siu.edu || delwarif at yahoo.com From mathieu.oneil at anu.edu.au Mon May 20 01:03:47 2013 From: mathieu.oneil at anu.edu.au (Mathieu ONeil) Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 08:03:47 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Conference programme: ICT and Work Message-ID: <37EAFE25559D4643B43426CE35235DCE015C24CE@SIXPRD0610MB383.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com> *Apologies for multiple posts* Conference programme ICT and Work : The United States at the Origin of the Dissemination of Digital Capitalism Universit? Paris Sorbonne Histoire et dynamique des espaces anglophones (ED4 - HDEA) - Travail, culture et soci?t? (TCS) Date: 29 - 30 May 2013 Venue: Maison de la Recherche, 28 rue Serpente, 75006 Paris Abstracts: http://ictandwork.blogspot.fr/ Registration: inscription.ictwork at gmail.com Contribution: 30 euros (students 10 euros) Wednesday 29 May 1:30 pm Registration of participants 2:00 pm Welcome by Barth?l?my Jobert, President, Universit? Paris Sorbonne; Marie-Madeleine Martinet, Director, HDEA, Universit? Paris Sorbonne; and Alexis Tadi?, Director, Doctoral School, Universit? Paris Sorbonne. 2:30 pm Presentation of European COST Action IS-12-02: Dynamics of Virtual Work by Ursula Huws, University of Hertfordshire Business School 2:55 pm Introductory remarks by Olivier Frayss?, Universit? Paris Sorbonne, Exporting United States Work Models: Laying Out the Issue Keynote Address 3:15-4:30 pm Eran Fisher, The Open University of Israel, From Ford to Google: The Ideology of Technology Past and Present Respondent: Antonio Casilli, Telecom ParisTech, EHESS Chair: Mathieu O?Neil, Universit? Paris Sorbonne 4:30 pm Tea Break Session 1 ? The Californian Paradigm: Technology and Work Culture 4:50 pm Adam Fish, Lancaster University, Silicon Valley or Hollywood? Place, Politics, and Technology in Cultures of Internet and Television Convergence 5:10 pm Thibault Cl?ment, Universit? Paris Sorbonne, Whistle While You Work: Disney's Theme Parks as Socio-Technical Devices and the Diffusion of US Work Culture Respondent: H?l?ne Schmutz, Universit? Paris Sorbonne 5:30-6:15 pm Discussion Thursday 30 May 9:00 am Coffee, registration. Session 2 ? ICT and Labor: New Dynamics in the Era of Globalization 9:30 am Jakob Rigi, Central European University, Intellectual Property and Labor Aristocracy in the USA: the United States as a Knowledge-Based Rentier State 9:50 am Mary L. Gray, Microsoft Research New England, Digital Piecework: Lessons from an Ethnographic Study on Amazon?s MTURK Program Respondent: ?lisabeth Koechlin, Universit? Paris Sorbonne 10:10-10.30 am Discussion 10:30 am Coffee break 10:50 am Angela Martinez Dy, Nottingham University, Unmasking the ?Great Equalizer?: Internet Entrepreneurship by Marginalized Actors 11:10 am Eve Bantman Masum, Universit? Toulouse Le Mirail, Marketing Migration in North America: the Business Model of Brokerage in a Networked Age Respondent: Medina Niang, Universit? Paris Sorbonne 11:30-12:00 am Discussion Lunch break Session 3 ? Reevaluating the Production / Consumption Relationship 2:30 pm Michael Palm, University of North Carolina, Magic Touch: Transaction Apps and the Political Economy of Swiping 2:50 pm Marie-Christine Pauwels, Universit? Paris-Ouest Nanterre la D?fense, Work and Prosumerism: Collaborative Consumption in the US Respondent: Mathieu O'Neil, Universit? Paris Sorbonne 3:10-3:30 pm Discussion 3:30 pm Tea break Session 4 ? Alternative models 3:50 pm Mandy Tr?ger, University of Illinois, Understanding the Role of Political Economy in US Communication Research 4:10 pm Arwid Lund, University of Uppsala, Peer to Peer Production's Relationship to Capitalism 4:30 pm Johan S?derberg, University of G?teborg: Techno-Utopists and Digital Capitalism 4:50 pm Lela Mosemghvdlishvili & Jeroen Jansz, Erasmus University Rotterdam, What is Free?: Commoditization of Open Source Software Development by Google Respondent: Mathieu O?Neil, Universit? Paris Sorbonne 5:10-6:00 pm Discussion and conference wrap-up 6:30 pm Closing drinks -- -- **** Dr Mathieu O'Neil Associate Professor, HDEA-TCS, Universit? Paris Sorbonne 1 rue Victor Cousin 75230 Paris cedex 05, France http://www.paris-sorbonne.fr/l-universite/nos-enseignants-chercheurs/article/o-neil-mathieu Adjunct Research Fellow, ADSRI, The Australian National University Coombs Building (#9) Canberra ACT 0200, Australia https://researchers.anu.edu.au/researchers/o-neil-m From vili at lehdonvirta.com Mon May 20 15:21:00 2013 From: vili at lehdonvirta.com (Vili Lehdonvirta) Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 23:21:00 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] IS1202 Training School on Virtual Work, Malta, Sep 16-20 *travel grant application DL May 24* References: Message-ID: Dear AoIRers, Some months ago, Christian Fuchs introduced a new international research network titled Dynamics of Virtual Work (more formally known as COST Action IS1202) to this list. As the leader of the Early-Stage Researchers Subgroup of this network, I'm happy to introduce a summer school that is now being organised under its auspices. A good amount of funding is available to cover participants' travel expenses. The application deadline is this Friday already, but the application process itself is light. I would encourage applications from all doctoral students and postdocs from eligible countries (see link below) who are interested in topics such as prosumer work, crowdsourcing, microwork, virtual teams and avatar-mediated collaboration. Warm regards, Vili IS1202 TRAINING SCHOOL ON VIRTUAL WORK Theoretical and Methodological Approaches to the Study of Virtual Work University of Malta, 16-20 September 2013 Travel grants available - application deadline *May 24th* http://www.um.edu.mt/events/is1202training2013 Information and communication technologies have given rise to new types of paid and unpaid 'digital' or 'virtual' labour. They range from online prosumer work and service co-creation to game labour and the exploitation of global wage differences through digital microwork. These new forms of labour exemplify shifts in the borderlines between 'play' and 'work', as well as in 'employment' and 'entrepreneurship', and have significant implications to private life, global development and the nature of work in general. Because of the gender division of labour, they also affect women and men differently. The objective of this training school is to prepare doctoral students and postdocs from a variety of disciplines to carry out successful research in the cross-disciplinary field of virtual work studies. Virtual work is a multi-faceted phenomenon: in addition to one's own disciplinary background, successful researchers must also understand key contributions from neighbouring disciplines. In this training school, participants will obtain grounding in the most important theoretical perspectives, as well as receive instruction in cutting-edge methodological approaches. Participants will also present their own work, network with other emerging scholars and some of the preeminent scholars in the field, and discuss publication venues, funding strategies and other building blocks of a successful academic career. The Training School on Virtual Work takes place at the University of Malta and its beautiful Mediterranean surroundings. The school is funded by the IS1202 COST Action on the Dynamics of Virtual Work. Funding for travel and participation is available to eligible doctoral students and postdocs. Major theoretical approaches: ? Labour Sociology - Professor J?rg Flecker, University of Vienna, Austria ? Social Psychology of Organizations - Dr Marko Hakonen, Aalto University, Finland ? Political Economy of Communications - Professor Katharine Sarikakis, University o Vienna, Austria (tbc) ? Microeconomics and Behavioral Economics - Assistant Professor John Horton, Stern School of Business, New York University, United States ? Gender Studies - tbc Important Dates: 24th May 2013 - Deadline for applications for funding 30th May 2013 - Notification of grant selection results. Each applicant will be contacted personally about the outcome of his/her application. 16th September 2013 - Training school commences Organising committee: Dr Vili Lehdonvirta, Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford Dr Mark Micallef, Department of Computer Science, University of Malta Contact: is1202training2013 at um.edu.mt http://www.um.edu.mt/events/is1202training2013 -- Dr Vili Lehdonvirta Virtual economies and digital work Research Fellow, Oxford Internet Institute http://vili.lehdonvirta.com -- Twitter: ViliLe -- Skype: vlehdonv -- Tel. +44 7456 420012 From ac at aoir.org Tue May 21 08:59:48 2013 From: ac at aoir.org (Kelly Boudreau) Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 11:59:48 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] 2013 Executive Committee Election: Candidate Statements & Voting Information Message-ID: Candidate statements for the 2013 Executive election are now available. For more information on each candidate, please click here. Please be aware that in order to vote in this year?s election you must be an active member of AoIR no later than 23:59 Eastern time (-0400 UTC), Tuesday, May 21st. Voting will open May 22, 2013 at 12:01 am (Eastern time, -0400 UTC) and close June 1st, 2013 at 12:00 pm (NOON Eastern time, -0400 UTC). To vote, please click on the following link and use your AoIR Membership User ID number. (To find this number, please log into your AoIR membership page at http://members.aoir.org/ and select ?view profile?. It is listed as User ID.) If you have any questions concerning your AoIR membership please contact ac at aoir.org. For questions on the election or the voting process, please contact secretary at aoir.org. - Association Coordinator, AoIR From ac at aoir.org Tue May 21 09:08:28 2013 From: ac at aoir.org (Kelly Boudreau) Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 12:08:28 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] 2013 Executive Committee Election: Candidate Statements & Voting Information Message-ID: Candidate statements for the 2013 Executive election are now available. For more information on each candidate, please click here. Please be aware that in order to vote in this year?s election you must be an active member of AoIR no later than 23:59 Eastern time (-0400 UTC), Tuesday, May 21st. Voting will open May 22, 2013 at 12:01 am (Eastern time, -0400 UTC) and close June 1st, 2013 at 12:00 pm (NOON Eastern time, -0400 UTC). To vote, please click on the following link and use your AoIR Membership User ID number. (To find this number, please log into your AoIR membership page at http://members.aoir.org/ and select ?view profile?. It is listed as User ID.) If you have any questions concerning your AoIR membership please contact ac at aoir.org. For questions on the election or the voting process, please contact secretary at aoir.org. - Association Coordinator, AoIR From jwhitson at connect.carleton.ca Tue May 21 09:42:24 2013 From: jwhitson at connect.carleton.ca (Jennifer Whitson) Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 12:42:24 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] CFP - Surveillance, Games and Play Message-ID: Hello, Bart Simon and I are editing a special issue of *Surveillance & Society *on surveillance, games and play. The deadline for submissions is September 15th, and the issue will be published this spring. We're hoping AOIR members will contribute, so please contact either Bart or I if you have any questions. *CFP Surveillance, Games and Play * The games we play on our computers, iPads, and video game consoles are watching us. They track our every online move and send data on who we are, how we play, and whom we play with back to game and virtual world publishers such as Sony and Microsoft. Two events in the summer of 2011 exemplify the need to study surveillance in games: a hacker attack against Sony's Playstation Network compromised over 77 million user accounts including credit card numbers, while iPhone users discovered hidden code in their devices that tracked their movements and secretly sent this data back to Apple. This form of consumer surveillance that targets players has eluded critical appraisal in both the games studies and surveillance literature. The games we play are not only watching us, but are leveraging surveillance to mold us into better students, workers, and consumers, as evidenced by the growth of gamification applications that combine playful design and feedback mechanisms from games with users' social profiles (e.g. Facebook, twitter, and LinkedIn) in non-game applications explicitly geared to drive behavioural change. Accordingly, traditional surveillance activities are transformed through their combination with playful frames of reference and game-like elements. Yet, as argued by Anders Albrechtslund and Lynsey Dubbeld in volume 3(2/3) of this journal, surveillance is fun. It is an essential component of many games and virtual worlds. It enables family to find each other and play together online, such as when adult children who live thousands of miles away challenge their parents to a *Words with Friends *scrabble match over Facebook. Surveillance allows game companies to match strangers with similar skill sets and play-styles together in multiplayer games, thus increasing the flow of the game and players' mutual enjoyment. Surveillance facilitates coordinated teamwork and sophisticated game economies, exemplified by informational tools such as the damage mods and kill-point monitors created by players for massively-multiplayer online games. Surveillance also makes online games and virtual worlds safe for children and young adults, restricting both the use of inappropriate language and content, as well as prohibiting the entry of potentially dangerous adults. Moreover, surveillance is pleasurable. As game company Valve found when they forayed into biometrics (i.e. measuring galvanic skin response and arousal levels), players are more engaged when they can see how they affect their opponents' own physiological responses. We, as players, like to watch our opponents, anticipating what they will do next. We also use surveillance to improve our prowess and extend our moments of victory by using recording software and game replay functions This theme issue is dedicated to balancing two very different sides of surveillance: surveillance as a technology of corporate governance and surveillance as a technology of pleasure and play. *Possible research areas might include (but are not limited to):* - The role of surveillance in enabling play and games - The role of play and games in normalizing surveillance - Surveillance as gameplay or surveillance as a game mechanic - Playful surveillance applications - Playful representations of surveillance - Playful resistance to surveillance - Issues of identity, anonymity and pseudonymity in online games and virtual worlds - Online visibilities and the relationship between game publishers and user populations - The implications of using data gathered in-game for non-game applications - The use of surveillance and the representation of surveillance in online games, virtual worlds, and/or gamified applications, including topics such as: - Games that educate users about privacy and surveillance - End-User Licensing Agreements, Terms of Service, and awareness of surveillance - Applications of social networking services, locational data, and GPS devices in games and play - Uses of data gathering services, screen-capture tools, and recorded gameplay sessions - The surveillance of children and youth in virtual worlds and games - State and police use of in-game data for surveillance, tracking, behavioral profiling etc. - Surveillance and the competitive, professional e-sports gaming industry - Data mining, game metrics, and targeted advertising in the game industry This is not intended to be an exclusive listing of possibilities for this edition. Other possibilities are welcomed and encouraged and can be discussed in advance with the guest-editors: Jennifer R.Whitsonand Bart Simon . All papers must be submitted through the online submission system no later than *September 15th 2013*, for publication in *March 2014.* Click herefor further information on submissions. Thanks, Jennifer R. Whitson, PhD Postdoctoral Fellow, Technoculture Arts and Games Research Centre Concordia University Montreal, Canada From fforna3 at uic.edu Tue May 21 10:06:48 2013 From: fforna3 at uic.edu (Federica Fornaciari) Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 19:06:48 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] IGERT vide/poster: self-disclosure and privacy concerns in Amazon - deadline for voting MAY 23rd Message-ID: Dear all, as some of you already know the annual IGERT video and poster competition sponsored by the National Science Foundation is now on! There are lots of other interesting videos and posters!! Me and my colleagues at UIC have put together a video/poster that investigates self-disclosure and privacy concerns on Amazon reviews. We hope that you will take the time to enjoy our video and will consider sharing it on Facebook or Twitter with your network of friends and followers! You will also have an opportunity to vote for the public choice award if you enjoy our project (deadline May 23rd ? 10pm EDT) Here are some instructions: 1) click on this link http://posterhall.org/igert2013/posters/354 2) click on public choice 3) click on ?like the presentation on Facebook? 4) and share it on your network! Thank you for your support! Federica -- Federica Fornaciari Ph. D. Candidate, University of Illinois at Chicago ESP-IGERT fellow http://fedefo.wordpress.com/about/ http://www.igert.org/profiles/4709 @fedefo From editor at connexionsjournal.org Wed May 22 00:43:10 2013 From: editor at connexionsjournal.org (connexions journal) Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 01:43:10 -0600 Subject: [Air-L] =?windows-1252?q?CFP=3A_connexions_=95_international_prof?= =?windows-1252?q?essional_communication_journal_2=281=29_issue_-_F?= =?windows-1252?q?ebruary_2004?= Message-ID: Please accept my apologies for cross-postings _______________________________________ Dear Colleague, Following on from its inaugural issue on the field of international professional communication, and the forthcoming issue on international engineering communication, *connexions ? international professional communication journal* invites you to continue the conversations on IPC by contributing to Issue 2(1). The journal welcomes *papers that explore* the *practice, research, pedagogy, methodology, and technology* of efficient and effective written, oral, visual, electronic and non-verbal professional communication in academic, business, crisis, development, environmental, health, media, nonprofit, political, research, science, technical and other work and civic activity contexts in local, national, international, and global work and civic activity settings. *Manuscripts *of - original *research articles* of 5,000 to 7,000 words of body text, - *review articles* of 3,000 to 5,000 words of body text, - *focused commentary* and *industry perspectives* articles of 500 to 3,000 words of body text, - *teaching cases* of 3,000 to 5,000 words of body text. *Submission procedures* - Submit - cover page containing your name, institutional affiliation, and email address); - complete research article, review article, focused commentary or industry perspective article, or teaching case. - Prepare the cover page and manuscript on letter or A4 size pages, 1.5 line spacing, and Georgia 12-point font. - Save the cover page and manuscript in doc, docx, or rtf format. - Submit your proposal by email to the Editor at editor at connexionsjournal.org *Schedule* - Proposal deadline: September 30, 2013. - Notification of acceptance: November 30, 2013. - Date of publication: February 28, 2014. If you have any questions about your proposal, feel free to contact the Editor at editor at connexionsjournal.org Thank you for considering writing a paper for *connexions **? international professional communication journal* Ros?rio Dur?o Editor www.connexionsjournal.org connexions ? international professional communication journal (ISSN 2325-6044) Department of Communication, Liberal Arts, and Social Sciences New Mexico Tech **** From bertha.chin at gmail.com Wed May 22 02:52:16 2013 From: bertha.chin at gmail.com (Bertha Chin) Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 10:52:16 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] CFP: New Media and Society special issue on crowdfunding Message-ID: *Apologies for cross-posting* Call for Papers: New Media & Society special issue on crowd funding. Edited by Lucy Bennett, Bertha Chin and Bethan Jones The concept of crowdfunding, where grassroots creative projects are funded by the masses through websites such as Kickstarter and Indiegogo has been steadily gaining attention in the last few years. The 2013 success of the Veronica Mars movie campaign, along with the successful crowdfunding projects spearheaded by musicians like Amanda Palmer and, most recently, actor Zach Braff, has raised much discussion surrounding the rich and powerful possibilities of this method of funding. However, the practice has also invited much criticism, not just of Kickstarter but also of crowdfunding in general. Among some of the most common accusations levelled at crowdfunding are: it is used by media conglomerates to exploit fans; successful artists using the scheme take money away from genuine independent producers who actually need it; and the time and money spent on delivering perks to donors detracts from the time and money invested in the actual project. However, others have argued that the existence of crowdfunding affords media scholars new ways of examining the role of the audience in television and film production, that fan agency needs to be more widely considered in discussions of fan exploitation, and that ?fan-ancing? is leading to a new business model for the financing of artistic projects that is free from studio or network intervention. This special issue seeks to examine and unravel the debates around crowdfunding and thus brings together contributors from a range of academic disciplines. We are seeking papers that offer a wide range of perspectives on the processes of crowdfunding projects, from analyses of the crowdfunded projects themselves, to the interaction between producers and audiences, and to the role that Kickstarter plays in discussions around fan agency and exploitation. Thus, we invite proposals on, but not limited to, the following topics surrounding crowd funding: - Case studies of crowd funding campaigns - Fandom - Unsuccessful crowd funding efforts - The role of the internet and social media in crowd funding - Producer/funder relationships - Crowd funding in the music, film, television and games industries - Anti-fandom - The role of auteurs and cult names/media in attracting backers - Fan exploitation and labour - Rewards and producer accountability Please send 400 word abstracts, along with a short author biography, by 20th June 2013. Please email these to bennettlucyk at gmail.com, bertha.chin at gmail.com and bethanvjones at hotmail.com. -- Dr. Bertha Chin Independent Scholar Board Member, Fan Studies Network From katharine.willis at plymouth.ac.uk Wed May 22 04:21:06 2013 From: katharine.willis at plymouth.ac.uk (Katharine Willis) Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 12:21:06 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] PhD Studentship in Digital Neighbourhoods (Three-year full time) Message-ID: <7AB6195D91E1CC4FADEBDEED07196D352F9E2E8490@ILS132.uopnet.plymouth.ac.uk> **apologies for cross-posting*** Three-year full time funded PhD Studentship Digital Neighbourhoods This project explores the links between ICT infrastructures and social communities. The project will study how such ICT infrastructures, and in particular broadband internet access, become localized within a community; and the broader impacts this may have on social networks and sense of place within a neighbourhood setting. It aims to provide insights and formulate recommendations on how online social networks can integrate with place-based communities in order to overcome digital divides at a neighbourhood level. Applications are invited from candidates for a 3 year full time PhD studentship at Plymouth University under the supervision of Dr. Katharine Willis and Professor Alessandro Aurigi. The studentship pays for fees (at the UK home student rate) and provides a ?13726 per year stipend for the student for three years. The project is part of a larger research project funded by the EU Marie Curie programme and the European Regional Development Fund. Studentship Description The student will develop a theoretical approach around the topic of the relationship between digital community and physical neighbourhood as well as undertaking research using a range of quantitative and qualitative methods, but with a focus on social network analysis. The student will spend time undertaking fieldwork in four neighbourhoods in Cornwall, in order to assess the social and spatial roles and implications of internet infrastructures. The student will benefit from interactions with researchers from a range of disciplines and with project partners such as Superfast Cornwall/ERDF. BT, Citizen?s Online and the local community organisations. Person Specification Applicants should have a Masters qualification in Architecture, Urban Studies, Urban Sociology, Anthropology or another related discipline. Applicants would be expected to have a clear interest in the impacts of technologies on the use of public space and on social networks, and an ability to undertake cross-disciplinary research with a strong spatial component. Strong analytical skills are desirable, as is experience of conducting fieldwork and an ability to work independently. Candidates should have excellent written and oral communication skills. We will actively support students in disseminating the results of their work and the development of their academic career. How to apply for this position Formal applications should be submitted using the application form available at http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/pages/view.asp?page=32190 marking the application DIGITAL NEIGHBOURHOODS. Include a covering letter outlining motivation, interest, and suitability for this project, please e-mail to susan.matheron at plymouth.ac.uk. Please not this is a specified project and we do not expect a project proposal but an indication as to how you would approach the project. Do not send the form to Central Admissions, as indicated on the application form. Informal enquiries may be made before the submission date to katharine.willis at plymouth.ac.uk. The student would start his/her study on 1st October 2013. Closing date for applications 12 noon on Friday 14th June 2013. Shortlisted candidates will be notified by Friday 21st June 2013 and will be invited to attend an interview on Friday 28th June 2013 in Plymouth. http://www.jobs.ac.uk/job/AGM673/three-year-full-time-phd-studentship-in-digital-neighbourhoods/ From ajk407 at nyu.edu Wed May 22 12:15:19 2013 From: ajk407 at nyu.edu (AJ Kelton) Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 15:15:19 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] 2013 Emerging Learning Design Conference - about 2 weeks and counting down! Message-ID: Please forgive any duplication and feel free to share with those who would benefit. The 2013 Emerging Learning Design Conference is just about 2 weeks off and promises to be an exceptional event. This intimate conference experience provides excellent sessions with sufficient blocks of time for discussion and networking between presentations. Registration includes all sessions, breakfast, lunch, beverage breaks, and an afternoon snack. There is also an opportunity to add on the Networking Cocktail Party for a relaxing and enjoyable way to mingle with other conference attendees and special guests. Aside from our concurrent sessions, workshops, and special Ignite! & Engage! session, our Keynote Presenter this year is Dr. Christopher Hoadley and his presentation is entitled The Death Of Content: Why Universities and Schools are (and aren?t) being replaced by the Internet Conveniently located at Montclair State University, the conference is easily accessible by car, bus, or train. With less than 30 seats to go until registration closes, follow the URL below to reserve yours today http://eld13-air.eventbrite.com Don't miss this great opportunity. Check out the full schedule at http://eld.montclair.edu/schedule/ and register today -- ----- AJ Kelton Director of Emerging & Instructional Technology College of Humanities and Social Sciences - Montclair State University Doctoral Candidate Educational Communication and Technology - New York University ---------- Emerging Learning Design 2013 http://eld.montclair.edu Twitter: @ELDConf ---------- http://www.ajkelton.net Twitter: @aj_kelton From vili at lehdonvirta.com Wed May 22 13:51:36 2013 From: vili at lehdonvirta.com (Vili Lehdonvirta) Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 21:51:36 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Training School on Digital Labour, Globalisation and Creative Industries, Bulgaria, July 22-26 References: Message-ID: <782FB505-2C52-4CAE-8082-68D0D3F47FD8@lehdonvirta.com> Dear AoIers, The Dynamics of Virtual Work research network (COST IS1202) chaired by professor Ursula Huws is also organising another training school this summer. Whereas the Malta school focuses on theory and methodology, this Bulgaria school combines practical workshops with onsite visits as well as networking with experts. Please find details below. To find out more or to apply for a place, please email costis1202 at herts.ac.uk. The first round of places will be allocated already this Friday (May 24th). All the best, Vili > IS1202 Bulgaria Training School: July 22?26 > Digital Labour, Globalisation and Creative Industries > Bansko, Bulgaria, July 22-26, 2013 > http://dynamicsofvirtualwork.com/bulgaria-training-school/ > > This summer school offers PhD students and new researchers the chance to combine onsite visits with practical workshops and the chance to network with leading international experts in the field. It will take place in Razlog, near the Bulgarian mountain resort of Bansko. > > The workshop will be student-centred giving participants an opportunity to discuss and develop their own current projects, either as doctoral students or as post-docs/early career researchers with others in the field. At the same time there will be a parallel opportunity to work as part of a short term research team, identifying research: opportunities, questions, strategies and methodologies. The latter theme to the workshop will be developed in conjunction with proposed local site visits to businesses/workplaces. The workshop will focus on the development of research skills, including methodologies suitable for exploring the creative industries and will explore issues associated with work and employment in this broad sector. > > Research takes place in a context; historical, political, social, economic and technological and the workshop will pay some attention to the local context of Bulgaria ? a relatively recent member of the EU and faced with its own unique issues arising from its history as a former Eastern European Bloc countries. > The early 1990s marked the beginning of a new era in the global division of labour in digitised activities. In this period, Bulgaria emerged as one of the major offshore locations, providing the world with back-office services in software development, call centres and film studios. > > Grants are available to cover the cost of travel and accommodation if you are carrying out research on virtual work, creative industries or the new international division of labour in creative work. > > To find out more or apply for a place, please email costis1202 at herts.ac.uk > > > -- Dr Vili Lehdonvirta Virtual economies and digital work Research Fellow, Oxford Internet Institute http://vili.lehdonvirta.com -- Twitter: ViliLe -- Skype: vlehdonv -- Tel. +44 7456 420012 From K.ORiordan at sussex.ac.uk Thu May 23 07:36:08 2013 From: K.ORiordan at sussex.ac.uk (Kate O'Riordan) Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 14:36:08 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Call for Chapters: Edited collection on tablet computers, e-readers and other new media objects Message-ID: <6305E6BA10BDAD44A9CE7A944A4E5F4E1BCFF052@EX-SHA-MBX1.ad.susx.ac.uk> Call for Chapters: Edited collection on tablet computers, e-readers and other new media objects We invite contributions to a peer-reviewed edited collection that brings together empirical, theoretical, critical and creative responses to tablet computers, e-readers and other artifacts. Building on the research presented at the Tablet Symposium at the University of Sussex in April 2013, this edited collection will gather chapters which address the use of tablets, readers and ipads across many walks of life including academic, artistic, pedagogical, medical, corporate, activist and everyday contexts. Chapters will develop themes including, but not limited to: -Tablet and e-readers? relationship with the book -Challenges and rewards of using tablets to replace current working, creative and research practices -Definitions, representations and ways of understanding this object or set of objects -Roles that tablets and e-readers play in more general cultural understandings of technology -Questions of materiality -Users. Who uses tablets? In what ways are these devices inclusive? In what ways do they exclude people or groups? -The historical placement of tablets and e-readers: within the history of the book, the history of ubiquitous computing, popular culture and science -fiction -Critical tools and frameworks for interrogating tablets and other new media objects. Chapters should be 8000 words in length and use Harvard referencing. The collection will be peer reviewed, and will be published in e-book format via REFRAME. REFRAME is an open access academic digital platform for the online practice, publication and curation of internationally produced research and scholarship. Its subject specialisms?media, film and music (including media practice, cultural studies and journalism) ? are also those of its publisher, the School of Media, Film and Music at the University of Sussex, UK. Abstracts should be 600-800 words and contain a clear outline of the argument, the theoretical framework, methodology and results (if applicable). Abstracts should also include 5 keywords which describe the chapter, and should be sent to r.burns at sussex.ac.uk by the deadline of 30th June 2013. Important dates: Deadline for abstracts: 30th June 2013 Notification of accepted papers: mid July 2013 Deadline for full chapters: 31st October 2013 Expected publication date: April 2014 For more information, please contact any of the editorial team. Many thanks, Caroline Bassett, Ryan Burns, Kate O?Riordan and Russell Pearce School of Media, Film and Music - University of Sussex CFP and info about original symposium: www.sussex.ac.uk/rcmdc/projects/tablet REFRAME: http://reframe.sussex.ac.uk/ School of Media, Film and Music: www.sussex.ac.uk/mfm/ Dr Kate O'Riordan Reader, Media Film and Music University of Sussex Falmer BN1 9RG k.oriordan at sussex.ac.uk From christian.katzenbach at gmail.com Thu May 23 11:51:09 2013 From: christian.katzenbach at gmail.com (Christian Katzenbach) Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 20:51:09 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] Last Call for Applications: Summer Fellows at Institute for Internet and Society Message-ID: Hi all, our call for application for a spontaneous summer fellowships closes on Monday. I would be delighted if someone from the AoIR-Community was interested in spending the summer at our recently founded institute in Berlin. Find the call below, and don't hesitate to contact me if you have questions or consult the website: http://www.hiig.de/en/call-for-summer-fellows/ Best, Christian ##### Call for Summer Fellows This summer the Alexander Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society opens its doors for fellows from all over the world! We invite applications from early stage and experienced researchers pursuing a project of transdisciplinary Internet research. If you are seeking exchange regarding your research aspirations and find our objectives to match yours or to complement them, we are looking forward to hearing your thoughts! Opportunities: Our fellowship provides innovative thinkers a unique opportunity to exchange experiences and set off new initiatives in an inviting intellectual environment. The four selected fellows are very welcome to collaborate in a growing international team and to participate in the research activities at our institute. We encourage you to actively shape your stay according to your research interests. We offer a number of opportunities to make a contribution to our research programme, such as: ? Developing a paper concerning your research project, e.g. writing a journal paper in our ?SSRN Internet & Society Series? ? Holding a presentation about a topic of your choice in our weekly journal club ? Organising a workshop of your research topic ? Engage in joint activities and projects with other fellows ? And more ? according to your creativity Benefits: Based in the heart of Berlin we will provide you with modern office space that you will share with our researchers and you will participate in the activities of our institute. Fellows are expected to bring their own funding through their home institution or outside grants. Fellows must take care of their accommodation, insurance, childcare, and transportation arrangements. However, in specific cases we can provide fellows on request with a travel allowance of up to ? 700,- and a visa subsidy of up to ? 200,-. Timeframe: We offer fellowships over three months from July to September. The prospective starting date is July 1st, 2013. We believe spending face to face time together will enhance collaboration. Qualifications: ? Master?s or doctorate degree (in exceptional cases master students shortly before graduation) ? Fluency in English; command of German is appreciated ? Research experience and an Internet research project of your own Required application documents: ? curriculum vitae ? letter of motivation: explaining your interest in the fellowship, your expectations and your research background (1 page) ? outline of a) your research project, b) the work you aim to conduct during the fellowship, c) contributions you plan to realise during your stay, d) projects on our research agenda that are of interest to you, and e) if possible, preferred project partners at our institute (please enter in the online form below) ? optional: your latest publication or work sample covering Internet research (maximum of 1 paper / chapter / presentation in English or German) If you have any questions please contact Elena Pfautsch via application[@]hiig.de. Applications will only be accepted through the online application form: http://www.hiig.de/en/call-for-summer-fellows/ From cgcsassistant at asc.upenn.edu Thu May 23 12:25:18 2013 From: cgcsassistant at asc.upenn.edu (CGCS Assistant) Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 19:25:18 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Internet Policy Observatory Post-Doctoral Fellowship or Scholar in Residence In-Reply-To: <61C735DAD1165245AD64E164F39C28DA442551@MB3.asc.local> References: <61C735DAD1165245AD64E164F39C28DA442551@MB3.asc.local> Message-ID: Internet Policy Observatory Post-Doctoral Fellowship or Scholar in Residence Center for Global Communication Studies ANNENBERG SCHOOL FOR COMMUNICATION UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA The Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania is currently soliciting applications for the Internet Policy Observatory Post Doctoral Fellowship or Scholar in Residence at the Center for Global Communication Studies. The Post Doctoral Fellow will help develop and manage existing research programs surrounding the Internet Policy Observatory, and develop his/her own independent related research agenda in the area of global internet policy Annenberg?s Center for Global Communication Studies (CGCS) is a leader in international education and training in comparative media law and policy. The Center's research and policy work addresses issues of media regulation, media and democracy, measuring and evaluation of media development programs, public service broadcasting, and the media's role in conflict and post-conflict environments. The Internet Policy Observatory is a multi-component project with a collaborative network and the goal of assessing incipient Internet policy and governance shifts in key national fora where restrictive approaches are being considered. The project will examine trends and efforts where national decisions have significance for the formation of global Internet policy. In addition to sponsoring research and collaborations with key global research and academic organizations, the Internet Policy Observatory will undertake its own research initiatives to establish data on the social and political context of online communications within targeted countries. Some topics the Internet Policy Observatory will engage in include: * The evolution of mechanisms and processes that affect domestic Internet policy; * The legal, political, economic, and social factors (domestic and international) that influence the implementation or non-implementation of such policies; * The relationship between national efforts and international policy formations; * The role of civil society in domestic Internet policy processes and control; and * The role of public opinion as a mode of determining a ?demand side? for useful Internet policy developments. Applicants should hold postgraduate qualifications at PhD level or equivalent in a field related to internet policy studies, law or policy, communication, media/cultural studies. Applicants should possess a track record of publishing in high quality international journals or other appropriate refereed publications, as well as teaching experience. Experience in research proposal development and implementation of research projects involving both quantitative and qualitative methodologies is an required. This one-year position comes with a stipend of $40,000 to $50,000 (depending on years of prior experience), health insurance, $2,000 in travel and research support, office space with computer and telephone, and full access to the Penn library system. Annenberg welcomes domestic and international applicants. If applicant has not completed graduate studies in English, the University of Pennsylvania?s TOEFL standards apply (http://www.sas.upenn.edu/lps/node/452). The fellowship is a one year term. To apply, please send an application package with CV, statement of interest, and a brief (2-3 page) proposal for a research project related to the study of global internet policy to bsmith at asc.upenn.edu. Research projects may expand existing research or propose new lines of inquiry. Please contact the same email address if you have any questions. Application deadline: June 21, 2013 with a start date tentatively (flexible) August 15, 2013. From H.Kennedy at leeds.ac.uk Thu May 23 14:19:34 2013 From: H.Kennedy at leeds.ac.uk (Helen Kennedy) Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 22:19:34 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Lectureship in Media and Communication Studies, University of Leeds In-Reply-To: <66F01BC4D7AAFB4EA82FEAFAB0939228052BC4D5D7AB@HERMES7.ds.leeds.ac.uk> References: <998DF73FAFB08D4E8802CD75ADA4A75502F19192185A@HERMES7.ds.leeds.ac.uk>, <66F01BC4D7AAFB4EA82FEAFAB0939228052BC4D5D7AB@HERMES7.ds.leeds.ac.uk> Message-ID: <66F01BC4D7AAFB4EA82FEAFAB0939228052BC4D1B48B@HERMES7.ds.leeds.ac.uk> Available from 1 September 2013 or as soon as possible thereafter You will have a PhD in media and communication studies, or another relevant subject area. You will be able to teach journalism studies and aspects of ?promotional culture?, including the critical analysis of public relations, marketing, branding and advertising. You must be able to demonstrate a developing record of research in media and communication studies, with a clear indication of potential to achieve internationally recognised standards of excellence, preferably in the areas indicated above. University of Leeds Grade 8 (?37,382 - ?44,607 p.a.) Informal enquiries may be made to Professor Stephen Coleman, email s.coleman at leeds.ac.uk. Closing Date: 11 June 2013 Interviews are expected to be held on 10 July 2013 Further details can be found at: http://www.jobs.ac.uk/job/AGN686/lectureship-in-media-and-communication-studies/. From meganzahay at gmail.com Thu May 23 14:53:53 2013 From: meganzahay at gmail.com (Megan Zahay) Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 17:53:53 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data Message-ID: Hi everyone, I have been lurking on the list for about a year now and really enjoying the wealth of insights and information, but this is my first addition to it. I am currently working on a project which would like to track the network of some YouTube videos, so that includes things like referrals from other videos, embedding videos on external sites, video comments, text comments, etc. I would also like to use any demographic data available. Can anyone inform me about the reliability of the statistics provided on YouTube itself for each video, or point me in the direction of some publications on the subject? Additionally, if anyone is aware of any programs that would allow me to view the network between groups of videos or research that has been done in this area I would be very appreciative. Thank you in advance! Megan Zahay B.A. Arcadia University From alexleavitt at gmail.com Thu May 23 15:28:00 2013 From: alexleavitt at gmail.com (Alex Leavitt) Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 15:28:00 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Megan, I've been working on a YouTube data project for about a year now. The kind of granularity that you're asking for doesn't reeeeally exist... but you can get data for users and video metadata, but you'd also need some skills dealing with YouTube's API. You can theoretically string together a network of recommended videos (I've seen a visualization of it, but I can't find the link...). Also, unless you have direct access to the analytics for each video (by having it under your account), I'm fairly certain that you can't see stats regarding use of the videos on external sites. --- Alexander Leavitt PhD Student USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism http://alexleavitt.com Twitter: @alexleavitt On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Megan Zahay wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I have been lurking on the list for about a year now and really enjoying > the wealth of insights and information, but this is my first addition to > it. I am currently working on a project which would like to track the > network of some YouTube videos, so that includes things like referrals from > other videos, embedding videos on external sites, video comments, text > comments, etc. I would also like to use any demographic data available. Can > anyone inform me about the reliability of the statistics provided on > YouTube itself for each video, or point me in the direction of some > publications on the subject? Additionally, if anyone is aware of any > programs that would allow me to view the network between groups of videos > or research that has been done in this area I would be very appreciative. > > Thank you in advance! > > Megan Zahay > B.A. Arcadia University > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > From amandalbrennan at gmail.com Thu May 23 15:45:07 2013 From: amandalbrennan at gmail.com (amanda brennan) Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 18:45:07 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: @Alex, is this the YouTube network visualization you were thinking of? https://blogs.k-state.edu/it-news/2013/04/08/the-nodexl-series-conducting-a-data-extraction-of-a-youtube-video-network-part-7/It seems similar to what you were mentioning. @Megan, while it's not exactly what you're looking for, Know Your Meme scrapes Facebook shares & Twitter link statistics to any video uploaded to the site, if you're looking for easy access to those stats. They're on the right side of the page under the description. amanda is an internet scientist. know your meme memelibrarian.com tweets about cats On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Alex Leavitt wrote: > Hi Megan, > > I've been working on a YouTube data project for about a year now. The kind > of granularity that you're asking for doesn't reeeeally exist... but you > can get data for users and video metadata, but you'd also need some skills > dealing with YouTube's API. You can theoretically string together a network > of recommended videos (I've seen a visualization of it, but I can't find > the link...). Also, unless you have direct access to the analytics for each > video (by having it under your account), I'm fairly certain that you can't > see stats regarding use of the videos on external sites. > > --- > > Alexander Leavitt > PhD Student > USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism > http://alexleavitt.com > Twitter: @alexleavitt > > > > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Megan Zahay wrote: > > > Hi everyone, > > > > I have been lurking on the list for about a year now and really enjoying > > the wealth of insights and information, but this is my first addition to > > it. I am currently working on a project which would like to track the > > network of some YouTube videos, so that includes things like referrals > from > > other videos, embedding videos on external sites, video comments, text > > comments, etc. I would also like to use any demographic data available. > Can > > anyone inform me about the reliability of the statistics provided on > > YouTube itself for each video, or point me in the direction of some > > publications on the subject? Additionally, if anyone is aware of any > > programs that would allow me to view the network between groups of videos > > or research that has been done in this area I would be very appreciative. > > > > Thank you in advance! > > > > Megan Zahay > > B.A. Arcadia University > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > From halavais at gmail.com Thu May 23 16:25:46 2013 From: halavais at gmail.com (Alexander Halavais) Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 16:25:46 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates Message-ID: Dear AoIR Members (and members of the broader community), Just a reminder that AoIR elections are now open, and will be until the end of the month. I want to encourage all members to vote. There are lots of ways to help contribute to and shape the future of an organization like ours, and electing an executive committee that represents your interests is one of these. I have not yet voted and I'm hoping the candidates can answer a question for me. (And I hope others will ask questions as well, despite the looming deadline!) I've looked over your candidate statements (linked here: http://aoir.org/2013-executive-committee-election-candidate-statements-voting-information/ ) and I recognize and agree with the need to increase connections among members outside of the conference setting--something that several of you noted. That said, I wonder what single, concrete change you would most like to see in the conferences themselves, and how you might suggest bringing that about. What would you like to see in, say, Bangkok for 2014 that we haven't seen in previous conferences? (If anything!) And what can you do to help make that happen? Thank you all for running, and I look forward to your responses. Best, Alex -- -- // // This email is // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) From jhunsinger at wlu.ca Thu May 23 16:37:32 2013 From: jhunsinger at wlu.ca (Jeremy hunsinger) Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 19:37:32 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I think that it is time to institute a formalized graduate student mentoring program, where we associate graduate students with mentors that will help them prepare materials for the conference, and in other ways. On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Alexander Halavais wrote: > Dear AoIR Members (and members of the broader community), > > Just a reminder that AoIR elections are now open, and will be until the end > of the month. I want to encourage all members to vote. There are lots of > ways to help contribute to and shape the future of an organization like > ours, and electing an executive committee that represents your interests is > one of these. > > I have not yet voted and I'm hoping the candidates can answer a question > for me. (And I hope others will ask questions as well, despite the looming > deadline!) > > I've looked over your candidate statements (linked here: > > http://aoir.org/2013-executive-committee-election-candidate-statements-voting-information/ > ) > and I recognize and agree with the need to increase connections among > members outside of the conference setting--something that several of you > noted. That said, I wonder what single, concrete change you would most like > to see in the conferences themselves, and how you might suggest bringing > that about. What would you like to see in, say, Bangkok for 2014 that we > haven't seen in previous conferences? (If anything!) And what can you do to > help make that happen? > > Thank you all for running, and I look forward to your responses. > > Best, > > Alex > > > > -- > -- > // > // This email is > // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > // > // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > // http://alex.halavais.net > // > // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. > // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > From jenni.powell at gmail.com Thu May 23 16:43:55 2013 From: jenni.powell at gmail.com (Jenni Powell) Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 16:43:55 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: A resource you might find useful is http://vidstatsx.com/. It's not the prettiest site in the world but a lot of it's stats are easier to find than on YouTube. It's particularly useful for tracking the top 100 channels. On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 3:45 PM, amanda brennan wrote: > @Alex, is this the YouTube network visualization you were thinking of? > > https://blogs.k-state.edu/it-news/2013/04/08/the-nodexl-series-conducting-a-data-extraction-of-a-youtube-video-network-part-7/It > seems similar to what you were mentioning. > > @Megan, while it's not exactly what you're looking for, Know Your Meme > scrapes Facebook shares & Twitter link statistics to any video uploaded to > the site, if you're looking for easy access to those stats. They're on the > right side of the page under > the description. > > amanda is an internet scientist. > know your meme > memelibrarian.com > tweets about cats > > > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Alex Leavitt > wrote: > > > Hi Megan, > > > > I've been working on a YouTube data project for about a year now. The > kind > > of granularity that you're asking for doesn't reeeeally exist... but you > > can get data for users and video metadata, but you'd also need some > skills > > dealing with YouTube's API. You can theoretically string together a > network > > of recommended videos (I've seen a visualization of it, but I can't find > > the link...). Also, unless you have direct access to the analytics for > each > > video (by having it under your account), I'm fairly certain that you > can't > > see stats regarding use of the videos on external sites. > > > > --- > > > > Alexander Leavitt > > PhD Student > > USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism > > http://alexleavitt.com > > Twitter: @alexleavitt > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Megan Zahay > wrote: > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > I have been lurking on the list for about a year now and really > enjoying > > > the wealth of insights and information, but this is my first addition > to > > > it. I am currently working on a project which would like to track the > > > network of some YouTube videos, so that includes things like referrals > > from > > > other videos, embedding videos on external sites, video comments, text > > > comments, etc. I would also like to use any demographic data available. > > Can > > > anyone inform me about the reliability of the statistics provided on > > > YouTube itself for each video, or point me in the direction of some > > > publications on the subject? Additionally, if anyone is aware of any > > > programs that would allow me to view the network between groups of > videos > > > or research that has been done in this area I would be very > appreciative. > > > > > > Thank you in advance! > > > > > > Megan Zahay > > > B.A. Arcadia University > > > _______________________________________________ > > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Jenni Powell Content and Speaker Coordinator - VidCon Producer - The Lizzie Bennet Diaries Welcome to Sanditon Geek & Sundry Vlogs 10408 Oxford St. North Hollywood, CA 91606 m. (858) 335-4426 www.vidcon.com www.youtube.com/lizziebennet www.youtube.com/pemberleydigital www.youtube.com/geekandsundryvlogs From joly at punkcast.com Thu May 23 18:19:39 2013 From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie) Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 21:19:39 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ah Jenni! Noiw we know the secret to your success on http://vvx.io ! On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 7:43 PM, Jenni Powell wrote: > A resource you might find useful is http://vidstatsx.com/. > > It's not the prettiest site in the world but a lot of it's stats are easier > to find than on YouTube. It's particularly useful for tracking the top 100 > channels. > > > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 3:45 PM, amanda brennan >wrote: > > > @Alex, is this the YouTube network visualization you were thinking of? > > > > > https://blogs.k-state.edu/it-news/2013/04/08/the-nodexl-series-conducting-a-data-extraction-of-a-youtube-video-network-part-7/It > > seems similar to what you were mentioning. > > > > @Megan, while it's not exactly what you're looking for, Know Your Meme > > scrapes Facebook shares & Twitter link statistics to any video uploaded > to > > the site, if you're looking for easy access to those stats. They're on > the > > right side of the page under > > the description. > > > > amanda is an internet scientist. > > know your meme > > memelibrarian.com > > tweets about cats > > > > > > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Alex Leavitt > > wrote: > > > > > Hi Megan, > > > > > > I've been working on a YouTube data project for about a year now. The > > kind > > > of granularity that you're asking for doesn't reeeeally exist... but > you > > > can get data for users and video metadata, but you'd also need some > > skills > > > dealing with YouTube's API. You can theoretically string together a > > network > > > of recommended videos (I've seen a visualization of it, but I can't > find > > > the link...). Also, unless you have direct access to the analytics for > > each > > > video (by having it under your account), I'm fairly certain that you > > can't > > > see stats regarding use of the videos on external sites. > > > > > > --- > > > > > > Alexander Leavitt > > > PhD Student > > > USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism > > > http://alexleavitt.com > > > Twitter: @alexleavitt > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Megan Zahay > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > > > I have been lurking on the list for about a year now and really > > enjoying > > > > the wealth of insights and information, but this is my first addition > > to > > > > it. I am currently working on a project which would like to track the > > > > network of some YouTube videos, so that includes things like > referrals > > > from > > > > other videos, embedding videos on external sites, video comments, > text > > > > comments, etc. I would also like to use any demographic data > available. > > > Can > > > > anyone inform me about the reliability of the statistics provided on > > > > YouTube itself for each video, or point me in the direction of some > > > > publications on the subject? Additionally, if anyone is aware of any > > > > programs that would allow me to view the network between groups of > > videos > > > > or research that has been done in this area I would be very > > appreciative. > > > > > > > > Thank you in advance! > > > > > > > > Megan Zahay > > > > B.A. Arcadia University > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers > http://aoir.org > > > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > > -- > Jenni Powell > Content and Speaker Coordinator - VidCon > Producer - The Lizzie Bennet Diaries > Welcome to Sanditon > Geek & Sundry Vlogs > > 10408 Oxford St. > North Hollywood, CA 91606 > m. (858) 335-4426 > > www.vidcon.com > www.youtube.com/lizziebennet > www.youtube.com/pemberleydigital > www.youtube.com/geekandsundryvlogs > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- - From jenni.powell at gmail.com Thu May 23 18:27:40 2013 From: jenni.powell at gmail.com (Jenni Powell) Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 18:27:40 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Heeheehee, you got me Joly! :) On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 6:19 PM, Joly MacFie wrote: > > > Ah Jenni! > > Noiw we know the secret to your success on http://vvx.io ! > > > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 7:43 PM, Jenni Powell wrote: > >> A resource you might find useful is http://vidstatsx.com/. >> >> It's not the prettiest site in the world but a lot of it's stats are >> easier >> to find than on YouTube. It's particularly useful for tracking the top >> 100 >> channels. >> >> >> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 3:45 PM, amanda brennan > >wrote: >> >> > @Alex, is this the YouTube network visualization you were thinking of? >> > >> > >> https://blogs.k-state.edu/it-news/2013/04/08/the-nodexl-series-conducting-a-data-extraction-of-a-youtube-video-network-part-7/It >> > seems similar to what you were mentioning. >> > >> > @Megan, while it's not exactly what you're looking for, Know Your Meme >> > scrapes Facebook shares & Twitter link statistics to any video uploaded >> to >> > the site, if you're looking for easy access to those stats. They're on >> the >> > right side of the page >> under >> > the description. >> > >> > amanda is an internet scientist. >> > know your meme >> > memelibrarian.com >> > tweets about cats >> > >> > >> > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Alex Leavitt >> > wrote: >> > >> > > Hi Megan, >> > > >> > > I've been working on a YouTube data project for about a year now. The >> > kind >> > > of granularity that you're asking for doesn't reeeeally exist... but >> you >> > > can get data for users and video metadata, but you'd also need some >> > skills >> > > dealing with YouTube's API. You can theoretically string together a >> > network >> > > of recommended videos (I've seen a visualization of it, but I can't >> find >> > > the link...). Also, unless you have direct access to the analytics for >> > each >> > > video (by having it under your account), I'm fairly certain that you >> > can't >> > > see stats regarding use of the videos on external sites. >> > > >> > > --- >> > > >> > > Alexander Leavitt >> > > PhD Student >> > > USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism >> > > http://alexleavitt.com >> > > Twitter: @alexleavitt >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Megan Zahay >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > > Hi everyone, >> > > > >> > > > I have been lurking on the list for about a year now and really >> > enjoying >> > > > the wealth of insights and information, but this is my first >> addition >> > to >> > > > it. I am currently working on a project which would like to track >> the >> > > > network of some YouTube videos, so that includes things like >> referrals >> > > from >> > > > other videos, embedding videos on external sites, video comments, >> text >> > > > comments, etc. I would also like to use any demographic data >> available. >> > > Can >> > > > anyone inform me about the reliability of the statistics provided on >> > > > YouTube itself for each video, or point me in the direction of some >> > > > publications on the subject? Additionally, if anyone is aware of any >> > > > programs that would allow me to view the network between groups of >> > videos >> > > > or research that has been done in this area I would be very >> > appreciative. >> > > > >> > > > Thank you in advance! >> > > > >> > > > Megan Zahay >> > > > B.A. Arcadia University >> > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> > > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers >> http://aoir.org >> > > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> > > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> > > > >> > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> > > > http://www.aoir.org/ >> > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers >> http://aoir.org >> > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> > > >> > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> > > http://www.aoir.org/ >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> > >> > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> > http://www.aoir.org/ >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Jenni Powell >> Content and Speaker Coordinator - VidCon >> Producer - The Lizzie Bennet Diaries >> Welcome to Sanditon >> Geek & Sundry Vlogs >> >> 10408 Oxford St. >> North Hollywood, CA 91606 >> m. (858) 335-4426 >> >> www.vidcon.com >> www.youtube.com/lizziebennet >> www.youtube.com/pemberleydigital >> www.youtube.com/geekandsundryvlogs >> _______________________________________________ >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> http://www.aoir.org/ >> > > > > -- > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast > WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com > http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com > VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org > -------------------------------------------------------------- > - > -- Jenni Powell Content and Speaker Coordinator - VidCon Producer - The Lizzie Bennet Diaries Welcome to Sanditon Geek & Sundry Vlogs 10408 Oxford St. North Hollywood, CA 91606 m. (858) 335-4426 www.vidcon.com www.youtube.com/lizziebennet www.youtube.com/pemberleydigital www.youtube.com/geekandsundryvlogs From cassian at hotmail.co.uk Fri May 24 02:02:21 2013 From: cassian at hotmail.co.uk (Main) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 10:02:21 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data Message-ID: Have you tried Webometric Analyst? It's free software available from Wolverhampton University. I've not played with the youtube function myself but I have seen research which does similar things to the project you describe. You will need to download the manual and I recommend Mike Thelwall's work on webometrics to help make sense of the program. Cassian --- Original Message --- From: "Megan Zahay" Sent: May 23, 2013 10:54 PM To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data Hi everyone, I have been lurking on the list for about a year now and really enjoying the wealth of insights and information, but this is my first addition to it. I am currently working on a project which would like to track the network of some YouTube videos, so that includes things like referrals from other videos, embedding videos on external sites, video comments, text comments, etc. I would also like to use any demographic data available. Can anyone inform me about the reliability of the statistics provided on YouTube itself for each video, or point me in the direction of some publications on the subject? Additionally, if anyone is aware of any programs that would allow me to view the network between groups of videos or research that has been done in this area I would be very appreciative. Thank you in advance! Megan Zahay B.A. Arcadia University _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From stuart.shulman at gmail.com Fri May 24 03:46:51 2013 From: stuart.shulman at gmail.com (Stuart Shulman) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 06:46:51 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Context Miner http://www.contextminer.org/ Great program for YouTube data. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:02 AM, Main wrote: > Have you tried Webometric Analyst? It's free software available from > Wolverhampton University. I've not played with the youtube function myself > but I have seen research which does similar things to the project you > describe. You will need to download the manual and I recommend Mike > Thelwall's work on webometrics to help make sense of the program. > > Cassian > > --- Original Message --- > > From: "Megan Zahay" > Sent: May 23, 2013 10:54 PM > To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org > Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data > > Hi everyone, > > I have been lurking on the list for about a year now and really enjoying > the wealth of insights and information, but this is my first addition to > it. I am currently working on a project which would like to track the > network of some YouTube videos, so that includes things like referrals from > other videos, embedding videos on external sites, video comments, text > comments, etc. I would also like to use any demographic data available. Can > anyone inform me about the reliability of the statistics provided on > YouTube itself for each video, or point me in the direction of some > publications on the subject? Additionally, if anyone is aware of any > programs that would allow me to view the network between groups of videos > or research that has been done in this area I would be very appreciative. > > Thank you in advance! > > Megan Zahay > B.A. Arcadia University > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Dr. Stuart W. Shulman people.umass.edu/stu Editor Emeritus, JITP jitp.net Director, QDAP-UMass umass.edu/qdap Founder and CEO, Texifter texifter.com LinkedIn: linkedin.com/pub/stuart-shulman/10/351/899 Twitter: twitter.com/#!/StuartWShulman From oranitkl at gmail.com Fri May 24 04:44:37 2013 From: oranitkl at gmail.com (oranit klein) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 14:44:37 +0300 Subject: [Air-L] Audiovisual Thinking - Call for videos Message-ID: Please post on the air list: *Audiovisual Thinking - Call for videos Issue #2013:7* *The creative economy* This issue of Audiovisual Thinking focuses on ?the creative economy?, which has become a central focus of government policy in many states. In the belief that cultural production is now central to economic life, and an essential part of global competitiveness, governments have intervened in various ways to try and stimulate cultural production and financial returns. How does this look from the standpoint of those in cultural work? Topics could include (but are not limited to): - Case studies of cultural workers at work. - Reflections on intervention by government bodies and cultural agencies: the exercise of power. How do subsidies, tax breaks, training and other kinds of support impact on the structures and strategies of creative businesses? - Cultural work and intellectual property ? are there connections? Who benefits? - How is digital technology affecting cultural work and intellectual property? - How do ideas about the creative economy circulate? - What links are there between cultural work, philanthropy and other forms of patronage? - What do we know about the self-organisation of cultural collectives? *Further reading:* Richard E. Caves, Creative Industries, Harvard University Press, 2000. John Howkins, The Creative Economy, Penguin Books, 2007. John Hartley (ed.) Creative Industries, Blackwell Publishing, 2005. David Hesmondhalgh, The Cultural Industries, Third Edition, Sage 2012. Philip Schlesinger , 'Creativity: from discourse to doctrine?' Screen 48(3) 2007: 377-387 Philip Schlesinger, ?Creativity and the experts: New Labour, think tanks and the policy process?, International Journal of Press Politics 14(3) 2009: 3-20. *Guest Editor: Professor Philip Schlesinger . THIS CALL IS NOW OPEN . DEADLINE 15th OCTOBER 2013.* What is Audiovisual Thinking ? Audiovisual Thinking is a peer reviewed academic online journal and pioneering forum where academics, practitioners and educators can articulate, conceptualize and disseminate their research about audiovisual culture through video. International in scope and multidisciplinary in approach, the purpose of Audiovisual Thinking is to develop and promote academic thinking in and about all aspects of audiovisuality and audiovisual culture. Advised by a board of leading academics and thinkers in the fields of audiovisuality, communication and the media and hosted by Copenhagen University, the journal seeks to set the standard for academic audiovisual essays now and in the future. We study, teach and research the moving image, media and audiovisuality, yet we rarely mediate in these same forms and media. Audiovisual Thinking hopes to change this. From gekker.alex at gmail.com Fri May 24 05:32:03 2013 From: gekker.alex at gmail.com (Alex Gekker) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 14:32:03 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] Fwd: =DEADLINE EXTENSION= Call for Papers Games for Health Europe 2013 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear all, Due to several requests we are prolonging the submissions deadline till Friday, June 7th 23:59 CET. looking forward to your submissions. To submit: https://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=gfheu2013 ______________________________ __________ From: Schouten, B.A.M. [bschouten at tue.nl] -Apologies if you receive multiple times, please circulate this to your colleagues who might be interested, thank you so much- Call for Papers for the peer-reviewed track of the third European Conference on Games for Health Europe,4-5 November 2013 Utrecht, The Netherlands. Founded in 2004, the Games for Health Project supports community, knowledge and business development efforts to use cutting-edge games and game technologies to improve health and health care. The Games for Health Conference brings together researchers, medical professionals and game developers to share information about the impact of games, playful interaction and game technologies on health, health care and health policy. Over three days, more than 400 attendees will participate in over 60 sessions provided by an international array of 80+ speakers, cutting across a wide range of activities in health and health care. Topics include exergaming, physical therapy, disease management, health behavior change, biofeedback, scientific validation, rehab, epidemiology, training, cognitive health, nutrition and education. The aim of the conference is to bring together academics and practitioners working within the field of Game & Play Design, Design Research, Game Development and the Medical Community to explore and innovate within the area of Health. The conference provides an excellent opportunity to showcase practice and to mainstream research ideas and outcomes. It will introduce a wider audience to key findings and products from research and will illustrate how practice feeds back into and informs research. The conference will create a forum for two-way communication between the academic and practitioner communities and particularly welcomes user led presentations and workshops. The programme will include presentations of papers, workshops, a doctoral consortium and an exhibition space for demonstrations and posters. Themes and topics: The conference encourages papers from multi disciplines, especially from game & play as well as from health practitioners and researchers. This call for papers is intended to solicit contributions from an international audience on recent developments and experiments that: ? Present innovative and state-of-the-art design and applications that use playful concepts in health care settings, ? Describe game-based and playful solutions to behavior change and pervasive healthcare problems, ? Share experiences, insights, best-practices and lessons-learned, ? Report the results of technical and social evaluations with regards to playful interaction and serious game design related to health care, ? Report scientific insights on development and efficacy of gameplay in professional an patient education, ? Report results of longitudinal studies, ? Discuss and highlight the key challenges and future developments within the domain. Selected (peer reviewed) papers will be published by Springer Publishers. Submission Deadline: June 7th, 2013 Notification of Acceptance: June 21th, 2013 Final Submission: July 15th, 2013 Please find more information on http://www.gamesforhealtheurope.org/academicor mail: Alex Gekker ( a.gekker at uu.nl) The editors: Prof. Dr. B.A.M. Schouten BA (Eindhoven University of Technology) Dr. Marlies Schijven, MD MHSc (Academic Medical Center of Amsterdam) Dr. Ir. M.M. Bekker (Eindhoven University of Technology) Prof. Dr. Ben A.M. Schouten BA Playful Interactions Department of Industrial Design Eindhoven University of Technology P.O Box 513, 5600 MB Eindhoven, The Netherlands Main Building 3.38 phn: 31(0)40-2472481 fax: 31(0)40-2475376 cel: 31 (0)653758997 From R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk Fri May 24 06:10:12 2013 From: R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk (Deller, Ruth A) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 13:10:12 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Oooh, difficult question as I think there are several things we could do, some of which others have mentioned. I'm interested in the conference becoming a bit more creative and dynamic so I would encourage conference and programme chairs to think about what they might want to do to shake the programme up - this might change each year depending on where we are and who the team are. But I'd encourage more flexibility in thinking about things like keynotes, plenaries or even panel formats. Not necessarily to do away with things but to allow freedom to try new things out. In that vein, given that many of our members can't get to the conferences due to the costs of flights etc, I would like to see something in the programme whereby we could connect with them - streaming talks (or some of the talks) and maybe even having some of them present virtually in certain panels. I would look to work with the programme and conference chair about this to see if we can get the technology to make it happen. -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Alexander Halavais Sent: 24 May 2013 00:26 To: aoir list Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates Dear AoIR Members (and members of the broader community), Just a reminder that AoIR elections are now open, and will be until the end of the month. I want to encourage all members to vote. There are lots of ways to help contribute to and shape the future of an organization like ours, and electing an executive committee that represents your interests is one of these. I have not yet voted and I'm hoping the candidates can answer a question for me. (And I hope others will ask questions as well, despite the looming deadline!) I've looked over your candidate statements (linked here: http://aoir.org/2013-executive-committee-election-candidate-statements-voting-information/ ) and I recognize and agree with the need to increase connections among members outside of the conference setting--something that several of you noted. That said, I wonder what single, concrete change you would most like to see in the conferences themselves, and how you might suggest bringing that about. What would you like to see in, say, Bangkok for 2014 that we haven't seen in previous conferences? (If anything!) And what can you do to help make that happen? Thank you all for running, and I look forward to your responses. Best, Alex -- -- // // This email is // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From geneloeb at gmail.com Fri May 24 06:54:12 2013 From: geneloeb at gmail.com (gene loeb) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 08:54:12 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I think Ruth gave a meaningful, needed response of inclusion of more persons. Specific activities should be designed for member participation. "Elected official"s should not be the only route to member participation. I think too much emphasis is given to this area. There should be more positions for this, maybe even 10 presidential positions , even 30 vice presidents and a large advisory group. I have looked for ways to be more active, would like to do more. Thanks for all of your help. Gene Gene Loeb, Ph.D. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 8:10 AM, Deller, Ruth A wrote: > Oooh, difficult question as I think there are several things we could do, > some of which others have mentioned. > > I'm interested in the conference becoming a bit more creative and dynamic > so I would encourage conference and programme chairs to think about what > they might want to do to shake the programme up - this might change each > year depending on where we are and who the team are. But I'd encourage > more flexibility in thinking about things like keynotes, plenaries or even > panel formats. Not necessarily to do away with things but to allow freedom > to try new things out. In that vein, given that many of our members can't > get to the conferences due to the costs of flights etc, I would like to see > something in the programme whereby we could connect with them - streaming > talks (or some of the talks) and maybe even having some of them present > virtually in certain panels. I would look to work with the programme and > conference chair about this to see if we can get the technology to make it > happen. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto: > air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Alexander Halavais > Sent: 24 May 2013 00:26 > To: aoir list > Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates > > Dear AoIR Members (and members of the broader community), > > Just a reminder that AoIR elections are now open, and will be until the > end of the month. I want to encourage all members to vote. There are lots > of ways to help contribute to and shape the future of an organization like > ours, and electing an executive committee that represents your interests is > one of these. > > I have not yet voted and I'm hoping the candidates can answer a question > for me. (And I hope others will ask questions as well, despite the looming > deadline!) > > I've looked over your candidate statements (linked here: > > http://aoir.org/2013-executive-committee-election-candidate-statements-voting-information/ > ) > and I recognize and agree with the need to increase connections among > members outside of the conference setting--something that several of you > noted. That said, I wonder what single, concrete change you would most like > to see in the conferences themselves, and how you might suggest bringing > that about. What would you like to see in, say, Bangkok for 2014 that we > haven't seen in previous conferences? (If anything!) And what can you do to > help make that happen? > > Thank you all for running, and I look forward to your responses. > > Best, > > Alex > > > > -- > -- > // > // This email is > // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > // > // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > // http://alex.halavais.net > // > // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. > // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association > of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or > unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- With Sincerest Best Wishes , Gene Gene Loeb, Ph.D. From jhuns at vt.edu Fri May 24 07:07:59 2013 From: jhuns at vt.edu (jeremy hunsinger) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 10:07:59 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4247BB5C-1CB6-4D2A-A8A0-AA419EA2D00B@vt.edu> In my memory... there has been at least 3 proposals for streaming type talks at the conference and at least 1 committee established to try to make it happen. I think that the answer is less of 'stream talks' because if that was going to happen, it would have achieved critical mass to make it happen by now as we have the people with technical understanding and capacity in our membership to make it happen. I suspect that people don't really want streaming, but what they do want, as I indicated in my nomination information is more opportunity to participate. I think that is really about more opportunities to network and share research in face to face environments. This is why i suggested that we should 'distribute the association activities', or in other words, we should sponsor or co-sponsor small events at other conferences in places away from the other conference. For instance if the International Studies Association is in Budapest and we have members there, we could sponsor a small event there, or similar activities with any scholarly association. The idea is to put AoIR members in closer contact with each other by using their other disciplinary and interdisciplinary associations as venues for AoIR. In conjunction with those activities, I suggest we start activities that bond our association together better, such as Mentoring, restarting the Birds of Feather lunches, and making our 'web and email space' more actively available to member interaction, which it is now somewhat, but we only have 2 or 3 other email groups existing and I think that mostly those groups are non-functioning, such as the graduate student list, the political economy and policy list, etc. Advertising those more and providing more of those, will I think allow us to grow both deeper and broader in our membership. If the goal is to get people involved in novel and interesting ways, I think we should be providing the infrastructure for that involvement. Jeremy Hunsinger Communication Studies Wilfrid Laurier University Center for Digital Discourse and Culture Virginia Tech Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. --Pablo Picasso From R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk Fri May 24 07:14:26 2013 From: R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk (Deller, Ruth A) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 14:14:26 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: <4247BB5C-1CB6-4D2A-A8A0-AA419EA2D00B@vt.edu> References: <4247BB5C-1CB6-4D2A-A8A0-AA419EA2D00B@vt.edu> Message-ID: I think the idea of multiple events has some merit - in addition to your sponsorship suggestions, perhaps we can even out forward AOIR-affiliated panels at other large conferences? Re: streaming - I've seen a lot of people asking for streaming on the Twitter feeds the past couple of IR conferences, although they may be a minority - there are probably other ways of interactive participation for those not physically present that we can look at - Twitter's obviously one, but it often ends up being reportage and comment from the people there and maybe we could look at ways of having more dialogue/interaction with those not there. And we should bring back Terri's kissing booth ;) I do think that as an internet-research organisation, we could be using the internet a lot more than we are... I think we both agree - and so do pretty much all the candidates from their statements - that widening participation is really key to the future of AOIR. I'm sure we're all open to suggestions from members about how that can happen though, especially those who have felt distanced from things so far or have struggled to get to conferences. Ruth -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of jeremy hunsinger Sent: 24 May 2013 15:08 To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In my memory... there has been at least 3 proposals for streaming type talks at the conference and at least 1 committee established to try to make it happen. I think that the answer is less of 'stream talks' because if that was going to happen, it would have achieved critical mass to make it happen by now as we have the people with technical understanding and capacity in our membership to make it happen. I suspect that people don't really want streaming, but what they do want, as I indicated in my nomination information is more opportunity to participate. I think that is really about more opportunities to network and share research in face to face environments. This is why i suggested that we should 'distribute the association activities', or in other words, we should sponsor or co-sponsor small events at other conferences in places away from the other conference. For instance if the International Studies Association is in Budapest and we have members there, we could sponsor a small event there, or similar activities with any scholarly association. The idea is to put AoIR members in closer contact with each other by using t heir other disciplinary and interdisciplinary associations as venues for AoIR. In conjunction with those activities, I suggest we start activities that bond our association together better, such as Mentoring, restarting the Birds of Feather lunches, and making our 'web and email space' more actively available to member interaction, which it is now somewhat, but we only have 2 or 3 other email groups existing and I think that mostly those groups are non-functioning, such as the graduate student list, the political economy and policy list, etc. Advertising those more and providing more of those, will I think allow us to grow both deeper and broader in our membership. If the goal is to get people involved in novel and interesting ways, I think we should be providing the infrastructure for that involvement. Jeremy Hunsinger Communication Studies Wilfrid Laurier University Center for Digital Discourse and Culture Virginia Tech Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. --Pablo Picasso _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk Fri May 24 07:16:13 2013 From: R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk (Deller, Ruth A) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 14:16:13 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: References: <4247BB5C-1CB6-4D2A-A8A0-AA419EA2D00B@vt.edu> Message-ID: That should read 'put forward' btw. Not sure what 'out forwarding' is although I bet it's used in some BZNS SPK somewhere! -----Original Message----- From: Deller, Ruth A Sent: 24 May 2013 15:14 To: 'jeremy hunsinger'; air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: RE: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates I think the idea of multiple events has some merit - in addition to your sponsorship suggestions, perhaps we can even out forward AOIR-affiliated panels at other large conferences? Re: streaming - I've seen a lot of people asking for streaming on the Twitter feeds the past couple of IR conferences, although they may be a minority - there are probably other ways of interactive participation for those not physically present that we can look at - Twitter's obviously one, but it often ends up being reportage and comment from the people there and maybe we could look at ways of having more dialogue/interaction with those not there. And we should bring back Terri's kissing booth ;) I do think that as an internet-research organisation, we could be using the internet a lot more than we are... I think we both agree - and so do pretty much all the candidates from their statements - that widening participation is really key to the future of AOIR. I'm sure we're all open to suggestions from members about how that can happen though, especially those who have felt distanced from things so far or have struggled to get to conferences. Ruth -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of jeremy hunsinger Sent: 24 May 2013 15:08 To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In my memory... there has been at least 3 proposals for streaming type talks at the conference and at least 1 committee established to try to make it happen. I think that the answer is less of 'stream talks' because if that was going to happen, it would have achieved critical mass to make it happen by now as we have the people with technical understanding and capacity in our membership to make it happen. I suspect that people don't really want streaming, but what they do want, as I indicated in my nomination information is more opportunity to participate. I think that is really about more opportunities to network and share research in face to face environments. This is why i suggested that we should 'distribute the association activities', or in other words, we should sponsor or co-sponsor small events at other conferences in places away from the other conference. For instance if the International Studies Association is in Budapest and we have members there, we could sponsor a small event there, or similar activities with any scholarly association. The idea is to put AoIR members in closer contact with each other by using t heir other disciplinary and interdisciplinary associations as venues for AoIR. In conjunction with those activities, I suggest we start activities that bond our association together better, such as Mentoring, restarting the Birds of Feather lunches, and making our 'web and email space' more actively available to member interaction, which it is now somewhat, but we only have 2 or 3 other email groups existing and I think that mostly those groups are non-functioning, such as the graduate student list, the political economy and policy list, etc. Advertising those more and providing more of those, will I think allow us to grow both deeper and broader in our membership. If the goal is to get people involved in novel and interesting ways, I think we should be providing the infrastructure for that involvement. Jeremy Hunsinger Communication Studies Wilfrid Laurier University Center for Digital Discourse and Culture Virginia Tech Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. --Pablo Picasso _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From meganzahay at gmail.com Fri May 24 07:21:02 2013 From: meganzahay at gmail.com (Megan Zahay) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 10:21:02 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks for your responses, all are very helpful! NodeXL seems particularly interesting for visualizing connections. Megan On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 6:46 AM, Stuart Shulman wrote: > Context Miner > http://www.contextminer.org/ > > Great program for YouTube data. > > > On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:02 AM, Main wrote: > >> Have you tried Webometric Analyst? It's free software available from >> Wolverhampton University. I've not played with the youtube function myself >> but I have seen research which does similar things to the project you >> describe. You will need to download the manual and I recommend Mike >> Thelwall's work on webometrics to help make sense of the program. >> >> Cassian >> >> --- Original Message --- >> >> From: "Megan Zahay" >> Sent: May 23, 2013 10:54 PM >> To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org >> Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> I have been lurking on the list for about a year now and really enjoying >> the wealth of insights and information, but this is my first addition to >> it. I am currently working on a project which would like to track the >> network of some YouTube videos, so that includes things like referrals >> from >> other videos, embedding videos on external sites, video comments, text >> comments, etc. I would also like to use any demographic data available. >> Can >> anyone inform me about the reliability of the statistics provided on >> YouTube itself for each video, or point me in the direction of some >> publications on the subject? Additionally, if anyone is aware of any >> programs that would allow me to view the network between groups of videos >> or research that has been done in this area I would be very appreciative. >> >> Thank you in advance! >> >> Megan Zahay >> B.A. Arcadia University >> _______________________________________________ >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> http://www.aoir.org/ >> _______________________________________________ >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> http://www.aoir.org/ >> > > > > -- > > Dr. Stuart W. Shulman > people.umass.edu/stu > > Editor Emeritus, JITP > jitp.net > > Director, QDAP-UMass > umass.edu/qdap > > Founder and CEO, Texifter > texifter.com > > LinkedIn: linkedin.com/pub/stuart-shulman/10/351/899 > Twitter: twitter.com/#!/StuartWShulman > > From jhuns at vt.edu Fri May 24 07:21:26 2013 From: jhuns at vt.edu (jeremy hunsinger) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 10:21:26 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: References: <4247BB5C-1CB6-4D2A-A8A0-AA419EA2D00B@vt.edu> Message-ID: <43B2FE49-28C2-46B0-B474-5F2077BD37A0@vt.edu> On May 24, 2013, at 10:14 AM, "Deller, Ruth A" wrote: > I think the idea of multiple events has some merit - in addition to your sponsorship suggestions, perhaps we can even out forward AOIR-affiliated panels at other large conferences? I think there was some discussion about this in the past, and there were concerns about branding and cross-branding AoIR in regards to affiliating with other organizations. In my recollection, the early decision on this was to allow the members to form their own panels at other conferences ad hoc, but not have them branded AoIR. > > Re: streaming - I've seen a lot of people asking for streaming on the Twitter feeds the past couple of IR conferences, although they may be a minority - there are probably other ways of interactive participation for those not physically present that we can look at - Twitter's obviously one, but it often ends up being reportage and comment from the people there and maybe we could look at ways of having more dialogue/interaction with those not there. And we should bring back Terri's kissing booth ;) I do think that as an internet-research organisation, we could be using the internet a lot more than we are... Always true, but then we have the problem of labor-time of volunteers also. This is why I think that more member involvement helps to solve some of this issue, because it distributes the labors. > > I think we both agree - and so do pretty much all the candidates from their statements - that widening participation is really key to the future of AOIR. I'm sure we're all open to suggestions from members about how that can happen though, especially those who have felt distanced from things so far or have struggled to get to conferences. yes, i think we both agree about this. Jeremy Hunsinger Communication Studies Wilfrid Laurier University Center for Digital Discourse and Culture Virginia Tech Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. --Pablo Picasso From alan.neustadtl at gmail.com Fri May 24 07:30:26 2013 From: alan.neustadtl at gmail.com (Alan Neustadtl) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 10:30:26 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: You might also explore NodeXL ( http://nodexl.codeplex.com/releases/view/104762), a free MS Excel add-in that has the ability to directly import networks from Youtube. Best, Alan On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:02 AM, Main wrote: > Have you tried Webometric Analyst? It's free software available from > Wolverhampton University. I've not played with the youtube function myself > but I have seen research which does similar things to the project you > describe. You will need to download the manual and I recommend Mike > Thelwall's work on webometrics to help make sense of the program. > > Cassian > > --- Original Message --- > > From: "Megan Zahay" > Sent: May 23, 2013 10:54 PM > To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org > Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data > > Hi everyone, > > I have been lurking on the list for about a year now and really enjoying > the wealth of insights and information, but this is my first addition to > it. I am currently working on a project which would like to track the > network of some YouTube videos, so that includes things like referrals from > other videos, embedding videos on external sites, video comments, text > comments, etc. I would also like to use any demographic data available. Can > anyone inform me about the reliability of the statistics provided on > YouTube itself for each video, or point me in the direction of some > publications on the subject? Additionally, if anyone is aware of any > programs that would allow me to view the network between groups of videos > or research that has been done in this area I would be very appreciative. > > Thank you in advance! > > Megan Zahay > B.A. Arcadia University > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > From dbrabham at email.unc.edu Fri May 24 08:35:53 2013 From: dbrabham at email.unc.edu (Brabham, Daren C) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 15:35:53 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: <43B2FE49-28C2-46B0-B474-5F2077BD37A0@vt.edu> References: <4247BB5C-1CB6-4D2A-A8A0-AA419EA2D00B@vt.edu> <43B2FE49-28C2-46B0-B474-5F2077BD37A0@vt.edu> Message-ID: Not sure if Alex meant for candidates for open seats to respond to his questions, too, or if it was just for the VP candidates...but here it goes... I think the conferences work well as-is, really. The only parts that need improvement, perhaps, is that some panels struggle to sustain a coherent theme (i.e., a video game theory panel might have a paper or two that really are about video game theories, but the other couple of papers are about other things/theories and use an analysis of a video game to make their point). It is extremely difficult to somehow group ad hoc papers together into coherent panels, though, so I'm sure previous program planners have truly done their best. I don't have an answer for how to make this kind of thing better, except maybe to encourage whole thematic panels more...or to consider poster sessions or lightning talk formats for some of the ill-fitting ad hoc papers...or to maybe just call all of the ad hoc panels potpourri panels and just include more papers on each of them (5 or 6 per panel?). We are all Internet scholars, and we are all able to find full papers later (SSRN, emailing presenters personally, or whatever). The value for this conference, for me, is exposure to many ideas in short formats, and then good discussion that follows. The other value of the conference is the social hour. Informal cocktail time with colleagues is the best way to find mentors, extend scholarly conversation, and find allies in the field. I would actually oppose any more efforts to add new grad student mentoring programming to the conference. We have the doctoral colloquium, which is great. But really beyond that there need to be more mixers, more trading of business cards, more informal conversations between grad students and senior scholars. I know I would probably not want to be assigned a grad student to mentor throughout the year, but I would welcome any opportunity to have a beer with a grad student interested in the things I'm interested in. So, on the "mentoring grad students" front, I disagree with Jeremy and would like to see a less formal, more frequent social interaction across ranks than new panels and programs. That's really how the academy works, and the sooner the formal boundaries between ranks come down (and I think formal mentoring arrangements inherently keep these boundaries up), the better for grad students. db --- Daren C. Brabham, Ph.D. Assistant Professor, School of Journalism & Mass Communication Editor, Case Studies in Strategic Communication | www.csscjournal.org University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Carroll Hall, CB 3365 Chapel Hill, NC 27599 (801) 633-4796 (mobile) daren.brabham at unc.edu | www.darenbrabham.com From jhunsinger at wlu.ca Fri May 24 08:45:30 2013 From: jhunsinger at wlu.ca (Jeremy hunsinger) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 11:45:30 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: References: <4247BB5C-1CB6-4D2A-A8A0-AA419EA2D00B@vt.edu> <43B2FE49-28C2-46B0-B474-5F2077BD37A0@vt.edu> Message-ID: I prefer informal relations too, but informal relations work best in small companies, as we grow and reach out, we'll need to provide clear 'paths to community' which may take more or less formal systems, but 'paths into the community' is really what the graduate student mentoring is about, less than systems of hierarchy and formalized relations. Also mentorship is 'opt-in', if you want to participate great, if not, no worries. I've been on both sides of the mentorship relationship so far, and I think that i've benefitted from all the relationships that I've developed, so I am a strong supporter of mentor networks for graduate students. From jstromer at syr.edu Fri May 24 09:24:04 2013 From: jstromer at syr.edu (Jennifer Stromer-Galley) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 16:24:04 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <58ACB774CD3A274A828C0A15EF7A1BE10939149A@SUEX10-mbx-01.ad.syr.edu> I know, Alex, you ask for a single, concrete suggestion, but I am going to toss out a few ideas. Some are likely better than others, sort of like a smorgasbord. I think the conference already does well what a conference should: allow researchers to present their scholarship, stimulate conversation on that scholarship, and enable networking and connecting opportunities for attendees. So, efforts to improve the conference should work to further enhance that core function. To that end, I would recommend some additions: 1) Improving connections and networking: at one of the social receptions, organize some cross-group mingling, to make sure our new members and junior scholars are making connections. One way to do this might be to borrow from the comic book genre: asking people when they register to provide their super hero name (mine would be Girlhero) and a slogan (you know, like "To Infinity and Beyond!"). This would go on the badge or maybe on a separate card that people could put in their badge holder at the social event. Catchy slogans and names would stimulate conversation, and get otherwise strangers to chat a bit. Or, alternatively, though a bit less fun (more scholarly I suppose), would be to ask people to list 3 key words (perhaps pre-defined choices) that would go on their badge. During the social event, their mission would be to find others with same or similar key words. It seems there should be some sort of prize there somewhere to incent some hunting for others with similar keywords. 2a) Promoting high quality scholarship: Given that the conference each year has a theme, I would encourage us to think about establishing a top scholarship award on that theme. This might be implemented as part of the abstract submission process, where people would indicate whether their abstract is on the theme. We would need to organize a volunteer committee to review submissions, perhaps headed by someone on the Exec. The one hitch here is that those who submit on the theme would need to provide a full paper within N number of days before the conference so that they could be reviewed in a timely manner and a decision rendered in time for the conference. But, I imagine those logistics can be worked out. And I imagine this in some ways as a variant of the publishing work that has been done in the past with submissions. Which leads me to: 2b) Also on promoting high quality scholarship: We need to continue to find ways to get the excellent scholarship published. So, working with existing, relevant journals to promote theme issues out of the conference, or edited books should be work we continue. Establishing a publication committee that could work toward this goal strikes me as wise, if there are volunteers. (Maybe this already exists?) 3) Association Visioning: As I suggested in my statement, I would like to see a panel at Bangkok that does a bit of navel gazing, if you will, and contemplates where we are as an organization and where Internet scholarship is likely to be in oh 10 years, and how will we as an association prepare for the inevitable shift in our object(s) of study? I could image bringing together some of the past members of the Executive Board to start some discussion and contextualize the original vision and purpose of the association, and then have an open conversation that I would hope would continue after the conference through the aoir list or perhaps a separate list. 4) Promotion of the Conference: I would really like us to consider establishing a position, maybe someone on the Executive Board would serve in a vital role of heading organization and conference promotion and establishing a small committee of volunteers to help in that effort. Although not an addition, the last thing I would like to see continue is a workshop that brings together doctoral students and senior scholars. I feel quite strongly that such a workshop can be highly beneficial to all involved, for all the reasons you might imagine: intellectual stimulation, networking, and the like. Okay, that is quite enough out of me for now. Often smorgasbords go overboard, as I likely did here. Regards, ~Jenny Associate Professor?| School of Information Studies Syracuse University 220 Hinds Hall Syracuse, New York 13244 t 315.443.1823? f 315.443.5673? e jstromer at syr.edu? syr.academia.edu/jenniferstromergalley ischool.syr.edu -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Alexander Halavais Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 7:26 PM To: aoir list Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates Dear AoIR Members (and members of the broader community), Just a reminder that AoIR elections are now open, and will be until the end of the month. I want to encourage all members to vote. There are lots of ways to help contribute to and shape the future of an organization like ours, and electing an executive committee that represents your interests is one of these. I have not yet voted and I'm hoping the candidates can answer a question for me. (And I hope others will ask questions as well, despite the looming deadline!) I've looked over your candidate statements (linked here: http://aoir.org/2013-executive-committee-election-candidate-statements-voting-information/ ) and I recognize and agree with the need to increase connections among members outside of the conference setting--something that several of you noted. That said, I wonder what single, concrete change you would most like to see in the conferences themselves, and how you might suggest bringing that about. What would you like to see in, say, Bangkok for 2014 that we haven't seen in previous conferences? (If anything!) And what can you do to help make that happen? Thank you all for running, and I look forward to your responses. Best, Alex -- -- // // This email is // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From jhowison at ischool.utexas.edu Fri May 24 09:26:07 2013 From: jhowison at ischool.utexas.edu (James Howison) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 11:26:07 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9AEF9795BB9E4BED9B3BC4CF91DD7591@ischool.utexas.edu> I think those tools are great. I also think, though, that it's worth thinking through how the structures that you'll produce relate to the sort of networks that SNA metrics were developed for. We've written a piece that tries to figure through the implications of analyzing networks drawn from different kinds of digital trace data, including linking the sort of processes that either produce the networks or happen over the networks with the typical SNA metrics. I'm sure that there's interesting stuff to be learned from network views of trace data on Youtube :) But lots to think about in terms of interactions vs relationships, temporal collapsing of data, meaning of non-links, survey vs sampling logic etc. Howison, J., Wiggins, A., & Crowston, K. (2012). Validity Issues in the Use of Social Network Analysis with Digital Trace Data. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 12(12). Available in PDF (http://james.howison.name/pubs/HowisonWigginsCrowstonValiditySNAJAIS.pdf) Lots of references to great thinking on these questions from Borgatti, Monge and Contractor and others. -- James Howison Sent with Sparrow (http://www.sparrowmailapp.com/?sig) On Friday, May 24, 2013 at 09:30 CDT, Alan Neustadtl wrote: > You might also explore NodeXL ( > http://nodexl.codeplex.com/releases/view/104762), a free MS Excel add-in > that has the ability to directly import networks from Youtube. > > Best, > Alan > > > On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:02 AM, Main wrote: > > > Have you tried Webometric Analyst? It's free software available from > > Wolverhampton University. I've not played with the youtube function myself > > but I have seen research which does similar things to the project you > > describe. You will need to download the manual and I recommend Mike > > Thelwall's work on webometrics to help make sense of the program. > > > > Cassian > > > > --- Original Message --- > > > > From: "Megan Zahay" > > Sent: May 23, 2013 10:54 PM > > To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org (mailto:air-l at listserv.aoir.org) > > Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > I have been lurking on the list for about a year now and really enjoying > > the wealth of insights and information, but this is my first addition to > > it. I am currently working on a project which would like to track the > > network of some YouTube videos, so that includes things like referrals from > > other videos, embedding videos on external sites, video comments, text > > comments, etc. I would also like to use any demographic data available. Can > > anyone inform me about the reliability of the statistics provided on > > YouTube itself for each video, or point me in the direction of some > > publications on the subject? Additionally, if anyone is aware of any > > programs that would allow me to view the network between groups of videos > > or research that has been done in this area I would be very appreciative. > > > > Thank you in advance! > > > > Megan Zahay > > B.A. Arcadia University > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org (mailto:Air-L at listserv.aoir.org) mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org (mailto:Air-L at listserv.aoir.org) mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org (mailto:Air-L at listserv.aoir.org) mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ From jstromer at syr.edu Fri May 24 09:50:42 2013 From: jstromer at syr.edu (Jennifer Stromer-Galley) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 16:50:42 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: References: <4247BB5C-1CB6-4D2A-A8A0-AA419EA2D00B@vt.edu> Message-ID: <58ACB774CD3A274A828C0A15EF7A1BE1093914DF@SUEX10-mbx-01.ad.syr.edu> We definitely have seen members organize informal social gatherings and panels at other associations' conferences, and we should continue to encourage that. The issue of streaming the conference to those who cannot attend is so tricky. When I was pregnant and then had wee ones, I really cut back on my conference travel, so I did not attend AoIR. I would have loved to be present, but even if there had been some digital means for me to watch panels or attend virtually, I don't know if I would have. I do think we as an association about the Internet could and should put more energy over the next few years towards building a richer digital presence, and that might mean experimenting with avenues for digital participation with the conference. The how of that requires some thought. ~Jenny -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Deller, Ruth A Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 10:14 AM To: 'jeremy hunsinger'; air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates I think the idea of multiple events has some merit - in addition to your sponsorship suggestions, perhaps we can even out forward AOIR-affiliated panels at other large conferences? Re: streaming - I've seen a lot of people asking for streaming on the Twitter feeds the past couple of IR conferences, although they may be a minority - there are probably other ways of interactive participation for those not physically present that we can look at - Twitter's obviously one, but it often ends up being reportage and comment from the people there and maybe we could look at ways of having more dialogue/interaction with those not there. And we should bring back Terri's kissing booth ;) I do think that as an internet-research organisation, we could be using the internet a lot more than we are... I think we both agree - and so do pretty much all the candidates from their statements - that widening participation is really key to the future of AOIR. I'm sure we're all open to suggestions from members about how that can happen though, especially those who have felt distanced from things so far or have struggled to get to conferences. Ruth -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of jeremy hunsinger Sent: 24 May 2013 15:08 To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In my memory... there has been at least 3 proposals for streaming type talks at the conference and at least 1 committee established to try to make it happen. I think that the answer is less of 'stream talks' because if that was going to happen, it would have achieved critical mass to make it happen by now as we have the people with technical understanding and capacity in our membership to make it happen. I suspect that people don't really want streaming, but what they do want, as I indicated in my nomination information is more opportunity to participate. I think that is really about more opportunities to network and share research in face to face environments. This is why i suggested that we should 'distribute the association activities', or in other words, we should sponsor or co-sponsor small events at other conferences in places away from the other conference. For instance if the International Studies Association is in Budapest and we have members there, we could sponsor a small event there, or similar activities with any scholarly association. The idea is to put AoIR members in closer contact with each other by using t heir other disciplinary and interdisciplinary associations as venues for AoIR. In conjunction with those activities, I suggest we start activities that bond our association together better, such as Mentoring, restarting the Birds of Feather lunches, and making our 'web and email space' more actively available to member interaction, which it is now somewhat, but we only have 2 or 3 other email groups existing and I think that mostly those groups are non-functioning, such as the graduate student list, the political economy and policy list, etc. Advertising those more and providing more of those, will I think allow us to grow both deeper and broader in our membership. If the goal is to get people involved in novel and interesting ways, I think we should be providing the infrastructure for that involvement. Jeremy Hunsinger Communication Studies Wilfrid Laurier University Center for Digital Discourse and Culture Virginia Tech Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. --Pablo Picasso _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ _______________________________________________ From kquinn8 at uic.edu Fri May 24 18:53:25 2013 From: kquinn8 at uic.edu (Kelly Quinn) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 20:53:25 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates Message-ID: <06be01ce58ea$a578c4f0$f06a4ed0$@uic.edu> Hi Alex and all, The suggestions from Jeremy, Ruth, Jenny and Darren the conference activities are great. I'd like to see additional opportunities for our members to connect with each other too, so I'd like the Exec Board to go a little further than just 'encourage' our members to get together at other conferences. I'd like to see us establish an informal group of members who will be responsible to organize meet-ups at the various major and not-so-major conferences that our members attend. Informal, because the sole responsibility would be to establish a place and time for AoIR-ists to meet during these other conferences. Group, because to make this work consistently we need people that attend (or reside in host cities) a variety of conferences. This group would simply be charged with opening the AoIR embrace a little wider; we would have additional opportunities to network with each other; and we can get more of our members involved. In the past, a few key members have taken on this responsibility on their own (thank you!), but sharing responsibility among our members to do this on an ongoing and regular basis will sustain the effort and energy. Putting just a little structure around the process would give an opportunity for any of our members to pitch in to make sure these meet-ups take place. Since many of the conference dates and acceptances are out by October, we can collect information and recruit willing volunteers at our annual meeting. Meet-up information can be published on the listserv and also posted on the website. While I anticipate that several members would step up to this role for the 'greater good,' perhaps the Exec Board might even kick in an extra drink ticket at the conference banquet for anyone who organized a meet-up event during the past year ;-) Kelly ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 16:25:46 -0700 From: Alexander Halavais To: aoir list Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Dear AoIR Members (and members of the broader community), Just a reminder that AoIR elections are now open, and will be until the end of the month. I want to encourage all members to vote. There are lots of ways to help contribute to and shape the future of an organization like ours, and electing an executive committee that represents your interests is one of these. I have not yet voted and I'm hoping the candidates can answer a question for me. (And I hope others will ask questions as well, despite the looming deadline!) I've looked over your candidate statements (linked here: http://aoir.org/2013-executive-committee-election-candidate-statements-votin g-information/ ) and I recognize and agree with the need to increase connections among members outside of the conference setting--something that several of you noted. That said, I wonder what single, concrete change you would most like to see in the conferences themselves, and how you might suggest bringing that about. What would you like to see in, say, Bangkok for 2014 that we haven't seen in previous conferences? (If anything!) And what can you do to help make that happen? Thank you all for running, and I look forward to your responses. Best, Alex -- -- // // This email is // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) From geneloeb at gmail.com Fri May 24 21:06:03 2013 From: geneloeb at gmail.com (gene loeb) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 23:06:03 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: <06be01ce58ea$a578c4f0$f06a4ed0$@uic.edu> References: <06be01ce58ea$a578c4f0$f06a4ed0$@uic.edu> Message-ID: Kelly, Great ideas I was trying to express similar ideas. Thanks, Gene Gene Loeb, Ph.D. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 8:53 PM, Kelly Quinn wrote: > Hi Alex and all, > > The suggestions from Jeremy, Ruth, Jenny and Darren the conference > activities are great. I'd like to see additional opportunities for our > members to connect with each other too, so I'd like the Exec Board to go a > little further than just 'encourage' our members to get together at other > conferences. I'd like to see us establish an informal group of members who > will be responsible to organize meet-ups at the various major and > not-so-major conferences that our members attend. Informal, because the > sole > responsibility would be to establish a place and time for AoIR-ists to meet > during these other conferences. Group, because to make this work > consistently we need people that attend (or reside in host cities) a > variety > of conferences. This group would simply be charged with opening the AoIR > embrace a little wider; we would have additional opportunities to network > with each other; and we can get more of our members involved. In the past, > a > few key members have taken on this responsibility on their own (thank > you!), > but sharing responsibility among our members to do this on an ongoing and > regular basis will sustain the effort and energy. Putting just a little > structure around the process would give an opportunity for any of our > members to pitch in to make sure these meet-ups take place. > > Since many of the conference dates and acceptances are out by October, we > can collect information and recruit willing volunteers at our annual > meeting. Meet-up information can be published on the listserv and also > posted on the website. While I anticipate that several members would step > up > to this role for the 'greater good,' perhaps the Exec Board might even kick > in an extra drink ticket at the conference banquet for anyone who organized > a meet-up event during the past year ;-) > > Kelly > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 16:25:46 -0700 > From: Alexander Halavais > To: aoir list > Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates > Message-ID: > uCM39JsXP75ES0Hh7Bqspwm-feq6W2tejCJgy47HPZjrw at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Dear AoIR Members (and members of the broader community), > > Just a reminder that AoIR elections are now open, and will be until the end > of the month. I want to encourage all members to vote. There are lots of > ways to help contribute to and shape the future of an organization like > ours, and electing an executive committee that represents your interests is > one of these. > > I have not yet voted and I'm hoping the candidates can answer a question > for me. (And I hope others will ask questions as well, despite the looming > deadline!) > > I've looked over your candidate statements (linked here: > > http://aoir.org/2013-executive-committee-election-candidate-statements-votin > g-information/ > ) > and I recognize and agree with the need to increase connections among > members outside of the conference setting--something that several of you > noted. That said, I wonder what single, concrete change you would most like > to see in the conferences themselves, and how you might suggest bringing > that about. What would you like to see in, say, Bangkok for 2014 that we > haven't seen in previous conferences? (If anything!) And what can you do to > help make that happen? > > Thank you all for running, and I look forward to your responses. > > Best, > > Alex > > > > -- > -- > // > // This email is > // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > // > // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > // http://alex.halavais.net > // > // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. > // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > > > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- With Sincerest Best Wishes , Gene Gene Loeb, Ph.D. From gurstein at gmail.com Sat May 25 00:38:43 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sat, 25 May 2013 10:38:43 +0300 Subject: [Air-L] Call for Papers (Abstracts) Community Informatics and the Millenium Development Goals (MDGs) Message-ID: <0b0601ce591a$e9e20a90$bda61fb0$@gmail.com> Please forward as appropriate. ================================================== Call for Papers: Special Issue ? Community Informatics and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) The Journal of Community Informatics (http://ci-journal.net) Abstract submissions due June 15, 2013 Full papers due September 1, 2013 Anticipated publication date February 1, 2014 The international peer-reviewed Journal of Community Informatics (http://ci-journal.net/) is a medium for the communication of research of interest to a global network of academics, community informatics practitioners and national and multilateral policy makers. A special issue of the journal will be devoted to examining the relationship between Community Informatics and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Community Informatics (CI) is the study and practice of enabling communities and the grassroots to improve their lives through Information and Communications Technologies (ICTs). This special issue will focus on how community-based use of ICTs can contribute to both the achievement of specific MDG targets and the development of the post-2015 global development agenda. The issue is expected to be published in early 2014 and thus provide inputs to ongoing discussions on the finalization of a new global development agenda. Call for papers The field of Community Informatics seeks to explore the potential of ICTs and their applications for social and economic development at the community level. It particularly seeks to ensure that marginalized individuals and communities can benefit from the opportunities that ICTs can provide. Active and meaningful participation by people at the community/grassroots level is arguably one critical element for the successful achievement of the MDGs ? and any other development priorities, for that matter. As demonstrated in different parts of the world, ICTs enable the participation of people and give voice to the voiceless. For this special issue, we are inviting original, unpublished research, points of view, case studies, reviews and field notes. All research papers will be double-blind peer-reviewed. Insights and analytical perspectives from practitioners and policy makers in the form of notes from the field or case studies are also encouraged. These will not be peer-reviewed but will be assessed as to their suitability for publication. Expected topics in this special issue include: 1. National and local policies needed to foster synergies between CI and the MDGs 2. Local government, CI and ICTs: how to create a sound ecosystem for development and MDG achievement? 3. Enabling communities to participate in local MDG decision making processes via ICTs 4. CI and access to information and open data related to MDG development priorities 5. CI and local participation strategies to meet MDGs 6. CI and social inclusion of groups targeted in MDGs 7. CI and local MDG related capacity development: can ICTs close or widen the gap? 8. The potential role for CI in the post-2015 global development agenda; 9. Assessing the empirical evidence on the role of community ICTs in the MDGs to date And specifically related to individual MDG targets: 10. Using community-based ICTs to address extreme poverty and hunger 11. CI approaches to achieving universal primary education; 12. CI contributions to the promotion of gender equality and women's empowerment 13. CI influence to in the elimination of child mortality and achievement of maternal health 14. CI approaches to combating HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases 15. CI and environmental sustainability 16. CI as a component of national and regional health information systems 17. CI and Environmental Sustainability 18. CI contributions to developing global MDG partnerships Special Issue Editors: Charles Dhewa ? CEO, Knowledge Transfer Africa (Pvt) Ltd, charles at knowledgetransafrica.com / charlesdhewa7 at gmail.com Jude Genilo ? Head, Media Studies and Journalism Department, University of Liberal Arts Bangladesh, jude.genilo at ulab.edu.bd / jgenilo at yahoo.com Raul Zambrano ? Cluster Leader, Senior Policy Advisor, ICTD and e-governance, UNDP, raul at undp.org Chris Zielinski ? CEO, International Alliance on Information for All, chris at chriszielinski.com Special Issue Assistant Michel Castagn? ? castagne at alumni.ubc.ca Abstracts should be sent to the Assistant castagne at alumni.ubc.ca no later than June 30, 2013. From jhuns at vt.edu Sat May 25 04:55:16 2013 From: jhuns at vt.edu (jeremy hunsinger) Date: Sat, 25 May 2013 07:55:16 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: <06be01ce58ea$a578c4f0$f06a4ed0$@uic.edu> References: <06be01ce58ea$a578c4f0$f06a4ed0$@uic.edu> Message-ID: <3F5781EE-478A-41F0-8A8A-2C643B371C18@vt.edu> I was thinking that the structure for the meetups would be less 'group' like, and more '100 word proposal' with one to two available every two month period, thus spreading it over the year and judged mostly on a first come first serve criteria for those two months. From Hoffma89 at uwm.edu Sat May 25 08:59:47 2013 From: Hoffma89 at uwm.edu (Anthony Hoffmann) Date: Sat, 25 May 2013 10:59:47 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: <3F5781EE-478A-41F0-8A8A-2C643B371C18@vt.edu> References: <06be01ce58ea$a578c4f0$f06a4ed0$@uic.edu> <3F5781EE-478A-41F0-8A8A-2C643B371C18@vt.edu> Message-ID: <2E55E186-18AB-4937-9653-BCB08E074DB8@uwm.edu> Hello, all! Lots of good stuff here, so I'm mostly going to build on what's already been said with two proposals... #1 - In my candidate statement, I also mentioned the need for formalized mentorship opportunities. It was noted here that we already have the doctoral colloquium, which is a great opportunity for graduate students - and this is true! However, it can also feel a bit hit-and-run (which has its value, of course). It would be great to compliment that sort of experience with opportunities for sustained collaboration between graduate students and faculty across different institutions. One way to go about this would be to establish a limited number of year long "fellowships" - the Association could sponsor a few student fellows and pair them with willing and interested faculty fellows and give them a year to work together on some sort of output (this can be more or less specific, depending on how the fellowship is ultimately framed), which can then be presented or showcased in some way at the annual conference. I had the opportunity to do something similar with the International Society for Ethics and Information Technology a few years back and I count the conversations that occurred with my faculty mentor among some of the most formative of my early graduate career. Not only was it valuable to carry out a sustained collaboration with someone outside of my institution, it was also great to show up to a conference having already established a working relationship with an established scholar in the field. So, in short, any sort of new mentorship opportunities should serve the Association and its graduate student members in ways that compliment or extend or achieve different goals - but do not step on - already established opportunities like the doctoral colloquium. #2 - There has also been some discussion of different/more/cost-conscious social events at the conference. I'd like to add to this discussion, but take a bit of a risk... So, here's my idea for an additional social event that could also serve to open up opportunities for conversation that young graduate students or AoIR n00bs might otherwise not have: a poster session. But not your usual poster session - which often serves as the first foray into conference life for graduate students everywhere. Instead, we reverse the roles. We ask active and respected faculty members from different institutions to prepare a poster (it could be about their work, about an ongoing project, a proposed project, something, anything - it could also feature as many lolcats as necessary!) and then - in usual poster session style - the selected faculty would have to stand by their poster! And graduate students or other scholars new to AoIR could approach them and ask them questions about their work! Rather than being a "formal" conference session, it could be framed as a social event that turns some traditional aspects of the conference format on its head - and, of course, it would create an opportunity for conversations that doesn't always exist at standard cocktail hours. Anyway, those are two ideas (albeit ideas geared towards opening up new opportunities for mentorship and socializing for graduate students) to add to the pile. -Anthony On May 25, 2013, at 6:55 AM, jeremy hunsinger wrote: > I was thinking that the structure for the meetups would be less 'group' like, and more '100 word proposal' with one to two available every two month period, thus spreading it over the year and judged mostly on a first come first serve criteria for those two months. > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ From sunlim at nus.edu.sg Sat May 25 09:50:54 2013 From: sunlim at nus.edu.sg (Sun Sun LIM) Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 00:50:54 +0800 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: <58ACB774CD3A274A828C0A15EF7A1BE1093914DF@SUEX10-mbx-01.ad.syr.edu> References: <4247BB5C-1CB6-4D2A-A8A0-AA419EA2D00B@vt.edu> <58ACB774CD3A274A828C0A15EF7A1BE1093914DF@SUEX10-mbx-01.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <17800BD62B014D408560EFE7E2D16D2F05202540@MBX08.stf.nus.edu.sg> Thanks Alex for your question. Just to chime in, I agree that streaming the conference may not be that essential as my personal experience is also not to avail of such services, and I have encountered few colleagues (none, in fact) who has. Instead, picking up on Jenny's point about building a richer digital presence, we may want to think about developing an online archive of videos of selected lectures, TED style perhaps. I reckon that if effectively presented, those are likely to attract more viewers than streaming. For the conference proper, the current format works, and is something academics/researchers are familiar with and can therefore make the most of. That said, I think we could also think of opening up pockets of time (say 90 mins) to try out alternative formats such as BarCamp http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BarCamp or PechaKucha http://chronicle.com/blogs/profhacker/challenging-the-presentation-paradigm-in-6-minutes-40-seconds-pecha-kucha/22807 where we have briefer and more "packed" exchanges of quick ideas centring around specific themes. These presentations would not have "conference paper status" per se but are really meant to ignite further discussion. The sessions should ideally segue into a reception/coffee break so that the discussion can continue informally amongst conference attendees. Sun Sun LIM, PhD Associate Professor & Deputy Head (on sabbatical leave from Oct '12 to June '13) Department of Communications & New Media National University of Singapore Website: http://profile.nus.edu.sg/fass/cnmlss/ -----Original Message----- From: Jennifer Stromer-Galley [mailto:jstromer at syr.edu] Sent: Saturday, May 25, 2013 12:51 AM To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates We definitely have seen members organize informal social gatherings and panels at other associations' conferences, and we should continue to encourage that. The issue of streaming the conference to those who cannot attend is so tricky. When I was pregnant and then had wee ones, I really cut back on my conference travel, so I did not attend AoIR. I would have loved to be present, but even if there had been some digital means for me to watch panels or attend virtually, I don't know if I would have. I do think we as an association about the Internet could and should put more energy over the next few years towards building a richer digital presence, and that might mean experimenting with avenues for digital participation with the conference. The how of that requires some thought. ~Jenny -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Deller, Ruth A Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 10:14 AM To: 'jeremy hunsinger'; air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates I think the idea of multiple events has some merit - in addition to your sponsorship suggestions, perhaps we can even out forward AOIR-affiliated panels at other large conferences? Re: streaming - I've seen a lot of people asking for streaming on the Twitter feeds the past couple of IR conferences, although they may be a minority - there are probably other ways of interactive participation for those not physically present that we can look at - Twitter's obviously one, but it often ends up being reportage and comment from the people there and maybe we could look at ways of having more dialogue/interaction with those not there. And we should bring back Terri's kissing booth ;) I do think that as an internet-research organisation, we could be using the internet a lot more than we are... I think we both agree - and so do pretty much all the candidates from their statements - that widening participation is really key to the future of AOIR. I'm sure we're all open to suggestions from members about how that can happen though, especially those who have felt distanced from things so far or have struggled to get to conferences. Ruth -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of jeremy hunsinger Sent: 24 May 2013 15:08 To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In my memory... there has been at least 3 proposals for streaming type talks at the conference and at least 1 committee established to try to make it happen. I think that the answer is less of 'stream talks' because if that was going to happen, it would have achieved critical mass to make it happen by now as we have the people with technical understanding and capacity in our membership to make it happen. I suspect that people don't really want streaming, but what they do want, as I indicated in my nomination information is more opportunity to participate. I think that is really about more opportunities to network and share research in face to face environments. This is why i suggested that we should 'distribute the association activities', or in other words, we should sponsor or co-sponsor small events at other conferences in places away from the other conference. For instance if the International Studies Association is in Budapest and we have members there, we could sponsor a small event there, or similar activities with any scholarly association. The idea is to put AoIR members in closer contact with each other by using t heir other disciplinary and interdisciplinary associations as venues for AoIR. In conjunction with those activities, I suggest we start activities that bond our association together better, such as Mentoring, restarting the Birds of Feather lunches, and making our 'web and email space' more actively available to member interaction, which it is now somewhat, but we only have 2 or 3 other email groups existing and I think that mostly those groups are non-functioning, such as the graduate student list, the political economy and policy list, etc. Advertising those more and providing more of those, will I think allow us to grow both deeper and broader in our membership. If the goal is to get people involved in novel and interesting ways, I think we should be providing the infrastructure for that involvement. Jeremy Hunsinger Communication Studies Wilfrid Laurier University Center for Digital Discourse and Culture Virginia Tech Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. --Pablo Picasso _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ _______________________________________________ From cristian.berrio at gmail.com Sun May 26 12:15:38 2013 From: cristian.berrio at gmail.com (Cristian Berrio Zapata) Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 16:15:38 -0300 Subject: [Air-L] Internet Historiography In-Reply-To: <1369011736.32088.YahooMailNeo@web160904.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> References: <1369011736.32088.YahooMailNeo@web160904.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: 2013/5/19 Denise N. Rall > The ?house that Dick built?: Constructing the team that built the bomb Very interesting references! I am researchin the history of internet and the Web BUT, when entering Latin America. If you know any documents about that I will be more than thankful. Regarding historiography, I like Briggs, A., & Burke, P. (2002). De Gutemberg a Internet: una historia social de los medios de comunicaci?n (M. A. Galmarini, Trans.): Aguilar, Altea, Taurus, Alfaguara S.A. This is originally in English but I have the Spanish vesion. Also Breton, P. (1991). Hist?ria da inform?tica: S?o Paulo: Editora Unesp.I have the portugese version but th original is in French and with no doubt it migh be in English. And Breton, P. (1992). L'utopie de la communication. Paris: La D?couverte essais. Same coment as above. A chilean autor, talk about the feudal inheritage in Latin america and IT, in a mixture that created three mythic scenarios for knowledge. That might be of use: Duque, R. B. (2007). How the Internet is Shaping the Chilean Scientific Community: Globalization and Dependency. Doctoral Dissertation, Louisiana State University, Louisiana Finally, there is a document that I found interesting about the effects of IT in society: Agger, D. G., Armstrong, D. B., Boggs, J., Fein, L., Ferry, W. H., Geismar, M., . . . Worthy, W. (1964). The Triple Revolution: Cybernation - Weaponry - Human Rights. In T. A. H. C. o. t. T. Revolution (Ed.), Mississipp Freedom School Curriculum: http://educationanddemocracy.org/. Hope this will be of use and please do no forguet, if you know any sources about the Internet and Web entering Latin America I will be thankful. -- *Cristian Berr?o Zapata* From rawbird at gmail.com Sun May 26 12:22:07 2013 From: rawbird at gmail.com (Adam Fish) Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 20:22:07 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Internet Historiography In-Reply-To: References: <1369011736.32088.YahooMailNeo@web160904.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: A big thanks to all those submitting excellent links to my request for research on internet historiography! Best, Adam Fish, PhD Media and Cultural Studies Department of Sociology Lancaster University, UK LA1 4YT p. 01524592699 a.fish2 at lancaster.ac.uk @mediacultures, mediacultures.org http://www.research.lancs.ac.uk/portal/en/people/adam-fish(10a5067e-a828-497b-95ae-e35ed07f9ba1).html On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 8:15 PM, Cristian Berrio Zapata < cristian.berrio at gmail.com> wrote: > > 2013/5/19 Denise N. Rall > > The ?house that Dick built?: Constructing the team that built the bomb > > > Very interesting references! I am researchin the history of internet and > the Web BUT, when entering Latin America. If you know any documents about > that I will be more than thankful. > > Regarding historiography, I like Briggs, A., & Burke, P. (2002). De > Gutemberg a Internet: una historia social de los medios de comunicaci?n (M. > A. Galmarini, Trans.): Aguilar, Altea, Taurus, Alfaguara S.A. This is > originally in English but I have the Spanish vesion. > > Also Breton, P. (1991). Hist?ria da inform?tica: S?o Paulo: Editora > Unesp.I have the portugese version but th original is in French and with no > doubt it migh be in English. > > And Breton, P. (1992). L'utopie de la communication. Paris: La D?couverte > essais. Same coment as above. > > A chilean autor, talk about the feudal inheritage in Latin america and IT, > in a mixture that created three mythic scenarios for knowledge. That might > be of use: Duque, R. B. (2007). How the Internet is Shaping the Chilean > Scientific Community: Globalization and Dependency. Doctoral Dissertation, > Louisiana State University, Louisiana > > Finally, there is a document that I found interesting about the effects of > IT in society: Agger, D. G., Armstrong, D. B., Boggs, J., Fein, L., Ferry, > W. H., Geismar, M., . . . Worthy, W. (1964). The Triple Revolution: > Cybernation - Weaponry - Human Rights. In T. A. H. C. o. t. T. Revolution > (Ed.), Mississipp Freedom School Curriculum: > http://educationanddemocracy.org/. > > Hope this will be of use and please do no forguet, if you know any sources > about the Internet and Web entering Latin America I will be thankful. > > > -- > *Cristian Berr?o Zapata* > From suely.fragoso at ymail.com Sun May 26 14:54:48 2013 From: suely.fragoso at ymail.com (Suely Fragoso) Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 14:54:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Air-L] Internet Historiography In-Reply-To: References: <1369011736.32088.YahooMailNeo@web160904.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1369605288.25470.YahooMailNeo@web141205.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Christian ? My suggestionsabout the history of the internet in Latin America: ? - This M.Sc. dissertation is about the first years of the internet in Brazil? = Carvalho, M. S. R. M. (2006). A trajet?ria da Internet no Brasil: do surgimento das redes de computadores institui??o dos mecanismos de governan?a. M.Sc. thesis presented to FRJ/Engineering ? - The Brazilian Network Information Center (http://www.nic.br/english/) publishes (nearly) annual surveys on the Use of Information and Communication Technologies in Brazil ? - This book is a collection from authors based on different Latin American countries. I think some texts will be of interest to you. A brief summary of the content is at? http://www.editorasulina.com.br/detalhes.php?id=491 = S. Fragoso e A. E. Maldonado (eds) A Internet na Am?rica Latina. Porto Alegre, Editora Sulina, 2010 ? - The Journal of Community Informatics (ci-journal.net) has published special editions about Latin America and about Brazil. Perhaps you will find something interesting there ? ?- Finally, entering the dangerous realm of self-promotion, there is my text about the first years of Orkut in Brazil. Orkut was decisive for the popularization of the web in this country = S. Fragoso, WTF A Crazy Brazilian Invasion. In ESS, Charles ; SUDWEEKS,Fay ; HRACHOVEC, Herbert (orgs) ; CATaC 2006 - Fifth International Conference onCultural Attitudes Towards Technology and Communication , 2006, Tartu. Estonia.School of Information Technology - Murdoch University, 2006. v. 1. p. 255-274 ? You are welcome to ask for help to access any of the above ? Suely ________________________________ From: Cristian Berrio Zapata To: Denise N. Rall Cc: Kevin Driscoll ; "air-l at listserv.aoir.org" Sent: Sunday, May 26, 2013 4:15 PM Subject: Re: [Air-L] Internet Historiography 2013/5/19 Denise N. Rall > The ?house that Dick built?: Constructing the team that built the bomb Very interesting references! I am researchin the history of internet and the Web BUT, when entering Latin America. If you know any documents about that I will be more than thankful. Regarding historiography, I like Briggs, A., & Burke, P. (2002). De Gutemberg a Internet: una historia social de los medios de comunicaci?n (M. A. Galmarini, Trans.): Aguilar, Altea, Taurus, Alfaguara S.A. This is originally in English but I have the Spanish vesion. Also Breton, P. (1991). Hist?ria da inform?tica: S?o Paulo: Editora Unesp.I have the portugese version but th original is in French and with no doubt it migh be in English. And Breton, P. (1992). L'utopie de la communication. Paris: La D?couverte essais. Same coment as above. A chilean autor, talk about the feudal inheritage in Latin america and IT, in a mixture that created three mythic scenarios for knowledge. That might be of use: Duque, R. B. (2007). How the Internet is Shaping the Chilean Scientific Community: Globalization and Dependency. Doctoral Dissertation, Louisiana State University, Louisiana Finally, there is a document that I found interesting about the effects of IT in society: Agger, D. G., Armstrong, D. B., Boggs, J., Fein, L., Ferry, W. H., Geismar, M., . . . Worthy, W. (1964). The Triple Revolution: Cybernation - Weaponry - Human Rights. In T. A. H. C. o. t. T. Revolution (Ed.), Mississipp Freedom School Curriculum: http://educationanddemocracy.org/. Hope this will be of use and please do no forguet, if you know any sources about the Internet and Web entering Latin America I will be thankful. -- *Cristian Berr?o Zapata* _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From wellman at chass.utoronto.ca Sun May 26 15:24:13 2013 From: wellman at chass.utoronto.ca (Barry Wellman) Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 18:24:13 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] internet, etc in Brasil Message-ID: read the wonderful recent book by Yuri Tahkteyev about software programming industry in Brasil, with specific case study of Lua. Barry Wellman _______________________________________________________________________ S.D. Clark Professor FRSC NetLab Director Faculty of Information (iSchool) 611 Bissell Building 140 St. George St. University of Toronto Toronto Canada M5S 3G6 http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman twitter: @barrywellman NETWORKED:The New Social Operating System. Lee Rainie & Barry Wellman MIT Press http://amzn.to/zXZg39 Print $22 Kindle $16 Old/NewCyberTimes http://bit.ly/c8N9V8 ________________________________________________________________________ From irsh at itu.dk Sun May 26 22:51:36 2013 From: irsh at itu.dk (Irina Shklovski) Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 05:51:36 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Final CFP: CSCW 2014, Papers due May 31st Message-ID: [Please forward to those who might be interested -- Apologies for cross-posting] CALL FOR PAPERS, COMPUTER-SUPPORTED COOPERATIVE WORK AND SOCIAL COMPUTING 2014 (CSCW 2014) Baltimore, MD, Feb 15-19, 2014 http://cscw.acm.org CSCW is an international and interdisciplinary conference focused on how technology intersects with social practices. To support diverse and high-quality contributions, CSCW employs a two-phase review process and does not impose an arbitrary length limit on submissions. IMPORTANT DATES * May 31, 5:00pm PDT, 2013: Submission due * July 6: First-round notification (Revise & Resubmit or Reject) * July 26, 5:00pm PDT: Revised papers due * August 23: Final notifications We invite submissions that detail existing practices or inform the design or deployment of systems or introduce novel systems, interaction techniques, or algorithms. The scope of CSCW includes, but is not limited to, social computing and social media, technologically-enabled or enhanced communication, education technologies, crowdsourcing, multi-user input technologies, collaboration, information sharing, and coordination. It includes socio-technical activities at work, in the home, in education, in healthcare, in the arts, for socializing and for entertainment. New results or new ways of thinking about, studying or supporting shared activities can be in these and related areas: - Social and crowd computing. Studies, theories, designs, mechanisms, systems, and/or infrastructures addressing social media, social networking, user-generated content, wikis, blogs, online gaming, crowdsourcing, collective intelligence, virtual worlds, collaborative information seeking, etc. - System design. Hardware, architectures, infrastructures, interaction design, technical foundations, algorithms, and/or toolkits that enable the building of new social and collaborative systems and experiences. - Theories and models. Critical analysis or organizing theory with clear relevance to the design or study of social and collaborative systems. - Empirical investigations. Findings, guidelines, and/or ethnographic studies relating to technologies, practices, or use of communication, collaboration, and social technologies. - Methodologies and tools. Novel methods or combinations of approaches and tools used in building systems or studying their use. - Domain-specific social and collaborative applications. Including for healthcare, transportation, gaming (for enjoyment or productivity), ICT4D, sustainability, education, accessibility, collective intelligence, global collaboration, or other domains. - Collaboration systems based on emerging technologies. Mobile and ubiquitous computing, game engines, virtual worlds, multi-touch technologies, novel display technologies, vision and gesture recognition systems, big data infrastructures, MOOCs, crowd labor markets, SNSes, sensor-based environments, etc. - Crossing boundaries. Studies, prototypes, or other investigations that explore interactions across disciplines, distance, languages, generations, and cultures, to help better understand how to transcend social, temporal, and/or spatial boundaries. Papers should detail original research contributions. Papers must report new research results that represent a contribution to the field. They must provide sufficient details and support for their results and conclusions. They must cite relevant published research or experience, highlight novel aspects of the submission, and identify the most significant contributions. Evaluation is on the basis of originality, significance, quality of research, quality of writing, and contribution to conference program diversity. SUBMISSIONS Paper submissions must be made via the Precision Conference System. A link to the submission site will be made available by early May. Papers will be presented at the CSCW conference and will be included in the conference proceedings archived in the ACM Digital Library. CSCW does not accept submissions that were published previously in formally reviewed publications or that are currently submitted elsewhere. Send queries about Paper submissions to papers2014 at cscw.acm.org. ============================================== Irina Shklovski Associate Professor Interaction Design Research Group (ID) Digital Media & Communication Research Group (DMC) IT University of Copenhagen Rued Langgaards Vej, 7 2300, K?benhavn S. Danmark http://www.itu.dk/people/irsh/ ============================================== From agruzd at gmail.com Mon May 27 06:30:35 2013 From: agruzd at gmail.com (Anatoliy Gruzd) Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 10:30:35 -0300 Subject: [Air-L] #SMSociety13: Social Media & Society Conference - Call for Posters (4 days left!) Message-ID: <51A35FFB.3000302@gmail.com> (Apologies for cross-posting) CALL FOR POSTER ABSTRACTS (Due: May 30, 2013!) ----------------------------------------------------------- What: 2013 International Conference on Social Media and Society Where: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada When: September 14-15, 2013 Website: http://SocialMediaAndSociety.com/ Twitter hashtag: #SMSociety13 ----------------------------------------------------------- We are delighted to announce that we have a great line-up of presentations by researchers and practitioners from 43 institutions hailing from 14 different countries! Here is a list of accepted panel and paper submissions: http://socialmediaandsociety.com/?page_id=7 But there is still time to submit a poster abstract by *May 30, 2013*. Please share this with interested colleagues. For further inquiries, please contact Dr. Anatoliy Gruzd at gruzd at dal.ca From radhika at cyberdiva.org Mon May 27 08:35:27 2013 From: radhika at cyberdiva.org (Radhika Gajjala) Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 11:35:27 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Feminism and Intimacy in Cold, Neoliberal Times Message-ID: http://fem.icahdq.org/ohana/website/?p=84677204 ___ *Feminism and Intimacy in Cold, Neoliberal Times* *June 21st, 2013 (10 am - 6 pm)* Annual Gender Event, Goldsmiths University of London. Departments of Media and Communication, and SociologyChaired by Angela McRobbie, Sara Ahmed, Beverly Skeggs, Sarah KemberFor detailed information, please visit http://www.gold.ac.uk/calendar/?id=6554 This event will bring prominent feminist researchers and two visual artists together to discuss key dynamics within the field of feminist and queer intimacy studies. We will consider, among other things, the possibility of a cultural politics of love, queer resistances in the ?trans? forming of clinical and therapeutic practice, class relations in changing worlds of intimacy, the politics of care and compassion, the market for ?self-esteem?, mother love, family ?human capital?, and modes of countering the ?insurgent patriarchy? of contemporary neoliberalism. We welcome scholars from the US who are able to speak at Goldsmiths, University of London in connection with the Annual ICA Event. All speakers are keynotes, papers will be 25 minutes in length. 10-11.30 Lynn Jamieson (Edinburgh) New Sociologies of Intimacy Sarah Banet-Weiser (USC) Economies of Visibility and the Market for Self-Esteem Lyndsey Moon (Roehampton) Queer Resistances: ?Trans? forming Clinical and Therapeutic Practice 11.45-1.15 Priya Kapoor (Portland) Susan Douglas (Michigan) Enlightened Sexism meets Enlightened Ageism Andrea Press (Virginia) Feminism LOL Media Culture in a Post-feminist Age 2.00-3.30 Carol Stabile (Oregon) Magic Vaginas: The End of Men and Working Like a Dog Radhika Gajjala (Bowling Green) Digital Subaltern 2.0 Lisa Henderson (Amherst, Mass) Queers and Class 4.00-5.30 Heidi Hoefinger (NDRI, NY) Sex, Love and Money in Cambodia Kerstin Drechsel (Kassel and Berlin) Heat Storage Systems Mary Whilte (Loughborough) Mummy Work 5.30- 6.30 drinks reception. ALL WELCOME ------------------------------ *May 13, 2013* *2013 Teresa Award Ceremony* The Feminist Scholarship Division is delighted to announce that Karen Ross, professor of Media and Public Communication, and director of postgraduate research in the School of the Arts at the University of Liverpool, is the 2013 recipient of the Teresa Award for the Advancement of Feminist Scholarship. The award will be presented during the ICA conference in London at a ceremony and reception to be held Tuesday, June 18, from 6 to 7:15 p.m. at the Hilton Metropole in Hilton Meeting Rooms 16 and 17. Please join us in celebrating Karen's many accomplishments. Karen was chosen for the award from a very competitive field. Both the quality and quantity of her work are truly exceptional -- in the important questions tackled in her research, whether in the context of gendered political communication, media representation, or activism, as well as in her work to advance women in higher education and media organizations. Her commitment to social change as evidenced by her efforts to create a more equitable, inclusive and just academy, her position as the inaugural editor of *Communication, Culture & Critique*, as well as all of her other work on editorial boards and elsewhere, also speak to her status as an internationally renowned and highly respected feminist scholar who has significantly contributed to the advancement of feminist scholarship. The committee is delighted to be able to present this much deserved award to her. We hope you can join us in honoring Karen! I look forward to seeing those of you who can make it in London! All the best, Marian Meyers (on behalf of the Teresa Award Committee) From editor at connexionsjournal.org Tue May 28 22:39:53 2013 From: editor at connexionsjournal.org (connexions journal) Date: Tue, 28 May 2013 23:39:53 -0600 Subject: [Air-L] connexions journal special issues: Call for Guest Editors Message-ID: connexions ? international professional communication journal encourages the development of insightful and innovative topics and approaches on international professional communication through its Special Issues. You are cordially invited to take a leading role in this process by guest editing a special issue of connexions: - *Special Issue 2(2): June 2014* - *Special Issue 3(1): February 2015* - *Special Issue 3(2): June 2015* - *Special Issue 3(3): December 2015* - *Special Issue 4(1): February 2016* - *Special Issue 4(2): June 2016* - *Special Issue 4(3): December 2016* The general requirements for guest editing a special issue of connexions* * are: - Special Issues are organized by a minimum of 2, and a maximum of 3 Guest Editors. - Guest Editors are recognized experts in the area they are proposing for the Special Issue. - Guest Editors are from different institutions and, preferably, from different countries. - Special Issues reflect the international aims and scope of the journal. Therefore, Special Issues include authors from at least 3 countries. The journal publishes four types of articles: - *Original research articles* of 5,000 to 7,000 words of body text (i.e., excluding references, notes, and appendices). - *Review articles* of 3,000 to 5,000 words of body text. - *Focused commentary and industry perspectives articles* of 500 to 3,000 words of body text. - *Teaching cases* of 3,000 to 5,000 words of body text. For further information on special issues requirements, see http://connexionsjournal.org/special-issues/ Please send your proposal for a Special Issue to Ros?rio Dur?o at editor at connexionsjournal.org Thank you for considering organizing a Special Issue for connexions ? international professional communication journal. Ros?rio Dur?o Editor *www.connexionsjournal.org **connexions ?** international professi****onal communication journal *(ISSN 2325-6044) *Department of Communication, Liberal Arts, Social Sciences * *New Mexico Tech ** *** From Noella.Edelmann at donau-uni.ac.at Wed May 29 02:00:54 2013 From: Noella.Edelmann at donau-uni.ac.at (Noella Edelmann) Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 11:00:54 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] CeDEM13: A Summary Message-ID: <51A5DFE6020000DA00048865@gwgwia.donau-uni.ac.at> The CeDEM13 Conference for eDemocracy and Open Government was held 20-23 May 2013 in Krems and saw keynotes held by Beth Noveck, Karine Nahon, Johna Carlo Bertot and Tiago Peixoto. Presenters and attendees came from 23 countries, allowing for interesting conversations and networking opportunities. If you were unable to attend, then you can read the summary on our blog http://digitalgovernment.wordpress.com/2013/05/28/summary-cedem13/ The blog covers all the keynotes, the presenters, the sessions, the ppts.! Or take a look at the photos https://secure.flickr.com/photos/e-governance/sets/72157633602959048/ or and watch the films: http://www.youtube.com/user/eGovernanceKrems CeDEM13 Proceedings The CeDEM13 proceedings will soon be available online (OA) as a pdf, and in book format by the end of summer. We will let you know when they are ready! CeDEM13 and the Open Access eJournal for e-Democracy and Open Government (JeDEM) The best CeDEM13 papers will be published in a special issue of JeDEM later this year. If you are interested in submitting a paper for the current call, please see: http://www.jedem.org/announcement/view/9 Come to CeDEM14! CeDEM14 will be held 21-23 May 2014 in Krems * more details to be found on our website www.donau-uni.ac.at/cedem or stay tuned by following us on @e_society or signing up for our newsletter (http://egov.donau-uni.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/edem). Noella Noella Edelmann BA, MSc, MAS Researcher CeDEM13 Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government www.donau-uni.ac.at/cedem JeDEM eJournal of eDemocracy and Open Government www.jedem.org Digital Government Blog http://digitalgovernment.wordpress.com/ Centre for E-Government Danube University Krems Dr.-Karl-Dorrek-Strasse 30 3500 Krems Austria www.donau-uni.ac.at/egov From ted.coopman at gmail.com Wed May 29 10:07:39 2013 From: ted.coopman at gmail.com (Ted Coopman) Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 10:07:39 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] IR 14 Question Message-ID: All, Has anyone received acceptance/rejection of a panel or roundtable submission? My stand alone paper result came in (out-of-luck) but nothing yet on the roundtable we pitched. -TED -- Ted M. Coopman Ph.D. Lecturer Department of Communication Studies San Jose State University http://www.sjsu.edu/people/ted.coopman/ From tiltons at ohio.edu Wed May 29 10:09:54 2013 From: tiltons at ohio.edu (Tilton, Shane) Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 13:09:54 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] IR 14 Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Nope On May 29, 2013, at 1:07 PM, Ted Coopman wrote: > All, > > Has anyone received acceptance/rejection of a panel or roundtable > submission? My stand alone paper result came in (out-of-luck) but nothing > yet on the roundtable we pitched. > > -TED > > -- > Ted M. Coopman Ph.D. > Lecturer > Department of Communication Studies > San Jose State University > http://www.sjsu.edu/people/ted.coopman/ > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ From sblasi2 at uic.edu Wed May 29 10:11:04 2013 From: sblasi2 at uic.edu (Stacy Blasiola) Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 12:11:04 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: <06be01ce58ea$a578c4f0$f06a4ed0$@uic.edu> References: <06be01ce58ea$a578c4f0$f06a4ed0$@uic.edu> Message-ID: Hi Alex and all, Alex, thanks for your question. I think some great suggestions have been made here. I would add that I believe one of the best ways to impact the conference is by influencing what goes on between conferences. I think organically cultivating relationships through the email lists (and as I mentioned specifically in revamping the grad student list) would help to make the conference less intimating to first time goers, and give people another reason to go (I'd like to meet these people I've been communicating with). To Kelly's point, I really like the idea of appointing individuals to coordinate AoIR meet-ups at other conferences. I think that is a "between the conference" activity that would help further the goals of growing membership, fostering relationships, and generating build up to our own conference that helps get people excited about who we are and what we do. Alex, thanks again for your question. Cheers, Stacy On May 24, 2013 8:53 PM, "Kelly Quinn" wrote: > Hi Alex and all, > > The suggestions from Jeremy, Ruth, Jenny and Darren the conference > activities are great. I'd like to see additional opportunities for our > members to connect with each other too, so I'd like the Exec Board to go a > little further than just 'encourage' our members to get together at other > conferences. I'd like to see us establish an informal group of members who > will be responsible to organize meet-ups at the various major and > not-so-major conferences that our members attend. Informal, because the > sole > responsibility would be to establish a place and time for AoIR-ists to meet > during these other conferences. Group, because to make this work > consistently we need people that attend (or reside in host cities) a > variety > of conferences. This group would simply be charged with opening the AoIR > embrace a little wider; we would have additional opportunities to network > with each other; and we can get more of our members involved. In the past, > a > few key members have taken on this responsibility on their own (thank > you!), > but sharing responsibility among our members to do this on an ongoing and > regular basis will sustain the effort and energy. Putting just a little > structure around the process would give an opportunity for any of our > members to pitch in to make sure these meet-ups take place. > > Since many of the conference dates and acceptances are out by October, we > can collect information and recruit willing volunteers at our annual > meeting. Meet-up information can be published on the listserv and also > posted on the website. While I anticipate that several members would step > up > to this role for the 'greater good,' perhaps the Exec Board might even kick > in an extra drink ticket at the conference banquet for anyone who organized > a meet-up event during the past year ;-) > > Kelly > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 16:25:46 -0700 > From: Alexander Halavais > To: aoir list > Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates > Message-ID: > uCM39JsXP75ES0Hh7Bqspwm-feq6W2tejCJgy47HPZjrw at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Dear AoIR Members (and members of the broader community), > > Just a reminder that AoIR elections are now open, and will be until the end > of the month. I want to encourage all members to vote. There are lots of > ways to help contribute to and shape the future of an organization like > ours, and electing an executive committee that represents your interests is > one of these. > > I have not yet voted and I'm hoping the candidates can answer a question > for me. (And I hope others will ask questions as well, despite the looming > deadline!) > > I've looked over your candidate statements (linked here: > > http://aoir.org/2013-executive-committee-election-candidate-statements-votin > g-information/ > ) > and I recognize and agree with the need to increase connections among > members outside of the conference setting--something that several of you > noted. That said, I wonder what single, concrete change you would most like > to see in the conferences themselves, and how you might suggest bringing > that about. What would you like to see in, say, Bangkok for 2014 that we > haven't seen in previous conferences? (If anything!) And what can you do to > help make that happen? > > Thank you all for running, and I look forward to your responses. > > Best, > > Alex > > > > -- > -- > // > // This email is > // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > // > // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > // http://alex.halavais.net > // > // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. > // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > > > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > From halavais at gmail.com Wed May 29 10:13:53 2013 From: halavais at gmail.com (Alexander Halavais) Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 10:13:53 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] IR 14 Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Will check on this and make sure they are (re?) sent. Thanks for the note. - Alex On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Tilton, Shane wrote: > Nope > > On May 29, 2013, at 1:07 PM, Ted Coopman wrote: > > > All, > > > > Has anyone received acceptance/rejection of a panel or roundtable > > submission? My stand alone paper result came in (out-of-luck) but nothing > > yet on the roundtable we pitched. > > > > -TED > > > > -- > > Ted M. Coopman Ph.D. > > Lecturer > > Department of Communication Studies > > San Jose State University > > http://www.sjsu.edu/people/ted.coopman/ > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- -- // // This email is // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) From gotved at itu.dk Thu May 30 04:15:47 2013 From: gotved at itu.dk (Stine Gotved) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 11:15:47 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] IR 14 Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: We got notice about panel acceptance on Monday ? :) Stine On 29/05/13 19.13, "Alexander Halavais" wrote: >Will check on this and make sure they are (re?) sent. Thanks for the note. > >- Alex > > > >On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Tilton, Shane wrote: > >> Nope >> >> On May 29, 2013, at 1:07 PM, Ted Coopman wrote: >> >> > All, >> > >> > Has anyone received acceptance/rejection of a panel or roundtable >> > submission? My stand alone paper result came in (out-of-luck) but >>nothing >> > yet on the roundtable we pitched. >> > >> > -TED >> > >> > -- >> > Ted M. Coopman Ph.D. >> > Lecturer >> > Department of Communication Studies >> > San Jose State University >> > http://www.sjsu.edu/people/ted.coopman/ >> > _______________________________________________ >> > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> > >> > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> > http://www.aoir.org/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> http://www.aoir.org/ >> > > > >-- >-- >// >// This email is >// [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. >// [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. >// >// Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur >// http://alex.halavais.net >// >// Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. >// (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) >_______________________________________________ >The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >http://www.aoir.org/ > From tsenft at gmail.com Thu May 30 07:27:02 2013 From: tsenft at gmail.com (Terri Senft) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 10:27:02 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. Message-ID: Hi Pals, With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the list regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of Internet Researchers today. I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I feel personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group these days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR as my intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. Some Big Questions I Have: 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same as organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these organizations? 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it reflected in submission procedures? 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our organization? How do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, necessary or fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and artists really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer used to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as ubiquitous as literature studies. 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases professionalization trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars and its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the boundaries of the field? Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want and leave the rest. Fondly, T -- Dr. Theresa M. Senft Global Liberal Studies Program School of Arts & Sciences New York University 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 home: *www.terrisenft.net ** *(needs a serious updating) facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft twitter: @terrisenft From amarkham at gmail.com Thu May 30 09:04:51 2013 From: amarkham at gmail.com (Annette Markham) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 11:04:51 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Final Call: May 31 deadline for submissions to the doctoral colloquium Message-ID: A reminder that if you (or someone you know) is interested in applying for the doctoral colloquium at this year's AOIR conference, the May 31 deadline is approaching. Here's the call: http://ir14.aoir.org/doctoral-colloquium/ If anyone has questions, please feel free to contact me directly, annette ***************************************************** Annette N. Markham, Ph.D. Guest Professor, Department of Informatics, Ume? University, Sweden Affiliate Professor, School of Communication, Loyola University, Chicago amarkham at gmail.com http://markham.internetinquiry.org/ Twitter: annettemarkham From jhunsinger at wlu.ca Thu May 30 09:12:26 2013 From: jhunsinger at wlu.ca (Jeremy hunsinger) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 12:12:26 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: well, for my part, I'll take some of the old with some of the new. I remember the conference being much more inquisitive, challenging, and playful; scholarly rigor was promoted, but not promoted above inclusion of different perspectives and even strangeness. There was always a risk for the first few years that a panel wouldn't work, or a paper wouldn't really be 'strong' but that risk hasn't gone away with the push toward longer submissions and more rigor, instead it has just been transformed into a more reviewed perspective. In the first few years, I remember having great fun making a list of likely topics, and the lists always had a few humorous ones, the lists were always aimed toward inclusion of topic and discipline, and in my mind they served as recruitment devices, but they also set the tone of the conferences as 'collegial, open, interesting'. I remember regretting the decision to see the topics go, but they were replaced with other ideas. I'm not sure they were better though, either the topics or the new modes of presenting the conferences ideas, both work. I think that for me, AoIR, unlike ICA and AoIR is and should be like friends and family, and future friends. That's been the spirit that i've always approached it with, and granted I know i've grated a few people over the years with my insistence on first names and similar things, but I do think we should be an organizations where a Master's student should be encouraged to talk to the most senior people in the field without recognizing the ever present academic star system and related matters. beyond those points... I think that AoIR has felt significant pressure in the last few years to create an identity for itself that competes with other organizations, but I'm not sure competition is really what we should be after. I think we should aim to be over-arching and umbrella-like, more than unique and separable. I'd rather the thought be promoted that Aoir is the organization that you come to when your discipline, or other conference isn't enough, when you can't get your ideas addressed completely, when you truly need people that are both disciplinary and interdisciplinary, who can be models for success, who can share histories and research projects which will enable future people to do better research, etc. mostly, i see professionalism as a problem centered on the control of knowledge as Ivan Illich taught us ever so long ago, i believe we do have to pay attention to our presentation and we might appear to be professional, but we don't have to BE professional, instead we can be friends and colleagues. From halavais at gmail.com Thu May 30 09:17:18 2013 From: halavais at gmail.com (Alexander Halavais) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 09:17:18 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] Call for Participation: IR14 Preconf on Microcredentials Message-ID: Representing personal history, ability, and reputation online: Microcredentials, badges, endorsements, and other mechanisms With the momentous changes in social media use in professional contexts, and the rapid evolution of learning ecologies and experimentation with different kinds of learning online, the need to present experience and expertise to new communities is now more pressing than ever. The ways in which individuals formally construct their identities for multiple publics is also changing. While the traditional resume or biography remains important, we are finding new ways of explicitly summarizing our traces online and communicating these experiences to various publics. During this half-day pre-conference, attendees will present recently completed work and work in progress that addresses badges, microcredentials, reputation economies, markers of expertise, and related work. Our emphasis will be on empirical work that draws on a range of approaches to understand how reputation, experience, and expertise are made visible, regulated, and shared within online contexts and across contexts. The time will be split between a small number of presentations of more completed work, and thematic discussions around broader questions and research agendas for the area. Thanks to support through the Digital Media and Learning Competition, the pre-conference and lunch is free of charge to participants but there will a limited number of seats. If you are interested in participating, please submit a one-page (max) brief of your research and interests with a brief bio, to Alexander.Halavais at asu.edu by June 15, 2013. -- -- // // This email is // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) From f.attwood at mdx.ac.uk Thu May 30 09:35:49 2013 From: f.attwood at mdx.ac.uk (Feona Attwood) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 17:35:49 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like that before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a proposal in this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into that kind of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that format were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life out of them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which seemed very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be continued. I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. Feona On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: > Hi Pals, > > With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the list > regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of > Internet Researchers today. > > I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I feel > personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group these > days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR as my > intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be > fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. > > Some Big Questions I Have: > > 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same as > organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these > organizations? > > 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it > reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it > reflected in submission procedures? > > 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our organization? How > do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, necessary or > fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? > > 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and artists > really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer used > to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as ubiquitous > as literature studies. > > 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases professionalization > trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars and > its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the boundaries > of the field? > > Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want and > leave the rest. > > > Fondly, > T > > -- > > > > > Dr. Theresa M. Senft > Global Liberal Studies Program > School of Arts & Sciences > New York University > 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 > > home: *www.terrisenft.net ** > *(needs a serious updating) > facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft > twitter: @terrisenft > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving all correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. All incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our digital document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University processed in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered items and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. There are items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not be scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the University. From khillis at email.unc.edu Thu May 30 09:46:02 2013 From: khillis at email.unc.edu (Hillis, Ken) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 16:46:02 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] aoir Message-ID: <2D204A3ABC61C942AFA59CABEC89E4AF56836F25@ITS-MSXMBS4M.ad.unc.edu> Thanks Terri, Feona and others who are raising this very important issue. I, for one, am seriously wondering, after reading the reviews from two panels I agreed to moderate, what AoIR is now about. One panel was accepted and was was rejected, yet both used the now 'discredited' and 'outmoded' format of submission used in previous years, in part because organizers strongly indicated after a flurry of concerned emails many months back that no proposal would be discriminated against if it used the old fomat. Yet this is precisely what did happen--one panel was accepted (with 2 reviews) and the other rejected (with 4 reviews, two of which were glowing and two of which picked the proposal apart on the basis of not conforming to the new format--even as one of them overtly stated her/his discomfort in doing so given the overall conference thematic of resistance/appropriation. I am a humanities scholar who happens to very much respect social science approaches--this is an issue that we, as a department of communication studies (I'm incoming Chair) have been grappling with now for more than two years and we're very much focused on ways that humanities and social science approaches can complement one another. I thought AoIR was about this as well, or at least it seems that it used to be organized along those lines. But, something has changed and proposals that feature 'theory' now run the risk of rejection on the basis of 'poorly conceived' methods, inadequate description of the entire project (that one is working on proposing almost a full year in advance of presenting) and so forth . . . Perhaps enough for now. I *almost never* post a personal type of email to this list. But I am saddened and, yes, even angered, even as I know it's an all volunteer project. Yet it really felt like it was the algorithm making the decisions this time round . . . Ken Ken Hillis Department Chair and Professor of Media and Technology Studies Department of Communication Studies The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3285 USA From halavais at gmail.com Thu May 30 10:09:56 2013 From: halavais at gmail.com (Alexander Halavais) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 10:09:56 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] AoIR & IR14 Deadline Roundup Message-ID: Please mark your calendars with the following deadlines, as relevant: May 31 (Tomorrow!): IR14.0 Doctoral Colloquium application due: http://ir14.aoir.org/doctoral-colloquium/ June 1: AoIR Executive Committee voting complete AT NOON ETD: http://aoir.org/2013-executive-committee-election-candidate-statements-voting-information/ June 15: Deadline for "Representing personal history, ability, and reputation online" pre-conference application: http://ir14.aoir.org/preconference-workshop-representing-personal-history-ability-and-reputation-online/ July 1: Final copy of paper must be uploaded to ConfTool for inclusion in SPIR: http://conftool.com/aoir-ir14/ July 15: IR14.0 Travel Grant applications due: http://aoir.org/ir14-0-travel-grant-applications/ August 1: Earlybird and presenters' deadline for registration. Note that presenters *must* be registered by this date or their presentation will be removed from the program: http://bit.ly/ir14-register August 1: Deadline for Ignite-IR proposals: http://bit.ly/ignite-ir14 August 1: Preconference abstract deadline (for preconferences requiring abstracts): http://ir14.aoir.org/preconference-workshops/ August 20: Preliminary conference schedule available: http://ir14.aoir.org October 23-26: IR14.0 Conference in Denver: http://ir14.aoir.org October 27-28:: #aoircamp: http://ir14.aoir.org/preconference-workshops/ Finally, I encourage you to reserve your room at the Westin as soon as possible. October is a busy conference month for a busy conference town, but more importantly, we have to make our hotel quota or it results in a substantial cost to the Association and its members.Thank you! Best, Alex From bbakiogl at gmail.com Thu May 30 10:13:57 2013 From: bbakiogl at gmail.com (Burcu Bakioglu) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 12:13:57 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] aoir In-Reply-To: <2D204A3ABC61C942AFA59CABEC89E4AF56836F25@ITS-MSXMBS4M.ad.unc.edu> References: <2D204A3ABC61C942AFA59CABEC89E4AF56836F25@ITS-MSXMBS4M.ad.unc.edu> Message-ID: Hi all, I can't speak to the change in culture of AoIR myself, and I am sure this is extremely important too, but what concerns me here is the lack of consistency in the review process. How does one panel/proposal gets reviewed by two reviewers, the other by four? Why are we rejecting some panels based on formatting and others get accepted? I understand that this was the first year that we implemented this, but if mixed signals were given for the submission process (which I'm not sure because I'm not privy to the back-end conversations that may have happened, I just followed the e-mail exchanges and used the new template), then really, it undermines the trust in the whole system. My only 2 cents on the topic, BsB On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Hillis, Ken wrote: > Thanks Terri, Feona and others who are raising this very important issue. > I, for one, am seriously wondering, after reading the reviews from two > panels I agreed to moderate, what AoIR is now about. One panel was accepted > and was was rejected, yet both used the now 'discredited' and 'outmoded' > format of submission used in previous years, in part because organizers > strongly indicated after a flurry of concerned emails many months back that > no proposal would be discriminated against if it used the old fomat. Yet > this is precisely what did happen--one panel was accepted (with 2 reviews) > and the other rejected (with 4 reviews, two of which were glowing and two > of which picked the proposal apart on the basis of not conforming to the > new format--even as one of them overtly stated her/his discomfort in doing > so given the overall conference thematic of resistance/appropriation. > > I am a humanities scholar who happens to very much respect social science > approaches--this is an issue that we, as a department of communication > studies (I'm incoming Chair) have been grappling with now for more than two > years and we're very much focused on ways that humanities and social > science approaches can complement one another. I thought AoIR was about > this as well, or at least it seems that it used to be organized along those > lines. But, something has changed and proposals that feature 'theory' now > run the risk of rejection on the basis of 'poorly conceived' methods, > inadequate description of the entire project (that one is working on > proposing almost a full year in advance of presenting) and so forth . . . > > Perhaps enough for now. I *almost never* post a personal type of email to > this list. But I am saddened and, yes, even angered, even as I know it's an > all volunteer project. Yet it really felt like it was the algorithm making > the decisions this time round . . . > > Ken > > > Ken Hillis > Department Chair and Professor of Media and Technology Studies > Department of Communication Studies > The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill > Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3285 USA > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Thanks, Burcu S. Bakioglu, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Fellow in New Media Lawrence University http://www.palefirer.com -- Come to the dark side, we have cookies! From halavais at gmail.com Thu May 30 10:19:05 2013 From: halavais at gmail.com (Alexander Halavais) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 10:19:05 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> Message-ID: It would be helpful, at least to me, if folks could be more explicit about *what* they objected to in the template. There were no content restrictions. Yes, there were spaces for citations, subtitles, and for a title, but if these were omitted, they were omitted. I am well aware of the power of defaults, but I'm missing what it was about this particular template that makes it difficult. (Yes, I've heard from folks that the word-count was restrictive, but that isn't directly a template issue.) Best, Alex On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Feona Attwood wrote: > Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. > > My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like that before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a proposal in this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into that kind of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that format were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life out of them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which seemed very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be continued. I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. > Feona > > > > On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: > >> Hi Pals, >> >> With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the list >> regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of >> Internet Researchers today. >> >> I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I feel >> personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group these >> days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR as my >> intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be >> fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. >> >> Some Big Questions I Have: >> >> 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same as >> organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these >> organizations? >> >> 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it >> reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it >> reflected in submission procedures? >> >> 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our organization? How >> do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, necessary or >> fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? >> >> 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and artists >> really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer used >> to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as ubiquitous >> as literature studies. >> >> 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases professionalization >> trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars and >> its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the boundaries >> of the field? >> >> Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want and >> leave the rest. >> >> >> Fondly, >> T >> >> -- >> >> >> >> >> Dr. Theresa M. Senft >> Global Liberal Studies Program >> School of Arts & Sciences >> New York University >> 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 >> >> home: *www.terrisenft.net ** >> *(needs a serious updating) >> facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft >> twitter: @terrisenft >> _______________________________________________ >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving all correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. All incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our digital document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. > > If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University processed in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered items and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. There are items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not be scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the University. > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ -- -- // // This email is // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) From amarkham at gmail.com Thu May 30 10:20:44 2013 From: amarkham at gmail.com (Annette Markham) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 12:20:44 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: References: <4247BB5C-1CB6-4D2A-A8A0-AA419EA2D00B@vt.edu> <43B2FE49-28C2-46B0-B474-5F2077BD37A0@vt.edu> Message-ID: Hi All, I really appreciate the ongoing conversation among the candidates, and I think Terri has just added another stack of interesting questions to the mix. I figured I better jump in before the conversations get too entangled. Tagging onto Daren's comments about the importance of informal structures, I'll add that I believe there's an important and natural difference between the official organizational structure and the informal organizational culture. While they're not unrelated or separate, I find it useful to make a distinction so that we can think about what we can do as members in addition to (versus) what we ask the Exec Committee to do for us as administrators/leaders. If we want the organization to grow in a certain way, we all have the opportunity to volunteer to help shape or shift it. I personally prefer the loose structure that AOIR has tried to maintain, which allows for a more organic evolution of the organizational culture. Build too much formality, and "good ideas for the moment" can, over time, become boxes we'll struggle to think outside of. I think AOIR has always been open to creative modes of interaction and efforts to socialize new members. I have never found the Executive Committee resistant to a good idea. It seems the system is working pretty well. The events at conferences have shifted quite a lot over the past ten years. This year, too. Based on creative input from members, we're doing at least two things differently at this year's conference that I think move us in the direction that many of the candidates have been talking about in terms of Alex's question. 1) The doctoral colloquium: This year (based on some feedback we've gotten in the past couple of years), I'm planning it somewhat differently: In addition to organizing participants in small groups to discuss their research projects, we'll also have much more time for informal discussion between students and the mentors of their choice. This way, students who really wanted to talk with particular senior scholars could have that opportunity built into the structure of the day. I anticipate it will feel a bit like speed dating..... (incidentally, I believe something like this was done previously, some years ago. Mentors were stationary while students moved around to talk with whomever they chose. Maybe someone who was in attendance could fill in some of the details of that event) The other thing we'll do somewhat differently this year is to connect former with current participants at a small reception at the end of the colloquium where we'll invite previous colloquium mentors and participants to meet and chat with the current group. This may not achieve the outcomes of a more formalized socialization into the organization, but it's certainly intended to add another informal event to the conference that might bring new members into the fold and help connect newer scholars with others in the organization. What I like about the doctoral colloquium is that it can be organized differently each year, depending on who organizes it, the region in which we're holding the conference (which attracts different participants), and so forth. This means it can be adjusted over time without fear of breaking some rule or norm. I appreciate this flexibility and this year will be yet another learning experience to see what seems to work and what doesn't. 2) The new post-conference event called #AOIRcamp: This idea was inspired by Terri's plenary talk at last year's AOIR conference, where she encouraged more expressive forms of writing, more risk taking, etc. The actual plan emerged from various conversations among David Phillips, Terri Senft, Kelly Quinn, Valerie Fazel, Meghan Dougherty, and myself. We want to create a space after the conference where people can brainstorm or network project ideas emerging from their conference experience, participate in writing workshops if desired, get some serious writing accomplished, or simply have some quiet time to gather their post-conference thoughts and write. All this in the beauty of the Rocky Mountains, with the opportunity for socializing, hiking, and soaking in natural hot springs. Basically, after the conference ends, whoever registers for #AOIRcamp will be transported a nearby national park and stay another two nights in park housing. More details will be forthcoming at http://ir14.aoir.org/preconference-workshops/ (and i should note that people will need to pay for their own lodging/food, since this is not a sponsored event). I mention #AOIRcamp here because it's a direct effort to accomplish what many of us are talking about: building the impetus for meeting outside the AOIR conference, creating opportunities for creative, out-of-the-box experiences, and strengthening the AOIR infrastructure to support this sort of activity. So...I guess, in answer to Alex's original question, where he asks what concrete thing we'd change and how, then, I'd say these are two concrete things I'm helping to change. As for how it happens, I think it involves many conversations, brainstorming, planning, listening, and being willing to help do the work of organizing, pitching it, and whatever else it takes to make it happen. ***************************************************** Annette N. Markham, Ph.D. Guest Professor, Department of Informatics, Ume? University, Sweden Affiliate Professor, School of Communication, Loyola University, Chicago amarkham at gmail.com http://markham.internetinquiry.org/ Twitter: annettemarkham On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Brabham, Daren C wrote: > Not sure if Alex meant for candidates for open seats to respond to his > questions, too, or if it was just for the VP candidates...but here it > goes... > > I think the conferences work well as-is, really. The only parts that need > improvement, perhaps, is that some panels struggle to sustain a coherent > theme (i.e., a video game theory panel might have a paper or two that > really are about video game theories, but the other couple of papers are > about other things/theories and use an analysis of a video game to make > their point). It is extremely difficult to somehow group ad hoc papers > together into coherent panels, though, so I'm sure previous program > planners have truly done their best. I don't have an answer for how to make > this kind of thing better, except maybe to encourage whole thematic panels > more...or to consider poster sessions or lightning talk formats for some of > the ill-fitting ad hoc papers...or to maybe just call all of the ad hoc > panels potpourri panels and just include more papers on each of them (5 or > 6 per panel?). > > We are all Internet scholars, and we are all able to find full papers > later (SSRN, emailing presenters personally, or whatever). The value for > this conference, for me, is exposure to many ideas in short formats, and > then good discussion that follows. > > The other value of the conference is the social hour. Informal cocktail > time with colleagues is the best way to find mentors, extend scholarly > conversation, and find allies in the field. I would actually oppose any > more efforts to add new grad student mentoring programming to the > conference. We have the doctoral colloquium, which is great. But really > beyond that there need to be more mixers, more trading of business cards, > more informal conversations between grad students and senior scholars. I > know I would probably not want to be assigned a grad student to mentor > throughout the year, but I would welcome any opportunity to have a beer > with a grad student interested in the things I'm interested in. So, on the > "mentoring grad students" front, I disagree with Jeremy and would like to > see a less formal, more frequent social interaction across ranks than new > panels and programs. That's really how the academy works, and the sooner > the formal boundaries between ranks come down (and > I think formal mentoring arrangements inherently keep these boundaries > up), the better for grad students. > > db > > --- > Daren C. Brabham, Ph.D. > Assistant Professor, School of Journalism & Mass Communication > Editor, Case Studies in Strategic Communication | www.csscjournal.org > University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill > Carroll Hall, CB 3365 > Chapel Hill, NC 27599 > (801) 633-4796 (mobile) > daren.brabham at unc.edu | www.darenbrabham.com > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > From luishestres at gmail.com Thu May 30 10:27:02 2013 From: luishestres at gmail.com (Luis Hestres) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 13:27:02 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> Message-ID: I agree with Feona regarding the proposal format. This year I submitted a paper proposal to AoIR for the first time, and I think the format forced me to make choices about my paper that made it seemed less theoretically nuanced than it actually is. I don't know exactly how it was done in the past, but I would feel much more comfortable submitting to AoIR in the future if I could submit full papers. Of course some reasonable standardization (font size, page limit, citation format, etc.) would be fine, but full paper submissions or something close to it would be ideal. Luis - - - - - Luis E. Hestres Ph.D. candidate | School of Communication | American University More about me at luishestres.com (http://luishestres.com/) or LinkedIn (http://www.linkedin.com/in/hestres) | Follow me on Twitter (https://twitter.com/#!/luishestres/) | My SSRN Author page: http://ssrn.com/author=1820222 "Theoretical critiques are like sociopaths: Their aggressive drives are rarely balanced by constructive instincts." -- From "Caught in a Winding, Snarling Vine: The Structural Bias of Political Process Theory" by Jeff Goodwin and James M. Jasper, Sociological Forum 14(1), 1999 On Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 12:35 PM, Feona Attwood wrote: > Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. > > My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like that before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a proposal in this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into that kind of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that format were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life out of them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which seemed very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be continued. I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. > Feona > > > > On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: > > > Hi Pals, > > > > With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the list > > regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of > > Internet Researchers today. > > > > I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I feel > > personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group these > > days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR as my > > intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be > > fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. > > > > Some Big Questions I Have: > > > > 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same as > > organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these > > organizations? > > > > 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it > > reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it > > reflected in submission procedures? > > > > 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our organization? How > > do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, necessary or > > fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? > > > > 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and artists > > really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer used > > to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as ubiquitous > > as literature studies. > > > > 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases professionalization > > trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars and > > its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the boundaries > > of the field? > > > > Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want and > > leave the rest. > > > > > > Fondly, > > T > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Theresa M. Senft > > Global Liberal Studies Program > > School of Arts & Sciences > > New York University > > 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 > > > > home: *www.terrisenft.net ** > > *(needs a serious updating) > > facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft (http://www.facebook.com/theresa.senft) > > twitter: @terrisenft > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org (mailto:Air-L at listserv.aoir.org) mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving all correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. All incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our digital document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. > > If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University processed in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered items and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. There are items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not be scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the University. > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org (mailto:Air-L at listserv.aoir.org) mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > > From scroeser at gmail.com Thu May 30 10:33:12 2013 From: scroeser at gmail.com (Sky Croeser) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 13:33:12 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> Message-ID: The template seemed to be very much oriented towards a more 'hard science' approach, and towards research which was already completed. Trying to jam more subjective research, or research to be completed in the period between abstract submission and the conference, into the format did not seem to work particularly well. On 30 May 2013 13:19, Alexander Halavais wrote: > It would be helpful, at least to me, if folks could be more explicit > about *what* they objected to in the template. There were no content > restrictions. Yes, there were spaces for citations, subtitles, and for > a title, but if these were omitted, they were omitted. > > I am well aware of the power of defaults, but I'm missing what it was > about this particular template that makes it difficult. (Yes, I've > heard from folks that the word-count was restrictive, but that isn't > directly a template issue.) > > Best, > > Alex > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Feona Attwood > wrote: > > Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had > similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. > > > > My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to > signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like that > before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a proposal in > this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into that kind > of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, > innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that format > were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life out of > them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which seemed > very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission > process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be continued. > I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting > anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. > > Feona > > > > > > > > On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: > > > >> Hi Pals, > >> > >> With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the list > >> regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of > >> Internet Researchers today. > >> > >> I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I > feel > >> personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group these > >> days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR as > my > >> intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be > >> fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. > >> > >> Some Big Questions I Have: > >> > >> 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same as > >> organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these > >> organizations? > >> > >> 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it > >> reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it > >> reflected in submission procedures? > >> > >> 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our organization? > How > >> do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, > necessary or > >> fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? > >> > >> 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and > artists > >> really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer > used > >> to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as > ubiquitous > >> as literature studies. > >> > >> 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases professionalization > >> trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars > and > >> its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the > boundaries > >> of the field? > >> > >> Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want and > >> leave the rest. > >> > >> > >> Fondly, > >> T > >> > >> -- > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Dr. Theresa M. Senft > >> Global Liberal Studies Program > >> School of Arts & Sciences > >> New York University > >> 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 > >> > >> home: *www.terrisenft.net ** > >> *(needs a serious updating) > >> facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft > >> twitter: @terrisenft > >> _______________________________________________ > >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >> > >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > >> http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving all > correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. All > incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our digital > document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. > > > > If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University processed > in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered items > and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. There > are items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not > be scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the > University. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > -- > -- > // > // This email is > // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > // > // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > // http://alex.halavais.net > // > // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. > // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > From jhunsinger at wlu.ca Thu May 30 10:35:53 2013 From: jhunsinger at wlu.ca (Jeremy hunsinger) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 13:35:53 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> Message-ID: I think the problem in part is that it was a template that said it was for a paper, and not a template that said it was for a proposal or abstract. This combined with the required length, added considerably to the lack of clarity. I think we need to go back to the 'those that need to submit full papers for them to count, can submit full papers' but those papers are not automatically submitted for publication, and the other track should be a simple 500 word abstract, or longer panel abstract. the clarity of the two track system was again slightly problematic, but it was inclusive in ways that this system is not On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Alexander Halavais wrote: > It would be helpful, at least to me, if folks could be more explicit > about *what* they objected to in the template. There were no content > restrictions. Yes, there were spaces for citations, subtitles, and for > a title, but if these were omitted, they were omitted. > > I am well aware of the power of defaults, but I'm missing what it was > about this particular template that makes it difficult. (Yes, I've > heard from folks that the word-count was restrictive, but that isn't > directly a template issue.) > > Best, > > Alex > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Feona Attwood > wrote: > > Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had > similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. > > > > My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to > signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like that > before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a proposal in > this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into that kind > of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, > innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that format > were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life out of > them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which seemed > very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission > process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be continued. > I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting > anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. > > Feona > > > > > > > > On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: > > > >> Hi Pals, > >> > >> With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the list > >> regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of > >> Internet Researchers today. > >> > >> I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I > feel > >> personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group these > >> days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR as > my > >> intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be > >> fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. > >> > >> Some Big Questions I Have: > >> > >> 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same as > >> organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these > >> organizations? > >> > >> 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it > >> reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it > >> reflected in submission procedures? > >> > >> 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our organization? > How > >> do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, > necessary or > >> fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? > >> > >> 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and > artists > >> really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer > used > >> to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as > ubiquitous > >> as literature studies. > >> > >> 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases professionalization > >> trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars > and > >> its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the > boundaries > >> of the field? > >> > >> Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want and > >> leave the rest. > >> > >> > >> Fondly, > >> T > >> > >> -- > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Dr. Theresa M. Senft > >> Global Liberal Studies Program > >> School of Arts & Sciences > >> New York University > >> 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 > >> > >> home: *www.terrisenft.net ** > >> *(needs a serious updating) > >> facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft > >> twitter: @terrisenft > >> _______________________________________________ > >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >> > >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > >> http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving all > correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. All > incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our digital > document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. > > > > If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University processed > in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered items > and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. There > are items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not > be scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the > University. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > -- > -- > // > // This email is > // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > // > // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > // http://alex.halavais.net > // > // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. > // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > From soates at umd.edu Thu May 30 10:45:38 2013 From: soates at umd.edu (Sarah Ann Oates) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 17:45:38 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk>, Message-ID: <4D173A5B6FCE2D44BEB003A158461C250A5D81F9@OITMX1006.AD.UMD.EDU> As a content analysis scholar :) I see different threads emerging here.? One is about the changes in the submission format, which apparently both submitters and reviewers found unhelpful on some points. I think it's definitely worth thinking about -- and given the openness and commitment of the AoIR community I think that will be taken on board.? I see two other, more fundamental questions.? First, is the annual conference now over-capacity and is it time for the grass-roots to start to form regional groups? I, for one, would really welcome this. I think one of the problems of the conference is the huge interest in the field and how effectively AoIR has harnessed that energy. It just won't fit in one annual conference any more. I got rejected last year (there! it's out there!) but when I saw the program I could see how much was crammed into the conference. There are just so many scholars who can benefit from going to the conference -- people like me who started in the pre-internet era and are trying to study it as well as 'digital natives'. And I think there is a enormous amount of value in the interchange between those two groups.? Second, here's the tougher questions. Academic conferences work in a particular way -- they tend to consolidate disciplines and their networks. This is a good thing, but it can also become a relatively narrow way of exchanging information in the internet era. So is the AoIR conference supposed to be a traditional academic conference, a hybrid of traditional academic conference proceedings and new ways of presenting information, or some altogether new way of sharing and expanding knowledge? Are we too wedded to 'traditional' ways of doing things? For example, why not put paper proposals up on line and have the list and/or some other constituency vote on them? OK, that may be freaking some people out but I think it might be time for a serious reflection on gatekeeping -- as well as the incredible amount of free labor that goes into reviewing proposals.? All that being said, the AoIR list is the single most valuable resource in my internet research. So it's amazing even as it faces these new challenges.? Sarah? Sarah Oates Professor and Senior Scholar Philip Merrill College of Journalism 2100L John S. and James L. Knight Hall University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742-7111 phone: +1 301 405 4510 Email: soates at umd.edu ________________________________________ From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] on behalf of Luis Hestres [luishestres at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 1:27 PM To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. I agree with Feona regarding the proposal format. This year I submitted a paper proposal to AoIR for the first time, and I think the format forced me to make choices about my paper that made it seemed less theoretically nuanced than it actually is. I don't know exactly how it was done in the past, but I would feel much more comfortable submitting to AoIR in the future if I could submit full papers. Of course some reasonable standardization (font size, page limit, citation format, etc.) would be fine, but full paper submissions or something close to it would be ideal. Luis - - - - - Luis E. Hestres Ph.D. candidate | School of Communication | American University More about me at luishestres.com (http://luishestres.com/) or LinkedIn (http://www.linkedin.com/in/hestres) | Follow me on Twitter (https://twitter.com/#!/luishestres/) | My SSRN Author page: http://ssrn.com/author=1820222 "Theoretical critiques are like sociopaths: Their aggressive drives are rarely balanced by constructive instincts." -- From "Caught in a Winding, Snarling Vine: The Structural Bias of Political Process Theory" by Jeff Goodwin and James M. Jasper, Sociological Forum 14(1), 1999 On Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 12:35 PM, Feona Attwood wrote: > Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. > > My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like that before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a proposal in this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into that kind of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that format were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life out of them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which seemed very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be continued. I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. > Feona > > > > On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: > > > Hi Pals, > > > > With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the list > > regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of > > Internet Researchers today. > > > > I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I feel > > personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group these > > days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR as my > > intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be > > fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. > > > > Some Big Questions I Have: > > > > 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same as > > organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these > > organizations? > > > > 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it > > reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it > > reflected in submission procedures? > > > > 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our organization? How > > do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, necessary or > > fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? > > > > 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and artists > > really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer used > > to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as ubiquitous > > as literature studies. > > > > 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases professionalization > > trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars and > > its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the boundaries > > of the field? > > > > Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want and > > leave the rest. > > > > > > Fondly, > > T > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Theresa M. Senft > > Global Liberal Studies Program > > School of Arts & Sciences > > New York University > > 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 > > > > home: *www.terrisenft.net ** > > *(needs a serious updating) > > facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft (http://www.facebook.com/theresa.senft) > > twitter: @terrisenft > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org (mailto:Air-L at listserv.aoir.org) mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving all correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. All incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our digital document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. > > If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University processed in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered items and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. There are items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not be scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the University. > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org (mailto:Air-L at listserv.aoir.org) mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > > _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From halavais at gmail.com Thu May 30 11:00:22 2013 From: halavais at gmail.com (Alexander Halavais) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 11:00:22 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> Message-ID: OK, so I want to separate the word-count issue from the template issue, because they are divisible and too easily conflated. TEMPLATE On the template issue: we've been through this once before, but the reason the template exists is to give some structure for proceedings. I made the argument--and have made the argument since I ran for VP--that I wanted what goes on at AoIR to reach a wider audience, and to spread beyond those who can attend the conference each year. Many of you running for Exec have expressed a similar interest, and have proposed various mechanisms for accomplishing this. For me, getting our work out in some form so that it was findable on the web was important. The template exists because to be able to find and use stuff in a collection, it is easier if there is some structural similarity--you know where to find the title, the author, etc. There is nothing, at least to my mind, that says "hard science" in that. Yes, there was a format for subtitles (in case it's not obvious from this email, I quite like subtitles), and tables, etc., but none of this required their use. Maybe the issue is APA for the citation style? I frankly couldn't care less about citation styles, and didn't pick it. This seemed to be the most common style used in most previous IR conferences, but that doesn't mean it should predominate. I don't see why it can't be "use whatever you want as long as it is findable"--APA was arbitrary. Perhaps that is what signals "hard science"? Would, by contrast, MLA or Chicago then signal "Humanities"? I think there is value in getting our work out there. I think asking people to share what they do at AoIR is valuable. I suspect that a number of others do too. But I think there should also be options for not sharing. It may be (with deep apologies to Suely and Andrew, who have invested a lot of time and effort here) that SPIR just isn't worthy of ongoing support. WORD COUNT On the word count issue: One of the reason I've separated these is that I've heard largely support for the longer limits, with a few grumblings about 1,200 being too short. We've had a number of restrictions in the past, ranging from 250 to 1000. What I've heard consistently during my 8 years on Exec is people saying that it's hard to judge work based on two or three paragraphs alone, and that this results a bad refereeing process. I think the 500 word limit favors those who can write good abstracts. I count myself in that number--my longer work may not be that great, but I write an awesome 500 word abstract. That said, there were no such limits on roundtables, and some of the proposals were quite short. We have allowed full papers for the last couple (three?) years, but the number of papers submitted was vanishingly small, and a nine-thousand word paper requires a disproportionate amount of reviewer time. REVIEWING Finally, on the issue of reviews, I want to thank those who volunteered to review this year. I'll note that many of you did not, meaning that (a) your expertise was missing when it came to assign reviews and (b) the reviewers who were assigned often had more reviews than we have assigned in the past. I agree we need to provide better guidance to reviewers, and some of you (reviewers and authors) will hear from me soon about helping shape that process. But the first step is to be willing to put time into reviewing. I just want to be very clear that there was a range of excellent reviewing and reviewing that could have been much better, from a range of early-career scholars and more experienced reviewers. Regardless of this, I think our reviewers deserve a significant amount of praise and respect for volunteering to review. Alex On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Jeremy hunsinger wrote: > I think the problem in part is that it was a template that said it was for a > paper, and not a template that said it was for a proposal or abstract. > This combined with the required length, added considerably to the lack of > clarity. I think we need to go back to the 'those that need to submit full > papers for them to count, can submit full papers' but those papers are not > automatically submitted for publication, and the other track should be a > simple 500 word abstract, or longer panel abstract. the clarity of the two > track system was again slightly problematic, but it was inclusive in ways > that this system is not > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Alexander Halavais > wrote: >> >> It would be helpful, at least to me, if folks could be more explicit >> about *what* they objected to in the template. There were no content >> restrictions. Yes, there were spaces for citations, subtitles, and for >> a title, but if these were omitted, they were omitted. >> >> I am well aware of the power of defaults, but I'm missing what it was >> about this particular template that makes it difficult. (Yes, I've >> heard from folks that the word-count was restrictive, but that isn't >> directly a template issue.) >> >> Best, >> >> Alex >> >> >> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Feona Attwood >> wrote: >> > Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had >> > similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. >> > >> > My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to >> > signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like that >> > before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a proposal in >> > this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into that kind >> > of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, >> > innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that format >> > were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life out of >> > them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which seemed >> > very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission >> > process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be continued. >> > I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting >> > anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. >> > Feona >> > >> > >> > >> > On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: >> > >> >> Hi Pals, >> >> >> >> With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the >> >> list >> >> regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of >> >> Internet Researchers today. >> >> >> >> I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I >> >> feel >> >> personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group these >> >> days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR as >> >> my >> >> intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be >> >> fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. >> >> >> >> Some Big Questions I Have: >> >> >> >> 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same as >> >> organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these >> >> organizations? >> >> >> >> 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it >> >> reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it >> >> reflected in submission procedures? >> >> >> >> 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our organization? >> >> How >> >> do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, >> >> necessary or >> >> fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? >> >> >> >> 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and >> >> artists >> >> really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer >> >> used >> >> to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as >> >> ubiquitous >> >> as literature studies. >> >> >> >> 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases >> >> professionalization >> >> trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars >> >> and >> >> its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the >> >> boundaries >> >> of the field? >> >> >> >> Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want and >> >> leave the rest. >> >> >> >> >> >> Fondly, >> >> T >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Dr. Theresa M. Senft >> >> Global Liberal Studies Program >> >> School of Arts & Sciences >> >> New York University >> >> 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 >> >> >> >> home: *www.terrisenft.net ** >> >> *(needs a serious updating) >> >> facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft >> >> twitter: @terrisenft >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> >> http://www.aoir.org/ >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > >> > >> > Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving all >> > correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. All >> > incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our digital >> > document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. >> > >> > If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University processed >> > in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered items >> > and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. There are >> > items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not be >> > scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the University. >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> > >> > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> > http://www.aoir.org/ >> >> >> >> -- >> -- >> // >> // This email is >> // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. >> // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. >> // >> // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur >> // http://alex.halavais.net >> // >> // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. >> // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) >> _______________________________________________ >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> http://www.aoir.org/ > > -- -- // // This email is // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) From rueduardo2000 at hotmail.com Thu May 30 11:09:15 2013 From: rueduardo2000 at hotmail.com (eduardo erazo acosta) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 18:09:15 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: , <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk>, , , Message-ID: Good Day, I researcher in education and Internet in Colombia Can anyone tell me if there are scholarships for travel? and power particuipar speaker at the conference this year?? THANKS ?? ::::::::::::::::: > Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 11:00:22 -0700 > From: halavais at gmail.com > To: jhunsinger at wlu.ca > CC: > Subject: Re: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. > > OK, so I want to separate the word-count issue from the template > issue, because they are divisible and too easily conflated. > > TEMPLATE > > On the template issue: we've been through this once before, but the > reason the template exists is to give some structure for proceedings. > I made the argument--and have made the argument since I ran for > VP--that I wanted what goes on at AoIR to reach a wider audience, and > to spread beyond those who can attend the conference each year. Many > of you running for Exec have expressed a similar interest, and have > proposed various mechanisms for accomplishing this. For me, getting > our work out in some form so that it was findable on the web was > important. > > The template exists because to be able to find and use stuff in a > collection, it is easier if there is some structural similarity--you > know where to find the title, the author, etc. There is nothing, at > least to my mind, that says "hard science" in that. Yes, there was a > format for subtitles (in case it's not obvious from this email, I > quite like subtitles), and tables, etc., but none of this required > their use. > > Maybe the issue is APA for the citation style? I frankly couldn't care > less about citation styles, and didn't pick it. This seemed to be the > most common style used in most previous IR conferences, but that > doesn't mean it should predominate. I don't see why it can't be "use > whatever you want as long as it is findable"--APA was arbitrary. > Perhaps that is what signals "hard science"? Would, by contrast, MLA > or Chicago then signal "Humanities"? > > I think there is value in getting our work out there. I think asking > people to share what they do at AoIR is valuable. I suspect that a > number of others do too. But I think there should also be options for > not sharing. It may be (with deep apologies to Suely and Andrew, who > have invested a lot of time and effort here) that SPIR just isn't > worthy of ongoing support. > > WORD COUNT > > On the word count issue: One of the reason I've separated these is > that I've heard largely support for the longer limits, with a few > grumblings about 1,200 being too short. We've had a number of > restrictions in the past, ranging from 250 to 1000. What I've heard > consistently during my 8 years on Exec is people saying that it's hard > to judge work based on two or three paragraphs alone, and that this > results a bad refereeing process. I think the 500 word limit favors > those who can write good abstracts. I count myself in that number--my > longer work may not be that great, but I write an awesome 500 word > abstract. That said, there were no such limits on roundtables, and > some of the proposals were quite short. > > We have allowed full papers for the last couple (three?) years, but > the number of papers submitted was vanishingly small, and a > nine-thousand word paper requires a disproportionate amount of > reviewer time. > > REVIEWING > > Finally, on the issue of reviews, I want to thank those who > volunteered to review this year. I'll note that many of you did not, > meaning that (a) your expertise was missing when it came to assign > reviews and (b) the reviewers who were assigned often had more reviews > than we have assigned in the past. I agree we need to provide better > guidance to reviewers, and some of you (reviewers and authors) will > hear from me soon about helping shape that process. But the first step > is to be willing to put time into reviewing. > > I just want to be very clear that there was a range of excellent > reviewing and reviewing that could have been much better, from a range > of early-career scholars and more experienced reviewers. Regardless of > this, I think our reviewers deserve a significant amount of praise and > respect for volunteering to review. > > Alex > > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Jeremy hunsinger wrote: > > I think the problem in part is that it was a template that said it was for a > > paper, and not a template that said it was for a proposal or abstract. > > This combined with the required length, added considerably to the lack of > > clarity. I think we need to go back to the 'those that need to submit full > > papers for them to count, can submit full papers' but those papers are not > > automatically submitted for publication, and the other track should be a > > simple 500 word abstract, or longer panel abstract. the clarity of the two > > track system was again slightly problematic, but it was inclusive in ways > > that this system is not > > > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Alexander Halavais > > wrote: > >> > >> It would be helpful, at least to me, if folks could be more explicit > >> about *what* they objected to in the template. There were no content > >> restrictions. Yes, there were spaces for citations, subtitles, and for > >> a title, but if these were omitted, they were omitted. > >> > >> I am well aware of the power of defaults, but I'm missing what it was > >> about this particular template that makes it difficult. (Yes, I've > >> heard from folks that the word-count was restrictive, but that isn't > >> directly a template issue.) > >> > >> Best, > >> > >> Alex > >> > >> > >> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Feona Attwood > >> wrote: > >> > Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had > >> > similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. > >> > > >> > My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to > >> > signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like that > >> > before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a proposal in > >> > this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into that kind > >> > of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, > >> > innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that format > >> > were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life out of > >> > them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which seemed > >> > very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission > >> > process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be continued. > >> > I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting > >> > anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. > >> > Feona > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: > >> > > >> >> Hi Pals, > >> >> > >> >> With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the > >> >> list > >> >> regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of > >> >> Internet Researchers today. > >> >> > >> >> I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I > >> >> feel > >> >> personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group these > >> >> days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR as > >> >> my > >> >> intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be > >> >> fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. > >> >> > >> >> Some Big Questions I Have: > >> >> > >> >> 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same as > >> >> organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these > >> >> organizations? > >> >> > >> >> 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it > >> >> reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it > >> >> reflected in submission procedures? > >> >> > >> >> 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our organization? > >> >> How > >> >> do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, > >> >> necessary or > >> >> fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? > >> >> > >> >> 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and > >> >> artists > >> >> really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer > >> >> used > >> >> to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as > >> >> ubiquitous > >> >> as literature studies. > >> >> > >> >> 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases > >> >> professionalization > >> >> trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars > >> >> and > >> >> its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the > >> >> boundaries > >> >> of the field? > >> >> > >> >> Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want and > >> >> leave the rest. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Fondly, > >> >> T > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Dr. Theresa M. Senft > >> >> Global Liberal Studies Program > >> >> School of Arts & Sciences > >> >> New York University > >> >> 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 > >> >> > >> >> home: *www.terrisenft.net ** > >> >> *(needs a serious updating) > >> >> facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft > >> >> twitter: @terrisenft > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > >> >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > >> >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > >> >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >> >> > >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > >> >> http://www.aoir.org/ > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > >> > > >> > Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving all > >> > correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. All > >> > incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our digital > >> > document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. > >> > > >> > If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University processed > >> > in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered items > >> > and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. There are > >> > items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not be > >> > scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the University. > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > >> > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > >> > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > >> > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >> > > >> > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > >> > http://www.aoir.org/ > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> -- > >> // > >> // This email is > >> // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > >> // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > >> // > >> // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > >> // http://alex.halavais.net > >> // > >> // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. > >> // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > >> _______________________________________________ > >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >> > >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > >> http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > > > > -- > -- > // > // This email is > // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > // > // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > // http://alex.halavais.net > // > // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. > // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ From halavais at gmail.com Thu May 30 11:12:19 2013 From: halavais at gmail.com (Alexander Halavais) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 11:12:19 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: <4D173A5B6FCE2D44BEB003A158461C250A5D81F9@OITMX1006.AD.UMD.EDU> References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> <4D173A5B6FCE2D44BEB003A158461C250A5D81F9@OITMX1006.AD.UMD.EDU> Message-ID: +1 to open review and freaking people out--together or separately. If there are others who want to see what we can do on this front, I'd be interested in talking with you. It may not work for everyone, but I'd at least love to see a track that is open-reviewed. - A On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Sarah Ann Oates wrote: > As a content analysis scholar :) I see different threads emerging here. > > One is about the changes in the submission format, which apparently both submitters and reviewers found unhelpful on some points. I think it's definitely worth thinking about -- and given the openness and commitment of the AoIR community I think that will be taken on board. > > I see two other, more fundamental questions. > > First, is the annual conference now over-capacity and is it time for the grass-roots to start to form regional groups? I, for one, would really welcome this. I think one of the problems of the conference is the huge interest in the field and how effectively AoIR has harnessed that energy. It just won't fit in one annual conference any more. I got rejected last year (there! it's out there!) but when I saw the program I could see how much was crammed into the conference. There are just so many scholars who can benefit from going to the conference -- people like me who started in the pre-internet era and are trying to study it as well as 'digital natives'. And I think there is a enormous amount of value in the interchange between those two groups. > > Second, here's the tougher questions. Academic conferences work in a particular way -- they tend to consolidate disciplines and their networks. This is a good thing, but it can also become a relatively narrow way of exchanging information in the internet era. So is the AoIR conference supposed to be a traditional academic conference, a hybrid of traditional academic conference proceedings and new ways of presenting information, or some altogether new way of sharing and expanding knowledge? Are we too wedded to 'traditional' ways of doing things? For example, why not put paper proposals up on line and have the list and/or some other constituency vote on them? OK, that may be freaking some people out but I think it might be time for a serious reflection on gatekeeping -- as well as the incredible amount of free labor that goes into reviewing proposals. > > All that being said, the AoIR list is the single most valuable resource in my internet research. So it's amazing even as it faces these new challenges. > > Sarah > > Sarah Oates > Professor and Senior Scholar > Philip Merrill College of Journalism > 2100L John S. and James L. Knight Hall > University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742-7111 > phone: +1 301 405 4510 > > Email: soates at umd.edu > ________________________________________ > From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] on behalf of Luis Hestres [luishestres at gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 1:27 PM > To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org > Subject: Re: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. > > I agree with Feona regarding the proposal format. This year I submitted a paper proposal to AoIR for the first time, and I think the format forced me to make choices about my paper that made it seemed less theoretically nuanced than it actually is. I don't know exactly how it was done in the past, but I would feel much more comfortable submitting to AoIR in the future if I could submit full papers. Of course some reasonable standardization (font size, page limit, citation format, etc.) would be fine, but full paper submissions or something close to it would be ideal. > > Luis > > - - - - - > Luis E. Hestres > Ph.D. candidate | School of Communication | American University > More about me at luishestres.com (http://luishestres.com/) or LinkedIn (http://www.linkedin.com/in/hestres) | Follow me on Twitter (https://twitter.com/#!/luishestres/) | My SSRN Author page: http://ssrn.com/author=1820222 > "Theoretical critiques are like sociopaths: Their aggressive drives are rarely balanced by constructive instincts." > -- From "Caught in a Winding, Snarling Vine: The Structural Bias of Political Process Theory" by Jeff Goodwin and James M. Jasper, Sociological Forum 14(1), 1999 > > > On Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 12:35 PM, Feona Attwood wrote: > >> Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. >> >> My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like that before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a proposal in this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into that kind of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that format were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life out of them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which seemed very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be continued. I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. >> Feona >> >> >> >> On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: >> >> > Hi Pals, >> > >> > With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the list >> > regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of >> > Internet Researchers today. >> > >> > I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I feel >> > personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group these >> > days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR as my >> > intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be >> > fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. >> > >> > Some Big Questions I Have: >> > >> > 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same as >> > organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these >> > organizations? >> > >> > 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it >> > reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it >> > reflected in submission procedures? >> > >> > 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our organization? How >> > do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, necessary or >> > fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? >> > >> > 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and artists >> > really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer used >> > to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as ubiquitous >> > as literature studies. >> > >> > 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases professionalization >> > trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars and >> > its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the boundaries >> > of the field? >> > >> > Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want and >> > leave the rest. >> > >> > >> > Fondly, >> > T >> > >> > -- >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Dr. Theresa M. Senft >> > Global Liberal Studies Program >> > School of Arts & Sciences >> > New York University >> > 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 >> > >> > home: *www.terrisenft.net ** >> > *(needs a serious updating) >> > facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft (http://www.facebook.com/theresa.senft) >> > twitter: @terrisenft >> > _______________________________________________ >> > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org (mailto:Air-L at listserv.aoir.org) mailing list >> > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> > >> > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> > http://www.aoir.org/ >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving all correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. All incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our digital document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. >> >> If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University processed in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered items and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. There are items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not be scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the University. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org (mailto:Air-L at listserv.aoir.org) mailing list >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> http://www.aoir.org/ >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ -- -- // // This email is // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) From halavais at gmail.com Thu May 30 11:16:54 2013 From: halavais at gmail.com (Alexander Halavais) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 11:16:54 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] Travel grants (was: Let's talk about AoIR) Message-ID: Hello, Eduardo: There is a small travel grant available, which will not cover travel from most places but may help. And those applying from Asia, Africa, and South America are particularly targeted. More information here: http://aoir.org/ir14-0-travel-grant-applications/ A list of our keynote and plenaries may be found here: http://ir14.aoir.org/speakers/ Hope to see you in Denver. Best, Alex On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:09 AM, eduardo erazo acosta wrote: > Good Day, > > I researcher in education and Internet in Colombia > > Can anyone tell me if there are scholarships for travel? > > and power particuipar speaker at the conference this year?? > > THANKS ?? > > ::::::::::::::::: > > >> Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 11:00:22 -0700 >> From: halavais at gmail.com >> To: jhunsinger at wlu.ca >> CC: >> Subject: Re: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. >> >> OK, so I want to separate the word-count issue from the template >> issue, because they are divisible and too easily conflated. >> >> TEMPLATE >> >> On the template issue: we've been through this once before, but the >> reason the template exists is to give some structure for proceedings. >> I made the argument--and have made the argument since I ran for >> VP--that I wanted what goes on at AoIR to reach a wider audience, and >> to spread beyond those who can attend the conference each year. Many >> of you running for Exec have expressed a similar interest, and have >> proposed various mechanisms for accomplishing this. For me, getting >> our work out in some form so that it was findable on the web was >> important. >> >> The template exists because to be able to find and use stuff in a >> collection, it is easier if there is some structural similarity--you >> know where to find the title, the author, etc. There is nothing, at >> least to my mind, that says "hard science" in that. Yes, there was a >> format for subtitles (in case it's not obvious from this email, I >> quite like subtitles), and tables, etc., but none of this required >> their use. >> >> Maybe the issue is APA for the citation style? I frankly couldn't care >> less about citation styles, and didn't pick it. This seemed to be the >> most common style used in most previous IR conferences, but that >> doesn't mean it should predominate. I don't see why it can't be "use >> whatever you want as long as it is findable"--APA was arbitrary. >> Perhaps that is what signals "hard science"? Would, by contrast, MLA >> or Chicago then signal "Humanities"? >> >> I think there is value in getting our work out there. I think asking >> people to share what they do at AoIR is valuable. I suspect that a >> number of others do too. But I think there should also be options for >> not sharing. It may be (with deep apologies to Suely and Andrew, who >> have invested a lot of time and effort here) that SPIR just isn't >> worthy of ongoing support. >> >> WORD COUNT >> >> On the word count issue: One of the reason I've separated these is >> that I've heard largely support for the longer limits, with a few >> grumblings about 1,200 being too short. We've had a number of >> restrictions in the past, ranging from 250 to 1000. What I've heard >> consistently during my 8 years on Exec is people saying that it's hard >> to judge work based on two or three paragraphs alone, and that this >> results a bad refereeing process. I think the 500 word limit favors >> those who can write good abstracts. I count myself in that number--my >> longer work may not be that great, but I write an awesome 500 word >> abstract. That said, there were no such limits on roundtables, and >> some of the proposals were quite short. >> >> We have allowed full papers for the last couple (three?) years, but >> the number of papers submitted was vanishingly small, and a >> nine-thousand word paper requires a disproportionate amount of >> reviewer time. >> >> REVIEWING >> >> Finally, on the issue of reviews, I want to thank those who >> volunteered to review this year. I'll note that many of you did not, >> meaning that (a) your expertise was missing when it came to assign >> reviews and (b) the reviewers who were assigned often had more reviews >> than we have assigned in the past. I agree we need to provide better >> guidance to reviewers, and some of you (reviewers and authors) will >> hear from me soon about helping shape that process. But the first step >> is to be willing to put time into reviewing. >> >> I just want to be very clear that there was a range of excellent >> reviewing and reviewing that could have been much better, from a range >> of early-career scholars and more experienced reviewers. Regardless of >> this, I think our reviewers deserve a significant amount of praise and >> respect for volunteering to review. >> >> Alex >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Jeremy hunsinger >> wrote: >> > I think the problem in part is that it was a template that said it was >> > for a >> > paper, and not a template that said it was for a proposal or abstract. >> > This combined with the required length, added considerably to the lack >> > of >> > clarity. I think we need to go back to the 'those that need to submit >> > full >> > papers for them to count, can submit full papers' but those papers are >> > not >> > automatically submitted for publication, and the other track should be a >> > simple 500 word abstract, or longer panel abstract. the clarity of the >> > two >> > track system was again slightly problematic, but it was inclusive in >> > ways >> > that this system is not >> > >> > >> > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Alexander Halavais >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> It would be helpful, at least to me, if folks could be more explicit >> >> about *what* they objected to in the template. There were no content >> >> restrictions. Yes, there were spaces for citations, subtitles, and for >> >> a title, but if these were omitted, they were omitted. >> >> >> >> I am well aware of the power of defaults, but I'm missing what it was >> >> about this particular template that makes it difficult. (Yes, I've >> >> heard from folks that the word-count was restrictive, but that isn't >> >> directly a template issue.) >> >> >> >> Best, >> >> >> >> Alex >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Feona Attwood >> >> wrote: >> >> > Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had >> >> > similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. >> >> > >> >> > My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to >> >> > signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like >> >> > that >> >> > before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a >> >> > proposal in >> >> > this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into >> >> > that kind >> >> > of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, >> >> > innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that >> >> > format >> >> > were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life >> >> > out of >> >> > them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which >> >> > seemed >> >> > very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission >> >> > process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be >> >> > continued. >> >> > I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting >> >> > anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. >> >> > Feona >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> Hi Pals, >> >> >> >> >> >> With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the >> >> >> list >> >> >> regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of >> >> >> Internet Researchers today. >> >> >> >> >> >> I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, >> >> >> I >> >> >> feel >> >> >> personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group >> >> >> these >> >> >> days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR >> >> >> as >> >> >> my >> >> >> intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be >> >> >> fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. >> >> >> >> >> >> Some Big Questions I Have: >> >> >> >> >> >> 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same >> >> >> as >> >> >> organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these >> >> >> organizations? >> >> >> >> >> >> 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is >> >> >> it >> >> >> reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it >> >> >> reflected in submission procedures? >> >> >> >> >> >> 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our >> >> >> organization? >> >> >> How >> >> >> do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, >> >> >> necessary or >> >> >> fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? >> >> >> >> >> >> 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and >> >> >> artists >> >> >> really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My >> >> >> answer >> >> >> used >> >> >> to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as >> >> >> ubiquitous >> >> >> as literature studies. >> >> >> >> >> >> 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases >> >> >> professionalization >> >> >> trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest >> >> >> scholars >> >> >> and >> >> >> its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the >> >> >> boundaries >> >> >> of the field? >> >> >> >> >> >> Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want >> >> >> and >> >> >> leave the rest. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Fondly, >> >> >> T >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Dr. Theresa M. Senft >> >> >> Global Liberal Studies Program >> >> >> School of Arts & Sciences >> >> >> New York University >> >> >> 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 >> >> >> >> >> >> home: *www.terrisenft.net ** >> >> >> *(needs a serious updating) >> >> >> facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft >> >> >> twitter: @terrisenft >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> >> >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers >> >> >> http://aoir.org >> >> >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> >> >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> >> >> >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> >> >> http://www.aoir.org/ >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving >> >> > all >> >> > correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. >> >> > All >> >> > incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our >> >> > digital >> >> > document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. >> >> > >> >> > If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University >> >> > processed >> >> > in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered >> >> > items >> >> > and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. >> >> > There are >> >> > items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not >> >> > be >> >> > scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the >> >> > University. >> >> > >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> >> > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers >> >> > http://aoir.org >> >> > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> >> > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> > >> >> > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> >> > http://www.aoir.org/ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> -- >> >> // >> >> // This email is >> >> // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. >> >> // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. >> >> // >> >> // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur >> >> // http://alex.halavais.net >> >> // >> >> // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. >> >> // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> >> http://www.aoir.org/ >> > >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> -- >> // >> // This email is >> // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. >> // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. >> // >> // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur >> // http://alex.halavais.net >> // >> // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. >> // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) >> _______________________________________________ >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> http://www.aoir.org/ -- -- // // This email is // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) From tsenft at gmail.com Thu May 30 11:20:25 2013 From: tsenft at gmail.com (Terri Senft) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 14:20:25 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> Message-ID: Alex, My objections (which I've already articulated in the past) weren't with the template, but with the set out on the AoIR 13 Conference page, which laid at the paper proposal guidelines as follows: - Description/summary of the work's intellectual merit with respect to its findings, its relation to extant research and its broader impacts. - A description of the methodological approach or the theoretical underpinnings informing the research inquiry. - Conclusions or discussion of findings. ------------------------------------------------- Conclusions? Findings? In a paper proposed in January and delivered in October? You don't need to be a Foucault scholar to understand how that forecloses all sorts of projects, including ones that are activist, performance-oriented, involve collaboration with communities in flux, and so forth. Last year during a plenary talk for this very organization, I asked when we would hear from the Roland Barthes of Internet Studies. Under this sort of structure, I don't even think McLuhan would stand a chance. Thinkers this interesting just don't even want to play in the "Live Act my Finished Paper" sandbox. __________________________________________ Now, to the oft-suggested idea that interesting thinkers take their work to the preconference/workshop/roundtable/fishbowl/hamster wheel margins: I am actually okay with this. In fact, I tried it this year. I begin with the guidelines as stated. ROUNDTABLE and FISHBOWL PROPOSALS ? submit a statement indicating the nature of the discussion and form of interaction, and listing initial participants. Below are the responses I received for a proposal for a roundtable on the deployment of the term "slut" online, that pulled together a group of internationally recognized experts on teen sexuality education, global sex work, anti-racist activism, gaming cultures, and law. Roughly 80 percent of these individuals had never been to an AoIR conference before. Comments for the authors ------------------------ Review 1 In theory, a panel on this topic could be quite interesting but there is only an abstract provided, not a full proposal using the template, and it says very little about exactly what the panel will contain or its specific relevance to AOIR - it's just a very underdeveloped proposal. Review 2 I absolutely feel like a conversation about the role of social media in framing and negotiating sexual recognition and subjectivity NEEDS to be at IR14.0. My only concern: the connections between U.S./North American practices and other(ed) global practices seems tenuous and a bit unclear through the discussion. I would encourage participants to work on bringing these ties to the forefront to frame the discussion a bit more clearly. Review 3 The various phenomena you chose to discuss are very interesting and significant for various areas; however, I'm concerned that your proposal still stays on the surface level, focusing on describing the phenomena but not interpreting them. I'd like to know what sets of theories you are going to use to frame your discussion, and how you will do that. I'm also interested in learning how you would approach these phenomena with a cross-cultural angle. For example, how did you get the cross-cultural data? What sampling procedures are you going to use here? _____________ Now, I can see one reviewers mistaking my roundtable submission for a panel, but two out of three doing that? I'm just so confused, and clearly so is everyone else. The bottom line, and what I would really like to know, is whether this is an organization that is more interested in the margin, or the center? I'm not sure the answer can be both, and I'm not sure I want that decision made by ConfTool or whatever it is we are using. Control society and all that. With love in my heart (really), Terri Dr. Theresa M. Senft Global Liberal Studies Program School of Arts & Sciences New York University 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 home: *www.terrisenft.net ** *(needs a serious updating) facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft twitter: @terrisenft ______________________ From consalvo at mit.edu Thu May 30 11:20:03 2013 From: consalvo at mit.edu (Mia Consalvo) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 14:20:03 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> Message-ID: hi all, To weigh in on the template and reviewing: Template: 1. I am not a fan of templates generally, so having one at all is always a bit of trouble. I don't think it's really that hard to find author names on a paper or to have folks use different fonts or page widths. 2. The call this year said "Please note that your submissions must adhere to the template to be accepted". This is a bit off-putting, right off the bat. It immediately felt antagonistic, and made me feel that I was being judged first on how well I conformed to guidelines, and then only second on my ideas. 3. The template has guidelines for font choice, font size, an abstract (for an abstract!), headings, subheadings, charts, diagrams, references, images, and so on. Much of my time was spent deleting all of the stuff I didn't need to use. It also created an expectation in my mind (true or not) that this is what submissions are supposed to look like, that this is what they are supposed to include. I was trying to propose a roundtable and it didn't fit at all with the template. Somewhere else on the submission page (I forget where) I realized that roundtables didn't have to follow these guidelines, but I had already been put off by the formal structures. It wasn't about APA or MLA- it was the enforcement of a rigid structure that felt so anti-aoir. Reviewing: AoIR is not the only organization and/or conference to suffer from bad reviewing. The question is, if we are reviewing ourselves, why are we doing such a bad job at it? Are we overworked? Are we getting too many reviews? Are we having collective bad days? Are we being asked to review out of our depth? We really need to have a good discussion about this, because WE are the ones doing this to ourselves. Finally, I'd point out that reviewing scores me/us little or NO credits either in our university jobs, our daily life, or in general recognition other than a formal thank you somewhere in a program. I'm not suggesting reviewers be paid for their work, but maybe thinking about offering other kinds of recognitions (best review? best reviewer? top review mentors?) might help improve quality by encouraging us to spend more time on them. Mia On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Alexander Halavais wrote: > OK, so I want to separate the word-count issue from the template > issue, because they are divisible and too easily conflated. > > TEMPLATE > > On the template issue: we've been through this once before, but the > reason the template exists is to give some structure for proceedings. > I made the argument--and have made the argument since I ran for > VP--that I wanted what goes on at AoIR to reach a wider audience, and > to spread beyond those who can attend the conference each year. Many > of you running for Exec have expressed a similar interest, and have > proposed various mechanisms for accomplishing this. For me, getting > our work out in some form so that it was findable on the web was > important. > > The template exists because to be able to find and use stuff in a > collection, it is easier if there is some structural similarity--you > know where to find the title, the author, etc. There is nothing, at > least to my mind, that says "hard science" in that. Yes, there was a > format for subtitles (in case it's not obvious from this email, I > quite like subtitles), and tables, etc., but none of this required > their use. > > Maybe the issue is APA for the citation style? I frankly couldn't care > less about citation styles, and didn't pick it. This seemed to be the > most common style used in most previous IR conferences, but that > doesn't mean it should predominate. I don't see why it can't be "use > whatever you want as long as it is findable"--APA was arbitrary. > Perhaps that is what signals "hard science"? Would, by contrast, MLA > or Chicago then signal "Humanities"? > > I think there is value in getting our work out there. I think asking > people to share what they do at AoIR is valuable. I suspect that a > number of others do too. But I think there should also be options for > not sharing. It may be (with deep apologies to Suely and Andrew, who > have invested a lot of time and effort here) that SPIR just isn't > worthy of ongoing support. > > WORD COUNT > > On the word count issue: One of the reason I've separated these is > that I've heard largely support for the longer limits, with a few > grumblings about 1,200 being too short. We've had a number of > restrictions in the past, ranging from 250 to 1000. What I've heard > consistently during my 8 years on Exec is people saying that it's hard > to judge work based on two or three paragraphs alone, and that this > results a bad refereeing process. I think the 500 word limit favors > those who can write good abstracts. I count myself in that number--my > longer work may not be that great, but I write an awesome 500 word > abstract. That said, there were no such limits on roundtables, and > some of the proposals were quite short. > > We have allowed full papers for the last couple (three?) years, but > the number of papers submitted was vanishingly small, and a > nine-thousand word paper requires a disproportionate amount of > reviewer time. > > REVIEWING > > Finally, on the issue of reviews, I want to thank those who > volunteered to review this year. I'll note that many of you did not, > meaning that (a) your expertise was missing when it came to assign > reviews and (b) the reviewers who were assigned often had more reviews > than we have assigned in the past. I agree we need to provide better > guidance to reviewers, and some of you (reviewers and authors) will > hear from me soon about helping shape that process. But the first step > is to be willing to put time into reviewing. > > I just want to be very clear that there was a range of excellent > reviewing and reviewing that could have been much better, from a range > of early-career scholars and more experienced reviewers. Regardless of > this, I think our reviewers deserve a significant amount of praise and > respect for volunteering to review. > > Alex > > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Jeremy hunsinger > wrote: > > I think the problem in part is that it was a template that said it was > for a > > paper, and not a template that said it was for a proposal or abstract. > > This combined with the required length, added considerably to the lack of > > clarity. I think we need to go back to the 'those that need to submit > full > > papers for them to count, can submit full papers' but those papers are > not > > automatically submitted for publication, and the other track should be a > > simple 500 word abstract, or longer panel abstract. the clarity of the > two > > track system was again slightly problematic, but it was inclusive in ways > > that this system is not > > > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Alexander Halavais > > wrote: > >> > >> It would be helpful, at least to me, if folks could be more explicit > >> about *what* they objected to in the template. There were no content > >> restrictions. Yes, there were spaces for citations, subtitles, and for > >> a title, but if these were omitted, they were omitted. > >> > >> I am well aware of the power of defaults, but I'm missing what it was > >> about this particular template that makes it difficult. (Yes, I've > >> heard from folks that the word-count was restrictive, but that isn't > >> directly a template issue.) > >> > >> Best, > >> > >> Alex > >> > >> > >> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Feona Attwood > >> wrote: > >> > Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had > >> > similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. > >> > > >> > My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to > >> > signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like that > >> > before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a > proposal in > >> > this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into > that kind > >> > of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, > >> > innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that > format > >> > were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life > out of > >> > them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which > seemed > >> > very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission > >> > process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be > continued. > >> > I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting > >> > anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. > >> > Feona > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: > >> > > >> >> Hi Pals, > >> >> > >> >> With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the > >> >> list > >> >> regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of > >> >> Internet Researchers today. > >> >> > >> >> I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I > >> >> feel > >> >> personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group > these > >> >> days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR > as > >> >> my > >> >> intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be > >> >> fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. > >> >> > >> >> Some Big Questions I Have: > >> >> > >> >> 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same > as > >> >> organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these > >> >> organizations? > >> >> > >> >> 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it > >> >> reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it > >> >> reflected in submission procedures? > >> >> > >> >> 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our > organization? > >> >> How > >> >> do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, > >> >> necessary or > >> >> fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? > >> >> > >> >> 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and > >> >> artists > >> >> really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer > >> >> used > >> >> to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as > >> >> ubiquitous > >> >> as literature studies. > >> >> > >> >> 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases > >> >> professionalization > >> >> trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars > >> >> and > >> >> its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the > >> >> boundaries > >> >> of the field? > >> >> > >> >> Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want > and > >> >> leave the rest. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Fondly, > >> >> T > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Dr. Theresa M. Senft > >> >> Global Liberal Studies Program > >> >> School of Arts & Sciences > >> >> New York University > >> >> 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 > >> >> > >> >> home: *www.terrisenft.net ** > >> >> *(needs a serious updating) > >> >> facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft > >> >> twitter: @terrisenft > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > >> >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers > http://aoir.org > >> >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > >> >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >> >> > >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > >> >> http://www.aoir.org/ > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > >> > > >> > Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving all > >> > correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. All > >> > incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our > digital > >> > document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. > >> > > >> > If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University > processed > >> > in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered > items > >> > and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. > There are > >> > items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not > be > >> > scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the > University. > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > >> > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers > http://aoir.org > >> > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > >> > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >> > > >> > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > >> > http://www.aoir.org/ > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> -- > >> // > >> // This email is > >> // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > >> // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > >> // > >> // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > >> // http://alex.halavais.net > >> // > >> // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. > >> // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > >> _______________________________________________ > >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >> > >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > >> http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > > > > -- > -- > // > // This email is > // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > // > // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > // http://alex.halavais.net > // > // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. > // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Mia Consalvo, Ph.D. Visiting Associate Professor Comparative Media Studies Massachusetts Institute of Technology 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Building 14N-226 Cambridge, MA 02139-4307 USA consalvo at mit.edu 617.324.1868 From tsenft at gmail.com Thu May 30 11:38:54 2013 From: tsenft at gmail.com (Terri Senft) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 14:38:54 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> Message-ID: Mia, I love the idea of substantially honoring the work serious reviewers do by rewarding them at least with a solid line on their CV. Could we have something like an AoIR Conference Editorial Committee, just like we have an Ethics Committee? Where we could elect or appoint, say, six folks (grad students would be great) who would be "point people" for respective areas (say, identities and representation, communities and blah blah, interface and blah blah ) who could take on the heavy lifting of reviewing in their areas? Not instead of the blind reviews, but as a overseer over processes and someone to turn to when a reviewer says, "I'm really the wrong person to look at this.") Then, on a CV, under professional affiliations, a grad student could say, Association of Internet Researchers, Conference Committee Editorial Member--Race & Gender Area. Or like that.... T in areas where they have ? On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Mia Consalvo wrote: > hi all, > > To weigh in on the template and reviewing: > > Template: > 1. I am not a fan of templates generally, so having one at all is always a > bit of trouble. I don't think it's really that hard to find author names on > a paper or to have folks use different fonts or page widths. > 2. The call this year said "Please note that your submissions must adhere > to the template to be accepted". This is a bit off-putting, right off the > bat. It immediately felt antagonistic, and made me feel that I was being > judged first on how well I conformed to guidelines, and then only second on > my ideas. > 3. The template has guidelines for font choice, font size, an abstract (for > an abstract!), headings, subheadings, charts, diagrams, references, images, > and so on. Much of my time was spent deleting all of the stuff I didn't > need to use. It also created an expectation in my mind (true or not) that > this is what submissions are supposed to look like, that this is what they > are supposed to include. I was trying to propose a roundtable and it didn't > fit at all with the template. Somewhere else on the submission page (I > forget where) I realized that roundtables didn't have to follow these > guidelines, but I had already been put off by the formal structures. It > wasn't about APA or MLA- it was the enforcement of a rigid structure that > felt so anti-aoir. > > Reviewing: AoIR is not the only organization and/or conference to suffer > from bad reviewing. The question is, if we are reviewing ourselves, why are > we doing such a bad job at it? Are we overworked? Are we getting too many > reviews? Are we having collective bad days? Are we being asked to review > out of our depth? We really need to have a good discussion about this, > because WE are the ones doing this to ourselves. > > Finally, I'd point out that reviewing scores me/us little or NO credits > either in our university jobs, our daily life, or in general recognition > other than a formal thank you somewhere in a program. I'm not suggesting > reviewers be paid for their work, but maybe thinking about offering other > kinds of recognitions (best review? best reviewer? top review mentors?) > might help improve quality by encouraging us to spend more time on them. > > Mia > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Alexander Halavais >wrote: > > > OK, so I want to separate the word-count issue from the template > > issue, because they are divisible and too easily conflated. > > > > TEMPLATE > > > > On the template issue: we've been through this once before, but the > > reason the template exists is to give some structure for proceedings. > > I made the argument--and have made the argument since I ran for > > VP--that I wanted what goes on at AoIR to reach a wider audience, and > > to spread beyond those who can attend the conference each year. Many > > of you running for Exec have expressed a similar interest, and have > > proposed various mechanisms for accomplishing this. For me, getting > > our work out in some form so that it was findable on the web was > > important. > > > > The template exists because to be able to find and use stuff in a > > collection, it is easier if there is some structural similarity--you > > know where to find the title, the author, etc. There is nothing, at > > least to my mind, that says "hard science" in that. Yes, there was a > > format for subtitles (in case it's not obvious from this email, I > > quite like subtitles), and tables, etc., but none of this required > > their use. > > > > Maybe the issue is APA for the citation style? I frankly couldn't care > > less about citation styles, and didn't pick it. This seemed to be the > > most common style used in most previous IR conferences, but that > > doesn't mean it should predominate. I don't see why it can't be "use > > whatever you want as long as it is findable"--APA was arbitrary. > > Perhaps that is what signals "hard science"? Would, by contrast, MLA > > or Chicago then signal "Humanities"? > > > > I think there is value in getting our work out there. I think asking > > people to share what they do at AoIR is valuable. I suspect that a > > number of others do too. But I think there should also be options for > > not sharing. It may be (with deep apologies to Suely and Andrew, who > > have invested a lot of time and effort here) that SPIR just isn't > > worthy of ongoing support. > > > > WORD COUNT > > > > On the word count issue: One of the reason I've separated these is > > that I've heard largely support for the longer limits, with a few > > grumblings about 1,200 being too short. We've had a number of > > restrictions in the past, ranging from 250 to 1000. What I've heard > > consistently during my 8 years on Exec is people saying that it's hard > > to judge work based on two or three paragraphs alone, and that this > > results a bad refereeing process. I think the 500 word limit favors > > those who can write good abstracts. I count myself in that number--my > > longer work may not be that great, but I write an awesome 500 word > > abstract. That said, there were no such limits on roundtables, and > > some of the proposals were quite short. > > > > We have allowed full papers for the last couple (three?) years, but > > the number of papers submitted was vanishingly small, and a > > nine-thousand word paper requires a disproportionate amount of > > reviewer time. > > > > REVIEWING > > > > Finally, on the issue of reviews, I want to thank those who > > volunteered to review this year. I'll note that many of you did not, > > meaning that (a) your expertise was missing when it came to assign > > reviews and (b) the reviewers who were assigned often had more reviews > > than we have assigned in the past. I agree we need to provide better > > guidance to reviewers, and some of you (reviewers and authors) will > > hear from me soon about helping shape that process. But the first step > > is to be willing to put time into reviewing. > > > > I just want to be very clear that there was a range of excellent > > reviewing and reviewing that could have been much better, from a range > > of early-career scholars and more experienced reviewers. Regardless of > > this, I think our reviewers deserve a significant amount of praise and > > respect for volunteering to review. > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Jeremy hunsinger > > wrote: > > > I think the problem in part is that it was a template that said it was > > for a > > > paper, and not a template that said it was for a proposal or abstract. > > > This combined with the required length, added considerably to the lack > of > > > clarity. I think we need to go back to the 'those that need to submit > > full > > > papers for them to count, can submit full papers' but those papers are > > not > > > automatically submitted for publication, and the other track should be > a > > > simple 500 word abstract, or longer panel abstract. the clarity of the > > two > > > track system was again slightly problematic, but it was inclusive in > ways > > > that this system is not > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Alexander Halavais < > halavais at gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> It would be helpful, at least to me, if folks could be more explicit > > >> about *what* they objected to in the template. There were no content > > >> restrictions. Yes, there were spaces for citations, subtitles, and for > > >> a title, but if these were omitted, they were omitted. > > >> > > >> I am well aware of the power of defaults, but I'm missing what it was > > >> about this particular template that makes it difficult. (Yes, I've > > >> heard from folks that the word-count was restrictive, but that isn't > > >> directly a template issue.) > > >> > > >> Best, > > >> > > >> Alex > > >> > > >> > > >> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Feona Attwood > > >> wrote: > > >> > Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had > > >> > similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. > > >> > > > >> > My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to > > >> > signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like > that > > >> > before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a > > proposal in > > >> > this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into > > that kind > > >> > of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, > > >> > innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that > > format > > >> > were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life > > out of > > >> > them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which > > seemed > > >> > very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the > submission > > >> > process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be > > continued. > > >> > I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine > submitting > > >> > anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. > > >> > Feona > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: > > >> > > > >> >> Hi Pals, > > >> >> > > >> >> With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the > > >> >> list > > >> >> regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of > > >> >> Internet Researchers today. > > >> >> > > >> >> I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal > reviews, I > > >> >> feel > > >> >> personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group > > these > > >> >> days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR > > as > > >> >> my > > >> >> intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would > be > > >> >> fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. > > >> >> > > >> >> Some Big Questions I Have: > > >> >> > > >> >> 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the > same > > as > > >> >> organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these > > >> >> organizations? > > >> >> > > >> >> 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is > it > > >> >> reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it > > >> >> reflected in submission procedures? > > >> >> > > >> >> 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our > > organization? > > >> >> How > > >> >> do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, > > >> >> necessary or > > >> >> fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? > > >> >> > > >> >> 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and > > >> >> artists > > >> >> really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My > answer > > >> >> used > > >> >> to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as > > >> >> ubiquitous > > >> >> as literature studies. > > >> >> > > >> >> 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases > > >> >> professionalization > > >> >> trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest > scholars > > >> >> and > > >> >> its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the > > >> >> boundaries > > >> >> of the field? > > >> >> > > >> >> Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want > > and > > >> >> leave the rest. > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> Fondly, > > >> >> T > > >> >> > > >> >> -- > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> Dr. Theresa M. Senft > > >> >> Global Liberal Studies Program > > >> >> School of Arts & Sciences > > >> >> New York University > > >> >> 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 > > >> >> > > >> >> home: *www.terrisenft.net ** > > >> >> *(needs a serious updating) > > >> >> facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft > > >> >> twitter: @terrisenft > > >> >> _______________________________________________ > > >> >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > >> >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers > > http://aoir.org > > >> >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > >> >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > >> >> > > >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > >> >> http://www.aoir.org/ > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving > all > > >> > correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. > All > > >> > incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our > > digital > > >> > document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. > > >> > > > >> > If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University > > processed > > >> > in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered > > items > > >> > and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. > > There are > > >> > items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will > not > > be > > >> > scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the > > University. > > >> > > > >> > _______________________________________________ > > >> > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > >> > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers > > http://aoir.org > > >> > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > >> > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > >> > > > >> > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > >> > http://www.aoir.org/ > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> -- > > >> // > > >> // This email is > > >> // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > > >> // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > > >> // > > >> // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > > >> // http://alex.halavais.net > > >> // > > >> // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my > phone. > > >> // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers > http://aoir.org > > >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > >> > > >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > >> http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > -- > > // > > // This email is > > // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > > // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > > // > > // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > > // http://alex.halavais.net > > // > > // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. > > // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > > -- > Mia Consalvo, Ph.D. > Visiting Associate Professor > Comparative Media Studies > Massachusetts Institute of Technology > 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Building 14N-226 > Cambridge, MA 02139-4307 > USA > consalvo at mit.edu > 617.324.1868 > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Dr. Theresa M. Senft Global Liberal Studies Program School of Arts & Sciences New York University 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 home: *www.terrisenft.net ** *(needs a serious updating) facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft twitter: @terrisenft From ku26 at drexel.edu Thu May 30 11:49:15 2013 From: ku26 at drexel.edu (Unsworth,Kristene) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 18:49:15 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> Message-ID: <36DF838FDB1BE048866CF3ACE977294E06F848@MB1.drexel.edu> Mia, Terri and all, I think this is really a great idea. I hesitate to add too much since I wasn't able to participate as a reviewer this time around. I think that recognizing our work as reviewers for conferences would do a lot toward giving the process more weight. Good reviews do take time and often there is the feeling that no one else can step up to do the work. If we have a sort of "Editorial Committee" people that volunteer to be on it could make and plan for the time the review will take. In some institutions this may even "count" during annual review - which for those of us on the tenure track treadmill always appreciate. Last year was my first Aoir Conference and I have to say it was a fantastic experience; so much so that I volunteered to be on the Ethics Committee! Kristene Unsworth, Ph.D. Assistant Professor The iSchool, College of? Information?Science and Technology Drexel University 3141 Chestnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19104 Tel: 215.895.6274 ?| ?Fax: 215.895.2494 ischool.drexel.edu -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Terri Senft Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 2:39 PM To: Mia Consalvo Cc: air-l at listserv.aoir.org; jhunsinger at wlu.ca Subject: Re: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. Mia, I love the idea of substantially honoring the work serious reviewers do by rewarding them at least with a solid line on their CV. Could we have something like an AoIR Conference Editorial Committee, just like we have an Ethics Committee? Where we could elect or appoint, say, six folks (grad students would be great) who would be "point people" for respective areas (say, identities and representation, communities and blah blah, interface and blah blah ) who could take on the heavy lifting of reviewing in their areas? Not instead of the blind reviews, but as a overseer over processes and someone to turn to when a reviewer says, "I'm really the wrong person to look at this.") Then, on a CV, under professional affiliations, a grad student could say, Association of Internet Researchers, Conference Committee Editorial Member--Race & Gender Area. Or like that.... T in areas where they have ? On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Mia Consalvo wrote: > hi all, > > To weigh in on the template and reviewing: > > Template: > 1. I am not a fan of templates generally, so having one at all is > always a bit of trouble. I don't think it's really that hard to find > author names on a paper or to have folks use different fonts or page widths. > 2. The call this year said "Please note that your submissions must > adhere to the template to be accepted". This is a bit off-putting, > right off the bat. It immediately felt antagonistic, and made me feel > that I was being judged first on how well I conformed to guidelines, > and then only second on my ideas. > 3. The template has guidelines for font choice, font size, an abstract > (for an abstract!), headings, subheadings, charts, diagrams, > references, images, and so on. Much of my time was spent deleting all > of the stuff I didn't need to use. It also created an expectation in > my mind (true or not) that this is what submissions are supposed to > look like, that this is what they are supposed to include. I was > trying to propose a roundtable and it didn't fit at all with the > template. Somewhere else on the submission page (I forget where) I > realized that roundtables didn't have to follow these guidelines, but > I had already been put off by the formal structures. It wasn't about > APA or MLA- it was the enforcement of a rigid structure that felt so anti-aoir. > > Reviewing: AoIR is not the only organization and/or conference to > suffer from bad reviewing. The question is, if we are reviewing > ourselves, why are we doing such a bad job at it? Are we overworked? > Are we getting too many reviews? Are we having collective bad days? > Are we being asked to review out of our depth? We really need to have > a good discussion about this, because WE are the ones doing this to ourselves. > > Finally, I'd point out that reviewing scores me/us little or NO > credits either in our university jobs, our daily life, or in general > recognition other than a formal thank you somewhere in a program. I'm > not suggesting reviewers be paid for their work, but maybe thinking > about offering other kinds of recognitions (best review? best > reviewer? top review mentors?) might help improve quality by encouraging us to spend more time on them. > > Mia > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Alexander Halavais > >wrote: > > > OK, so I want to separate the word-count issue from the template > > issue, because they are divisible and too easily conflated. > > > > TEMPLATE > > > > On the template issue: we've been through this once before, but the > > reason the template exists is to give some structure for proceedings. > > I made the argument--and have made the argument since I ran for > > VP--that I wanted what goes on at AoIR to reach a wider audience, > > and to spread beyond those who can attend the conference each year. > > Many of you running for Exec have expressed a similar interest, and > > have proposed various mechanisms for accomplishing this. For me, > > getting our work out in some form so that it was findable on the web > > was important. > > > > The template exists because to be able to find and use stuff in a > > collection, it is easier if there is some structural similarity--you > > know where to find the title, the author, etc. There is nothing, at > > least to my mind, that says "hard science" in that. Yes, there was a > > format for subtitles (in case it's not obvious from this email, I > > quite like subtitles), and tables, etc., but none of this required > > their use. > > > > Maybe the issue is APA for the citation style? I frankly couldn't > > care less about citation styles, and didn't pick it. This seemed to > > be the most common style used in most previous IR conferences, but > > that doesn't mean it should predominate. I don't see why it can't be > > "use whatever you want as long as it is findable"--APA was arbitrary. > > Perhaps that is what signals "hard science"? Would, by contrast, MLA > > or Chicago then signal "Humanities"? > > > > I think there is value in getting our work out there. I think asking > > people to share what they do at AoIR is valuable. I suspect that a > > number of others do too. But I think there should also be options > > for not sharing. It may be (with deep apologies to Suely and Andrew, > > who have invested a lot of time and effort here) that SPIR just > > isn't worthy of ongoing support. > > > > WORD COUNT > > > > On the word count issue: One of the reason I've separated these is > > that I've heard largely support for the longer limits, with a few > > grumblings about 1,200 being too short. We've had a number of > > restrictions in the past, ranging from 250 to 1000. What I've heard > > consistently during my 8 years on Exec is people saying that it's > > hard to judge work based on two or three paragraphs alone, and that > > this results a bad refereeing process. I think the 500 word limit > > favors those who can write good abstracts. I count myself in that > > number--my longer work may not be that great, but I write an awesome > > 500 word abstract. That said, there were no such limits on > > roundtables, and some of the proposals were quite short. > > > > We have allowed full papers for the last couple (three?) years, but > > the number of papers submitted was vanishingly small, and a > > nine-thousand word paper requires a disproportionate amount of > > reviewer time. > > > > REVIEWING > > > > Finally, on the issue of reviews, I want to thank those who > > volunteered to review this year. I'll note that many of you did not, > > meaning that (a) your expertise was missing when it came to assign > > reviews and (b) the reviewers who were assigned often had more > > reviews than we have assigned in the past. I agree we need to > > provide better guidance to reviewers, and some of you (reviewers and > > authors) will hear from me soon about helping shape that process. > > But the first step is to be willing to put time into reviewing. > > > > I just want to be very clear that there was a range of excellent > > reviewing and reviewing that could have been much better, from a > > range of early-career scholars and more experienced reviewers. > > Regardless of this, I think our reviewers deserve a significant > > amount of praise and respect for volunteering to review. > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Jeremy hunsinger > > > > wrote: > > > I think the problem in part is that it was a template that said it > > > was > > for a > > > paper, and not a template that said it was for a proposal or abstract. > > > This combined with the required length, added considerably to the > > > lack > of > > > clarity. I think we need to go back to the 'those that need to > > > submit > > full > > > papers for them to count, can submit full papers' but those papers > > > are > > not > > > automatically submitted for publication, and the other track > > > should be > a > > > simple 500 word abstract, or longer panel abstract. the clarity > > > of the > > two > > > track system was again slightly problematic, but it was inclusive > > > in > ways > > > that this system is not > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Alexander Halavais < > halavais at gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> It would be helpful, at least to me, if folks could be more > > >> explicit about *what* they objected to in the template. There > > >> were no content restrictions. Yes, there were spaces for > > >> citations, subtitles, and for a title, but if these were omitted, they were omitted. > > >> > > >> I am well aware of the power of defaults, but I'm missing what it > > >> was about this particular template that makes it difficult. (Yes, > > >> I've heard from folks that the word-count was restrictive, but > > >> that isn't directly a template issue.) > > >> > > >> Best, > > >> > > >> Alex > > >> > > >> > > >> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Feona Attwood > > >> > > >> wrote: > > >> > Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have > > >> > had similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. > > >> > > > >> > My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals > > >> > seems to signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across > > >> > anything like > that > > >> > before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a > > proposal in > > >> > this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do > > >> > into > > that kind > > >> > of format. It seems designed to filter out anything > > >> > imaginative, innovative, speculative or original. The papers I > > >> > reviewed in that > > format > > >> > were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the > > >> > life > > out of > > >> > them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference > > >> > which > > seemed > > >> > very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the > submission > > >> > process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't > > >> > be > > continued. > > >> > I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine > submitting > > >> > anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. > > >> > Feona > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: > > >> > > > >> >> Hi Pals, > > >> >> > > >> >> With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to > > >> >> approach the list regarding some questions I have about > > >> >> culture of the Association of Internet Researchers today. > > >> >> > > >> >> I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal > reviews, I > > >> >> feel > > >> >> personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this > > >> >> group > > these > > >> >> days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of > > >> >> AoIR > > as > > >> >> my > > >> >> intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which > > >> >> would > be > > >> >> fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. > > >> >> > > >> >> Some Big Questions I Have: > > >> >> > > >> >> 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us > > >> >> the > same > > as > > >> >> organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from > > >> >> these organizations? > > >> >> > > >> >> 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? > > >> >> How is > it > > >> >> reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How > > >> >> is it reflected in submission procedures? > > >> >> > > >> >> 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our > > organization? > > >> >> How > > >> >> do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, > > >> >> necessary or fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? > > >> >> > > >> >> 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, > > >> >> and artists really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet > > >> >> studies'? My > answer > > >> >> used > > >> >> to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as > > >> >> ubiquitous as literature studies. > > >> >> > > >> >> 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases > > >> >> professionalization trump a desire for a conference that > > >> >> encourages its youngest > scholars > > >> >> and > > >> >> its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the > > >> >> boundaries of the field? > > >> >> > > >> >> Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you > > >> >> want > > and > > >> >> leave the rest. > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> Fondly, > > >> >> T > > >> >> > > >> >> -- > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> Dr. Theresa M. Senft > > >> >> Global Liberal Studies Program School of Arts & Sciences New > > >> >> York University > > >> >> 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 > > >> >> > > >> >> home: *www.terrisenft.net ** *(needs a > > >> >> serious updating) > > >> >> facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft > > >> >> twitter: @terrisenft > > >> >> _______________________________________________ > > >> >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the > > >> >> Association of Internet Researchers > > http://aoir.org > > >> >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > >> >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > >> >> > > >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > >> >> http://www.aoir.org/ > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of > > >> > receiving > all > > >> > correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. > All > > >> > incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by > > >> > our > > digital > > >> > document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. > > >> > > > >> > If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University > > processed > > >> > in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, > > >> > couriered > > items > > >> > and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. > > There are > > >> > items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but > > >> > will > not > > be > > >> > scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the > > University. > > >> > > > >> > _______________________________________________ > > >> > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the > > >> > Association of Internet Researchers > > http://aoir.org > > >> > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > >> > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > >> > > > >> > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > >> > http://www.aoir.org/ > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> -- > > >> // > > >> // This email is > > >> // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > > >> // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > > >> // > > >> // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // > > >> http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors > > >> above to autocorrect on my > phone. > > >> // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the > > >> Association of Internet Researchers > http://aoir.org > > >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > >> > > >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > >> http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > -- > > // > > // This email is > > // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > > // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > > // > > // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // http://alex.halavais.net > > // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my > > phone. > > // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the > > Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, > > change options or unsubscribe at: > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > > -- > Mia Consalvo, Ph.D. > Visiting Associate Professor > Comparative Media Studies > Massachusetts Institute of Technology > 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Building 14N-226 Cambridge, MA 02139-4307 > USA consalvo at mit.edu > 617.324.1868 > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the > Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change > options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Dr. Theresa M. Senft Global Liberal Studies Program School of Arts & Sciences New York University 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 home: *www.terrisenft.net ** *(needs a serious updating) facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft twitter: @terrisenft _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From je.burgess at qut.edu.au Thu May 30 11:58:33 2013 From: je.burgess at qut.edu.au (Jean Burgess) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 04:58:33 +1000 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> Message-ID: <792900BF-9C47-4101-A061-D1AF767C3EA7@qut.edu.au> Thank you, Alex, for elaborating on this issue once again. A few comments just on the conference, rather than the broader set of questions Terri initially raised. I for one am OK with both the use of a template and the requirement to submit short papers, rather than only abstracts, for both individual papers and panel proposals. While the changes created extra work (and work is hard and annoying), I'm now glad that I have a nearly-finished short paper that will get published somewhere so people can read it, and like it or not, that will count as 'fully refereed paper in proceedings', which give me and my institutional those all-important brownie points. The roundtable and fishbowl formats left room for looser, more speculative or creative session formats. I reviewed several submissions. From my perspective as a reviewer, the short paper (rather than abstract) format made it easier to review them, without adding the burden of reading thousands upon thousands of words--it's much easier to get the gist of a paper if it has a bit more room for substance rather than meta-narrative; and it made it easier to separate submissions in terms of quality. I agree we could have done with clearer guidelines (customized to the new submission requirements, which in turn need to be matched to the criteria provided in conf-tool), but I for one exercised my best judgement on the relevance, interestingness, and rigour of the papers, not their technical compliance with the template. I also tried to mark across the range where appropriate. Having said that, using multiple reviewers usually does result in multiple perspectives. Cheers Jean On May 30, 2013, at 2:00 PM, Alexander Halavais wrote: > OK, so I want to separate the word-count issue from the template > issue, because they are divisible and too easily conflated. > > TEMPLATE > > On the template issue: we've been through this once before, but the > reason the template exists is to give some structure for proceedings. > I made the argument--and have made the argument since I ran for > VP--that I wanted what goes on at AoIR to reach a wider audience, and > to spread beyond those who can attend the conference each year. Many > of you running for Exec have expressed a similar interest, and have > proposed various mechanisms for accomplishing this. For me, getting > our work out in some form so that it was findable on the web was > important. > > The template exists because to be able to find and use stuff in a > collection, it is easier if there is some structural similarity--you > know where to find the title, the author, etc. There is nothing, at > least to my mind, that says "hard science" in that. Yes, there was a > format for subtitles (in case it's not obvious from this email, I > quite like subtitles), and tables, etc., but none of this required > their use. > > Maybe the issue is APA for the citation style? I frankly couldn't care > less about citation styles, and didn't pick it. This seemed to be the > most common style used in most previous IR conferences, but that > doesn't mean it should predominate. I don't see why it can't be "use > whatever you want as long as it is findable"--APA was arbitrary. > Perhaps that is what signals "hard science"? Would, by contrast, MLA > or Chicago then signal "Humanities"? > > I think there is value in getting our work out there. I think asking > people to share what they do at AoIR is valuable. I suspect that a > number of others do too. But I think there should also be options for > not sharing. It may be (with deep apologies to Suely and Andrew, who > have invested a lot of time and effort here) that SPIR just isn't > worthy of ongoing support. > > WORD COUNT > > On the word count issue: One of the reason I've separated these is > that I've heard largely support for the longer limits, with a few > grumblings about 1,200 being too short. We've had a number of > restrictions in the past, ranging from 250 to 1000. What I've heard > consistently during my 8 years on Exec is people saying that it's hard > to judge work based on two or three paragraphs alone, and that this > results a bad refereeing process. I think the 500 word limit favors > those who can write good abstracts. I count myself in that number--my > longer work may not be that great, but I write an awesome 500 word > abstract. That said, there were no such limits on roundtables, and > some of the proposals were quite short. > > We have allowed full papers for the last couple (three?) years, but > the number of papers submitted was vanishingly small, and a > nine-thousand word paper requires a disproportionate amount of > reviewer time. > > REVIEWING > > Finally, on the issue of reviews, I want to thank those who > volunteered to review this year. I'll note that many of you did not, > meaning that (a) your expertise was missing when it came to assign > reviews and (b) the reviewers who were assigned often had more reviews > than we have assigned in the past. I agree we need to provide better > guidance to reviewers, and some of you (reviewers and authors) will > hear from me soon about helping shape that process. But the first step > is to be willing to put time into reviewing. > > I just want to be very clear that there was a range of excellent > reviewing and reviewing that could have been much better, from a range > of early-career scholars and more experienced reviewers. Regardless of > this, I think our reviewers deserve a significant amount of praise and > respect for volunteering to review. > > Alex > > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Jeremy hunsinger wrote: >> I think the problem in part is that it was a template that said it was for a >> paper, and not a template that said it was for a proposal or abstract. >> This combined with the required length, added considerably to the lack of >> clarity. I think we need to go back to the 'those that need to submit full >> papers for them to count, can submit full papers' but those papers are not >> automatically submitted for publication, and the other track should be a >> simple 500 word abstract, or longer panel abstract. the clarity of the two >> track system was again slightly problematic, but it was inclusive in ways >> that this system is not >> >> >> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Alexander Halavais >> wrote: >>> >>> It would be helpful, at least to me, if folks could be more explicit >>> about *what* they objected to in the template. There were no content >>> restrictions. Yes, there were spaces for citations, subtitles, and for >>> a title, but if these were omitted, they were omitted. >>> >>> I am well aware of the power of defaults, but I'm missing what it was >>> about this particular template that makes it difficult. (Yes, I've >>> heard from folks that the word-count was restrictive, but that isn't >>> directly a template issue.) >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Alex >>> >>> >>> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Feona Attwood >>> wrote: >>>> Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had >>>> similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. >>>> >>>> My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to >>>> signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like that >>>> before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a proposal in >>>> this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into that kind >>>> of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, >>>> innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that format >>>> were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life out of >>>> them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which seemed >>>> very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission >>>> process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be continued. >>>> I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting >>>> anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. >>>> Feona >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Pals, >>>>> >>>>> With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the >>>>> list >>>>> regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of >>>>> Internet Researchers today. >>>>> >>>>> I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I >>>>> feel >>>>> personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group these >>>>> days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR as >>>>> my >>>>> intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be >>>>> fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. >>>>> >>>>> Some Big Questions I Have: >>>>> >>>>> 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same as >>>>> organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these >>>>> organizations? >>>>> >>>>> 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it >>>>> reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it >>>>> reflected in submission procedures? >>>>> >>>>> 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our organization? >>>>> How >>>>> do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, >>>>> necessary or >>>>> fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? >>>>> >>>>> 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and >>>>> artists >>>>> really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer >>>>> used >>>>> to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as >>>>> ubiquitous >>>>> as literature studies. >>>>> >>>>> 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases >>>>> professionalization >>>>> trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars >>>>> and >>>>> its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the >>>>> boundaries >>>>> of the field? >>>>> >>>>> Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want and >>>>> leave the rest. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Fondly, >>>>> T >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dr. Theresa M. Senft >>>>> Global Liberal Studies Program >>>>> School of Arts & Sciences >>>>> New York University >>>>> 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 >>>>> >>>>> home: *www.terrisenft.net ** >>>>> *(needs a serious updating) >>>>> facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft >>>>> twitter: @terrisenft >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >>>>> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >>>>> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >>>>> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >>>>> >>>>> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >>>>> http://www.aoir.org/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> >>>> Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving all >>>> correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. All >>>> incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our digital >>>> document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. >>>> >>>> If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University processed >>>> in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered items >>>> and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. There are >>>> items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not be >>>> scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the University. >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >>>> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >>>> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >>>> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >>>> >>>> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >>>> http://www.aoir.org/ >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> -- >>> // >>> // This email is >>> // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. >>> // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. >>> // >>> // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur >>> // http://alex.halavais.net >>> // >>> // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. >>> // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) >>> _______________________________________________ >>> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >>> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >>> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >>> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >>> >>> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >>> http://www.aoir.org/ >> >> > > > > -- > -- > // > // This email is > // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > // > // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > // http://alex.halavais.net > // > // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. > // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ From holly.kruse at gmail.com Thu May 30 12:00:35 2013 From: holly.kruse at gmail.com (Holly Kruse) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 14:00:35 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: <36DF838FDB1BE048866CF3ACE977294E06F848@MB1.drexel.edu> References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> <36DF838FDB1BE048866CF3ACE977294E06F848@MB1.drexel.edu> Message-ID: I think that it's great that we're having this discusson on the list. I've reviewed for the past eight or nine AoIR conferences, and I like to think that I have a pretty good handle on reviewing for this conference. I could be wrong. Still, I propose that for the next conference we craft clear guidelines for reviewers, so that reviewers are less apt, for instance, to expect a roundtable abstract to demonstrate the same level of theoretical development as paper proposals for a panel. Likewise, we could do our best to ensure that if we keep the SPIR template for submissions, reviewers are aware that not including a methodology or results section is totally fine if it's not appropriate for the paper that's being proposed. I'm willing to spearhead this effort at clarification. Holly From enicole at umich.edu Thu May 30 12:29:57 2013 From: enicole at umich.edu (Nicole Ellison) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 15:29:57 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] conference discussion Message-ID: Heya, I agree with Terri that there should be a space for the kinds of work she describes, but I also want to point out that for the kind of work that at least some of us do, it is quite difficult to adequately assess a paper that is based on proposed research that hasn't been conducted yet. If I'm reviewing a paper, I'd like to see findings and I'd like to see conclusions. If an author doesn't have them yet, maybe the paper should be submitted the following year. Since I know this is likely to be misunderstood, let me say it again: I think there should be a place for work in progress, performance, activist collaborations, etc. But there is also good, interesting, empirical work that can be written up in January and presented months later, and which can't really be assessed until this is done. For instance, suppose you propose an experiment and your manipulation doesn't work? I don't personally do experiments, but I'd like AOIR to be a place where this kind of work is welcome along with everything else. That was kind of the genesis for the organization in the first place, if I recall correctly. I think different formats for different kinds of work is the ticket here. Nicole From tamara at psu.edu Thu May 30 12:37:48 2013 From: tamara at psu.edu (Tamara Peyton) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 15:37:48 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR Message-ID: I've been a quiet yet active member of AOIR since 2003 and have watched it develop over that period. I, too, recently noticed a distinct influence of formalization and "scientification" of the conference, and have had more theoretical pieces rejected for the annual conference on a few occasions because they weren't "empirically grounded" (direct quote). I see this discussion as exemplifying the ongoing tensions within our Internet studies community. I "read" the template this year as signifying a shift to a more formal approach similar to ACM, a huge organization that is frequented, in part, by a lot of iSchool folks, and one could argue that iSchools have become one of the more prominent places for Internet Studies. So I actualy liked having the template, though I too puzzled over how to fit our panel paper (which yes it got rejected) into it, given we didn't have "findings" so much as general discussions of the impact of a phenomenon. Yet, because AOIR has typically been low profile in respect to iSchools and because AOIR hasn't annually produced printed proceedings, the AoIR community and organization has an inferior or even non-existent reputation in iSchools. As someone who has recently made the switch between sociology/media studies into the ACM /iSchool world, I can tell you that I cannot get any funding whatsoever to go to AoIR because it is seen as the least worthy of environments, mocked as one of those "lazy abstract-only playground venues" (direct quote from another uni's iSchool faculty). And this despite the fact that I know firsthand that AoIR is arguably THE best place to get a collection of top notch Internet Studies work seen and discussed! My point? The attempts to formalize and add more rigour to AoIR is something I think is a worthy cause. I get weary of self funding myself to go to the conference, only to see people slap-hazardly throwing together a presentation at the last minute based on a tiny abstract they wrote 9-12 months earlier. At the same time, as others have already more cogently pointed out, we have to be careful that our attempts to increase the quality of our community's output doesn't squeeze out the more experimental, last minute or provocative theory work, activist work, etc. How to do so is what we're apparently grappling with now. What could we do? Perhaps have university "ambassadors" for various venues that champion the association within areas typically neglectful of AOIR? Have specific meta-areas/meta-keywords that are standardized and self-selected by authors to papers so that the experimental, activist or theoretical papers get reviewed as a group and are reviewed only by like-minded reviewers who volunteer for those meta-areas? I do volunteer for reviews and I actually did 15 (!!) of them this year, with scores across the range depending on the internal merit of the piece as presented. To those who suggest we should do more and be more active, I have to say that I would love to but given the fact that my department will not support me in the attempt, I have had to sadly work towards conferences and venues with a higher "rep", in and outside of the ACM world (e.g. ASA and ICA annual confs). -- Tamara Peyton College of Information Sciences & Technology The Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA 16802 tamara at psu.edu / http://about.me/tamarapeyton / @pstamara From kfitz47 at gmail.com Thu May 30 12:41:57 2013 From: kfitz47 at gmail.com (Kathleen Fitzpatrick) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 14:41:57 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> <36DF838FDB1BE048866CF3ACE977294E06F848@MB1.drexel.edu> Message-ID: Hi, all. I wanted to mention that another of the organizations I'm active in, the Alliance of Digital Humanities Organizations, which puts on the annual DH conference, recently experienced some growing pains around its conference submission and reviewing process. The conference has recently seen a dramatic uptick in submissions, from a much more diverse range of fields, methodologies, and parts of the world than in the past, and as a result recent conference program processes were beset by challenges in getting the right reviewers for the right proposals. And this produced a lot of hard feelings across the board: among authors who felt rudely treated, among reviewers who felt overtasked, and among program committee members who totally *were* overtasked. This year's program committee, led by Bethany Nowviskie, introduced a number of changes in the process, which Bethany detailed in a blog post: http://nowviskie.org/2012/cats-and-ships/. The most important of these changes may have been the bidding process, in which reviewers get to request particular abstracts to review (as well as marking those abstracts for which they are not qualified). I have served as a reviewer for the last several years and can say that the proposals I was asked to review this year were far more appropriate to my subfield than they had ever before been. The process also included a few other crucial changes: First, after a reviewer submitted her reviews, she was able to see the other reviews of those abstracts (though without reviewer names attached), and she could modify or add to her reviews in response. Second, after the review period was closed, authors were given the opportunity to respond to the reviews. And finally, the program committee was able to return to particular reviewers to ask them for clarification or reconsideration, before making a final decision. All of this, from what I've heard, made the committee's process more complex, but I did not see any complaints online about the process or its results this year, while recent years had produced lots of audible discontent. Bethany has promised to write some more assessing the results of the process; the conference is coming up, so perhaps that will be available soon. All best, Kathleen -- Kathleen Fitzpatrick // Director of Scholarly Communication Modern Language Association // mla.org // @kfitz On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Holly Kruse wrote: > I think that it's great that we're having this discusson on the list. I've > reviewed for the past eight or nine AoIR conferences, and I like to think > that I have a pretty good handle on reviewing for this conference. I could > be wrong. Still, I propose that for the next conference we craft clear > guidelines for reviewers, so that reviewers are less apt, for instance, to > expect a roundtable abstract to demonstrate the same level of theoretical > development as paper proposals for a panel. Likewise, we could do our best > to ensure that if we keep the SPIR template for submissions, reviewers are > aware that not including a methodology or results section is totally fine > if it's not appropriate for the paper that's being proposed. I'm willing to > spearhead this effort at clarification. > > Holly > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > From krguidry at mistakengoal.com Thu May 30 12:48:47 2013 From: krguidry at mistakengoal.com (krguidry at mistakengoal.com) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 15:48:47 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6d04e73967d7208daadce231cb56c522@mistakengoal.com> On 2013-05-30 10:27, Terri Senft wrote: > > With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the > list > regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of > Internet Researchers today. I'm more than a little bit dismayed that all of the (public) responses to Terri's very broad questions about AoIR have focused entirely on the conference. Is that some quirk or oddity perhaps related to the timing of the questions and other recent posts related to the conference? Or is this evidence that for many people the conference *is* AoIR? I hope the former and not the latter as that would be quite limiting and very disappointing for those of us who rarely or never are able to attend the conference. Kevin From tsenft at gmail.com Thu May 30 12:52:11 2013 From: tsenft at gmail.com (Terri Senft) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 15:52:11 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] conference discussion In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I'm about to get cranky so just one more from my end. Just so we are all clear on this point: nobody is arguing, or has argued, that there isn't value to the type of 'straight' research Nicole is talking about. I can and have produced that sort of work myself. In fact, smelling trouble with this new proposal format, I even submitted a 'straight' proposal for a panel, and it was accepted. I can do that work. I *do* do that work. I can deliver that work. And I also do other sorts of things. What I am asking is if we have space anymore for other things beyond the sort of research Nicole describes. I'm asking selfishly. Sorry to be crude, but as I said to a friend, Denver is a long way for me to fly just to find out I'll be handing out Kleenex at Communication Annual publication circle jerk. Please understand that for me at least, this isn't about sour grapes, but what happens when an organization valorizes 'straight' (note adjective)research as the most legitimate trajectory of inquiry. If people submitted rigorous proposals with detailed findings and were rejected for boring the living crap out of the reader, they'd go up the wall. I feel the same way when someone looks at a project designed to be truly interdisciplinary* and says, 'Where's your sample?" My sample? I teach research methods. I value discussions on methodology. But that's not a question about method. That's just someone who doesn't understand a project spouting the language of method. And it's as dismissive as if I called someone's straight research boring. There are political affects to these types of dismissals that make the conference subtitle of Resistance and Appropriation a bitter pill to swallow. I would say more, but I've decided this is better laid out as a piece of writing. Which I will then submit for publication, because like all of you, that's what I do. Maybe when it's done, I'll submit it to AoiR to read on a podium, as per what appears to be manifesting as the new regime. Party On, T (**and by "interdisciplinary," I don't mean introduce communication scholars to interface designers--I mean getting sex workers who use mobile phones to talk with teen sexual health advocates, and then getting those two to talk to theorists of race and gender, all about, um INTERNET USE) On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Nicole Ellison wrote: > Heya, > I agree with Terri that there should be a space for the kinds of work she > describes, but I also want to point out that for the kind of work that at > least some of us do, it is quite difficult to adequately assess a paper > that is based on proposed research that hasn't been conducted yet. If I'm > reviewing a paper, I'd like to see findings and I'd like to see > conclusions. If an author doesn't have them yet, maybe the paper should be > submitted the following year. > Since I know this is likely to be misunderstood, let me say it again: I > think there should be a place for work in progress, > performance, activist collaborations, etc. But there is also good, > interesting, empirical work that can be written up in January and presented > months later, and which can't really be assessed until this is done. For > instance, suppose you propose an experiment and your manipulation doesn't > work? I don't personally do experiments, but I'd like AOIR to be a place > where this kind of work is welcome along with everything else. That was > kind of the genesis for the organization in the first place, if I recall > correctly. > I think different formats for different kinds of work is the ticket here. > > Nicole > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Dr. Theresa M. Senft Global Liberal Studies Program School of Arts & Sciences New York University 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 home: *www.terrisenft.net ** *(needs a serious updating) facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft twitter: @terrisenft From axel.maireder at univie.ac.at Thu May 30 13:47:35 2013 From: axel.maireder at univie.ac.at (Axel Maireder) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 22:47:35 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: <36DF838FDB1BE048866CF3ACE977294E06F848@MB1.drexel.edu> References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> <36DF838FDB1BE048866CF3ACE977294E06F848@MB1.drexel.edu> Message-ID: <2C076FEF-0116-4859-AC8A-BE9E7F7B535F@univie.ac.at> Dear all, Some thoughts from a young(er), European member of the AOIR community (finishing my PhD soon, hopefully): I've been at three IR-conferences within the last five years, and I have also been at ICA, IAMCR, ECREA and other communication conferences. Every time I attended, the IR was the highlight of the conference year. I've talked to other young Internet researchers, and a lot of them feel the same.The reason for this is neither that IR presentations are more sophisticated than at other conferences, nor that it has the best social events (well, they are fine, but have you been to IAMCR in Braga or Istanbul? ;-) The AOIR gathers researchers from different fields (communication, social anthropology, sociology,?), who present very different types of projects and ideas, based on very different theoretical and methodological perspectives - it is definitely very diverse. But, unlike at ICA, ECREA, and IAMCR, I always felt that there is a common ground at the IR, a collective major question that inspires most of us, and is reflected by many of the presentations. In the end, it is all about understanding what "the Internet" is, how society shapes it, how it reflects society, and how society is shaped by it. My feeling is that everyone is working on this question, from their own, necessarily limited, perspectives. For the AOIR community, the Internet is not "only" "object" of research (to study something else), but the Internet is fascinating in itself. In my opinion, this is the USP of the AOIR, and this is what it makes a community. And researching the Internet (still) needs new, uncommon, surprising ideas and approaches. I found those inspiring ideas at the last AOIR conferences, and I hope I will continue to find them in the future. (Whatever that means for the current discussion on CfP and reviewing) Axel --- Axel Maireder, MA Department of Communication, University of Vienna, Austria http://homepage.univie.ac.at/axel.maireder From bury417 at yahoo.ca Thu May 30 14:49:14 2013 From: bury417 at yahoo.ca (Rhiannon Bury) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 14:49:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> Message-ID: <1369950554.49508.YahooMailNeo@web140606.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Joining in for a? kick at the can. Like some others who have commented, I? have been around AoIR for years and have been accepted at every IR to which I made a submission, including this year. I happen to have a large research project (for one scholar) on the go with? lot of survey and interview data collected and analyzed over the past couple of years. Although it was time consuming, I was able to formulate an argument, demonstrate its merits, describe the methods and discuss the findings in 1200 words. In fact, when I finished, I realized that I had effectively written the 15-minute presentation (our panel has four presenters).?? But what if these? guidelines had been in place in 2005, or 2008 or even 2012? In February of those years, I had ideas, I had an argument (sort of), I might even have had some raw data or was in the process of collecting some. There's not a chance in hell I would have been able to come up with a short paper that would pass muster. To this end I would like to pick up and quote from one of Terri's posts in the thread: Conclusions? Findings? In a paper proposed in January and delivered in October? You don't need to be a Foucault scholar to understand how that forecloses all sorts of projects, including ones that are activist, performance-oriented, involve collaboration with communities in flux, and so forth. It seems to me that the short paper format is neither fish nor fowl. You either accept abstracts and take some chances on ideas in progress. Sure some papers will fizzle but others will soar. Or you ask for full papers and those you accept get published in an Annual Proceedings. If AoIR found that very few full papers were being submitted, then the solution is to get rid of the full paper submission. As for the disciplinary focus, if it has been decided that IR conferences are going to be traditional social science conferences that accept only empirical research, then say so and drop the claim to interdisciplinarity. If not, then these guidelines needs to be revisited and revised. best Rhiannon Rhiannon Bury Associate Professor Women's and Gender Studies Athabasca University rbury at athabascau.ca From davekarpf at gmail.com Thu May 30 15:04:12 2013 From: davekarpf at gmail.com (Dave Karpf) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 18:04:12 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: <1369950554.49508.YahooMailNeo@web140606.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> <1369950554.49508.YahooMailNeo@web140606.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I'll add my $.02. Like others, I found the 1,200 word limit a bit... odd. Abstracts are 250-500 words. Articles are 6,000-8,000 words. 1,200 words is part of the netherspace in between. 1,200 is basically a lengthy blog post. I, for one, have two home disciplines, each with its own conference norms. In political science (APSA), they just ask for an abstract, and they don't use peer reviewers. That puts a lot of authority in the hands of the elected leadership. It also lets authors propose a research puzzle that they expect to complete over the next 8-10 months. In communication (ICA), they ask for a full paper, and they do use peer reviewers. That puts power in the hands of the active membership. It ensures well-done research, and opens up the opportunity for conference proceedings, but also limits the pieces that can be contributed. For this year's AoIR, I basically took a powerpoint talk that I've given a few places and turned it into a 1,200 word short-paper. It was good to get it down on paper, but also felt underdeveloped compared to the papers I'm used to writing. Like Luis, I think this was embedded in the word limit, rather than the style template. I'm still new enough to AoIR that I can't say for sure what I think the community *should* be. I'm still acclimating and forming impressions of the community. But, FWIW, I much prefer the APSA model. I like conferences to be an opportunity to interact with works-in-progress. And if I have a piece that's already polished and complete, I'd rather send it to a journal than a conference. Looking forward to Denver, Dave On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Rhiannon Bury wrote: > Joining in for a kick at the can. > > Like some others who have commented, I have been around AoIR for years > and have been accepted at every IR to which I made a submission, including > this year. I happen to have a large research project (for one scholar) on > the go with lot of survey and interview data collected and analyzed over > the past couple of years. Although it was time consuming, I was able to > formulate an argument, demonstrate its merits, describe the methods and > discuss the findings in 1200 words. In fact, when I finished, I realized > that I had effectively written the 15-minute presentation (our panel has > four presenters). But what if these guidelines had been in place in > 2005, or 2008 or even 2012? In February of those years, I had ideas, I had > an argument (sort of), I might even have had some raw data or was in the > process of collecting some. There's not a chance in hell I would have been > able to come up with a short paper that would pass muster. To this end I > would like > to pick up and quote from one of Terri's posts in the thread: > > Conclusions? Findings? In a paper proposed in January and delivered in > October? You don't need to be a Foucault scholar to understand how that > forecloses all sorts of projects, including ones that are activist, > performance-oriented, involve collaboration with communities in flux, and > so forth. > > > It seems to me that the short paper format is neither fish nor fowl. You > either accept abstracts and take some chances on ideas in progress. Sure > some papers will fizzle but others will soar. Or you ask for full papers > and those you accept get published in an Annual Proceedings. If AoIR found > that very few full papers were being submitted, then the solution is to get > rid of the full paper submission. > > As for the disciplinary focus, if it has been decided that IR conferences > are going to be traditional social science conferences that accept only > empirical research, then say so and drop the claim to interdisciplinarity. > If not, then these guidelines needs to be revisited and revised. > > best > > Rhiannon > > Rhiannon Bury > Associate Professor > Women's and Gender Studies > Athabasca University > rbury at athabascau.ca > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Dave Karpf, PhD Assistant Professor George Washington University School of Media and Public Affairs www.davidkarpf.com davekarpf at gmail.com Author of *The MoveOn Effect: The Unexpected Transformation of American Political Advocacy *(Oxford University Press) From wellman at chass.utoronto.ca Thu May 30 15:40:37 2013 From: wellman at chass.utoronto.ca (Barry Wellman) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 18:40:37 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] think of the audience Message-ID: We do need some sort of quality control, because too much open vagueness is more likely to lead to unthought-through papers than exciting innovative ones. A public presentation is not the place to get advice on a diss. proposal -- you can do that in private or set up birds of a feather roundtables. But it is unfair to subject an audience to such stuff. This has been a problem with AoIR since the first Kansas meeting and one reason I have cut back on my attendance. While I would kvell to hear anything Terri Senft had to say about anything. Alas, we are all not Terri. YMMV Barry Wellman _______________________________________________________________________ S.D. Clark Professor FRSC NetLab Director Faculty of Information (iSchool) 611 Bissell Building 140 St. George St. University of Toronto Toronto Canada M5S 3G6 http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman twitter: @barrywellman NETWORKED:The New Social Operating System. Lee Rainie & Barry Wellman MIT Press http://amzn.to/zXZg39 Print $22 Kindle $16 Old/NewCyberTimes http://bit.ly/c8N9V8 ________________________________________________________________________ From dbrabham at email.unc.edu Thu May 30 15:58:49 2013 From: dbrabham at email.unc.edu (Brabham, Daren C) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 22:58:49 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> <1369950554.49508.YahooMailNeo@web140606.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I'll jump in and defend the longer word count for this year's submissions. I have reviewed for the conference several times and had always griped about how shoddy work slipped through because it was a "hot" or trendy topic. I grew tired of reading abstracts that promised to study some new flavor of the day (Second Life, Foursquare, Arab Spring and Occupy Wall Street on Twitter, MOOCs - you name it) by "doing an analysis" of the phenomenon. Sorry, but I don't think it makes me a social science square to demand a bit more explanation of a method than "an analysis." The purpose of academic research is to generate new knowledge, right? And we need to know that the new knowledge is being generated in the appropriate ways. You can't just "analyze" something...that analysis happens through some more precise procedures - critical discourse analysis, quantitative content analysis, ethnography, rhetorical criticism, Marxist cultural critique, lab experiments, whatever. Too many abstracts in previous years neglected even name-dropping these terms, which would have at least given some clue to the reviewer as to what the author was actually planning to DO to generate new knowledge. I echo Tamara's point that one grows "weary of self funding" a trip to "the conference [because one's home department does not view an abstract-submission conference as worthy for travel funding or for getting tenure], only to see people slap-hazardly throwing together a presentation at the last minute based on a tiny abstract they wrote 9-12 months earlier." You all have seen the scattered, read-off-the-back-of-my-cocktail-napkin-from-last-night presentations at AoIR (and other conferences), and it is damn frustrating and insulting to folks in the room who scraped together some money to fly halfway around the world to listen to good research. I believe the new word count was trying to catch the good abstract-writers and the folks who have a knack for latching onto glittery, trendy topics and hold them to a higher standard of knowledge creation. And even though I think we could probably develop a more flexible template (or several approved template versions), this is what the template was trying to do too - that's what all the "method" and "findings" stuff is about. Now, I'm all for the nontraditional, the transformative, and even the half-baked. Other organizations (say, the National Communication Association) have performance studies-type divisions that accept a wide range of submissions, even non-text ones, but all submissions adhere to a much deeper standard than just an abstract. There's some edgy work going on at NCA (though I have my own beef with that organization for other reasons!) that certainly breaks templates and genres but still manages to convey to reviewers that the work is well thought-out and will make a contribution to knowledge. I think we already are quite flexible with the range of methods and theories and research we accept. Want to toss out the "findings" section in the template and write a great critical-cultural essay? Go for it. A qualified reviewer will totally get what you're doing and won't fault you for altering the template...seriously they won't, especially a critical-cultural scholar. But I'm guessing (and Hector and past program chairs - you can correct me on this if I'm wrong) that not enough people are volunteering to review papers. It's hard to be the lone researcher who studies X when no one in the reviewer pool studies X. Either more of us need to step up to review or we need to reach out and invite ad hoc reviewers from wildly different disciplines to review papers for our conference (not just a pool of other submitters). Another idea: I like half-baked research, especially around the hot, trendy topics of the day. Why can't we have a "hot topics" panel or two at every conference where some folks - invited or competitively - jockey for a chance to offer first impressions of these new phenomena and sketch out bold agendas for research...which can then spur full papers to the next year's conference? So, like, with MOOCs or 3D printing or whatever it is that's hot this year, I'd rather hear a "Critical Reading and Agenda for Research on MOOCs" where people can talk frankly about the issues without having to prepare a full paper to talk on the topic. It could be a way our field plants early flags in these new landscapes as they emerge, in a more conversational way. I suppose Roundtable Discussions are what this kind of thing is for, but I've not seen a super awesome Roundtable yet....they seem more like rehearsed performances (panels, really) and not critical discussions. But I may not have attended the right ones. Anyway...those are my thoughts on the conference template/word count stuff. I still think we're a group that welcomes different research perspectives and needs to stay that way. I'd hate to see AoIR turn into another ACM or ICA or NCA or whatever (no offense)...it should stay small, interdisciplinary, and loose in its boundary-making. But I do think we can step up the quality control a bit. We're at a point where many more people want to present at the conference than there are slots for them, so why not ask for the bar to be raised? Final shout-out: Kudos to Hector for running a smooth CFP process (despite the expected hiccups with transitioning to a new template) and a smooth and relatively speedy review process. I feel like I was asked to review submissions that were much more in line with my expertise this year, when in many past year's it's felt like - for whatever reason - I was reviewing stuff that looked like Greek to me. Bravo on that, then. db --- Daren C. Brabham, Ph.D. Assistant Professor, School of Journalism & Mass Communication Editor, Case Studies in Strategic Communication | www.csscjournal.org University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Carroll Hall, CB 3365 Chapel Hill, NC 27599 (801) 633-4796 (mobile) daren.brabham at unc.edu | www.darenbrabham.com From mepetit at utsc.utoronto.ca Thu May 30 16:30:58 2013 From: mepetit at utsc.utoronto.ca (Michael Petit) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 19:30:58 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR (Michael Petit) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <05af60d9c7db69d639f80c8219004c02.squirrel@webmail.utsc.utoronto.ca> Hello Everyone, I can't speak to how the template affected the composition of proposals submitted, but I can attest to its effect on at least one of the reviewers, who wrote the following about mine: ?While each abstract has strong elements, they are each far shorter and less developed than the short papers using the required SPIR template. While the SPIR template was quite demanding, it was nevertheless a template that every other paper and panel I?ve reviewed stuck to. [ ] While I feel something of a pedant reinforcing a template so at odds with the conference themes [of appropriation and resistance], to be fair to everyone who did use the template, these abstracts all need development.? Reject. Based on past experience (this would have been my 7th AoIR), this panel would have been accepted, but apparently theoretically-engaged work from a humanistic perspective that follows the methodologies of the humanities is much less welcome on the basis of the SPIR template. (I'm also wondering why some proposals (such as mine) were assigned 4 reviewers while others had only 2, but perhaps this is a separate issue.) Fiona writes that she did not submit a proposal this year because she found the template foreign to the ways in which she conducts and reports her research. But she also writes that she'll be attending AoIR to discuss the issues this thread has raised. I would very much like to contribute to those discussions, but unfortunately, like many, I do not have institutional funding to attend without being on the program. I won't be there. I hope those who attend find the conference interesting. I felt I had developed an intellectual home at AoIR, but the algorithmic thinking that underpins the template and the way this conference is being organized has given me second thoughts. -- Michael Petit, PhD Director, Media Studies and the Joint Program in New Media Studies Department of Arts, Culture & Media University of Toronto Scarborough Toronto, ON M1C 1A4 416.287.7164 From anafmonteiro at gmail.com Fri May 31 03:53:44 2013 From: anafmonteiro at gmail.com (Ana Francisca Monteiro) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 11:53:44 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] CFP - SIIE2013 - XV International Symposium on Computers in Education Message-ID: XV International Symposium on Computers in Education Viseu, Portugal | 13 - 15 november 2013 siie13esev.ipv.pt ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Overview ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The 15th edition of the International Symposium on Computers in Education (SIIE) will be held in Viseu, Portugal, from 13 to 15 November 2013. The International Symposium on Computers in Education (SIIE) is an international forum for presenting, discussing and reflecting on research, development and practices in the field of Information and Communications Technology (ICT) in Education. The previous editions were held alternately between Spain and Portugal, providing a space for researchers, educators and institutional representatives to exchange and debate ideas. SIIE has become a reference, particularly in the Ibero-American context. The 15th edition of the International Symposium on Computers in Education (SIIE) will be held in Viseu, Portugal, from 13 to 15 November 2013. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Topics ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The 15th edition of SIIE encourages the submission of original contributions in English (preferred), Spanish or Portuguese in various areas including, but not limited to, the following: - Design, development and evaluation of educational software - Interaction Design for education - Design and standardization of educational technologies, modelling languages and metadata - Data mining and Web mining for education - Semantic Web in education - Intelligent educational systems - Personal learning environments - Tools and Web-based educational resources - Games and simulations in education - Virtual laboratories - Ubiquitous/mobile computing and education - Robotics and education - Free/Open Software, Open Knowledge and Open Educational Resources - Technology, knowledge and skills management in education - Emerging technologies in education - Use and evaluation methodologies of ICT in educational contexts - Innovative experiences of ICT in Teaching / Learning - Social aspects of ICT in educational settings - Gender, cultural diversities and specific audiences - ICT applications for special education needs - Teacher education and ICT - Distance education - Social Web, collaborative systems and learning communities. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Formats ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Invited keynote speakers Paper presentation Posters ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Official Languages ---------------------------------------------------------------------- English (preferred) Portuguese Spanish ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Paper publication ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Accepted papers will be published in the Symposium Proceedings (CD-ROM with ISBN), which will be distributed to participants. Best papers presented at the Symposium will be selected, according to the Program Committee evaluation, for inclusion in other publications soon to be announced. The Organizing Committee is currently involved in negotiations to ensure the publication of papers in reference publications. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Paper submission ---------------------------------------------------------------------- All contributions must be sent as PDF (preferred), Doc, Docx or ODT and follow the official ACM Proceedings Format guidelines available at http://www.acm.org/sigs/pubs/proceed/template.html. Paper contributions will be limited to 6 pages and Posters contributions to 2 pages. All proposals must be anonymously submitted, the authors name and institution should not be included in the submitted file. These data should only be included in the submission form. Proposals will be submitted through https://www.easychair.org/account/signin.cgi?conf=siie13 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dates ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 15/06/2013 Submission ends 29/7/2013 Review results sent out 9/9/2013 Submission of final version of accepted proposals 1/10/2013 Deadline for registration of authors of accepted papers 13/11/2013 SIIE 2013 begins ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Registration ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For registrations paid until October 1, 2013 Registration fee: 150 ? For registrations paid after October 1, 2013 Registration fee: 180 ? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Emerging Researchers Bursaries ---------------------------------------------------------------------- SIIE 2013 has decided to offer financial support for two emerging researchers from low GDP European countries to enable their participation. The bursary consists of free entry to the SIIE (and social events), a 300 ? travel bursary and free accommodation (Students' Residence). The bursary is for PhD students and new researchers within one year of completing their PhD in order to allow them to participate in SIIE 2013 in Viseu. From raquelrecuero at gmail.com Fri May 31 04:30:08 2013 From: raquelrecuero at gmail.com (Raquel Recuero) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 08:30:08 -0300 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> <1369950554.49508.YahooMailNeo@web140606.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <51A889C0.1000805@gmail.com> Hi everyone! I'd like to make a few suggestions and perhaps add some ideas to the discussion: _1) About the new template:_ If I may talk for us in South America and specially in Brazil... Event though I think the new "short paper" (for us it is actually an extended abstract) is better than 500 words to allow you to argue a bit more about your research, the new model made hard for us to get funding to attend the conference because there is no full paper option. Before, we could submit full papers (and we actually did and the review process to get published in SPIR was *awesome*). *Suggestion:* I know this will sound very ACM/AAAI/IEEE etc.but... Why don't we create short/full paper proposals? Short papers are ideal for folks who have ongoing research and want to discuss it (maybe without publication) and full papers for those other folks (like me) who need to present something more complete in order to get funding. Also perhaps a way to differentiate roundtables and panels would be the format of papers (and the completeness of the research): roundtable = short papers; panel= full papers. We can also have different types of proposal for other things that contemplate other types of discussion. SPIR could continue on publishing full papers and the proceedings, short ones. _2) About reviews:_ Although I wasn't a reviewer this year and I think people are really generous to volunteer (I forgot to volunteer - shame on me!), it is pretty much a fact by now that while some reviews were awesome, some were not so good. My panel got through, but with odd reviews that only focused on one or two of our six papers. This seems to point out that reviewers are having some difficulties in understanding what they are evaluating (not one paper, but a panel of six) and how they should do it (perhaps the system we used is somewhat flawed). Also, my students that got rejected, like many people in this list, got complete opposite reviews with also complete opposite marks (like 90 and 24, for example). And I felt it was very discouraging for them (as for everyone else) to submit again because the process was so weird. It is normal to get rejected. But at least it seems fair to have *some* coherence in the rejection/approval process. *Suggestion:* We can create reviewer guidelines for different types of proposals. I also like the bidding process someone suggested and the idea of creating a program committee or something in order to credit properly the people who are doing the hard work. Maybe create meta reviewers would also help the conflicts (and I think someone already suggested this). _3) About AOIR__Conference_ That said, I would like to point that I *love* AOIR conferences. I've been to several others and still think we get more discussion and more debate with our papers in IR than in any other. Also, it is very much likely to find similar works and people with similar interests. However, I also feel that in the last conferences the abstract model was too short and many very very early works that perhaps were not yet polished enough to be presented were accepted. I think we need better ways to select good work (which doesn't mean it has to be finished) and the "short paper" was a step towards it. The conference, for me, is about a discussion, about exchanging ideas and we need good work to inspire them. *Suggestion*: If people feel the conference is becoming too broad, maybe we should think about creating tracks that represent the lines of research/objects of our associates. That would also help more focus on the discussions and would also help the reviewers to know what to expect and how to evaluate papers from each track. We could have, for example, a methodological discussion track. Sorry for the long email. :) Best, Raquel From R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk Fri May 31 05:00:20 2013 From: R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk (Deller, Ruth A) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 12:00:20 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR Message-ID: Wow, a few days away on annual leave and I come back to find AOIR asploding all over my inbox! Lots of things to digest here but my twopenn'orth on a few of them (apologies, these thoughts will be conference specific ones not ones pertaining to AOIR in general, although I might come back to that later) CONFERENCE TEMPLATES I'll hold my hands up, I really struggled with the format this year both to write and to review. I'm used to just submitting and reviewing conference abstracts of 250-500 words so a longer one - yet something too short to be a proper paper - was a bit of a shock to the system, and not only that, it had its own particular fonts and styles and layouts! I found that quite intimidating and unnecessarily formal and I wasn't sure of its purpose. As others have said, it was too short to be a paper, too long for an abstract and trying to decide exactly what got put into it was hard. When reviewing, it was problematic using the template because everyone had interpreted it in different ways, some giving mini papers, others extended abstracts, others something else entirely - I genuinely found it hard to judge and I do a lot of reviewing of abstracts and of papers - but this hybrid beast was new to me. Having seen Terri's comment about roundtables/panels, I fear I am possibly one of those guilty of confusing them in the reviewing process this year somehow - on last year's system it seemed much clearer whether things were papers, panels, fishbowls etc - although I was on the organising team last year and accessed everything via the back system so maybe it looked different for team members than for actual reviewers. I do worry that we might have lost some quality papers, panels and roundtables purely because of the formatting issues and people's difficulty in interpreting the brief both as authors and reviewers. CONFERENCE FEEL AND SO ON I think one of the things this issue with the templates highlights is the problems of interdisciplinarity - I am ALL FOR it and think one of our biggest strengths is that we can accommodate scholars from lots of disciplines and countries - but it does mean that, naturally, we all differ a lot in practice and in terms of what is considered 'prestigious' (unlike some people's experiences, my research centre actually thinks a lot of AOIR - probably not enough to fund me to go to Denver but that's just because they don't like spending money). Therefore, we're probably never going to agree on what the conference should be: a creative exchange where newer, innovative stuff can be shared, or a place for finished products. I'm not an either/or person, so I would always advocate the both/and way of thinking. Being on the conference team last year I did sometimes find we were restricted in what we could put on the programme and how we could structure plenaries, keynotes etc. I personally feel that we're researching at the cutting edge and the creative edge. The internet is always changing and I worry that to fully take on board Nicole's suggestion of only submitting things that had 'findings' would stifle that and lead to more dated things being presented rather than allowing us to be fresh - and I think one of our distinctive markers should be our ability to be up-to-date with developments in our research field. Academia moves ridiculously slowly, the internet maddeningly quickly - we can't let everything be dictated by the former when we're interested in the latter. That said, I also appreciate the concerns over 'rigour' needing to be part of the process. I wasn't convinced by the arguments that conferences aren't a place for sharing works-in-progress though - every conference I've ever been to (and they've all been interdisciplinary or in media, cultural studies and a bit of sociology and all in either the UK or USA so I acknowledge that different fields and countries will vary) has had a combination of new work, work-in-progress and work completed. I love that and I think it keeps things fresh as well as encouraging newer work, PhD students etc. I've heard terrible presentations on completed work and excellent ones on work-in-progress so I don't consider the stage the work is at to be a marker of quality at all. One option could be to have different streams - completed papers, work-in-progress, whatever. I'd love us to have more workshops or similar where we get to experiment with different internet platforms and technologies. I bet several people would love it if they could have an hour to learn about, and get to grips with, 4chan or Tumblr or Vine or whatever it may be. I would love much more creativity and innovation in the programme - more 'traditional' conference fare is fine, but only to a point. Conferences for me are much more about connection than anything else - I read articles and books if I want the finished, extensive product. I want conferences to inspire me and introduce me to exciting people. OTHER CONFERENCE STUFF Sarah mentioned the size of the conference (and the expense of it for many). I don't know if this is worth thinking about, but another organisation I was once part of used to have an annual conference of its members, who were from all over the world. It got difficult and expensive for many people to meet that way, so they moved to having conferences on each continent instead with a 'global gathering' every two or three years. So maybe we could look to alternate with a continental/national conference one year and a big global shindig the next? Or have more web/internet-based ways of sharing and connecting - if not streaming, then weeks/months where we actively work to share stuff via blogs or online repositories or YouTube or Twitter or whatever works best for what we want to share. Ruth From qcentral at indiana.edu Fri May 31 06:36:16 2013 From: qcentral at indiana.edu (qCentral) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 15:36:16 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] job in a cool spot with cool peeps In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2DCA2440-F12E-450B-86B6-AA9D2D28AB0F@indiana.edu> pretty interesting place (with Lucy Suchman, Adam Fish, and a number of other smart scholars across campus). > PLEASE CIRCULATE ? APOLOGIES FOR CROSS-POSTINGS > __________________________________________ > > The Department of Sociology at Lancaster University seeks to appoint a Senior Lecturer with a specialism in the media industries. > > You are expected to be research active with high-level publications and significant research funding, and have excellent teaching abilities at both UG and PG levels, relevant administrative skills and the ability to take a leadership role. Candidates with experience of working in the media industries are particularly encouraged to apply. If appointed, you will develop new postgraduate and undergraduate modules on the media industries, and new collaborative teaching initiatives with other departments. Salary will be in the range ?47,314 ? ?53,233. > > Lancaster Sociology is a research-oriented department with specialisms in science and technology studies, cultural political economy, mobilities, media and cultural studies, political sociology and gender and women?s studies. In the last UK Research Assessment Exercise the Department was placed in the top five group of UK departments. It was also recently placed 5th in the UK in the 2014 Complete University Guide, and in the top 40 sociology departments in the world in the 2013 QS World University Rankings. > > For more information on the post, including how to apply, go to: http://hr-jobs.lancs.ac.uk/Vacancy.aspx?ref=A722. > > The closing date for applications is Monday 24 June 2013; the interview date is to be confirmed. > > Informal enquiries are welcome and should be made to Dr Bronislaw Szerszynski, tel +44 (0)1524 592659, e-mail: bron at lancaster.ac.uk. > > The Department?s webpage is at http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/sociology/. > > ______________________ Mary L. Gray Senior Researcher, Microsoft Research New England, Cambridge MA Associate Professor, Communication and Culture Adjunct Faculty, American Studies; Anthropology; Gender Studies Indiana University, Bloomington mLg at qcentral dot edu www dot maryLgray dot org @maryLgray From jhuns at vt.edu Fri May 31 08:13:54 2013 From: jhuns at vt.edu (Jeremy hunsinger) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 11:13:54 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: <51A889C0.1000805@gmail.com> References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> <1369950554.49508.YahooMailNeo@web140606.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <51A889C0.1000805@gmail.com> Message-ID: aside from the conference and submission system, are there other significant cultural/structural questions that we should think about in regards to AoIR? or is the conference the main issue? I think one of the issue is that the conference has become the main issue, and the list has basically changed from a fairly dynamic one, to a fairly circumscribed announcement list with a little discussion instead of being, as it once was, a sort of intellectual heart that drives the conference. So for me, I'd say list-culture and perhaps other AoIR media cultures need some intervention to transform them toward a more integrative and enabling structure. That's always been one of my concerns though... I'm wondering what non-conference related matters are out there? From R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk Fri May 31 08:19:55 2013 From: R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk (Deller, Ruth A) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 15:19:55 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> <1369950554.49508.YahooMailNeo@web140606.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <51A889C0.1000805@gmail.com> Message-ID: Perhaps that is the very thing we should talk about - is the mailing list still the best environment for discussion, or has it become largely a technology (in academia anyway) of information? I'm on a bunch of academic mailing lists, but the conversation is usually CFPs, job ads and sometimes requests for help. Discussion is rare - and Air-L is one of the most 'discuss-y' of those I'm on even then. I discuss things all the time pertaining to AOIR... face-to-face, on Twitter... on Facebook... on blogs (or via reading others' blogs)... in forums... and in email too - but less so. Email once felt like a dynamic medium, now it doesn't really. I'm not saying we 'take it all to Twitter' or blogs, that'd be madness, as I think the list is still incredibly useful but maybe we ought to think about whether our discussion can thrive elsewhere as well? -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Jeremy hunsinger Sent: 31 May 2013 16:14 To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. aside from the conference and submission system, are there other significant cultural/structural questions that we should think about in regards to AoIR? or is the conference the main issue? I think one of the issue is that the conference has become the main issue, and the list has basically changed from a fairly dynamic one, to a fairly circumscribed announcement list with a little discussion instead of being, as it once was, a sort of intellectual heart that drives the conference. So for me, I'd say list-culture and perhaps other AoIR media cultures need some intervention to transform them toward a more integrative and enabling structure. That's always been one of my concerns though... I'm wondering what non-conference related matters are out there? _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From jhuns at vt.edu Fri May 31 08:24:32 2013 From: jhuns at vt.edu (jeremy hunsinger) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 11:24:32 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> <1369950554.49508.YahooMailNeo@web140606.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <51A889C0.1000805@gmail.com> Message-ID: I agree there are other possibilities than email for discussion, though a few have been tried in the past to greater and lesser degrees for the organization. we also have the irc channel, we used to have and probably still have a full jabber system, the video system we used to have is gone though, but there are other capabilities we could use like twitter, facebook, zotero, and other tech. but i'm also wondering about the other issues people might see. On May 31, 2013, at 11:19 AM, "Deller, Ruth A" wrote: > Perhaps that is the very thing we should talk about - is the mailing list still the best environment for discussion, or has it become largely a technology (in academia anyway) of information? I'm on a bunch of academic mailing lists, but the conversation is usually CFPs, job ads and sometimes requests for help. Discussion is rare - and Air-L is one of the most 'discuss-y' of those I'm on even then. > > I discuss things all the time pertaining to AOIR... face-to-face, on Twitter... on Facebook... on blogs (or via reading others' blogs)... in forums... and in email too - but less so. Email once felt like a dynamic medium, now it doesn't really. I'm not saying we 'take it all to Twitter' or blogs, that'd be madness, as I think the list is still incredibly useful but maybe we ought to think about whether our discussion can thrive elsewhere as well? > Jeremy Hunsinger Communication Studies Wilfrid Laurier University Center for Digital Discourse and Culture Virginia Tech Imagination is the one weapon in the war against reality. -Jules de Gaultier () ascii ribbon campaign - against html mail /\ - against microsoft attachments From ngodbold at gmail.com Fri May 31 08:27:10 2013 From: ngodbold at gmail.com (Natalya Godbold) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2013 01:27:10 +1000 Subject: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ruth Deller commented: *So maybe we could look to alternate with a continental/national conferenceone year and a big global shindig the next? Or have more web/internet-based ways of sharing and connecting - if not streaming, then weeks/months where we actively work to share stuff via blogs or online repositories or YouTube or Twitter or whatever works best for what we want to share.* A cute idea. A panel, held via email, discussion board or chatroom. It happens at a particular time. Maybe the presentation is streamed, or maybe the paper is available in longhand before the time starts. Then for half an hour, people can ask the author questions about the paper, to which the author has to answer in real time. As an Australian who pays for most of her own conference attendances including the thousands of dollars in airfares to other continents, the idea has its merits. Mainly for the author, who gets instant feedback from a variety of sources. And your responses don't disappear into the air, you already wrote them down. That would give me a lot of useful grist for the mill. Perhaps it would be good to be in a chatroom or on a discussion board, for the sake of the layout. But if it happened say, via the air-l list, the discussion might prompt people who didn't intend to attend, to chuck in a comment. Probably this happens in your world all the time, but its a fascinating new idea to me. xn On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 10:00 PM, Deller, Ruth A wrote: > > Wow, a few days away on annual leave and I come back to find AOIR > asploding all over my inbox! Lots of things to digest here but my > twopenn'orth on a few of them (apologies, these thoughts will be conference > specific ones not ones pertaining to AOIR in general, although I might come > back to that later) > > CONFERENCE TEMPLATES > > I'll hold my hands up, I really struggled with the format this year both > to write and to review. I'm used to just submitting and reviewing > conference abstracts of 250-500 words so a longer one - yet something too > short to be a proper paper - was a bit of a shock to the system, and not > only that, it had its own particular fonts and styles and layouts! I found > that quite intimidating and unnecessarily formal and I wasn't sure of its > purpose. As others have said, it was too short to be a paper, too long for > an abstract and trying to decide exactly what got put into it was hard. > When reviewing, it was problematic using the template because everyone had > interpreted it in different ways, some giving mini papers, others extended > abstracts, others something else entirely - I genuinely found it hard to > judge and I do a lot of reviewing of abstracts and of papers - but this > hybrid beast was new to me. > > Having seen Terri's comment about roundtables/panels, I fear I am possibly > one of those guilty of confusing them in the reviewing process this year > somehow - on last year's system it seemed much clearer whether things were > papers, panels, fishbowls etc - although I was on the organising team last > year and accessed everything via the back system so maybe it looked > different for team members than for actual reviewers. I do worry that we > might have lost some quality papers, panels and roundtables purely because > of the formatting issues and people's difficulty in interpreting the brief > both as authors and reviewers. > > CONFERENCE FEEL AND SO ON > > I think one of the things this issue with the templates highlights is the > problems of interdisciplinarity - I am ALL FOR it and think one of our > biggest strengths is that we can accommodate scholars from lots of > disciplines and countries - but it does mean that, naturally, we all differ > a lot in practice and in terms of what is considered 'prestigious' (unlike > some people's experiences, my research centre actually thinks a lot of AOIR > - probably not enough to fund me to go to Denver but that's just because > they don't like spending money). Therefore, we're probably never going to > agree on what the conference should be: a creative exchange where newer, > innovative stuff can be shared, or a place for finished products. > > I'm not an either/or person, so I would always advocate the both/and way > of thinking. Being on the conference team last year I did sometimes find we > were restricted in what we could put on the programme and how we could > structure plenaries, keynotes etc. I personally feel that we're > researching at the cutting edge and the creative edge. The internet is > always changing and I worry that to fully take on board Nicole's suggestion > of only submitting things that had 'findings' would stifle that and lead to > more dated things being presented rather than allowing us to be fresh - and > I think one of our distinctive markers should be our ability to be > up-to-date with developments in our research field. Academia moves > ridiculously slowly, the internet maddeningly quickly - we can't let > everything be dictated by the former when we're interested in the latter. > > That said, I also appreciate the concerns over 'rigour' needing to be part > of the process. I wasn't convinced by the arguments that conferences > aren't a place for sharing works-in-progress though - every conference I've > ever been to (and they've all been interdisciplinary or in media, cultural > studies and a bit of sociology and all in either the UK or USA so I > acknowledge that different fields and countries will vary) has had a > combination of new work, work-in-progress and work completed. I love that > and I think it keeps things fresh as well as encouraging newer work, PhD > students etc. I've heard terrible presentations on completed work and > excellent ones on work-in-progress so I don't consider the stage the work > is at to be a marker of quality at all. > > One option could be to have different streams - completed papers, > work-in-progress, whatever. I'd love us to have more workshops or similar > where we get to experiment with different internet platforms and > technologies. I bet several people would love it if they could have an > hour to learn about, and get to grips with, 4chan or Tumblr or Vine or > whatever it may be. I would love much more creativity and innovation in > the programme - more 'traditional' conference fare is fine, but only to a > point. Conferences for me are much more about connection than anything > else - I read articles and books if I want the finished, extensive product. > I want conferences to inspire me and introduce me to exciting people. > > OTHER CONFERENCE STUFF > > Sarah mentioned the size of the conference (and the expense of it for > many). I don't know if this is worth thinking about, but another > organisation I was once part of used to have an annual conference of its > members, who were from all over the world. It got difficult and expensive > for many people to meet that way, so they moved to having conferences on > each continent instead with a 'global gathering' every two or three years. > So maybe we could look to alternate with a continental/national conference > one year and a big global shindig the next? Or have more > web/internet-based ways of sharing and connecting - if not streaming, then > weeks/months where we actively work to share stuff via blogs or online > repositories or YouTube or Twitter or whatever works best for what we want > to share. > > Ruth > > > > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Natalya Godbold PhD Candidate (Human Information Behaviour / Health Communication) Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences University of Technology, Sydney ?`~.. ?><((((?>?. .~??`~.. ?><((((?>?. .~??`~.. ?><((((?>?. .><((((?>`~.??.~??`~.?.~??`~...?><((((?> .,,.~??`~.. ?><((((?>?. .....,,.><((((?>`~.??.~??`~.?.~??`~...?><((((?> .~??`~.. ?><((((?>?. .,,.~??`~.. ?><((((?>?. .~??`~.. UTS CRICOS Provider Code: 00099F DISCLAIMER: This email message and any accompanying attachments may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message or attachments. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the views of the University of Technology Sydney. Before opening any attachments, please check them for viruses and defects. Think. Green. Do. Please consider the environment before printing this email. From willronb at yahoo.com Fri May 31 09:33:17 2013 From: willronb at yahoo.com (William Bain) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 09:33:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR Message-ID: <1370017997.9639.YahooMailNeo@web122101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Dear AOIRers, I just wanted to note that recently the tendency on air-l seems to be that a discussive moment springs up from time to time, instead of being more constant, as in the past. Guess that's obvious from what's been said on this thread. However, in my humble, the cfp's and tecnho refs are great but I think the listserv is at its most dynamic when lots of opinions are being exchanged. The more info the better as I see it........? Possibly important in terms of renewal & spreading the word? Best wishes, William PhD Student Comparative Literature Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona From joseph.2011 at reagle.org Fri May 31 10:34:38 2013 From: joseph.2011 at reagle.org (Joseph Reagle) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 13:34:38 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR In-Reply-To: <1370017997.9639.YahooMailNeo@web122101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1370017997.9639.YahooMailNeo@web122101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <51A8DF2E.4080600@reagle.org> On 05/31/2013 12:33 PM, William Bain wrote: > from what's been said on this thread. However, > in my humble, the cfp's and tecnho refs are great > but I think the listserv is at its most dynamic > when lots of opinions are being exchanged. air-l certainly seems much more like a massive announce list than a discussion list presently, and hence I hesitate (including now) to violate this presumed focus. And this tends to be a self-perpetuating phenomenon. Perhaps it would be worthwhile to have an announce and discuss list? From enicole at umich.edu Fri May 31 10:39:15 2013 From: enicole at umich.edu (Nicole Ellison) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 13:39:15 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. Message-ID: Re: Ruth's comment that: "The internet is always changing and I worry that to fully take on board Nicole's suggestion of only submitting things that had 'findings' ..." I'd like to clarify that this is not what I said at all, nor do I think this should be the case. I'm actually pretty shocked that my note was interpreted this way. My comment was about the need for different kinds of presentation formats that support different kinds of work. For empirical ("straight") research, I think it makes sense to include "findings" when assessments about quality are being made. The perceived low-quality of the conference (and its subsequent implications for funding, tenure decisions, etc.) have been noted by others, and I think encouraging people to include their findings when submitting empirical work will go a long way towards addressing the problems others have noted with regard to cocktail-napkin-notes presentations or excellent abstracts/poor papers. ***I also think there should be separate formats for the other kinds of work that Terri and others have mentioned - be they roundtables, birds of a feather, performances, workshops, etc.*** I think the conference can support these different kinds of presentation modes. I agree that having clearer guidelines for authors and reviewers will help with the reviewing problems that have been noted, as would a larger reviewing pool. Thanks, Nicole -- Nicole B. Ellison Associate Professor School of Information University of Michigan From bakera at ohio.edu Fri May 31 10:52:06 2013 From: bakera at ohio.edu (Baker, Andrea) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 13:52:06 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR Message-ID: <2AB274F3-B1E0-45D6-A11B-87B394351E32@ohio.edu> Hi, everyone, I am out of town for a few days, and wanted to note just that I find this discussion fascinating. I hope we don't cut it off prematurely, but rather let the opinions flow freely. Clearly we are gathering a wide range of opinions on all sides, in response to this year's CFP and reviews, and the nature of AoIR, and its future direction. I hope to weigh in a little later on. cheers, andee From R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk Fri May 31 11:00:20 2013 From: R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk (Deller, Ruth A) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 18:00:20 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Nicole/All Thanks for the comment - apologies if I misunderstood your intentions although I am still a little confused - you state: "My comment was about the need for different kinds of presentation formats that support different kinds of work." - Absolutely, I totally agree with you here. But re: this comment: "For empirical ("straight") research, I think it makes sense to include "findings" when assessments about quality are being made. The perceived low-quality of the conference (and its subsequent implications for funding, tenure decisions, etc.) have been noted by others, and I think encouraging people to include their findings when submitting empirical work will go a long way towards addressing the problems others have noted with regard to cocktail-napkin-notes presentations or excellent abstracts/poor papers." - it seems to suggest (and I may be misreading you so I apologise if so) that any empirical research should be completed with some form of clear 'findings' before submitting an abstract (or equivalent) for a paper - and this is something I'm not very keen on applying as a rule. It's great for some to write abstracts including clear findings, of course, but I do think there is a place for papers that represent works-in-progress, or papers that represent empirical research currently underway that will be completed by the conference time. Indeed, this is often more useful than presenting things that are in press and we can read in journals or books a few weeks later. For one thing, having a conference paper accepted gives people an impetus to work on understanding, interpreting and analysing their data (if they have data, that is) rather than putting it off. For another, it keeps things 'fresh' and it also allows comments and questions that may provide vital input into the shaping of publications. And, of course, it opens up the space for PhD students who won't have concrete 'findings' often until later in their project. I don't think that's unique to us, by the way, the majority of conferences I've attended (as I mentioned) have papers at all stages of the process, so if people do have some findings to put in their abstract/submission, then that's great, but I would be very wary about making that the standard everyone should have to meet in order to give a paper. That was what I meant in my response to your earlier comment - however, I may still be misreading your intention here and apologies if that's the case. If you just mean 'it'd be good to put in your findings if you can at this stage but it's cool if you can't' rather than 'it's a must if you've done empirical research to put your findings in and if you're still figuring them out then you can't submit anything yet' then fair enough. Ruth ________________________________________ From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] on behalf of Nicole Ellison [enicole at umich.edu] Sent: 31 May 2013 18:39 To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. Re: Ruth's comment that: "The internet is always changing and I worry that to fully take on board Nicole's suggestion of only submitting things that had 'findings' ..." I'd like to clarify that this is not what I said at all, nor do I think this should be the case. I'm actually pretty shocked that my note was interpreted this way. My comment was about the need for different kinds of presentation formats that support different kinds of work. For empirical ("straight") research, I think it makes sense to include "findings" when assessments about quality are being made. The perceived low-quality of the conference (and its subsequent implications for funding, tenure decisions, etc.) have been noted by others, and I think encouraging people to include their findings when submitting empirical work will go a long way towards addressing the problems others have noted with regard to cocktail-napkin-notes presentations or excellent abstracts/poor papers. ***I also think there should be separate formats for the other kinds of work that Terri and others have mentioned - be they roundtables, birds of a feather, performances, workshops, etc.*** I think the conference can support these different kinds of presentation modes. I agree that having clearer guidelines for authors and reviewers will help with the reviewing problems that have been noted, as would a larger reviewing pool. Thanks, Nicole -- Nicole B. Ellison Associate Professor School of Information University of Michigan _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From tsenft at gmail.com Fri May 31 11:13:41 2013 From: tsenft at gmail.com (Terri Senft) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 14:13:41 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR In-Reply-To: <51A8DF2E.4080600@reagle.org> References: <1370017997.9639.YahooMailNeo@web122101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <51A8DF2E.4080600@reagle.org> Message-ID: Some quick things I wanted to throw in here: 1. First, It has come to my attention that some of the hardworking Conference Committee folks feel a bit "thrown under the bus" by these conversations. I wanted to say I feel lousy about this. One problem of striking while the iron is hot is that sometimes people feel burned by what transpires. This can especially be the case when those people are also feeling burned out--and who wouldn't feel burned out after 123678924 million conference submissions? I promise--and I hope anyone who has participated in these threads will do the same--not to talk here and privately, and then flake out when it's time to try and make things right. Personally, I have a bunch of ideas about how I can help, with submission guidelines, reviewer training, and maybe as part of a "critical and cultural theory" track, if we start to track. I promise to make good on my bitching and moaning by being more of a team player to make things right. I encourage others to do the same, here and now, in writing, so the Exec knows who to hunt down, after the smoke clears from these talks. 2. Re: the discussion Nicole raised about "straight" research: Because I know you follow my personal life (don't even front), I will remind that Nicole is a dear friend and a colleague whose work I admire and cite constantly. She values what I do, and I value what she does, and sometimes, we even do the same things! One more time: what I am trying to suss is not whether 'straight' or experimental/theoretical work is better stuff, but whether AoIR can hold both dear in practice. We all talk a big game about the interdisciplinary life, but if we are going back to the same old same old when the rubber meets the road, that's something people have a right to know. 3. Re: Barry's comment about doctoral candidates and quality: SHAME ON YOU for writing so dismissively about our strongest organizational component. You know how much you've influenced me as an intellectual and how I love you as a human being, but man, sometimes you miss the boat. To wit: You say, "Everyone is not Terri Senft," which appeals to my supermodel nature so thanks, but you don't get that as an intellectual I didn't start this way. It was raw, sheer luck that Andrew Herman and Tom Swiss grabbed me to contribute AS A GRAD STUDENT to a conference ( later a book) that for all intents and purposes, began this organization. You know what the conference's name was? THE WEB: MYTH, METAPHOR, MAGIC.How's that for hippy dippy? You want the next round of Terri Senfts? You need to GROW THEM. And it starts with things like conferences. I think getting some shady, half baked submissions is worth it. Others don't. I get it. Just want to know if it's time for me, and others like me, to move on--no harm, no foul. 3. I love Joseph's idea about an Announce list and a Discuss list. In the most informal poll ever among Twitter users, it seems lots of them won't discuss stuff in email format because they fear 'cluttering' the list (among other concerns.) An Announce list would keep people tangentially interested in Internet Studies up to date, and a Discuss list might better foster longer um, discussions. I think that's enough from me. Fondly--no really! T Because I know you follow my personal life (don't even front), I On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Joseph Reagle wrote: > On 05/31/2013 12:33 PM, William Bain wrote: > >> from what's been said on this thread. However, >> in my humble, the cfp's and tecnho refs are great >> but I think the listserv is at its most dynamic >> when lots of opinions are being exchanged. >> > > air-l certainly seems much more like a massive announce list than a > discussion list presently, and hence I hesitate (including now) to violate > this presumed focus. And this tends to be a self-perpetuating phenomenon. > > Perhaps it would be worthwhile to have an announce and discuss list? > > ______________________________**_________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/** > listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Dr. Theresa M. Senft Global Liberal Studies Program School of Arts & Sciences New York University 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 home: *www.terrisenft.net ** *(needs a serious updating) facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft twitter: @terrisenft From R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk Fri May 31 11:19:39 2013 From: R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk (Deller, Ruth A) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 18:19:39 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR In-Reply-To: References: <1370017997.9639.YahooMailNeo@web122101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <51A8DF2E.4080600@reagle.org>, Message-ID: Terri - thanks for saying this: "1. First, It has come to my attention that some of the hardworking Conference Committee folks feel a bit "thrown under the bus" by these conversations" and reminding us that there's a team working really hard on IR14 right now. I hope the conference committee don't feel too downhearted by all of this discussion - I know how much work goes into these things and knowing who the Denver team are, am confident it will be absolutely brilliant in October - so please guys, don't take any of it personally and know we appreciate your hard work. These conversations are what happen with a bunch of opinionated academics from various traditions get together and I trust something productive will come from it, but I hope no-one takes things too much to heart. Ruth ________________________________________ From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] on behalf of Terri Senft [tsenft at gmail.com] Sent: 31 May 2013 19:13 To: Joseph Reagle Cc: William Bain; air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR Some quick things I wanted to throw in here: 1. First, It has come to my attention that some of the hardworking Conference Committee folks feel a bit "thrown under the bus" by these conversations. I wanted to say I feel lousy about this. One problem of striking while the iron is hot is that sometimes people feel burned by what transpires. This can especially be the case when those people are also feeling burned out--and who wouldn't feel burned out after 123678924 million conference submissions? I promise--and I hope anyone who has participated in these threads will do the same--not to talk here and privately, and then flake out when it's time to try and make things right. Personally, I have a bunch of ideas about how I can help, with submission guidelines, reviewer training, and maybe as part of a "critical and cultural theory" track, if we start to track. I promise to make good on my bitching and moaning by being more of a team player to make things right. I encourage others to do the same, here and now, in writing, so the Exec knows who to hunt down, after the smoke clears from these talks. 2. Re: the discussion Nicole raised about "straight" research: Because I know you follow my personal life (don't even front), I will remind that Nicole is a dear friend and a colleague whose work I admire and cite constantly. She values what I do, and I value what she does, and sometimes, we even do the same things! One more time: what I am trying to suss is not whether 'straight' or experimental/theoretical work is better stuff, but whether AoIR can hold both dear in practice. We all talk a big game about the interdisciplinary life, but if we are going back to the same old same old when the rubber meets the road, that's something people have a right to know. 3. Re: Barry's comment about doctoral candidates and quality: SHAME ON YOU for writing so dismissively about our strongest organizational component. You know how much you've influenced me as an intellectual and how I love you as a human being, but man, sometimes you miss the boat. To wit: You say, "Everyone is not Terri Senft," which appeals to my supermodel nature so thanks, but you don't get that as an intellectual I didn't start this way. It was raw, sheer luck that Andrew Herman and Tom Swiss grabbed me to contribute AS A GRAD STUDENT to a conference ( later a book) that for all intents and purposes, began this organization. You know what the conference's name was? THE WEB: MYTH, METAPHOR, MAGIC.How's that for hippy dippy? You want the next round of Terri Senfts? You need to GROW THEM. And it starts with things like conferences. I think getting some shady, half baked submissions is worth it. Others don't. I get it. Just want to know if it's time for me, and others like me, to move on--no harm, no foul. 3. I love Joseph's idea about an Announce list and a Discuss list. In the most informal poll ever among Twitter users, it seems lots of them won't discuss stuff in email format because they fear 'cluttering' the list (among other concerns.) An Announce list would keep people tangentially interested in Internet Studies up to date, and a Discuss list might better foster longer um, discussions. I think that's enough from me. Fondly--no really! T Because I know you follow my personal life (don't even front), I On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Joseph Reagle wrote: > On 05/31/2013 12:33 PM, William Bain wrote: > >> from what's been said on this thread. However, >> in my humble, the cfp's and tecnho refs are great >> but I think the listserv is at its most dynamic >> when lots of opinions are being exchanged. >> > > air-l certainly seems much more like a massive announce list than a > discussion list presently, and hence I hesitate (including now) to violate > this presumed focus. And this tends to be a self-perpetuating phenomenon. > > Perhaps it would be worthwhile to have an announce and discuss list? > > ______________________________**_________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/** > listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Dr. Theresa M. Senft Global Liberal Studies Program School of Arts & Sciences New York University 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 home: *www.terrisenft.net ** *(needs a serious updating) facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft twitter: @terrisenft _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From dtoews at yorku.ca Fri May 31 11:26:38 2013 From: dtoews at yorku.ca (David Toews) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 14:26:38 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. Message-ID: <1370024798.51a8eb5eb9a34@mymail.yorku.ca> I am an outsider looking in, I don't attend AOIR. Nor do I attend AA, but I do lurk on this listserve and I consequently I feel free to take from Terri's list of questions the problem of "Who are we?" I'm not a part of the we, so for me its more a problem of "who are you?". I'm actually very interested in the question of "who are you". From what I can see, you are an organization of communications scholars rooted in the idea that the internet represents a dramatically new media of communication who are at the same time trying to downplay this drama because you are at the same time rooted in the notion that communications as a field still needs to be more professionalized. So your choice to me seems simple: a) make it explicit that this is a communications organization with respectable professional standards, or b) re-think your objectives: are you committed to such objects 'the internet' and 'media' or are you open thinkers enough to pursue new ways of imagining the convergence of the social, cultural, and technological? I would think (b) would be alot more interesting. The world has enough 'communications' conferences and organization. Two cents worth from an outsider. -- Dr. David Toews, PhD Assistant Professor Sociology Department York University 2060 Vari Hall 4700 Keele Street Toronto, Ontario Canada M3J 1P3 Tel. 416-736-2100 ext. 60307 Fax. 416-736-5370 dtoews at yorku.ca Follow me on Twitter! http://twitter.com/dtoews From wellman at chass.utoronto.ca Fri May 31 16:31:49 2013 From: wellman at chass.utoronto.ca (Barry Wellman) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 19:31:49 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] terri misinterpreted me Message-ID: just for the record, as these things perpetuate. Barry Wellman _______________________________________________________________________ S.D. Clark Professor FRSC NetLab Director Faculty of Information (iSchool) 611 Bissell Building 140 St. George St. University of Toronto Toronto Canada M5S 3G6 http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman twitter: @barrywellman NETWORKED:The New Social Operating System. Lee Rainie & Barry Wellman MIT Press http://amzn.to/zXZg39 Print $22 Kindle $16 Old/NewCyberTimes http://bit.ly/c8N9V8 ________________________________________________________________________ From sflorini at indiana.edu Fri May 31 16:34:13 2013 From: sflorini at indiana.edu (Sarah Florini) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 18:34:13 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR Message-ID: HI, all. I just want to echo what has already been said about the conference organizers. You guys are awesome. I appreciate all your work. I'm sure everyone feels the same. I, personally, see this conversation as part of the growing pains of the organization. The change in the submission process just happened to be the thing that sparked it. But, the conversation was probably going to happen sooner or later. If such conversations didn't happen occasionally, AoiR would become calcified and cease to be the reflexive intellectual space we all seem to appreciate. But, I have nothing by love and praise for the conference organizers. There have been a lot of good ideas put forth. I think the track idea might be a useful one to think about. We're an interdisciplinary organization, and if we want to have an interdiscipinary conference we need to try and find a way to accommodate the disciplinary needs of members. That way people can "fit" AoIR into what they need to be doing for tenure, promotion, travel funds, etc. A lot of people have said that their home departments don't take AoIR conferences seriously and won't give them funding to come. Those people need a peer refereed full paper that can be published in proceedings to justify their attendance to their departments. I would hate to see AoiR conferences loose those people and their work. So, we should keep those needs in mind. But, we also need to keep in mind the points that have already been made about work in-progress, performances, activist work, etc. It seems like there could be some kind of track system for different kinds of work so that we can be more confident that those different "flavors" of contribution are being evaluated appropriate criteria. Also, ditto to what Terri said about being willing to help. As these problems get tackled, I'm always happy to help with what I can. Best, Sarah Florini A.W. Mellon Postdoctoral Fellow Department of Communication Arts University of Wisconsin-Madison From huatongs at gmail.com Fri May 31 16:35:14 2013 From: huatongs at gmail.com (Huatong Sun) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 16:35:14 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] =?windows-1252?q?Conference_review=2C_=93sampling_procedu?= =?windows-1252?q?re=2C=94_and_interdisciplinarity?= Message-ID: Dear Terri, I was Reviewer 3 for your roundtable proposal who asked about sampling procedure. Thanks for your feedback to my review, and I appreciate having this chance to engage in a discussion of exploring the interdisciplinarity of the AOIR. Maybe you don?t remember, I met you and Nicole in the CSCW workshop on digital identity in Chicago in 2004, and I enjoyed chatting with you about your book project of camgirls at that time. In this message, I'd like to clarify about some misunderstanding about my review and share my thoughts. Hopefully this side of reviewer?s story will help improve the quality of future AOIR conferences, :). A disclaimer first: I saw most of the current discussion about the AOIR review system started from this year?s paper template; however, I didn?t use that template to review your proposal, and I reread the CFP part concerning the roundtable session to make sure I understood the expectation of the conference organizers for this format before reviewing your piece (since I didn?t get particular review guidelines for roundtable proposals). And I do support work-in-progress submissions: I regularly submit this type of work for feedback myself and I organized a review of this type of submissions for a conference last year. Let?s go back to the review. A review is just a review, one person?s opinion about certain research, and I?m upset to see such a review is misinterpreted in this context of a discussion on how to make an interdisciplinary conference better. So far I only attended AOIR once (as many interdisciplinary researchers with small travel budgets on this list, I have to be highly selective on the conferences I go). While I enjoyed the fresh ideas at AOIR, I was disappointed to see some presentations only had the depth of news reporting, which I regarded as an issue of description vs. interpretation in research. Of course your proposal is much more than that, but I don?t want to deny that my past experience influenced my review. I wanted to see more of the details, as I wrote in the comment. I guess one could understand my feelings if s/he serves on a job search committee: There are always those moments of disappointment when you see a stellar job applicant looks glorious on paper articulates his/her research framework poorly in a phone interview. By all the means, I?m sorry about the misunderstanding and frustration that came from my unsophisticated use of ?sample? in review comments. I?m a qualitative researcher, and I don?t do experimental social science research at all. When I asked about ?sampling procedures? in review, I simply wanted to know how you chose your cases for cross-cultural comparison because I reviewed many cross-cultural studies that picked up their sites randomly without justification. The lesson I learned from this case is that I would be much more careful about my wording in review in the future, particularly for this type of interdisciplinary conferences. Even though I didn?t intend to, people could misinterpret the connotation that go with certain words. I apologize about this misuse. On the other end, I was wondering whether the sampling question lacked legitimacy if it had been raised by an experimental social scientist. Isn?t one part of the joys of attending this kind of interdisciplinary conferences is to have our ideas collided in different perspectives? Yes, we are looking for camaraderie in professional communities, but we also want to see our ideas inquired and challenged by people who share research interests in similar topics but employ different research methodologies. Or maybe are we just still so discipline-rooted? The conference review process is always an interesting and heated topic for discussion. I?d like to recommend Jonathan Grudin?s recent piece: ?Varieties of Conference Experiences? (The Information Society, 29: 71?77, 2013). Citing Anderson?s research, he wrote: ?A selective conference accepts perhaps 5 percent that most experts would agree are strong, dismisses about 50 percent that attract no positive reviews, and arguably conducts a lottery to select among the rest to fill the remaining slots? (p. 75). For an interdisciplinary conference like AOIR, it is not a surprise that we have arguments about those selected papers. Yes, my submission was selected this year, but the one before this was rejected. As a writing scholar, I saw the problem of the paper template, and I discussed it in length with my colleague Jim Porter as we both tried hard to fit our own papers into that template before the deadline. I hope we are able to find a better system to review papers, and this is why I wrote to share another side of the story. Terri, I feel your pain about center and marginality, as my work was considered marginal. I still remembered how I was stunned to find that I was the only one who had a different skin color from dozens of attendees in a big meeting room as I was respectfully nodding my head and earnestly taking notes of the feedback for my dissertation proposal at a graduate research network years ago. In retrospect, I?m grateful for the critical (and sometimes brutal) feedback. It has taught me how to negotiate in a milieu of diverse perspectives, learn to be open-minded, and not to be offended by the face value of the words; of course it helped me improve my project eventually. I always use that experience to remind myself to be supportive to new work. I hope this note clarifies some confusions and misunderstanding about my review. I?m looking forward to reading more exciting work from you! Best, Huatong ------------------------------------------------------------------ Huatong Sun, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Digital Media Studies Interdisciplinary Arts and Sciences University of Washington Tacoma http://faculty.washington.edu/htsun/ Book: Cross-Cultural Technology Design: Creating Culture-Sensitive Technology for Local Users http://global.oup.com/academic/product/cross-cultural-technology-design-9780199744763 From loriken at illinois.edu Fri May 31 17:56:15 2013 From: loriken at illinois.edu (Kendall, Lori) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2013 00:56:15 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <72A7C5438AAF2B4382455117C749427D2A4961E8@CITESMBX1.ad.uillinois.edu> Hey folks, I've reviewed submissions for most of the IR conferences, and have been on the Conference Committee for three years now, as program chair and as VP. In October, I'll be AoIR's incoming president, and will continue on the committee in that capacity. As such, I've been following this discussion with a great deal of interest and thought. I want to thank all of you for your thoughtful comments and ideas. I also want to say, first and foremost, that you all rock, and our conference rocks. Rest assured that the decisions on what to accept were very difficult; if we have not managed to take your submission for this conference it's not a reflection on the quality of your work. We simply had too much good work. I hope I'll see you all in Denver, because I can promise you it will be a great conference. What I mostly hear when I talk to people who attend the IR conferences is that they are better in many ways than other conferences they attend. I have also heard people say that this perception doesn't always extend to people in their departments, disciplines, etc. That's sad, and I hope we can do a better job of showing people outside of AoIR who we are and what we do. I know that desire has driven many of the things Alex and the other members of the executive committee have been trying to do over the past several years. SPIR, and the (slightly) longer submissions, is part of those efforts. I see much of the struggle here as part of the hard work of being interdisciplinary. That struggle will continue in the process of planning the conference, including the work of reviewing. There have been a lot of good suggestions that have come up in this discussion, and I'm assembling these for later reflection and discussion amongst the conference committee and the executive committee. About the only thing I'll say upfront is that we have a tradition of avoiding tracks at AoIR, and I'm not convinced we should abandon that tradition. That seems to me to be a way to move away from interdisciplinarity, back to our separate silos, rather than mixing it up, and exposing ourselves to the wide variety of types of work that appear at the IR conferences. If anything, I'll be pushing this year and the next few years to mix things up more. Thanks again for all your hard work, and I look forward to seeing you in Denver! Lori From bury417 at yahoo.ca Fri May 31 18:32:22 2013 From: bury417 at yahoo.ca (Rhiannon Bury) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 18:32:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR In-Reply-To: <72A7C5438AAF2B4382455117C749427D2A4961E8@CITESMBX1.ad.uillinois.edu> References: <72A7C5438AAF2B4382455117C749427D2A4961E8@CITESMBX1.ad.uillinois.edu> Message-ID: <1370050342.5962.YahooMailNeo@web140604.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Great response Lori. You rock! :) I totally get receiving too many great submissions and having to make hard choices.? But investing all that time writing a short paper, fiddling around with formatting etc makes that rejection even more disappointing. We expect that with a journal submission but for a conference abstract? I still firmly believe that the potential of a paper can still be assessed in 600 words. I would also never use more than 2 reviewers unless there was a complete difference of opinion. If we don't want to go with "tracks", and we want to remain interdisciplinary, then we need to work on the proposal guidelines so that they do not disadvantage submissions? based in humanities and or cultural studies that are primarily theoretical engagements. (I don't want to say theoretically-based because I would hope much empirical work would be theoretically informed). Cultural studies papers do not have "Methodology" sections. They do not have "Discussions of Findings." So some "and/or" phrasing will be needed. One suggestion would be to is add a place on the form to indicate "discipline(s)".?? Reviewers should also specify their disciplinary orientation not just their areas of interest or expertise. best Rhiannon ? ________________________________ From: "Kendall, Lori" To: "air-l at listserv.aoir.org" Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 6:56:15 PM Subject: Re: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR Hey folks, I've reviewed submissions for most of the IR conferences, and have been on the Conference Committee for three years now, as program chair and as VP. In October, I'll be AoIR's incoming president, and will continue on the committee in that capacity. As such, I've been following this discussion with a great deal of interest and thought. I want to thank all of you for your thoughtful comments and ideas. I also want to say, first and foremost, that you all rock, and our conference rocks. Rest assured that the decisions on what to accept were very difficult; if we have not managed to take your submission for this conference it's not a reflection on the quality of your work. We simply had too much good work. I hope I'll see you all in Denver, because I can promise you it will be a great conference. What I mostly hear when I talk to people who attend the IR conferences is that they are better in many ways than other conferences they attend. I have also heard people say that this perception doesn't always extend to people in their departments, disciplines, etc. That's sad, and I hope we can do a better job of showing people outside of AoIR who we are and what we do. I know that desire has driven many of the things Alex and the other members of the executive committee have been trying to do over the past several years. SPIR, and the (slightly) longer submissions, is part of those efforts. I see much of the struggle here as part of the hard work of being interdisciplinary. That struggle will continue in the process of planning the conference, including the work of reviewing. There have been a lot of good suggestions that have come up in this discussion, and I'm assembling these for later reflection and discussion amongst the conference committee and the executive committee. About the only thing I'll say upfront is that we have a tradition of avoiding tracks at AoIR, and I'm not convinced we should abandon that tradition. That seems to me to be a way to move away from interdisciplinarity, back to our separate silos, rather than mixing it up, and exposing ourselves to the wide variety of types of work that appear at the IR conferences. If anything, I'll be pushing this year and the next few years to mix things up more. Thanks again for all your hard work, and I look forward to seeing you in Denver! Lori _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From mariarosariataddeo at gmail.com Fri May 31 23:20:29 2013 From: mariarosariataddeo at gmail.com (Mariariosaria Taddeo) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2013 07:20:29 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] CFP: Workshop Ethics of Cyber Conflict Message-ID: <6D48C248-4A64-4A00-BBCF-7B7BADB33891@gmail.com> Dear Colleagues, Apologies for cross posting. Please find below a CFP on a 'Workshop on the Ethics of Cyber Conflict', which I am organising in collaboration with the NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence. With kind regards, Mariarosaria Taddeo -- Dr. Mariarosaria Taddeo Research Fellow in Cyber Security and Ethics, PAIS, University of Warwick Research Associate - Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford http://taddeo.philosophyofinformation.net/index.html ************************************* Ethics of Cyber Conflict Time: November 2013 Place: Rome, Italy Participation fee: none In the age of the so-called information revolution, the ability to control, disrupt or manipulate the enemy?s information infrastructure has become as decisive as weapon superiority with respect to determining the outcome of conflicts. So much so that Pentagon?s definition of cyberspace as a new domain in which war is waged, alongside land, sea, air and space, comes as no surprise. The deployment of cyber conflicts as part of a state?s defensive or offensive strategy is a fast growing phenomenon, which is rapidly changing the dynamics of combat as well as the role that warfare plays in political negotiations and the life of civil societies. Such changes are not the exclusive concern of the military, for they also have a bearing on ethicists and policymakers, since existing ethical theories of war, together with national and international regulations, struggle to address the novelties of this phenomenon. The issue could not be more pressing and there is a much felt and fast escalating need to share information and coordinate ethical theorising about cyber conflicts. Contributions to the workshop will address issues concerning the way ICTs are affecting our ethical views of conflicts and warfare, as well as the analysis of just-war principles in the light of the dissemination of cyber conflicts; humanitarian military interventions based on ICTs; whether preventive acts of cyber war may satisfy jus-ad-bellum criteria; challenges of upholding jus-in-bello standards in cyber warfare, especially in asymmetric conflicts; attribution and proportionality of the response to cyber attacks; moral permissibility of automated responses and ethical deployment of military robotic weapons. More details can be found on the workshop website http://ccdcoe.org/428.html . The workshop will be a two-day event organised by the NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence and chaired by Dr Mariarosaria Taddeo, Department of Politics and International Studies, University of Warwick. The event will gather ethicists, experts in military studies, policymakers and experts in cyber security to discuss the ethical problems caused by cyber conflicts. Submission of Papers: Authors are required to submit an extended abstract of the planned paper which should describe the topic and set out the main aspects and structure of the research (up to 1000 words). Following a preliminary review and acceptance of the abstract, the authors will be requested to submit the full paper that meets high academic quality, which will be considered for a publication in an international peer-reviewed journal. Speakers will be offered travel, transfer from,and to the airport, accommodation for the duration of the event. Submission details, author guidance and other practical information will be made available on the Centre?s website latest by August 2013. Important Dates Extended abstracts (1000 words): 9 September 2013 Notification of acceptance: 30 September 2013 Full paper: 07 November 2013 Registration is required for this event, please contact events -at- ccdcoe.org For enquiries about the workshop, please contact Lt Ludovica Glorioso (ludovica.glorioso -at- ccdcoe.org) or Anna-Maria Talih?rm (anna-maria.taliharm -at- ccdcoe.org) From adi_kuntsman at yahoo.com Wed May 1 01:12:36 2013 From: adi_kuntsman at yahoo.com (Adi Kuntsman) Date: Wed, 1 May 2013 01:12:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Air-L] Social media and Political Horizons: Israel/Palestine, the Middle East and Beyond Message-ID: <1367395956.72563.YahooMailNeo@web161901.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Social media and Political Horizons: Israel/Palestine, the Middle East and Beyond 14 June 2013? 1-5pm? Venue TBC Organised by: Adi Kuntsman, The University of Manchester and Rebecca L. Stein, Duke University At the core of this workshop is a rethinking of the so-called ?digital democracy? proposition ? that is, an argument about the ways that digital technologies, chiefly social media, can advance pro-democracy politics.? In the last few years, this popular proposition has come under increasing criticism from scholars who have reminded us of the flexible nature of digital technologies, including the ways they have been employed by dictators and police states as public relations platforms, tools for tracking and monitoring political dissidents, and means of counter-insurgency more generally. What has emerged in the scholarly literature is something of a dichotomy ? digital democracy posited against digital dictatorship.? The event takes a more complex approach to the politics of digital technology, through a discussion of the ways that social media can be employed on both sides of this political divide.? More specifically, the discussion will approach social media both as tools of warfare, military occupation, and authoritarian rule, and as means to subvert and resist such political regimes. Contra most of the literature on digital democracy and digital dictatorship alike, our discussion will focus on questions of everyday culture and language as they emerge where politics and social media meet. Programme 9.30 -10.00 Registration ? 10.00-12.00 Roundtable discussion Simon Faulkner, Manchester Metropolitan University Adi Kuntsman, The University of Manchester and Rebecca L. Stein, Duke U? Miriyam Aouragh, Oxford University Yasmin Ibrahim, Queen Mary Farida Vis, Sheffield University ? 12.00-1.00 Lunch ? 1.00-2.30? Public lecture Theresa Senft, NYU ?My Body Belongs to Me? On Global Spheres, Networked Nudity and Feminist Activism? ? ? Attendance is free but registration is required. Please email naveeda.raoufi at student.manchester.ac.uk ??to register Registration deadline: 1 June 2013 ? --- Dr Adi Kuntsman https://sites.google.com/site/adikuntsman/ From christian.fuchs at uti.at Wed May 1 02:19:08 2013 From: christian.fuchs at uti.at (Christian Fuchs) Date: Wed, 01 May 2013 10:19:08 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] CfP Critical Visual Theory - Deadline June 15 Message-ID: <5180DE0C.5000409@uti.at> Call for Papers for a special issue of tripleC (http://www.triple-c.at/index.php/tripleC/index): Communication, Capitalism & Critique: Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society on the general topic of Critical Visual Theory Detailed Information/CfP: http://fuchs.uti.at/wp-content/CfP_VisualCommunication.pdf Edited by Peter Ludes, Mass Communication, Jacobs University Bremen, Kathrin Fahlenbrach, Media Studies, Hamburg University, and Winfried N?th, Cognitive Semiotics, S?o Paulo Catholic University. The overall task of this special issue is to combine critical insights into current economic, technical, political, cultural, and ecological dimensions of transnational and global visual communication. The papers to be included in this issue should make use of critical theories to advance a better understanding of visual information technologies in general and of strategies of veiling financial, military, economic, religious interests in particular. A special focus will be on current forms of surveillance of public and private life. The editors invite contributions to topics such as: * Visual humanities and social sciences: concepts, methods, and theories * Visual data and semiotics: networks and analyses * Visual hegemonies: image- and profit-making * Veiling: Key Invisibles * Visual culture zones: Africa, Arab countries, China, Europe, India, Japan, Latin and North America Preliminary time schedule June 15, 2013: Abstract submission, via email to p.ludes at jacobs-university.de, kathrin.fahlenbrach at uni-hamburg.de, and noeth at uni-kassel.de . July 15, 2013: Feedback to authors about acceptance or rejection of abstract September 15, 2013: Submission of full papers to the editors via http://www.triple-c.at via the electronic submission system: http://www.triple-c.at/index.php/tripleC/about/submissions#onlineSubmissions . Guidelines for formatting and style: http://www.triple-c.at/index.php/tripleC/about/submissions#authorGuidelines http://fuchs.uti.at/wp-content/tripleC_2013.dot tripleC ? Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society is a journal that is specialising in publishing articles that focus on critical studies of media, communication and digital media in the context of the information society. It is indexed in Scopus and Communication & Mass Media Complete. From kaw522 at york.ac.uk Wed May 1 02:54:39 2013 From: kaw522 at york.ac.uk (Kim Witten) Date: Wed, 1 May 2013 10:54:39 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Air-L Digest, Vol 105, Issue 32 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4667F735-F3A6-4D33-B95C-1EF280D443F9@york.ac.uk> Articles like this make me cringe. People engaging in social activity with their friends feel less inhibited and enjoy cookies more than granola bars at that time? Why is this so surprising? To me, it goes back to that technological determinism/digital dualist argument that SNSs and the like are Doing Things To Our Brains. Danger point! Seriously though, the framing of this Wired story suggests something of the deterministic sort, even though the published article title ("?Are Close Friends the Enemy?...) and a statement by the author (1) say otherwise. Still, the Wired article title ("Does Facebook Praise Kill Self-Control?") and other statements (2,3) frame it differently. 1. "Wilcox cautions that those findings do not necessarily mean that spending time on social networks causes any of those things." 2. "the ?likes? prompted by your status updates and photo posts might also have a negative impact, especially on your waistline and pocketbook." ("likes" being the cause here, not the content of the update, the social engagement or the people participating in it.) 3. "those people who reported higher self-esteem and lower self control *from* browsing Facebook happen to have a higher body mass index and more credit card debt." (emphasis mine) Also, people are fat, have debt, read CNN, or like/dislike granola bars for various reasons. The latter two are not good controls. Thoughts? -Kim > ----------------- > > Message: 5 > Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 09:16:19 -0400 > From: nativebuddha > To: Deanya Lattimore > Cc: "air-l-aoir.org at listserv.aoir.org" > > Subject: Re: [Air-L] Facebook, cookies and self-control? > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > that was my impression as well. > > -robert > > > On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Deanya Lattimore > wrote: > >> Here'e the study itself, downloadable - >> http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2155864 >> >> It's hard to say anything about a study that doesn't say anything. >> The researchers do everything that researchers do these days who want >> their studies to become public and picked up by the media; in this way, the >> media draws its own conclusions that the researchers themselves are too >> cautious to draw. >> >> I think this one deserves to be put up for an Ig Nobel. >> :-) >> Deanya >> >> >> On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 9:20 PM, nativebuddha wrote: >> >>> Wondered what others thought about the validity of these findings: >>> >>> http://www.wired.com/business/2013/01/self-control-and-facebook/ >>> >>> -Robert >>> _______________________________________________ >>> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >>> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >>> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >>> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >>> >>> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >>> http://www.aoir.org/ From wellman at chass.utoronto.ca Wed May 1 17:10:11 2013 From: wellman at chass.utoronto.ca (Barry Wellman) Date: Wed, 1 May 2013 20:10:11 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] never, ever Message-ID: colleagues, judge research by the media account read the original article and make a judgement. over and out ps; funny example - a close friend heard on TV today that everyone should buy Chrome laptops. really over and out Barry Wellman _______________________________________________________________________ S.D. Clark Professor FRSC NetLab Director Faculty of Information (iSchool) 611 Bissell Building 140 St. George St. University of Toronto Toronto Canada M5S 3G6 http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman twitter: @barrywellman NETWORKED:The New Social Operating System. Lee Rainie & Barry Wellman MIT Press http://amzn.to/zXZg39 Print $22 Kindle $16 Old/NewCyberTimes http://bit.ly/c8N9V8 ________________________________________________________________________ From demy.mail at gmail.com Thu May 2 05:06:54 2013 From: demy.mail at gmail.com (dem) Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 14:06:54 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] Summer schools in quantitative Internet research? Message-ID: Dear AOIRists, I am looking to apply to a summer research program for 2013 in Internet research, my background is in media studies (I have graduated with an MA in New Media in 2012) and Computer Science (currently studying towards a Bsc) and my main research interests are: online social networks, studying online politics with online data, network science, machine learning, data mining and data analysis. If you know of any summer schools (or research projects/groups at universities) that are currently accepting applications in these areas, then please let me know! Thank you! Best, Demet Dagdelen From ik at mgovernment.org Thu May 2 05:18:47 2013 From: ik at mgovernment.org (Prof. I. Kushchu) Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 13:18:47 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] PhD / Research programs - linguistics and social media Message-ID: <81F82700-1D56-45EC-97B3-0E3BAFA5164E@mgovernment.org> Dear Colleagues A bright student, (a linguist by training and currently completing a Masters thesis about socio-linguistics approaches to the use of language on Facebook), asked me for research and PhD programs for further studies -Not very much related to my expertise, unfortunately. Any suggestions for such programs in the intersection of linguistics and social media? Bests wishes Kushchu ------- IBRAHIM KUSHCHU, MBA, MSC., PHD Associate Professor and Founding Director, Mobile Government Consortium International, UK http://www.mgovernment.org ik at mgovernment.org +44 1273 777853 - Visit mLife Conferences http://www.m4life.org From j.unger at lancaster.ac.uk Thu May 2 05:32:46 2013 From: j.unger at lancaster.ac.uk (Unger, Johann) Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 12:32:46 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] PhD / Research programs - linguistics and social media In-Reply-To: <81F82700-1D56-45EC-97B3-0E3BAFA5164E@mgovernment.org> References: <81F82700-1D56-45EC-97B3-0E3BAFA5164E@mgovernment.org> Message-ID: <14D4EABD43B0994BB954328FDA1F50F701F8BD2C@EX-0-MB1.lancs.local> Dear Kushchu, Language at Internet is an open access journal that regularly has good articles that take a sociolinguistic approach to Facebook data (though last year their output seems to have dipped a bit). At Lancaster we have several staff researching in the area of language and digital media (David Barton, Julia Gillen, Karin Tusting, Mark Sebba, myself) and also a number of PhD students already looking at facebook and other social networks - and we have a new MA in Digital Literacies, which means there are also research training opportunities for PhD students working in this area. Further information is available here: http://www.ling.lancs.ac.uk/study/phd/ Best, Johnny. Dr J W Unger Lecturer and Academic Director of Summer Programmes Department of Linguistics and English Language Lancaster University LA1 4YL e-mail: j.unger at lancaster.ac.uk tel: +44 1524 592591 Follow me on Twitter @johnnyunger On 2 May 2013, at 13:18, "Prof. I. Kushchu" > wrote: Dear Colleagues A bright student, (a linguist by training and currently completing a Masters thesis about socio-linguistics approaches to the use of language on Facebook), asked me for research and PhD programs for further studies -Not very much related to my expertise, unfortunately. Any suggestions for such programs in the intersection of linguistics and social media? Bests wishes Kushchu ------- IBRAHIM KUSHCHU, MBA, MSC., PHD Associate Professor and Founding Director, Mobile Government Consortium International, UK http://www.mgovernment.org ik at mgovernment.org +44 1273 777853 - Visit mLife Conferences http://www.m4life.org _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From imgershon at gmail.com Thu May 2 06:50:01 2013 From: imgershon at gmail.com (Ilana Gershon) Date: Thu, 02 May 2013 09:50:01 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] PhD / Research programs - linguistics and social media In-Reply-To: <81F82700-1D56-45EC-97B3-0E3BAFA5164E@mgovernment.org> References: <81F82700-1D56-45EC-97B3-0E3BAFA5164E@mgovernment.org> Message-ID: <51826F09.7000300@gmail.com> Dear Kushchu, Indiana University would also be a good place to study this -- either in the linguistics department or in the Dept. of Communication and Culture. Regards, Ilana Ilana Gershon Dept. of Communication and Culture Indiana University On 5/2/2013 8:18 AM, Prof. I. Kushchu wrote: > Dear Colleagues > > A bright student, (a linguist by training and currently completing a Masters thesis about socio-linguistics approaches to the use of language on Facebook), asked me for research and PhD programs for further studies -Not very much related to my expertise, unfortunately. > > Any suggestions for such programs in the intersection of linguistics and social media? > > Bests wishes > Kushchu > > ------- > IBRAHIM KUSHCHU, MBA, MSC., PHD > Associate Professor and Founding Director, > Mobile Government Consortium International, UK > http://www.mgovernment.org > ik at mgovernment.org > +44 1273 777853 > > - Visit mLife Conferences http://www.m4life.org > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > . > From matti.nelimarkka at hiit.fi Thu May 2 07:10:36 2013 From: matti.nelimarkka at hiit.fi (Matti Nelimarkka) Date: Thu, 02 May 2013 17:10:36 +0300 Subject: [Air-L] Workshop on Backchannels and Live participation tools @ ECSCW 2013 Message-ID: Call for Participation: Workshop on Backchannels and Live participation tools, including: * Examples and demos of prototypes, experiments and system descriptions of and for backchanneling and other forms of audience participation * Research methods for analysis * Case studies and empirical findings * Exploration of new ideas Part of ECSCW 2013 (Sep 21st - Sep 25th @ Paphos, Cyprus) Workshop date: Sep 21st Submission deadline: June 28th Teaser: Backhannels and live participation tools are used e.g. in education, conferences and TV shows to increase the interactivity and participation of learners, participants and viewers. Research-wise the domain is scattered across different fields, such as HCI, CSCW and education. This workshop aims to draw together researchers, developers and practitioners in this area to consider (1) how to conduct high quality research and (2) how to make research with impact on the larger society. More details: http://lead.aalto.fi/activities/ecscw-2013-workshop/ From mail at ratcliffe.ca Thu May 2 07:40:45 2013 From: mail at ratcliffe.ca (Tony Ratcliffe) Date: Thu, 02 May 2013 08:40:45 -0600 Subject: [Air-L] New MSc in Learning Innovation by distance learning In-Reply-To: <14D4EABD43B0994BB954328FDA1F50F701F8BD2C@EX-0-MB1.lancs.local> Message-ID: Hello everyone, We have a new MSc in Learning Innovation starting October at the Institute of Learning, University of Leicester. It will be delivered through distance learning. Professor Gr?inne Conole is director of the Institute. You can contact my supervisor, Dr Palitha Edirisingha, to discuss the offering. His contact information is shown on the page: http://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/education/distance-learning/mscli/course-de tails Of course, I am always prepared to talk about my distance experiences! Tony A.E. (Tony) Ratcliffe PhD Research Student University of Leicester (residing in Canada) http://linkedin/in/tonyratcliffe From gurstein at gmail.com Thu May 2 08:54:40 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 08:54:40 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] [JoCI] New Special Issue: Community Informatics and Co-Creation of Innovation In-Reply-To: <02eb01ce474c$7caa5f70$75ff1e50$@gmail.com> References: <20130502153552.AE192101EBA@php5.vcn.bc.ca> <02eb01ce474c$7caa5f70$75ff1e50$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <02f301ce474d$63e7c2b0$2bb74810$@gmail.com> The Journal of Community Informatics has just published its latest issue at http://www.ci-journal.net/index.php/ciej. We invite you to review the Table of Contents here and then visit our web site to review articles and items of interest. Thanks for the continuing interest in our work, Michael Gurstein Editor in Chief: Journal of Community Informatics, Vancouver CANADA Phone 604-602-0624 gurstein at gmail.com The Journal of Community Informatics Vol 9, No 3 (2013): Special Issue: CI and the Co-Creation of Innovation Table of Contents http://www.ci-journal.net/index.php/ciej/issue/view/47 Editorial Introduction HTML Susana Finquelievich, Mariana Salgado Community Innovation and Community Informatics HTML Michael Gurstein Articles The Emergence and Development of a Regional Living Lab: The Case of San Luis, Argentina HTML Susana Finquelievich The ecology of linking technologies: toward a non-instrumental look at new technological repertoires HTML Roc?o G?mez Facilitating community innovation: The Outils-R?seaux Way HTML Lorna Heaton, Florence Millerand, Serge Proulx Are the Users Driving, and How Open is Open? Experiences from Living Lab and User Driven Innovation projects HTML Kari-Hans Kommonen, Andrea Botero Communities, Crowds and Focal Sites: Fine-Tuning the Theoretical Grounding of Collaboration Online HTML Azi Lev-On The Emergence of Converging Communities via Twitter HTML Cecilia Loureiro-Koechlin, Tim Butcher Collaborative Knowledge Creation in Development Networks: Lessons Learned from a Transnational Programme HTML Fabio Nascimbeni RLABS: A SOUTH AFRICAN PERSPECTIVE ON A COMMUNITY-DRIVEN APPROACH TO COMMUNITY INFORMATICS HTML Marlon Parker, Julia Wills, Gary Brian Wills Museums as Living Labs Challenge, Fad or Opportunity? HTML Mariana Salgado Reviews Digital Habitats ? stewarding technology for communities HTML Joanna Saad Sulonen Case Studies Appropriation of ICTs by informal communities in metropolitan cities. The case of the ?La Salada? market in the Latin American context HTML Ester Schiavo, Sergio Rodr?guez, Paula Vera From bury417 at yahoo.ca Thu May 2 09:38:56 2013 From: bury417 at yahoo.ca (Rhiannon Bury) Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 09:38:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Air-L] ethics and listservs Message-ID: <1367512736.98490.YahooMailNeo@web140603.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Hi everyone There has been a? development on an internal Faculty Association listserv at my university that I thought those of you interested in research ethics may wish to advise or comment on. First a little background. The provincial government hasdpromised to increase funding by 2% to postsecondary educaton sector last year. They reneged on that promise and slashed the budget by 7%. Our university Administration responded almost instantly by using a "financial stringency" clause in our collective agreement, giving lay off notices to about 25 academic and professional staff, included tenured faculty. We are a small university and so we have a faculty association listserv set up specifically for discussion of university issues. Tensions as you can imagine are running high and the listserv is very active. Like at most universities, there is tension between the Faculty of Business and the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences. Yesterday one member sent around an spreadsheet with what he described as "research" on how representative the discussion list was of the total membership. It included a list of the names of those who had contributed and ranked them in terms of the number of posts. He never stated his reasons for conducting such "research", although he did say that it is was an "internal document" for membership. Reaction was swift and explosive. Some people were outraged, claiming he had misused the list and their information. The list shows that majority of frequent posters were from one Faculty, leading some to state that this member, from the other faculty,? was really trying to demonstrate that their opinions, almost all critical of the university administration, were overrepresented. Others expressed fear that this information could be forwarded on to the Administration (the member is apparently tight with the Acting VPA) and then used to shape the next round of lay offs (ie get rid of the "trouble makers.") Still others thought there was nothing wrong with sharing such "data", some suggesting that it could be useful information to encourage more diverse opinion. My feeling that it is completely unethical though because it is not formal research, it probably falls outside the purview of the Research Ethics Board. Still it does name names--had he just presented aggregated data grouped by Faculty, I don't think anyone would have said much of anything.? It would be like me collecting data on everyone's posts here and then presenting my findings with your names here out of the blue Interested in your thoughts. Rhiannon Rhiannon Bury Associate Professor Women's and Gender Studies Athabasca University rbury at athabascau.ca @television2pt0 From listserv.aoir.org at elkears.com Thu May 2 11:59:37 2013 From: listserv.aoir.org at elkears.com (Joshua Treadway) Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 14:59:37 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] ethics and listservs In-Reply-To: <1367512736.98490.YahooMailNeo@web140603.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> References: <1367512736.98490.YahooMailNeo@web140603.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I don't see the problem with it. It is a compilation of data you all had access to and he released that data back to the same group. If he didn't release the names, it would be of no difficulty to figure out the outliers as, again, you all have access to the same source data. If all of you were in sitting in a circle, taking turns talking. And this 'researcher' took notes and said that 'Prof. Smith' is over representing his argument and I have the statistics, would that be objectionable? Again, it wasn't privileged information and from your information it wasn't released to outside sources. All it did was add clarity to the arguments represented (and pseudonyms in this case would offer no real protection, only weaken data). I think is situation sheds light on a problem with Computer-Mediated-Communications, there is often a false sense of distance between the speakers and the computer acts as shield when that simply is not the case. On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 12:38 PM, Rhiannon Bury wrote: > Hi everyone > > There has been a development on an internal Faculty Association listserv > at my university that I thought those of you interested in research ethics > may wish to advise or comment on. > > > First a little background. The provincial government hasdpromised to > increase funding by 2% to postsecondary educaton sector last year. They > reneged on that promise and slashed the budget by 7%. Our university > Administration responded almost instantly by using a "financial stringency" > clause in our collective agreement, giving lay off notices to about 25 > academic and professional staff, included tenured faculty. We are a small > university and so we have a faculty association listserv set up > specifically for discussion of university issues. Tensions as you can > imagine are running high and the listserv is very active. Like at most > universities, there is tension between the Faculty of Business and the > Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences. > > > Yesterday one member sent around an spreadsheet with what he described as > "research" on how representative the discussion list was of the total > membership. It included a list of the names of those who had contributed > and ranked them in terms of the number of posts. He never stated his > reasons for conducting such "research", although he did say that it is was > an "internal document" for membership. Reaction was swift and explosive. > Some people were outraged, claiming he had misused the list and their > information. The list shows that majority of frequent posters were from one > Faculty, leading some to state that this member, from the other faculty, > was really trying to demonstrate that their opinions, almost all critical > of the university administration, were overrepresented. Others expressed > fear that this information could be forwarded on to the Administration (the > member is apparently tight with the Acting VPA) and then used to shape the > next round of > lay offs (ie get rid of the "trouble makers.") Still others thought there > was nothing wrong with sharing such "data", some suggesting that it could > be useful information to encourage more diverse opinion. > > My feeling that it is completely unethical though because it is not formal > research, it probably falls outside the purview of the Research Ethics > Board. Still it does name names--had he just presented aggregated data > grouped by Faculty, I don't think anyone would have said much of anything. > It would be like me collecting data on everyone's posts here and then > presenting my findings with your names here out of the blue > > > Interested in your thoughts. > > > Rhiannon > > > Rhiannon Bury > Associate Professor > Women's and Gender Studies > Athabasca University > rbury at athabascau.ca > > @television2pt0 > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > From charles.ess at gmail.com Thu May 2 12:51:12 2013 From: charles.ess at gmail.com (Charles Ess) Date: Thu, 02 May 2013 21:51:12 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] ethics and listservs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: This response makes a technical sense - especially if there were no clear terms of service / ethical requirements, etc. that needed to be agreed to before an account was given. But if there were such a ToS, then it might contain provisions that would apply one way or another? Moreover, the AoIR guidelines (in both 2002 and 2012) point to the importance of researchers taking into consideration the _sensitivity_ of information and whether or not release of sensitive information would possibly / likely result in harm. In general, the greater likelihood of harm, the more the burden lies on the researcher to ensure protection of anonymity, etc. What's interesting to me, after more than a decade of reading various ethical sections in diverse research reports, dissertations, etc. are the number of times researchers will in fact "go the extra mile" (a good Samaritan ethics) to do what they believe / feel / think to be the right thing - protecting their subjects from disclosure of potentially damaging information - even where extant policies and practices make no such requirement. FWIW: based on that reading and affiliated discussions with scores of researchers from a variety of cultures and traditions - I think it fair to say most of them would _not_ do something like this as so very likely to result in serious damage to those named, etc. A more minimalist approach - intended as a descriptive, not normative statement - might go along the lines suggested here; but again, there might be one or more statements in a ToS that would shed important light on that. But finally, it seems clear that this is not "research" in the sense we are usually interested in and that would thus fall under the guidelines and suggestions of the relevant research communities. Rather, it seems clearly politically motivated and designed to serve as a form of intimidation, which in my tiny little mind disqualifies it as research in the sense I'm interested in and that the research communities we have worked with are concerned with. Whether or not the collector of the data has a right to disseminate this sort of data - e.g., in the name of freedom of speech - is another complication. Hope these are useful reflections in some way or another. - charles Associate Professor in Media Studies Department of Media and Communication Director, Centre for Research on Media Innovations University of Oslo P.O. Box 1093 Blindern NO-0317 Oslo Norway email: charles.ess at media.uio.no On 02.05.13 20:59, "Joshua Treadway" wrote: > I don't see the problem with it. It is a compilation of data you all had > access to and he released that data back to the same group. If he didn't > release the names, it would be of no difficulty to figure out the outliers > as, again, you all have access to the same source data. > > If all of you were in sitting in a circle, taking turns talking. And this > 'researcher' took notes and said that 'Prof. Smith' is over representing > his argument and I have the statistics, would that be objectionable? > > Again, it wasn't privileged information and from your information it wasn't > released to outside sources. All it did was add clarity to the arguments > represented (and pseudonyms in this case would offer no real protection, > only weaken data). > > I think is situation sheds light on a problem with > Computer-Mediated-Communications, there is often a false sense of distance > between the speakers and the computer acts as shield when that simply is > not the case. > > > On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 12:38 PM, Rhiannon Bury wrote: > >> Hi everyone >> >> There has been a development on an internal Faculty Association listserv >> at my university that I thought those of you interested in research ethics >> may wish to advise or comment on. >> >> >> First a little background. The provincial government hasdpromised to >> increase funding by 2% to postsecondary educaton sector last year. They >> reneged on that promise and slashed the budget by 7%. Our university >> Administration responded almost instantly by using a "financial stringency" >> clause in our collective agreement, giving lay off notices to about 25 >> academic and professional staff, included tenured faculty. We are a small >> university and so we have a faculty association listserv set up >> specifically for discussion of university issues. Tensions as you can >> imagine are running high and the listserv is very active. Like at most >> universities, there is tension between the Faculty of Business and the >> Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences. >> >> >> Yesterday one member sent around an spreadsheet with what he described as >> "research" on how representative the discussion list was of the total >> membership. It included a list of the names of those who had contributed >> and ranked them in terms of the number of posts. He never stated his >> reasons for conducting such "research", although he did say that it is was >> an "internal document" for membership. Reaction was swift and explosive. >> Some people were outraged, claiming he had misused the list and their >> information. The list shows that majority of frequent posters were from one >> Faculty, leading some to state that this member, from the other faculty, >> was really trying to demonstrate that their opinions, almost all critical >> of the university administration, were overrepresented. Others expressed >> fear that this information could be forwarded on to the Administration (the >> member is apparently tight with the Acting VPA) and then used to shape the >> next round of >> lay offs (ie get rid of the "trouble makers.") Still others thought there >> was nothing wrong with sharing such "data", some suggesting that it could >> be useful information to encourage more diverse opinion. >> >> My feeling that it is completely unethical though because it is not formal >> research, it probably falls outside the purview of the Research Ethics >> Board. Still it does name names--had he just presented aggregated data >> grouped by Faculty, I don't think anyone would have said much of anything. >> It would be like me collecting data on everyone's posts here and then >> presenting my findings with your names here out of the blue >> >> >> Interested in your thoughts. >> >> >> Rhiannon >> >> >> Rhiannon Bury >> Associate Professor >> Women's and Gender Studies >> Athabasca University >> rbury at athabascau.ca >> >> @television2pt0 >> _______________________________________________ >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> http://www.aoir.org/ >> > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ From wallace at autistici.org Thu May 2 13:12:57 2013 From: wallace at autistici.org (wallace) Date: Thu, 02 May 2013 22:12:57 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] Fantomton release [FT006] Radarstation 2 Message-ID: <5182C8C9.2050803@autistici.org> Out now!!: the new Fantomton release [FT006] Radarstation 2 Download here for free: http://fantomton.de/ft006-radarstation-2/ The abandoned listening station on the Teufelsberg Berlin has a magical atmosphere. The industrial area with its rusty metal surfaces, broken glass and the unique acoustic in the domes provide a rich repertoire of fascinating sounds which reflect the area?s ambience. We could not resist the attraction of the place and visited it in 2009, equipped with microphones and recording devices. Subsequently the recordings were given to some musicians in order to get different interpretations of the sound material. The goal was to translate the impressions of the place into music. Recently more artists decided to work with our sound material to produce new tracks for this second Radarstation album, thus creating more versatile perspectives of that soundscape. From mumageed at yahoo.com Thu May 2 15:59:58 2013 From: mumageed at yahoo.com (Muhammad Abdul-Mageed) Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 15:59:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Air-L] PhD / Research programs - linguistics and social media In-Reply-To: <51826F09.7000300@gmail.com> References: <81F82700-1D56-45EC-97B3-0E3BAFA5164E@mgovernment.org> <51826F09.7000300@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1367535598.80398.YahooMailNeo@web140702.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Dear Kushchu, Like Ilana, I also recommend our very own Indiana University, Bloomington. Prof. Susan Herring, the former editor of JCMC and the current editor of Language at Internet, is based in IU's School of Library and Information Science (soon to become the Department of Information and Library Science as we merge with the School of Informatics and Computing) and also the Department of Linguistics. We also have a host of?scholars working within the area of social informatics, etc. IU also has the Rob Kling Center for Social Informatics. We have courses on Computer-Mediated Communication, Computer-Mediated Discourse Analysis, Gender and Computerization, Social Media Mining, and Content Analysis for the World Wide Web. You could checkProf. Herring's as well as my own Webpages (especially the research and teaching sections of each) for more about these courses. I also recommend checking other courses we have. In linguistics, we also have faculty interested in overlapping areas.? Please feel free to email me off the list at "mabdulma at indiana.edu" should you need further related information. Good luck with your search! Cheers, Muhammad --? Muhammad Abdul-Mageed,? Adjunct Lecturer and Ph.D. Candidate, School of Library and Information Science & Department of Linguistics Indiana University, Bloomington Mailing Address: School of Library and Information Science? 10th St. and Jordan Ave.? Indiana University? Bloomington, IN 47405-3907 USA mabdulma at indiana.edu,?mageed at ccls.columbia.edu http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~mabdulma "You can't lead the people, if you don't love the people.? You can't save the people, if you don't serve the people."?~ Cornel West ________________________________ From: Ilana Gershon To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2013 9:50:01 AM Subject: Re: [Air-L] PhD / Research programs - linguistics and social media Dear Kushchu, Indiana University would also be a good place to study this -- either in the linguistics department or in the Dept. of Communication and Culture. Regards, Ilana Ilana Gershon Dept. of Communication and Culture Indiana University On 5/2/2013 8:18 AM, Prof. I. Kushchu wrote: > Dear Colleagues > > A bright student, (a linguist by training and currently completing a Masters thesis about socio-linguistics approaches to the use of language on Facebook),? asked me for research and PhD programs for further studies -Not very much related to my expertise, unfortunately. > > Any suggestions for such programs in the intersection of linguistics and social media? > > Bests wishes > Kushchu > > ------- > IBRAHIM KUSHCHU, MBA, MSC., PHD > Associate Professor and Founding Director, > Mobile Government Consortium International, UK > http://www.mgovernment.org > ik at mgovernment.org >? +44 1273 777853 > > - Visit mLife Conferences http://www.m4life.org > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > . > _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From bury417 at yahoo.ca Thu May 2 19:44:06 2013 From: bury417 at yahoo.ca (Rhiannon Bury) Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 19:44:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Air-L] ethics and listservs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1367549046.42439.YahooMailNeo@web140602.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Thanks to both of you for your thoughts. This does help clarify in my mind thatsharing of the so-called "data" was a political and ideological strategy done under theguise of "objective research." The Faculty union who administers the listserv stated later today that they will be discussing a moderation policy at the next Executive meeting. They recognize freedom of speech and open debate need to be balanced with the? desire for an inclusive community and safe space and that such a balance? is a difficult one to strike. Rhiannon ________________________________ From: Charles Ess To: Joshua Treadway ; Rhiannon Bury ; Air list Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2013 1:51:12 PM Subject: Re: [Air-L] ethics and listservs This response makes a technical sense - especially if there were no clear terms of service / ethical requirements, etc. that needed to be agreed to before an account was given. But if there were such a ToS, then it might contain provisions that would apply one way or another? Moreover, the AoIR guidelines (in both 2002 and 2012) point to the importance of researchers taking into consideration the _sensitivity_ of information and whether or not release of sensitive information would possibly / likely result in harm.? In general, the greater likelihood of harm, the more the burden lies on the researcher to ensure protection of anonymity, etc. What's interesting to me, after more than a decade of reading various ethical sections in diverse research reports, dissertations, etc. are the number of times researchers will in fact "go the extra mile" (a good Samaritan ethics) to do what they believe / feel / think to be the right thing - protecting their subjects from disclosure of potentially damaging information - even where extant policies and practices make no such requirement.? FWIW: based on that reading and affiliated discussions with scores of researchers from a variety of cultures and traditions - I think it fair to say most of them would _not_ do something like this as so very likely to result in serious damage to those named, etc. A more minimalist approach - intended as a descriptive, not normative statement - might go along the lines suggested here; but again, there might be one or more statements in a ToS that would shed important light on that. But finally, it seems clear that this is not "research" in the sense we are usually interested in and that would thus fall under the guidelines and suggestions of the relevant research communities.? Rather, it seems clearly politically motivated and designed to serve as a form of intimidation, which in my tiny little mind disqualifies it as research in the sense I'm interested in and that the research communities we have worked with are concerned with. Whether or not the collector of the data has a right to disseminate this sort of data - e.g., in the name of freedom of speech - is another complication. Hope these are useful reflections in some way or another. - charles Associate Professor in Media Studies Department of Media and Communication Director, Centre for Research on Media Innovations University of Oslo P.O. Box 1093 Blindern NO-0317 Oslo Norway email: charles.ess at media.uio.no On 02.05.13 20:59, "Joshua Treadway" wrote: > I don't see the problem with it. It is a compilation of data you all had > access to and he released that data back to the same group. If he didn't > release the names, it would be of no difficulty to figure out the outliers > as, again, you all have access to the same source data. > > If all of you were in sitting in a circle, taking turns talking. And this > 'researcher' took notes and said that 'Prof. Smith' is over representing > his argument and I have the statistics, would that be objectionable? > > Again, it wasn't privileged information and from your information it wasn't > released to outside sources. All it did was add clarity to the arguments > represented (and pseudonyms in this case would offer no real protection, > only weaken data). > > I think is situation sheds light on a problem with > Computer-Mediated-Communications, there is often a false sense of distance > between the speakers and the computer acts as shield when that simply is > not the case. > > > On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 12:38 PM, Rhiannon Bury wrote: > >> Hi everyone >> >> There has been a? development on an internal Faculty Association listserv >> at my university that I thought those of you interested in research ethics >> may wish to advise or comment on. >> >> >> First a little background. The provincial government hasdpromised to >> increase funding by 2% to postsecondary educaton sector last year. They >> reneged on that promise and slashed the budget by 7%. Our university >> Administration responded almost instantly by using a "financial stringency" >> clause in our collective agreement, giving lay off notices to about 25 >> academic and professional staff, included tenured faculty. We are a small >> university and so we have a faculty association listserv set up >> specifically for discussion of university issues. Tensions as you can >> imagine are running high and the listserv is very active. Like at most >> universities, there is tension between the Faculty of Business and the >> Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences. >> >> >> Yesterday one member sent around an spreadsheet with what he described as >> "research" on how representative the discussion list was of the total >> membership. It included a list of the names of those who had contributed >> and ranked them in terms of the number of posts. He never stated his >> reasons for conducting such "research", although he did say that it is was >> an "internal document" for membership. Reaction was swift and explosive. >> Some people were outraged, claiming he had misused the list and their >> information. The list shows that majority of frequent posters were from one >> Faculty, leading some to state that this member, from the other faculty, >> was really trying to demonstrate that their opinions, almost all critical >> of the university administration, were overrepresented. Others expressed >> fear that this information could be forwarded on to the Administration (the >> member is apparently tight with the Acting VPA) and then used to shape the >> next round of >>? lay offs (ie get rid of the "trouble makers.") Still others thought there >> was nothing wrong with sharing such "data", some suggesting that it could >> be useful information to encourage more diverse opinion. >> >> My feeling that it is completely unethical though because it is not formal >> research, it probably falls outside the purview of the Research Ethics >> Board. Still it does name names--had he just presented aggregated data >> grouped by Faculty, I don't think anyone would have said much of anything. >> It would be like me collecting data on everyone's posts here and then >> presenting my findings with your names here out of the blue >> >> >> Interested in your thoughts. >> >> >> Rhiannon >> >> >> Rhiannon Bury >> Associate Professor >> Women's and Gender Studies >> Athabasca University >> rbury at athabascau.ca >> >> @television2pt0 >> _______________________________________________ >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> http://www.aoir.org/ >> > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ From ekoltsova at hse.ru Thu May 2 23:50:03 2013 From: ekoltsova at hse.ru (=?koi8-r?B?68/M2MPP18Eg5czFzsEg4NLYxdfOwQ==?=) Date: Fri, 3 May 2013 06:50:03 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] HA: Summer schools in quantitative Internet research? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Demet, try this one: http://sna.hse.ru/2013 International Summer School 2013 "Social Network Analysis: Internet Research". Best, Olessia Koltsova ________________________________________ ??: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] ?? ????? dem [demy.mail at gmail.com] ??????????: 2 ??? 2013 ?. 16:06 ????: air-l at listserv.aoir.org ????: [Air-L] Summer schools in quantitative Internet research? Dear AOIRists, I am looking to apply to a summer research program for 2013 in Internet research, my background is in media studies (I have graduated with an MA in New Media in 2012) and Computer Science (currently studying towards a Bsc) and my main research interests are: online social networks, studying online politics with online data, network science, machine learning, data mining and data analysis. If you know of any summer schools (or research projects/groups at universities) that are currently accepting applications in these areas, then please let me know! Thank you! Best, Demet Dagdelen _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From kdancheva at gmail.com Fri May 3 00:19:34 2013 From: kdancheva at gmail.com (Kalina Dancheva) Date: Fri, 3 May 2013 09:19:34 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] Summer schools in quantitative Internet research? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Demet, >From experience, I can recommend the Digital Methods Initiative in Amsterdam University : https://wiki.digitalmethods.net/Dmi/SummerSchool2013 . It's a great opportunity for exploring online phenomena with specially developed research tools. You can check the blogposts on the site from previous years in order to get an idea about the kind of research that has been done. Lots of success, Kalina 2013/5/2 dem > Dear AOIRists, > > I am looking to apply to a summer research program for 2013 in Internet > research, my background is in media studies (I have graduated with an MA in > New Media in 2012) and Computer Science (currently studying towards a Bsc) > and my main research interests are: online social networks, studying online > politics with online data, network science, machine learning, data mining > and data analysis. > > If you know of any summer schools (or research projects/groups at > universities) that are currently accepting applications in these areas, > then please let me know! > > Thank you! > > Best, > Demet Dagdelen > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Kalina Dancheva | MA student in New media and Digital Culture at Utrecht University *[E]* kdancheva at gmail.com *[F]* facebook.com/kalina.dan *[T]* @kalinadan *[L]* linkedin.com/in/kalinadancheva From sian.bayne at ed.ac.uk Fri May 3 01:54:20 2013 From: sian.bayne at ed.ac.uk (Sian Bayne) Date: Fri, 03 May 2013 09:54:20 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Two post-doctoral Fellowships in Digital Humanities at Edinburgh University Message-ID: <51837B3C.20608@ed.ac.uk> Applications are invited for two postdoctoral fellowships in digital humanities to be held at the Institute for Advanced Studies in the Humanities, The University of Edinburgh from 1 September 2013 to 30 April 2014. The fellowships are being funded by the College of Humanities and Social Science and are to be focused on any aspect of Digital Humanities research. Applicants should be scholars at an early stage of their career who have completed their doctorate within the last three years. A bursary of ?10k will be offered to each Fellow and office accommodation will be provided within the Institute. The fellows will be expected to make contact with others in the College working in this area, and to arrange at least one seminar or workshop during the fellowship. They will also contribute to the planning and organisation of a digital humanities conference for the College in Spring 2014. We warmly welcome applications from both within and beyond the University of Edinburgh. Closing date for applications is 3 June 2013. http://www.iash.ed.ac.uk/dighums.html -- Dr Sian Bayne Associate Dean (digital scholarship) College of Humanities and Social Science The University of Edinburgh sian.bayne at ed.ac.uk +44 (0)131 651 6337 The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336. From maxigas at anargeek.net Fri May 3 10:07:04 2013 From: maxigas at anargeek.net (maxigas) Date: Fri, 03 May 2013 19:07:04 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [Air-L] ethics and listservs In-Reply-To: <1367512736.98490.YahooMailNeo@web140603.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> References: <1367512736.98490.YahooMailNeo@web140603.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20130503.190704.694912677201902281.maxigas@anargeek.net> From: Rhiannon Bury Subject: [Air-L] ethics and listservs Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 09:38:56 -0700 (PDT) > My feeling that it is completely unethical though because it is not > formal research, it probably falls outside the purview of the > Research Ethics Board. Still it does name names--had he just > presented aggregated data grouped by Faculty, I don't think anyone > would have said much of anything.? It would be like me collecting > data on everyone's posts here and then presenting my findings with > your names here out of the blue integrity of data was not harmed, no data breach happened -- before and after the event the same people can access the same data. if the person released findings outside the mailing list, that could be problematic. but just to show what can be done with the data that all members have access to is a good thing. it's also something that can be called research, although not professional. if some people find the results surprising, it could have a positive educational effect. if you don't like that the data you produce can be digested in this way, you should refine your data handling / security / etc. policies, not shoot the messenger! ps: maybe you are trying to use 'ethics' here just to disqualify the arguments of another person in a debate? (just a hunch.) maxigas, kiberpunk When people say ?society? i usually ask myself who the fuck is this society. ~ Angelo Lucia -- * * |metatron * * |research * * |unit FA00 8129 13E9 2617 C614 0901 7879 63BC 287E D166 From christian.fuchs at uti.at Fri May 3 10:11:51 2013 From: christian.fuchs at uti.at (Christian Fuchs) Date: Fri, 03 May 2013 18:11:51 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Website of the EU COST Action Dynamics of Virtual Work Message-ID: <5183EFD7.6080703@uti.at> We are proud to announce the launch the website of the EU COST Action "Dynamics of Virtual Work": http://dynamicsofvirtualwork.com/ The network is funded by COST: European Cooperation in Science and Technology and led by the University of Hertfordshire. With 28 European countries and two non-European ones already signed up, this COST Action is already marking out and consolidating an important new field of research on the dynamics of virtual work, bringing together scholars from different disciplinary backgrounds. Over the next four years, we will be holding a series of conferences and workshops http://dynamicsofvirtualwork.com/events/ addressed by leading international experts. Training workshops will be held for PhD students and new researchers who can apply for funding to attend. New researchers can also apply for grants to visit institutions in other signed-up COST countries: http://dynamicsofvirtualwork.com/new-researchers/ We will also be organising workshops and briefings for policymakers: http://dynamicsofvirtualwork.com/policy/ News of forthcoming events: http://dynamicsofvirtualwork.com/events/ News on new publications: http://dynamicsofvirtualwork.com/documents/ Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/costis1202 -- Christian Fuchs Professor of Social Media University of Westminster Communication and Media Research Institute c.fuchs at westminster.ac.uk Tel +44 (0) 20 7911 5000-extension 67380 http://fuchs.uti.at From amarkham at gmail.com Fri May 3 13:13:19 2013 From: amarkham at gmail.com (Annette Markham) Date: Fri, 3 May 2013 15:13:19 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] submission deadline extension: IR14 doctoral colloquium Message-ID: Hi All, Apparently we had some contradictory information on the AOIR website for the submission deadline for the doctoral colloquium. So we've decided to extend the deadline to *May 31, 2013.* Sorry for any confusion, annette * * * Announcing the Doctoral Colloquium at the IR14.0 conference in Denver, October 23, 2013 *Submission deadline: Friday, May 31, 2013 ** * * In keeping with its commitment to students? scholarship in the Association of Internet Researchers, the IR14.0 Doctoral Colloquium offers PhD students working in internet research or a related field a special forum on October 23, 2013. For many years, this pre-conference event has provided students with the opportunity to spend some hours with senior scholars talking about their research projects, addressing methodological and theoretical challenges, and getting informal advice on juggling the multiple pressures associated with job searching, publishing, and finishing the dissertation. This year, Annette Markham will coordinate the Doctoral Colloquium and will be joined by colleagues including: Tom Boellstorf, University of California, Irvine Steve Jones, University of Illinois at Chicago Mia Consalvo, Concordia University Charles Ess, University of Oslo Alice Marwick, Fordham University Michele Jackson, University of Colorado, Boulder Adrienne Russell, University of Denver Lori Kendall, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Klaus Bruhn Jensen, University of Copenhagen Michael Zimmer, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee ....Others to be announced later. Details forthcoming on the IR14 conference website: http://ir14.aoir.org/ SUBMISSION/PARTICIPATION If you're an interested student, you should prepare a brief application including: a) a two-page summary of your research. This should provide a context for the research, describe the methods being used, the progress to date, and primary concerns and issues; and b) A brief statement indicating why you want to participate in this doctoral colloquium and what you?d like to get out of it. Submission format: Single PDF document Submission address: amarkham at gmail.com *Submission deadline: Friday, May 31, 2013 * Applicants will be notified of acceptance by July 1, 2013. Successful applicants will be asked to prepare a four-page paper on their research and the issues they wish to discuss by August 31, 2013. Feel free to contact me with questions, annette ****************************** Annette N. Markham, Ph.D. Guest Professor, Department of Informatics, Ume? University, Sweden Guest and Affiliate Professor, School of Communication, Loyola University, Chicago amarkham at gmail.com http://markham.internetinquiry.org/ Twitter: annettemarkham From ptimusk at sympatico.ca Sat May 4 10:55:41 2013 From: ptimusk at sympatico.ca (Peter Timusk) Date: Sat, 4 May 2013 13:55:41 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Readings on Data Brokers Message-ID: I am being asked to become a "Data Broker" in government. This seems an old mid 1990's term yet I see nothing in the list archive around this concept or role. While I know service behaviour I am looking to read something in the nature of a business book or deeper study with a social science or technical foundation that can help me move along to get into this role. The boss asking this is also a former Internet Studies scholar so he may be lifting this term "Data Broker" from the 1990's. I work in a national statistics agency where sometimes I write about internet use statistics but this is only a sometime job that I am allowed because I have read the work of many A o IR scholars. My real in demand skills are statistical programming not my knowledge of the Internet. So do you have any references to studies talking about "Data Brokers"? From netcrit at gmail.com Sat May 4 17:07:12 2013 From: netcrit at gmail.com (Matthew Allen) Date: Sun, 5 May 2013 10:07:12 +1000 Subject: [Air-L] Internet studies news from Curtin University Message-ID: Dear all While I am now Head of School and Professor of Internet Studies, School of communication and creative arts, Deakin University, I remain in touch with my former colleagues at Curtin University in the Department of Internet Studies. The information on this website about the future of the department's course might be of interest to AOIR members ... http://savenetstudies.net Thanks Matthew Allen -- Sent from Gmail Mobile From jhunsinger at wlu.ca Sat May 4 20:14:37 2013 From: jhunsinger at wlu.ca (Jeremy hunsinger) Date: Sat, 4 May 2013 22:14:37 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Internet studies news from Curtin University In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: one word: crap! my official letter on letterhead will be in the mail monday. On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Matthew Allen wrote: > Dear all > > While I am now Head of School and Professor of Internet Studies, School > of communication and creative arts, Deakin University, I remain in touch > with my former colleagues at Curtin University in the Department of > Internet Studies. > > The information on this website about the future of the department's course > might be of interest to AOIR members ... http://savenetstudies.net > > Thanks > Matthew Allen > > > -- > Sent from Gmail Mobile > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > From stephanie.betz at anu.edu.au Sun May 5 16:49:26 2013 From: stephanie.betz at anu.edu.au (Stephanie Betz) Date: Sun, 5 May 2013 23:49:26 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Keeping and Cataloging Online and Multi-Media Material Message-ID: <13DB92E31E010342AC2EE6CE9FD87EB20F212917@HKXPRD0610MB389.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com> Good morning everyone, I'm hoping to draw from the brains trust of internet researchers some tips for keeping and cataloging vast quantities of online multi-media materials. I'm doing a project that involves looking at Tumblr content, and am having difficulties coming up with an efficient and useful method for storing and retrieving material for later content analysis. Does anyone have any tried and true methods for content storage and retrieval? High or low-tech, I'm open to both - just some way to make sure I'm across this material, and will be able to retrieve it when I desperately need an example during my writing phase. Thanks all, Stephanie Betz. --- Stephanie Betz PhD Candidate, Anthropology School of Archaeology & Anthropology College of Arts and Social Sciences The Australian National University A.D. Hope Building #14 Canberra, ACT 0200 AUSTRALIA From sanaz.raji at gmail.com Sun May 5 17:13:45 2013 From: sanaz.raji at gmail.com (Sanaz Raji) Date: Mon, 6 May 2013 01:13:45 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Internet studies news from Curtin University In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Jeremy: I hope that you can also endorse this petition *"Racism is a part of everyday life in higher education institutions in Britain. We face a future where university racisms are likely to be highly durable protean and impervious to intervention."* -- From Institutional Racism in Higher Education by Ian Law, Deborah Phillips and Laura Turney Please sign and share: https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/vice-chancellor-university-of-l eeds-stop-treating-international-students-like-2nd-class-citizens-2Thank you. Sanaz On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 4:14 AM, Jeremy hunsinger wrote: > one word: crap! > > my official letter on letterhead will be in the mail monday. > > > On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Matthew Allen wrote: > > > Dear all > > > > While I am now Head of School and Professor of Internet Studies, School > > of communication and creative arts, Deakin University, I remain in touch > > with my former colleagues at Curtin University in the Department of > > Internet Studies. > > > > The information on this website about the future of the department's > course > > might be of interest to AOIR members ... http://savenetstudies.net > > > > Thanks > > Matthew Allen > > > > > > -- > > Sent from Gmail Mobile > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Sanaz Raji +44 (0) 780 7873 550 Web: http://leeds.academia.edu/SanazRaji From marc at codeforamerica.org Mon May 6 13:44:36 2013 From: marc at codeforamerica.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Marc_H=E9bert?=) Date: Mon, 6 May 2013 13:44:36 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] Data Brokering Message-ID: Hello Peter, Could you give us more details about your new role as a "data broker?" What are the expectations of your manager in this position? Are you being asked to look for patterns in the data to inform policy implementation? If so, then will you also be tasked to think about how these statistical data integrate/could be informed by more qualitative data? Let me know if these sorts of reports overlap with your new position/responsibilities. Kind regards, Marc --------------------- Marc Hebert, Ph.D. UX/Ethnographic Researcher 2013 Code for America Fellow Collaborating with the City & County of San Francisco On May 4, 2013, at 3:00 PM, air-l-request at listserv.aoir.org wrote: > Send Air-L mailing list submissions to > air-l at listserv.aoir.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > air-l-request at listserv.aoir.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > air-l-owner at listserv.aoir.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Air-L digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Readings on Data Brokers (Peter Timusk) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sat, 4 May 2013 13:55:41 -0400 > From: Peter Timusk > To: "aoir list" > Subject: [Air-L] Readings on Data Brokers > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > I am being asked to become a "Data Broker" in government. This seems an old > mid 1990's term yet I see nothing in the list archive around this concept or > role. While I know service behaviour I am looking to read something in the > nature of a business book or deeper study with a social science or technical > foundation that can help me move along to get into this role. The boss > asking this is also a former Internet Studies scholar so he may be lifting > this term "Data Broker" from the 1990's. I work in a national statistics > agency where sometimes I write about internet use statistics but this is > only a sometime job that I am allowed because I have read the work of many A > o IR scholars. My real in demand skills are statistical programming not my > knowledge of the Internet. > > > > > > So do you have any references to studies talking about "Data Brokers"? > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > > End of Air-L Digest, Vol 106, Issue 4 > ************************************* From Noella.Edelmann at donau-uni.ac.at Tue May 7 01:40:32 2013 From: Noella.Edelmann at donau-uni.ac.at (Noella Edelmann) Date: Tue, 07 May 2013 10:40:32 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government 22-24 May 2013, Danube University Krems, Austria Message-ID: <5188DA20020000DA000470EA@gwgwia.donau-uni.ac.at> Apologies for Cross-posting! ****************************** Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government 22-24 May 2013, Danube University Krems, Austria! Hope to see you at the CeDEM13! We have lots of wonderful presentations, workshops, reflections, networking opportunities, a fab social dinner on 22. May...... .... and we proudly present the following keynotes: - John Carlo Bertot from the University of Maryland - Karine Nahon from the University of Washington - Beth Noveck from New York University and MIT, and former United States Deputy Chief Technology Officer. - Tiago Peixoto from the World Bank, Washington For the programme and registration please go to: http://www.amiando.com/cedem.html Or see the programme here: http://www.donau-uni.ac.at/imperia/md/content/department/gpa/zeg/dokumente/cedem13_programv0.1_3.pdf Find us on facebook: https://www.facebook.com/120470071343471/posts/156758537834321 Kind regards Noella Noella Edelmann BA, MSc, MAS Researcher CeDEM13 Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government www.donau-uni.ac.at/cedem JeDEM eJournal of eDemocracy and Open Government www.jedem.org Digital Government Blog http://digitalgovernment.wordpress.com/ Centre for E-Government Danube University Krems Dr.-Karl-Dorrek-Strasse 30 3500 Krems Austria www.donau-uni.ac.at/egov From irsh at itu.dk Tue May 7 04:50:42 2013 From: irsh at itu.dk (Irina Shklovski) Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 11:50:42 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] 2nd CFP: CSCW 2014, Papers due May 31st Message-ID: [Please forward to those who might be interested -- Apologies for cross-posting] CALL FOR PAPERS, COMPUTER-SUPPORTED COOPERATIVE WORK AND SOCIAL COMPUTING 2014 (CSCW 2014) Baltimore, MD, Feb 15-19, 2014 http://cscw.acm.org CSCW is an international and interdisciplinary conference focused on how technology intersects with social practices. To support diverse and high-quality contributions, CSCW employs a two-phase review process and does not impose an arbitrary length limit on submissions. IMPORTANT DATES * May 31, 5:00pm PDT, 2013: Submission due * July 6: First-round notification (Revise & Resubmit or Reject) * July 26, 5:00pm PDT: Revised papers due * August 23: Final notifications We invite submissions that detail existing practices or inform the design or deployment of systems or introduce novel systems, interaction techniques, or algorithms. The scope of CSCW includes, but is not limited to, social computing and social media, technologically-enabled or enhanced communication, education technologies, crowdsourcing, multi-user input technologies, collaboration, information sharing, and coordination. It includes socio-technical activities at work, in the home, in education, in healthcare, in the arts, for socializing and for entertainment. New results or new ways of thinking about, studying or supporting shared activities can be in these and related areas: - Social and crowd computing. Studies, theories, designs, mechanisms, systems, and/or infrastructures addressing social media, social networking, user-generated content, wikis, blogs, online gaming, crowdsourcing, collective intelligence, virtual worlds, collaborative information seeking, etc. - System design. Hardware, architectures, infrastructures, interaction design, technical foundations, algorithms, and/or toolkits that enable the building of new social and collaborative systems and experiences. - Theories and models. Critical analysis or organizing theory with clear relevance to the design or study of social and collaborative systems. - Empirical investigations. Findings, guidelines, and/or ethnographic studies relating to technologies, practices, or use of communication, collaboration, and social technologies. - Methodologies and tools. Novel methods or combinations of approaches and tools used in building systems or studying their use. - Domain-specific social and collaborative applications. Including for healthcare, transportation, gaming (for enjoyment or productivity), ICT4D, sustainability, education, accessibility, collective intelligence, global collaboration, or other domains. - Collaboration systems based on emerging technologies. Mobile and ubiquitous computing, game engines, virtual worlds, multi-touch technologies, novel display technologies, vision and gesture recognition systems, big data infrastructures, MOOCs, crowd labor markets, SNSes, sensor-based environments, etc. - Crossing boundaries. Studies, prototypes, or other investigations that explore interactions across disciplines, distance, languages, generations, and cultures, to help better understand how to transcend social, temporal, and/or spatial boundaries. Papers should detail original research contributions. Papers must report new research results that represent a contribution to the field. They must provide sufficient details and support for their results and conclusions. They must cite relevant published research or experience, highlight novel aspects of the submission, and identify the most significant contributions. Evaluation is on the basis of originality, significance, quality of research, quality of writing, and contribution to conference program diversity. SUBMISSIONS Paper submissions must be made via the Precision Conference System. A link to the submission site will be made available by early May. Papers will be presented at the CSCW conference and will be included in the conference proceedings archived in the ACM Digital Library. CSCW does not accept submissions that were published previously in formally reviewed publications or that are currently submitted elsewhere. Send queries about Paper submissions to papers2014 at cscw.acm.org. ============================================== Irina Shklovski Associate Professor Interaction Design Research Group (ID) Digital Media & Communication Research Group (DMC) IT University of Copenhagen Rued Langgaards Vej, 7 2300, K?benhavn S. Danmark http://www.itu.dk/people/irsh/ ============================================== From kontakt at renekoenig.eu Tue May 7 07:38:22 2013 From: kontakt at renekoenig.eu (=?UTF-8?B?UmVuw6kgS8O2bmln?=) Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 16:38:22 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] Call for contributions: Society of the Query reader on search, search engines and alternatives Message-ID: <00cf01ce4b30$868b42b0$93a1c810$@renekoenig.eu> Dear colleagues, Please consider contributing to our reader on search (engines). Deadline for abstracts is June 15th, 2013. See below. Best, Ren? Ren? K?nig, Dipl.-Soz. Karlsruhe Institute of Technology Institute for Technology Assessment and Systems Analysis (ITAS) P.O. Box 3640 76021 Karlsruhe Germany Tel.: +49 (0) 721 / 608-22209 Web/Skype: renekoenig.eu Twitter: r_koenig CALL FOR CONTRIBUTIONS Society of the Query Reader See also: http://networkcultures.org/wpmu/query/2013/05/07/call-for-contributions-society-of-the-query-reader/ The INC Reader Series, edited by Geert Lovink, give an overview of the present day research, critique, and artistic practices in a thematic research field at once broad and limited. The set up is multidisciplinary, with academic (humanities, social sciences, software studies etc.), artistic, and activist contributors. Following the success of the previous INC readers we would like to put together an anthology with key texts considering online search and search engines. In parallel with the second Society of the Query conference which will take place in Amsterdam on November 7-8 2013, the Institute of Network Cultures is devoted to produce a reader that brings together actual theory about the foundation and history of search, the economics of search engines, search and education, alternatives, and much more. This publication is edited by Ren? K?nig and Miriam Rasch, and produced by the Institute of Network Cultures in Amsterdam, to be launched early 2014. It will be open access and available in print and various digital formats (see below for information on the INC reader series). POSSIBLE TOPICS Theory and Foundations of Search // Googlization: Mapping Google?s Dominance // Search Engines and Education // Searching Elsewhere: Non-Western Perspectives // Personalization: Testing the Filter Bubble // Regulation in a Globalizing World // Localization as the New Paradigm // Software Matters: Sociotechnical and Algorithmic Cultures // Showcasing Alternative Search Engines WE INVITE: Internet, visual culture and media scholars, researchers, artists, curators, producers, lawyers, engineers, open-source and open-content advocates, activists, conference participants, and others to submit materials and proposals. FORMATS : We welcome interviews, dialogues, essays and articles, images (b/w), email exchanges, manifestos, with a maximum of 8,000 words, but preferably shorter at around 5,000 words. For scope and style, take a look at the previous INC Readers and the style guide (pdf). WANT TO JOIN? Send in your proposal (500 words max.) before June 15th, 2013. You may expect a response before July 15th, 2013. DEADLINE FOR CONTRIBUTIONS: September 15th, 2013. EMAIL TO: Miriam Rasch (publications Institute of Network Cultures) at miriam[at]networkcultures[dot]org MORE INFORMATION Society of the Query: http://networkcultures.org/query INC readers: http://networkcultures.org/publications ABOUT THE READER SERIES The INC reader series are derived from conference contributions and produced by the Institute of Network Cultures in Amsterdam. They are available (for free) in print and pdf; check http://networkcultures.org/publications. INC Reader #8: Geert Lovink and Miriam Rasch (eds), Unlike Us Reader: Social Media Monopolies and Their Alternatives, Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2013. INC Reader #7: Geert Lovink and Nathaniel Tkacz (eds), Critical Point of View: A Wikipedia Reader, Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2011. INC Reader #6: Geert Lovink and Rachel Somers Miles (eds), Video Vortex Reader II: moving images beyond YouTube, Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2011. INC Reader #5: Scott McQuire, Meredith Martin, and Sabine Niederer (eds.), Urban Screens Reader, Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2009. INC Reader #4: Geert Lovink and Sabine Niederer (eds.), Video Vortex Reader: Responses to YouTube, Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2008. INC Reader #3: Geert Lovink and Ned Rossiter (eds.), MyCreativity Reader: A Critique of Creative Industries, Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2007. INC Reader #2: Katrien Jacobs, Marije Janssen and Matteo Pasquinelli (eds.), C?Lick Me: A Netporn Studies Reader, Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2007. INC Reader #1: Geert Lovink and Soenke Zehle (eds.), Incommunicado Reader, Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2005. CONTACT Miriam Rasch Ren? K?nig Publications Institute of Network Cultures ITAS, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology miriam[at]networkcultures[dot]org kontakt[at]renekoenig[dot]eu t: +31 (0)20 595 1865 t: +49 (0)721 608 22209 From ajk407 at nyu.edu Tue May 7 12:29:05 2013 From: ajk407 at nyu.edu (AJ Kelton) Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 15:29:05 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] ELD13 Early Bird Registration Expires Friday Message-ID: The Emerging Learning Design (ELD) Conference is pleased to introduce the nearly two dozen amazing presentations at this year's conference. ELD13 will take place on Friday, June 7th, 2013 here at Montclair State University. Early Bird Pricing is schedule to expire on Friday, May 10th, so take advantage of the lower pricing. http://eld.montclair.edu/registration/ For the full schedule, times, and descriptions, please see http://eld.montclair.edu/schedule/ The titles of our sessions this year are: - Keynote - The Death Of Content:Why Universities and Schools are (and aren?t) being replaced by the Internet by Dr. Christopher Hoadley from New York University - Big Data Thinking and Learning 3.0 as Guides for Online Textbook Development - Choosing Effective Multimedia Simulations for Chemistry Learning - Design Rationale and Implications for Cultural Heritage Gaming: A Case Study of a Jewish Game for Learning - Digital Education, MOOCs and the Specter of the Cyberteacher - Does your institution suffer from dissociative identity disorder? - Emerging Technologies, Education, Exploration ? and Ethics - Etextbook with Google Earth Development: Integrating SOA Technologies for Learning with Research - Making student Wikipedians: Encouraging disruptive scholarly communication - Mindfulness: Emerging Mobile Tools and the Potential to Help Learners - Navigating a Literacy Rich World: Untethering English Language Learners From the Classroom - PowerPoint: The Rules of Engagement - Technology and 21st Century Literacy in a Time of Accountability - The Design of RPGs to Teach Ethics and Empathy - The Scratch Disruption: Video Game Design with Scratch - Virtual Enhancements to Physical Spaces: A QR Code Based Orientation Game - Virtual Instructor ? Student Interaction in an Asynchronous Learning Network - Visualizing American Literature with Pinterest - Where does 3D printing fit into your pedagogical thinking ? Select proceeding will appear in the Journal of Emerging Learning Design ( http://eldj.montclair.edu) scheduled to be published in early 2014. The Inaugural Issue of the ELDJ is online, with two invited articles, one from each of the keynote speakers for ELD11 (Using the Tool Adoption and Alignment Model to Assess Pedagogical Fit of Social Communication Tools by Sarah Smith-Robbins, PhD) and ELD12 (Designing for Technology Enhanced Activity to Support Learning by Joshua A. Danish, PhD.) Visit the ELDJ site and subscribe (URL) to receive an email when new articles and announcements are posted. -- -- ----- AJ Kelton Director of Emerging & Instructional Technology College of Humanities and Social Sciences Montclair State University http://eit.montclair.edu ---------- Emerging Learning Design 2013 http://eld.montclair.edu Twitter: @ELDConf Hashtag: #ELD13 Journal of Emerging Learning Design http://eldj.montclair.edu ---------- From luca.rossi at uniurb.it Tue May 7 15:52:57 2013 From: luca.rossi at uniurb.it (Luca Rossi) Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 18:52:57 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Symposium on Multiple Network Modeling, Analysis and Mining Message-ID: I hope you might find this interesting: Call for participation: Symposium on Multiple Network Modeling, Analysis and Mining DTU - Technical University of Denmark Monday, June 3rd, 2013 Multiple networks have been studied in several disciplines including computer science, physics, social network analysis, statistics and sociology, under various names like multilayer, multiplex, multidimensional, multimodal networks and labeled graphs. The Symposium on Multiple Network Modeling, Analysis and Mining, that will be held as a satellite event of the NetSci conference (the primary conference on Network Science), will provide a detailed view over some recent results and open problems in this field, presented by leading experts, and will consitute a starting point for the emergence of an interdisciplinary community focused on the study of multiple networks. Participation is free, including lunch and coffee-breaks (limited places available: please register ASAP). All the details including the preliminary program are available at: http://multiplenetworks.netsci2013.net -- Luca Rossi LaRiCA - Advanced Communication Laboratory Faculty of Sociology - "Carlo Bo" University, Urbino luca.rossi at uniurb.it T. +39 0722 305726 F. +39 0722 305727 http://larica.uniurb.it/redline From jhuns at vt.edu Tue May 7 18:56:50 2013 From: jhuns at vt.edu (jeremy hunsinger) Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 21:56:50 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Fwd: [cpsr-global] CPSR dissolution and Gary Chapman, Winner of CPSR's Norbert Wiener Award References: Message-ID: Begin forwarded message: > From: Doug Schuler > Subject: [cpsr-global] CPSR dissolution and Gary Chapman, Winner of CPSR's Norbert Wiener Award > Date: May 7, 2013 9:49:57 PM EDT > To: cpsr-global at lists.cpsr.org > Reply-To: cpsr-global at lists.cpsr.org > > > Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility Dissolution and > Gary Chapman, Winner of CPSR's Norbert Wiener Award for Social and Professional Responsibility > > > It is my unenviable task to announce that Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR), a non-profit educational corporation, has been dissolved. > > CPSR was launched in 1981 in Palo Alto, California, to question the computerization of war in the United States via the Strategic Computing Initiative to use artificial intelligence in war, and, soon after, the Strategic Defense Initiative ? ?Star Wars?. Over the years CPSR evolved into a ?big tent? organization that addressed a variety of computer-related areas including workplace issues, privacy, participatory design, freedom of information, community networks, and many others. > > Now, of course, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of organizations and movements that are concerned not only about the misuses of ICT by governments and corporations (and others) but also about trying to develop approaches that help communities work together to address issues related to economic and other inequalities and environmental degradation ? as well as broader issues such as war and peace. > > CPSR to me provided a vital link to important ideas and to inspirational and creative people. These people believed that positive social change was possible and that the use of ICT could play a significant role. For example, in 1993, CPSR developed a document designed to help shape the National Information Infrastructure (NII) program promoted by the Clinton/Gore administration to help guide the evolution of networked digital communication. Through a variety of conferences, workshops and reports, CPSR encouraged conversations about computers and society that went beyond hyperbole and conventional wisdom. > > Although in many ways the issues that CPSR helped publicize have changed forms they generally still remain. The ethical and other issues surrounding the computerization of war, for one thing, have not gone away just because they?re not prominent on the public agenda. CPSR?s original focus on the use of artificial intelligence in ?battle management? etc. and the possibility of launch on warning is probably still pertinent. The advent of ubiquitous and inexpensive drones definitely is. > > Apparently, as many people know, the age of the participatory membership organizations is over ? their numbers are certainly way down ? and we in CPSR had certainly noticed that trend. I personally suspect that this development is not necessarily a good thing. I certainly would welcome another membership organization with CPSR?s Big Tent orientation. > > On the occasion of CPSR?s dissolution we?ve developed two small projects for keeping CPSR?s spirit alive. > > The first is that it would be a good opportunity to catalog the groups and organizations around the world that would be natural allies to CPSR if it still existed. We?ve started this cataloging (see http://www.publicsphereproject.org/civic_organizations) but presumably have only captured a small fraction of these organizations. Please open an account on the Public Sphere Project site and add the information about your organization. > > The second is less concrete but probably no less important. To help the current and future generation of activists as we envision possible futures and interventions, we?d like to put these two related questions forward: What applications of ICT are the most important to human development and sustainability? And, on the other hand, What are the strongest challenges to these applications? Please email me your thoughts on this and I will do my best to compile the thoughts and make them public. > > ********* > > With this note I also want to announce that CPSR?s final Norbert Wiener Award for Social and Professional Responsibility winner is Gary Chapman, who served as CPSR?s first executive director from 1985 to 1992. The award recognizes outstanding contributions for social responsibility in computing technology. Named for Norbert Wiener (1894-1964), who, in addition to a long and active scientific career that brought the word "cybernetics" (and, hence, cyberspace) into the language, was also a leader in assessing the social implications of computerization. Writing in Science (1960) Wiener reminds us that, ?...even when the individual believes that science contributes to the human ends which he has at heart, his belief needs a continual scanning and re-evaluation which is only partly possible. For the individual scientist, even the partial appraisal of the liaison between the man and the historical process requires an imaginative forward glance at history which is difficult, exacting, and only limitedly achievable...We must always exert the full strength of our imagination.? > > Gary who died in 2010, spent nearly three decades working towards peace and social justice as it related to information technology. As Marc Rotenberg of the Electronic Privacy and Information Center (EPIC) stated, Gary ?made many people stop and ask hard questions about technology. Not just ?Is it cool?? but ?Does it make our lives better, or more just? And does it make our world more secure?? ? > > Gary?s technology column, "Digital Nation," was carried in over 200 newspapers and websites. He taught and lectured all over the world, most recently as a guest faculty member at the University of Porto in Porto, Portugal. Since his time at CPSR he had been involved in a multitude of related projects including the International School for Digital Transformation (ISDT) that he and others at the University of Texas convened annually in Porto, Portugal. > > Gary was on the faculty of the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas, Austin. On the local level, he also worked to bridge the digital divide, the gulf between those with access to technology and those without. In 1995, for example, he worked on the successful grant application that led to the establishment of Austin Free-Net (www.austinfree.net), which installed the first public access Internet stations in Austin, and continues today as a national model for bringing digital opportunities to low-income and digitally challenged residents. And in 2010, Gary co-founded Big Gig Austin (www.biggigaustin.org), which anchored the successful community campaign to bring the Google gigabit fiber network to Austin. > > Gary was a principled and untiring advocate for the use of the Internet a tool for collaboration and other means to bring people together. Also, as a former medic with the Army Special Forces, Gary was especially concerned about the uses of computing in warfare. In his articles in the CPSR Newsletter, he warned that ?Automating our ignorance of how to cope with war will produce only more disaster.? With David Bellin he co-edited ?Computers in Battle: Will They Work??, a book on the implications of computer technology in war, and was involved for many years in a rich collaboration with the Pugwash-USPID (Unione Scienziati Per Il Disarmo)-ISODARCO (International School on Disarmament and Research on Conflicts) community in Italy and elsewhere. > > Gary contributed chapters to several books that I was involved with. Most recently, he contributed The Good Life, one of the patterns (publicsphereproject.org/patterns/lv) in Liberating Voices, a book that I wrote (with the help of 85 others). The verbiage from the pattern card abridged from the full text reminds us of Gary's humane values, and serves as an important challenge for all of us: > > People who hope for a better world feel the need for a shared vision of the "good life" that is flexible enough for innumerable individual circumstances but comprehensive enough to unite people in optimistic, deliberate, progressive social change. This shared vision of The Good Life should promote and sustain conviviality and solidarity among people, as well as feelings of individual effectiveness, self-worth and purpose. A shared vision of The Good Life is always adapting; it encompasses suffering, loss and conflict as well as pleasures, reverence and common goals of improvement. An emergent framework for the modern "good life" is based on some form of humanism, particularly pragmatic or civic humanism, with room for a spiritual dimension that does not seek domination. Finally, the environmental crises of the planet require a broad vision of a "good life" that can harmonize human aspirations with natural limits. All this needs to be an ongoing and open-ended "conversation," best suited to small geographic groups that can craft and then live an identity that reflects their vision of a "good life." > > Although this will be CPSR's final Weiner award, the work that Gary and other activists from CPSR and other organizations helped launch over two decades ago is now being carried forward by scores of organizations and thousands of activists all over the world, as digital information and communication systems have assumed such a central location on the world's stage. > > Several projects including a Festschrift or other book project or event related to CPSR and social responsibility have been discussed although no firm plans have been made. > > Gary Chapman was patient but persistent in his pursuit of progressive goals and a better life for all. Sadly, Gary left us before he could see his vision brought to fruition. He'll be missed but we all must push forward with his vision. > > > ********* > > CPSR?s Norbert Wiener Award for Social and Professional Responsibility Winners > > > 2013 - Gary Chapman > For his tireless efforts to promote human values within an increasingly computerized world. > > > 1987 - David Parnas > For his work to promote software reliability and his campaign to raise public awareness of the technical infeasibility of the Strategic Defense Initiative. > > 1988 - Joe Weizenbaum > For his work to promote the human side of his computing, as expressed in his book Computer Power and Human Reason. > > 1989 - Daniel D. McCracken > For his work in the late 1960s to organize computer professionals against the deployment of ABM systems. > > 1990 - Kristen Nygaard > For his pioneering work in Norway to develop "participatory design," which seeks the direct involvement of workers in the development of the computer-based tools they use. > > 1991 - Severo Ornstein and Laura Gould > For their tireless energy to guide CPSR through its early years. > > 1992 - Barbara Simons > For her work on human rights, military funding, and the U.C. Berkeley reentry program for women. > > 1993 - Institute for Global Communication > For using network technology to empower previously disenfranchised individuals and groups working for progressive change. > > 1994 - Antonia Stone > For her work in founding the Playing To Win organization, which has brought computer skills to many people who have long been technologically disadvantaged. > > 1995 - Tom Grundner > For his pioneering work in establishing the Free Net movement, which has provided access to network technology to entire communities who would otherwise be unrepresented. > > 1996 - Phil Zimmermann > Inventor of Pretty Good Privacy (PGP). PGP allows the average person to encode his or her email. Previously, only governments or large corporations could make their email secure. > > 1997 - Peter Neumann > Editor of the RISKS Digest, for his outstanding contributions to the field of Risk and Reliability in Computer Science. Read his Notes on Receiving CPSR's Norbert Wiener Award > > 1998 - The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) > A large open international community of individuals, engaged in the development of new Internet standard specifications, for its tremendously positive technical and other contributions to the evolution and smooth operation of the Internet. > > 1999 - The Free Software & Open Source Movements > This movement profoundly challenges the belief that market mechanisms are always best-suited for unleashing technological innovation. This voluntary and collaborative model for software development is providing a true alternative to proprietary, closed software. > > 2000 - Marc Rotenberg > For his ongoing efforts through CPSR and the Electronic Privacy Information Center to protect the loss of public's privacy through technological innovation. > > 2001 - Nira Schwartz and Theodore Postol > For their courageous efforts to disclose misinformation and falsified test results of the proposed National Missile Defense system. > > 2002 - Karl Auerbach > For pioneering democratic Internet governance. > > 2003 - Mitch Kapor > For being a role model for anyone seeking to succeed in the cut-throat world of high tech business without sacrificing integrity and conscience. > > 2004 - Barry Steinhardt > For being a prominent advocate for privacy and other civil liberties in the face of technologically-oriented threats. > > 2005 - Douglas Engelbart > For being a pioneer of human-computer interface technology, inventor of the mouse, and social-impact visionary. > > 2008 - Bruce Schneier > For his technical achievements and passionate advocacy for privacy, security, and civil liberties. > > > > Douglas Schuler > douglas at publicsphereproject.org > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Public Sphere Project > http://www.publicsphereproject.org/ > > Creating the World Citizen Parliament > http://interactions.acm.org/archive/view/may-june-2013/creating-the-world-citizen-parliament > > Liberating Voices! A Pattern Language for Communication Revolution (project) > http://www.publicsphereproject.org/patterns/lv > > Liberating Voices! A Pattern Language for Communication Revolution (book) > http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=11601 > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > cpsr-global at lists.cpsr.org > To be removed from the list, send any message to: > cpsr-global-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org > > For all list information and functions, see: > http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/cpsr-global Jeremy Hunsinger Communication Studies Wilfrid Laurier University Center for Digital Discourse and Culture Virginia Tech Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. --Pablo Picasso From carmelv at gmail.com Tue May 7 23:36:39 2013 From: carmelv at gmail.com (Carmel Vaisman) Date: Wed, 8 May 2013 09:36:39 +0300 Subject: [Air-L] News websites that allow both anonymous and FB/TW identified comments Message-ID: Dear IRs, I'm working with a colleague on a project of hate vs. support rhetoric in news commentary and we would like to look at both anonymous and identified users. Israeli news websites allow both the old system of anonymous commentary and Facebook identified one and it makes for an interesting comparison, however, it is a challenge finding similar sites in English. We would appreciate any recommendation you have for news websites that allow both sorts of commentary. Thank you, Carmel Vaisman, PhD. The Interdisciplinary Program in the Humanities Tel Aviv University carmell at post.tau.ac.il @carmelva From slavka.karakusheva at gmail.com Wed May 8 08:31:17 2013 From: slavka.karakusheva at gmail.com (Slavka Karakusheva) Date: Wed, 8 May 2013 18:31:17 +0300 Subject: [Air-L] Seminar_BG journal - special issue # 2 Cultural Shortcuts: Popular, Digital, Wonderful, National Message-ID: Dear all, Seminar_BG is an online journal for cultural studies, situated at the borderlines of disciplines such as cultural anthropology, aesthetics, sociology, and media analysis and publishished within the Deprtment of History and Theory of Culture, Sofia University "St. Kliment Ohridski". The new *special issue with selected papers # 2: **Cultural Shortcuts: Popular, Digital, Wonderful, National *(in English) is available online. Weber?s ?steel-hard cage of modernity? (*stahlhartes Geh?use*) seems out of sight today. The very metaphor of steel, so dear to the times of industrialization, seems hopelessly out of date in the age of optic fibre, silicone and flexibility. It is as if the call to *change the world* has mutated into the program to *change communications*, and respectively, at the centre of this second modernity we no longer find the dirty, noisy, majestic steel-plant, but something dreamlike the kindergarten-style offices of Google. To turn away from the real world and concentrate on its representation, on networks, ratings, data bases, avatars, and the like - this tends to bring us back the wonderful. Rigorous taxonomy is replaced by clouds of tags that change their shape whenever you look at them from a different angle; the simplicity of plan and progress - by the infinite task of reflexive self-monitoring; ideological purity ? by emotional complexity. The old coordinates no longer seem operational in this new, gaseous stage of culture. There is no ?high? vs. ?popular?, as there is no legitimate distinction between expertise and amateurism; creation and consumption tend to become indistinguishable, and the separation line between public and private interests is constantly challenged and redefined. That all has become culture seems to be the logical result of moving the centre of interest from the outer world towards culture itself. The present texts have been selected from the three last issues of * Seminar_BG* in an attempt to reflect on the cultural situation through the media lens. Over-production of information, brought about by the expansion of commercial agents, was boosted in the last years even further by the ascent of the interactive Web 2.0. There are no institutions ready to harness the unprecedented flow of cultural content. We do not know who is an author, what is original, and to what extent interaction develops or destroys the work of art. Even traditional figures as doctors or religious leaders find themselves challenged; modern constructs like the nation and political representation ? re-enchanted. The varied research perspectives towards the wonderful world of media-cultures might leave the reader with the question: what if we were in some new, *wired cage* of the second modernity? Ivaylo Ditchev, editor *Content:* - Dessislava Lilova - Literature Online: The Subversive Practices of Fan Fiction - Orlin Spassov - A Change in the Canon: Television and Its Audience as Co-authors - Krassimir Terziev - Maneuvers of the Good Old Aura: The Artwork in the Culture of Convergence - Ivaylo Ditchev - The Culture of Flows: Authors, Users, Pirates - Todor Hristov - Publishing on the Internet and the Abduction of Copyright - Julia Rone - *Fegelein's Views on Folklore * - Mila Mineva - The Importance of Being Enslaved - Galina Goncharova - Providers?Users of Medical Knowledge on the Bulgarian Net - Nikela Daskalova - The Monopoly over Magical Thinking Enjoy the reading! The Seminar_BG Team www: http://www.seminar-bg.eu/ @: seminar_bg at yahoo.com fb: ???????_BG From robert.ackland at anu.edu.au Wed May 8 09:38:47 2013 From: robert.ackland at anu.edu.au (Robert Ackland) Date: Wed, 8 May 2013 16:38:47 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Social Media Analysis course: Sydney 1-5 July In-Reply-To: References: <1367512736.98490.YahooMailNeo@web140603.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <518A7F95.7@anu.edu.au> Dear List, I'm running a course in Social Media Analysis in Sydney, 1-5 July. This course will provide students with an introduction to social media analysis in the context of social research. The course is designed for social researchers interested in social media, and covers methods of accessing and analysing digital trace data from websites, blogsites, Twitter and Facebook. While there is emphasis on social networks (e.g. WWW hyperlink networks, follower networks in Twitter, friendship networks in Facebook), analysing text content from social media is also covered. There will also be an introduction to using Virtual Worlds (e.g. Second Life and Massively Multiplayer Online Games) and online experiments for social research. Analytic approaches include social network analysis and text content analysis. The course also provides practical training in two software tools that can be used for social research using social media data: VOSON (for hyperlink network construction and analysis) and NodeXL (an Excel 2007/2010 template for social media network analysis). You can find out more about the course and how to book here: https://www.acspri.org.au/node/1080 Regards, Rob -- Dr Robert Ackland Associate Professor, Australian Demographic and Social Research Institute, The Australian National University e-mail: robert.ackland at anu.edu.au homepage: https://researchers.anu.edu.au/researchers/ackland-rj project: http://voson.anu.edu.au Information about the Master of Social Research (Social Science of the Internet specialisation): http://adsri.anu.edu.au/graduate-study/msr CRICOS No: 061772F My book Web Social Science (SAGE) will be in bookstores in July -- From lpotts at msu.edu Wed May 8 18:05:04 2013 From: lpotts at msu.edu (Liza Potts) Date: Wed, 8 May 2013 21:05:04 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] SIGDOC Deadline Extension Message-ID: Greetings Fellow AoIR members! We are extending the deadline for SIGDOC 2013 conference submissions (SIGDOC is a special interest group within the Association for Computing Machinery focused on the design of communication). Here are the new dates: June 1: Manuscripts are due. June 30: Acceptance notices go out. If your submission is accepted as-is, you can upload it for publication in the proceedings. Work begins on your conference presentation. July 20: If your submission was accepted pending revisions, the revisions are due. Aug 7: Your final date to upload your manuscript to Sheridan Printing for inclusion in the proceedings. In addition to our usual papers, reports, and poster briefs, this year, we've launched a new kind of submission type: Panels! There are three different panel types, including ones that have full papers and ones that do not. We are trying out this new format to encourage newcomers and those of you who have new research you are ready to talk about, but maybe you haven't baked it into a full paper yet. See more details here: http://sigdoc.acm.org/2013/?page_id=34 Please encourage your colleagues, students, and industry partners to join us at SIGDOC this year. We are planning an awesome conference for you down at East Carolina University. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the conference chairs directly: Michael Albers (albersm at ecu.edu) and Nina Wishbow (nina.wishbow at gmail.com). Best, Liza Vice Chair of SIGDOC _________________________________________ Liza Potts, Ph.D. Michigan State University Director of User Experience Projects, WIDE @ MATRIX Assistant Professor Department of Writing, Rhetoric, & American Cultures 434 Farm Lane (Bessey Hall) Room 291, East Lansing, MI 48824 Gtalk: LKPotts | Skype: LKPotts From mjohns at luther.edu Wed May 8 18:12:07 2013 From: mjohns at luther.edu (Mark D. Johns) Date: Wed, 8 May 2013 20:12:07 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Final Call: Carl J. Couch Internet Research Award 2013 Message-ID: CALL FOR AWARD APPLICATIONS Carl J. Couch Internet Research Award 2013 Sponsored by the Carl Couch Center for Social and Internet Research http://www.cccsir.com/ The Carl Couch Center issues an international call for student-authored papers to be considered for Carl J. Couch Internet Research Award. The Couch Center welcomes both theoretical and empirical papers that apply symbolic interactionist approaches to internet studies. According to basic symbolic interactionist premises, what we understand as self, identity, relationship, and cultural formations are constructed dialogically and interactively. While the works of George H. Mead, Georg Simmel, Erving Goffman and other leading symbolic interactionists have been integral to the study of social interaction, Carl Couch was among the first from this tradition to suggest the importance of engaging in the study of mediated interaction. It is critical that symbolic interactionists move boldly forward, beyond Couch's initial suggestion, to study what has become for many a dominant form of communication in their everyday life. Whether we research identities, emotion, memory, family, work, career, presentations of self, deception, love, loss or other areas, the impact of mediated communication is felt by those interacting within it. As internet-related media continue to influence our everyday interactions--not only with other people but also with technologies, devices, algorithms, platform parameters, and so forth--it becomes crucial for symbolic interactionists to attend to the role of these mediating factors in the interaction process. We encourage any paper that uses a symbolic interactionist approach in internet studies. We also encourage papers that explore the interface between deliberate social interaction and structured (or automated) interactions sponsored or enacted by various technological features, exploring not only how identities, relations, and social formations are negotiated through social interactions, but also how these interactions are mediated further through the use or capacities of various technologies. Papers will be evaluated based on the quality of (1) mastery of symbolic interactionist approaches and concepts, (2) originality, (3) organization, (4) presentation, and (5) advancement of knowledge. Those contemplating entering should note that an interactionist approach demands thoughtful analysis, and not mere description, of social interactions. Evaluation will be administered by a Review Committee of four: Mark D. Johns, Luther College, Decorah, Iowa Jennifer Dunn, Texas Tech University, Lubbock Annette Markham, University of Wisconsin?Milwaukee Lois Ann Scheidt, Indiana University, Bloomington Competition is open to graduate or undergraduate students of all disciplines. Works that are published or accepted for publication are not eligible for award consideration. Entries should be in English and not exceed 30 pages (approximately 7500 words) in length, including references and appendices. Limit of one entry per student per year. The top paper will receive Couch Award to be presented at the 2013 meeting of the Association of Internet Researchers (aoir.org) at the University of Denver. The top paper will be awarded a certificate and a cash prize of $300 US and the author will be invited to present their work at a session of the AoIR conference, October 24-27, 2013 in Denver, Colorado, USA. Candidates should send a copy of their paper, with a 100-word abstract, electronically to Mark Johns at mjohns at luther.edu Application deadline is May 15, 2013. Notification of award will be sent by June 15. Those with questions or comments about Couch Award application, please contact: Mark D. Johns Communication Studies Luther College, Decorah, Iowa Phone: 563-387-1347 E-mail: mjohns at luther.edu From alexleavitt at gmail.com Wed May 8 18:43:08 2013 From: alexleavitt at gmail.com (Alex Leavitt) Date: Wed, 8 May 2013 18:43:08 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] Scales for social media participation akin to "experience"? Message-ID: Hi AoIR-ers! Does anyone know of any scales that measure the "experience" of a user that participates in social media platforms (this could also cover things like older online communities and online MMOs). By experience, I'm talking about familiarity with a platform/community's technical features, social norms, folk history, etc. This might cover things like relative skill on the site, but I'm not interested in use in a general or beginner sense (but perhaps use of advanced features as a marker of being experience). If you email me off-list, I can compile everyone's references. Thanks for the help! Alex --- Alexander Leavitt PhD Student USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism http://alexleavitt.com Twitter: @alexleavitt From gabriella.coleman at mcgill.ca Thu May 9 05:38:01 2013 From: gabriella.coleman at mcgill.ca (Gabriella Coleman) Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 08:38:01 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Fwd: Deadline EXTENDED - May 29: Research Delegations, The Participatory Condition Colloquium (Media@McGill, Nov. 14-16) In-Reply-To: <20211_1368031403_518A80AB_20211_99_12_1499E9B85801D444B8C456DEDBE08C361BD82BE3@exmbx2010-9.campus.MCGILL.CA> References: <20211_1368031403_518A80AB_20211_99_12_1499E9B85801D444B8C456DEDBE08C361BD82BE3@exmbx2010-9.campus.MCGILL.CA> Message-ID: <518B98A9.2050607@mcgill.ca> *** In preparation for The Participatory Condition, an international colloquium we will be hosting on campus and at the Mus?e d'Art Contemporain next November, Media at McGill welcomes expressions of interest to participate in Colloquium Research Delegations from graduate students and postdoctoral scholars in the Dept. of Art History and Communications Studies. You are invited to participate in one of two ways: 1) as a research relegate, heading a team of colleagues assigned to a particular colloquium section 2) as a team member of the research delegation Research delegates and team members will be assigned to one of the following sections: Publics and Participation; Surveillance and Legislation; The Participatory Condition; Gaming; Art and Design As part of their responsibilities, research delegates will: - Put together a team of graduate and postdoctoral researchers who will participate in the delegate's activities for the assigned section. The team can be composed of both AHCS and non-AHCS researchers, primarily at the PhD or postdoctoral level. - Contribute informed postings to the colloquium website, blog and social media sites before, during, and after the colloquium (from c. Oct. 15 to Dec. 10, 2013). - Attend the colloquium in its entirety, and take detailed notes of the assigned sessions. - Pose the first formal question(s) to the panelists during the Q&A session with the public. - Present a critical account of the assigned section in a post-colloquium seminar to be held with fellow team members, research delegates and members of the colloquium committee (early December 2013). - Following the colloquium, research delegates are also invited to submit a text (c. 5000 words), potentially co-authored with their team members, for a peer-reviewed publication on Media at McGill's website. Expressions of interest to become a colloquium research delegate or team member should be sent to tamar.tembeck at mcgill.ca by May 29th, 2013. Please give a first and second choice for the colloquium section to which you would like to be assigned, and specify if you would like to be a research delegate or a delegation team member. If you would like to get involved as research delegate, please include the following in your email: - A short biography (100 words), the title of your research project, and the name of your supervisor(s) - A brief description of how the colloquium relates to your research - A list of potential team members (optional) Up to 5 research delegates will be nominated for the colloquium, and each delegate will be awarded a $250 honorarium. -- Tamar Tembeck, Ph.D. Academic Associate Media at McGill media.mcgill.ca tamar.tembeck at mcgill.ca McGill University Ferrier Building, room 231 840 Dr. Penfield Montreal, QC H3A 0G2 Canada Tel: (514) 398-5003 Fax: (514) 398-8763 Want to be removed from this listserver? Please email Maureen Coote at maureen.coote at mcgill.ca and SPECIFY WHICH LIST YOU WANT TO BE REMOVED FROM. From rforno at infowarrior.org Thu May 9 05:59:30 2013 From: rforno at infowarrior.org (Richard Forno) Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 08:59:30 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] NSA's 2007 "Internet Research" guide Message-ID: This little nugget is showing up in my various newsfeeds today. It's the unclassified "Internet Research" guide put together by the US National Security Agency in 2007 entitled "Untangling The Web". (The fact that it was (to use my term) 'faux-classified' and took a FOIA request by someone to obtain it pathetically amuses me, but that's a different discussion for a different venue.) It's not a scholarly text, but it's interesting to see the various examples/resources listed within its 650 pages. At the very least, it might be a useful historical item for fellow AOIR'ers. 12MB PDF download: http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/Untangling_the_Web.pdf --rick --- Just because i'm near the punchbowl doesn't mean I'm also drinking from it. From erika.darics at port.ac.uk Thu May 9 06:38:36 2013 From: erika.darics at port.ac.uk (Erika Darics) Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 14:38:36 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Digital Business Discourse CFP Message-ID: --Apologies for cross-posting-- Dear Colleagues, I invite chapter proposals for a volume entitled Digital Business Discourse, to be published by Palgrave in the series *Palgrave Studies in Professional and Organizational Discourse*. *Digital Business Discourse* Proposal submission deadline* 26 May 2013* Recent scholarship on business discourse either only scarcely registers computer-mediated discourse, or struggles to meaningfully combine the findings of the scholarship of organizational studies and linguistic/ computer-mediated discourse studies. The proposed volume of *Digital Business Discourse* is aimed to fill this gap by bringing together research addressing the interactional practices enabled by the various mediated communication modes currently used in the professional workplace or virtual work teams. The main aim of the volume is to bring together research on computer-mediated or digital business discourse, specifically studies that include language or discourse-focussed analysis of naturally occurring digital business interactions. The manuscripts sought are about 9,000 words long, containing original, previously unpublished research. For further details please visit: http://erika.darics.co/currentprojects.php or contact me at dbd at darics.co.uk Warmest wishes, *** Dr Erika Darics University of Portsmouth tel: +44 (0) 23 9284 6155 e-mail: erika.darics at port.ac.uk From amnewell at utexas.edu Thu May 9 06:56:57 2013 From: amnewell at utexas.edu (Angela Newell) Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 08:56:57 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] NSA's 2007 "Internet Research" guide In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Wired's Take: Use These Secret NSA Google Search Tips to Become Your Own Spy Agency - By Kim Zetter - 05.08.13 - 2:37 PM - There?s so much data available on the internet that even government cyberspies need a little help now and then to sift through it all. So to assist them, the National Security Agency produced a book to help its spies uncover intelligence hiding on the web. The 643-page tome, called *Untangling the Web: A Guide to Internet Research*(.pdf), was just released by the NSA following a FOIA request filed in April by MuckRock , a site that charges fees to process public records for activists and others. The book was published by the Center for Digital Content of the National Security Agency, and is filled with advice for using search engines, the Internet Archive and other online tools. But the most interesting is the chapter titled ?Google Hacking.? Say you?re a cyberspy for the NSA and you want sensitive inside information on companies in South Africa. What do you do? Search for confidential Excel spreadsheets the company inadvertently posted online by typing ?filetype:xls site:za confidential? into Google, the book notes. Want to find spreadsheets full of passwords in Russia? Type ?filetype:xls site:ru login.? Even on websites written in non-English languages the terms ?login,? ?userid,? and ?password? are generally written in English, the authors helpfully point out. Misconfigured web servers ?that list the contents of directories not intended to be on the web often offer a rich load of information to Google hackers,? the authors write, then offer a command to exploit these vulnerabilities ? intitle: ?index of? site:kr password. ?Nothing I am going to describe to you is illegal, nor does it in any way involve accessing unauthorized data,? the authors assert in their book. Instead it ?involves using publicly available search engines to access publicly available information that almost certainly was not intended for public distribution.? You know, sort of like the ?hacking? for which Andrew ?weev? Aurenheimer was recently sentenced to 3.5 years in prisonfor obtaining publicly accessible information from AT&T?s website. Stealing intelligence on the internet that others don?t want you to have might not be illegal, but it does come with other risks, the authors note: ?It is critical that you handle all Microsoft file types on the internet with extreme care. Never open a Microsoft file type on the internet. Instead, use one of the techniques described here,? they write in a footnote. The word ?here? is hyperlinked, but since the document is a PDF the link is inaccessible. No word about the dangers that Adobe PDFs pose. But the version of the manual the NSA released was last updated in 2007, so let?s hope later versions cover it. Although the author?s name is redacted in the version released by the NSA, Muckrock?s FOIA indicates it was written by Robyn Winder and Charlie Speight. A note the NSA added to the book before releasing it under FOIA says that the opinions expressed in it are the authors?, and not the agency?s. Lest you think that none of this is new, that Johnny Long has been talking about this for years at hacker conferences and in his book Google Hacking, you?d be right. In fact, the authors of the NSA book give a shoutout to Johnny, but with the caveat that Johnny?s tips are designed for cracking ? breaking into websites and servers. ?That is not something I encourage or advocate,? the author writes. http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/05/nsa-manual-on-hacking-internet/?cid=7829534 On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 7:59 AM, Richard Forno wrote: > > This little nugget is showing up in my various newsfeeds today. It's the > unclassified "Internet Research" guide put together by the US National > Security Agency in 2007 entitled "Untangling The Web". (The fact that it > was (to use my term) 'faux-classified' and took a FOIA request by someone > to obtain it pathetically amuses me, but that's a different discussion for > a different venue.) > > It's not a scholarly text, but it's interesting to see the various > examples/resources listed within its 650 pages. At the very least, it > might be a useful historical item for fellow AOIR'ers. > > 12MB PDF download: > http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/Untangling_the_Web.pdf > > --rick > > --- > Just because i'm near the punchbowl doesn't mean I'm also drinking from it. > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Angela Newell, Ph.D. University of Texas at Austin LBJ School of Public Affairs amnewell at gmail.com amnewell at utexas.edu From sarina.chen at uni.edu Thu May 9 09:24:45 2013 From: sarina.chen at uni.edu (Shing-Ling (Sarina) Chen) Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 11:24:45 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] 2013 Steve Jones Internet Research Lecture Series Features Jeremy Silver Message-ID: The 2013 Steve Jones Internet Research Lecture Series will feature Jeremy Silver. Silver will deliver his lecture, ?The Digital Medieval?, at 12:30 pm (London time) on Thursday, June 20 in Hilton Metropole, Board Room 1, during the International Communication Association?s 63rd Annual Conference, in London, UK, June 17-21. Jeremy Silver is an entrepreneur, adviser and digital media thought-leader, focused on innovation and growth in creative businesses. He advises on the creative industries at the UK Technology Strategy Board. He is Chairman of Semetric, a real time analytics company providing actionable data to the entertainment business and Chairman of MusicGlue, an artist?s services company providing direct to consumer online ticketing to bands (including for example, Mumford & Sons, Marillion, Enter Chikari). He is a non executive director of the Bridgeman Art Library. He is Chairman of Gollant Media Ventures. Silver was CEO of Sibelius Software (a music notation software company) which he led for six years and sold to Avid Technology, securing an exit for the Founders and investors, Quester VCT. During the first internet bubble, Silver was worldwide Vice President of New Media for EMI Music Group in London and then in Los Angeles. He went on to run the playlist-sharing, social music service, Uplister Inc, based in San Francisco, backed by August Capital. Silver began his music industry career at the BPI as director of press & PR, and went on to become director of media affairs at the Virgin Music Group, working closely with many artists including Genesis, Meat Loaf, Brian Eno, Massive Attack and the Future Sound of London. Silver has presented and spoken on music and digital media at conferences and seminars around the world including TEDx, Midem, Thinking Digital, and In The City. Silver has a PhD in English Literature. Silver?s intermittent blog appears at www.mediaclarity.com This event is co-sponsored by the Carl Couch Center for Social and Internet Research (www.cccsir.com), University of Illinois, Chicago, and the International Communication Association. For more information about this event, please contact Shing-Ling Sarina Chen, sarina.chen at uni.edu. From sherylgrant at gmail.com Thu May 9 09:59:02 2013 From: sherylgrant at gmail.com (Sheryl Grant) Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 12:59:02 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Now accepting proposals: Project:Connect -- Summer Youth Programming Competition Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~PLEASE CIRCULATE WIDELY. Apologies for cross-posting.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ *HASTAC/MacArthur Foundation Digital Media and Learning Competition 5 * *Project:Connect -- Summer Youth Programming Competition* The fifth Digital Media and Learning Competition, the Project:Connect -- Summer Youth Programming Competition, *is now accepting applications*. The Project:Connect -- Summer Youth Programming Competition calls for summer event and programming proposals to excite and enable youth to engage the web in civil, collaborative, productive, safe, and confidence-building ways. The Competition supports single or multi-day participatory and hands-on learning experiences (labs, hackathons, pop-up events) that support youth working with peers, mentors, and educators on learning and creating experiences toward a better web for all. Based on the principles of Connected Learning?learning that is equitable, social, and participatory ? Project:Connect Summer Youth Programs will give young people hands-on experience creating, testing, and investigating ways to make using the web a better place to learn, connect, make, contribute, and share. The Project:Connect -- Summer Youth Program Competition is administered by HASTAC and supported by the MacArthur Foundation, in collaboration with the Born This Way Foundationand Mozilla . A related Open International Competition focused on Project:Connect will be announced on May 28th. For the latest news, connect with us in one of the ways listed below. *For full information: *dmlcompetition.net *Awards*: Up to $10,000 per institution (winners to be announced in early July) *Deadline*: Online applications are due June 10, 2013, at 5pm PST. How to apply . *Timeline*: Project:Connect -- Youth Summer Programs will be held July-September, 2013. Full timeline . Who is eligible to apply: U.S.-based non-profit learning development and civic engagement institutions and organizations (including learning development organizations such as museums, libraries, after school and summer programs). Additional eligibility requirements . Winning proposals will create: - Social Tools for Social Good ? Enabling people to create a culture of kindness, respect, and safety that enhances civic participation for youth. - Social Tools that Enable Control of Information ? Helping youth understand how to control their information, and manage privacy and security. - Social Tools that Enable Literacy ? Helping youth build, access, and understand the web in ways that support interest-driven learning, and empower learners to connect in safe ways with resources, mentors, and peers. Program participants may design or create: - Social apps ? Create apps, including mobile apps, that promote and enable civic engagement with peers, community building, and kindness to others. - Badging programs ? Create apps, including mobile apps, that leverage badging and other recognition and feedback methods to inspire youth to develop civic engagement with peers and community building in connected, cooperative, collaborative, safe, and respectful ways. - Learning content ? Create learning content, curricula, media promotions, and other approaches about how to foster a more engaged, egalitarian, safe, and sharing internet. Project:Connect -- Summer Youth Programs may include: - Hackathons, that involve youth in connection with mentoring developers and educators in designing, prototyping, and/or coding software; or developing learning programs that promote a better web for learning through connecting and connecting through learning. - Digital learning labs, that provide hands-on experience using digital tools for connecting safely, collaborating purposefully, and communicating effectively via the web. - Testing labs, that involve young people in evaluating software and online learning programs that promote good web citizenship, or a better web for learning and sharing. - Mentoring or leadership workshops, that identify potential peer instructors and mentors, and provide them with opportunities to learn how to support and mentor others effectively and respectfully in web-based connected learning programs and applications. - Journalism and communications labs, where young people ? acting as reporters, bloggers, and podcasters ? participate in the creation of public media that engages questions of equity, good citizenship, privacy, collaboration, and sharing on the web. - Badge development workshops, that provide youth with the tools to develop badges for recognizing and rewarding effective digital citizenship, promoting privacy, effective web participation, and connected learning opportunities. Connect with the Digital Media and Learning Competition: Web: www.dmlcompetition.net Twitter: www.twitter.com/dmlComp Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/DMLcomp G+: https://plus.google.com/u/0/103047964663117398536/ LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Digital-Media-Learning-Competition-3935137 List-serv: Send an email to dmlcompnews-request [at] duke.edu with "subscribe" in the subject line From david at davidlgates.com Thu May 9 13:56:15 2013 From: david at davidlgates.com (David L. Gates) Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 15:56:15 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] doctoral research project Message-ID: <439E7D85855E46C0A4F0DCA4872FD84F@Gates> I am an experienced marital/family therapist who has dealt with infidelity in my practice for decades. At this moment, I am a doctoral student conducting an online survey on the interaction of guilt, shame, and forgiveness on the security of a relationship when there has been infidelity. I need at minimum 64 individuals who are in a committed relationship where there has been infidelity. The survey is, of course, completely confidential...no personal identifiers are sought and all info is coded. The link to the survey is https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/6JPW7RB. Participants can simply log on and complete the survey. I can be contacted by phone at 847-525-0877 or by e-mail at david at davidlgates.com From jsalmons at vision2lead.com Thu May 9 16:15:37 2013 From: jsalmons at vision2lead.com (Janet Salmons, Ph.D.) Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 17:15:37 -0600 Subject: [Air-L] Scales for social media participation akin to "experience"? Message-ID: The "Social Technographics Ladder" is a couple of years old, and somewhat simplistic, but it does illustrate a progression from passive "spectators" to "creators": http://blogs.forrester.com/f/b/users/JROUSSEAUANDERSON/blog--st.gif. (from Li, C., & Bernoff, J. (2011). *Groundswell: Winning in a world transformed by social technologies* (2nd ed.). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.) I'll look forward to seeing what others on the list contribute to answer your question! Best, Janet *Janet Salmons Ph.D.* *Capella University School of Business and Vision2Lead, Inc. *Site- http://www.vision2lead.com Follow Twitter at #einterview Now available as Kindle e-books: Cases in Online Interview Research and Online Interviews in Real Time PO Box 943 Boulder, CO 80306-0943 jsalmons at vision2lead.com From andymcstay at gmail.com Thu May 9 22:27:43 2013 From: andymcstay at gmail.com (Andy) Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 06:27:43 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Social media as therapy Message-ID: Hi all, This does feel a little like cheating (it is really OK to just ask people?!), but can any of you fine people suggest readings and papers detailing where social media has been used in a therapeutic manner to aid in overcoming addictions? If you have anything involving involving images (such as Instagram), all the better. Thanks hive mind! Cheers, Andy From nielshendriks at gmail.com Thu May 9 23:59:31 2013 From: nielshendriks at gmail.com (Niels Hendriks) Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 08:59:31 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] Second Call: Participatory Design for Persons with Cognitive or Sensory Impairments @ Interact2013 Message-ID: * Are you interested in participatory design and do you work with users with impairments? We organize a workshop on participatory design for persons with cognitive or sensory impairmentsat Interact 2013 in Cape Town, South Africa. This workshop will be held on Tuesday September 3rd. Workshop on participatory design for users with impairments Involving people with impairments in the design process is very challenging, especially when impairments affect cognitive functions or communication. People with such impairments may have substantial problems with thought processes and communication, including understanding abstractions, sequencing thoughts and actions, understanding symbols, and interpreting social cues. Many participatory design techniques are based on these processes and are therefore not usable, or need to be adjusted for people with impairments. Workshop aims This workshop aims to exchange experiences with participatory design techniques that were designed for, or adapted to people with impairments. Since many of these techniques are highly focused on specific target groups, a further aim is to extract general principles and to generate guidelines for involving users with impairments in the design process. Who should attend? Researchers and designers who have been involved in one or more design-oriented project(s) involving users with impairments are invited to participate. After this workshop, a call for papers will be launched for a special issue (on the topic of the workshop) of the journal CoDesign. Important dates - May 15: application deadline - May 24: notification of acceptance - September 3: workshop date - September 4 to 6: Interact main conference Further information & contact Please visit our project website for the workshop's programme and to apply for the workshop: http://interact2013impairmentsworkshop.wordpress.com/. For more information and questions, please contact Karin Slegers: karin.slegers at soc.kuleuven.be We hope to see you in Cape Town in September!* From ftmarchese at yahoo.com Fri May 10 14:13:58 2013 From: ftmarchese at yahoo.com (Frank Marchese) Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 14:13:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Air-L] CFP: Digital Art and the Urban Environment: a Symposium, Art Exhibition, and Scholarly Volume Message-ID: <1368220438.96446.YahooMailNeo@web125806.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> First Call for Participation Digital Art and the Urban Environment: a Symposium, Art Exhibition, and Scholarly Volume Location:????????? Pace University, Downtown Manhattan, New York City ? Date:??????????????? Friday, October 4, 2013 ? Sponsors: ??????? Pace Digital Gallery, Seidenberg School of Computer Science and Information Systems, and the Pace Academy for Applied Environmental Studies ? Digital and new media artists utilize innovations in locative media, tracking technologies, telecommunication networks, and novel computer interfaces to craft artworks that create new ways to connect with the city. Just as their predecessors transformed urban neighborhoods, such as New York?s SoHo and Chelsea, through their energy and imagination, today?s artists are altering our perceptions of, and relationships with, urban space though their digital inventions and interventions. Thus, it is the purpose of this symposium, art exhibition, and scholarly volume to formally appraise the ways new media and digital artists engage urban ecology. It seeks to gather together contributions from artists, architects, computer scientists, designers, urban planners, social scientists, critical theorists, and others to consider these new modes of seeing, representing, and connecting within the urban setting. ? There are three possible ways to participate: ? 1.??? Symposium. Propose an oral presentation, dialog, panel, or other form of audience engagement for the symposium. Topics can range from reviews of how technology supports digital artistic practice to social studies of how a group or community is engaged by the work of digital and new media artists ? and everything in between. ? The proposal should be approximately 300 words in length, include a very short list of important references, the names and affiliations of the presenters, along with a brief bio of each. Papers related to all accepted presentations will be considered for the edited scholarly volume (see below). ? 2.???? Edited Scholarly Volume. The goal of the scholarly volume is to define and contextualize the ways new media and digital artists engage the urban environment and its population. It seeks chapter proposals that describe theories, applications, analyses, case studies, reviews, histories, and manifestos that include, but art not limited to: ? ????????? Artistic and design practices for the urban setting ????????? Artist, designer, scientist, technologist collaborations ????????? Artistic creations and practice based on scientific/technological models and simulations ????????? Virtual and physical information artifacts related to, or created through, artistic and design processes ????????? Artistic mapping of information within the urban setting ????????? The relationship between information spaces and urban spaces ????????? The role of the viewer in urban art ????????? How digital artistic practice engages communities within the urban setting ????????? Technological advances supporting urban art ????????? User interfaces supporting urban art ? As with the symposium proposal, a chapter proposal should be approximately 300 words in length, include a very short list of important references, the names and affiliations of the presenters, along with a brief bio of each. It is anticipated that the scholarly volume will be published by a major international publisher. ? 3.????? Art Exhibition. Artists are invited to submit artwork related to the symposium theme for display either within the Pace Digital Gallery or through its website (http://csis.pace.edu/digitalgallery/index.html ). Artists should submit a short proposal describing their artwork, a brief biography, and the URL of their websites. All artwork in the show will be documented in the show?s catalog. ? Important Information: Due Date: All submissions are due by Sunday, July 13, 2012. ? All proposals for symposia presentations, book chapters, artwork, and any other inquiries should be emailed to: ? Dr. Francis T. Marchese Pace Digital Gallery & Department of Computer Science Pace University 163 William Street, 2nd Floor NY, NY10038 Email: fmarchese at pace.edu Academic Web page: http://csis.pace.edu/~marchese Pace Digital Gallery Web page: http://csis.pace.edu/digitalgallery/ From binark at baskent.edu.tr Sat May 11 02:44:31 2013 From: binark at baskent.edu.tr (F. Mutlu Binark) Date: Sat, 11 May 2013 12:44:31 +0300 Subject: [Air-L] (no subject) In-Reply-To: <1368220438.96446.YahooMailNeo@web125806.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1368220438.96446.YahooMailNeo@web125806.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Here the declaration made by the academicians and the NGO particpants, following the 1st National New Media Conference in Turkey: https://yenimedya.wordpress.com/2013/05/10/final-decleration-of-1st-national-new-media-conference-was-published/ -- Prof.Dr. Mutlu Binark Baskent Universitesi Iletisim Fakultesi Radyo-Tv. ve Sinema Blm. Bagl?ca Kampusu Eskisehir Yolu 20.km. 06530 Ankara Tel: (312) 246 6652-53 Fax: (312) 246 66 57 www.yenimedya.wordpress.com www.dijitaloyun.wordpress.com alternatifbilisim.tv -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. From binark at baskent.edu.tr Sat May 11 02:45:52 2013 From: binark at baskent.edu.tr (F. Mutlu Binark) Date: Sat, 11 May 2013 12:45:52 +0300 Subject: [Air-L] Declaration of 1st National New Media Conference In-Reply-To: References: <1368220438.96446.YahooMailNeo@web125806.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: sorry for cross posting... > Here the declaration made by the academicians and the NGO particpants, > following the 1st National New Media Conference in Turkey: > > https://yenimedya.wordpress.com/2013/05/10/final-decleration-of-1st-national-new-media-conference-was-published/ > > -- > Prof.Dr. Mutlu Binark > Baskent Universitesi > Iletisim Fakultesi > Radyo-Tv. ve Sinema Blm. > Bagl?ca Kampusu > Eskisehir Yolu 20.km. > 06530 Ankara > Tel: (312) 246 6652-53 > Fax: (312) 246 66 57 > www.yenimedya.wordpress.com > www.dijitaloyun.wordpress.com > alternatifbilisim.tv > > > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean. > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. From geneloeb at gmail.com Sat May 11 08:59:39 2013 From: geneloeb at gmail.com (gene loeb) Date: Sat, 11 May 2013 10:59:39 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] need help with project Message-ID: I have tried to have an informal site about use of internet to help elderly. Increasing creative uses of internet have been occuring and I want to emphasize uses of internet, and use of technology to help communities-community informatics. I am not good in designing a site so my work has been by word of mouth. the name I have used is "center for technoloogy and cognitive health of older persons" I need help-other sites emphasize technology in general. I want to redo my site to emphasize research, where researchers and those with ideas can share. There is a great lack of sharing of research. I would like to share this activity with others-a researcher and or a university or foundation. I woulld rename it to something like "Institute for Technology and Cognitive (or Mental ) Health of Older Persons. Please help. And thanks for get well greetings for my pneomonia hospitalization. I am out of the hospital now and with a little pain. Now I want to help others. Thanks, wonderful people Gene Gene Loeb, Ph.D. -- With Sincerest Best Wishes , Gene Gene Loeb, Ph.D. From editor at connexionsjournal.org Sat May 11 11:13:35 2013 From: editor at connexionsjournal.org (connexions journal) Date: Sat, 11 May 2013 12:13:35 -0600 Subject: [Air-L] =?windows-1252?q?Publication_of_inaugural_issue_of_connex?= =?windows-1252?q?ions_=95_international_professional_communication?= =?windows-1252?q?_journal?= Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, I am delighted to announce the publication of the first issue of connexions at http://connexionsjournal.org/special-isues/1-1/ I hope you enjoy the issue. Ros?rio Ros?rio Dur?o Editor *www.connexionsjournal.org **connexions on facebook , LinkedIn, twitter * *connexions ?** international professi****onal communication journal *(ISSN 2325-6044) *Department of Communication, Liberal Arts, and Social Sciences - **New Mexico Tech ** *** From lists at catherinemiddleton.ca Sun May 12 08:14:56 2013 From: lists at catherinemiddleton.ca (Catherine Middleton) Date: Sun, 12 May 2013 11:14:56 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] AoIR election: Candidates Message-ID: <0E93DEED-0439-4973-B6EB-9AE3531BE413@catherinemiddleton.ca> Hello all, I'm very pleased to announce the slate of candidate for the upcoming AoIR Executive committee election. Candidates' position statements and details on the voting process will be posted soon. Candidates for Vice President Ruth Deller Jeremy Hunsinger Jennifer Stromer-Galley Secretary Andrew Herman (acclaimed) Treasurer Michael Zimmer (acclaimed) Candidates for Open Seats Daren Brabham Sun Sun Lim Annette Markham Kelly Quinn Dylan Wittkower Candidates for Graduate Student Representative Stacy Blasiola Anthony Hoffmann Catherine Middleton AoIR Secretary From vmayer at tulane.edu Sun May 12 15:16:08 2013 From: vmayer at tulane.edu (Mayer, Vicki A) Date: Sun, 12 May 2013 22:16:08 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] badges for undergrad writing and presentation skills? Message-ID: Hi all, I've been searching for any institutions that use badges or some other flex new media system to assess undergrad writing and/or presentation skills. So far, the best I've found is a badge for wikipedia entry writing. I'm just trying to get the lay of the land on this. Thanks, Dr. Vicki Mayer Editor, Television & New Media Director, MediaNOLA, http://medianola.org Professor Communication Department 205 Newcomb Hall Tulane University New Orleans, LA 70118 From geneloeb at gmail.com Sun May 12 20:25:06 2013 From: geneloeb at gmail.com (gene loeb) Date: Sun, 12 May 2013 22:25:06 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Fwd: Vol 8 Issue 1 In-Reply-To: <20130508125007.1012.25952@chaiten.ccurico.local> References: <20130508125007.1012.25952@chaiten.ccurico.local> Message-ID: This is an interesting publication which may have some content- of interest to Air members.--- thank you, gene geneloeb at gmail.com Forwarded message ---------- From: Daete: Wed, May 8, 2013 at 7:50 AM Subject: Vol 8 Issue 1 To: geneloeb at gmail.com Dear JTAER Reader, The volume 8, issue 1 (April 2013) of the Journal of Theoretical andApplied Electronic Commerce Research (ISSN 0718-1876) is now available online. This issue includes the following papers: Special Issue on Use and Impact of Social Networking Guest Editors? Introduction Frantisek Sudzina, Hans-Dieter Zimmermann and Sherah Kurnia Research Social Identity for Teenagers: Understanding Behavioral Intention to Participate in Virtual World Environment Heikki Karjaluoto and Matti Lepp?niemi pp. 1-16 Shopping and Word-of-Mouth Intentions on Social Media Patrick Mikalef, Michail Giannakos and Adamantia Pateli pp. 17-34 Social Networks, Interactivity and Satisfaction: Assessing Socio-Technical Behavioral Factors as an Extension to Technology Acceptance Belinda Shipps and Brandis Phillips pp. 35-52 What Drives Consumers to Pass Along Marketer-Generated eWOM in Social Network Games? Social and Game Factors in Play Sara Steffes Hansen and Jin Kyun Lee pp. 53-68 Electronic Word of Mouth and Knowledge Sharing on Social Network Sites: A Social Capital Perspective Jae Hoon Choi and Judy E. Scott pp. 69-82 We would like to invite you to consider the Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research to publish the results of your research projects in the field of Electronic Commerce. We also encourage you to participate as a referee, giving your time and expertise to the research community of which you are an important member. To become a referee for the Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, please email the Editor-in-Chief (ncerpa at utalca.cl) offering your expertise in specific areas of e-Commerce. Please read the editorial from December 2012 to learn about the new Research Network and Alert System. It may be accessed at the following address: http://www.jtaer.com/network/index.php. If you are already an author, reviewer or member of the editorial board, you may use your current login and password to access the new system. Otherwise, you may register and obtaing a login and password Warm regards, Dr. Narciso Cerpa Editor-in-Chief Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research www.jtaer.com jtaer at utalca.cl We are pleased to provide you with information that might be of interest to you. Would you like to stop receiving these valuable messages in your inbox? Click here. Would you like to update your information and continue receiving these messages? Click here . -- With Sincerest Best Wishes , Gene Gene Loeb, Ph.D. From T.Markham at bbk.ac.uk Mon May 13 03:40:30 2013 From: T.Markham at bbk.ac.uk (Tim Markham) Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 11:40:30 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] ICA Pre-conference: Conditions of Mediation - 17 June 2013 at Birkbeck, University of London Message-ID: CALL FOR LISTENERS/PARTICIPANTS Conditions of Mediation: Phenomenological Approaches to Media, Technology and Communication 2013 International Communication Association (ICA) Preconference ICA Theory, Philosophy and Critique Division 17 June 2013, Birkbeck, University of London Conference website (includes full conference programme and registration details): http://conditionsofmediation.wordpress.com Confirmed keynote speakers: * Dr David Berry, Swansea University * Professor Nick Couldry, Goldsmiths, University of London * Professor Graham Harman, American University of Cairo * Professor Shaun Moores, University of Sunderland * Professor Lisa Parks, University of California Santa Barbara * Professor Paddy Scannell, University of Michigan Conference Outline: Media theory seems to have reached a moment in which it is effectively orthodox to presume we must pay attention first and foremost to the intricacies of everyday experience. Ethnographic audience studies, for example, have attacked assumptions that there is a discrete relationship between media content and audiences, arguing that media forms, content and technologies have indeterminate and multifaceted significance within the daily rhythms and spaces of their everyday lives. Studies of digital and networked media, meanwhile, have put into question the very notion of 'audiences' as the starting point for understanding mediated experience. For some, accounting for the intricacies of everyday mediated experience has implied asking people what they actually do with media. But for others this is not enough: instead, the question is what constitutes the conditions of media experience in the first place. How do political configurations of discourses and inherited dispositions prefigure mediated action? How do material arrangements themselves constitute environments for mediated experience? How might we account for nonhuman agency, for example the ways in which software objects interact not only with human perceptions but also each other? Such questions point to a renewed confidence in explaining not just how but also why media, technology and communication are experienced as they are - all the while resisting a reversion to functionalism. These interests in the very conditions of mediation suggest, if sometimes only implicitly, an emerging interest in a phenomenology of media. Indeed, phenomenology - broadly the structuring of perception - has seemingly obvious relevance for recent academic interests in media experience. Yet its use or invocation in media studies has been scattered. While this might simply reflect the considerable diversity of phenomenological philosophies and their applications, there have also been concerted efforts recently to rethink phenomenology across the social sciences and humanities. Paired with recent interests in mediated experience, the time seems apt to reassess what it might mean to theorize media phenomenologically. Conditions of Mediation seeks to bring together scholars from a very wide range of perspectives - such as media history, media archaeology, audience studies, political theory, metaphysics, software studies, science and technology studies, digital aesthetics, cultural geography and urban studies - to reflect explicitly on the phenomenological groundings of their work on media. The phenomenological thinking to which participants might connect will be broad-based, ranging from core thinkers such as Husserl, Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty and Sartre to those with looser affiliations to phenomenology per se, for example Arendt, Bergson, Bourdieu, Deleuze, Garfinkel, Ingold, Latour, Whitehead and Harman. In short, the overall aim is that this conference goes beyond a mere congregation of media phenomenologists. Instead, it will encourage critical reflection on what various readings of phenomenology might offer media and technology studies that other approaches cannot. Conversely, it will also welcome reflections on the limits of phenomenological approaches in philosophical, theoretical, political and empirical terms. If you have any inquiries, please email both: Scott Rodgers (s.rodgers at bbk.ac.uk) and Tim Markham (t.markham at bbk.ac.uk) -- Dr Tim Markham Reader in Journalism and Media Head of Department, Media and Cultural Studies Programme Director, MA/PGCert Journalism, BA Media and Business Applications Director of Graduate Research, Media and Cultural Studies Assistant Dean for Recruitment and Retention, School of Arts Birkbeck, University of London 43 Gordon Square London WC1H 0PD tel: (020) 3073 8380 t.markham at bbk.ac.uk http://www.bbk.ac.uk/culture/our-staff/tim_markham From j-laprise at northwestern.edu Mon May 13 05:38:34 2013 From: j-laprise at northwestern.edu (John Paul Laprise) Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 12:38:34 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] CFP 8th GIGANET Symposium Message-ID: Please circulate: CALL FOR PAPERS 8th Annual Symposium 21 October 2013 Bali, Indonesia Deadline for abstract submission: July 1 2013 The Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet) is seeking research submissions about Internet Governance to be presented at its Eighth Annual Symposium, held on 21 October 2013, one day before the United Nations Internet Governance Forum (IGF) in Bali, Indonesia. GigaNet is a scholarly community that promotes the development of Internet Governance as a recognized, interdisciplinary field of study and facilitates informed dialogue on policy issues and related matters between scholars and governments, international organizations, the private sector and civil society. http://giga-net.org/ Since 2006, GigaNet has organized an Annual Symposium to showcase research about Internet Governance, bringing together researchers from a wide range of disciplines and fields. As in previous years, the symposium will provide room to discuss current and future questions as well as the challenges encountered and results achieved in global Internet governance. Conference themes GigaNet is interested in receiving abstracts related to Internet Governance themes, especially those containing innovative approaches and/or emerging research areas. This year, we are especially encouraging submissions on two interwoven themes: * Cybersecurity, cybersurveillance, cyberespionage and cyberwarfare and * State and non-state actor efforts to control the Internet The program committee welcomes proposals on any other topics related to global Internet governance. This year, one panel will be especially devoted to emerging scholars in the field. We define emerging scholars as doctoral students working on an approved proposal through scholars who have received their PhD within the past three years. Accepted papers from senior scholars will be presented and discussed in a roundtable format involving business, government and technical community representatives, while emerging scholars will present their work in a more traditional academic panel. In both cases, presenters should expect to have conversations about their work with people from a wide range of stakeholder groups. Submissions Interested scholars should submit abstracts of their research paper at the Easy Chair platform: https://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=giganet2013 The deadline for submission is July 1, 2013! Paper proposals should be submitted following these requirements: ? An abstract of 800-1000 words, in English, where it is mandatory to describe the main research goal(s) and the methodological background of the paper ? A short bio note focused on institutional affiliations, advanced degrees, scholarly publications and work in the field of Internet Governance and related issues (for example ICTs). Please include a link to a more detailed CV. ? Authors of accepted abstracts must submit their final papers by 30 September 2013. Those unable to do so will be removed from the program. Process and publication The Program Committee will evaluate submitted abstracts and inform proposal authors of acceptance decisions by email before 29 July 2013. Accepted submissions and final papers will be published on the GigaNet website. An online publication with selected papers on the main challenges of Internet Governance is also planned for the Bali IGF. Registration The GigaNet Annual Symposium is free of charge. However, registration will be required to gain entry to the event venue. Please continue visiting our website for further information about registration, venue and accommodation. If you have any question related to the submission or the symposium activities, please e-mail the Program Committee Chair: j-laprise at northwestern.edu. Best regards, John Laprise, Ph.D. Visiting Fellow Oxford Internet Institute Oxford University Assistant Professor of Communication in Residence Northwestern University in Qatar Northwestern University From joly at punkcast.com Mon May 13 09:22:05 2013 From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie) Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 12:22:05 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] CALLS for PAPERS and PROPOSALS / MAY 2013 deadlines Message-ID: Ana Isobel is a member of the Internet Society based in Sao Paulo, Brazil. She is regularly contributes to our linked in group, which I moderate. I thought this collection might be of interest, although some of the deadlines are already past. I wonder if she ia already on this list? If not, I should perhaps invite her. CALLS for PAPERS and PROPOSALS / MAY 2013 deadlines 1) The IADIS Multi Conference on Computer Science & Information Systems (MCCSIS 2013) aims to address subjects like Computer Science, Information Systems & other emergent related fields: e-Learning 2013 - eL2013: http://www.elearning-conf.org/ Intelligent Systems & Agents 2013 - ISA2013: http://www.isa-conf.org/ Theory & Practice in Modern Computing 2013 - TPMC2013: http://www.tpmc-conf.org/ Game & Entertainment Technologies 2013 - GET2013: http://www.gaming-conf.org/ ICT, Society, & Human Beings 2013 ? ICT2013: http://www.ict-conf.org/ Web Based Communities & Social Media 2013 - WBC2013: http://www.webcommunities-conf.org/ Interfaces & Human Computer Interaction 2013 - IHCI2013: http://www.ihci-conf.org/ Data Mining 2013 - DM2013: http://www.datamining-conf.org/ e-Commerce 2013 - EC2013: http://www.ecommerce-conf.org/ Computer Graphics, Visualization, Computer Vision & Image Processing 2013 - CGVCVIP2013: http://www.cgv-conf.org/ e-Health 2013 - eH2013: http://www.ehealth-conf.org/ Collaborative Technologies 2013 - CT2013: http://www.collaborativetech-conf.org/ Information Systems Post-implementation & Change Management 2013 - ISPCM2013: http://www.ispcm-conf.org/ Submission Deadline (2nd call): May 1st Source: http://www.mccsis.org/ 2) 2013 Technology4Good Awards The Awards celebrate the hard work of people of all ages who use the power of computers & the internet to make the world a better place. It is open to any UK-based individual, business, charity or public body who can show how they are using digital technology to help an individual or group of people to overcome their disabilities. It is free to enter & there are eight categories: Accessibility BT Get IT Together Community Impact Digital Giving Digital Skills Grow Your Charity Online IT Volunteer of the Year Local Digital Champion Nominations close 5pm, May 3. Source: http://www.technology4goodawards.org.uk/accessibility-award-2013/ 3) Girls Transform the World Digital Action Campaign / World Pulse When girls are heard, they will transform the world. Now is the time for every girl to have the education & boundless opportunities she needs to unleash her potential. You are invited to join us in speaking out for the rights of girls as we showcase the voices & solutions of grassroots women around the world. Why Participate? Your voice will be heard ? You will connect ? Your voice will be elevated Make Like-Minded Connections: Share your story & connect with others in similar situations. Learn & Be Inspired: Read others? stories, learn about other experiences, & gain inspiration. Explore Solutions: Find out how others climbed over, dug under, or broke through their barriers, & hear their visions for the future. Transform: Watch your story find its way to places you never thought imaginable. Watch it make impact. Tell us your own story & perspective on girls?either personally experienced or witnessed in your community?& outline your vision for change. Deadline: May 10. Learn how to participate at http://tinyurl.com/c96mjrg 4a) DRT4all 2013: V Intl Congress on Design, Research Networks, & Technology for All (Sep 23- 25; Madrid, Spain) It is a window to the future. Its main goal is getting to know about the latest advances in ICT supporting independent living of people with functional limitations, & to demonstrate how these technologies can work together in order to help people with disabilities & the elderly lead a better life, & to achieve a full integration into society. DRT4all is above all a scientific conference where we hope to showcase the different characteristics of assistive technologies, with user experience as the key aspect. Industry stakeholders & public administration officials, who also play a central role in the development of these technologies, will be a prominent part of this event. Call for papers (extended): May 15th Source: http://tinyurl.com/caccjsz 4b) 2013/2014 Elizabeth Neuffer Fellowship The International Women's Media Foundation (IWMF) is now accepting applications for the 2013/2014 Elizabeth Neuffer Fellowship, designed for a woman journalist working in print, broadcast or digital news media to spend seven months in a tailored program that combines access to MIT?s Center for International Studies and media outlets including The Boston Globe and The New York Times. Journalists working in the print, broadcast and Internet media, including freelancers, are eligible to apply. Applicants must have a minimum of three years of experience in journalism. Applications will be accepted until May 1st, and the fellowship will run from Sep 2013 ? Mar 2014. To apply, visit iwmf.org/2013neuffer to start the online application process. For more information about this fellowship, go to iwmf.org/2013neuffer, contact Ann Marie Valentine (202-496-1992, neuffer at iwmf.org) and follow @IWMF on Twitter. Source: http://iwmf.org/neufferfellowship/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/2013-03-12 5) W3C Workshop - Referencing and Applying WCAG 2.0 in Different Contexts: Intl Standard Accessibility Policies, Web Applications, Mobile Web (May 23; Brussels, Belgium) This is a W3C Workshop and is open to policy-makers, users, developers, accessibility experts, researchers, and others interested in adopting, referencing, and applying WCAG 2.0. We invite you to: - Discuss approaches for referencing and adopting WCAG 2.0 - Exchange experiences with implementing policies that reference WCAG 2.0 - Share resources that support the implementation of WCAG 2.0 - Identify priorities for further developing resources and support material. Participation in this Workshop is free; spaces are limited. Registration will close on 7 May, or when spaces are filled. Source: http://www.w3.org/WAI/ACT/workshop 6) International Development Journalism Competition "Entries are invited for The Guardian International Development Journalism competition which focuses to search enthusiastic writers who want to demonstrate their journalistic abilities by examining crucial issues. The challenge is to write a feature of 650 to 1,000 words on an aspect of global poverty that deserves greater media exposure. Eligibility & Criteria: Those working at any of the following are all eligible; people writing for national magazines, journals, radio + TV stations, websites and local newspapers. The Competition is open to UK residents aged 18. Deadline application: May 12 Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development-professionals-network/2013/mar/27/international-development-journalism-competition-about-the-awards 7) "Supporting public procurement for innovative solutions (PPI) in eHealth, active and healthy ageing and assisted living" - Call for proposals The objective of PPI pilots is to reinforce early deployment of innovative ICT solutions by enabling trans-national buyers groups of public procurers possibly together with other types of procurers - to overcome the fragmentation of demand for innovative ICT solutions in Europe, and to share the risks and costs of acting as early adopters of innovative solutions. Access the presentations done by the European Commission at the workshop of 15 January 2013: PPI explanation of the instrument: http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/cf/dae/document.cfm?action=display&doc_id=1562 European Innovation Partnership on Active & Healthy Ageing Obj 3.2 content focus: http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/cf/dae/document.cfm?action=display&doc_id=1565 eHealth Action Plan - Obj 3.2.a content focus: http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/cf/dae/document.cfm?action=display&doc_id=1566 The video of the workshop is available for viewing at http://scic.ec.europa.eu/streaming/index.php?es=2&sessionno=8abfe8ac9ec214d68541fcb888c0b4c3 For further details please read the guide for applicants is available on the participant portal, in which you can find further detailed information regarding the PPI instruments, conditions, specificities, etcetera. Contact: infso-ict-psp at ec.europa.eu Deadline:May 14 Source: http://www.age-platform.eu/en/call-for-proposals 8) Programme: CIP - ICT Policy Support Programme - Call for proposals: theme 3 (ICT For Health, Ageing Well and Inclusion) It will support: 3.1 a) Telehealth programmes for the management of mental disorders - Pilot A 3.1 b) Wide deployment of integrated care - Pilot B 3.2.a) eHealth - PPI pilot (more details on PPI objectives below) 3.2 b) Active & healthy ageing and assisted living - PPI pilots (more details on PPI objectives below) 3.3 a) Innovation for age friendly cities, buildings and environments - Thematic Network 3.3 b) Assessing impact and raising awareness on benefits of innovative eHealth tools and services - Thematic Network 3.3 c) Sustainability of EU wide info-structure and collaborative governance - Thematic Network 3.3 d) Clinical practice guidelines for eHealth services - Thematic Network This theme contributes to the implementation of the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing (EIP on AHA) and supports the enactment of the Digital Agenda for Europe Key Action 13 promoting patient empowerment and the wider deployment of telemedicine to enhance deployment of innovation in health and empower patients. For additional info see: - http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/news-redirect/9332/ - http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/page/call_CIP?callIdentifier=CIP-ICT-PSP-2013-7&specificProgram=ICT-PSP Deadline: May 14 Source: http://www.age-platform.eu/en/call-for-proposals 9) ICMI 2013 - Intl Conference on Multimodal Interaction (Dec 9 - 13; Sydney, Australia) It is the premier intl forum for multidisciplinary research on multimodal human-human & HCI, interfaces, & system development. The conference focuses on theoretical & empirical foundations, component technologies, & combined multimodal processing techniques that define the field of multimodal interaction analysis, interface design, & system development. Topics of interest include but are not limited to: - Multimodal interaction processing; - Interactive systems & applications; - Modeling human communication patterns; - Data, evaluation & standards for multimodal interactive systems. Long & short paper submission: May 24th (11:59pm PDT). Source: http://icmi.acm.org/2013/index.php?id=home -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- - From eardevol at uoc.edu Mon May 13 11:26:32 2013 From: eardevol at uoc.edu (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Elisenda_Ard=E8vol?=) Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 20:26:32 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] Last minute: CfP Dicital Culture and Communication Ecrea Workshop Message-ID: Digital Culture: Promises and Discomforts In this workshop we want to critically discuss the promises and discomforts of digital culture taking into account the tensions raised by different material practices, understandings and social orders around the role of digital media in performing social change. Special focus lies on the three aspects of Digital Culture: (1) Digital imaginations and narratives The images of future are drawn in tecno-scapes, like in science-fiction films, artificial intelligence designs, virtual worlds or metaverses. What kinds of individuals, societies and environments are imagined through the growing pervasiveness of Digital Culture into our lives? How digital imaginaries shape our experience and relate to our ways of narrating ourselves and our creative practices? What are the role of innovation, creative industries and urbanlabs in the design of the future and in the different kinds of social intervention? How digital imagination is performing new narrative forms as well as transforming knowledge production and sharing? (2) Digital Neighbourhoods and Citizenship Among the existing networked digital technologies it is smartphones and tablet computers, which are becoming increasingly popular at an extraordinary pace. These devices not only make digital media applications truly ubiquitous but also create an abundance of digital location-sensitive information, which saturates local places, social relations, and the perception and organisation of neighbourhoods. The concept of space turns into a mash-up of material and digital places, creating new forms of the social while at the same time renegotiating the cultural and political logics of local/global or private/public. How does the use of digital media trigger new social phenomena, such as altered forms and modes of communication, collaboration, consumption, infrastructure, mobility or public service? (3) Digital Engagement and Social Change Digital engagement manifests itself in a broad range of digital practices. People discursively engage through and with digital media and thus dissolve spatial, temporal and social boundaries. Especially a few popular commercial social networks, like Facebook and Twitter, are presumed to play a crucial role in the process of social change by means of interaction and connectivity. On a political dimension, citizens and activists voice their opinions, discuss political issues, organize and mobilize for protest in new or alternative public spheres. However, it remains unclear, whether and in which differentiations digital media engagement affects established power relations and thus promotes social change. Which diverse forms of political engagement unfold in digital media environments? How can underlying technological and power structures of media be rendered visible and to what extent do they affect the possibilities and boundaries of digital engagement? We welcome papers picking up any of the described issues and topics and we will also consider contributions related with digital forms of social intervention, art projects or urbanlabs proposals. Extended abstracts should be no longer than 700 words, written in English and contain a clear outline of the argument, the theoretical framework, methodology and results (if applicable). Participants may submit more than one proposal, but only one paper by the same first author might be accepted. Panel and paper proposals from PhD students and early career scholars are particularly welcome. All proposals should be submitted by May 15, 2013 to ecreadigitalculture at gmail.com. Notifications of acceptance will be sent out after June 13, 2013. Keynote Speakers We are delighted to announce the following two keynote speakers: Annette Markham (Ume? University, Sweden) ? topic to be announced Jakob Svensson (Karlstad University, Sweden) will give a lecture on ?New Media for Development? The workshop will take place at the Department of Media Studies of the University of Bonn, Germany, Poppelsdorfer Allee 47, 53115, Bonn. The conference date is October 2nd ? 5th, 2013. More information on the conference venue and registration will be published here and at dccecrea2013.uni-bonn.de Elisenda Ardevol http://dccecrea.wordpress.com/ From gciampag at indiana.edu Mon May 13 12:51:36 2013 From: gciampag at indiana.edu (Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia) Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 15:51:36 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] 2nd Call for Contributions: Collective Behaviors and Networks, satellite @ ECCS'13, (Barcelona, September 19, 2013) Message-ID: <51914448.7020907@indiana.edu> ***** Apologies for multiple copies ***** You are cordially invited to submit a contribution to "Collective Behaviors and Networks", a one-day satellite event of the 2013 European Conference on Complex Systems (ECCS'13), to be held in Barcelona, September 19, 2013. Goal of this workshop is to provide a discussion venue about advances in the study of networks applied to the dynamics of social collective behaviors. Particular attention will be devoted, but not limited to, the following topics: - Group formation, evolution and group behavior analysis. - Modeling, tracking and forecasting dynamic groups in social media. - Community detection and dynamic community structure analysis. - Social simulation, cultural, opinion, and normative dynamics. - Empirical calibration and validation of agent-based social models. - Models of social capital, collective action, social movements. - Coevolution of network and behavior. More information on COVEnANT2013 can be found here: http://covenant2013.com More information on ECCS'13 can be found here: http://eccs13.eu Requirements Participants are invited to submit their contributions via the EasyChair system at the following link: https://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=covenant2013 Contributions must be at most 2 pages long, and must provide the following information: title, list of authors with affiliations, and abstract. Accepted format is PDF only. More information, about selection, registration, etc., can be found here: http://www.covenant2013.com/?page_id=25 Important Dates May 17, 2013 Abstract submission deadline June 19, 2013 Notification of acceptance September 19, 2013 Satellite meeting Data Challenge In order to encourage the development of predictive, data-driven models of collective phenomena, a link prediction competition will be held as part of the meeting. Monetary prizes will be awarded to the best contributions, which will be evaluated according to rigorous scientific criteria by the program committee of the event. 1st prize: US$800, 2nd prize: US$200. Further information (task, data set, dates) to be released soon. Keynote Speakers Yong-Yeol Ahn, Indiana University, US J. Doyne Farmer, University of Oxford, UK Dirk Helbing, ETH Z?rich, Switzerland Jure Leskovec, Stanford University, US Alessandro Vespignani, Northeastern University, US Special Issue The best original contributions will be invited to submit an extended version for inclusion in a special issue of EPJ Data Science (Springer). Organizing Committee Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia, Indiana University, US Emilio Ferrara, Indiana University, US Alessandro Flammini, Indiana University, US Filippo Menczer, Indiana University, US Program Committee Luca M. Aiello, Yahoo Research Barcelona, Spain Andrea Baronchelli, Northwestern University, US Pasquale De Meo, University of Messina, Italy Santo Fortunato, Aalto University, Finland Jacob Foster, University of Chicago, US Matteo Gagliolo, Universit? Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium Bruno Gon?alves, Aix-Marseille Universit?, France Andrea Lancichinetti, Northwestern University, US Michael M?s, ETH Z?rich, Switzerland Tam?s Nepusz, E?tv?s Lor?nd University, Hungary Orion Penner, IMT Lucca, Italy Nicola Perra, Northeastern University, US Filippo Radicchi, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Spain Jos? J. Ramasco, IFISC, Spain Carlos Roca, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Spain Giancarlo Ruffo, University of Turin, Italy Daniel Villatoro, Barcelona Digital Technology Centre, Spain -- Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia Postdoctoral fellow Center for Complex Networks and Systems Research Indiana University ? 910 E 10th St ? Bloomington ? IN 47408 ? http://cnets.indiana.edu/ ? gciampag at indiana.edu From joly at punkcast.com Mon May 13 12:51:58 2013 From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie) Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 15:51:58 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Internet Policy Review (IPR), a news and analysis service about internet regulation in Europe Message-ID: (Another one from Ana) Internet Policy Review (IPR), a news and analysis service about internet regulation in Europe The IPR, a project of the Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society located in Berlin, Germany, tracks public regulatory changes as well as private policy developments which are expected to have long lasting impacts on European societies. The service?s main platform and its complementary channels of communication are to form an authoritative resource on internet governance for academics, civil society advocates, entrepreneurs, the media and public policy makers alike. The idea is that the IPR offers resources and research that will add a layer of knowledge to current debates on internet policy. In a word, IPR?s expertise resides in its clear and independent analysis of inter-European digital policy changes. At the intersection of academia and journalism, the IPR is driven by a small editorial team and a group of authors. More information is available at http://policyreview.info/about Source http://www.hiig.de/en/introducing-the-internet-policy-review/ -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- - From artur.lugmayr at tut.fi Mon May 13 14:30:20 2013 From: artur.lugmayr at tut.fi (artur.lugmayr at tut.fi) Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 00:30:20 +0300 (EEST) Subject: [Air-L] CfP :: ACADEMIC MINDTREK CONFERENCE 2013 :: Extended Deadline- 2nd June 2013 :: 1st-4th October :: Tampere, Finland :: Message-ID: <6596721.15.1368480620469.JavaMail.lugmayr@HLO45-TC> ========================================================================================= ACADEMIC MINDTREK CONFERENCE 2013 ?Making Sense of Converging Media? 1st-4th October, 2013 Tampere, Finland **** Call for Papers, Extended Abstracts, Posters, Demonstration, Workshops, Tutorials http://www.academicmindtrek.org, http://www.mindtrek.org Long and short papers, posters, demonstrations, and extended abstracts due on 2nd June 2013 (EXTENDED DEADLINE !) Tutorials and Workshops due on 2nd June 2013 (EXTENDED DEADLINE !) In cooperation with ACM, ACM SIGMM, and ACM SIGCHI Contributions will be published in the ACM digital library and selected set of high-level work will be published as book chapters or in journals ========================================================================================= ========================================================================================= CALL FOR PAPERS, ABSTRACTS, POSTERS, DEMOS, WORKSHOPS & TUTORIALS ========================================================================================= We are pleased to invite you to the Academic MindTrek conference, 1st ? 4th October 2013, which brings together a cross-disciplinary crowd of people to investigate current and emerging topics of media in many facets. The conference explores academically the emerging and frontier-breaking applications of new media in everyday contexts of leisure, business and organizational life. October 2nd will be the main Academic MindTrek day with other sessions on the preceding and following days. Due to increasing popularity of the conference, we are extending the scope of Academic MindTrek 2013! The academic conference features six major themes: * Social Media * Ambient & Ubiquitous Media * Business & Media * Human-Computer Interaction (new track!) * Open Source * Digital Games * ICT & E-Government ========================================================================================= Why to Participate? ========================================================================================= The MindTrek Association hosts MindTrek as a yearly conference, where the Academic MindTrek conference has been a part of this unique set of events comprising competitions, world famous keynote speakers, plenary sessions, media festivals, and workshops since 1997. It is a meeting place where researchers, experts and thinkers present results from their latest work regarding the development of Internet, interactive media, and the information society: * Real chance for media enthusiasts to think outside the box * Brings together researchers and practitioners from diverse disciplines that are involved in the development of media in various fields, ranging from sociology and the economy to technology * The highest ranked papers will be published in academic journals (e.g. in 2012 we published a selected set of articles in ACM Computers in Entertainment, Electronic Markets ? The International Journal on Networked Business, and the International Journal of Ambient Computing and Intelligence. * Provides a chance to learn from the vast media genre at large * Allows participants to exchange views with cross-disciplinary experts * Aims to provide insights about the convergence of the various media and the future of media * High-level keynote speakers. A few examples from previous years: Keith Partridge, Tomi T. Ahonen (Consultant), Latif Ladid (IPV6 Forum), Beat Schwegler (Microsoft), Cinzia dal Zotto (Univ. of Neuchatel), Ari Ojansivu (Google), Ramine Darabiha (Rovio), Molly R?nge (Crowdculture), Slava Kozlov (Philips Design), Dave Nielsen (CloudCamp), Janne J?rvinen (F-Secure), Olavi Toivainen (Nokia), Herbert Snorrason (OpenLeaks), Tuija Aalto (YLE), Juha Kaario (Varaani), among many others. Also this year we are preparing a wide set of invited speakers & keynotes. Social Media ========================================================================================= ?Get social!? Social media and Web 2.0 technologies are applied in ever diverse practices both in private and public communities. Totally new business models are emerging, traditional communication and expression modalities are challenged, and new practices are constructed in the collaborative, interactive media space. Ambient and Ubiquitous Media ========================================================================================= ?The medium is the message!? ? This conference track focuses on the definition of ambient and ubiquitous media with a cross-disciplinary viewpoint: ambient media between technology, art, and content. The focus of this track is on applications, location based services, ubiquitous computation, augmented reality, theory, art-works, mixed reality concepts, the Web 3.0, and user experiences that make ubiquitous and ambient media tick. Media Business, Media Production and Media Management ========================================================================================= Media business and media management face the challenges of the emergence of new forms of digital media and focuses on leadership practices, business models and value chains. It discusses competition, patterns of media usage, advertising models, and how traditional media can cope with the challenges coming from digital media focusing on media business and media management issues. Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) ========================================================================================= The wide field of HCI is to discuss issues around human computer interaction modalities, consumer experience, design of computer systems, human aspects, universal media access, ergonomics, communication, novel interaction modalities, privacy, trusted systems, interaction theories, and sociological and psychological factors. This theme of devotes to several of these aspects, and is targeted to the scientific community dealing with several applied and theoretical aspects of HCI and user experience. Open Source ========================================================================================= The last decade has seen a significant increase in open source initiatives such as open source software, open standards, open content, open media, or even open source hardware. On the one hand, the open movement has created new kinds of opportunities such as new business models and development approaches. On the other hand, it has introduced new kinds of technical and non-technical challenges. Digital Games ========================================================================================= The culture and business of digital games is becoming increasingly varied. The current trends range from novel interface innovations and digital distribution channels to social game dynamics and player-generated content. The games track is open for theoretical works, empirical case studies and constructive projects. ICT & E-Government ========================================================================================= In recent years, ICT has played a pivotal role in the development of digital economy. This technology facilitates the rapid accumulation and dissemination of information, group interaction, communication, and collaboration. ICT has become one of the core elements of managerial reform around the world. Since the launch of web 2.0 and emergence of ICT infrastructure, processes and policies many governments and public officials use new online tools to communicate among themselves, and with organizations and citizens. Demonstrations ========================================================================================= The aim is to gather demonstrations from researchers and professionals from the communities related to the topics of MindTrek. The objective for the demonstrations is to provide a forum for exchanging experiences, practical projects, or media demonstrators. The target audience includes members of the academic community, industry, or laboratories who can demonstrate the results of their research projects with a practical implementation. Special academic sessions (e.g. tutorials, demonstrations, workshops, and multidisciplinary sessions) will be held parallel to the MindTrek business conference. Academic speakers and authors are warmly welcome to register for the business conference tracks as part of the academic conference with our special registration rate. The Academic MindTrek registration includes full service such as coffees, lunches, and social gatherings. The organizing committee invites you to submit original high quality full papers, long or short, addressing the special theme and the topics, for presentation at the conference and inclusion in the proceedings. ========================================================================================= Conference Publications ========================================================================================= The scientific part of the conference is organized in cooperation with ACM SIGMM, and ACM SIGCHI. Conference proceedings will be published in the ACM Digital Library, which includes short and long papers, workshop proposals, demonstration proposals, and tutorial proposals. Extended abstracts will be published in the adjunct conference proceedings; however, they will not be published within the ACM Digital Library. Selected high quality papers will be published in international journals, as book chapters, edited books, or via open access journals. There will also be a reward for the overall best paper from the academic conference. All the papers should follow the style guidelines of the conference. Short and Long Paper Proposals ========================================================================================= All submissions will be peer-reviewed double blinded, therefore please remove any information that could give an indication of the authorship. Short papers should be between 2-4 pages long and the paper presentation will be 15 minutes plus 5 minutes discussion within a session; long papers should be 6-8 pages and will be presented in 20 minutes slots, plus 5 minutes discussion. Workshop Proposals ========================================================================================= Feel free to suggest workshops which are co-organized with the Academic MindTrek. Workshop proposals should include the organizing committee, a 2 page description of the theme of the workshop, a short CV of organizers, duration, the proceedings publisher, and the schedule. Workshop organizers also have the possibility to add publications to the main conference proceedings. Depending on the attracted number of papers for each workshop, we provide space for either half-day or full-day workshops. Previous examples include e.g. a workshop on eLearning. Nevertheless, feel free to suggestion your own. Demonstrations Proposals ========================================================================================= Demonstration proposals shall be 2-3 pages and include: a) a description and motivation of the demonstration; b) general architecture of the demonstration; c) description of the main features; d) a brief comparison with other existing related demonstrations; e) audio-visual materials to illustrate the demonstration (if applicable); f) the type of license, and g) the Internet address of the demonstration (if applicable). It is strongly recommended that the authors make the demonstration (or a suitable version or movie) on the Internet during the evaluation. Tutorial Proposals ========================================================================================= Tutorial proposals should include a 2-page description of the tutorial, intended audience, a short CV, timetable, required equipment, references, and a track record of previous tutorials. The target length of tutorials is 2-4 hours. Previous examples include a tutorial on audio based media. However, feel free to suggest your own. Extended Abstracts ========================================================================================= Extended abstracts should be between 1-2 pages long and contain 500-800 words. They should describe the research problem, background, research questions, and the contribution to the conference. Extended abstracts will not be published within the ACM digital library. Poster Presentations ========================================================================================= Posters should be between 2-3 pages long and a poster should be presented during the conference. Attendees have the possibility to exhibit their posters on a A0 poster wall d uring the conference. ========================================================================================= Submission Deadlines ========================================================================================= - 2nd June 2013 (EXTENDED DEADLINE !) deadline for long papers (6-8 pages), short papers (3-4 pages), extended abstracts (1-2 pages), posters (1-2 pages) and demonstrations (2-3 pages) - 2nd June 2013 (EXTENDED DEADLINE !) deadline for tutorial proposals and workshop proposals - 30th June 2013: notification of acceptance/rejection for papers, extended abstracts, posters, and demos, tutorials - 20th July 2013: camera ready papers and copyright forms - 5th August 2013: submission of camera ready papers - 1st-4th October 2013: Academic MindTrek and MindTrek Business Conference Suggested key-dates for workshop organizers ========================================================================================= - 15th August 2013: deadline for workshop papers - 10th September 2013: deadline for camera-ready papers ========================================================================================= Conference Themes ========================================================================================= 1. Social Media - Business models, service models, and policies - Social media in innovation and business - Intra and inter organizational use of social media - Questions related to identity, motivation and values - Blogs, wikis, collaboration and social platform designs in practice - Knowledge management and learning with social media - Experience management with social media - Crowdsourcing, user-created content and social networks - Enterprise 2.0 and social computing in work organizations - Evaluation and research methods of social media - Social media and community design - Benefits and limitations of social media applications 2. Ambient and Ubiquitous Media - between Technology, Services, and Users - Applications and services utilizing ubiquitous and pervasive technology - Ubicom in eLearning, leisure, storytelling, art works, advertising, and mixed reality contexts - Next generation user interfaces, ergonomics, multimodality, and human-computer interaction - Art works for smart public or indoor spaces, mobile phones, museums, or cultural applications - Context awareness, sensor perception, context sensitive Internet, and smart daily objects - Personalization, multimodal interaction, smart user interfaces, and ergonomics - Ambient human computer interaction, experience design, usability, and audience research - Software, hardware, middleware, and technologies for pervasive and ubiquitous - Theoretical methods and algorithms in ubiquitous and ambient systems - Business models, service models, media economics, regulations, x-commerce, and policies - User positioning, location awareness - Augmented reality in ubiquitous applications - Device interoperability, remote user interfaces, inter-device connections 3. Media Business, Media Studies, and Media Management - Media politics: policy, practices, conception, and media regulation - Production technology: processes, and optimization - Business models: value chain/value net, revenue models, and product architecture - Strategic and operational Management of TIME Industries: Technology, Information, Media, Entertainment - Key data analytics: balanced scorecard, competition analysis, performance indicators, social media monitoring, google analytics, ? - Media use: patterns, engagement, and consumer experiences - Customer relationship management: communities & engagement 4. Human-Computer Interaction - User experience and experience design - Interaction design techniques and methods - User interaction and HCI design - Creativity, practices and innovation in HCI - Analysis, theories, and procedures in interaction design - Methods, systems, and toolkits supporting HCI - Human centered computing and understanding interaction - Interactivity methods - Designing for experience and interactivity - Design, evaluation, and implementation of interactive systems - Phenomena surrounding interactivity 5. Open Source - Forms of openness: open source software, open standards, - Open content, open media, open source hardware, and open access - Establishment of an open source community - Practices on developing open source systems - Practices for maintaining a successful project - Open source processes and techniques - Differences on open source and closed source systems - Using open source in commercial context - Challenges of open source development - Teaching open source in academia and industry 6. Digital Games - Theoretical and analytical approaches on games and play - Analysis of player experience - Game design research - Economy and business models in the game industry - Innovation in and around games - Digital distribution of games - Online, mobile and cross-platform games - Social and casual games - Pervasive and ubiquitous games - augmented and altered reality games - Mobile and cross-media games - Gamification, fun ware and playful design - Player-created content 7. ICT & E-Government - M-government - Web 2.0 and e-government social network - E-government obstacles and challenges - E-government project failure - Future of e-government - Improving the public service efficiency and effectiveness - E-government in developing countries - Citizen?s technological limitations - ICT and democracy (e-Democracy agenda at e-government level) - Citizens' education and accessibility to ICT - exploiting the learning and communicative potential of emerging online tools - new media forms (games, blogs, wiki, G3 mobile communications ========================================================================================= Paper Submission ========================================================================================= - Please follow the style guidelines on http://www.acm.org/sigs/publications/proceedings-templates for formatting your paper - Note that since the papers will be published by the ACM digital library all authors need to sign an ACM copyright form. (For further guidelines see: http://www.acm.org/pubs/copyright_form.html) - Submit papers here: http://www.tut.fi/emmi/Submissions/2013mindtrek/ ========================================================================================= Organizing Committee ========================================================================================= General Chair Artur Lugmayr, Tampere Univ. of Technology (TUT), FIN Program Chairs Helj? Franssila, Tampere Univ. (UTA), FIN Track chair: Social Media Hannu K?rkk?inen, Tampere Univ. of Technology (TUT), FIN Track chair: Ambient Media Moyen Mustaquim, Uppsala University, SE Track chair: Media Business, Media Studies, and Media Management Johanna Gr?blbauer, St. P?lten University of Applied Sciences (FH), AT Track chair: Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) Pauliina Tuomi, University of Turku, FIN Track chair: Digital Games Janne Paavilainen, University of Tampere (UTA), FIN Track chair: ICT & E-Government Fatemeh Ahmadi Zeleti, Tampere Univ. of Technology (TUT), FIN Track chair: Open source Imed Hammouda, Tampere Univ. of Technology (TUT), FIN Panel Chair Jari Jussila, Tampere Univ. of Technology (TUT), FIN Demonstrations & Poster Chair Paul Coulton, Lancaster University, UK Workshop & Tutorial Chair Andreas Meiszner, UNU, Netherlands Conference Management Consultant Yuan Fu, TUT, FIN Conference Manager and Local Arrangements Subodh Agnihotri, Tampere Univ. of Technology (TUT), FIN Lester Lasrado, Tampere Univ. of Technology (TUT), FIN Program Committee (from Academic Mindtrek 2012 - to be confirmed) Alexander Eichhorn, Simula Research Laboratory, Norway Anders Larsson, Uppsala University, Sweden Andreas Sackl, Telecommunications Research Center Vienna (FTW), Austria Annika Waern, Stockholm University, Sweden Antti Salovaara, Aalto University, Finland Antti Syv?nen, University of Tampere, Finland Ben Kirman, University of Lincoln, United Kingdom Bj?rn Von Rimscha, University of Zurich, Switzerland Conor Linehan, University of Lincoln, United Kingdom Corinna Ogonowski, University of Siegen, Germany Cumhur Erkut, Aalto University, Finland Eija Kaasinen, VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Finland Elina Ollila, Knight Wish, United States Hannu K?rkk?inen, Tampere University of Technology, Finland Hannu Korhonen, University of Tampere, Finland Hannu Paunonen, Metso Automation, Finland Helj? Franssila, University of Tampere, Finland Jaakko Stenros, University of Tampere, Finland Jaakko Suominen, University of Turku, Finland Jan Krone, University of Applied Sciences St. Poelten, Austria Janne Paavilainen, University of Tampere, Finland Jan-Niklas Antons, Technische Universit?t Berlin, Germany Jari Jussila, Tampere University of Technology, Finland Jeff McCarthy, Manchester Metropolitan University, United Kingdom Joerg Niesenhaus, University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany Juho Hamari, HIIT, Finland Jukka vanhala, Tampere University of Technology, Finland Jussi Holopainen, Independent, Germany Jussi Okkonen, University of Tampere, Finland Karin Puehringer, University Salzburg, Austria Katrin Schoenenberg, T-Labs, TU-Berlin, Germany Kristina Kunze, Fraunhofer Institute for Digital Media Technology, Germany Leena Arhippainen, Center for Internet Excellence / University of Oulu, Finland Mark Lochrie, Lancaster University, United Kingdom Paul Murschetz, University of Westminster, United Kingdom Per Backlund, University of Sk?vde, Sweden Peter Haric, Leitbetriebe Institut, Austria Sara Kepplinger, Ilmenau University of Technology, Germany Sebastian Egger, Telecommunications Research Center Vienna (FTW), Austria Sonja Kangas, Souplala, Finland Staffan Bj?rk, Gothenburg University, Sweden Sujan Shrestha, Towson University, United States Svenja Hagenhoff, University Erlangen, Germany Teija Vainio, University of Tampere, Finland Thomas Olsson, Tampere University of Technology, Finland Tobias Nystr?m, Uppsala University, Sweden Veikko Ikonen, VTT, Finland Yuan Fu, EMMi Lab. Finland Yue Dai, University of Eastern Finland, Finland Zhiwen Yu, Northwestern Polytechnical University, China ========================================================================================= Contact ========================================================================================= Questions concerning academic content, papers, tutorials, workshops, scientific contributions: Email: academic-mindtrek-chairs at listmail.tut.fi General questions concerning payments, administration, copyright forms, local arrangements, and the venue: Email: academic-mindtrek-info at listmail.tut.fi ========================================================================================= Submit papers here ========================================================================================= http://www.tut.fi/emmi/Submissions/2013mindtrek/ ========================================================================================= Further Information ========================================================================================= http://www.academicmindtrek.org Supported by MindTrek Association, City of Tampere, Tampere University of Technology (TUT), Tampere University (UTA), Tampere University of Applied Sciences (TAMK), Ambient Media Association (AMEA) From artur.lugmayr at tut.fi Mon May 13 14:48:34 2013 From: artur.lugmayr at tut.fi (artur.lugmayr at tut.fi) Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 00:48:34 +0300 (EEST) Subject: [Air-L] CfP :: INTERACT :: WORKSHOP ON (RE)CREATING LIVELY CITIES THROUGH AMBIENT TECHNOLOGIES: ARTS, CULTURE AND GASTRONOMIC EXPERIENCES (CLCAT) :: EXTENDED DEADLINE 21st MAY 2013 Message-ID: <31470479.15.1368481714963.JavaMail.lugmayr@HLO45-TC> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CALL FOR PAPERS, DEMONSTRATIONS, AND POSTERS IN CONJUCTION WITH INTERACT 2013, CAPE TOWN, SOUTH AFRICA - 6th-9th September 2013 2ND INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP ON (RE)CREATING LIVELY CITIES THROUGH AMBIENT TECHNOLOGIES: ARTS, CULTURE AND GASTRONOMIC EXPERIENCES (CLCAT) http://www.tut.fi/emmi/WWW/ameamain/relci2013 Deadline for 2-5 pages position papers: 21st May 2013 (EXTENDED DEADLINE!) Artur Lugmayr (Tampere Univ. of Technology), Tampere, Finland, lartur at acm.org Jaz Hee-jeong Choi, Urban Informatics Research Lab, QUT, Brisbane Australia, h.choi at qut.edu.au Kirralie Houghton, Urban Informatics Research Lab, QUT, Brisbane Australia, kirralie.houghton at qut.edu.au --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Digital and interactive technologies are becoming increasingly embedded in everyday lives of people around the world. Application of technologies such as real-time, context-aware, and interactive technologies; augmented and immersive realities;, social media; and location-based services has been particularly evident in urban environments where technological and sociocultural infrastructures enable easier deployment and adoption as compared to non-urban areas. There has been growing consumer demand for new forms of experiences and services enabled through these emerging technologies. We call this ambient media, as the media is embedded in the natural human living environment. This workshop focuses on ambient media services, applications, and technologies that promote people?s engagement in creating and re-creating liveliness in urban environments, particularly through arts, culture, and gastronomic experiences. The workshop takes a multidisciplinary and future oriented approach, and welcomes participants from diverse disciplinary domains for open discussions about technological, sociocultural, and content-related aspects of ambient media services that support people?s engagement in (re)creating their urban environments into a livelier place through art, cultural, and gastronomic experiences. Within this context, we welcome submissions relating to (but not limited to) the following: ? case-studies (successful, and especially unsuccessful ones); ? speculative and innovative concepts or design; ? demonstrations of services and applications; ? user-experience studies and evaluations; ? artistic installations and contents; ? social and/or economic studies, businesses models, and marketing ? technological novelties, evaluations, and solutions; The following topics fit within the scope of the workshop: ? Analysis of videos related to art, culture, and gastronomy ? Ubiquitous environments and interfaces in lively city environments ? Intelligent appliances and gadgets supporting art, culture and gastronomy ? Multimedia learning for activities around smart city environments ? Locative media and context sensor technologies ? Artistic, cultural, and gastronomic services and applications; ? Socio-economic studies, business models, advertising, and marketing; ? Applied ambient media technologies in city environments (e.g. P2P, 3D, augmented reality, QoE, protocols, networks, security, and privacy); ? Engagement and persuasion in smart environments; ? QoE and for ambient urban city applications. PUBLICATIONS ? Submit your contribution by using the INTERACT template: [--> http://www.interact2013.org/Interact2013/media/Store/documents/Paper%20formats/Word-2007-2010-Technical-Instructions.zip] ? To the following submission syste: [--> http://webhotel2.tut.fi/emmi/Conferences/2012same/ (!!!) NOTE (!!!): PLEASE DON'T FORGET TO TICK RELCI 2013 AS SUBMISSION TYPE!!! SUBMISSION DEADLINE 21st May 2013 (EXTENDED DEADLINE!) MORE INFORMATION http://www.ambientmediaassociation.org/relci2012 From benallenmorton at gmail.com Mon May 13 16:39:22 2013 From: benallenmorton at gmail.com (Ben Morton) Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 18:39:22 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Journals Related to 'Free Labor' in the Online Economy Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, I need some help finding a Journal suitable for my work. I recently completed a manuscript that critiques the usage of "free labor," "exploitation," and other such terms when studying the collective and often crowdsourced work of individuals within online networks. I am engaging with critical research of online economies, mostly by Tiziana Terranova, Mark Andrejevic, Jonathan Zittrain, and Nancy Baym. Although I am happy to be finished with the manuscript I need some help finding a Journal that might be suitable for this type of research. If I could exploit your free labor for a moment (see what I did there?), could you recommend any journals you think may benefit? Best, Ben Morton From info at webuse.org Tue May 14 08:59:01 2013 From: info at webuse.org (Eszter Hargittai) Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 10:59:01 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] CFP Doctoral Workshop on Digital Tools to Study Human Behavior in Online Environments Message-ID: Please help spread the word. And if you're eligible, please consider applying. (If you're not eligible, but interested, see below, we have a form for you, too.:) Thanks! Eszter Eszter Hargittai Delaney Family Professor, Communication Studies Department, Northwestern University Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society, Harvard University CALL FOR PARTICIPATION: DOCTORAL WORKSHOP Developing Best Practices for Using Digital Tools to Study Human Behavior in Online Environments http://webuse.org/workshop2013/ We invite doctoral students who study human behavior in digital environments, and who are at the beginning stages of their dissertation work, to apply to a workshop focusing on methodological issues in this kind of research. (At a different stage in your work, but still interested? See below.) WHEN: August 18-20, 2013 WHERE: Evanston, Illinois, USA (just north of Chicago) COST: None, the workshop will cover participants' lodging and meals, and in most cases the full cost of their travel HOST: Web Use Project, School of Communication, Northwestern University The goal of the workshop is to bring together about a dozen junior and half-a-dozen senior scholars to discuss methodological best practices for the in-depth study of human behavior in digital environments. So-called "big data" offer lots of opportunities to study the social world, but may miss insights that methods such as in-person observations and interviews can discover. Bringing different types of data and methods together can help address challenges, such as biased data sets, and can help glean new insights. Workshop participants will discuss tools that exist and tools that need to be developed for sharable, sustainable, and scalable approaches to collecting, coding, and analyzing comparable data about human behavior in digital environments. The workshop welcomes applications from full-time doctoral students, regardless of citizenship. Ideally, applicants will not yet have begun data collection for their dissertation, or will be in the early stages of that process. Applicants should, however, have a well-defined dissertation research question. We welcome students from a variety of disciplines, including but not limited to anthropology, communication, demography, economics, human computer interaction, information and library sciences, media studies, political science, science and technology studies, and sociology. Students need not be enrolled at a university in the U.S. to participate. NOT ELIGIBLE, BUT INTERESTED? We ask scholars working on related projects, but either not yet at the dissertation data collection stage or well into their projects to get in touch with us so that we can keep them posted of future meetings and funding opportunities. We welcome hearing from senior scholars as well. http://bit.ly/wupform13 Review of applications for the workshop will begin May 29, 2013. For full consideration, please send application materials before that date. TO APPLY: 1. Fill out and submit this online form: http://bit.ly/wrkshp13 2. Fill out the Application Form linked at http://webuse.org/workshop2013/ 3. Send the Application Form and a copy of your CV (with your last name, first name initial in the file name, e.g., HargittaiE-CV.pdf) as attachments to workshop2013 at webuse.org . Questions? Please email workshop2013 at webuse.org with any questions related to the workshop. Funding for the workshop is provided by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. http://sloan.org From difusion at medialab-prado.es Tue May 14 09:35:05 2013 From: difusion at medialab-prado.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Medialab-Prado_Comunicaci=F3n?=) Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 18:35:05 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] CFP Solid Interfaces & Urban Games: Digital Games in the Public Space Message-ID: <519267B9.20503@medialab-prado.es> Please spread! //////////////////////////////////////////// *Solid Interfaces & Urban Games: Digital Games in the Public Space. Call for Projects* Open Call for project proposals to be developed during a production workshop for the creation of video games related to public space and the city as an interface (July 1-7, 2013) in Medialab-Prado (Madrid, Spain). During seven days of intensive work, ideas will be tested and prototypes developed by working with partners and technical assistants. Deadline: May 31, 2013. More information and submissions: http://medialab-prado.es/article/convocatoria_interfaces_solidas _Framework_ In recent years, the video game experience has outgrown TV screens, game consoles and laptops, becoming increasingly ubiquitous. The availability of mobile devices, tablets, sensors, geolocation services, augmented realities and media facades has allowed the development of new game ideas experimentally and as a prototype. At the forefront of these game forms, which take place in some cases without the screen as an interface, is the interaction with other users and with the environment. Moreover, commercial controllers like Wiimote or Kinect have popularized the idea of the game away from the traditional game controller, transforming the game into a complete physical experience. This workshop proposes to think about games in the public space as an opportunity to generate other uses of the city and connections among its citizens. _Lines of Work_ The selection will consider ideas and projects that are already taking place and address one of the following elements: ? The use of urban furniture as an interface for the game ? Media Fa?ade ? Non-random Games ? Interaction with the space ? Place specific ? Networked City _Methodology_ A maximum of 4 projects will be selected and developed collaboratively in this intensive workshop with the support of tutors, technical assistants and partners. Once projects are selected, there will be an open call for collaborators, who will be fairly selected by the organization and the project promoters. Open Call for collaborators. June 6 - 30, 2013 From amit at coursolve.org Tue May 14 17:29:46 2013 From: amit at coursolve.org (Amit Jain) Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 20:29:46 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Resource: Data analytics support from students Message-ID: *An education researcher at Oxford is organizing an opportunity for researchers and nonprofits to receive free data analytics support from students in a massively open online course. Anyone can join the course and post real-world projects for tens of thousands of students to attempt to solve. Please read below and forward widely!* // *Calling all professors, researchers, and nonprofits* -- harness student learning to get free data analyses from the University of Washington's Introduction to Data Science course! Sign up now to recruit from tens of thousands of students to take on your organization's projects in data visualization, analysis, or predictive modeling. You may not need an internal store of data to benefit -- your organization can learn volumes through publicly available datasets. For details and project ideas, please visit: http://coursolve.org/courses/datascience/ Questions? Contact amit at coursolve.org. -- Amit Jain Coursolve (http://coursolve.org) Twitter: @coursolve | Facebook: Coursolve amit at coursolve.org | +1 617-752-2673 From jwallis at csu.edu.au Tue May 14 17:53:44 2013 From: jwallis at csu.edu.au (Wallis, Jacob) Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 10:53:44 +1000 Subject: [Air-L] Journals Related to 'Free Labor' in the Online Economy In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Ben, This sort of piece sounds like a great fit for either "Information, Communication & Society" or "The Information Society". Good luck! Jake Jake Wallis Lecturer | School of Information Studies Boorooma Street Wagga Wagga, NSW 2650 Australia Tel: +61 2 6933 4397 Fax: +61 2 6933 2733 Email: jwallis at csu.edu.au www.csu.edu.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 18:39:22 -0500 From: Ben Morton To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: [Air-L] Journals Related to 'Free Labor' in the Online Economy Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Dear Colleagues, I need some help finding a Journal suitable for my work. I recently completed a manuscript that critiques the usage of "free labor," "exploitation," and other such terms when studying the collective and often crowdsourced work of individuals within online networks. I am engaging with critical research of online economies, mostly by Tiziana Terranova, Mark Andrejevic, Jonathan Zittrain, and Nancy Baym. Although I am happy to be finished with the manuscript I need some help finding a Journal that might be suitable for this type of research. If I could exploit your free labor for a moment (see what I did there?), could you recommend any journals you think may benefit? Best, Ben Morton Charles Sturt University | ALBURY-WODONGA | BATHURST | CANBERRA | DUBBO | GOULBURN | MELBOURNE | ONTARIO | ORANGE | PORT MACQUARIE | SYDNEY | WAGGA WAGGA | LEGAL NOTICE This email (and any attachment) is confidential and is intended for the use of the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must not copy, distribute, take any action in reliance on it or disclose it to anyone. Any confidentiality is not waived or lost by reason of mistaken delivery. Email should be checked for viruses and defects before opening. Charles Sturt University (CSU) does not accept liability for viruses or any consequence which arise as a result of this email transmission. Email communications with CSU may be subject to automated email filtering, which could result in the delay or deletion of a legitimate email before it is read at CSU. The views expressed in this email are not necessarily those of CSU. Charles Sturt University in Australia http://www.csu.edu.au The Grange Chancellery, Panorama Avenue, Bathurst NSW Australia 2795 (ABN: 83 878 708 551; CRICOS Provider Numbers: 00005F (NSW), 01947G (VIC), 02960B (ACT)). TEQSA Provider Number: PV12018 Charles Sturt University in Ontario http://www.charlessturt.ca 860 Harrington Court, Burlington Ontario Canada L7N 3N4 Registration: www.peqab.ca Consider the environment before printing this email. Disclaimer added by CodeTwo Exchange Rules 2007 http://www.codetwo.com From venkatraman.shriram at gmail.com Tue May 14 20:12:57 2013 From: venkatraman.shriram at gmail.com (Shriram Venkatraman) Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 08:42:57 +0530 Subject: [Air-L] Journals Related to 'Free Labor' in the Online Economy (Ben Morton) Message-ID: Have seen articles on Digital Labor in http://nms.sagepub.com/ (New Media and Society) Thanks, Shriram Venkatraman www.gsmis.org http://www.ucl.ac.uk/social-networking @UCLSocNet From pmgazz at gmx.co.uk Wed May 15 08:05:57 2013 From: pmgazz at gmx.co.uk (Paula Graham) Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 16:05:57 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Flossie 2013 CfP In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5193A455.3070201@gmx.co.uk> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- CfP: FLOSSIE 2013, 8/9 November, QMUL, London, UK -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flossie 2013 is a two-day event for women who are interested in any aspect of open technology, open knowledge, digital arts, and social innovation. Whether you code, tinker, use FLOSS in your projects, or want to explore open alternatives, all women are welcome - from expert to novice, or anywhere in between. Flossie 2013 is a chance to showcase your project, share skills, or talk about something which really interests you. We're also scheduling plenty of time to network, share and build on ideas, and to meet new friends and old. Call for proposals: We?re inviting proposals for all aspects of the day. 1. Talk about your current project or a project you?d like to set up 2. Skills sharing workshops on any aspect of Free/Libre Open Source software, hardware, data ? anything open! 3. Talk about social innovation and diversifying technology design 4. Send us your idea for an activity ? as long as it's open! Even if you don?t feel you have the expertise yourself, and just have an idea, let us know. Deadline: 19 July 2013 Submit your proposal here: http://www.flossie.org/openconf/ If you have any questions, please email conf at flossie.org or find more information on our website at www.flossie.org -- From pmgazz at gmx.co.uk Wed May 15 08:17:41 2013 From: pmgazz at gmx.co.uk (Paula Graham) Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 16:17:41 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Flossie 2013 CfP In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5193A715.40104@gmx.co.uk> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- CfP: FLOSSIE 2013, 8/9 November, QMUL, London, UK -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flossie 2013 is a two-day event for women who are interested in any aspect of open technology, open knowledge, digital arts, and social innovation. Whether you code, tinker, use FLOSS in your projects, or want to explore open alternatives, all women are welcome - from expert to novice, or anywhere in between. Flossie 2013 is a chance to showcase your project, share skills, or talk about something which really interests you. We're also scheduling plenty of time to network, share and build on ideas, and to meet new friends and old. Call for proposals: We?re inviting proposals for all aspects of the day. 1. Talk about your current project or a project you?d like to set up 2. Skills sharing workshops on any aspect of Free/Libre Open Source software, hardware, data ? anything open! 3. Talk about social innovation and diversifying technology design 4. Send us your idea for an activity ? as long as it's open! Even if you don?t feel you have the expertise yourself, and just have an idea, let us know. Deadline: 19 July 2013 Submit your proposal here: http://www.flossie.org/openconf/ If you have any questions, please email conf at flossie.org or find more information on our website at www.flossie.org -- From purplepooka at blueyonder.co.uk Wed May 15 08:40:38 2013 From: purplepooka at blueyonder.co.uk (Emma Pooka) Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 16:40:38 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Bad Influences: Invitation to read and participate in a blog fiction PhD project In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <002f01ce5182$8cde99c0$a69bcd40$@co.uk> I want to announce my PhD project on this list, as I hope that it will be relevant to some researchers here. Please do pass on the details to any colleagues or students who you think would be interested in reading or participating. Bad Influences (http://badinfluences.org.uk) is a multi-character, real-time, interactive blog fiction. It began in January and will continue until November. The purpose of the project is to explore the poetics of blog fiction, especially those relating to the narrative time effects of real-time serialisation, a feature of epistolary fiction using a blog or social network as its platform. It is also an interactive creative writing project that I hope will be enjoyable to read and to participate in whether you have an academic interest in digital literatures and narratology or not! Bad Influences is set in 2026 and tells the story of a global pandemic flu virus through the blogs of four characters, based in London, New Jersey, Beijing and Canberra. The blogs are pre-written and are being posted in real-time (i.e., each post or comment goes up precisely 13 years before the event it relates). The comments sections of the blogs are open for reader participation (upon filling in a participation agreement http://badinfluences.org.uk/take-part/participation-agreement/), and the commentary is a mixture of pre-written character interaction and improvised interaction between reader-participants and characters. This project could be of interest to anybody teaching or researching digital literatures, interactive storytelling, narrative time, disaster fiction or creative writing. Please feel free to contact me on purplepooka at badinfluences.org.uk for more information, or explore the site and the story at http://badinfluences.org.uk. Questions and feedback are very welcome, and I'd love to hear about any use you make of the project in your own research or teaching. Many thanks, Emma Segar (Edge Hill University) purplepooka at badinfluences.org.uk From scroeser at gmail.com Wed May 15 09:27:04 2013 From: scroeser at gmail.com (Sky Croeser) Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 19:27:04 +0300 Subject: [Air-L] Resource: Data analytics support from students In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am a little skeptical about this. While I think it has the potential to be very useful, outsourcing data analysis (a key aspect of research, presumably), seems potentially problematic both in terms of the quality of research and in terms of the academic labour market (why hire a skilled research assistant when you can get students to do it for free)? I'm curious - are these issues being addressed within the project at all? On 15 May 2013 03:29, Amit Jain wrote: > *An education researcher at Oxford is organizing an opportunity for > researchers and nonprofits to receive free data analytics support from > students in a massively open online course. Anyone can join the course and > post real-world projects for tens of thousands of students to attempt to > solve. Please read below and forward widely!* > > // > > *Calling all professors, researchers, and nonprofits* -- harness student > learning to get free data analyses from the University of Washington's > Introduction > to Data Science course! Sign > up > now to recruit from tens of thousands of students to take on your > organization's projects in data visualization, analysis, or predictive > modeling. You may not need an internal store of data to benefit -- your > organization can learn volumes through publicly available datasets. > > For details and project ideas, please visit: > http://coursolve.org/courses/datascience/ > > Questions? Contact amit at coursolve.org. > > -- > Amit Jain > Coursolve (http://coursolve.org) > Twitter: @coursolve | Facebook: > Coursolve > amit at coursolve.org | +1 617-752-2673 > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > From Tim.Hutchings at open.ac.uk Wed May 15 11:33:14 2013 From: Tim.Hutchings at open.ac.uk (Tim.Hutchings) Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 19:33:14 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Registration Open: Digital Media and Sacred Text, June 17 (Open University, London) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9317489861278C419F4BB340B120C8DF0445273EBE@SALCEYCMS1.open.ac.uk> DIGITAL MEDIA AND SACRED TEXT Monday 17 June 2013, Open University Camden Town, London, UK 9am - 6pm This one-day Open University conference will bring together academics interested in the study of digital sacred texts and religious e-reading, including sociologists, anthropologists, media scholars, computer scientists, historians and digital humanists. We also welcome religious practitioners and publishers engaged in creating digital sacred texts. We are delighted to announce that the keynote speaker will be Professor Heidi Campbell (Texas A&M University). Attendance at this event will cost ?20. Thanks to generous funding from the Arts and Humanities Research Council, 30 free places are available for the first delegates to register. A full programme and online registration page can be accessed here: http://www.mediatingreligion.org/events/digital-media-and-sacred-text - Tim Hutchings, Centre for Research on Socio-Cultural Change, Open University -- The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC 038302). From amit at coursolve.org Wed May 15 16:11:19 2013 From: amit at coursolve.org (Amit Jain) Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 19:11:19 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Resource: Data analytics support from students In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks - skepticism is a healthy impulse! Regarding your concern about quality, part of the intention of the course is to determine whether students can indeed create solutions of enough merit to have an impact. We believe they can, but the results either way will help us investigate the efficacy of such co-creative, collaborative networks over the internet. Along those lines, this resource* *is *not* intended to replace the work of paid research assistants. Instead, it should be seen as an opportunity to expand capacity by having students from around the world take on projects that might otherwise remain unfulfilled. Please feel free to email me directly with any additional questions, or visit http://coursolve.org/courses/datascience for more details. On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Sky Croeser wrote: > I am a little skeptical about this. While I think it has the potential to > be very useful, outsourcing data analysis (a key aspect of research, > presumably), seems potentially problematic both in terms of the quality of > research and in terms of the academic labour market (why hire a skilled > research assistant when you can get students to do it for free)? > > I'm curious - are these issues being addressed within the project at all? > > > On 15 May 2013 03:29, Amit Jain wrote: > > > *An education researcher at Oxford is organizing an opportunity for > > researchers and nonprofits to receive free data analytics support from > > students in a massively open online course. Anyone can join the course > and > > post real-world projects for tens of thousands of students to attempt to > > solve. Please read below and forward widely!* > > > > // > > > > *Calling all professors, researchers, and nonprofits* -- harness student > > learning to get free data analyses from the University of Washington's > > Introduction > > to Data Science course! Sign > > up > > now to recruit from tens of thousands of students to take on your > > organization's projects in data visualization, analysis, or predictive > > modeling. You may not need an internal store of data to benefit -- your > > organization can learn volumes through publicly available datasets. > > > > For details and project ideas, please visit: > > http://coursolve.org/courses/datascience/ > > > > Questions? Contact amit at coursolve.org. > > > > -- > > Amit Jain > > Coursolve (http://coursolve.org) > > Twitter: @coursolve | Facebook: > > Coursolve > > amit at coursolve.org | +1 617-752-2673 > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Amit Jain Coursolve (http://coursolve.org) Twitter: @coursolve | Facebook: Coursolve amit at coursolve.org | +1 617-752-2673 From tomoore at deloitte.com Wed May 15 16:16:21 2013 From: tomoore at deloitte.com (Moore, Tony A (US - Glen Mills)) Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 23:16:21 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Resource: Data analytics support from students In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0225CA701B21C94AA4D5C6CB823B7E762D9B5F1A@USNDC1423.us.deloitte.com> Sounds rather interesting for someone in industry. While we clearly can't share any client or private data, this course could help an organization identify potential talent for the data science / analytics shortage. Sounds like a good interview to me. Tony Moore Strategy, Brand & Innovation | Knowledge Manager | Deloitte Analytics This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, by you is strictly prohibited. v.E.1 -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Amit Jain Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 7:11 PM To: Sky Croeser; Air-L Subject: Re: [Air-L] Resource: Data analytics support from students Thanks - skepticism is a healthy impulse! Regarding your concern about quality, part of the intention of the course is to determine whether students can indeed create solutions of enough merit to have an impact. We believe they can, but the results either way will help us investigate the efficacy of such co-creative, collaborative networks over the internet. Along those lines, this resource* *is *not* intended to replace the work of paid research assistants. Instead, it should be seen as an opportunity to expand capacity by having students from around the world take on projects that might otherwise remain unfulfilled. Please feel free to email me directly with any additional questions, or visit http://coursolve.org/courses/datascience for more details. On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Sky Croeser wrote: > I am a little skeptical about this. While I think it has the potential to > be very useful, outsourcing data analysis (a key aspect of research, > presumably), seems potentially problematic both in terms of the quality of > research and in terms of the academic labour market (why hire a skilled > research assistant when you can get students to do it for free)? > > I'm curious - are these issues being addressed within the project at all? > > > On 15 May 2013 03:29, Amit Jain wrote: > > > *An education researcher at Oxford is organizing an opportunity for > > researchers and nonprofits to receive free data analytics support from > > students in a massively open online course. Anyone can join the course > and > > post real-world projects for tens of thousands of students to attempt to > > solve. Please read below and forward widely!* > > > > // > > > > *Calling all professors, researchers, and nonprofits* -- harness student > > learning to get free data analyses from the University of Washington's > > Introduction > > to Data Science course! Sign > > up > > now to recruit from tens of thousands of students to take on your > > organization's projects in data visualization, analysis, or predictive > > modeling. You may not need an internal store of data to benefit -- your > > organization can learn volumes through publicly available datasets. > > > > For details and project ideas, please visit: > > http://coursolve.org/courses/datascience/ > > > > Questions? Contact amit at coursolve.org. > > > > -- > > Amit Jain > > Coursolve (http://coursolve.org) > > Twitter: @coursolve | Facebook: > > Coursolve > > amit at coursolve.org | +1 617-752-2673 > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Amit Jain Coursolve (http://coursolve.org) Twitter: @coursolve | Facebook: Coursolve amit at coursolve.org | +1 617-752-2673 _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From dscaraboto at gmail.com Thu May 16 06:32:14 2013 From: dscaraboto at gmail.com (Daiane Scaraboto) Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 09:32:14 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Collaborative Innovation Networks Conference - CFP deadline May 31 Message-ID: This conference may be of interest to some AOIR members:* -----------------------------------------------* *COINS13: Call for Submissions* *When: *August 11-13, 2013 *Where:* Santiago de Chile, Pontificia Universidad Cat?lica de Chile *Papers:* Paper submission deadline May 15, 2013 (*extended to May 31*) *Workshops:* Proposal submission deadline May 15, 2013 (*extended to May 31* ) *Artifacts:* Proposal submission deadline June 1, 2013 *Web:* http://www.coinschile.com The Collaborative Innovation Networks Conference (COINS) invites you to submit your papers, workshop proposals, and artifacts to the 4th annual international conference to be held in Santiago de Chile, hosted by Pontificia Universidad Cat?lica de Chile from August 11 to August 13, 2013. COINS13 brings together practitioners, researchers and students of the emerging science of collaboration to share their work, learn from each other, and get inspired through creative new ideas. Conference activities will take place throughout the historic cities of Santiago and Valparaiso. Attendees will be encouraged to engage with the community, meet local entrepreneurs, artists, and designers, take a guided tour of the city, and participate in hands-on workshops and interactive sessions. Where science, design, business and art meet, COINS13 looks at the emerging forces behind the phenomena of open-source, creative, entrepreneurial and social movements. Through interactive workshops, professional presentations, and fascinating keynotes, COINS13 combines a wide range of interdisciplinary fields such as social network analysis, group dynamics, design and visualization, information systems, collective action and the psychology and sociality of collaboration. The best papers will be selected for a special issue of the International Journal of Organisational Design and Engineering (IJODE; http://www.inderscience.com/jhome.php?jcode=IJODE). Program Chairs: Marisa Von B?low (UC) & Cristobal Garcia (UC) Proceedings Chair: Peter Gloor (MIT) *Learning from the Swarm* The COINS13 conference committee seeks original paper submissions, creative workshop ideas and concepts, unique artifacts or installations, and engaging rapid-fire presentations celebrating the theme ?Learning from the Swarm?. This year we are asking what is relevant with regard to the innovative powers of creative and civic swarms, what are the observable qualities of virtual collaboration and mobilization, and how does the quest for global cooperation affect local networks. We invite both theoretical and practice-based dialogues, case studies, scientific papers, technological solutions, research studies, and interactive artifacts that thoroughly reflect this year?s conference theme. We invite researchers and designers to submit their latest scientific results and experimental design solutions as full research papers, workshop proposals, and artifact demonstrations in the following conference themes: ? Networks & Collaboration in a Global Context: Optimization through Collaboration | Teamwork through virtually enhanced Collaboration | Measuring the performance of COINs | Patterns of swarm creativity ? Group Dynamics, Social Movements & Net Activism: Collaborative Learning | Collaborative Leadership | Design & visualization of interdisciplinary collaboration | Virtual Teaming ? Individual & Social Learning: The psychology and sociality of collaboration and collective action | Social Behavior Modeling | Social Intelligence and Social Cognition ? Tools and Methods: Social System Design and Architectures | Dynamic Social Network Analysis | Semantic Social Network Analysis | Actor Network Theory The increase of online social network communication opens up unprecedented opportunities to read the collective mind, revealing trends while they are still being hatched by small groups of creative individuals. The Web has become a mirror of the real world, allowing researchers, in fields of social & behavioral science as well as design, to study and better understand why some new ideas change our lives, while others never make it from the drawing board of the innovator. Collaborative Innovation Networks, or COINs, are cyberteams of self-motivated people with a collective vision, enabled by technology to collaborate, challenge the status-quo and innovate by sharing ideas, information, resources and work. COINs are powered by swarm creativity, wherein people work together in a structure that enables a fluid creation and exchange of ideas. ?Coolhunting? ? the discovering, analyzing, and measuring of trends and trendsetters as well as movers and shakers ? puts COINs to productive use. Below are the details and deadlines for the submission of Papers, Workshops, and Artifacts sessions. For up to date information and additional details please visit our website: www.coinschile.com To engage with the broader COINs community, follow us on twitter @coinschile and join our Facebook page (Collaborative Innovation Networks: COINs Conference). *Papers:* Submission Deadline May 15, 2013 (extended to May 31) COINS13 seeks original, high-quality papers that reflect the full breadth and scope of collaboration science and design including: bold research ideas, conceptual developments, research investigations, methodological & theoretical advances, design ideas, development experiences and more. Submissions should report original research, reflections on theoretical concerns, methodological advances, or other insights that contribute to our understanding of all aspects of collaboration and help advance the state of knowledge for the community. We encourage perspectives from diverse disciplinary backgrounds. Papers should be submitted in .doc or .pdf format. Authors are required to attend the conference to present their work. Submit papers by May 31, 2013 on EasyChair: https://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=coins13 Important Dates: May 15, 2013 | Deadline for Paper Submissions (extended to May 31) June 30, 2013 | Author(s) will be notified of provisional acceptance of the paper July 30, 2013 | Final copy for conference to publications chair August 11-13 | Paper presentations at COINS13, Santiago, Chile *Workshops:* Proposals Submission Deadline May 15, 2013 (extended to May 31) Workshops will take place during the conference and will form part of the main program. This year we are accepting proposals for both two-hour and four-hour sessions. Workshops are intended to provide a forum for exchanging ideas, sharing experiences, fostering conversation and research communities, learning from each other, exploring controversies, engaging in debate, envisioning future directions and elaborating new methods and perspectives. Workshop activities can range from open forum discussion, to demonstrations or presentations with discussion, to collaborative activities such as structured brainstorming, illustrative games or role-plays. Whatever the focus or format, organizers will be required to schedule time for conversation, reflection, discussion, and debate. Although we envision most workshop activities to take place in one setting, let us know if your workshop will venture out into other sites in Santiago. Workshop proposals should include: ? a summary of 500 words describing the theme(s) of the workshop ? a longer detailed description of the workshop structure, activities and goals ? the names, contact information and background of the organizer(s) ? the maximum number of participants you'd like to attend the workshop ? anticipated A/V requirements. Please be as specific as possible as it helps us in selection, and in helping you plan the workshop. Workshop participants will be registered on a first come first served basis by the conference committee, so the workshop organizers will not be able to select their participants. Accepted workshops will be publicized via the COINS13 website within a month after organizers are notified. Workshop organizers will also be encouraged to promote COINS13 and their workshops to potential attendees. Submit proposals by May 15, 2013 to:https:// www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=coins13. Additionally, please include your email address and other contact details. Important Dates: May 15, 2013 | Deadline for workshop submissions (extended to May 31) June 30, 2013 | Author(s) will be notified of provisional acceptance of the workshop August 11-13 | Workshop at COINS13, Santiago, Chile *Artifacts:* Proposals Submission Deadline June 1, 2013 The artifacts category seeks to provide participants with an opportunity to present work in a forum that facilitates open discussion and enables direct interaction with conference attendees. A dedicated session will be held during the conference to present the artifacts. Artifacts can be anything from design sketchbooks, to reformed organizational processes, to ads you?ve produced, to products you?ve made, to short films, to conceptual objects, etc. We encourage submissions that are thought provoking and visually engaging, and which cover exploratory/speculative work, smaller projects, unusual representations of ethnographic work, and so on. The form of the presented materials is open. In keeping with the category title artifacts though, we encourage submissions based on some material instantiation that can be exhibited at the conference. Our hope is that it will be the ?thinginess? of the artifacts that will, in part, prompt interaction with and between conference attendees. Submissions should include a single page describing or illustrating the proposed submission (the one page inclusive of any and all figures and references, where appropriate). This page should convey to reviewers what the artifact being submitted is and how it is hoped to provoke discussion. The page will also be included in the published conference proceedings. Also included in the submissions should be a paragraph and image (no more that 150 words) that can be displayed on the conference website. Please submit these submission materials by June 1, 2013 to: https://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=coins13 Additionally, please include your email address and other contact details. *Important Dates:* June 1, 2013 | Deadline for artifacts submissions June 30, 2013 | Author(s) will be notified of provisional acceptance of the artifact. Accepted submissions will have their 150 word descriptions posted on the COINS13 website. Descriptions (including images) of accepted artifacts will be published in the COINS13 Proceedings. July 30, 2013 | Final papers due August 11-13 | artifacts presentations at COINS13, Santiago, Chile. The artifact itself should be transported to Santiago for the conference. *Academic Committee:* Jose Allard, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile Jana Diesner, UIUC Jorge Fabrega, Universidad Adolfo Iba?ez Kai Fischbach, Bamberg University Karin Frick, GDI Sebasti?n Gatica - Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile Takashi Iba, Keio University Emmanuel Lazega, Paris Dauphine Ionna Likorenzu, INRIA Takis Metaxas, Wellesley & Harvard Meghan Pierce, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile Alvaro Pina-Stranger, Ecole des Mines Johannes Putzke, University of Cologne Carlos Rodriguez-Sickert, Universidad del Desarrollo Erica Salvaj, Universidad del Desarrollo Daiane Scarboto, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile Detlef Schoder, Cologne University Yang Song, University of Amsterdam Ruth Stock-Homburg, Technical University of Darmstadt Marisa Von B?llow, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile *Steering Committee:* Cristobal Garcia, PUC Peter Gloor, MIT Julia Gluesing, Wayne State University Casper Lassenius, Aalto University Christine Miller, SCAD Maria Paasivaara, Aalto University Ken Riopelle, Wayne State University More information: http://www.coinschile.com Daiane Scaraboto Assistant Professor of Marketing Escuela de Administraci?n Pontificia Universidad Cat?lica de Chile T:+56 2354-4340 ext. 1594 http://uc-cl.academia.edu/DaianeScaraboto 2013/5/15 > Send Air-L mailing list submissions to > air-l at listserv.aoir.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > air-l-request at listserv.aoir.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > air-l-owner at listserv.aoir.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Air-L digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Resource: Data analytics support from students (Amit Jain) > 2. Journals Related to 'Free Labor' in the Online Economy > (Wallis, Jacob) > 3. Re: Journals Related to 'Free Labor' in the Online Economy > (Ben Morton) (Shriram Venkatraman) > 4. Flossie 2013 CfP (Paula Graham) > 5. Flossie 2013 CfP (Paula Graham) > 6. Bad Influences: Invitation to read and participate in a blog > fiction PhD project (Emma Pooka) > 7. Re: Resource: Data analytics support from students (Sky Croeser) > 8. Registration Open: Digital Media and Sacred Text, June 17 > (Open University, London) (Tim.Hutchings) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 20:29:46 -0400 > From: Amit Jain > To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org > Subject: [Air-L] Resource: Data analytics support from students > Message-ID: > < > CAOfkNix1+wJNeppcpxTrqvYp2n-A3H_wu0bjcYNfqBFBut7g4w at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > *An education researcher at Oxford is organizing an opportunity for > researchers and nonprofits to receive free data analytics support from > students in a massively open online course. Anyone can join the course and > post real-world projects for tens of thousands of students to attempt to > solve. Please read below and forward widely!* > > // > > *Calling all professors, researchers, and nonprofits* -- harness student > learning to get free data analyses from the University of Washington's > Introduction > to Data Science course! Sign > up > now to recruit from tens of thousands of students to take on your > organization's projects in data visualization, analysis, or predictive > modeling. You may not need an internal store of data to benefit -- your > organization can learn volumes through publicly available datasets. > > For details and project ideas, please visit: > http://coursolve.org/courses/datascience/ > > Questions? Contact amit at coursolve.org. > > -- > Amit Jain > Coursolve (http://coursolve.org) > Twitter: @coursolve | Facebook: > Coursolve > amit at coursolve.org | +1 617-752-2673 > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 10:53:44 +1000 > From: "Wallis, Jacob" > To: "air-l at listserv.aoir.org" > Subject: [Air-L] Journals Related to 'Free Labor' in the Online > Economy > Message-ID: > < > E826490A65E1C240BB38D3B9E767DAA738D896FD37 at MAIL01.CSUMain.csu.edu.au> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Hi Ben, > > This sort of piece sounds like a great fit for either "Information, > Communication & Society" or "The Information Society". > > Good luck! > Jake > > Jake Wallis > Lecturer | School of Information Studies > Boorooma Street > Wagga Wagga, NSW 2650 > Australia > Tel: +61 2 6933 4397 > Fax: +61 2 6933 2733 > Email: jwallis at csu.edu.au > www.csu.edu.au > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 18:39:22 -0500 > From: Ben Morton > To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org > Subject: [Air-L] Journals Related to 'Free Labor' in the Online > Economy > Message-ID: > < > CAEKywwYs9uvV4Kre0rFM_CUq5mk+GK-cV_rttB4V8geFBT8LbQ at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Dear Colleagues, > > I need some help finding a Journal suitable for my work. > > I recently completed a manuscript that critiques the usage of "free labor," > "exploitation," and other such terms when studying the collective and > often crowdsourced work of individuals within online networks. I am > engaging with critical research of online economies, mostly by Tiziana > Terranova, Mark Andrejevic, Jonathan Zittrain, and Nancy Baym. > > Although I am happy to be finished with the manuscript I need some help > finding a Journal that might be suitable for this type of research. If I > could exploit your free labor for a moment (see what I did there?), could > you recommend any journals you think may benefit? > > Best, > Ben Morton > Charles Sturt University > > | ALBURY-WODONGA | BATHURST | CANBERRA | DUBBO | GOULBURN | MELBOURNE | > ONTARIO | ORANGE | PORT MACQUARIE | SYDNEY | WAGGA WAGGA | > > LEGAL NOTICE > This email (and any attachment) is confidential and is intended for the > use of the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient of this > email, you must not copy, distribute, take any action in reliance on it or > disclose it to anyone. Any confidentiality is not waived or lost by reason > of mistaken delivery. Email should be checked for viruses and defects > before opening. Charles Sturt University (CSU) does not accept liability > for viruses or any consequence which arise as a result of this email > transmission. Email communications with CSU may be subject to automated > email filtering, which could result in the delay or deletion of a > legitimate email before it is read at CSU. The views expressed in this > email are not necessarily those of CSU. > > Charles Sturt University in Australia http://www.csu.edu.au The Grange > Chancellery, Panorama Avenue, Bathurst NSW Australia 2795 (ABN: 83 878 708 > 551; CRICOS Provider Numbers: 00005F (NSW), 01947G (VIC), 02960B (ACT)). > TEQSA Provider Number: PV12018 > > Charles Sturt University in Ontario http://www.charlessturt.ca 860 > Harrington Court, Burlington Ontario Canada L7N 3N4 Registration: > www.peqab.ca > > Consider the environment before printing this email. > > Disclaimer added by CodeTwo Exchange Rules 2007 > http://www.codetwo.com > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 08:42:57 +0530 > From: Shriram Venkatraman > To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org > Subject: Re: [Air-L] Journals Related to 'Free Labor' in the Online > Economy (Ben Morton) > Message-ID: > < > CAEqTNUZcLm74Y2PBrkQJ+4a8h8vSp5O+MjWkn+96vRs4jkyqRQ at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Have seen articles on Digital Labor in http://nms.sagepub.com/ (New Media > and Society) > > > Thanks, > Shriram Venkatraman > > www.gsmis.org > http://www.ucl.ac.uk/social-networking > @UCLSocNet > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 16:05:57 +0100 > From: Paula Graham > To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org > Subject: [Air-L] Flossie 2013 CfP > Message-ID: <5193A455.3070201 at gmx.co.uk> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > CfP: FLOSSIE 2013, 8/9 November, QMUL, London, UK > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Flossie 2013 is a two-day event for women who are interested in any > aspect of open technology, open knowledge, digital arts, and social > innovation. Whether you code, tinker, use FLOSS in your projects, or > want to explore open alternatives, all women are welcome - from expert > to novice, or anywhere in between. > > Flossie 2013 is a chance to showcase your project, share skills, or talk > about something which really interests you. We're also scheduling plenty > of time to network, share and build on ideas, and to meet new friends > and old. > > Call for proposals: > > We?re inviting proposals for all aspects of the day. > 1. Talk about your current project or a project you?d like to set up > 2. Skills sharing workshops on any aspect of Free/Libre Open Source > software, hardware, data ? anything open! > 3. Talk about social innovation and diversifying technology design > 4. Send us your idea for an activity ? as long as it's open! Even if you > don?t feel you have the expertise yourself, and just have an idea, let > us know. > > Deadline: 19 July 2013 > > Submit your proposal here: http://www.flossie.org/openconf/ > > If you have any questions, please email conf at flossie.org or find more > information on our website at www.flossie.org > > -- > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 16:17:41 +0100 > From: Paula Graham > To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org > Subject: [Air-L] Flossie 2013 CfP > Message-ID: <5193A715.40104 at gmx.co.uk> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > CfP: FLOSSIE 2013, 8/9 November, QMUL, London, UK > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Flossie 2013 is a two-day event for women who are interested in any > aspect of open technology, open knowledge, digital arts, and social > innovation. Whether you code, tinker, use FLOSS in your projects, or > want to explore open alternatives, all women are welcome - from expert > to novice, or anywhere in between. > > Flossie 2013 is a chance to showcase your project, share skills, or talk > about something which really interests you. We're also scheduling plenty > of time to network, share and build on ideas, and to meet new friends > and old. > > Call for proposals: > > We?re inviting proposals for all aspects of the day. > 1. Talk about your current project or a project you?d like to set up > 2. Skills sharing workshops on any aspect of Free/Libre Open Source > software, hardware, data ? anything open! > 3. Talk about social innovation and diversifying technology design > 4. Send us your idea for an activity ? as long as it's open! Even if you > don?t feel you have the expertise yourself, and just have an idea, let > us know. > > Deadline: 19 July 2013 > > Submit your proposal here: http://www.flossie.org/openconf/ > > If you have any questions, please email conf at flossie.org or find more > information on our website at www.flossie.org > > -- > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 16:40:38 +0100 > From: "Emma Pooka" > To: > Subject: [Air-L] Bad Influences: Invitation to read and participate in > a blog fiction PhD project > Message-ID: <002f01ce5182$8cde99c0$a69bcd40$@co.uk> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > I want to announce my PhD project on this list, as I hope that it will be > relevant to some researchers here. Please do pass on the details to any > colleagues or students who you think would be interested in reading or > participating. > > Bad Influences (http://badinfluences.org.uk) is a multi-character, > real-time, interactive blog fiction. It began in January and will continue > until November. The purpose of the project is to explore the poetics of > blog fiction, especially those relating to the narrative time effects of > real-time serialisation, a feature of epistolary fiction using a blog or > social network as its platform. It is also an interactive creative writing > project that I hope will be enjoyable to read and to participate in whether > you have an academic interest in digital literatures and narratology or > not! > > Bad Influences is set in 2026 and tells the story of a global pandemic flu > virus through the blogs of four characters, based in London, New Jersey, > Beijing and Canberra. The blogs are pre-written and are being posted in > real-time (i.e., each post or comment goes up precisely 13 years before the > event it relates). The comments sections of the blogs are open for reader > participation (upon filling in a participation agreement > http://badinfluences.org.uk/take-part/participation-agreement/), and the > commentary is a mixture of pre-written character interaction and improvised > interaction between reader-participants and characters. > > This project could be of interest to anybody teaching or researching > digital > literatures, interactive storytelling, narrative time, disaster fiction or > creative writing. Please feel free to contact me on > purplepooka at badinfluences.org.uk for more information, or explore the site > and the story at http://badinfluences.org.uk. Questions and feedback are > very welcome, and I'd love to hear about any use you make of the project in > your own research or teaching. > > Many thanks, > Emma Segar (Edge Hill University) > purplepooka at badinfluences.org.uk > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 19:27:04 +0300 > From: Sky Croeser > To: Air-L > Subject: Re: [Air-L] Resource: Data analytics support from students > Message-ID: > DBGYt-5X2HcjFchw at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > I am a little skeptical about this. While I think it has the potential to > be very useful, outsourcing data analysis (a key aspect of research, > presumably), seems potentially problematic both in terms of the quality of > research and in terms of the academic labour market (why hire a skilled > research assistant when you can get students to do it for free)? > > I'm curious - are these issues being addressed within the project at all? > > > On 15 May 2013 03:29, Amit Jain wrote: > > > *An education researcher at Oxford is organizing an opportunity for > > researchers and nonprofits to receive free data analytics support from > > students in a massively open online course. Anyone can join the course > and > > post real-world projects for tens of thousands of students to attempt to > > solve. Please read below and forward widely!* > > > > // > > > > *Calling all professors, researchers, and nonprofits* -- harness student > > learning to get free data analyses from the University of Washington's > > Introduction > > to Data Science course! Sign > > up > > now to recruit from tens of thousands of students to take on your > > organization's projects in data visualization, analysis, or predictive > > modeling. You may not need an internal store of data to benefit -- your > > organization can learn volumes through publicly available datasets. > > > > For details and project ideas, please visit: > > http://coursolve.org/courses/datascience/ > > > > Questions? Contact amit at coursolve.org. > > > > -- > > Amit Jain > > Coursolve (http://coursolve.org) > > Twitter: @coursolve | Facebook: > > Coursolve > > amit at coursolve.org | +1 617-752-2673 > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 19:33:14 +0100 > From: Tim.Hutchings > To: "air-l at listserv.aoir.org" > Subject: [Air-L] Registration Open: Digital Media and Sacred Text, > June 17 (Open University, London) > Message-ID: > <9317489861278C419F4BB340B120C8DF0445273EBE at SALCEYCMS1.open.ac.uk> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > DIGITAL MEDIA AND SACRED TEXT > > Monday 17 June 2013, Open University > Camden Town, London, UK > 9am - 6pm > > This one-day Open University conference will bring together academics > interested in the study of digital sacred texts and religious e-reading, > including sociologists, anthropologists, media scholars, computer > scientists, historians and digital humanists. We also welcome religious > practitioners and publishers engaged in creating digital sacred texts. > > We are delighted to announce that the keynote speaker will be Professor > Heidi Campbell (Texas A&M University). > > Attendance at this event will cost ?20. Thanks to generous funding from > the Arts and Humanities Research Council, 30 free places are available for > the first delegates to register. > > A full programme and online registration page can be accessed here: > http://www.mediatingreligion.org/events/digital-media-and-sacred-text > > - Tim Hutchings, Centre for Research on Socio-Cultural Change, Open > University > > -- > The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an > exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC > 038302). > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > > End of Air-L Digest, Vol 106, Issue 16 > ************************************** > From c.haythorn at ubc.ca Thu May 16 08:25:58 2013 From: c.haythorn at ubc.ca (Caroline Haythornthwaite) Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 08:25:58 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] CFP Networked Learning conference References: Message-ID: CFP: Networked Learning Conference Chairs: Maarten de Laat & Thomas Ryberg http://www.networkedlearningconference.org.uk/ Papers Due: Friday 4th October, 2013. Conference: April 7-9, 2014, Edinburgh, UK -------------------- Dear Colleague We are pleased to announce the Call for papers for the Ninth International Conference on Networked Learning in Higher Education, Lifelong Learning and Professional Development. The conference is hosted by the University of Edinburgh, at the John McIntyre Conference Centre in Edinburgh, on the 7th. 8th & 9th April 2014. Keynote Speakers: Professor Neil Selwyn & Professor Steve Fuller This conference is considered a major event in the international 'technology enhanced learning' conference circuit, and provides a friendly, collegiate context for meeting researchers and practitioners in networked learning All submissions are peer reviewed, and accepted papers published in conference proceeding Further details on submission at: www.networkedlearningconference.org.uk/documents/call.pdf NOTE: Full papers must be submitted for peer review by Friday 4th October, 2013. PRE-CONFERENCE ONLINE HOT SEATs will run from September 2013 to March 2014: Details of Hot Seat hosts can be found at: http://networkedlearningconference.ning.com/ Full Conference Details can be found at: http://www.networkedlearningconference.org.uk/ Maarten de Laat, Open University, Netherlands & Thomas Ryberg, Aalborg University, Denmark From rawbird at gmail.com Thu May 16 09:29:26 2013 From: rawbird at gmail.com (Adam Fish) Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 17:29:26 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Internet Historiography Message-ID: Dear AOIRers, Anybody know of articles or books analysing 1) the political historiography of the internet. Who has criticized the historiography of the internet as being written for political gain? Secondly, any research on 2) the space shared by classic liberalism, technology, and history? I am writing this piece on how Obama?s statement on ?the internet? you didn?t build that,? celebrating social liberal federal investments in technology, has been (mis)interpreted by various political actors. Any leads? Best, Adam Fish, PhD Media and Cultural Studies Department of Sociology Lancaster University, UK LA1 4YT p. 01524592699 a.fish2 at lancaster.ac.uk @mediacultures, mediacultures.org http://www.research.lancs.ac.uk/portal/en/people/adam-fish(10a5067e-a828-497b-95ae-e35ed07f9ba1).html From glovi002 at umn.edu Thu May 16 10:53:03 2013 From: glovi002 at umn.edu (Peter Gloviczki) Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 12:53:03 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Internet Historiography In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Adam, Niels Brugger's work might be helpful to you, including his book Web History: < http://www.amazon.com/History-Digital-Formations-Niels-4gger/dp/1433104687>. Best wishes, Peter On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Adam Fish wrote: > Dear AOIRers, > > Anybody know of articles or books analysing 1) the political historiography > of the internet. Who has criticized the historiography of the internet as > being written for political gain? > > Secondly, any research on 2) the space shared by classic liberalism, > technology, and history? > > I am writing this piece on how Obama?s statement on ?the internet? you > didn?t build that,? celebrating social liberal federal investments in > technology, has been (mis)interpreted by various political actors. > > Any leads? > > Best, > > > Adam Fish, PhD > > Media and Cultural Studies > > Department of Sociology > > Lancaster University, UK > > LA1 4YT > > p. 01524592699 > > a.fish2 at lancaster.ac.uk > > @mediacultures, mediacultures.org > > > http://www.research.lancs.ac.uk/portal/en/people/adam-fish(10a5067e-a828-497b-95ae-e35ed07f9ba1).html > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Peter Joseph Gloviczki, Ph.D. http://petergloviczki.com From hrosenba at indiana.edu Thu May 16 11:05:56 2013 From: hrosenba at indiana.edu (Howard Rosenbaum) Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 14:05:56 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] CFP> HICSS 2014 Minitrack: Crowdsourcing content production and online knowledge repositories Message-ID: Apologies for cross-posting HICSS 2014 Minitrack: Crowdsourcing content production and online knowledge repositories January 6-9, 2014 Big Island, Hawaii, USA Track: Digital and social media We are pleased to invite you to submit a paper to the Crowdsourcing mini-track for HICSS 2014 taking place at the Hilton Waikoloa on the Big Island of Hawaii from Jan. 6-9th, 2014. In line with the track emphasis on promoting digital and social-media-related research, this minitrack aims to expand the scope of research in HICSS and bring to the conference researchers interested in cutting edge topics involving socio-technical issues of mass knowledge production and crowdsourcing online knowledge repositories. As various forms of collaboration are enabled (and constrained) by the affordances available in social media, researchers are investigating a range of issues including: 1) the diverse ways in which people collaborate to create, manage, curate and manipulate online content and how these activities affect digital repositories; 2) how those who manage these repositories are responding to the dynamics of online co-creation of content; 3) the dynamics of crowdsourced online collaborations and online communities of practice; and 4) the ways in which we can best describe the socio-technical interaction networks that facilitate and inhibit mass knowledge production. In this mini track we are interested in empirical and theoretical work that addresses these and related socio-technical issues. Papers of interest will examine communities of online knowledge repositories such as YouTube, Yahoo!Answers, Wikipedia, and others and may address in this context topics such as: . The socio-technical dynamics of crowdsourcing and mass knowledge production sites . Vandalism and trolling in online mass knowledge production sites . Conflict and cooperation in content production sites . Issues of gender in collaborative content production sites . Global, cross-cultural and international aspects of content production and online intercultural collaborations in online content creation communities . Managing ethics in online mass knowledge production communities . Building, maintaining and ending social relationships on online repositories sites . Social question answering and collaborative information seeking behaviors . Challenges and opportunities of digital curation . Standards and quality of digital content online Detailed information about the conference can be found here http://www.hicss.hawaii.edu/hicss_47/apahome47.htm Information for potential authors can be found here http://www.hicss.hawaii.edu/hicss_47/47cfp.pdf Due date for submission of full papers is: June 15, 2013 Minitrack organizers Pnina Fichman Informatics West #301 901 East 10th Street SLIS, Indiana University Bloomington Indiana 47408 812 856 1587 Noriko Hara 1320 East 10th Street SLIS, Indiana University Bloomington Indiana 47405 812 855 1490 Howard Rosenbaum 1320 East 10th Street SLIS, Indiana University Bloomington Indiana 47405 812 855 3250 From arussell at stevens.edu Thu May 16 13:18:35 2013 From: arussell at stevens.edu (Andrew Russell) Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 16:18:35 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Internet Historiography In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Adam - For your first question, I presented a paper last fall called "Histories of Networking vs. the History of the Internet" that took political misinterpretations of the Internet's history (by Steven Johnson and Gordon Crovitz) as a point of departure. You can find it at http://arussell.org/papers/russell-SIGCIS-2012.pdf. In late 2013 Cambridge University Press will publish my book, _An Open World: History, Ideology, and Network Standards_ which has some critical comments on the historiography of the Internet, although perhaps not quite in the way you have framed it. On the second question, it's tough to know where to start since your question is one of the major questions that scholars in STS, the history of technology, and business history have been pursuing for decades (assuming you mean New Deal-style liberalism, as we call it in the US): Sheila Jasanoff, Langdon Winner, Richard John, Steve Usselman, Lou Galambos, Brian Balogh, Michael Dennis, Dominique Tobbell, etc. If you mean American federal policies that have promoted technological innovation, Norberg & O'Neill's "Transforming Computer Technology" has a richly detailed history of ARPA's IPTO - which sounds directly on point for you. I'm happy to be more specific or otherwise share cites, etc if you think it would be helpful; and in any case please let us know when you finish what you're working on! Cheers, Andy On May 16, 2013, at 12:29 PM, Adam Fish wrote: > Dear AOIRers, > > Anybody know of articles or books analysing 1) the political historiography > of the internet. Who has criticized the historiography of the internet as > being written for political gain? > > Secondly, any research on 2) the space shared by classic liberalism, > technology, and history? > > I am writing this piece on how Obama?s statement on ?the internet? you > didn?t build that,? celebrating social liberal federal investments in > technology, has been (mis)interpreted by various political actors. > > Any leads? > > Best, > > > Adam Fish, PhD > > Media and Cultural Studies > > Department of Sociology > > Lancaster University, UK > > LA1 4YT > > p. 01524592699 > > a.fish2 at lancaster.ac.uk > > @mediacultures, mediacultures.org > > http://www.research.lancs.ac.uk/portal/en/people/adam-fish(10a5067e-a828-497b-95ae-e35ed07f9ba1).html > --------------------------------------------------------------------- Andrew L. Russell, Ph.D. Director, Program in Science & Technology Studies Assistant Professor, History College of Arts & Letters Stevens Institute of Technology Hoboken, New Jersey 07030 t. 201-216-5400 f. 201-216-8245 arussell at stevens.edu http://www.stevens.edu/cal/sts http://www.arussell.org From meta.sj at gmail.com Thu May 16 14:31:34 2013 From: meta.sj at gmail.com (Samuel Klein) Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 17:31:34 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Fwd: [Wiki-research-l] Research analyst opening at Wikimedia In-Reply-To: <7ADC5900-A893-4D1F-BA2C-121F0CC41E66@wikimedia.org> References: <7ADC5900-A893-4D1F-BA2C-121F0CC41E66@wikimedia.org> Message-ID: For the community-dataminers and researchers out there: SJ ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Dario Taraborelli Date: Tue, May 7, 2013 at 3:59 PM Subject: [Wiki-research-l] Research analyst opening at Wikimedia To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities , "A mailing list for the Analytics Team at WMF and everybody who has an interest in Wikipedia and analytics." Cc: Heather McAndrew , Ion Vazquez The Wikimedia Foundation is looking to hire a full-time Research Analyst to join our product research and analytics team: http://hire.jobvite.com/j/?cj=oTqrXfwr&s=wiki-research-l This opening is focused on research on editor engagement features and experiments developed by the Foundation's product team. Get in touch off-list if you have any questions on this opening (you can also contact Heather and Ion from our recruitment team, cc'ed). Dario _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l at lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l -- Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266 From kedrisco at usc.edu Thu May 16 15:36:40 2013 From: kedrisco at usc.edu (Kevin Driscoll) Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 15:36:40 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] Internet Historiography Message-ID: Hi Adam, On Thu, 16 May 2013 17:29:26 +0100, Adam Fish wrote: > > Anybody know of articles or books analysing 1) the political historiography > of the internet. Who has criticized the historiography of the internet as > being written for political gain? These are really interesting questions. Back in 1998, Roy Rosenzweig wrote a round up of recently published histories of the internet (including Hafner & Lyon, Norberg & O'Neill, and Edwards.) Not only is it an excellent integrative review but I found it helpful for reconstructing the stakes of telling different stories about the internet at that particular moment. Rosenzweig, Roy. "Wizards, bureaucrats, warriors, and hackers: Writing the history of the Internet." The American Historical Review 103, no. 5 (1998): 1530-1552. You might also look into the various documents produced by the FCC regarding the National Broadband Plan: http://www.broadband.gov/ I'm tracing some similar ground in my diss research right now. Looking forward to hearing more about what you turn up. Kevin Driscoll PhD candidate Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism University of Southern California From Julie.Freeman at canberra.edu.au Thu May 16 17:04:37 2013 From: Julie.Freeman at canberra.edu.au (Julie.Freeman) Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 00:04:37 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] CFP - Emerging Issues in Communication Research & Policy, Canberra, Australia Message-ID: Call for Papers: Emerging Issues in Communication Research and Policy News & Media Research Centre, University of Canberra, Australia 18-19 November 2013 www.canberra.edu.au/nmrc-conference-2013 Building on the success of the 2012 symposium on the future of the Australian National Broadband Network, the News & Media Research Centre (N&MRC) at the University of Canberra will be hosting its inaugural conference on 'Emerging Issues in Communication Research and Policy'. The aim of this forum is to bring together academic researchers, media practitioners and government professionals working in the media, Internet and telecommunications fields to facilitate analysis and critique of the impact of the changing media landscape and regulatory frameworks on the public. The full call for papers can be downloaded from www.canberra.edu.au/nmrc-conference-2013 Key Dates: Abstract / Full Paper Submission: 1 August 2013 Notification of Outcome: 1 October 2013 Revised Paper Deadline: 1 November 2013 Final Date for Registration: 1 November 2013 Accepted full papers will be published in the conference proceedings, which will have an ISBN and be made publicly available via the N&MRC website. Selected papers presented at the conference will be invited for publication in the Telecommunications Journal of Australia, vol. 64, no. 1 (March 2014) (see www.tja.org.au). Contact: Further information is available on the conference website: www.canberra.edu.au/nmrc-conference-2013 Please direct enquiries to Julie Freeman at NMRC.Conference at canberra.edu.au Dr Julie Freeman Postdoctoral Research Fellow News & Media Research Centre www.canberra.edu.au/nmrc Faculty of Arts & Design University of Canberra ACT 2601 Australia Email: NMRC.Conference at canberra.edu.au From jwallis at csu.edu.au Thu May 16 18:30:08 2013 From: jwallis at csu.edu.au (Wallis, Jacob) Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 11:30:08 +1000 Subject: [Air-L] Air-L Digest, Vol 106, Issue 17 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Adam, You might be interested in Matthew Allen's paper on the 'versioning' of the web: Allen, M. (2013). What was Web 2.0? Versions as the dominant mode of internet history. New Media & Society, 15(2), 260-275. Sounds like you're writing an interesting piece. Regards, Jake Jake Wallis Lecturer | School of Information Studies Boorooma Street Wagga Wagga, NSW 2650 Australia Tel: +61 2 6933 4397 Fax: +61 2 6933 2733 Email: jwallis at csu.edu.au www.csu.edu.au Twitter | Facebook | LinkedIn | YouTube ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 17:29:26 +0100 From: Adam Fish To: AoIR mailing list Subject: [Air-L] Internet Historiography Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Dear AOIRers, Anybody know of articles or books analysing 1) the political historiography of the internet. Who has criticized the historiography of the internet as being written for political gain? Secondly, any research on 2) the space shared by classic liberalism, technology, and history? I am writing this piece on how Obama?s statement on ?the internet? you didn?t build that,? celebrating social liberal federal investments in technology, has been (mis)interpreted by various political actors. Any leads? Best, Adam Fish, PhD Media and Cultural Studies Department of Sociology Lancaster University, UK LA1 4YT p. 01524592699 a.fish2 at lancaster.ac.uk @mediacultures, mediacultures.org http://www.research.lancs.ac.uk/portal/en/people/adam-fish(10a5067e-a828-497b-95ae-e35ed07f9ba1).html Charles Sturt University | ALBURY-WODONGA | BATHURST | CANBERRA | DUBBO | GOULBURN | MELBOURNE | ONTARIO | ORANGE | PORT MACQUARIE | SYDNEY | WAGGA WAGGA | LEGAL NOTICE This email (and any attachment) is confidential and is intended for the use of the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must not copy, distribute, take any action in reliance on it or disclose it to anyone. Any confidentiality is not waived or lost by reason of mistaken delivery. Email should be checked for viruses and defects before opening. Charles Sturt University (CSU) does not accept liability for viruses or any consequence which arise as a result of this email transmission. Email communications with CSU may be subject to automated email filtering, which could result in the delay or deletion of a legitimate email before it is read at CSU. The views expressed in this email are not necessarily those of CSU. Charles Sturt University in Australia http://www.csu.edu.au The Grange Chancellery, Panorama Avenue, Bathurst NSW Australia 2795 (ABN: 83 878 708 551; CRICOS Provider Numbers: 00005F (NSW), 01947G (VIC), 02960B (ACT)). TEQSA Provider Number: PV12018 Charles Sturt University in Ontario http://www.charlessturt.ca 860 Harrington Court, Burlington Ontario Canada L7N 3N4 Registration: www.peqab.ca Consider the environment before printing this email. Disclaimer added by CodeTwo Exchange Rules 2007 http://www.codetwo.com From netcrit at gmail.com Thu May 16 23:26:44 2013 From: netcrit at gmail.com (Matthew Allen) Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 16:26:44 +1000 Subject: [Air-L] Air-L Digest, Vol 106, Issue 17 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks for the pointer to my article. The are some related pieces which you can google up on history and the web or go to http://netcrit.net for pre prints or links. On Friday, 17 May 2013, Wallis, Jacob wrote: > Hi Adam, > > You might be interested in Matthew Allen's paper on the 'versioning' of > the web: > > Allen, M. (2013). What was Web 2.0? Versions as the dominant mode of > internet history. New Media & Society, 15(2), 260-275. > > Sounds like you're writing an interesting piece. > > Regards, > Jake > > Jake Wallis > Lecturer | School of Information Studies > Boorooma Street > Wagga Wagga, NSW 2650 > Australia > Tel: +61 2 6933 4397 > Fax: +61 2 6933 2733 > Email: jwallis at csu.edu.au > www.csu.edu.au > > Twitter | Facebook | LinkedIn | YouTube > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 17:29:26 +0100 > From: Adam Fish > > To: AoIR mailing list > > Subject: [Air-L] Internet Historiography > Message-ID: > SxDjuF23DFCJHz6Q7hOQ5JQ5rws-wzFMZVBbfF7Uts8Mw at mail.gmail.com > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 > > Dear AOIRers, > > Anybody know of articles or books analysing 1) the political historiography > of the internet. Who has criticized the historiography of the internet as > being written for political gain? > > Secondly, any research on 2) the space shared by classic liberalism, > technology, and history? > > I am writing this piece on how Obama?s statement on ?the internet? you > didn?t build that,? celebrating social liberal federal investments in > technology, has been (mis)interpreted by various political actors. > > Any leads? > > Best, > > > Adam Fish, PhD > > Media and Cultural Studies > > Department of Sociology > > Lancaster University, UK > > LA1 4YT > > p. 01524592699 > > a.fish2 at lancaster.ac.uk > > @mediacultures, mediacultures.org > > > http://www.research.lancs.ac.uk/portal/en/people/adam-fish(10a5067e-a828-497b-95ae-e35ed07f9ba1).html > Charles Sturt University > > | ALBURY-WODONGA | BATHURST | CANBERRA | DUBBO | GOULBURN | MELBOURNE | > ONTARIO | ORANGE | PORT MACQUARIE | SYDNEY | WAGGA WAGGA | > > LEGAL NOTICE > This email (and any attachment) is confidential and is intended for the > use of the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient of this > email, you must not copy, distribute, take any action in reliance on it or > disclose it to anyone. Any confidentiality is not waived or lost by reason > of mistaken delivery. Email should be checked for viruses and defects > before opening. Charles Sturt University (CSU) does not accept liability > for viruses or any consequence which arise as a result of this email > transmission. Email communications with CSU may be subject to automated > email filtering, which could result in the delay or deletion of a > legitimate email before it is read at CSU. The views expressed in this > email are not necessarily those of CSU. > > Charles Sturt University in Australia http://www.csu.edu.au The Grange > Chancellery, Panorama Avenue, Bathurst NSW Australia 2795 (ABN: 83 878 708 > 551; CRICOS Provider Numbers: 00005F (NSW), 01947G (VIC), 02960B (ACT)). > TEQSA Provider Number: PV12018 > > Charles Sturt University in Ontario http://www.charlessturt.ca 860 > Harrington Court, Burlington Ontario Canada L7N 3N4 Registration: > www.peqab.ca > > Consider the environment before printing this email. > > Disclaimer added by CodeTwo Exchange Rules 2007 > http://www.codetwo.com > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Sent from Gmail Mobile From soates at umd.edu Fri May 17 11:40:17 2013 From: soates at umd.edu (Sarah Ann Oates) Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 18:40:17 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Search Engines and Social Science: A Revolution in the Making Message-ID: <4D173A5B6FCE2D44BEB003A158461C250A5CC303@OITMX1006.AD.UMD.EDU> If you research and/or teach on issues relating to internet search, you may be interested in: Search Engines and Social Science: A Revolution in the Making By Filippo Trevisan at the University of Glasgow. This policy paper covers main points and presents additional research out of the Google Forum meetings in London. It was funded as part of a UK Economic and Social Research Council Knowledge Exchange Grant (Civic Consumers or Commercial Citizens?: Social Scientists Working with Google to Better Understand Online Search Behaviour). Download here: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2265348 Key points: n Google Trends is an especially promising tool that could enable academics to explore new questions. n Ever since the internet became commercially available in the mid-1990s, search engines have played a crucial role in orienting online traffic, distributing content and constructing knowledge. n While in the past scholars had been more interested in talking about the role of search engines themselves in shaping society, this approach is being increasingly complemented by work that focuses on how search engines can augment academic research in general. n It is crucial that academics investigate opportunities and challenges in the centrality of search engines in contemporary informational patterns and social interaction. n Emerging strands of research using search-engine tools/data productively include politics and public opinion studies; economics and business; public health and epidemiology; and response/reaction to natural disasters. n Google Trends data offers advantages over traditional social-science methods such as public opinion surveys. It provides enhanced opportunities to study crisis situations as well as the general relationship between offline events and online behaviour. n Applications such as Google Trends could provide unprecedented opportunities for examining the connections between new and old media. n The global dimension of Google Trends as well as the geographical filters that can be applied to its output can facilitate international research by providing comparable data at virtually no cost, thus substantially expanding the scope for social-science research across country boundaries. n Scholars should be aware of the potential drawbacks associated with this emerging methodology, including doubts over data representativeness when generalising from search engine users to an entire population; language differences and ?country effects? in relation to search; as well as limited flexibility afforded by Google Trends. Sincerely Sarah Oates ESRC Grant Principal Professor and Senior Scholar Philip Merrill College of Journalism University of Maryland 2100L Knight Hall College Park, MD 20742 Phone: 301-405-4510 Email: soates at umd.edu www.media-politics.com See an excerpt from my new book -- Revolution Stalled: The Political Limits of Internet in the Post-Soviet Sphere, 2013, Oxford University Press at http://goo.gl/HTcDd From nativebuddha at gmail.com Sun May 19 03:48:11 2013 From: nativebuddha at gmail.com (nativebuddha) Date: Sun, 19 May 2013 06:48:11 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Google goggles privacy privates References: <273D7480-3DF3-469B-A54D-6EC54C590F09@gmail.com> Message-ID: Techno phobia or really creepy? Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: > From: nativebuddha > Date: May 19, 2013, 6:43:22 AM EDT > To: nativebuddha at gmail.com > Subject: Link from Twitter > > bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/17/at-google-conference-even-cameras-in-the-bathroom?smid=tw-share > > Download the official Twitter app here > > > Sent from my iPhone From denrall at yahoo.com Sun May 19 18:02:16 2013 From: denrall at yahoo.com (Denise N. Rall) Date: Sun, 19 May 2013 18:02:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Air-L] Internet Historiography References: Message-ID: <1369011736.32088.YahooMailNeo@web160904.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Ah - Campbell-Kelly, M., & Aspray, W. (1996). Computer: A history of the information machine. New York: Basic Books. 2nd edition 2004. Is pretty clear about the industrial-military precedents. Likewise? Abbate, Janet. (2000). Inventing the internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. In particular, technological advances during WWII were then harnessed to commercial enterprises (see histories of IBM) My own modest contribution in this area: Rall, Denise N. 2006. ?The ?house that Dick built?: Constructing the team that built the bomb? Research Note: Social Studies of Science 36: 943-957. ?Cheers, Denise Dr Denise N. Rall, Adjunct Lecturer, School of Arts & Social Sciences Chair of Textiles stream,?Secretary-in-Waiting, Popular Culture Australia-New Zealand Currently in Lismore, NSW, Australia Phones - Mobile +(61)(0)438 233344 Fax +(61)(0)2 6624 5380 ________________________________ From: Kevin Driscoll To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org; rawbird at gmail.com Sent: Friday, 17 May 2013 8:36 AM Subject: Re: [Air-L] Internet Historiography Hi Adam, On Thu, 16 May 2013 17:29:26 +0100, Adam Fish wrote: > > Anybody know of articles or books analysing 1) the political historiography > of the internet. Who has criticized the historiography of the internet as > being written for political gain? These are really interesting questions. Back in 1998, Roy Rosenzweig wrote a round up of recently published histories of the internet (including Hafner & Lyon, Norberg & O'Neill, and Edwards.) Not only is it an excellent integrative review but I found it helpful for reconstructing the stakes of telling different stories about the internet at that particular moment. Rosenzweig, Roy. "Wizards, bureaucrats, warriors, and hackers: Writing the history of the Internet." The American Historical Review 103, no. 5 (1998): 1530-1552. You might also look into the various documents produced by the FCC regarding the National Broadband Plan: http://www.broadband.gov/ I'm tracing some similar ground in my diss research right now. Looking forward to hearing more about what you turn up. Kevin Driscoll PhD candidate Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism University of Southern California _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From rocofem at gmail.com Sun May 19 18:56:01 2013 From: rocofem at gmail.com (Michelle Rodino-Colocino) Date: Sun, 19 May 2013 21:56:01 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] my post from mlr31@psu.edu was rejected Message-ID: Can you please post this? It was rejected from my mlr31 at psu.edu address. I am a member of the air list from mlr31 at psu.edu. Thanks, Michelle We welcome the following proposals emailed to udcpc2013 at gmail.com by June 1, 2013: 1. 500-word abstracts that describe the purpose and significance of your research and/or activist projects, especially those that address the issues outlined in the call. 2. Full papers (up to 25 pages including references) from graduate and undergraduate students. The top student paper will be considered for the Top Student Paper Award. Student papers should be indicated as such and also contain a 500-word abstract. Students may apply for funding to cover some of their travel expenses through the Jeanne Hall Memorial Fund. To be considered for such funding, please include a one-line request for consideration of such funding on the top of your proposal. 3. Presentations of Media Literacy projects, including films and multimedia related to the call. 4. Finally, we welcome proposals for pre-constituted panels. Please include 500-word abstracts for each participant (4-5 participants) and one panel rationale of 200-350 words that articulates the connections between the projects and the overall significance of the panel. Sponsored in part by the Department of Media Studies at the University of San Francisco Michelle Rodino-Colocino, Ph.D. "Enjoy the process" --my mother Associate Professor "Mangia" --my grandmother Film/Video, Media and Women's Studies "Say it" --my daughter Chair, Steering Committee UDC (Union for Democratic Communications) http://www.democraticcommunications.net/ http://comm.psu.edu/people/mlr31 rocofem at gmail.com (work and personal) michelle at psu.edu (work) Michelle Rodino-Colocino, Ph.D. "Enjoy the process" --my mother Associate Professor "Mangia" --my grandmother Film/Video, Media Studies & Women's Studies "Say it" --my daughter 117 Carnegie, University Park, 16802 Chair, Steering Committee, Union for Democratic Communications/UDC http://www.democraticcommunications.net/ *http://comm.psu.edu/people/mlr31* rocofem at gmail.com (work and personal) michelle at psu.edu (work) From kathleen.kuehn at cnu.edu Sun May 19 20:30:31 2013 From: kathleen.kuehn at cnu.edu (Kathleen Kuehn) Date: Sun, 19 May 2013 23:30:31 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] CFP: Union for Democratic Communications/Project Censored 2013 Conference (Deadline June 1) Message-ID: CFP: The Point is to Change It: Media Democracy and Democratic Media in Action UDC/Project Censored Conference At the University of San Francisco, November 1-3 We invite submissions for the Union for Democratic Communication and Project Censored conference November 1-3, 2013 at the University of San Francisco. Submission deadline is June 1, 2013. Sponsored in part by the Department of Media Studies at the University of San Francisco With increasingly precarious employment, accelerating ecological degradation, gulfs between the 1% and the 99%, as well as dramatic booms and busts, we need a global media responsive to the 99%. We need rigorous critique of corporate media?s commodification of social life. We need critique of all forms of censorship, systematic information exclusion, and propaganda. We need grounded ideas for democratizing media in all formats and genres. We need media justice. To revitalize and retool media democracy in today?s media landscape, the Union for Democratic Communications (UDC) and Project Censored are teaming up for our 2013 conference. UDC, which held its first conference in 1981, has worked to overcome concentrated political-economic power in order to contribute to a world based on economic justice, equality, and peace. Project Censored, founded in 1976, has made its mission to expose and counteract modern-day censorship. Together, UDC and Project Censored hope to contribute to a more democratic society and world by sharing our scholarly and activist projects. We invite research, activist & artistic proposals from critical perspectives interrogating media institutions and technologies, political/economic structures, media practices, cultural practices & audiences; we invite studies in critical pedagogy and research on media activism. Proposals that address pro-democratic media reform or outline efforts to expand citizen access to media are particularly welcome. We welcome the following proposals emailed to udcpc2013 at gmail.com by June 1, 2013: 1. 500-word abstracts that describe the purpose and significance of your research and/or activist projects, especially those that address the issues outlined in the call. 2. Full papers (up to 25 pages including references) from graduate and undergraduate students. The top student paper will be considered for the Top Student Paper Award. Student papers should be indicated as such and also contain a 500-word abstract. Students may apply for funding to cover some of their travel expenses through the Jeanne Hall Memorial Fund. To be considered for such funding, please include a one-line request for consideration of such funding on the top of your proposal. 3. Presentations of Media Literacy projects, including films and multimedia related to the call. 4. Finally, we welcome proposals for pre-constituted panels. Please include 500-word abstracts for each participant (4-5 participants) and one panel rationale of 200-350 words that articulates the connections between the projects and the overall significance of the panel. Sponsored in part by the Department of Media Studies at the University of San Francisco Thanks -- Kathleen M. Kuehn, PhD Assistant Professor Christopher Newport University Department of Communication kathleen.kuehn at cnu.edu From delwarif at siu.edu Sun May 19 21:59:58 2013 From: delwarif at siu.edu (Delwar Hossain) Date: Sun, 19 May 2013 23:59:58 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Help for literature Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, I am going to conduct a study on the uses of social media among the South Asian diaspora in the U.S. Specifically, I will focus on some issues: online community, uses of native languages on social media. I really appreciate your suggestions regarding relevant literature on this area. -- .............................................................................................................................. Delwar Hossain || Ph.D. Candidate || College of Mass Communication and Media Arts Southern Illinois University Carbondale || IL-62901,USA || _________________________________________________________________________ Assistant Professor & Former Chairman || Department of Communication & Journalism|| University of Chittagong || e-mail: delwarif at siu.edu || delwarif at yahoo.com From mathieu.oneil at anu.edu.au Mon May 20 01:03:47 2013 From: mathieu.oneil at anu.edu.au (Mathieu ONeil) Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 08:03:47 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Conference programme: ICT and Work Message-ID: <37EAFE25559D4643B43426CE35235DCE015C24CE@SIXPRD0610MB383.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com> *Apologies for multiple posts* Conference programme ICT and Work : The United States at the Origin of the Dissemination of Digital Capitalism Universit? Paris Sorbonne Histoire et dynamique des espaces anglophones (ED4 - HDEA) - Travail, culture et soci?t? (TCS) Date: 29 - 30 May 2013 Venue: Maison de la Recherche, 28 rue Serpente, 75006 Paris Abstracts: http://ictandwork.blogspot.fr/ Registration: inscription.ictwork at gmail.com Contribution: 30 euros (students 10 euros) Wednesday 29 May 1:30 pm Registration of participants 2:00 pm Welcome by Barth?l?my Jobert, President, Universit? Paris Sorbonne; Marie-Madeleine Martinet, Director, HDEA, Universit? Paris Sorbonne; and Alexis Tadi?, Director, Doctoral School, Universit? Paris Sorbonne. 2:30 pm Presentation of European COST Action IS-12-02: Dynamics of Virtual Work by Ursula Huws, University of Hertfordshire Business School 2:55 pm Introductory remarks by Olivier Frayss?, Universit? Paris Sorbonne, Exporting United States Work Models: Laying Out the Issue Keynote Address 3:15-4:30 pm Eran Fisher, The Open University of Israel, From Ford to Google: The Ideology of Technology Past and Present Respondent: Antonio Casilli, Telecom ParisTech, EHESS Chair: Mathieu O?Neil, Universit? Paris Sorbonne 4:30 pm Tea Break Session 1 ? The Californian Paradigm: Technology and Work Culture 4:50 pm Adam Fish, Lancaster University, Silicon Valley or Hollywood? Place, Politics, and Technology in Cultures of Internet and Television Convergence 5:10 pm Thibault Cl?ment, Universit? Paris Sorbonne, Whistle While You Work: Disney's Theme Parks as Socio-Technical Devices and the Diffusion of US Work Culture Respondent: H?l?ne Schmutz, Universit? Paris Sorbonne 5:30-6:15 pm Discussion Thursday 30 May 9:00 am Coffee, registration. Session 2 ? ICT and Labor: New Dynamics in the Era of Globalization 9:30 am Jakob Rigi, Central European University, Intellectual Property and Labor Aristocracy in the USA: the United States as a Knowledge-Based Rentier State 9:50 am Mary L. Gray, Microsoft Research New England, Digital Piecework: Lessons from an Ethnographic Study on Amazon?s MTURK Program Respondent: ?lisabeth Koechlin, Universit? Paris Sorbonne 10:10-10.30 am Discussion 10:30 am Coffee break 10:50 am Angela Martinez Dy, Nottingham University, Unmasking the ?Great Equalizer?: Internet Entrepreneurship by Marginalized Actors 11:10 am Eve Bantman Masum, Universit? Toulouse Le Mirail, Marketing Migration in North America: the Business Model of Brokerage in a Networked Age Respondent: Medina Niang, Universit? Paris Sorbonne 11:30-12:00 am Discussion Lunch break Session 3 ? Reevaluating the Production / Consumption Relationship 2:30 pm Michael Palm, University of North Carolina, Magic Touch: Transaction Apps and the Political Economy of Swiping 2:50 pm Marie-Christine Pauwels, Universit? Paris-Ouest Nanterre la D?fense, Work and Prosumerism: Collaborative Consumption in the US Respondent: Mathieu O'Neil, Universit? Paris Sorbonne 3:10-3:30 pm Discussion 3:30 pm Tea break Session 4 ? Alternative models 3:50 pm Mandy Tr?ger, University of Illinois, Understanding the Role of Political Economy in US Communication Research 4:10 pm Arwid Lund, University of Uppsala, Peer to Peer Production's Relationship to Capitalism 4:30 pm Johan S?derberg, University of G?teborg: Techno-Utopists and Digital Capitalism 4:50 pm Lela Mosemghvdlishvili & Jeroen Jansz, Erasmus University Rotterdam, What is Free?: Commoditization of Open Source Software Development by Google Respondent: Mathieu O?Neil, Universit? Paris Sorbonne 5:10-6:00 pm Discussion and conference wrap-up 6:30 pm Closing drinks -- -- **** Dr Mathieu O'Neil Associate Professor, HDEA-TCS, Universit? Paris Sorbonne 1 rue Victor Cousin 75230 Paris cedex 05, France http://www.paris-sorbonne.fr/l-universite/nos-enseignants-chercheurs/article/o-neil-mathieu Adjunct Research Fellow, ADSRI, The Australian National University Coombs Building (#9) Canberra ACT 0200, Australia https://researchers.anu.edu.au/researchers/o-neil-m From vili at lehdonvirta.com Mon May 20 15:21:00 2013 From: vili at lehdonvirta.com (Vili Lehdonvirta) Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 23:21:00 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] IS1202 Training School on Virtual Work, Malta, Sep 16-20 *travel grant application DL May 24* References: Message-ID: Dear AoIRers, Some months ago, Christian Fuchs introduced a new international research network titled Dynamics of Virtual Work (more formally known as COST Action IS1202) to this list. As the leader of the Early-Stage Researchers Subgroup of this network, I'm happy to introduce a summer school that is now being organised under its auspices. A good amount of funding is available to cover participants' travel expenses. The application deadline is this Friday already, but the application process itself is light. I would encourage applications from all doctoral students and postdocs from eligible countries (see link below) who are interested in topics such as prosumer work, crowdsourcing, microwork, virtual teams and avatar-mediated collaboration. Warm regards, Vili IS1202 TRAINING SCHOOL ON VIRTUAL WORK Theoretical and Methodological Approaches to the Study of Virtual Work University of Malta, 16-20 September 2013 Travel grants available - application deadline *May 24th* http://www.um.edu.mt/events/is1202training2013 Information and communication technologies have given rise to new types of paid and unpaid 'digital' or 'virtual' labour. They range from online prosumer work and service co-creation to game labour and the exploitation of global wage differences through digital microwork. These new forms of labour exemplify shifts in the borderlines between 'play' and 'work', as well as in 'employment' and 'entrepreneurship', and have significant implications to private life, global development and the nature of work in general. Because of the gender division of labour, they also affect women and men differently. The objective of this training school is to prepare doctoral students and postdocs from a variety of disciplines to carry out successful research in the cross-disciplinary field of virtual work studies. Virtual work is a multi-faceted phenomenon: in addition to one's own disciplinary background, successful researchers must also understand key contributions from neighbouring disciplines. In this training school, participants will obtain grounding in the most important theoretical perspectives, as well as receive instruction in cutting-edge methodological approaches. Participants will also present their own work, network with other emerging scholars and some of the preeminent scholars in the field, and discuss publication venues, funding strategies and other building blocks of a successful academic career. The Training School on Virtual Work takes place at the University of Malta and its beautiful Mediterranean surroundings. The school is funded by the IS1202 COST Action on the Dynamics of Virtual Work. Funding for travel and participation is available to eligible doctoral students and postdocs. Major theoretical approaches: ? Labour Sociology - Professor J?rg Flecker, University of Vienna, Austria ? Social Psychology of Organizations - Dr Marko Hakonen, Aalto University, Finland ? Political Economy of Communications - Professor Katharine Sarikakis, University o Vienna, Austria (tbc) ? Microeconomics and Behavioral Economics - Assistant Professor John Horton, Stern School of Business, New York University, United States ? Gender Studies - tbc Important Dates: 24th May 2013 - Deadline for applications for funding 30th May 2013 - Notification of grant selection results. Each applicant will be contacted personally about the outcome of his/her application. 16th September 2013 - Training school commences Organising committee: Dr Vili Lehdonvirta, Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford Dr Mark Micallef, Department of Computer Science, University of Malta Contact: is1202training2013 at um.edu.mt http://www.um.edu.mt/events/is1202training2013 -- Dr Vili Lehdonvirta Virtual economies and digital work Research Fellow, Oxford Internet Institute http://vili.lehdonvirta.com -- Twitter: ViliLe -- Skype: vlehdonv -- Tel. +44 7456 420012 From ac at aoir.org Tue May 21 08:59:48 2013 From: ac at aoir.org (Kelly Boudreau) Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 11:59:48 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] 2013 Executive Committee Election: Candidate Statements & Voting Information Message-ID: Candidate statements for the 2013 Executive election are now available. For more information on each candidate, please click here. Please be aware that in order to vote in this year?s election you must be an active member of AoIR no later than 23:59 Eastern time (-0400 UTC), Tuesday, May 21st. Voting will open May 22, 2013 at 12:01 am (Eastern time, -0400 UTC) and close June 1st, 2013 at 12:00 pm (NOON Eastern time, -0400 UTC). To vote, please click on the following link and use your AoIR Membership User ID number. (To find this number, please log into your AoIR membership page at http://members.aoir.org/ and select ?view profile?. It is listed as User ID.) If you have any questions concerning your AoIR membership please contact ac at aoir.org. For questions on the election or the voting process, please contact secretary at aoir.org. - Association Coordinator, AoIR From ac at aoir.org Tue May 21 09:08:28 2013 From: ac at aoir.org (Kelly Boudreau) Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 12:08:28 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] 2013 Executive Committee Election: Candidate Statements & Voting Information Message-ID: Candidate statements for the 2013 Executive election are now available. For more information on each candidate, please click here. Please be aware that in order to vote in this year?s election you must be an active member of AoIR no later than 23:59 Eastern time (-0400 UTC), Tuesday, May 21st. Voting will open May 22, 2013 at 12:01 am (Eastern time, -0400 UTC) and close June 1st, 2013 at 12:00 pm (NOON Eastern time, -0400 UTC). To vote, please click on the following link and use your AoIR Membership User ID number. (To find this number, please log into your AoIR membership page at http://members.aoir.org/ and select ?view profile?. It is listed as User ID.) If you have any questions concerning your AoIR membership please contact ac at aoir.org. For questions on the election or the voting process, please contact secretary at aoir.org. - Association Coordinator, AoIR From jwhitson at connect.carleton.ca Tue May 21 09:42:24 2013 From: jwhitson at connect.carleton.ca (Jennifer Whitson) Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 12:42:24 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] CFP - Surveillance, Games and Play Message-ID: Hello, Bart Simon and I are editing a special issue of *Surveillance & Society *on surveillance, games and play. The deadline for submissions is September 15th, and the issue will be published this spring. We're hoping AOIR members will contribute, so please contact either Bart or I if you have any questions. *CFP Surveillance, Games and Play * The games we play on our computers, iPads, and video game consoles are watching us. They track our every online move and send data on who we are, how we play, and whom we play with back to game and virtual world publishers such as Sony and Microsoft. Two events in the summer of 2011 exemplify the need to study surveillance in games: a hacker attack against Sony's Playstation Network compromised over 77 million user accounts including credit card numbers, while iPhone users discovered hidden code in their devices that tracked their movements and secretly sent this data back to Apple. This form of consumer surveillance that targets players has eluded critical appraisal in both the games studies and surveillance literature. The games we play are not only watching us, but are leveraging surveillance to mold us into better students, workers, and consumers, as evidenced by the growth of gamification applications that combine playful design and feedback mechanisms from games with users' social profiles (e.g. Facebook, twitter, and LinkedIn) in non-game applications explicitly geared to drive behavioural change. Accordingly, traditional surveillance activities are transformed through their combination with playful frames of reference and game-like elements. Yet, as argued by Anders Albrechtslund and Lynsey Dubbeld in volume 3(2/3) of this journal, surveillance is fun. It is an essential component of many games and virtual worlds. It enables family to find each other and play together online, such as when adult children who live thousands of miles away challenge their parents to a *Words with Friends *scrabble match over Facebook. Surveillance allows game companies to match strangers with similar skill sets and play-styles together in multiplayer games, thus increasing the flow of the game and players' mutual enjoyment. Surveillance facilitates coordinated teamwork and sophisticated game economies, exemplified by informational tools such as the damage mods and kill-point monitors created by players for massively-multiplayer online games. Surveillance also makes online games and virtual worlds safe for children and young adults, restricting both the use of inappropriate language and content, as well as prohibiting the entry of potentially dangerous adults. Moreover, surveillance is pleasurable. As game company Valve found when they forayed into biometrics (i.e. measuring galvanic skin response and arousal levels), players are more engaged when they can see how they affect their opponents' own physiological responses. We, as players, like to watch our opponents, anticipating what they will do next. We also use surveillance to improve our prowess and extend our moments of victory by using recording software and game replay functions This theme issue is dedicated to balancing two very different sides of surveillance: surveillance as a technology of corporate governance and surveillance as a technology of pleasure and play. *Possible research areas might include (but are not limited to):* - The role of surveillance in enabling play and games - The role of play and games in normalizing surveillance - Surveillance as gameplay or surveillance as a game mechanic - Playful surveillance applications - Playful representations of surveillance - Playful resistance to surveillance - Issues of identity, anonymity and pseudonymity in online games and virtual worlds - Online visibilities and the relationship between game publishers and user populations - The implications of using data gathered in-game for non-game applications - The use of surveillance and the representation of surveillance in online games, virtual worlds, and/or gamified applications, including topics such as: - Games that educate users about privacy and surveillance - End-User Licensing Agreements, Terms of Service, and awareness of surveillance - Applications of social networking services, locational data, and GPS devices in games and play - Uses of data gathering services, screen-capture tools, and recorded gameplay sessions - The surveillance of children and youth in virtual worlds and games - State and police use of in-game data for surveillance, tracking, behavioral profiling etc. - Surveillance and the competitive, professional e-sports gaming industry - Data mining, game metrics, and targeted advertising in the game industry This is not intended to be an exclusive listing of possibilities for this edition. Other possibilities are welcomed and encouraged and can be discussed in advance with the guest-editors: Jennifer R.Whitsonand Bart Simon . All papers must be submitted through the online submission system no later than *September 15th 2013*, for publication in *March 2014.* Click herefor further information on submissions. Thanks, Jennifer R. Whitson, PhD Postdoctoral Fellow, Technoculture Arts and Games Research Centre Concordia University Montreal, Canada From fforna3 at uic.edu Tue May 21 10:06:48 2013 From: fforna3 at uic.edu (Federica Fornaciari) Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 19:06:48 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] IGERT vide/poster: self-disclosure and privacy concerns in Amazon - deadline for voting MAY 23rd Message-ID: Dear all, as some of you already know the annual IGERT video and poster competition sponsored by the National Science Foundation is now on! There are lots of other interesting videos and posters!! Me and my colleagues at UIC have put together a video/poster that investigates self-disclosure and privacy concerns on Amazon reviews. We hope that you will take the time to enjoy our video and will consider sharing it on Facebook or Twitter with your network of friends and followers! You will also have an opportunity to vote for the public choice award if you enjoy our project (deadline May 23rd ? 10pm EDT) Here are some instructions: 1) click on this link http://posterhall.org/igert2013/posters/354 2) click on public choice 3) click on ?like the presentation on Facebook? 4) and share it on your network! Thank you for your support! Federica -- Federica Fornaciari Ph. D. Candidate, University of Illinois at Chicago ESP-IGERT fellow http://fedefo.wordpress.com/about/ http://www.igert.org/profiles/4709 @fedefo From editor at connexionsjournal.org Wed May 22 00:43:10 2013 From: editor at connexionsjournal.org (connexions journal) Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 01:43:10 -0600 Subject: [Air-L] =?windows-1252?q?CFP=3A_connexions_=95_international_prof?= =?windows-1252?q?essional_communication_journal_2=281=29_issue_-_F?= =?windows-1252?q?ebruary_2004?= Message-ID: Please accept my apologies for cross-postings _______________________________________ Dear Colleague, Following on from its inaugural issue on the field of international professional communication, and the forthcoming issue on international engineering communication, *connexions ? international professional communication journal* invites you to continue the conversations on IPC by contributing to Issue 2(1). The journal welcomes *papers that explore* the *practice, research, pedagogy, methodology, and technology* of efficient and effective written, oral, visual, electronic and non-verbal professional communication in academic, business, crisis, development, environmental, health, media, nonprofit, political, research, science, technical and other work and civic activity contexts in local, national, international, and global work and civic activity settings. *Manuscripts *of - original *research articles* of 5,000 to 7,000 words of body text, - *review articles* of 3,000 to 5,000 words of body text, - *focused commentary* and *industry perspectives* articles of 500 to 3,000 words of body text, - *teaching cases* of 3,000 to 5,000 words of body text. *Submission procedures* - Submit - cover page containing your name, institutional affiliation, and email address); - complete research article, review article, focused commentary or industry perspective article, or teaching case. - Prepare the cover page and manuscript on letter or A4 size pages, 1.5 line spacing, and Georgia 12-point font. - Save the cover page and manuscript in doc, docx, or rtf format. - Submit your proposal by email to the Editor at editor at connexionsjournal.org *Schedule* - Proposal deadline: September 30, 2013. - Notification of acceptance: November 30, 2013. - Date of publication: February 28, 2014. If you have any questions about your proposal, feel free to contact the Editor at editor at connexionsjournal.org Thank you for considering writing a paper for *connexions **? international professional communication journal* Ros?rio Dur?o Editor www.connexionsjournal.org connexions ? international professional communication journal (ISSN 2325-6044) Department of Communication, Liberal Arts, and Social Sciences New Mexico Tech **** From bertha.chin at gmail.com Wed May 22 02:52:16 2013 From: bertha.chin at gmail.com (Bertha Chin) Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 10:52:16 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] CFP: New Media and Society special issue on crowdfunding Message-ID: *Apologies for cross-posting* Call for Papers: New Media & Society special issue on crowd funding. Edited by Lucy Bennett, Bertha Chin and Bethan Jones The concept of crowdfunding, where grassroots creative projects are funded by the masses through websites such as Kickstarter and Indiegogo has been steadily gaining attention in the last few years. The 2013 success of the Veronica Mars movie campaign, along with the successful crowdfunding projects spearheaded by musicians like Amanda Palmer and, most recently, actor Zach Braff, has raised much discussion surrounding the rich and powerful possibilities of this method of funding. However, the practice has also invited much criticism, not just of Kickstarter but also of crowdfunding in general. Among some of the most common accusations levelled at crowdfunding are: it is used by media conglomerates to exploit fans; successful artists using the scheme take money away from genuine independent producers who actually need it; and the time and money spent on delivering perks to donors detracts from the time and money invested in the actual project. However, others have argued that the existence of crowdfunding affords media scholars new ways of examining the role of the audience in television and film production, that fan agency needs to be more widely considered in discussions of fan exploitation, and that ?fan-ancing? is leading to a new business model for the financing of artistic projects that is free from studio or network intervention. This special issue seeks to examine and unravel the debates around crowdfunding and thus brings together contributors from a range of academic disciplines. We are seeking papers that offer a wide range of perspectives on the processes of crowdfunding projects, from analyses of the crowdfunded projects themselves, to the interaction between producers and audiences, and to the role that Kickstarter plays in discussions around fan agency and exploitation. Thus, we invite proposals on, but not limited to, the following topics surrounding crowd funding: - Case studies of crowd funding campaigns - Fandom - Unsuccessful crowd funding efforts - The role of the internet and social media in crowd funding - Producer/funder relationships - Crowd funding in the music, film, television and games industries - Anti-fandom - The role of auteurs and cult names/media in attracting backers - Fan exploitation and labour - Rewards and producer accountability Please send 400 word abstracts, along with a short author biography, by 20th June 2013. Please email these to bennettlucyk at gmail.com, bertha.chin at gmail.com and bethanvjones at hotmail.com. -- Dr. Bertha Chin Independent Scholar Board Member, Fan Studies Network From katharine.willis at plymouth.ac.uk Wed May 22 04:21:06 2013 From: katharine.willis at plymouth.ac.uk (Katharine Willis) Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 12:21:06 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] PhD Studentship in Digital Neighbourhoods (Three-year full time) Message-ID: <7AB6195D91E1CC4FADEBDEED07196D352F9E2E8490@ILS132.uopnet.plymouth.ac.uk> **apologies for cross-posting*** Three-year full time funded PhD Studentship Digital Neighbourhoods This project explores the links between ICT infrastructures and social communities. The project will study how such ICT infrastructures, and in particular broadband internet access, become localized within a community; and the broader impacts this may have on social networks and sense of place within a neighbourhood setting. It aims to provide insights and formulate recommendations on how online social networks can integrate with place-based communities in order to overcome digital divides at a neighbourhood level. Applications are invited from candidates for a 3 year full time PhD studentship at Plymouth University under the supervision of Dr. Katharine Willis and Professor Alessandro Aurigi. The studentship pays for fees (at the UK home student rate) and provides a ?13726 per year stipend for the student for three years. The project is part of a larger research project funded by the EU Marie Curie programme and the European Regional Development Fund. Studentship Description The student will develop a theoretical approach around the topic of the relationship between digital community and physical neighbourhood as well as undertaking research using a range of quantitative and qualitative methods, but with a focus on social network analysis. The student will spend time undertaking fieldwork in four neighbourhoods in Cornwall, in order to assess the social and spatial roles and implications of internet infrastructures. The student will benefit from interactions with researchers from a range of disciplines and with project partners such as Superfast Cornwall/ERDF. BT, Citizen?s Online and the local community organisations. Person Specification Applicants should have a Masters qualification in Architecture, Urban Studies, Urban Sociology, Anthropology or another related discipline. Applicants would be expected to have a clear interest in the impacts of technologies on the use of public space and on social networks, and an ability to undertake cross-disciplinary research with a strong spatial component. Strong analytical skills are desirable, as is experience of conducting fieldwork and an ability to work independently. Candidates should have excellent written and oral communication skills. We will actively support students in disseminating the results of their work and the development of their academic career. How to apply for this position Formal applications should be submitted using the application form available at http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/pages/view.asp?page=32190 marking the application DIGITAL NEIGHBOURHOODS. Include a covering letter outlining motivation, interest, and suitability for this project, please e-mail to susan.matheron at plymouth.ac.uk. Please not this is a specified project and we do not expect a project proposal but an indication as to how you would approach the project. Do not send the form to Central Admissions, as indicated on the application form. Informal enquiries may be made before the submission date to katharine.willis at plymouth.ac.uk. The student would start his/her study on 1st October 2013. Closing date for applications 12 noon on Friday 14th June 2013. Shortlisted candidates will be notified by Friday 21st June 2013 and will be invited to attend an interview on Friday 28th June 2013 in Plymouth. http://www.jobs.ac.uk/job/AGM673/three-year-full-time-phd-studentship-in-digital-neighbourhoods/ From ajk407 at nyu.edu Wed May 22 12:15:19 2013 From: ajk407 at nyu.edu (AJ Kelton) Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 15:15:19 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] 2013 Emerging Learning Design Conference - about 2 weeks and counting down! Message-ID: Please forgive any duplication and feel free to share with those who would benefit. The 2013 Emerging Learning Design Conference is just about 2 weeks off and promises to be an exceptional event. This intimate conference experience provides excellent sessions with sufficient blocks of time for discussion and networking between presentations. Registration includes all sessions, breakfast, lunch, beverage breaks, and an afternoon snack. There is also an opportunity to add on the Networking Cocktail Party for a relaxing and enjoyable way to mingle with other conference attendees and special guests. Aside from our concurrent sessions, workshops, and special Ignite! & Engage! session, our Keynote Presenter this year is Dr. Christopher Hoadley and his presentation is entitled The Death Of Content: Why Universities and Schools are (and aren?t) being replaced by the Internet Conveniently located at Montclair State University, the conference is easily accessible by car, bus, or train. With less than 30 seats to go until registration closes, follow the URL below to reserve yours today http://eld13-air.eventbrite.com Don't miss this great opportunity. Check out the full schedule at http://eld.montclair.edu/schedule/ and register today -- ----- AJ Kelton Director of Emerging & Instructional Technology College of Humanities and Social Sciences - Montclair State University Doctoral Candidate Educational Communication and Technology - New York University ---------- Emerging Learning Design 2013 http://eld.montclair.edu Twitter: @ELDConf ---------- http://www.ajkelton.net Twitter: @aj_kelton From vili at lehdonvirta.com Wed May 22 13:51:36 2013 From: vili at lehdonvirta.com (Vili Lehdonvirta) Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 21:51:36 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Training School on Digital Labour, Globalisation and Creative Industries, Bulgaria, July 22-26 References: Message-ID: <782FB505-2C52-4CAE-8082-68D0D3F47FD8@lehdonvirta.com> Dear AoIers, The Dynamics of Virtual Work research network (COST IS1202) chaired by professor Ursula Huws is also organising another training school this summer. Whereas the Malta school focuses on theory and methodology, this Bulgaria school combines practical workshops with onsite visits as well as networking with experts. Please find details below. To find out more or to apply for a place, please email costis1202 at herts.ac.uk. The first round of places will be allocated already this Friday (May 24th). All the best, Vili > IS1202 Bulgaria Training School: July 22?26 > Digital Labour, Globalisation and Creative Industries > Bansko, Bulgaria, July 22-26, 2013 > http://dynamicsofvirtualwork.com/bulgaria-training-school/ > > This summer school offers PhD students and new researchers the chance to combine onsite visits with practical workshops and the chance to network with leading international experts in the field. It will take place in Razlog, near the Bulgarian mountain resort of Bansko. > > The workshop will be student-centred giving participants an opportunity to discuss and develop their own current projects, either as doctoral students or as post-docs/early career researchers with others in the field. At the same time there will be a parallel opportunity to work as part of a short term research team, identifying research: opportunities, questions, strategies and methodologies. The latter theme to the workshop will be developed in conjunction with proposed local site visits to businesses/workplaces. The workshop will focus on the development of research skills, including methodologies suitable for exploring the creative industries and will explore issues associated with work and employment in this broad sector. > > Research takes place in a context; historical, political, social, economic and technological and the workshop will pay some attention to the local context of Bulgaria ? a relatively recent member of the EU and faced with its own unique issues arising from its history as a former Eastern European Bloc countries. > The early 1990s marked the beginning of a new era in the global division of labour in digitised activities. In this period, Bulgaria emerged as one of the major offshore locations, providing the world with back-office services in software development, call centres and film studios. > > Grants are available to cover the cost of travel and accommodation if you are carrying out research on virtual work, creative industries or the new international division of labour in creative work. > > To find out more or apply for a place, please email costis1202 at herts.ac.uk > > > -- Dr Vili Lehdonvirta Virtual economies and digital work Research Fellow, Oxford Internet Institute http://vili.lehdonvirta.com -- Twitter: ViliLe -- Skype: vlehdonv -- Tel. +44 7456 420012 From K.ORiordan at sussex.ac.uk Thu May 23 07:36:08 2013 From: K.ORiordan at sussex.ac.uk (Kate O'Riordan) Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 14:36:08 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Call for Chapters: Edited collection on tablet computers, e-readers and other new media objects Message-ID: <6305E6BA10BDAD44A9CE7A944A4E5F4E1BCFF052@EX-SHA-MBX1.ad.susx.ac.uk> Call for Chapters: Edited collection on tablet computers, e-readers and other new media objects We invite contributions to a peer-reviewed edited collection that brings together empirical, theoretical, critical and creative responses to tablet computers, e-readers and other artifacts. Building on the research presented at the Tablet Symposium at the University of Sussex in April 2013, this edited collection will gather chapters which address the use of tablets, readers and ipads across many walks of life including academic, artistic, pedagogical, medical, corporate, activist and everyday contexts. Chapters will develop themes including, but not limited to: -Tablet and e-readers? relationship with the book -Challenges and rewards of using tablets to replace current working, creative and research practices -Definitions, representations and ways of understanding this object or set of objects -Roles that tablets and e-readers play in more general cultural understandings of technology -Questions of materiality -Users. Who uses tablets? In what ways are these devices inclusive? In what ways do they exclude people or groups? -The historical placement of tablets and e-readers: within the history of the book, the history of ubiquitous computing, popular culture and science -fiction -Critical tools and frameworks for interrogating tablets and other new media objects. Chapters should be 8000 words in length and use Harvard referencing. The collection will be peer reviewed, and will be published in e-book format via REFRAME. REFRAME is an open access academic digital platform for the online practice, publication and curation of internationally produced research and scholarship. Its subject specialisms?media, film and music (including media practice, cultural studies and journalism) ? are also those of its publisher, the School of Media, Film and Music at the University of Sussex, UK. Abstracts should be 600-800 words and contain a clear outline of the argument, the theoretical framework, methodology and results (if applicable). Abstracts should also include 5 keywords which describe the chapter, and should be sent to r.burns at sussex.ac.uk by the deadline of 30th June 2013. Important dates: Deadline for abstracts: 30th June 2013 Notification of accepted papers: mid July 2013 Deadline for full chapters: 31st October 2013 Expected publication date: April 2014 For more information, please contact any of the editorial team. Many thanks, Caroline Bassett, Ryan Burns, Kate O?Riordan and Russell Pearce School of Media, Film and Music - University of Sussex CFP and info about original symposium: www.sussex.ac.uk/rcmdc/projects/tablet REFRAME: http://reframe.sussex.ac.uk/ School of Media, Film and Music: www.sussex.ac.uk/mfm/ Dr Kate O'Riordan Reader, Media Film and Music University of Sussex Falmer BN1 9RG k.oriordan at sussex.ac.uk From christian.katzenbach at gmail.com Thu May 23 11:51:09 2013 From: christian.katzenbach at gmail.com (Christian Katzenbach) Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 20:51:09 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] Last Call for Applications: Summer Fellows at Institute for Internet and Society Message-ID: Hi all, our call for application for a spontaneous summer fellowships closes on Monday. I would be delighted if someone from the AoIR-Community was interested in spending the summer at our recently founded institute in Berlin. Find the call below, and don't hesitate to contact me if you have questions or consult the website: http://www.hiig.de/en/call-for-summer-fellows/ Best, Christian ##### Call for Summer Fellows This summer the Alexander Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society opens its doors for fellows from all over the world! We invite applications from early stage and experienced researchers pursuing a project of transdisciplinary Internet research. If you are seeking exchange regarding your research aspirations and find our objectives to match yours or to complement them, we are looking forward to hearing your thoughts! Opportunities: Our fellowship provides innovative thinkers a unique opportunity to exchange experiences and set off new initiatives in an inviting intellectual environment. The four selected fellows are very welcome to collaborate in a growing international team and to participate in the research activities at our institute. We encourage you to actively shape your stay according to your research interests. We offer a number of opportunities to make a contribution to our research programme, such as: ? Developing a paper concerning your research project, e.g. writing a journal paper in our ?SSRN Internet & Society Series? ? Holding a presentation about a topic of your choice in our weekly journal club ? Organising a workshop of your research topic ? Engage in joint activities and projects with other fellows ? And more ? according to your creativity Benefits: Based in the heart of Berlin we will provide you with modern office space that you will share with our researchers and you will participate in the activities of our institute. Fellows are expected to bring their own funding through their home institution or outside grants. Fellows must take care of their accommodation, insurance, childcare, and transportation arrangements. However, in specific cases we can provide fellows on request with a travel allowance of up to ? 700,- and a visa subsidy of up to ? 200,-. Timeframe: We offer fellowships over three months from July to September. The prospective starting date is July 1st, 2013. We believe spending face to face time together will enhance collaboration. Qualifications: ? Master?s or doctorate degree (in exceptional cases master students shortly before graduation) ? Fluency in English; command of German is appreciated ? Research experience and an Internet research project of your own Required application documents: ? curriculum vitae ? letter of motivation: explaining your interest in the fellowship, your expectations and your research background (1 page) ? outline of a) your research project, b) the work you aim to conduct during the fellowship, c) contributions you plan to realise during your stay, d) projects on our research agenda that are of interest to you, and e) if possible, preferred project partners at our institute (please enter in the online form below) ? optional: your latest publication or work sample covering Internet research (maximum of 1 paper / chapter / presentation in English or German) If you have any questions please contact Elena Pfautsch via application[@]hiig.de. Applications will only be accepted through the online application form: http://www.hiig.de/en/call-for-summer-fellows/ From cgcsassistant at asc.upenn.edu Thu May 23 12:25:18 2013 From: cgcsassistant at asc.upenn.edu (CGCS Assistant) Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 19:25:18 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Internet Policy Observatory Post-Doctoral Fellowship or Scholar in Residence In-Reply-To: <61C735DAD1165245AD64E164F39C28DA442551@MB3.asc.local> References: <61C735DAD1165245AD64E164F39C28DA442551@MB3.asc.local> Message-ID: Internet Policy Observatory Post-Doctoral Fellowship or Scholar in Residence Center for Global Communication Studies ANNENBERG SCHOOL FOR COMMUNICATION UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA The Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania is currently soliciting applications for the Internet Policy Observatory Post Doctoral Fellowship or Scholar in Residence at the Center for Global Communication Studies. The Post Doctoral Fellow will help develop and manage existing research programs surrounding the Internet Policy Observatory, and develop his/her own independent related research agenda in the area of global internet policy Annenberg?s Center for Global Communication Studies (CGCS) is a leader in international education and training in comparative media law and policy. The Center's research and policy work addresses issues of media regulation, media and democracy, measuring and evaluation of media development programs, public service broadcasting, and the media's role in conflict and post-conflict environments. The Internet Policy Observatory is a multi-component project with a collaborative network and the goal of assessing incipient Internet policy and governance shifts in key national fora where restrictive approaches are being considered. The project will examine trends and efforts where national decisions have significance for the formation of global Internet policy. In addition to sponsoring research and collaborations with key global research and academic organizations, the Internet Policy Observatory will undertake its own research initiatives to establish data on the social and political context of online communications within targeted countries. Some topics the Internet Policy Observatory will engage in include: * The evolution of mechanisms and processes that affect domestic Internet policy; * The legal, political, economic, and social factors (domestic and international) that influence the implementation or non-implementation of such policies; * The relationship between national efforts and international policy formations; * The role of civil society in domestic Internet policy processes and control; and * The role of public opinion as a mode of determining a ?demand side? for useful Internet policy developments. Applicants should hold postgraduate qualifications at PhD level or equivalent in a field related to internet policy studies, law or policy, communication, media/cultural studies. Applicants should possess a track record of publishing in high quality international journals or other appropriate refereed publications, as well as teaching experience. Experience in research proposal development and implementation of research projects involving both quantitative and qualitative methodologies is an required. This one-year position comes with a stipend of $40,000 to $50,000 (depending on years of prior experience), health insurance, $2,000 in travel and research support, office space with computer and telephone, and full access to the Penn library system. Annenberg welcomes domestic and international applicants. If applicant has not completed graduate studies in English, the University of Pennsylvania?s TOEFL standards apply (http://www.sas.upenn.edu/lps/node/452). The fellowship is a one year term. To apply, please send an application package with CV, statement of interest, and a brief (2-3 page) proposal for a research project related to the study of global internet policy to bsmith at asc.upenn.edu. Research projects may expand existing research or propose new lines of inquiry. Please contact the same email address if you have any questions. Application deadline: June 21, 2013 with a start date tentatively (flexible) August 15, 2013. From H.Kennedy at leeds.ac.uk Thu May 23 14:19:34 2013 From: H.Kennedy at leeds.ac.uk (Helen Kennedy) Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 22:19:34 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Lectureship in Media and Communication Studies, University of Leeds In-Reply-To: <66F01BC4D7AAFB4EA82FEAFAB0939228052BC4D5D7AB@HERMES7.ds.leeds.ac.uk> References: <998DF73FAFB08D4E8802CD75ADA4A75502F19192185A@HERMES7.ds.leeds.ac.uk>, <66F01BC4D7AAFB4EA82FEAFAB0939228052BC4D5D7AB@HERMES7.ds.leeds.ac.uk> Message-ID: <66F01BC4D7AAFB4EA82FEAFAB0939228052BC4D1B48B@HERMES7.ds.leeds.ac.uk> Available from 1 September 2013 or as soon as possible thereafter You will have a PhD in media and communication studies, or another relevant subject area. You will be able to teach journalism studies and aspects of ?promotional culture?, including the critical analysis of public relations, marketing, branding and advertising. You must be able to demonstrate a developing record of research in media and communication studies, with a clear indication of potential to achieve internationally recognised standards of excellence, preferably in the areas indicated above. University of Leeds Grade 8 (?37,382 - ?44,607 p.a.) Informal enquiries may be made to Professor Stephen Coleman, email s.coleman at leeds.ac.uk. Closing Date: 11 June 2013 Interviews are expected to be held on 10 July 2013 Further details can be found at: http://www.jobs.ac.uk/job/AGN686/lectureship-in-media-and-communication-studies/. From meganzahay at gmail.com Thu May 23 14:53:53 2013 From: meganzahay at gmail.com (Megan Zahay) Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 17:53:53 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data Message-ID: Hi everyone, I have been lurking on the list for about a year now and really enjoying the wealth of insights and information, but this is my first addition to it. I am currently working on a project which would like to track the network of some YouTube videos, so that includes things like referrals from other videos, embedding videos on external sites, video comments, text comments, etc. I would also like to use any demographic data available. Can anyone inform me about the reliability of the statistics provided on YouTube itself for each video, or point me in the direction of some publications on the subject? Additionally, if anyone is aware of any programs that would allow me to view the network between groups of videos or research that has been done in this area I would be very appreciative. Thank you in advance! Megan Zahay B.A. Arcadia University From alexleavitt at gmail.com Thu May 23 15:28:00 2013 From: alexleavitt at gmail.com (Alex Leavitt) Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 15:28:00 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Megan, I've been working on a YouTube data project for about a year now. The kind of granularity that you're asking for doesn't reeeeally exist... but you can get data for users and video metadata, but you'd also need some skills dealing with YouTube's API. You can theoretically string together a network of recommended videos (I've seen a visualization of it, but I can't find the link...). Also, unless you have direct access to the analytics for each video (by having it under your account), I'm fairly certain that you can't see stats regarding use of the videos on external sites. --- Alexander Leavitt PhD Student USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism http://alexleavitt.com Twitter: @alexleavitt On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Megan Zahay wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I have been lurking on the list for about a year now and really enjoying > the wealth of insights and information, but this is my first addition to > it. I am currently working on a project which would like to track the > network of some YouTube videos, so that includes things like referrals from > other videos, embedding videos on external sites, video comments, text > comments, etc. I would also like to use any demographic data available. Can > anyone inform me about the reliability of the statistics provided on > YouTube itself for each video, or point me in the direction of some > publications on the subject? Additionally, if anyone is aware of any > programs that would allow me to view the network between groups of videos > or research that has been done in this area I would be very appreciative. > > Thank you in advance! > > Megan Zahay > B.A. Arcadia University > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > From amandalbrennan at gmail.com Thu May 23 15:45:07 2013 From: amandalbrennan at gmail.com (amanda brennan) Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 18:45:07 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: @Alex, is this the YouTube network visualization you were thinking of? https://blogs.k-state.edu/it-news/2013/04/08/the-nodexl-series-conducting-a-data-extraction-of-a-youtube-video-network-part-7/It seems similar to what you were mentioning. @Megan, while it's not exactly what you're looking for, Know Your Meme scrapes Facebook shares & Twitter link statistics to any video uploaded to the site, if you're looking for easy access to those stats. They're on the right side of the page under the description. amanda is an internet scientist. know your meme memelibrarian.com tweets about cats On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Alex Leavitt wrote: > Hi Megan, > > I've been working on a YouTube data project for about a year now. The kind > of granularity that you're asking for doesn't reeeeally exist... but you > can get data for users and video metadata, but you'd also need some skills > dealing with YouTube's API. You can theoretically string together a network > of recommended videos (I've seen a visualization of it, but I can't find > the link...). Also, unless you have direct access to the analytics for each > video (by having it under your account), I'm fairly certain that you can't > see stats regarding use of the videos on external sites. > > --- > > Alexander Leavitt > PhD Student > USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism > http://alexleavitt.com > Twitter: @alexleavitt > > > > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Megan Zahay wrote: > > > Hi everyone, > > > > I have been lurking on the list for about a year now and really enjoying > > the wealth of insights and information, but this is my first addition to > > it. I am currently working on a project which would like to track the > > network of some YouTube videos, so that includes things like referrals > from > > other videos, embedding videos on external sites, video comments, text > > comments, etc. I would also like to use any demographic data available. > Can > > anyone inform me about the reliability of the statistics provided on > > YouTube itself for each video, or point me in the direction of some > > publications on the subject? Additionally, if anyone is aware of any > > programs that would allow me to view the network between groups of videos > > or research that has been done in this area I would be very appreciative. > > > > Thank you in advance! > > > > Megan Zahay > > B.A. Arcadia University > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > From halavais at gmail.com Thu May 23 16:25:46 2013 From: halavais at gmail.com (Alexander Halavais) Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 16:25:46 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates Message-ID: Dear AoIR Members (and members of the broader community), Just a reminder that AoIR elections are now open, and will be until the end of the month. I want to encourage all members to vote. There are lots of ways to help contribute to and shape the future of an organization like ours, and electing an executive committee that represents your interests is one of these. I have not yet voted and I'm hoping the candidates can answer a question for me. (And I hope others will ask questions as well, despite the looming deadline!) I've looked over your candidate statements (linked here: http://aoir.org/2013-executive-committee-election-candidate-statements-voting-information/ ) and I recognize and agree with the need to increase connections among members outside of the conference setting--something that several of you noted. That said, I wonder what single, concrete change you would most like to see in the conferences themselves, and how you might suggest bringing that about. What would you like to see in, say, Bangkok for 2014 that we haven't seen in previous conferences? (If anything!) And what can you do to help make that happen? Thank you all for running, and I look forward to your responses. Best, Alex -- -- // // This email is // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) From jhunsinger at wlu.ca Thu May 23 16:37:32 2013 From: jhunsinger at wlu.ca (Jeremy hunsinger) Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 19:37:32 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I think that it is time to institute a formalized graduate student mentoring program, where we associate graduate students with mentors that will help them prepare materials for the conference, and in other ways. On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Alexander Halavais wrote: > Dear AoIR Members (and members of the broader community), > > Just a reminder that AoIR elections are now open, and will be until the end > of the month. I want to encourage all members to vote. There are lots of > ways to help contribute to and shape the future of an organization like > ours, and electing an executive committee that represents your interests is > one of these. > > I have not yet voted and I'm hoping the candidates can answer a question > for me. (And I hope others will ask questions as well, despite the looming > deadline!) > > I've looked over your candidate statements (linked here: > > http://aoir.org/2013-executive-committee-election-candidate-statements-voting-information/ > ) > and I recognize and agree with the need to increase connections among > members outside of the conference setting--something that several of you > noted. That said, I wonder what single, concrete change you would most like > to see in the conferences themselves, and how you might suggest bringing > that about. What would you like to see in, say, Bangkok for 2014 that we > haven't seen in previous conferences? (If anything!) And what can you do to > help make that happen? > > Thank you all for running, and I look forward to your responses. > > Best, > > Alex > > > > -- > -- > // > // This email is > // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > // > // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > // http://alex.halavais.net > // > // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. > // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > From jenni.powell at gmail.com Thu May 23 16:43:55 2013 From: jenni.powell at gmail.com (Jenni Powell) Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 16:43:55 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: A resource you might find useful is http://vidstatsx.com/. It's not the prettiest site in the world but a lot of it's stats are easier to find than on YouTube. It's particularly useful for tracking the top 100 channels. On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 3:45 PM, amanda brennan wrote: > @Alex, is this the YouTube network visualization you were thinking of? > > https://blogs.k-state.edu/it-news/2013/04/08/the-nodexl-series-conducting-a-data-extraction-of-a-youtube-video-network-part-7/It > seems similar to what you were mentioning. > > @Megan, while it's not exactly what you're looking for, Know Your Meme > scrapes Facebook shares & Twitter link statistics to any video uploaded to > the site, if you're looking for easy access to those stats. They're on the > right side of the page under > the description. > > amanda is an internet scientist. > know your meme > memelibrarian.com > tweets about cats > > > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Alex Leavitt > wrote: > > > Hi Megan, > > > > I've been working on a YouTube data project for about a year now. The > kind > > of granularity that you're asking for doesn't reeeeally exist... but you > > can get data for users and video metadata, but you'd also need some > skills > > dealing with YouTube's API. You can theoretically string together a > network > > of recommended videos (I've seen a visualization of it, but I can't find > > the link...). Also, unless you have direct access to the analytics for > each > > video (by having it under your account), I'm fairly certain that you > can't > > see stats regarding use of the videos on external sites. > > > > --- > > > > Alexander Leavitt > > PhD Student > > USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism > > http://alexleavitt.com > > Twitter: @alexleavitt > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Megan Zahay > wrote: > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > I have been lurking on the list for about a year now and really > enjoying > > > the wealth of insights and information, but this is my first addition > to > > > it. I am currently working on a project which would like to track the > > > network of some YouTube videos, so that includes things like referrals > > from > > > other videos, embedding videos on external sites, video comments, text > > > comments, etc. I would also like to use any demographic data available. > > Can > > > anyone inform me about the reliability of the statistics provided on > > > YouTube itself for each video, or point me in the direction of some > > > publications on the subject? Additionally, if anyone is aware of any > > > programs that would allow me to view the network between groups of > videos > > > or research that has been done in this area I would be very > appreciative. > > > > > > Thank you in advance! > > > > > > Megan Zahay > > > B.A. Arcadia University > > > _______________________________________________ > > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Jenni Powell Content and Speaker Coordinator - VidCon Producer - The Lizzie Bennet Diaries Welcome to Sanditon Geek & Sundry Vlogs 10408 Oxford St. North Hollywood, CA 91606 m. (858) 335-4426 www.vidcon.com www.youtube.com/lizziebennet www.youtube.com/pemberleydigital www.youtube.com/geekandsundryvlogs From joly at punkcast.com Thu May 23 18:19:39 2013 From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie) Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 21:19:39 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ah Jenni! Noiw we know the secret to your success on http://vvx.io ! On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 7:43 PM, Jenni Powell wrote: > A resource you might find useful is http://vidstatsx.com/. > > It's not the prettiest site in the world but a lot of it's stats are easier > to find than on YouTube. It's particularly useful for tracking the top 100 > channels. > > > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 3:45 PM, amanda brennan >wrote: > > > @Alex, is this the YouTube network visualization you were thinking of? > > > > > https://blogs.k-state.edu/it-news/2013/04/08/the-nodexl-series-conducting-a-data-extraction-of-a-youtube-video-network-part-7/It > > seems similar to what you were mentioning. > > > > @Megan, while it's not exactly what you're looking for, Know Your Meme > > scrapes Facebook shares & Twitter link statistics to any video uploaded > to > > the site, if you're looking for easy access to those stats. They're on > the > > right side of the page under > > the description. > > > > amanda is an internet scientist. > > know your meme > > memelibrarian.com > > tweets about cats > > > > > > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Alex Leavitt > > wrote: > > > > > Hi Megan, > > > > > > I've been working on a YouTube data project for about a year now. The > > kind > > > of granularity that you're asking for doesn't reeeeally exist... but > you > > > can get data for users and video metadata, but you'd also need some > > skills > > > dealing with YouTube's API. You can theoretically string together a > > network > > > of recommended videos (I've seen a visualization of it, but I can't > find > > > the link...). Also, unless you have direct access to the analytics for > > each > > > video (by having it under your account), I'm fairly certain that you > > can't > > > see stats regarding use of the videos on external sites. > > > > > > --- > > > > > > Alexander Leavitt > > > PhD Student > > > USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism > > > http://alexleavitt.com > > > Twitter: @alexleavitt > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Megan Zahay > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > > > I have been lurking on the list for about a year now and really > > enjoying > > > > the wealth of insights and information, but this is my first addition > > to > > > > it. I am currently working on a project which would like to track the > > > > network of some YouTube videos, so that includes things like > referrals > > > from > > > > other videos, embedding videos on external sites, video comments, > text > > > > comments, etc. I would also like to use any demographic data > available. > > > Can > > > > anyone inform me about the reliability of the statistics provided on > > > > YouTube itself for each video, or point me in the direction of some > > > > publications on the subject? Additionally, if anyone is aware of any > > > > programs that would allow me to view the network between groups of > > videos > > > > or research that has been done in this area I would be very > > appreciative. > > > > > > > > Thank you in advance! > > > > > > > > Megan Zahay > > > > B.A. Arcadia University > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers > http://aoir.org > > > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > > -- > Jenni Powell > Content and Speaker Coordinator - VidCon > Producer - The Lizzie Bennet Diaries > Welcome to Sanditon > Geek & Sundry Vlogs > > 10408 Oxford St. > North Hollywood, CA 91606 > m. (858) 335-4426 > > www.vidcon.com > www.youtube.com/lizziebennet > www.youtube.com/pemberleydigital > www.youtube.com/geekandsundryvlogs > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- - From jenni.powell at gmail.com Thu May 23 18:27:40 2013 From: jenni.powell at gmail.com (Jenni Powell) Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 18:27:40 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Heeheehee, you got me Joly! :) On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 6:19 PM, Joly MacFie wrote: > > > Ah Jenni! > > Noiw we know the secret to your success on http://vvx.io ! > > > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 7:43 PM, Jenni Powell wrote: > >> A resource you might find useful is http://vidstatsx.com/. >> >> It's not the prettiest site in the world but a lot of it's stats are >> easier >> to find than on YouTube. It's particularly useful for tracking the top >> 100 >> channels. >> >> >> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 3:45 PM, amanda brennan > >wrote: >> >> > @Alex, is this the YouTube network visualization you were thinking of? >> > >> > >> https://blogs.k-state.edu/it-news/2013/04/08/the-nodexl-series-conducting-a-data-extraction-of-a-youtube-video-network-part-7/It >> > seems similar to what you were mentioning. >> > >> > @Megan, while it's not exactly what you're looking for, Know Your Meme >> > scrapes Facebook shares & Twitter link statistics to any video uploaded >> to >> > the site, if you're looking for easy access to those stats. They're on >> the >> > right side of the page >> under >> > the description. >> > >> > amanda is an internet scientist. >> > know your meme >> > memelibrarian.com >> > tweets about cats >> > >> > >> > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Alex Leavitt >> > wrote: >> > >> > > Hi Megan, >> > > >> > > I've been working on a YouTube data project for about a year now. The >> > kind >> > > of granularity that you're asking for doesn't reeeeally exist... but >> you >> > > can get data for users and video metadata, but you'd also need some >> > skills >> > > dealing with YouTube's API. You can theoretically string together a >> > network >> > > of recommended videos (I've seen a visualization of it, but I can't >> find >> > > the link...). Also, unless you have direct access to the analytics for >> > each >> > > video (by having it under your account), I'm fairly certain that you >> > can't >> > > see stats regarding use of the videos on external sites. >> > > >> > > --- >> > > >> > > Alexander Leavitt >> > > PhD Student >> > > USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism >> > > http://alexleavitt.com >> > > Twitter: @alexleavitt >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Megan Zahay >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > > Hi everyone, >> > > > >> > > > I have been lurking on the list for about a year now and really >> > enjoying >> > > > the wealth of insights and information, but this is my first >> addition >> > to >> > > > it. I am currently working on a project which would like to track >> the >> > > > network of some YouTube videos, so that includes things like >> referrals >> > > from >> > > > other videos, embedding videos on external sites, video comments, >> text >> > > > comments, etc. I would also like to use any demographic data >> available. >> > > Can >> > > > anyone inform me about the reliability of the statistics provided on >> > > > YouTube itself for each video, or point me in the direction of some >> > > > publications on the subject? Additionally, if anyone is aware of any >> > > > programs that would allow me to view the network between groups of >> > videos >> > > > or research that has been done in this area I would be very >> > appreciative. >> > > > >> > > > Thank you in advance! >> > > > >> > > > Megan Zahay >> > > > B.A. Arcadia University >> > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> > > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers >> http://aoir.org >> > > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> > > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> > > > >> > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> > > > http://www.aoir.org/ >> > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers >> http://aoir.org >> > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> > > >> > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> > > http://www.aoir.org/ >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> > >> > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> > http://www.aoir.org/ >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Jenni Powell >> Content and Speaker Coordinator - VidCon >> Producer - The Lizzie Bennet Diaries >> Welcome to Sanditon >> Geek & Sundry Vlogs >> >> 10408 Oxford St. >> North Hollywood, CA 91606 >> m. (858) 335-4426 >> >> www.vidcon.com >> www.youtube.com/lizziebennet >> www.youtube.com/pemberleydigital >> www.youtube.com/geekandsundryvlogs >> _______________________________________________ >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> http://www.aoir.org/ >> > > > > -- > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast > WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com > http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com > VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org > -------------------------------------------------------------- > - > -- Jenni Powell Content and Speaker Coordinator - VidCon Producer - The Lizzie Bennet Diaries Welcome to Sanditon Geek & Sundry Vlogs 10408 Oxford St. North Hollywood, CA 91606 m. (858) 335-4426 www.vidcon.com www.youtube.com/lizziebennet www.youtube.com/pemberleydigital www.youtube.com/geekandsundryvlogs From cassian at hotmail.co.uk Fri May 24 02:02:21 2013 From: cassian at hotmail.co.uk (Main) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 10:02:21 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data Message-ID: Have you tried Webometric Analyst? It's free software available from Wolverhampton University. I've not played with the youtube function myself but I have seen research which does similar things to the project you describe. You will need to download the manual and I recommend Mike Thelwall's work on webometrics to help make sense of the program. Cassian --- Original Message --- From: "Megan Zahay" Sent: May 23, 2013 10:54 PM To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data Hi everyone, I have been lurking on the list for about a year now and really enjoying the wealth of insights and information, but this is my first addition to it. I am currently working on a project which would like to track the network of some YouTube videos, so that includes things like referrals from other videos, embedding videos on external sites, video comments, text comments, etc. I would also like to use any demographic data available. Can anyone inform me about the reliability of the statistics provided on YouTube itself for each video, or point me in the direction of some publications on the subject? Additionally, if anyone is aware of any programs that would allow me to view the network between groups of videos or research that has been done in this area I would be very appreciative. Thank you in advance! Megan Zahay B.A. Arcadia University _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From stuart.shulman at gmail.com Fri May 24 03:46:51 2013 From: stuart.shulman at gmail.com (Stuart Shulman) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 06:46:51 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Context Miner http://www.contextminer.org/ Great program for YouTube data. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:02 AM, Main wrote: > Have you tried Webometric Analyst? It's free software available from > Wolverhampton University. I've not played with the youtube function myself > but I have seen research which does similar things to the project you > describe. You will need to download the manual and I recommend Mike > Thelwall's work on webometrics to help make sense of the program. > > Cassian > > --- Original Message --- > > From: "Megan Zahay" > Sent: May 23, 2013 10:54 PM > To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org > Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data > > Hi everyone, > > I have been lurking on the list for about a year now and really enjoying > the wealth of insights and information, but this is my first addition to > it. I am currently working on a project which would like to track the > network of some YouTube videos, so that includes things like referrals from > other videos, embedding videos on external sites, video comments, text > comments, etc. I would also like to use any demographic data available. Can > anyone inform me about the reliability of the statistics provided on > YouTube itself for each video, or point me in the direction of some > publications on the subject? Additionally, if anyone is aware of any > programs that would allow me to view the network between groups of videos > or research that has been done in this area I would be very appreciative. > > Thank you in advance! > > Megan Zahay > B.A. Arcadia University > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Dr. Stuart W. Shulman people.umass.edu/stu Editor Emeritus, JITP jitp.net Director, QDAP-UMass umass.edu/qdap Founder and CEO, Texifter texifter.com LinkedIn: linkedin.com/pub/stuart-shulman/10/351/899 Twitter: twitter.com/#!/StuartWShulman From oranitkl at gmail.com Fri May 24 04:44:37 2013 From: oranitkl at gmail.com (oranit klein) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 14:44:37 +0300 Subject: [Air-L] Audiovisual Thinking - Call for videos Message-ID: Please post on the air list: *Audiovisual Thinking - Call for videos Issue #2013:7* *The creative economy* This issue of Audiovisual Thinking focuses on ?the creative economy?, which has become a central focus of government policy in many states. In the belief that cultural production is now central to economic life, and an essential part of global competitiveness, governments have intervened in various ways to try and stimulate cultural production and financial returns. How does this look from the standpoint of those in cultural work? Topics could include (but are not limited to): - Case studies of cultural workers at work. - Reflections on intervention by government bodies and cultural agencies: the exercise of power. How do subsidies, tax breaks, training and other kinds of support impact on the structures and strategies of creative businesses? - Cultural work and intellectual property ? are there connections? Who benefits? - How is digital technology affecting cultural work and intellectual property? - How do ideas about the creative economy circulate? - What links are there between cultural work, philanthropy and other forms of patronage? - What do we know about the self-organisation of cultural collectives? *Further reading:* Richard E. Caves, Creative Industries, Harvard University Press, 2000. John Howkins, The Creative Economy, Penguin Books, 2007. John Hartley (ed.) Creative Industries, Blackwell Publishing, 2005. David Hesmondhalgh, The Cultural Industries, Third Edition, Sage 2012. Philip Schlesinger , 'Creativity: from discourse to doctrine?' Screen 48(3) 2007: 377-387 Philip Schlesinger, ?Creativity and the experts: New Labour, think tanks and the policy process?, International Journal of Press Politics 14(3) 2009: 3-20. *Guest Editor: Professor Philip Schlesinger . THIS CALL IS NOW OPEN . DEADLINE 15th OCTOBER 2013.* What is Audiovisual Thinking ? Audiovisual Thinking is a peer reviewed academic online journal and pioneering forum where academics, practitioners and educators can articulate, conceptualize and disseminate their research about audiovisual culture through video. International in scope and multidisciplinary in approach, the purpose of Audiovisual Thinking is to develop and promote academic thinking in and about all aspects of audiovisuality and audiovisual culture. Advised by a board of leading academics and thinkers in the fields of audiovisuality, communication and the media and hosted by Copenhagen University, the journal seeks to set the standard for academic audiovisual essays now and in the future. We study, teach and research the moving image, media and audiovisuality, yet we rarely mediate in these same forms and media. Audiovisual Thinking hopes to change this. From gekker.alex at gmail.com Fri May 24 05:32:03 2013 From: gekker.alex at gmail.com (Alex Gekker) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 14:32:03 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] Fwd: =DEADLINE EXTENSION= Call for Papers Games for Health Europe 2013 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear all, Due to several requests we are prolonging the submissions deadline till Friday, June 7th 23:59 CET. looking forward to your submissions. To submit: https://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=gfheu2013 ______________________________ __________ From: Schouten, B.A.M. [bschouten at tue.nl] -Apologies if you receive multiple times, please circulate this to your colleagues who might be interested, thank you so much- Call for Papers for the peer-reviewed track of the third European Conference on Games for Health Europe,4-5 November 2013 Utrecht, The Netherlands. Founded in 2004, the Games for Health Project supports community, knowledge and business development efforts to use cutting-edge games and game technologies to improve health and health care. The Games for Health Conference brings together researchers, medical professionals and game developers to share information about the impact of games, playful interaction and game technologies on health, health care and health policy. Over three days, more than 400 attendees will participate in over 60 sessions provided by an international array of 80+ speakers, cutting across a wide range of activities in health and health care. Topics include exergaming, physical therapy, disease management, health behavior change, biofeedback, scientific validation, rehab, epidemiology, training, cognitive health, nutrition and education. The aim of the conference is to bring together academics and practitioners working within the field of Game & Play Design, Design Research, Game Development and the Medical Community to explore and innovate within the area of Health. The conference provides an excellent opportunity to showcase practice and to mainstream research ideas and outcomes. It will introduce a wider audience to key findings and products from research and will illustrate how practice feeds back into and informs research. The conference will create a forum for two-way communication between the academic and practitioner communities and particularly welcomes user led presentations and workshops. The programme will include presentations of papers, workshops, a doctoral consortium and an exhibition space for demonstrations and posters. Themes and topics: The conference encourages papers from multi disciplines, especially from game & play as well as from health practitioners and researchers. This call for papers is intended to solicit contributions from an international audience on recent developments and experiments that: ? Present innovative and state-of-the-art design and applications that use playful concepts in health care settings, ? Describe game-based and playful solutions to behavior change and pervasive healthcare problems, ? Share experiences, insights, best-practices and lessons-learned, ? Report the results of technical and social evaluations with regards to playful interaction and serious game design related to health care, ? Report scientific insights on development and efficacy of gameplay in professional an patient education, ? Report results of longitudinal studies, ? Discuss and highlight the key challenges and future developments within the domain. Selected (peer reviewed) papers will be published by Springer Publishers. Submission Deadline: June 7th, 2013 Notification of Acceptance: June 21th, 2013 Final Submission: July 15th, 2013 Please find more information on http://www.gamesforhealtheurope.org/academicor mail: Alex Gekker ( a.gekker at uu.nl) The editors: Prof. Dr. B.A.M. Schouten BA (Eindhoven University of Technology) Dr. Marlies Schijven, MD MHSc (Academic Medical Center of Amsterdam) Dr. Ir. M.M. Bekker (Eindhoven University of Technology) Prof. Dr. Ben A.M. Schouten BA Playful Interactions Department of Industrial Design Eindhoven University of Technology P.O Box 513, 5600 MB Eindhoven, The Netherlands Main Building 3.38 phn: 31(0)40-2472481 fax: 31(0)40-2475376 cel: 31 (0)653758997 From R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk Fri May 24 06:10:12 2013 From: R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk (Deller, Ruth A) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 13:10:12 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Oooh, difficult question as I think there are several things we could do, some of which others have mentioned. I'm interested in the conference becoming a bit more creative and dynamic so I would encourage conference and programme chairs to think about what they might want to do to shake the programme up - this might change each year depending on where we are and who the team are. But I'd encourage more flexibility in thinking about things like keynotes, plenaries or even panel formats. Not necessarily to do away with things but to allow freedom to try new things out. In that vein, given that many of our members can't get to the conferences due to the costs of flights etc, I would like to see something in the programme whereby we could connect with them - streaming talks (or some of the talks) and maybe even having some of them present virtually in certain panels. I would look to work with the programme and conference chair about this to see if we can get the technology to make it happen. -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Alexander Halavais Sent: 24 May 2013 00:26 To: aoir list Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates Dear AoIR Members (and members of the broader community), Just a reminder that AoIR elections are now open, and will be until the end of the month. I want to encourage all members to vote. There are lots of ways to help contribute to and shape the future of an organization like ours, and electing an executive committee that represents your interests is one of these. I have not yet voted and I'm hoping the candidates can answer a question for me. (And I hope others will ask questions as well, despite the looming deadline!) I've looked over your candidate statements (linked here: http://aoir.org/2013-executive-committee-election-candidate-statements-voting-information/ ) and I recognize and agree with the need to increase connections among members outside of the conference setting--something that several of you noted. That said, I wonder what single, concrete change you would most like to see in the conferences themselves, and how you might suggest bringing that about. What would you like to see in, say, Bangkok for 2014 that we haven't seen in previous conferences? (If anything!) And what can you do to help make that happen? Thank you all for running, and I look forward to your responses. Best, Alex -- -- // // This email is // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From geneloeb at gmail.com Fri May 24 06:54:12 2013 From: geneloeb at gmail.com (gene loeb) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 08:54:12 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I think Ruth gave a meaningful, needed response of inclusion of more persons. Specific activities should be designed for member participation. "Elected official"s should not be the only route to member participation. I think too much emphasis is given to this area. There should be more positions for this, maybe even 10 presidential positions , even 30 vice presidents and a large advisory group. I have looked for ways to be more active, would like to do more. Thanks for all of your help. Gene Gene Loeb, Ph.D. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 8:10 AM, Deller, Ruth A wrote: > Oooh, difficult question as I think there are several things we could do, > some of which others have mentioned. > > I'm interested in the conference becoming a bit more creative and dynamic > so I would encourage conference and programme chairs to think about what > they might want to do to shake the programme up - this might change each > year depending on where we are and who the team are. But I'd encourage > more flexibility in thinking about things like keynotes, plenaries or even > panel formats. Not necessarily to do away with things but to allow freedom > to try new things out. In that vein, given that many of our members can't > get to the conferences due to the costs of flights etc, I would like to see > something in the programme whereby we could connect with them - streaming > talks (or some of the talks) and maybe even having some of them present > virtually in certain panels. I would look to work with the programme and > conference chair about this to see if we can get the technology to make it > happen. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto: > air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Alexander Halavais > Sent: 24 May 2013 00:26 > To: aoir list > Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates > > Dear AoIR Members (and members of the broader community), > > Just a reminder that AoIR elections are now open, and will be until the > end of the month. I want to encourage all members to vote. There are lots > of ways to help contribute to and shape the future of an organization like > ours, and electing an executive committee that represents your interests is > one of these. > > I have not yet voted and I'm hoping the candidates can answer a question > for me. (And I hope others will ask questions as well, despite the looming > deadline!) > > I've looked over your candidate statements (linked here: > > http://aoir.org/2013-executive-committee-election-candidate-statements-voting-information/ > ) > and I recognize and agree with the need to increase connections among > members outside of the conference setting--something that several of you > noted. That said, I wonder what single, concrete change you would most like > to see in the conferences themselves, and how you might suggest bringing > that about. What would you like to see in, say, Bangkok for 2014 that we > haven't seen in previous conferences? (If anything!) And what can you do to > help make that happen? > > Thank you all for running, and I look forward to your responses. > > Best, > > Alex > > > > -- > -- > // > // This email is > // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > // > // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > // http://alex.halavais.net > // > // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. > // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association > of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or > unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- With Sincerest Best Wishes , Gene Gene Loeb, Ph.D. From jhuns at vt.edu Fri May 24 07:07:59 2013 From: jhuns at vt.edu (jeremy hunsinger) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 10:07:59 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4247BB5C-1CB6-4D2A-A8A0-AA419EA2D00B@vt.edu> In my memory... there has been at least 3 proposals for streaming type talks at the conference and at least 1 committee established to try to make it happen. I think that the answer is less of 'stream talks' because if that was going to happen, it would have achieved critical mass to make it happen by now as we have the people with technical understanding and capacity in our membership to make it happen. I suspect that people don't really want streaming, but what they do want, as I indicated in my nomination information is more opportunity to participate. I think that is really about more opportunities to network and share research in face to face environments. This is why i suggested that we should 'distribute the association activities', or in other words, we should sponsor or co-sponsor small events at other conferences in places away from the other conference. For instance if the International Studies Association is in Budapest and we have members there, we could sponsor a small event there, or similar activities with any scholarly association. The idea is to put AoIR members in closer contact with each other by using their other disciplinary and interdisciplinary associations as venues for AoIR. In conjunction with those activities, I suggest we start activities that bond our association together better, such as Mentoring, restarting the Birds of Feather lunches, and making our 'web and email space' more actively available to member interaction, which it is now somewhat, but we only have 2 or 3 other email groups existing and I think that mostly those groups are non-functioning, such as the graduate student list, the political economy and policy list, etc. Advertising those more and providing more of those, will I think allow us to grow both deeper and broader in our membership. If the goal is to get people involved in novel and interesting ways, I think we should be providing the infrastructure for that involvement. Jeremy Hunsinger Communication Studies Wilfrid Laurier University Center for Digital Discourse and Culture Virginia Tech Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. --Pablo Picasso From R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk Fri May 24 07:14:26 2013 From: R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk (Deller, Ruth A) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 14:14:26 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: <4247BB5C-1CB6-4D2A-A8A0-AA419EA2D00B@vt.edu> References: <4247BB5C-1CB6-4D2A-A8A0-AA419EA2D00B@vt.edu> Message-ID: I think the idea of multiple events has some merit - in addition to your sponsorship suggestions, perhaps we can even out forward AOIR-affiliated panels at other large conferences? Re: streaming - I've seen a lot of people asking for streaming on the Twitter feeds the past couple of IR conferences, although they may be a minority - there are probably other ways of interactive participation for those not physically present that we can look at - Twitter's obviously one, but it often ends up being reportage and comment from the people there and maybe we could look at ways of having more dialogue/interaction with those not there. And we should bring back Terri's kissing booth ;) I do think that as an internet-research organisation, we could be using the internet a lot more than we are... I think we both agree - and so do pretty much all the candidates from their statements - that widening participation is really key to the future of AOIR. I'm sure we're all open to suggestions from members about how that can happen though, especially those who have felt distanced from things so far or have struggled to get to conferences. Ruth -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of jeremy hunsinger Sent: 24 May 2013 15:08 To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In my memory... there has been at least 3 proposals for streaming type talks at the conference and at least 1 committee established to try to make it happen. I think that the answer is less of 'stream talks' because if that was going to happen, it would have achieved critical mass to make it happen by now as we have the people with technical understanding and capacity in our membership to make it happen. I suspect that people don't really want streaming, but what they do want, as I indicated in my nomination information is more opportunity to participate. I think that is really about more opportunities to network and share research in face to face environments. This is why i suggested that we should 'distribute the association activities', or in other words, we should sponsor or co-sponsor small events at other conferences in places away from the other conference. For instance if the International Studies Association is in Budapest and we have members there, we could sponsor a small event there, or similar activities with any scholarly association. The idea is to put AoIR members in closer contact with each other by using t heir other disciplinary and interdisciplinary associations as venues for AoIR. In conjunction with those activities, I suggest we start activities that bond our association together better, such as Mentoring, restarting the Birds of Feather lunches, and making our 'web and email space' more actively available to member interaction, which it is now somewhat, but we only have 2 or 3 other email groups existing and I think that mostly those groups are non-functioning, such as the graduate student list, the political economy and policy list, etc. Advertising those more and providing more of those, will I think allow us to grow both deeper and broader in our membership. If the goal is to get people involved in novel and interesting ways, I think we should be providing the infrastructure for that involvement. Jeremy Hunsinger Communication Studies Wilfrid Laurier University Center for Digital Discourse and Culture Virginia Tech Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. --Pablo Picasso _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk Fri May 24 07:16:13 2013 From: R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk (Deller, Ruth A) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 14:16:13 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: References: <4247BB5C-1CB6-4D2A-A8A0-AA419EA2D00B@vt.edu> Message-ID: That should read 'put forward' btw. Not sure what 'out forwarding' is although I bet it's used in some BZNS SPK somewhere! -----Original Message----- From: Deller, Ruth A Sent: 24 May 2013 15:14 To: 'jeremy hunsinger'; air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: RE: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates I think the idea of multiple events has some merit - in addition to your sponsorship suggestions, perhaps we can even out forward AOIR-affiliated panels at other large conferences? Re: streaming - I've seen a lot of people asking for streaming on the Twitter feeds the past couple of IR conferences, although they may be a minority - there are probably other ways of interactive participation for those not physically present that we can look at - Twitter's obviously one, but it often ends up being reportage and comment from the people there and maybe we could look at ways of having more dialogue/interaction with those not there. And we should bring back Terri's kissing booth ;) I do think that as an internet-research organisation, we could be using the internet a lot more than we are... I think we both agree - and so do pretty much all the candidates from their statements - that widening participation is really key to the future of AOIR. I'm sure we're all open to suggestions from members about how that can happen though, especially those who have felt distanced from things so far or have struggled to get to conferences. Ruth -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of jeremy hunsinger Sent: 24 May 2013 15:08 To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In my memory... there has been at least 3 proposals for streaming type talks at the conference and at least 1 committee established to try to make it happen. I think that the answer is less of 'stream talks' because if that was going to happen, it would have achieved critical mass to make it happen by now as we have the people with technical understanding and capacity in our membership to make it happen. I suspect that people don't really want streaming, but what they do want, as I indicated in my nomination information is more opportunity to participate. I think that is really about more opportunities to network and share research in face to face environments. This is why i suggested that we should 'distribute the association activities', or in other words, we should sponsor or co-sponsor small events at other conferences in places away from the other conference. For instance if the International Studies Association is in Budapest and we have members there, we could sponsor a small event there, or similar activities with any scholarly association. The idea is to put AoIR members in closer contact with each other by using t heir other disciplinary and interdisciplinary associations as venues for AoIR. In conjunction with those activities, I suggest we start activities that bond our association together better, such as Mentoring, restarting the Birds of Feather lunches, and making our 'web and email space' more actively available to member interaction, which it is now somewhat, but we only have 2 or 3 other email groups existing and I think that mostly those groups are non-functioning, such as the graduate student list, the political economy and policy list, etc. Advertising those more and providing more of those, will I think allow us to grow both deeper and broader in our membership. If the goal is to get people involved in novel and interesting ways, I think we should be providing the infrastructure for that involvement. Jeremy Hunsinger Communication Studies Wilfrid Laurier University Center for Digital Discourse and Culture Virginia Tech Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. --Pablo Picasso _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From meganzahay at gmail.com Fri May 24 07:21:02 2013 From: meganzahay at gmail.com (Megan Zahay) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 10:21:02 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks for your responses, all are very helpful! NodeXL seems particularly interesting for visualizing connections. Megan On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 6:46 AM, Stuart Shulman wrote: > Context Miner > http://www.contextminer.org/ > > Great program for YouTube data. > > > On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:02 AM, Main wrote: > >> Have you tried Webometric Analyst? It's free software available from >> Wolverhampton University. I've not played with the youtube function myself >> but I have seen research which does similar things to the project you >> describe. You will need to download the manual and I recommend Mike >> Thelwall's work on webometrics to help make sense of the program. >> >> Cassian >> >> --- Original Message --- >> >> From: "Megan Zahay" >> Sent: May 23, 2013 10:54 PM >> To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org >> Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> I have been lurking on the list for about a year now and really enjoying >> the wealth of insights and information, but this is my first addition to >> it. I am currently working on a project which would like to track the >> network of some YouTube videos, so that includes things like referrals >> from >> other videos, embedding videos on external sites, video comments, text >> comments, etc. I would also like to use any demographic data available. >> Can >> anyone inform me about the reliability of the statistics provided on >> YouTube itself for each video, or point me in the direction of some >> publications on the subject? Additionally, if anyone is aware of any >> programs that would allow me to view the network between groups of videos >> or research that has been done in this area I would be very appreciative. >> >> Thank you in advance! >> >> Megan Zahay >> B.A. Arcadia University >> _______________________________________________ >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> http://www.aoir.org/ >> _______________________________________________ >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> http://www.aoir.org/ >> > > > > -- > > Dr. Stuart W. Shulman > people.umass.edu/stu > > Editor Emeritus, JITP > jitp.net > > Director, QDAP-UMass > umass.edu/qdap > > Founder and CEO, Texifter > texifter.com > > LinkedIn: linkedin.com/pub/stuart-shulman/10/351/899 > Twitter: twitter.com/#!/StuartWShulman > > From jhuns at vt.edu Fri May 24 07:21:26 2013 From: jhuns at vt.edu (jeremy hunsinger) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 10:21:26 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: References: <4247BB5C-1CB6-4D2A-A8A0-AA419EA2D00B@vt.edu> Message-ID: <43B2FE49-28C2-46B0-B474-5F2077BD37A0@vt.edu> On May 24, 2013, at 10:14 AM, "Deller, Ruth A" wrote: > I think the idea of multiple events has some merit - in addition to your sponsorship suggestions, perhaps we can even out forward AOIR-affiliated panels at other large conferences? I think there was some discussion about this in the past, and there were concerns about branding and cross-branding AoIR in regards to affiliating with other organizations. In my recollection, the early decision on this was to allow the members to form their own panels at other conferences ad hoc, but not have them branded AoIR. > > Re: streaming - I've seen a lot of people asking for streaming on the Twitter feeds the past couple of IR conferences, although they may be a minority - there are probably other ways of interactive participation for those not physically present that we can look at - Twitter's obviously one, but it often ends up being reportage and comment from the people there and maybe we could look at ways of having more dialogue/interaction with those not there. And we should bring back Terri's kissing booth ;) I do think that as an internet-research organisation, we could be using the internet a lot more than we are... Always true, but then we have the problem of labor-time of volunteers also. This is why I think that more member involvement helps to solve some of this issue, because it distributes the labors. > > I think we both agree - and so do pretty much all the candidates from their statements - that widening participation is really key to the future of AOIR. I'm sure we're all open to suggestions from members about how that can happen though, especially those who have felt distanced from things so far or have struggled to get to conferences. yes, i think we both agree about this. Jeremy Hunsinger Communication Studies Wilfrid Laurier University Center for Digital Discourse and Culture Virginia Tech Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. --Pablo Picasso From alan.neustadtl at gmail.com Fri May 24 07:30:26 2013 From: alan.neustadtl at gmail.com (Alan Neustadtl) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 10:30:26 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: You might also explore NodeXL ( http://nodexl.codeplex.com/releases/view/104762), a free MS Excel add-in that has the ability to directly import networks from Youtube. Best, Alan On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:02 AM, Main wrote: > Have you tried Webometric Analyst? It's free software available from > Wolverhampton University. I've not played with the youtube function myself > but I have seen research which does similar things to the project you > describe. You will need to download the manual and I recommend Mike > Thelwall's work on webometrics to help make sense of the program. > > Cassian > > --- Original Message --- > > From: "Megan Zahay" > Sent: May 23, 2013 10:54 PM > To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org > Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data > > Hi everyone, > > I have been lurking on the list for about a year now and really enjoying > the wealth of insights and information, but this is my first addition to > it. I am currently working on a project which would like to track the > network of some YouTube videos, so that includes things like referrals from > other videos, embedding videos on external sites, video comments, text > comments, etc. I would also like to use any demographic data available. Can > anyone inform me about the reliability of the statistics provided on > YouTube itself for each video, or point me in the direction of some > publications on the subject? Additionally, if anyone is aware of any > programs that would allow me to view the network between groups of videos > or research that has been done in this area I would be very appreciative. > > Thank you in advance! > > Megan Zahay > B.A. Arcadia University > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > From dbrabham at email.unc.edu Fri May 24 08:35:53 2013 From: dbrabham at email.unc.edu (Brabham, Daren C) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 15:35:53 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: <43B2FE49-28C2-46B0-B474-5F2077BD37A0@vt.edu> References: <4247BB5C-1CB6-4D2A-A8A0-AA419EA2D00B@vt.edu> <43B2FE49-28C2-46B0-B474-5F2077BD37A0@vt.edu> Message-ID: Not sure if Alex meant for candidates for open seats to respond to his questions, too, or if it was just for the VP candidates...but here it goes... I think the conferences work well as-is, really. The only parts that need improvement, perhaps, is that some panels struggle to sustain a coherent theme (i.e., a video game theory panel might have a paper or two that really are about video game theories, but the other couple of papers are about other things/theories and use an analysis of a video game to make their point). It is extremely difficult to somehow group ad hoc papers together into coherent panels, though, so I'm sure previous program planners have truly done their best. I don't have an answer for how to make this kind of thing better, except maybe to encourage whole thematic panels more...or to consider poster sessions or lightning talk formats for some of the ill-fitting ad hoc papers...or to maybe just call all of the ad hoc panels potpourri panels and just include more papers on each of them (5 or 6 per panel?). We are all Internet scholars, and we are all able to find full papers later (SSRN, emailing presenters personally, or whatever). The value for this conference, for me, is exposure to many ideas in short formats, and then good discussion that follows. The other value of the conference is the social hour. Informal cocktail time with colleagues is the best way to find mentors, extend scholarly conversation, and find allies in the field. I would actually oppose any more efforts to add new grad student mentoring programming to the conference. We have the doctoral colloquium, which is great. But really beyond that there need to be more mixers, more trading of business cards, more informal conversations between grad students and senior scholars. I know I would probably not want to be assigned a grad student to mentor throughout the year, but I would welcome any opportunity to have a beer with a grad student interested in the things I'm interested in. So, on the "mentoring grad students" front, I disagree with Jeremy and would like to see a less formal, more frequent social interaction across ranks than new panels and programs. That's really how the academy works, and the sooner the formal boundaries between ranks come down (and I think formal mentoring arrangements inherently keep these boundaries up), the better for grad students. db --- Daren C. Brabham, Ph.D. Assistant Professor, School of Journalism & Mass Communication Editor, Case Studies in Strategic Communication | www.csscjournal.org University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Carroll Hall, CB 3365 Chapel Hill, NC 27599 (801) 633-4796 (mobile) daren.brabham at unc.edu | www.darenbrabham.com From jhunsinger at wlu.ca Fri May 24 08:45:30 2013 From: jhunsinger at wlu.ca (Jeremy hunsinger) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 11:45:30 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: References: <4247BB5C-1CB6-4D2A-A8A0-AA419EA2D00B@vt.edu> <43B2FE49-28C2-46B0-B474-5F2077BD37A0@vt.edu> Message-ID: I prefer informal relations too, but informal relations work best in small companies, as we grow and reach out, we'll need to provide clear 'paths to community' which may take more or less formal systems, but 'paths into the community' is really what the graduate student mentoring is about, less than systems of hierarchy and formalized relations. Also mentorship is 'opt-in', if you want to participate great, if not, no worries. I've been on both sides of the mentorship relationship so far, and I think that i've benefitted from all the relationships that I've developed, so I am a strong supporter of mentor networks for graduate students. From jstromer at syr.edu Fri May 24 09:24:04 2013 From: jstromer at syr.edu (Jennifer Stromer-Galley) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 16:24:04 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <58ACB774CD3A274A828C0A15EF7A1BE10939149A@SUEX10-mbx-01.ad.syr.edu> I know, Alex, you ask for a single, concrete suggestion, but I am going to toss out a few ideas. Some are likely better than others, sort of like a smorgasbord. I think the conference already does well what a conference should: allow researchers to present their scholarship, stimulate conversation on that scholarship, and enable networking and connecting opportunities for attendees. So, efforts to improve the conference should work to further enhance that core function. To that end, I would recommend some additions: 1) Improving connections and networking: at one of the social receptions, organize some cross-group mingling, to make sure our new members and junior scholars are making connections. One way to do this might be to borrow from the comic book genre: asking people when they register to provide their super hero name (mine would be Girlhero) and a slogan (you know, like "To Infinity and Beyond!"). This would go on the badge or maybe on a separate card that people could put in their badge holder at the social event. Catchy slogans and names would stimulate conversation, and get otherwise strangers to chat a bit. Or, alternatively, though a bit less fun (more scholarly I suppose), would be to ask people to list 3 key words (perhaps pre-defined choices) that would go on their badge. During the social event, their mission would be to find others with same or similar key words. It seems there should be some sort of prize there somewhere to incent some hunting for others with similar keywords. 2a) Promoting high quality scholarship: Given that the conference each year has a theme, I would encourage us to think about establishing a top scholarship award on that theme. This might be implemented as part of the abstract submission process, where people would indicate whether their abstract is on the theme. We would need to organize a volunteer committee to review submissions, perhaps headed by someone on the Exec. The one hitch here is that those who submit on the theme would need to provide a full paper within N number of days before the conference so that they could be reviewed in a timely manner and a decision rendered in time for the conference. But, I imagine those logistics can be worked out. And I imagine this in some ways as a variant of the publishing work that has been done in the past with submissions. Which leads me to: 2b) Also on promoting high quality scholarship: We need to continue to find ways to get the excellent scholarship published. So, working with existing, relevant journals to promote theme issues out of the conference, or edited books should be work we continue. Establishing a publication committee that could work toward this goal strikes me as wise, if there are volunteers. (Maybe this already exists?) 3) Association Visioning: As I suggested in my statement, I would like to see a panel at Bangkok that does a bit of navel gazing, if you will, and contemplates where we are as an organization and where Internet scholarship is likely to be in oh 10 years, and how will we as an association prepare for the inevitable shift in our object(s) of study? I could image bringing together some of the past members of the Executive Board to start some discussion and contextualize the original vision and purpose of the association, and then have an open conversation that I would hope would continue after the conference through the aoir list or perhaps a separate list. 4) Promotion of the Conference: I would really like us to consider establishing a position, maybe someone on the Executive Board would serve in a vital role of heading organization and conference promotion and establishing a small committee of volunteers to help in that effort. Although not an addition, the last thing I would like to see continue is a workshop that brings together doctoral students and senior scholars. I feel quite strongly that such a workshop can be highly beneficial to all involved, for all the reasons you might imagine: intellectual stimulation, networking, and the like. Okay, that is quite enough out of me for now. Often smorgasbords go overboard, as I likely did here. Regards, ~Jenny Associate Professor?| School of Information Studies Syracuse University 220 Hinds Hall Syracuse, New York 13244 t 315.443.1823? f 315.443.5673? e jstromer at syr.edu? syr.academia.edu/jenniferstromergalley ischool.syr.edu -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Alexander Halavais Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 7:26 PM To: aoir list Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates Dear AoIR Members (and members of the broader community), Just a reminder that AoIR elections are now open, and will be until the end of the month. I want to encourage all members to vote. There are lots of ways to help contribute to and shape the future of an organization like ours, and electing an executive committee that represents your interests is one of these. I have not yet voted and I'm hoping the candidates can answer a question for me. (And I hope others will ask questions as well, despite the looming deadline!) I've looked over your candidate statements (linked here: http://aoir.org/2013-executive-committee-election-candidate-statements-voting-information/ ) and I recognize and agree with the need to increase connections among members outside of the conference setting--something that several of you noted. That said, I wonder what single, concrete change you would most like to see in the conferences themselves, and how you might suggest bringing that about. What would you like to see in, say, Bangkok for 2014 that we haven't seen in previous conferences? (If anything!) And what can you do to help make that happen? Thank you all for running, and I look forward to your responses. Best, Alex -- -- // // This email is // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From jhowison at ischool.utexas.edu Fri May 24 09:26:07 2013 From: jhowison at ischool.utexas.edu (James Howison) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 11:26:07 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9AEF9795BB9E4BED9B3BC4CF91DD7591@ischool.utexas.edu> I think those tools are great. I also think, though, that it's worth thinking through how the structures that you'll produce relate to the sort of networks that SNA metrics were developed for. We've written a piece that tries to figure through the implications of analyzing networks drawn from different kinds of digital trace data, including linking the sort of processes that either produce the networks or happen over the networks with the typical SNA metrics. I'm sure that there's interesting stuff to be learned from network views of trace data on Youtube :) But lots to think about in terms of interactions vs relationships, temporal collapsing of data, meaning of non-links, survey vs sampling logic etc. Howison, J., Wiggins, A., & Crowston, K. (2012). Validity Issues in the Use of Social Network Analysis with Digital Trace Data. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 12(12). Available in PDF (http://james.howison.name/pubs/HowisonWigginsCrowstonValiditySNAJAIS.pdf) Lots of references to great thinking on these questions from Borgatti, Monge and Contractor and others. -- James Howison Sent with Sparrow (http://www.sparrowmailapp.com/?sig) On Friday, May 24, 2013 at 09:30 CDT, Alan Neustadtl wrote: > You might also explore NodeXL ( > http://nodexl.codeplex.com/releases/view/104762), a free MS Excel add-in > that has the ability to directly import networks from Youtube. > > Best, > Alan > > > On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:02 AM, Main wrote: > > > Have you tried Webometric Analyst? It's free software available from > > Wolverhampton University. I've not played with the youtube function myself > > but I have seen research which does similar things to the project you > > describe. You will need to download the manual and I recommend Mike > > Thelwall's work on webometrics to help make sense of the program. > > > > Cassian > > > > --- Original Message --- > > > > From: "Megan Zahay" > > Sent: May 23, 2013 10:54 PM > > To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org (mailto:air-l at listserv.aoir.org) > > Subject: [Air-L] YouTube Data > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > I have been lurking on the list for about a year now and really enjoying > > the wealth of insights and information, but this is my first addition to > > it. I am currently working on a project which would like to track the > > network of some YouTube videos, so that includes things like referrals from > > other videos, embedding videos on external sites, video comments, text > > comments, etc. I would also like to use any demographic data available. Can > > anyone inform me about the reliability of the statistics provided on > > YouTube itself for each video, or point me in the direction of some > > publications on the subject? Additionally, if anyone is aware of any > > programs that would allow me to view the network between groups of videos > > or research that has been done in this area I would be very appreciative. > > > > Thank you in advance! > > > > Megan Zahay > > B.A. Arcadia University > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org (mailto:Air-L at listserv.aoir.org) mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org (mailto:Air-L at listserv.aoir.org) mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org (mailto:Air-L at listserv.aoir.org) mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ From jstromer at syr.edu Fri May 24 09:50:42 2013 From: jstromer at syr.edu (Jennifer Stromer-Galley) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 16:50:42 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: References: <4247BB5C-1CB6-4D2A-A8A0-AA419EA2D00B@vt.edu> Message-ID: <58ACB774CD3A274A828C0A15EF7A1BE1093914DF@SUEX10-mbx-01.ad.syr.edu> We definitely have seen members organize informal social gatherings and panels at other associations' conferences, and we should continue to encourage that. The issue of streaming the conference to those who cannot attend is so tricky. When I was pregnant and then had wee ones, I really cut back on my conference travel, so I did not attend AoIR. I would have loved to be present, but even if there had been some digital means for me to watch panels or attend virtually, I don't know if I would have. I do think we as an association about the Internet could and should put more energy over the next few years towards building a richer digital presence, and that might mean experimenting with avenues for digital participation with the conference. The how of that requires some thought. ~Jenny -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Deller, Ruth A Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 10:14 AM To: 'jeremy hunsinger'; air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates I think the idea of multiple events has some merit - in addition to your sponsorship suggestions, perhaps we can even out forward AOIR-affiliated panels at other large conferences? Re: streaming - I've seen a lot of people asking for streaming on the Twitter feeds the past couple of IR conferences, although they may be a minority - there are probably other ways of interactive participation for those not physically present that we can look at - Twitter's obviously one, but it often ends up being reportage and comment from the people there and maybe we could look at ways of having more dialogue/interaction with those not there. And we should bring back Terri's kissing booth ;) I do think that as an internet-research organisation, we could be using the internet a lot more than we are... I think we both agree - and so do pretty much all the candidates from their statements - that widening participation is really key to the future of AOIR. I'm sure we're all open to suggestions from members about how that can happen though, especially those who have felt distanced from things so far or have struggled to get to conferences. Ruth -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of jeremy hunsinger Sent: 24 May 2013 15:08 To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In my memory... there has been at least 3 proposals for streaming type talks at the conference and at least 1 committee established to try to make it happen. I think that the answer is less of 'stream talks' because if that was going to happen, it would have achieved critical mass to make it happen by now as we have the people with technical understanding and capacity in our membership to make it happen. I suspect that people don't really want streaming, but what they do want, as I indicated in my nomination information is more opportunity to participate. I think that is really about more opportunities to network and share research in face to face environments. This is why i suggested that we should 'distribute the association activities', or in other words, we should sponsor or co-sponsor small events at other conferences in places away from the other conference. For instance if the International Studies Association is in Budapest and we have members there, we could sponsor a small event there, or similar activities with any scholarly association. The idea is to put AoIR members in closer contact with each other by using t heir other disciplinary and interdisciplinary associations as venues for AoIR. In conjunction with those activities, I suggest we start activities that bond our association together better, such as Mentoring, restarting the Birds of Feather lunches, and making our 'web and email space' more actively available to member interaction, which it is now somewhat, but we only have 2 or 3 other email groups existing and I think that mostly those groups are non-functioning, such as the graduate student list, the political economy and policy list, etc. Advertising those more and providing more of those, will I think allow us to grow both deeper and broader in our membership. If the goal is to get people involved in novel and interesting ways, I think we should be providing the infrastructure for that involvement. Jeremy Hunsinger Communication Studies Wilfrid Laurier University Center for Digital Discourse and Culture Virginia Tech Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. --Pablo Picasso _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ _______________________________________________ From kquinn8 at uic.edu Fri May 24 18:53:25 2013 From: kquinn8 at uic.edu (Kelly Quinn) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 20:53:25 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates Message-ID: <06be01ce58ea$a578c4f0$f06a4ed0$@uic.edu> Hi Alex and all, The suggestions from Jeremy, Ruth, Jenny and Darren the conference activities are great. I'd like to see additional opportunities for our members to connect with each other too, so I'd like the Exec Board to go a little further than just 'encourage' our members to get together at other conferences. I'd like to see us establish an informal group of members who will be responsible to organize meet-ups at the various major and not-so-major conferences that our members attend. Informal, because the sole responsibility would be to establish a place and time for AoIR-ists to meet during these other conferences. Group, because to make this work consistently we need people that attend (or reside in host cities) a variety of conferences. This group would simply be charged with opening the AoIR embrace a little wider; we would have additional opportunities to network with each other; and we can get more of our members involved. In the past, a few key members have taken on this responsibility on their own (thank you!), but sharing responsibility among our members to do this on an ongoing and regular basis will sustain the effort and energy. Putting just a little structure around the process would give an opportunity for any of our members to pitch in to make sure these meet-ups take place. Since many of the conference dates and acceptances are out by October, we can collect information and recruit willing volunteers at our annual meeting. Meet-up information can be published on the listserv and also posted on the website. While I anticipate that several members would step up to this role for the 'greater good,' perhaps the Exec Board might even kick in an extra drink ticket at the conference banquet for anyone who organized a meet-up event during the past year ;-) Kelly ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 16:25:46 -0700 From: Alexander Halavais To: aoir list Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Dear AoIR Members (and members of the broader community), Just a reminder that AoIR elections are now open, and will be until the end of the month. I want to encourage all members to vote. There are lots of ways to help contribute to and shape the future of an organization like ours, and electing an executive committee that represents your interests is one of these. I have not yet voted and I'm hoping the candidates can answer a question for me. (And I hope others will ask questions as well, despite the looming deadline!) I've looked over your candidate statements (linked here: http://aoir.org/2013-executive-committee-election-candidate-statements-votin g-information/ ) and I recognize and agree with the need to increase connections among members outside of the conference setting--something that several of you noted. That said, I wonder what single, concrete change you would most like to see in the conferences themselves, and how you might suggest bringing that about. What would you like to see in, say, Bangkok for 2014 that we haven't seen in previous conferences? (If anything!) And what can you do to help make that happen? Thank you all for running, and I look forward to your responses. Best, Alex -- -- // // This email is // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) From geneloeb at gmail.com Fri May 24 21:06:03 2013 From: geneloeb at gmail.com (gene loeb) Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 23:06:03 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: <06be01ce58ea$a578c4f0$f06a4ed0$@uic.edu> References: <06be01ce58ea$a578c4f0$f06a4ed0$@uic.edu> Message-ID: Kelly, Great ideas I was trying to express similar ideas. Thanks, Gene Gene Loeb, Ph.D. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 8:53 PM, Kelly Quinn wrote: > Hi Alex and all, > > The suggestions from Jeremy, Ruth, Jenny and Darren the conference > activities are great. I'd like to see additional opportunities for our > members to connect with each other too, so I'd like the Exec Board to go a > little further than just 'encourage' our members to get together at other > conferences. I'd like to see us establish an informal group of members who > will be responsible to organize meet-ups at the various major and > not-so-major conferences that our members attend. Informal, because the > sole > responsibility would be to establish a place and time for AoIR-ists to meet > during these other conferences. Group, because to make this work > consistently we need people that attend (or reside in host cities) a > variety > of conferences. This group would simply be charged with opening the AoIR > embrace a little wider; we would have additional opportunities to network > with each other; and we can get more of our members involved. In the past, > a > few key members have taken on this responsibility on their own (thank > you!), > but sharing responsibility among our members to do this on an ongoing and > regular basis will sustain the effort and energy. Putting just a little > structure around the process would give an opportunity for any of our > members to pitch in to make sure these meet-ups take place. > > Since many of the conference dates and acceptances are out by October, we > can collect information and recruit willing volunteers at our annual > meeting. Meet-up information can be published on the listserv and also > posted on the website. While I anticipate that several members would step > up > to this role for the 'greater good,' perhaps the Exec Board might even kick > in an extra drink ticket at the conference banquet for anyone who organized > a meet-up event during the past year ;-) > > Kelly > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 16:25:46 -0700 > From: Alexander Halavais > To: aoir list > Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates > Message-ID: > uCM39JsXP75ES0Hh7Bqspwm-feq6W2tejCJgy47HPZjrw at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Dear AoIR Members (and members of the broader community), > > Just a reminder that AoIR elections are now open, and will be until the end > of the month. I want to encourage all members to vote. There are lots of > ways to help contribute to and shape the future of an organization like > ours, and electing an executive committee that represents your interests is > one of these. > > I have not yet voted and I'm hoping the candidates can answer a question > for me. (And I hope others will ask questions as well, despite the looming > deadline!) > > I've looked over your candidate statements (linked here: > > http://aoir.org/2013-executive-committee-election-candidate-statements-votin > g-information/ > ) > and I recognize and agree with the need to increase connections among > members outside of the conference setting--something that several of you > noted. That said, I wonder what single, concrete change you would most like > to see in the conferences themselves, and how you might suggest bringing > that about. What would you like to see in, say, Bangkok for 2014 that we > haven't seen in previous conferences? (If anything!) And what can you do to > help make that happen? > > Thank you all for running, and I look forward to your responses. > > Best, > > Alex > > > > -- > -- > // > // This email is > // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > // > // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > // http://alex.halavais.net > // > // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. > // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > > > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- With Sincerest Best Wishes , Gene Gene Loeb, Ph.D. From gurstein at gmail.com Sat May 25 00:38:43 2013 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sat, 25 May 2013 10:38:43 +0300 Subject: [Air-L] Call for Papers (Abstracts) Community Informatics and the Millenium Development Goals (MDGs) Message-ID: <0b0601ce591a$e9e20a90$bda61fb0$@gmail.com> Please forward as appropriate. ================================================== Call for Papers: Special Issue ? Community Informatics and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) The Journal of Community Informatics (http://ci-journal.net) Abstract submissions due June 15, 2013 Full papers due September 1, 2013 Anticipated publication date February 1, 2014 The international peer-reviewed Journal of Community Informatics (http://ci-journal.net/) is a medium for the communication of research of interest to a global network of academics, community informatics practitioners and national and multilateral policy makers. A special issue of the journal will be devoted to examining the relationship between Community Informatics and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Community Informatics (CI) is the study and practice of enabling communities and the grassroots to improve their lives through Information and Communications Technologies (ICTs). This special issue will focus on how community-based use of ICTs can contribute to both the achievement of specific MDG targets and the development of the post-2015 global development agenda. The issue is expected to be published in early 2014 and thus provide inputs to ongoing discussions on the finalization of a new global development agenda. Call for papers The field of Community Informatics seeks to explore the potential of ICTs and their applications for social and economic development at the community level. It particularly seeks to ensure that marginalized individuals and communities can benefit from the opportunities that ICTs can provide. Active and meaningful participation by people at the community/grassroots level is arguably one critical element for the successful achievement of the MDGs ? and any other development priorities, for that matter. As demonstrated in different parts of the world, ICTs enable the participation of people and give voice to the voiceless. For this special issue, we are inviting original, unpublished research, points of view, case studies, reviews and field notes. All research papers will be double-blind peer-reviewed. Insights and analytical perspectives from practitioners and policy makers in the form of notes from the field or case studies are also encouraged. These will not be peer-reviewed but will be assessed as to their suitability for publication. Expected topics in this special issue include: 1. National and local policies needed to foster synergies between CI and the MDGs 2. Local government, CI and ICTs: how to create a sound ecosystem for development and MDG achievement? 3. Enabling communities to participate in local MDG decision making processes via ICTs 4. CI and access to information and open data related to MDG development priorities 5. CI and local participation strategies to meet MDGs 6. CI and social inclusion of groups targeted in MDGs 7. CI and local MDG related capacity development: can ICTs close or widen the gap? 8. The potential role for CI in the post-2015 global development agenda; 9. Assessing the empirical evidence on the role of community ICTs in the MDGs to date And specifically related to individual MDG targets: 10. Using community-based ICTs to address extreme poverty and hunger 11. CI approaches to achieving universal primary education; 12. CI contributions to the promotion of gender equality and women's empowerment 13. CI influence to in the elimination of child mortality and achievement of maternal health 14. CI approaches to combating HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases 15. CI and environmental sustainability 16. CI as a component of national and regional health information systems 17. CI and Environmental Sustainability 18. CI contributions to developing global MDG partnerships Special Issue Editors: Charles Dhewa ? CEO, Knowledge Transfer Africa (Pvt) Ltd, charles at knowledgetransafrica.com / charlesdhewa7 at gmail.com Jude Genilo ? Head, Media Studies and Journalism Department, University of Liberal Arts Bangladesh, jude.genilo at ulab.edu.bd / jgenilo at yahoo.com Raul Zambrano ? Cluster Leader, Senior Policy Advisor, ICTD and e-governance, UNDP, raul at undp.org Chris Zielinski ? CEO, International Alliance on Information for All, chris at chriszielinski.com Special Issue Assistant Michel Castagn? ? castagne at alumni.ubc.ca Abstracts should be sent to the Assistant castagne at alumni.ubc.ca no later than June 30, 2013. From jhuns at vt.edu Sat May 25 04:55:16 2013 From: jhuns at vt.edu (jeremy hunsinger) Date: Sat, 25 May 2013 07:55:16 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: <06be01ce58ea$a578c4f0$f06a4ed0$@uic.edu> References: <06be01ce58ea$a578c4f0$f06a4ed0$@uic.edu> Message-ID: <3F5781EE-478A-41F0-8A8A-2C643B371C18@vt.edu> I was thinking that the structure for the meetups would be less 'group' like, and more '100 word proposal' with one to two available every two month period, thus spreading it over the year and judged mostly on a first come first serve criteria for those two months. From Hoffma89 at uwm.edu Sat May 25 08:59:47 2013 From: Hoffma89 at uwm.edu (Anthony Hoffmann) Date: Sat, 25 May 2013 10:59:47 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: <3F5781EE-478A-41F0-8A8A-2C643B371C18@vt.edu> References: <06be01ce58ea$a578c4f0$f06a4ed0$@uic.edu> <3F5781EE-478A-41F0-8A8A-2C643B371C18@vt.edu> Message-ID: <2E55E186-18AB-4937-9653-BCB08E074DB8@uwm.edu> Hello, all! Lots of good stuff here, so I'm mostly going to build on what's already been said with two proposals... #1 - In my candidate statement, I also mentioned the need for formalized mentorship opportunities. It was noted here that we already have the doctoral colloquium, which is a great opportunity for graduate students - and this is true! However, it can also feel a bit hit-and-run (which has its value, of course). It would be great to compliment that sort of experience with opportunities for sustained collaboration between graduate students and faculty across different institutions. One way to go about this would be to establish a limited number of year long "fellowships" - the Association could sponsor a few student fellows and pair them with willing and interested faculty fellows and give them a year to work together on some sort of output (this can be more or less specific, depending on how the fellowship is ultimately framed), which can then be presented or showcased in some way at the annual conference. I had the opportunity to do something similar with the International Society for Ethics and Information Technology a few years back and I count the conversations that occurred with my faculty mentor among some of the most formative of my early graduate career. Not only was it valuable to carry out a sustained collaboration with someone outside of my institution, it was also great to show up to a conference having already established a working relationship with an established scholar in the field. So, in short, any sort of new mentorship opportunities should serve the Association and its graduate student members in ways that compliment or extend or achieve different goals - but do not step on - already established opportunities like the doctoral colloquium. #2 - There has also been some discussion of different/more/cost-conscious social events at the conference. I'd like to add to this discussion, but take a bit of a risk... So, here's my idea for an additional social event that could also serve to open up opportunities for conversation that young graduate students or AoIR n00bs might otherwise not have: a poster session. But not your usual poster session - which often serves as the first foray into conference life for graduate students everywhere. Instead, we reverse the roles. We ask active and respected faculty members from different institutions to prepare a poster (it could be about their work, about an ongoing project, a proposed project, something, anything - it could also feature as many lolcats as necessary!) and then - in usual poster session style - the selected faculty would have to stand by their poster! And graduate students or other scholars new to AoIR could approach them and ask them questions about their work! Rather than being a "formal" conference session, it could be framed as a social event that turns some traditional aspects of the conference format on its head - and, of course, it would create an opportunity for conversations that doesn't always exist at standard cocktail hours. Anyway, those are two ideas (albeit ideas geared towards opening up new opportunities for mentorship and socializing for graduate students) to add to the pile. -Anthony On May 25, 2013, at 6:55 AM, jeremy hunsinger wrote: > I was thinking that the structure for the meetups would be less 'group' like, and more '100 word proposal' with one to two available every two month period, thus spreading it over the year and judged mostly on a first come first serve criteria for those two months. > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ From sunlim at nus.edu.sg Sat May 25 09:50:54 2013 From: sunlim at nus.edu.sg (Sun Sun LIM) Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 00:50:54 +0800 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: <58ACB774CD3A274A828C0A15EF7A1BE1093914DF@SUEX10-mbx-01.ad.syr.edu> References: <4247BB5C-1CB6-4D2A-A8A0-AA419EA2D00B@vt.edu> <58ACB774CD3A274A828C0A15EF7A1BE1093914DF@SUEX10-mbx-01.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <17800BD62B014D408560EFE7E2D16D2F05202540@MBX08.stf.nus.edu.sg> Thanks Alex for your question. Just to chime in, I agree that streaming the conference may not be that essential as my personal experience is also not to avail of such services, and I have encountered few colleagues (none, in fact) who has. Instead, picking up on Jenny's point about building a richer digital presence, we may want to think about developing an online archive of videos of selected lectures, TED style perhaps. I reckon that if effectively presented, those are likely to attract more viewers than streaming. For the conference proper, the current format works, and is something academics/researchers are familiar with and can therefore make the most of. That said, I think we could also think of opening up pockets of time (say 90 mins) to try out alternative formats such as BarCamp http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BarCamp or PechaKucha http://chronicle.com/blogs/profhacker/challenging-the-presentation-paradigm-in-6-minutes-40-seconds-pecha-kucha/22807 where we have briefer and more "packed" exchanges of quick ideas centring around specific themes. These presentations would not have "conference paper status" per se but are really meant to ignite further discussion. The sessions should ideally segue into a reception/coffee break so that the discussion can continue informally amongst conference attendees. Sun Sun LIM, PhD Associate Professor & Deputy Head (on sabbatical leave from Oct '12 to June '13) Department of Communications & New Media National University of Singapore Website: http://profile.nus.edu.sg/fass/cnmlss/ -----Original Message----- From: Jennifer Stromer-Galley [mailto:jstromer at syr.edu] Sent: Saturday, May 25, 2013 12:51 AM To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates We definitely have seen members organize informal social gatherings and panels at other associations' conferences, and we should continue to encourage that. The issue of streaming the conference to those who cannot attend is so tricky. When I was pregnant and then had wee ones, I really cut back on my conference travel, so I did not attend AoIR. I would have loved to be present, but even if there had been some digital means for me to watch panels or attend virtually, I don't know if I would have. I do think we as an association about the Internet could and should put more energy over the next few years towards building a richer digital presence, and that might mean experimenting with avenues for digital participation with the conference. The how of that requires some thought. ~Jenny -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Deller, Ruth A Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 10:14 AM To: 'jeremy hunsinger'; air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates I think the idea of multiple events has some merit - in addition to your sponsorship suggestions, perhaps we can even out forward AOIR-affiliated panels at other large conferences? Re: streaming - I've seen a lot of people asking for streaming on the Twitter feeds the past couple of IR conferences, although they may be a minority - there are probably other ways of interactive participation for those not physically present that we can look at - Twitter's obviously one, but it often ends up being reportage and comment from the people there and maybe we could look at ways of having more dialogue/interaction with those not there. And we should bring back Terri's kissing booth ;) I do think that as an internet-research organisation, we could be using the internet a lot more than we are... I think we both agree - and so do pretty much all the candidates from their statements - that widening participation is really key to the future of AOIR. I'm sure we're all open to suggestions from members about how that can happen though, especially those who have felt distanced from things so far or have struggled to get to conferences. Ruth -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of jeremy hunsinger Sent: 24 May 2013 15:08 To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In my memory... there has been at least 3 proposals for streaming type talks at the conference and at least 1 committee established to try to make it happen. I think that the answer is less of 'stream talks' because if that was going to happen, it would have achieved critical mass to make it happen by now as we have the people with technical understanding and capacity in our membership to make it happen. I suspect that people don't really want streaming, but what they do want, as I indicated in my nomination information is more opportunity to participate. I think that is really about more opportunities to network and share research in face to face environments. This is why i suggested that we should 'distribute the association activities', or in other words, we should sponsor or co-sponsor small events at other conferences in places away from the other conference. For instance if the International Studies Association is in Budapest and we have members there, we could sponsor a small event there, or similar activities with any scholarly association. The idea is to put AoIR members in closer contact with each other by using t heir other disciplinary and interdisciplinary associations as venues for AoIR. In conjunction with those activities, I suggest we start activities that bond our association together better, such as Mentoring, restarting the Birds of Feather lunches, and making our 'web and email space' more actively available to member interaction, which it is now somewhat, but we only have 2 or 3 other email groups existing and I think that mostly those groups are non-functioning, such as the graduate student list, the political economy and policy list, etc. Advertising those more and providing more of those, will I think allow us to grow both deeper and broader in our membership. If the goal is to get people involved in novel and interesting ways, I think we should be providing the infrastructure for that involvement. Jeremy Hunsinger Communication Studies Wilfrid Laurier University Center for Digital Discourse and Culture Virginia Tech Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. --Pablo Picasso _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ _______________________________________________ From cristian.berrio at gmail.com Sun May 26 12:15:38 2013 From: cristian.berrio at gmail.com (Cristian Berrio Zapata) Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 16:15:38 -0300 Subject: [Air-L] Internet Historiography In-Reply-To: <1369011736.32088.YahooMailNeo@web160904.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> References: <1369011736.32088.YahooMailNeo@web160904.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: 2013/5/19 Denise N. Rall > The ?house that Dick built?: Constructing the team that built the bomb Very interesting references! I am researchin the history of internet and the Web BUT, when entering Latin America. If you know any documents about that I will be more than thankful. Regarding historiography, I like Briggs, A., & Burke, P. (2002). De Gutemberg a Internet: una historia social de los medios de comunicaci?n (M. A. Galmarini, Trans.): Aguilar, Altea, Taurus, Alfaguara S.A. This is originally in English but I have the Spanish vesion. Also Breton, P. (1991). Hist?ria da inform?tica: S?o Paulo: Editora Unesp.I have the portugese version but th original is in French and with no doubt it migh be in English. And Breton, P. (1992). L'utopie de la communication. Paris: La D?couverte essais. Same coment as above. A chilean autor, talk about the feudal inheritage in Latin america and IT, in a mixture that created three mythic scenarios for knowledge. That might be of use: Duque, R. B. (2007). How the Internet is Shaping the Chilean Scientific Community: Globalization and Dependency. Doctoral Dissertation, Louisiana State University, Louisiana Finally, there is a document that I found interesting about the effects of IT in society: Agger, D. G., Armstrong, D. B., Boggs, J., Fein, L., Ferry, W. H., Geismar, M., . . . Worthy, W. (1964). The Triple Revolution: Cybernation - Weaponry - Human Rights. In T. A. H. C. o. t. T. Revolution (Ed.), Mississipp Freedom School Curriculum: http://educationanddemocracy.org/. Hope this will be of use and please do no forguet, if you know any sources about the Internet and Web entering Latin America I will be thankful. -- *Cristian Berr?o Zapata* From rawbird at gmail.com Sun May 26 12:22:07 2013 From: rawbird at gmail.com (Adam Fish) Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 20:22:07 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Internet Historiography In-Reply-To: References: <1369011736.32088.YahooMailNeo@web160904.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: A big thanks to all those submitting excellent links to my request for research on internet historiography! Best, Adam Fish, PhD Media and Cultural Studies Department of Sociology Lancaster University, UK LA1 4YT p. 01524592699 a.fish2 at lancaster.ac.uk @mediacultures, mediacultures.org http://www.research.lancs.ac.uk/portal/en/people/adam-fish(10a5067e-a828-497b-95ae-e35ed07f9ba1).html On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 8:15 PM, Cristian Berrio Zapata < cristian.berrio at gmail.com> wrote: > > 2013/5/19 Denise N. Rall > > The ?house that Dick built?: Constructing the team that built the bomb > > > Very interesting references! I am researchin the history of internet and > the Web BUT, when entering Latin America. If you know any documents about > that I will be more than thankful. > > Regarding historiography, I like Briggs, A., & Burke, P. (2002). De > Gutemberg a Internet: una historia social de los medios de comunicaci?n (M. > A. Galmarini, Trans.): Aguilar, Altea, Taurus, Alfaguara S.A. This is > originally in English but I have the Spanish vesion. > > Also Breton, P. (1991). Hist?ria da inform?tica: S?o Paulo: Editora > Unesp.I have the portugese version but th original is in French and with no > doubt it migh be in English. > > And Breton, P. (1992). L'utopie de la communication. Paris: La D?couverte > essais. Same coment as above. > > A chilean autor, talk about the feudal inheritage in Latin america and IT, > in a mixture that created three mythic scenarios for knowledge. That might > be of use: Duque, R. B. (2007). How the Internet is Shaping the Chilean > Scientific Community: Globalization and Dependency. Doctoral Dissertation, > Louisiana State University, Louisiana > > Finally, there is a document that I found interesting about the effects of > IT in society: Agger, D. G., Armstrong, D. B., Boggs, J., Fein, L., Ferry, > W. H., Geismar, M., . . . Worthy, W. (1964). The Triple Revolution: > Cybernation - Weaponry - Human Rights. In T. A. H. C. o. t. T. Revolution > (Ed.), Mississipp Freedom School Curriculum: > http://educationanddemocracy.org/. > > Hope this will be of use and please do no forguet, if you know any sources > about the Internet and Web entering Latin America I will be thankful. > > > -- > *Cristian Berr?o Zapata* > From suely.fragoso at ymail.com Sun May 26 14:54:48 2013 From: suely.fragoso at ymail.com (Suely Fragoso) Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 14:54:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Air-L] Internet Historiography In-Reply-To: References: <1369011736.32088.YahooMailNeo@web160904.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1369605288.25470.YahooMailNeo@web141205.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Christian ? My suggestionsabout the history of the internet in Latin America: ? - This M.Sc. dissertation is about the first years of the internet in Brazil? = Carvalho, M. S. R. M. (2006). A trajet?ria da Internet no Brasil: do surgimento das redes de computadores institui??o dos mecanismos de governan?a. M.Sc. thesis presented to FRJ/Engineering ? - The Brazilian Network Information Center (http://www.nic.br/english/) publishes (nearly) annual surveys on the Use of Information and Communication Technologies in Brazil ? - This book is a collection from authors based on different Latin American countries. I think some texts will be of interest to you. A brief summary of the content is at? http://www.editorasulina.com.br/detalhes.php?id=491 = S. Fragoso e A. E. Maldonado (eds) A Internet na Am?rica Latina. Porto Alegre, Editora Sulina, 2010 ? - The Journal of Community Informatics (ci-journal.net) has published special editions about Latin America and about Brazil. Perhaps you will find something interesting there ? ?- Finally, entering the dangerous realm of self-promotion, there is my text about the first years of Orkut in Brazil. Orkut was decisive for the popularization of the web in this country = S. Fragoso, WTF A Crazy Brazilian Invasion. In ESS, Charles ; SUDWEEKS,Fay ; HRACHOVEC, Herbert (orgs) ; CATaC 2006 - Fifth International Conference onCultural Attitudes Towards Technology and Communication , 2006, Tartu. Estonia.School of Information Technology - Murdoch University, 2006. v. 1. p. 255-274 ? You are welcome to ask for help to access any of the above ? Suely ________________________________ From: Cristian Berrio Zapata To: Denise N. Rall Cc: Kevin Driscoll ; "air-l at listserv.aoir.org" Sent: Sunday, May 26, 2013 4:15 PM Subject: Re: [Air-L] Internet Historiography 2013/5/19 Denise N. Rall > The ?house that Dick built?: Constructing the team that built the bomb Very interesting references! I am researchin the history of internet and the Web BUT, when entering Latin America. If you know any documents about that I will be more than thankful. Regarding historiography, I like Briggs, A., & Burke, P. (2002). De Gutemberg a Internet: una historia social de los medios de comunicaci?n (M. A. Galmarini, Trans.): Aguilar, Altea, Taurus, Alfaguara S.A. This is originally in English but I have the Spanish vesion. Also Breton, P. (1991). Hist?ria da inform?tica: S?o Paulo: Editora Unesp.I have the portugese version but th original is in French and with no doubt it migh be in English. And Breton, P. (1992). L'utopie de la communication. Paris: La D?couverte essais. Same coment as above. A chilean autor, talk about the feudal inheritage in Latin america and IT, in a mixture that created three mythic scenarios for knowledge. That might be of use: Duque, R. B. (2007). How the Internet is Shaping the Chilean Scientific Community: Globalization and Dependency. Doctoral Dissertation, Louisiana State University, Louisiana Finally, there is a document that I found interesting about the effects of IT in society: Agger, D. G., Armstrong, D. B., Boggs, J., Fein, L., Ferry, W. H., Geismar, M., . . . Worthy, W. (1964). The Triple Revolution: Cybernation - Weaponry - Human Rights. In T. A. H. C. o. t. T. Revolution (Ed.), Mississipp Freedom School Curriculum: http://educationanddemocracy.org/. Hope this will be of use and please do no forguet, if you know any sources about the Internet and Web entering Latin America I will be thankful. -- *Cristian Berr?o Zapata* _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From wellman at chass.utoronto.ca Sun May 26 15:24:13 2013 From: wellman at chass.utoronto.ca (Barry Wellman) Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 18:24:13 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] internet, etc in Brasil Message-ID: read the wonderful recent book by Yuri Tahkteyev about software programming industry in Brasil, with specific case study of Lua. Barry Wellman _______________________________________________________________________ S.D. Clark Professor FRSC NetLab Director Faculty of Information (iSchool) 611 Bissell Building 140 St. George St. University of Toronto Toronto Canada M5S 3G6 http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman twitter: @barrywellman NETWORKED:The New Social Operating System. Lee Rainie & Barry Wellman MIT Press http://amzn.to/zXZg39 Print $22 Kindle $16 Old/NewCyberTimes http://bit.ly/c8N9V8 ________________________________________________________________________ From irsh at itu.dk Sun May 26 22:51:36 2013 From: irsh at itu.dk (Irina Shklovski) Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 05:51:36 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Final CFP: CSCW 2014, Papers due May 31st Message-ID: [Please forward to those who might be interested -- Apologies for cross-posting] CALL FOR PAPERS, COMPUTER-SUPPORTED COOPERATIVE WORK AND SOCIAL COMPUTING 2014 (CSCW 2014) Baltimore, MD, Feb 15-19, 2014 http://cscw.acm.org CSCW is an international and interdisciplinary conference focused on how technology intersects with social practices. To support diverse and high-quality contributions, CSCW employs a two-phase review process and does not impose an arbitrary length limit on submissions. IMPORTANT DATES * May 31, 5:00pm PDT, 2013: Submission due * July 6: First-round notification (Revise & Resubmit or Reject) * July 26, 5:00pm PDT: Revised papers due * August 23: Final notifications We invite submissions that detail existing practices or inform the design or deployment of systems or introduce novel systems, interaction techniques, or algorithms. The scope of CSCW includes, but is not limited to, social computing and social media, technologically-enabled or enhanced communication, education technologies, crowdsourcing, multi-user input technologies, collaboration, information sharing, and coordination. It includes socio-technical activities at work, in the home, in education, in healthcare, in the arts, for socializing and for entertainment. New results or new ways of thinking about, studying or supporting shared activities can be in these and related areas: - Social and crowd computing. Studies, theories, designs, mechanisms, systems, and/or infrastructures addressing social media, social networking, user-generated content, wikis, blogs, online gaming, crowdsourcing, collective intelligence, virtual worlds, collaborative information seeking, etc. - System design. Hardware, architectures, infrastructures, interaction design, technical foundations, algorithms, and/or toolkits that enable the building of new social and collaborative systems and experiences. - Theories and models. Critical analysis or organizing theory with clear relevance to the design or study of social and collaborative systems. - Empirical investigations. Findings, guidelines, and/or ethnographic studies relating to technologies, practices, or use of communication, collaboration, and social technologies. - Methodologies and tools. Novel methods or combinations of approaches and tools used in building systems or studying their use. - Domain-specific social and collaborative applications. Including for healthcare, transportation, gaming (for enjoyment or productivity), ICT4D, sustainability, education, accessibility, collective intelligence, global collaboration, or other domains. - Collaboration systems based on emerging technologies. Mobile and ubiquitous computing, game engines, virtual worlds, multi-touch technologies, novel display technologies, vision and gesture recognition systems, big data infrastructures, MOOCs, crowd labor markets, SNSes, sensor-based environments, etc. - Crossing boundaries. Studies, prototypes, or other investigations that explore interactions across disciplines, distance, languages, generations, and cultures, to help better understand how to transcend social, temporal, and/or spatial boundaries. Papers should detail original research contributions. Papers must report new research results that represent a contribution to the field. They must provide sufficient details and support for their results and conclusions. They must cite relevant published research or experience, highlight novel aspects of the submission, and identify the most significant contributions. Evaluation is on the basis of originality, significance, quality of research, quality of writing, and contribution to conference program diversity. SUBMISSIONS Paper submissions must be made via the Precision Conference System. A link to the submission site will be made available by early May. Papers will be presented at the CSCW conference and will be included in the conference proceedings archived in the ACM Digital Library. CSCW does not accept submissions that were published previously in formally reviewed publications or that are currently submitted elsewhere. Send queries about Paper submissions to papers2014 at cscw.acm.org. ============================================== Irina Shklovski Associate Professor Interaction Design Research Group (ID) Digital Media & Communication Research Group (DMC) IT University of Copenhagen Rued Langgaards Vej, 7 2300, K?benhavn S. Danmark http://www.itu.dk/people/irsh/ ============================================== From agruzd at gmail.com Mon May 27 06:30:35 2013 From: agruzd at gmail.com (Anatoliy Gruzd) Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 10:30:35 -0300 Subject: [Air-L] #SMSociety13: Social Media & Society Conference - Call for Posters (4 days left!) Message-ID: <51A35FFB.3000302@gmail.com> (Apologies for cross-posting) CALL FOR POSTER ABSTRACTS (Due: May 30, 2013!) ----------------------------------------------------------- What: 2013 International Conference on Social Media and Society Where: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada When: September 14-15, 2013 Website: http://SocialMediaAndSociety.com/ Twitter hashtag: #SMSociety13 ----------------------------------------------------------- We are delighted to announce that we have a great line-up of presentations by researchers and practitioners from 43 institutions hailing from 14 different countries! Here is a list of accepted panel and paper submissions: http://socialmediaandsociety.com/?page_id=7 But there is still time to submit a poster abstract by *May 30, 2013*. Please share this with interested colleagues. For further inquiries, please contact Dr. Anatoliy Gruzd at gruzd at dal.ca From radhika at cyberdiva.org Mon May 27 08:35:27 2013 From: radhika at cyberdiva.org (Radhika Gajjala) Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 11:35:27 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Feminism and Intimacy in Cold, Neoliberal Times Message-ID: http://fem.icahdq.org/ohana/website/?p=84677204 ___ *Feminism and Intimacy in Cold, Neoliberal Times* *June 21st, 2013 (10 am - 6 pm)* Annual Gender Event, Goldsmiths University of London. Departments of Media and Communication, and SociologyChaired by Angela McRobbie, Sara Ahmed, Beverly Skeggs, Sarah KemberFor detailed information, please visit http://www.gold.ac.uk/calendar/?id=6554 This event will bring prominent feminist researchers and two visual artists together to discuss key dynamics within the field of feminist and queer intimacy studies. We will consider, among other things, the possibility of a cultural politics of love, queer resistances in the ?trans? forming of clinical and therapeutic practice, class relations in changing worlds of intimacy, the politics of care and compassion, the market for ?self-esteem?, mother love, family ?human capital?, and modes of countering the ?insurgent patriarchy? of contemporary neoliberalism. We welcome scholars from the US who are able to speak at Goldsmiths, University of London in connection with the Annual ICA Event. All speakers are keynotes, papers will be 25 minutes in length. 10-11.30 Lynn Jamieson (Edinburgh) New Sociologies of Intimacy Sarah Banet-Weiser (USC) Economies of Visibility and the Market for Self-Esteem Lyndsey Moon (Roehampton) Queer Resistances: ?Trans? forming Clinical and Therapeutic Practice 11.45-1.15 Priya Kapoor (Portland) Susan Douglas (Michigan) Enlightened Sexism meets Enlightened Ageism Andrea Press (Virginia) Feminism LOL Media Culture in a Post-feminist Age 2.00-3.30 Carol Stabile (Oregon) Magic Vaginas: The End of Men and Working Like a Dog Radhika Gajjala (Bowling Green) Digital Subaltern 2.0 Lisa Henderson (Amherst, Mass) Queers and Class 4.00-5.30 Heidi Hoefinger (NDRI, NY) Sex, Love and Money in Cambodia Kerstin Drechsel (Kassel and Berlin) Heat Storage Systems Mary Whilte (Loughborough) Mummy Work 5.30- 6.30 drinks reception. ALL WELCOME ------------------------------ *May 13, 2013* *2013 Teresa Award Ceremony* The Feminist Scholarship Division is delighted to announce that Karen Ross, professor of Media and Public Communication, and director of postgraduate research in the School of the Arts at the University of Liverpool, is the 2013 recipient of the Teresa Award for the Advancement of Feminist Scholarship. The award will be presented during the ICA conference in London at a ceremony and reception to be held Tuesday, June 18, from 6 to 7:15 p.m. at the Hilton Metropole in Hilton Meeting Rooms 16 and 17. Please join us in celebrating Karen's many accomplishments. Karen was chosen for the award from a very competitive field. Both the quality and quantity of her work are truly exceptional -- in the important questions tackled in her research, whether in the context of gendered political communication, media representation, or activism, as well as in her work to advance women in higher education and media organizations. Her commitment to social change as evidenced by her efforts to create a more equitable, inclusive and just academy, her position as the inaugural editor of *Communication, Culture & Critique*, as well as all of her other work on editorial boards and elsewhere, also speak to her status as an internationally renowned and highly respected feminist scholar who has significantly contributed to the advancement of feminist scholarship. The committee is delighted to be able to present this much deserved award to her. We hope you can join us in honoring Karen! I look forward to seeing those of you who can make it in London! All the best, Marian Meyers (on behalf of the Teresa Award Committee) From editor at connexionsjournal.org Tue May 28 22:39:53 2013 From: editor at connexionsjournal.org (connexions journal) Date: Tue, 28 May 2013 23:39:53 -0600 Subject: [Air-L] connexions journal special issues: Call for Guest Editors Message-ID: connexions ? international professional communication journal encourages the development of insightful and innovative topics and approaches on international professional communication through its Special Issues. You are cordially invited to take a leading role in this process by guest editing a special issue of connexions: - *Special Issue 2(2): June 2014* - *Special Issue 3(1): February 2015* - *Special Issue 3(2): June 2015* - *Special Issue 3(3): December 2015* - *Special Issue 4(1): February 2016* - *Special Issue 4(2): June 2016* - *Special Issue 4(3): December 2016* The general requirements for guest editing a special issue of connexions* * are: - Special Issues are organized by a minimum of 2, and a maximum of 3 Guest Editors. - Guest Editors are recognized experts in the area they are proposing for the Special Issue. - Guest Editors are from different institutions and, preferably, from different countries. - Special Issues reflect the international aims and scope of the journal. Therefore, Special Issues include authors from at least 3 countries. The journal publishes four types of articles: - *Original research articles* of 5,000 to 7,000 words of body text (i.e., excluding references, notes, and appendices). - *Review articles* of 3,000 to 5,000 words of body text. - *Focused commentary and industry perspectives articles* of 500 to 3,000 words of body text. - *Teaching cases* of 3,000 to 5,000 words of body text. For further information on special issues requirements, see http://connexionsjournal.org/special-issues/ Please send your proposal for a Special Issue to Ros?rio Dur?o at editor at connexionsjournal.org Thank you for considering organizing a Special Issue for connexions ? international professional communication journal. Ros?rio Dur?o Editor *www.connexionsjournal.org **connexions ?** international professi****onal communication journal *(ISSN 2325-6044) *Department of Communication, Liberal Arts, Social Sciences * *New Mexico Tech ** *** From Noella.Edelmann at donau-uni.ac.at Wed May 29 02:00:54 2013 From: Noella.Edelmann at donau-uni.ac.at (Noella Edelmann) Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 11:00:54 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] CeDEM13: A Summary Message-ID: <51A5DFE6020000DA00048865@gwgwia.donau-uni.ac.at> The CeDEM13 Conference for eDemocracy and Open Government was held 20-23 May 2013 in Krems and saw keynotes held by Beth Noveck, Karine Nahon, Johna Carlo Bertot and Tiago Peixoto. Presenters and attendees came from 23 countries, allowing for interesting conversations and networking opportunities. If you were unable to attend, then you can read the summary on our blog http://digitalgovernment.wordpress.com/2013/05/28/summary-cedem13/ The blog covers all the keynotes, the presenters, the sessions, the ppts.! Or take a look at the photos https://secure.flickr.com/photos/e-governance/sets/72157633602959048/ or and watch the films: http://www.youtube.com/user/eGovernanceKrems CeDEM13 Proceedings The CeDEM13 proceedings will soon be available online (OA) as a pdf, and in book format by the end of summer. We will let you know when they are ready! CeDEM13 and the Open Access eJournal for e-Democracy and Open Government (JeDEM) The best CeDEM13 papers will be published in a special issue of JeDEM later this year. If you are interested in submitting a paper for the current call, please see: http://www.jedem.org/announcement/view/9 Come to CeDEM14! CeDEM14 will be held 21-23 May 2014 in Krems * more details to be found on our website www.donau-uni.ac.at/cedem or stay tuned by following us on @e_society or signing up for our newsletter (http://egov.donau-uni.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/edem). Noella Noella Edelmann BA, MSc, MAS Researcher CeDEM13 Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government www.donau-uni.ac.at/cedem JeDEM eJournal of eDemocracy and Open Government www.jedem.org Digital Government Blog http://digitalgovernment.wordpress.com/ Centre for E-Government Danube University Krems Dr.-Karl-Dorrek-Strasse 30 3500 Krems Austria www.donau-uni.ac.at/egov From ted.coopman at gmail.com Wed May 29 10:07:39 2013 From: ted.coopman at gmail.com (Ted Coopman) Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 10:07:39 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] IR 14 Question Message-ID: All, Has anyone received acceptance/rejection of a panel or roundtable submission? My stand alone paper result came in (out-of-luck) but nothing yet on the roundtable we pitched. -TED -- Ted M. Coopman Ph.D. Lecturer Department of Communication Studies San Jose State University http://www.sjsu.edu/people/ted.coopman/ From tiltons at ohio.edu Wed May 29 10:09:54 2013 From: tiltons at ohio.edu (Tilton, Shane) Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 13:09:54 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] IR 14 Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Nope On May 29, 2013, at 1:07 PM, Ted Coopman wrote: > All, > > Has anyone received acceptance/rejection of a panel or roundtable > submission? My stand alone paper result came in (out-of-luck) but nothing > yet on the roundtable we pitched. > > -TED > > -- > Ted M. Coopman Ph.D. > Lecturer > Department of Communication Studies > San Jose State University > http://www.sjsu.edu/people/ted.coopman/ > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ From sblasi2 at uic.edu Wed May 29 10:11:04 2013 From: sblasi2 at uic.edu (Stacy Blasiola) Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 12:11:04 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: <06be01ce58ea$a578c4f0$f06a4ed0$@uic.edu> References: <06be01ce58ea$a578c4f0$f06a4ed0$@uic.edu> Message-ID: Hi Alex and all, Alex, thanks for your question. I think some great suggestions have been made here. I would add that I believe one of the best ways to impact the conference is by influencing what goes on between conferences. I think organically cultivating relationships through the email lists (and as I mentioned specifically in revamping the grad student list) would help to make the conference less intimating to first time goers, and give people another reason to go (I'd like to meet these people I've been communicating with). To Kelly's point, I really like the idea of appointing individuals to coordinate AoIR meet-ups at other conferences. I think that is a "between the conference" activity that would help further the goals of growing membership, fostering relationships, and generating build up to our own conference that helps get people excited about who we are and what we do. Alex, thanks again for your question. Cheers, Stacy On May 24, 2013 8:53 PM, "Kelly Quinn" wrote: > Hi Alex and all, > > The suggestions from Jeremy, Ruth, Jenny and Darren the conference > activities are great. I'd like to see additional opportunities for our > members to connect with each other too, so I'd like the Exec Board to go a > little further than just 'encourage' our members to get together at other > conferences. I'd like to see us establish an informal group of members who > will be responsible to organize meet-ups at the various major and > not-so-major conferences that our members attend. Informal, because the > sole > responsibility would be to establish a place and time for AoIR-ists to meet > during these other conferences. Group, because to make this work > consistently we need people that attend (or reside in host cities) a > variety > of conferences. This group would simply be charged with opening the AoIR > embrace a little wider; we would have additional opportunities to network > with each other; and we can get more of our members involved. In the past, > a > few key members have taken on this responsibility on their own (thank > you!), > but sharing responsibility among our members to do this on an ongoing and > regular basis will sustain the effort and energy. Putting just a little > structure around the process would give an opportunity for any of our > members to pitch in to make sure these meet-ups take place. > > Since many of the conference dates and acceptances are out by October, we > can collect information and recruit willing volunteers at our annual > meeting. Meet-up information can be published on the listserv and also > posted on the website. While I anticipate that several members would step > up > to this role for the 'greater good,' perhaps the Exec Board might even kick > in an extra drink ticket at the conference banquet for anyone who organized > a meet-up event during the past year ;-) > > Kelly > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 16:25:46 -0700 > From: Alexander Halavais > To: aoir list > Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates > Message-ID: > uCM39JsXP75ES0Hh7Bqspwm-feq6W2tejCJgy47HPZjrw at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Dear AoIR Members (and members of the broader community), > > Just a reminder that AoIR elections are now open, and will be until the end > of the month. I want to encourage all members to vote. There are lots of > ways to help contribute to and shape the future of an organization like > ours, and electing an executive committee that represents your interests is > one of these. > > I have not yet voted and I'm hoping the candidates can answer a question > for me. (And I hope others will ask questions as well, despite the looming > deadline!) > > I've looked over your candidate statements (linked here: > > http://aoir.org/2013-executive-committee-election-candidate-statements-votin > g-information/ > ) > and I recognize and agree with the need to increase connections among > members outside of the conference setting--something that several of you > noted. That said, I wonder what single, concrete change you would most like > to see in the conferences themselves, and how you might suggest bringing > that about. What would you like to see in, say, Bangkok for 2014 that we > haven't seen in previous conferences? (If anything!) And what can you do to > help make that happen? > > Thank you all for running, and I look forward to your responses. > > Best, > > Alex > > > > -- > -- > // > // This email is > // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > // > // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > // http://alex.halavais.net > // > // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. > // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > > > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > From halavais at gmail.com Wed May 29 10:13:53 2013 From: halavais at gmail.com (Alexander Halavais) Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 10:13:53 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] IR 14 Question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Will check on this and make sure they are (re?) sent. Thanks for the note. - Alex On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Tilton, Shane wrote: > Nope > > On May 29, 2013, at 1:07 PM, Ted Coopman wrote: > > > All, > > > > Has anyone received acceptance/rejection of a panel or roundtable > > submission? My stand alone paper result came in (out-of-luck) but nothing > > yet on the roundtable we pitched. > > > > -TED > > > > -- > > Ted M. Coopman Ph.D. > > Lecturer > > Department of Communication Studies > > San Jose State University > > http://www.sjsu.edu/people/ted.coopman/ > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- -- // // This email is // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) From gotved at itu.dk Thu May 30 04:15:47 2013 From: gotved at itu.dk (Stine Gotved) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 11:15:47 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] IR 14 Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: We got notice about panel acceptance on Monday ? :) Stine On 29/05/13 19.13, "Alexander Halavais" wrote: >Will check on this and make sure they are (re?) sent. Thanks for the note. > >- Alex > > > >On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Tilton, Shane wrote: > >> Nope >> >> On May 29, 2013, at 1:07 PM, Ted Coopman wrote: >> >> > All, >> > >> > Has anyone received acceptance/rejection of a panel or roundtable >> > submission? My stand alone paper result came in (out-of-luck) but >>nothing >> > yet on the roundtable we pitched. >> > >> > -TED >> > >> > -- >> > Ted M. Coopman Ph.D. >> > Lecturer >> > Department of Communication Studies >> > San Jose State University >> > http://www.sjsu.edu/people/ted.coopman/ >> > _______________________________________________ >> > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> > >> > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> > http://www.aoir.org/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> http://www.aoir.org/ >> > > > >-- >-- >// >// This email is >// [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. >// [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. >// >// Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur >// http://alex.halavais.net >// >// Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. >// (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) >_______________________________________________ >The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >http://www.aoir.org/ > From tsenft at gmail.com Thu May 30 07:27:02 2013 From: tsenft at gmail.com (Terri Senft) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 10:27:02 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. Message-ID: Hi Pals, With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the list regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of Internet Researchers today. I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I feel personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group these days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR as my intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. Some Big Questions I Have: 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same as organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these organizations? 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it reflected in submission procedures? 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our organization? How do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, necessary or fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and artists really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer used to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as ubiquitous as literature studies. 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases professionalization trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars and its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the boundaries of the field? Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want and leave the rest. Fondly, T -- Dr. Theresa M. Senft Global Liberal Studies Program School of Arts & Sciences New York University 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 home: *www.terrisenft.net ** *(needs a serious updating) facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft twitter: @terrisenft From amarkham at gmail.com Thu May 30 09:04:51 2013 From: amarkham at gmail.com (Annette Markham) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 11:04:51 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Final Call: May 31 deadline for submissions to the doctoral colloquium Message-ID: A reminder that if you (or someone you know) is interested in applying for the doctoral colloquium at this year's AOIR conference, the May 31 deadline is approaching. Here's the call: http://ir14.aoir.org/doctoral-colloquium/ If anyone has questions, please feel free to contact me directly, annette ***************************************************** Annette N. Markham, Ph.D. Guest Professor, Department of Informatics, Ume? University, Sweden Affiliate Professor, School of Communication, Loyola University, Chicago amarkham at gmail.com http://markham.internetinquiry.org/ Twitter: annettemarkham From jhunsinger at wlu.ca Thu May 30 09:12:26 2013 From: jhunsinger at wlu.ca (Jeremy hunsinger) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 12:12:26 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: well, for my part, I'll take some of the old with some of the new. I remember the conference being much more inquisitive, challenging, and playful; scholarly rigor was promoted, but not promoted above inclusion of different perspectives and even strangeness. There was always a risk for the first few years that a panel wouldn't work, or a paper wouldn't really be 'strong' but that risk hasn't gone away with the push toward longer submissions and more rigor, instead it has just been transformed into a more reviewed perspective. In the first few years, I remember having great fun making a list of likely topics, and the lists always had a few humorous ones, the lists were always aimed toward inclusion of topic and discipline, and in my mind they served as recruitment devices, but they also set the tone of the conferences as 'collegial, open, interesting'. I remember regretting the decision to see the topics go, but they were replaced with other ideas. I'm not sure they were better though, either the topics or the new modes of presenting the conferences ideas, both work. I think that for me, AoIR, unlike ICA and AoIR is and should be like friends and family, and future friends. That's been the spirit that i've always approached it with, and granted I know i've grated a few people over the years with my insistence on first names and similar things, but I do think we should be an organizations where a Master's student should be encouraged to talk to the most senior people in the field without recognizing the ever present academic star system and related matters. beyond those points... I think that AoIR has felt significant pressure in the last few years to create an identity for itself that competes with other organizations, but I'm not sure competition is really what we should be after. I think we should aim to be over-arching and umbrella-like, more than unique and separable. I'd rather the thought be promoted that Aoir is the organization that you come to when your discipline, or other conference isn't enough, when you can't get your ideas addressed completely, when you truly need people that are both disciplinary and interdisciplinary, who can be models for success, who can share histories and research projects which will enable future people to do better research, etc. mostly, i see professionalism as a problem centered on the control of knowledge as Ivan Illich taught us ever so long ago, i believe we do have to pay attention to our presentation and we might appear to be professional, but we don't have to BE professional, instead we can be friends and colleagues. From halavais at gmail.com Thu May 30 09:17:18 2013 From: halavais at gmail.com (Alexander Halavais) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 09:17:18 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] Call for Participation: IR14 Preconf on Microcredentials Message-ID: Representing personal history, ability, and reputation online: Microcredentials, badges, endorsements, and other mechanisms With the momentous changes in social media use in professional contexts, and the rapid evolution of learning ecologies and experimentation with different kinds of learning online, the need to present experience and expertise to new communities is now more pressing than ever. The ways in which individuals formally construct their identities for multiple publics is also changing. While the traditional resume or biography remains important, we are finding new ways of explicitly summarizing our traces online and communicating these experiences to various publics. During this half-day pre-conference, attendees will present recently completed work and work in progress that addresses badges, microcredentials, reputation economies, markers of expertise, and related work. Our emphasis will be on empirical work that draws on a range of approaches to understand how reputation, experience, and expertise are made visible, regulated, and shared within online contexts and across contexts. The time will be split between a small number of presentations of more completed work, and thematic discussions around broader questions and research agendas for the area. Thanks to support through the Digital Media and Learning Competition, the pre-conference and lunch is free of charge to participants but there will a limited number of seats. If you are interested in participating, please submit a one-page (max) brief of your research and interests with a brief bio, to Alexander.Halavais at asu.edu by June 15, 2013. -- -- // // This email is // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) From f.attwood at mdx.ac.uk Thu May 30 09:35:49 2013 From: f.attwood at mdx.ac.uk (Feona Attwood) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 17:35:49 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like that before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a proposal in this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into that kind of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that format were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life out of them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which seemed very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be continued. I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. Feona On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: > Hi Pals, > > With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the list > regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of > Internet Researchers today. > > I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I feel > personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group these > days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR as my > intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be > fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. > > Some Big Questions I Have: > > 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same as > organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these > organizations? > > 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it > reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it > reflected in submission procedures? > > 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our organization? How > do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, necessary or > fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? > > 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and artists > really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer used > to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as ubiquitous > as literature studies. > > 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases professionalization > trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars and > its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the boundaries > of the field? > > Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want and > leave the rest. > > > Fondly, > T > > -- > > > > > Dr. Theresa M. Senft > Global Liberal Studies Program > School of Arts & Sciences > New York University > 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 > > home: *www.terrisenft.net ** > *(needs a serious updating) > facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft > twitter: @terrisenft > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving all correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. All incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our digital document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University processed in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered items and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. There are items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not be scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the University. From khillis at email.unc.edu Thu May 30 09:46:02 2013 From: khillis at email.unc.edu (Hillis, Ken) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 16:46:02 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] aoir Message-ID: <2D204A3ABC61C942AFA59CABEC89E4AF56836F25@ITS-MSXMBS4M.ad.unc.edu> Thanks Terri, Feona and others who are raising this very important issue. I, for one, am seriously wondering, after reading the reviews from two panels I agreed to moderate, what AoIR is now about. One panel was accepted and was was rejected, yet both used the now 'discredited' and 'outmoded' format of submission used in previous years, in part because organizers strongly indicated after a flurry of concerned emails many months back that no proposal would be discriminated against if it used the old fomat. Yet this is precisely what did happen--one panel was accepted (with 2 reviews) and the other rejected (with 4 reviews, two of which were glowing and two of which picked the proposal apart on the basis of not conforming to the new format--even as one of them overtly stated her/his discomfort in doing so given the overall conference thematic of resistance/appropriation. I am a humanities scholar who happens to very much respect social science approaches--this is an issue that we, as a department of communication studies (I'm incoming Chair) have been grappling with now for more than two years and we're very much focused on ways that humanities and social science approaches can complement one another. I thought AoIR was about this as well, or at least it seems that it used to be organized along those lines. But, something has changed and proposals that feature 'theory' now run the risk of rejection on the basis of 'poorly conceived' methods, inadequate description of the entire project (that one is working on proposing almost a full year in advance of presenting) and so forth . . . Perhaps enough for now. I *almost never* post a personal type of email to this list. But I am saddened and, yes, even angered, even as I know it's an all volunteer project. Yet it really felt like it was the algorithm making the decisions this time round . . . Ken Ken Hillis Department Chair and Professor of Media and Technology Studies Department of Communication Studies The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3285 USA From halavais at gmail.com Thu May 30 10:09:56 2013 From: halavais at gmail.com (Alexander Halavais) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 10:09:56 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] AoIR & IR14 Deadline Roundup Message-ID: Please mark your calendars with the following deadlines, as relevant: May 31 (Tomorrow!): IR14.0 Doctoral Colloquium application due: http://ir14.aoir.org/doctoral-colloquium/ June 1: AoIR Executive Committee voting complete AT NOON ETD: http://aoir.org/2013-executive-committee-election-candidate-statements-voting-information/ June 15: Deadline for "Representing personal history, ability, and reputation online" pre-conference application: http://ir14.aoir.org/preconference-workshop-representing-personal-history-ability-and-reputation-online/ July 1: Final copy of paper must be uploaded to ConfTool for inclusion in SPIR: http://conftool.com/aoir-ir14/ July 15: IR14.0 Travel Grant applications due: http://aoir.org/ir14-0-travel-grant-applications/ August 1: Earlybird and presenters' deadline for registration. Note that presenters *must* be registered by this date or their presentation will be removed from the program: http://bit.ly/ir14-register August 1: Deadline for Ignite-IR proposals: http://bit.ly/ignite-ir14 August 1: Preconference abstract deadline (for preconferences requiring abstracts): http://ir14.aoir.org/preconference-workshops/ August 20: Preliminary conference schedule available: http://ir14.aoir.org October 23-26: IR14.0 Conference in Denver: http://ir14.aoir.org October 27-28:: #aoircamp: http://ir14.aoir.org/preconference-workshops/ Finally, I encourage you to reserve your room at the Westin as soon as possible. October is a busy conference month for a busy conference town, but more importantly, we have to make our hotel quota or it results in a substantial cost to the Association and its members.Thank you! Best, Alex From bbakiogl at gmail.com Thu May 30 10:13:57 2013 From: bbakiogl at gmail.com (Burcu Bakioglu) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 12:13:57 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] aoir In-Reply-To: <2D204A3ABC61C942AFA59CABEC89E4AF56836F25@ITS-MSXMBS4M.ad.unc.edu> References: <2D204A3ABC61C942AFA59CABEC89E4AF56836F25@ITS-MSXMBS4M.ad.unc.edu> Message-ID: Hi all, I can't speak to the change in culture of AoIR myself, and I am sure this is extremely important too, but what concerns me here is the lack of consistency in the review process. How does one panel/proposal gets reviewed by two reviewers, the other by four? Why are we rejecting some panels based on formatting and others get accepted? I understand that this was the first year that we implemented this, but if mixed signals were given for the submission process (which I'm not sure because I'm not privy to the back-end conversations that may have happened, I just followed the e-mail exchanges and used the new template), then really, it undermines the trust in the whole system. My only 2 cents on the topic, BsB On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Hillis, Ken wrote: > Thanks Terri, Feona and others who are raising this very important issue. > I, for one, am seriously wondering, after reading the reviews from two > panels I agreed to moderate, what AoIR is now about. One panel was accepted > and was was rejected, yet both used the now 'discredited' and 'outmoded' > format of submission used in previous years, in part because organizers > strongly indicated after a flurry of concerned emails many months back that > no proposal would be discriminated against if it used the old fomat. Yet > this is precisely what did happen--one panel was accepted (with 2 reviews) > and the other rejected (with 4 reviews, two of which were glowing and two > of which picked the proposal apart on the basis of not conforming to the > new format--even as one of them overtly stated her/his discomfort in doing > so given the overall conference thematic of resistance/appropriation. > > I am a humanities scholar who happens to very much respect social science > approaches--this is an issue that we, as a department of communication > studies (I'm incoming Chair) have been grappling with now for more than two > years and we're very much focused on ways that humanities and social > science approaches can complement one another. I thought AoIR was about > this as well, or at least it seems that it used to be organized along those > lines. But, something has changed and proposals that feature 'theory' now > run the risk of rejection on the basis of 'poorly conceived' methods, > inadequate description of the entire project (that one is working on > proposing almost a full year in advance of presenting) and so forth . . . > > Perhaps enough for now. I *almost never* post a personal type of email to > this list. But I am saddened and, yes, even angered, even as I know it's an > all volunteer project. Yet it really felt like it was the algorithm making > the decisions this time round . . . > > Ken > > > Ken Hillis > Department Chair and Professor of Media and Technology Studies > Department of Communication Studies > The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill > Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3285 USA > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Thanks, Burcu S. Bakioglu, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Fellow in New Media Lawrence University http://www.palefirer.com -- Come to the dark side, we have cookies! From halavais at gmail.com Thu May 30 10:19:05 2013 From: halavais at gmail.com (Alexander Halavais) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 10:19:05 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> Message-ID: It would be helpful, at least to me, if folks could be more explicit about *what* they objected to in the template. There were no content restrictions. Yes, there were spaces for citations, subtitles, and for a title, but if these were omitted, they were omitted. I am well aware of the power of defaults, but I'm missing what it was about this particular template that makes it difficult. (Yes, I've heard from folks that the word-count was restrictive, but that isn't directly a template issue.) Best, Alex On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Feona Attwood wrote: > Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. > > My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like that before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a proposal in this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into that kind of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that format were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life out of them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which seemed very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be continued. I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. > Feona > > > > On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: > >> Hi Pals, >> >> With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the list >> regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of >> Internet Researchers today. >> >> I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I feel >> personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group these >> days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR as my >> intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be >> fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. >> >> Some Big Questions I Have: >> >> 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same as >> organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these >> organizations? >> >> 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it >> reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it >> reflected in submission procedures? >> >> 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our organization? How >> do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, necessary or >> fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? >> >> 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and artists >> really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer used >> to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as ubiquitous >> as literature studies. >> >> 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases professionalization >> trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars and >> its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the boundaries >> of the field? >> >> Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want and >> leave the rest. >> >> >> Fondly, >> T >> >> -- >> >> >> >> >> Dr. Theresa M. Senft >> Global Liberal Studies Program >> School of Arts & Sciences >> New York University >> 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 >> >> home: *www.terrisenft.net ** >> *(needs a serious updating) >> facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft >> twitter: @terrisenft >> _______________________________________________ >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving all correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. All incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our digital document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. > > If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University processed in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered items and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. There are items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not be scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the University. > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ -- -- // // This email is // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) From amarkham at gmail.com Thu May 30 10:20:44 2013 From: amarkham at gmail.com (Annette Markham) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 12:20:44 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates In-Reply-To: References: <4247BB5C-1CB6-4D2A-A8A0-AA419EA2D00B@vt.edu> <43B2FE49-28C2-46B0-B474-5F2077BD37A0@vt.edu> Message-ID: Hi All, I really appreciate the ongoing conversation among the candidates, and I think Terri has just added another stack of interesting questions to the mix. I figured I better jump in before the conversations get too entangled. Tagging onto Daren's comments about the importance of informal structures, I'll add that I believe there's an important and natural difference between the official organizational structure and the informal organizational culture. While they're not unrelated or separate, I find it useful to make a distinction so that we can think about what we can do as members in addition to (versus) what we ask the Exec Committee to do for us as administrators/leaders. If we want the organization to grow in a certain way, we all have the opportunity to volunteer to help shape or shift it. I personally prefer the loose structure that AOIR has tried to maintain, which allows for a more organic evolution of the organizational culture. Build too much formality, and "good ideas for the moment" can, over time, become boxes we'll struggle to think outside of. I think AOIR has always been open to creative modes of interaction and efforts to socialize new members. I have never found the Executive Committee resistant to a good idea. It seems the system is working pretty well. The events at conferences have shifted quite a lot over the past ten years. This year, too. Based on creative input from members, we're doing at least two things differently at this year's conference that I think move us in the direction that many of the candidates have been talking about in terms of Alex's question. 1) The doctoral colloquium: This year (based on some feedback we've gotten in the past couple of years), I'm planning it somewhat differently: In addition to organizing participants in small groups to discuss their research projects, we'll also have much more time for informal discussion between students and the mentors of their choice. This way, students who really wanted to talk with particular senior scholars could have that opportunity built into the structure of the day. I anticipate it will feel a bit like speed dating..... (incidentally, I believe something like this was done previously, some years ago. Mentors were stationary while students moved around to talk with whomever they chose. Maybe someone who was in attendance could fill in some of the details of that event) The other thing we'll do somewhat differently this year is to connect former with current participants at a small reception at the end of the colloquium where we'll invite previous colloquium mentors and participants to meet and chat with the current group. This may not achieve the outcomes of a more formalized socialization into the organization, but it's certainly intended to add another informal event to the conference that might bring new members into the fold and help connect newer scholars with others in the organization. What I like about the doctoral colloquium is that it can be organized differently each year, depending on who organizes it, the region in which we're holding the conference (which attracts different participants), and so forth. This means it can be adjusted over time without fear of breaking some rule or norm. I appreciate this flexibility and this year will be yet another learning experience to see what seems to work and what doesn't. 2) The new post-conference event called #AOIRcamp: This idea was inspired by Terri's plenary talk at last year's AOIR conference, where she encouraged more expressive forms of writing, more risk taking, etc. The actual plan emerged from various conversations among David Phillips, Terri Senft, Kelly Quinn, Valerie Fazel, Meghan Dougherty, and myself. We want to create a space after the conference where people can brainstorm or network project ideas emerging from their conference experience, participate in writing workshops if desired, get some serious writing accomplished, or simply have some quiet time to gather their post-conference thoughts and write. All this in the beauty of the Rocky Mountains, with the opportunity for socializing, hiking, and soaking in natural hot springs. Basically, after the conference ends, whoever registers for #AOIRcamp will be transported a nearby national park and stay another two nights in park housing. More details will be forthcoming at http://ir14.aoir.org/preconference-workshops/ (and i should note that people will need to pay for their own lodging/food, since this is not a sponsored event). I mention #AOIRcamp here because it's a direct effort to accomplish what many of us are talking about: building the impetus for meeting outside the AOIR conference, creating opportunities for creative, out-of-the-box experiences, and strengthening the AOIR infrastructure to support this sort of activity. So...I guess, in answer to Alex's original question, where he asks what concrete thing we'd change and how, then, I'd say these are two concrete things I'm helping to change. As for how it happens, I think it involves many conversations, brainstorming, planning, listening, and being willing to help do the work of organizing, pitching it, and whatever else it takes to make it happen. ***************************************************** Annette N. Markham, Ph.D. Guest Professor, Department of Informatics, Ume? University, Sweden Affiliate Professor, School of Communication, Loyola University, Chicago amarkham at gmail.com http://markham.internetinquiry.org/ Twitter: annettemarkham On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Brabham, Daren C wrote: > Not sure if Alex meant for candidates for open seats to respond to his > questions, too, or if it was just for the VP candidates...but here it > goes... > > I think the conferences work well as-is, really. The only parts that need > improvement, perhaps, is that some panels struggle to sustain a coherent > theme (i.e., a video game theory panel might have a paper or two that > really are about video game theories, but the other couple of papers are > about other things/theories and use an analysis of a video game to make > their point). It is extremely difficult to somehow group ad hoc papers > together into coherent panels, though, so I'm sure previous program > planners have truly done their best. I don't have an answer for how to make > this kind of thing better, except maybe to encourage whole thematic panels > more...or to consider poster sessions or lightning talk formats for some of > the ill-fitting ad hoc papers...or to maybe just call all of the ad hoc > panels potpourri panels and just include more papers on each of them (5 or > 6 per panel?). > > We are all Internet scholars, and we are all able to find full papers > later (SSRN, emailing presenters personally, or whatever). The value for > this conference, for me, is exposure to many ideas in short formats, and > then good discussion that follows. > > The other value of the conference is the social hour. Informal cocktail > time with colleagues is the best way to find mentors, extend scholarly > conversation, and find allies in the field. I would actually oppose any > more efforts to add new grad student mentoring programming to the > conference. We have the doctoral colloquium, which is great. But really > beyond that there need to be more mixers, more trading of business cards, > more informal conversations between grad students and senior scholars. I > know I would probably not want to be assigned a grad student to mentor > throughout the year, but I would welcome any opportunity to have a beer > with a grad student interested in the things I'm interested in. So, on the > "mentoring grad students" front, I disagree with Jeremy and would like to > see a less formal, more frequent social interaction across ranks than new > panels and programs. That's really how the academy works, and the sooner > the formal boundaries between ranks come down (and > I think formal mentoring arrangements inherently keep these boundaries > up), the better for grad students. > > db > > --- > Daren C. Brabham, Ph.D. > Assistant Professor, School of Journalism & Mass Communication > Editor, Case Studies in Strategic Communication | www.csscjournal.org > University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill > Carroll Hall, CB 3365 > Chapel Hill, NC 27599 > (801) 633-4796 (mobile) > daren.brabham at unc.edu | www.darenbrabham.com > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > From luishestres at gmail.com Thu May 30 10:27:02 2013 From: luishestres at gmail.com (Luis Hestres) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 13:27:02 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> Message-ID: I agree with Feona regarding the proposal format. This year I submitted a paper proposal to AoIR for the first time, and I think the format forced me to make choices about my paper that made it seemed less theoretically nuanced than it actually is. I don't know exactly how it was done in the past, but I would feel much more comfortable submitting to AoIR in the future if I could submit full papers. Of course some reasonable standardization (font size, page limit, citation format, etc.) would be fine, but full paper submissions or something close to it would be ideal. Luis - - - - - Luis E. Hestres Ph.D. candidate | School of Communication | American University More about me at luishestres.com (http://luishestres.com/) or LinkedIn (http://www.linkedin.com/in/hestres) | Follow me on Twitter (https://twitter.com/#!/luishestres/) | My SSRN Author page: http://ssrn.com/author=1820222 "Theoretical critiques are like sociopaths: Their aggressive drives are rarely balanced by constructive instincts." -- From "Caught in a Winding, Snarling Vine: The Structural Bias of Political Process Theory" by Jeff Goodwin and James M. Jasper, Sociological Forum 14(1), 1999 On Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 12:35 PM, Feona Attwood wrote: > Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. > > My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like that before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a proposal in this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into that kind of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that format were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life out of them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which seemed very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be continued. I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. > Feona > > > > On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: > > > Hi Pals, > > > > With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the list > > regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of > > Internet Researchers today. > > > > I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I feel > > personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group these > > days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR as my > > intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be > > fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. > > > > Some Big Questions I Have: > > > > 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same as > > organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these > > organizations? > > > > 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it > > reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it > > reflected in submission procedures? > > > > 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our organization? How > > do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, necessary or > > fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? > > > > 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and artists > > really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer used > > to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as ubiquitous > > as literature studies. > > > > 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases professionalization > > trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars and > > its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the boundaries > > of the field? > > > > Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want and > > leave the rest. > > > > > > Fondly, > > T > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Theresa M. Senft > > Global Liberal Studies Program > > School of Arts & Sciences > > New York University > > 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 > > > > home: *www.terrisenft.net ** > > *(needs a serious updating) > > facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft (http://www.facebook.com/theresa.senft) > > twitter: @terrisenft > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org (mailto:Air-L at listserv.aoir.org) mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving all correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. All incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our digital document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. > > If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University processed in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered items and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. There are items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not be scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the University. > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org (mailto:Air-L at listserv.aoir.org) mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > > From scroeser at gmail.com Thu May 30 10:33:12 2013 From: scroeser at gmail.com (Sky Croeser) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 13:33:12 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> Message-ID: The template seemed to be very much oriented towards a more 'hard science' approach, and towards research which was already completed. Trying to jam more subjective research, or research to be completed in the period between abstract submission and the conference, into the format did not seem to work particularly well. On 30 May 2013 13:19, Alexander Halavais wrote: > It would be helpful, at least to me, if folks could be more explicit > about *what* they objected to in the template. There were no content > restrictions. Yes, there were spaces for citations, subtitles, and for > a title, but if these were omitted, they were omitted. > > I am well aware of the power of defaults, but I'm missing what it was > about this particular template that makes it difficult. (Yes, I've > heard from folks that the word-count was restrictive, but that isn't > directly a template issue.) > > Best, > > Alex > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Feona Attwood > wrote: > > Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had > similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. > > > > My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to > signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like that > before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a proposal in > this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into that kind > of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, > innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that format > were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life out of > them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which seemed > very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission > process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be continued. > I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting > anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. > > Feona > > > > > > > > On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: > > > >> Hi Pals, > >> > >> With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the list > >> regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of > >> Internet Researchers today. > >> > >> I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I > feel > >> personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group these > >> days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR as > my > >> intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be > >> fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. > >> > >> Some Big Questions I Have: > >> > >> 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same as > >> organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these > >> organizations? > >> > >> 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it > >> reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it > >> reflected in submission procedures? > >> > >> 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our organization? > How > >> do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, > necessary or > >> fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? > >> > >> 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and > artists > >> really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer > used > >> to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as > ubiquitous > >> as literature studies. > >> > >> 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases professionalization > >> trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars > and > >> its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the > boundaries > >> of the field? > >> > >> Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want and > >> leave the rest. > >> > >> > >> Fondly, > >> T > >> > >> -- > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Dr. Theresa M. Senft > >> Global Liberal Studies Program > >> School of Arts & Sciences > >> New York University > >> 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 > >> > >> home: *www.terrisenft.net ** > >> *(needs a serious updating) > >> facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft > >> twitter: @terrisenft > >> _______________________________________________ > >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >> > >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > >> http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving all > correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. All > incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our digital > document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. > > > > If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University processed > in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered items > and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. There > are items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not > be scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the > University. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > -- > -- > // > // This email is > // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > // > // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > // http://alex.halavais.net > // > // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. > // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > From jhunsinger at wlu.ca Thu May 30 10:35:53 2013 From: jhunsinger at wlu.ca (Jeremy hunsinger) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 13:35:53 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> Message-ID: I think the problem in part is that it was a template that said it was for a paper, and not a template that said it was for a proposal or abstract. This combined with the required length, added considerably to the lack of clarity. I think we need to go back to the 'those that need to submit full papers for them to count, can submit full papers' but those papers are not automatically submitted for publication, and the other track should be a simple 500 word abstract, or longer panel abstract. the clarity of the two track system was again slightly problematic, but it was inclusive in ways that this system is not On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Alexander Halavais wrote: > It would be helpful, at least to me, if folks could be more explicit > about *what* they objected to in the template. There were no content > restrictions. Yes, there were spaces for citations, subtitles, and for > a title, but if these were omitted, they were omitted. > > I am well aware of the power of defaults, but I'm missing what it was > about this particular template that makes it difficult. (Yes, I've > heard from folks that the word-count was restrictive, but that isn't > directly a template issue.) > > Best, > > Alex > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Feona Attwood > wrote: > > Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had > similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. > > > > My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to > signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like that > before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a proposal in > this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into that kind > of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, > innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that format > were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life out of > them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which seemed > very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission > process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be continued. > I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting > anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. > > Feona > > > > > > > > On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: > > > >> Hi Pals, > >> > >> With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the list > >> regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of > >> Internet Researchers today. > >> > >> I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I > feel > >> personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group these > >> days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR as > my > >> intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be > >> fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. > >> > >> Some Big Questions I Have: > >> > >> 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same as > >> organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these > >> organizations? > >> > >> 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it > >> reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it > >> reflected in submission procedures? > >> > >> 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our organization? > How > >> do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, > necessary or > >> fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? > >> > >> 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and > artists > >> really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer > used > >> to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as > ubiquitous > >> as literature studies. > >> > >> 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases professionalization > >> trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars > and > >> its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the > boundaries > >> of the field? > >> > >> Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want and > >> leave the rest. > >> > >> > >> Fondly, > >> T > >> > >> -- > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Dr. Theresa M. Senft > >> Global Liberal Studies Program > >> School of Arts & Sciences > >> New York University > >> 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 > >> > >> home: *www.terrisenft.net ** > >> *(needs a serious updating) > >> facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft > >> twitter: @terrisenft > >> _______________________________________________ > >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >> > >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > >> http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving all > correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. All > incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our digital > document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. > > > > If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University processed > in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered items > and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. There > are items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not > be scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the > University. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > -- > -- > // > // This email is > // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > // > // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > // http://alex.halavais.net > // > // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. > // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > From soates at umd.edu Thu May 30 10:45:38 2013 From: soates at umd.edu (Sarah Ann Oates) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 17:45:38 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk>, Message-ID: <4D173A5B6FCE2D44BEB003A158461C250A5D81F9@OITMX1006.AD.UMD.EDU> As a content analysis scholar :) I see different threads emerging here.? One is about the changes in the submission format, which apparently both submitters and reviewers found unhelpful on some points. I think it's definitely worth thinking about -- and given the openness and commitment of the AoIR community I think that will be taken on board.? I see two other, more fundamental questions.? First, is the annual conference now over-capacity and is it time for the grass-roots to start to form regional groups? I, for one, would really welcome this. I think one of the problems of the conference is the huge interest in the field and how effectively AoIR has harnessed that energy. It just won't fit in one annual conference any more. I got rejected last year (there! it's out there!) but when I saw the program I could see how much was crammed into the conference. There are just so many scholars who can benefit from going to the conference -- people like me who started in the pre-internet era and are trying to study it as well as 'digital natives'. And I think there is a enormous amount of value in the interchange between those two groups.? Second, here's the tougher questions. Academic conferences work in a particular way -- they tend to consolidate disciplines and their networks. This is a good thing, but it can also become a relatively narrow way of exchanging information in the internet era. So is the AoIR conference supposed to be a traditional academic conference, a hybrid of traditional academic conference proceedings and new ways of presenting information, or some altogether new way of sharing and expanding knowledge? Are we too wedded to 'traditional' ways of doing things? For example, why not put paper proposals up on line and have the list and/or some other constituency vote on them? OK, that may be freaking some people out but I think it might be time for a serious reflection on gatekeeping -- as well as the incredible amount of free labor that goes into reviewing proposals.? All that being said, the AoIR list is the single most valuable resource in my internet research. So it's amazing even as it faces these new challenges.? Sarah? Sarah Oates Professor and Senior Scholar Philip Merrill College of Journalism 2100L John S. and James L. Knight Hall University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742-7111 phone: +1 301 405 4510 Email: soates at umd.edu ________________________________________ From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] on behalf of Luis Hestres [luishestres at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 1:27 PM To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. I agree with Feona regarding the proposal format. This year I submitted a paper proposal to AoIR for the first time, and I think the format forced me to make choices about my paper that made it seemed less theoretically nuanced than it actually is. I don't know exactly how it was done in the past, but I would feel much more comfortable submitting to AoIR in the future if I could submit full papers. Of course some reasonable standardization (font size, page limit, citation format, etc.) would be fine, but full paper submissions or something close to it would be ideal. Luis - - - - - Luis E. Hestres Ph.D. candidate | School of Communication | American University More about me at luishestres.com (http://luishestres.com/) or LinkedIn (http://www.linkedin.com/in/hestres) | Follow me on Twitter (https://twitter.com/#!/luishestres/) | My SSRN Author page: http://ssrn.com/author=1820222 "Theoretical critiques are like sociopaths: Their aggressive drives are rarely balanced by constructive instincts." -- From "Caught in a Winding, Snarling Vine: The Structural Bias of Political Process Theory" by Jeff Goodwin and James M. Jasper, Sociological Forum 14(1), 1999 On Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 12:35 PM, Feona Attwood wrote: > Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. > > My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like that before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a proposal in this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into that kind of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that format were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life out of them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which seemed very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be continued. I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. > Feona > > > > On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: > > > Hi Pals, > > > > With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the list > > regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of > > Internet Researchers today. > > > > I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I feel > > personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group these > > days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR as my > > intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be > > fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. > > > > Some Big Questions I Have: > > > > 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same as > > organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these > > organizations? > > > > 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it > > reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it > > reflected in submission procedures? > > > > 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our organization? How > > do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, necessary or > > fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? > > > > 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and artists > > really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer used > > to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as ubiquitous > > as literature studies. > > > > 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases professionalization > > trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars and > > its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the boundaries > > of the field? > > > > Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want and > > leave the rest. > > > > > > Fondly, > > T > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > Dr. Theresa M. Senft > > Global Liberal Studies Program > > School of Arts & Sciences > > New York University > > 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 > > > > home: *www.terrisenft.net ** > > *(needs a serious updating) > > facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft (http://www.facebook.com/theresa.senft) > > twitter: @terrisenft > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org (mailto:Air-L at listserv.aoir.org) mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving all correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. All incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our digital document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. > > If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University processed in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered items and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. There are items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not be scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the University. > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org (mailto:Air-L at listserv.aoir.org) mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > > _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From halavais at gmail.com Thu May 30 11:00:22 2013 From: halavais at gmail.com (Alexander Halavais) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 11:00:22 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> Message-ID: OK, so I want to separate the word-count issue from the template issue, because they are divisible and too easily conflated. TEMPLATE On the template issue: we've been through this once before, but the reason the template exists is to give some structure for proceedings. I made the argument--and have made the argument since I ran for VP--that I wanted what goes on at AoIR to reach a wider audience, and to spread beyond those who can attend the conference each year. Many of you running for Exec have expressed a similar interest, and have proposed various mechanisms for accomplishing this. For me, getting our work out in some form so that it was findable on the web was important. The template exists because to be able to find and use stuff in a collection, it is easier if there is some structural similarity--you know where to find the title, the author, etc. There is nothing, at least to my mind, that says "hard science" in that. Yes, there was a format for subtitles (in case it's not obvious from this email, I quite like subtitles), and tables, etc., but none of this required their use. Maybe the issue is APA for the citation style? I frankly couldn't care less about citation styles, and didn't pick it. This seemed to be the most common style used in most previous IR conferences, but that doesn't mean it should predominate. I don't see why it can't be "use whatever you want as long as it is findable"--APA was arbitrary. Perhaps that is what signals "hard science"? Would, by contrast, MLA or Chicago then signal "Humanities"? I think there is value in getting our work out there. I think asking people to share what they do at AoIR is valuable. I suspect that a number of others do too. But I think there should also be options for not sharing. It may be (with deep apologies to Suely and Andrew, who have invested a lot of time and effort here) that SPIR just isn't worthy of ongoing support. WORD COUNT On the word count issue: One of the reason I've separated these is that I've heard largely support for the longer limits, with a few grumblings about 1,200 being too short. We've had a number of restrictions in the past, ranging from 250 to 1000. What I've heard consistently during my 8 years on Exec is people saying that it's hard to judge work based on two or three paragraphs alone, and that this results a bad refereeing process. I think the 500 word limit favors those who can write good abstracts. I count myself in that number--my longer work may not be that great, but I write an awesome 500 word abstract. That said, there were no such limits on roundtables, and some of the proposals were quite short. We have allowed full papers for the last couple (three?) years, but the number of papers submitted was vanishingly small, and a nine-thousand word paper requires a disproportionate amount of reviewer time. REVIEWING Finally, on the issue of reviews, I want to thank those who volunteered to review this year. I'll note that many of you did not, meaning that (a) your expertise was missing when it came to assign reviews and (b) the reviewers who were assigned often had more reviews than we have assigned in the past. I agree we need to provide better guidance to reviewers, and some of you (reviewers and authors) will hear from me soon about helping shape that process. But the first step is to be willing to put time into reviewing. I just want to be very clear that there was a range of excellent reviewing and reviewing that could have been much better, from a range of early-career scholars and more experienced reviewers. Regardless of this, I think our reviewers deserve a significant amount of praise and respect for volunteering to review. Alex On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Jeremy hunsinger wrote: > I think the problem in part is that it was a template that said it was for a > paper, and not a template that said it was for a proposal or abstract. > This combined with the required length, added considerably to the lack of > clarity. I think we need to go back to the 'those that need to submit full > papers for them to count, can submit full papers' but those papers are not > automatically submitted for publication, and the other track should be a > simple 500 word abstract, or longer panel abstract. the clarity of the two > track system was again slightly problematic, but it was inclusive in ways > that this system is not > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Alexander Halavais > wrote: >> >> It would be helpful, at least to me, if folks could be more explicit >> about *what* they objected to in the template. There were no content >> restrictions. Yes, there were spaces for citations, subtitles, and for >> a title, but if these were omitted, they were omitted. >> >> I am well aware of the power of defaults, but I'm missing what it was >> about this particular template that makes it difficult. (Yes, I've >> heard from folks that the word-count was restrictive, but that isn't >> directly a template issue.) >> >> Best, >> >> Alex >> >> >> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Feona Attwood >> wrote: >> > Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had >> > similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. >> > >> > My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to >> > signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like that >> > before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a proposal in >> > this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into that kind >> > of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, >> > innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that format >> > were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life out of >> > them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which seemed >> > very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission >> > process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be continued. >> > I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting >> > anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. >> > Feona >> > >> > >> > >> > On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: >> > >> >> Hi Pals, >> >> >> >> With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the >> >> list >> >> regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of >> >> Internet Researchers today. >> >> >> >> I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I >> >> feel >> >> personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group these >> >> days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR as >> >> my >> >> intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be >> >> fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. >> >> >> >> Some Big Questions I Have: >> >> >> >> 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same as >> >> organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these >> >> organizations? >> >> >> >> 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it >> >> reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it >> >> reflected in submission procedures? >> >> >> >> 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our organization? >> >> How >> >> do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, >> >> necessary or >> >> fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? >> >> >> >> 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and >> >> artists >> >> really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer >> >> used >> >> to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as >> >> ubiquitous >> >> as literature studies. >> >> >> >> 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases >> >> professionalization >> >> trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars >> >> and >> >> its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the >> >> boundaries >> >> of the field? >> >> >> >> Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want and >> >> leave the rest. >> >> >> >> >> >> Fondly, >> >> T >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Dr. Theresa M. Senft >> >> Global Liberal Studies Program >> >> School of Arts & Sciences >> >> New York University >> >> 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 >> >> >> >> home: *www.terrisenft.net ** >> >> *(needs a serious updating) >> >> facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft >> >> twitter: @terrisenft >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> >> http://www.aoir.org/ >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > >> > >> > Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving all >> > correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. All >> > incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our digital >> > document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. >> > >> > If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University processed >> > in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered items >> > and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. There are >> > items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not be >> > scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the University. >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> > >> > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> > http://www.aoir.org/ >> >> >> >> -- >> -- >> // >> // This email is >> // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. >> // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. >> // >> // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur >> // http://alex.halavais.net >> // >> // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. >> // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) >> _______________________________________________ >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> http://www.aoir.org/ > > -- -- // // This email is // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) From rueduardo2000 at hotmail.com Thu May 30 11:09:15 2013 From: rueduardo2000 at hotmail.com (eduardo erazo acosta) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 18:09:15 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: , <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk>, , , Message-ID: Good Day, I researcher in education and Internet in Colombia Can anyone tell me if there are scholarships for travel? and power particuipar speaker at the conference this year?? THANKS ?? ::::::::::::::::: > Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 11:00:22 -0700 > From: halavais at gmail.com > To: jhunsinger at wlu.ca > CC: > Subject: Re: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. > > OK, so I want to separate the word-count issue from the template > issue, because they are divisible and too easily conflated. > > TEMPLATE > > On the template issue: we've been through this once before, but the > reason the template exists is to give some structure for proceedings. > I made the argument--and have made the argument since I ran for > VP--that I wanted what goes on at AoIR to reach a wider audience, and > to spread beyond those who can attend the conference each year. Many > of you running for Exec have expressed a similar interest, and have > proposed various mechanisms for accomplishing this. For me, getting > our work out in some form so that it was findable on the web was > important. > > The template exists because to be able to find and use stuff in a > collection, it is easier if there is some structural similarity--you > know where to find the title, the author, etc. There is nothing, at > least to my mind, that says "hard science" in that. Yes, there was a > format for subtitles (in case it's not obvious from this email, I > quite like subtitles), and tables, etc., but none of this required > their use. > > Maybe the issue is APA for the citation style? I frankly couldn't care > less about citation styles, and didn't pick it. This seemed to be the > most common style used in most previous IR conferences, but that > doesn't mean it should predominate. I don't see why it can't be "use > whatever you want as long as it is findable"--APA was arbitrary. > Perhaps that is what signals "hard science"? Would, by contrast, MLA > or Chicago then signal "Humanities"? > > I think there is value in getting our work out there. I think asking > people to share what they do at AoIR is valuable. I suspect that a > number of others do too. But I think there should also be options for > not sharing. It may be (with deep apologies to Suely and Andrew, who > have invested a lot of time and effort here) that SPIR just isn't > worthy of ongoing support. > > WORD COUNT > > On the word count issue: One of the reason I've separated these is > that I've heard largely support for the longer limits, with a few > grumblings about 1,200 being too short. We've had a number of > restrictions in the past, ranging from 250 to 1000. What I've heard > consistently during my 8 years on Exec is people saying that it's hard > to judge work based on two or three paragraphs alone, and that this > results a bad refereeing process. I think the 500 word limit favors > those who can write good abstracts. I count myself in that number--my > longer work may not be that great, but I write an awesome 500 word > abstract. That said, there were no such limits on roundtables, and > some of the proposals were quite short. > > We have allowed full papers for the last couple (three?) years, but > the number of papers submitted was vanishingly small, and a > nine-thousand word paper requires a disproportionate amount of > reviewer time. > > REVIEWING > > Finally, on the issue of reviews, I want to thank those who > volunteered to review this year. I'll note that many of you did not, > meaning that (a) your expertise was missing when it came to assign > reviews and (b) the reviewers who were assigned often had more reviews > than we have assigned in the past. I agree we need to provide better > guidance to reviewers, and some of you (reviewers and authors) will > hear from me soon about helping shape that process. But the first step > is to be willing to put time into reviewing. > > I just want to be very clear that there was a range of excellent > reviewing and reviewing that could have been much better, from a range > of early-career scholars and more experienced reviewers. Regardless of > this, I think our reviewers deserve a significant amount of praise and > respect for volunteering to review. > > Alex > > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Jeremy hunsinger wrote: > > I think the problem in part is that it was a template that said it was for a > > paper, and not a template that said it was for a proposal or abstract. > > This combined with the required length, added considerably to the lack of > > clarity. I think we need to go back to the 'those that need to submit full > > papers for them to count, can submit full papers' but those papers are not > > automatically submitted for publication, and the other track should be a > > simple 500 word abstract, or longer panel abstract. the clarity of the two > > track system was again slightly problematic, but it was inclusive in ways > > that this system is not > > > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Alexander Halavais > > wrote: > >> > >> It would be helpful, at least to me, if folks could be more explicit > >> about *what* they objected to in the template. There were no content > >> restrictions. Yes, there were spaces for citations, subtitles, and for > >> a title, but if these were omitted, they were omitted. > >> > >> I am well aware of the power of defaults, but I'm missing what it was > >> about this particular template that makes it difficult. (Yes, I've > >> heard from folks that the word-count was restrictive, but that isn't > >> directly a template issue.) > >> > >> Best, > >> > >> Alex > >> > >> > >> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Feona Attwood > >> wrote: > >> > Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had > >> > similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. > >> > > >> > My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to > >> > signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like that > >> > before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a proposal in > >> > this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into that kind > >> > of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, > >> > innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that format > >> > were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life out of > >> > them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which seemed > >> > very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission > >> > process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be continued. > >> > I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting > >> > anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. > >> > Feona > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: > >> > > >> >> Hi Pals, > >> >> > >> >> With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the > >> >> list > >> >> regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of > >> >> Internet Researchers today. > >> >> > >> >> I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I > >> >> feel > >> >> personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group these > >> >> days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR as > >> >> my > >> >> intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be > >> >> fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. > >> >> > >> >> Some Big Questions I Have: > >> >> > >> >> 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same as > >> >> organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these > >> >> organizations? > >> >> > >> >> 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it > >> >> reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it > >> >> reflected in submission procedures? > >> >> > >> >> 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our organization? > >> >> How > >> >> do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, > >> >> necessary or > >> >> fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? > >> >> > >> >> 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and > >> >> artists > >> >> really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer > >> >> used > >> >> to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as > >> >> ubiquitous > >> >> as literature studies. > >> >> > >> >> 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases > >> >> professionalization > >> >> trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars > >> >> and > >> >> its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the > >> >> boundaries > >> >> of the field? > >> >> > >> >> Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want and > >> >> leave the rest. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Fondly, > >> >> T > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Dr. Theresa M. Senft > >> >> Global Liberal Studies Program > >> >> School of Arts & Sciences > >> >> New York University > >> >> 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 > >> >> > >> >> home: *www.terrisenft.net ** > >> >> *(needs a serious updating) > >> >> facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft > >> >> twitter: @terrisenft > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > >> >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > >> >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > >> >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >> >> > >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > >> >> http://www.aoir.org/ > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > >> > > >> > Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving all > >> > correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. All > >> > incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our digital > >> > document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. > >> > > >> > If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University processed > >> > in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered items > >> > and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. There are > >> > items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not be > >> > scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the University. > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > >> > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > >> > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > >> > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >> > > >> > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > >> > http://www.aoir.org/ > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> -- > >> // > >> // This email is > >> // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > >> // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > >> // > >> // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > >> // http://alex.halavais.net > >> // > >> // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. > >> // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > >> _______________________________________________ > >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >> > >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > >> http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > > > > -- > -- > // > // This email is > // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > // > // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > // http://alex.halavais.net > // > // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. > // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ From halavais at gmail.com Thu May 30 11:12:19 2013 From: halavais at gmail.com (Alexander Halavais) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 11:12:19 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: <4D173A5B6FCE2D44BEB003A158461C250A5D81F9@OITMX1006.AD.UMD.EDU> References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> <4D173A5B6FCE2D44BEB003A158461C250A5D81F9@OITMX1006.AD.UMD.EDU> Message-ID: +1 to open review and freaking people out--together or separately. If there are others who want to see what we can do on this front, I'd be interested in talking with you. It may not work for everyone, but I'd at least love to see a track that is open-reviewed. - A On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Sarah Ann Oates wrote: > As a content analysis scholar :) I see different threads emerging here. > > One is about the changes in the submission format, which apparently both submitters and reviewers found unhelpful on some points. I think it's definitely worth thinking about -- and given the openness and commitment of the AoIR community I think that will be taken on board. > > I see two other, more fundamental questions. > > First, is the annual conference now over-capacity and is it time for the grass-roots to start to form regional groups? I, for one, would really welcome this. I think one of the problems of the conference is the huge interest in the field and how effectively AoIR has harnessed that energy. It just won't fit in one annual conference any more. I got rejected last year (there! it's out there!) but when I saw the program I could see how much was crammed into the conference. There are just so many scholars who can benefit from going to the conference -- people like me who started in the pre-internet era and are trying to study it as well as 'digital natives'. And I think there is a enormous amount of value in the interchange between those two groups. > > Second, here's the tougher questions. Academic conferences work in a particular way -- they tend to consolidate disciplines and their networks. This is a good thing, but it can also become a relatively narrow way of exchanging information in the internet era. So is the AoIR conference supposed to be a traditional academic conference, a hybrid of traditional academic conference proceedings and new ways of presenting information, or some altogether new way of sharing and expanding knowledge? Are we too wedded to 'traditional' ways of doing things? For example, why not put paper proposals up on line and have the list and/or some other constituency vote on them? OK, that may be freaking some people out but I think it might be time for a serious reflection on gatekeeping -- as well as the incredible amount of free labor that goes into reviewing proposals. > > All that being said, the AoIR list is the single most valuable resource in my internet research. So it's amazing even as it faces these new challenges. > > Sarah > > Sarah Oates > Professor and Senior Scholar > Philip Merrill College of Journalism > 2100L John S. and James L. Knight Hall > University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742-7111 > phone: +1 301 405 4510 > > Email: soates at umd.edu > ________________________________________ > From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] on behalf of Luis Hestres [luishestres at gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 1:27 PM > To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org > Subject: Re: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. > > I agree with Feona regarding the proposal format. This year I submitted a paper proposal to AoIR for the first time, and I think the format forced me to make choices about my paper that made it seemed less theoretically nuanced than it actually is. I don't know exactly how it was done in the past, but I would feel much more comfortable submitting to AoIR in the future if I could submit full papers. Of course some reasonable standardization (font size, page limit, citation format, etc.) would be fine, but full paper submissions or something close to it would be ideal. > > Luis > > - - - - - > Luis E. Hestres > Ph.D. candidate | School of Communication | American University > More about me at luishestres.com (http://luishestres.com/) or LinkedIn (http://www.linkedin.com/in/hestres) | Follow me on Twitter (https://twitter.com/#!/luishestres/) | My SSRN Author page: http://ssrn.com/author=1820222 > "Theoretical critiques are like sociopaths: Their aggressive drives are rarely balanced by constructive instincts." > -- From "Caught in a Winding, Snarling Vine: The Structural Bias of Political Process Theory" by Jeff Goodwin and James M. Jasper, Sociological Forum 14(1), 1999 > > > On Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 12:35 PM, Feona Attwood wrote: > >> Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. >> >> My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like that before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a proposal in this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into that kind of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that format were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life out of them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which seemed very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be continued. I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. >> Feona >> >> >> >> On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: >> >> > Hi Pals, >> > >> > With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the list >> > regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of >> > Internet Researchers today. >> > >> > I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I feel >> > personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group these >> > days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR as my >> > intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be >> > fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. >> > >> > Some Big Questions I Have: >> > >> > 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same as >> > organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these >> > organizations? >> > >> > 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it >> > reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it >> > reflected in submission procedures? >> > >> > 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our organization? How >> > do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, necessary or >> > fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? >> > >> > 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and artists >> > really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer used >> > to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as ubiquitous >> > as literature studies. >> > >> > 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases professionalization >> > trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars and >> > its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the boundaries >> > of the field? >> > >> > Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want and >> > leave the rest. >> > >> > >> > Fondly, >> > T >> > >> > -- >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Dr. Theresa M. Senft >> > Global Liberal Studies Program >> > School of Arts & Sciences >> > New York University >> > 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 >> > >> > home: *www.terrisenft.net ** >> > *(needs a serious updating) >> > facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft (http://www.facebook.com/theresa.senft) >> > twitter: @terrisenft >> > _______________________________________________ >> > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org (mailto:Air-L at listserv.aoir.org) mailing list >> > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> > >> > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> > http://www.aoir.org/ >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving all correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. All incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our digital document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. >> >> If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University processed in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered items and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. There are items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not be scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the University. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org (mailto:Air-L at listserv.aoir.org) mailing list >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> http://www.aoir.org/ >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ -- -- // // This email is // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) From halavais at gmail.com Thu May 30 11:16:54 2013 From: halavais at gmail.com (Alexander Halavais) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 11:16:54 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] Travel grants (was: Let's talk about AoIR) Message-ID: Hello, Eduardo: There is a small travel grant available, which will not cover travel from most places but may help. And those applying from Asia, Africa, and South America are particularly targeted. More information here: http://aoir.org/ir14-0-travel-grant-applications/ A list of our keynote and plenaries may be found here: http://ir14.aoir.org/speakers/ Hope to see you in Denver. Best, Alex On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:09 AM, eduardo erazo acosta wrote: > Good Day, > > I researcher in education and Internet in Colombia > > Can anyone tell me if there are scholarships for travel? > > and power particuipar speaker at the conference this year?? > > THANKS ?? > > ::::::::::::::::: > > >> Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 11:00:22 -0700 >> From: halavais at gmail.com >> To: jhunsinger at wlu.ca >> CC: >> Subject: Re: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. >> >> OK, so I want to separate the word-count issue from the template >> issue, because they are divisible and too easily conflated. >> >> TEMPLATE >> >> On the template issue: we've been through this once before, but the >> reason the template exists is to give some structure for proceedings. >> I made the argument--and have made the argument since I ran for >> VP--that I wanted what goes on at AoIR to reach a wider audience, and >> to spread beyond those who can attend the conference each year. Many >> of you running for Exec have expressed a similar interest, and have >> proposed various mechanisms for accomplishing this. For me, getting >> our work out in some form so that it was findable on the web was >> important. >> >> The template exists because to be able to find and use stuff in a >> collection, it is easier if there is some structural similarity--you >> know where to find the title, the author, etc. There is nothing, at >> least to my mind, that says "hard science" in that. Yes, there was a >> format for subtitles (in case it's not obvious from this email, I >> quite like subtitles), and tables, etc., but none of this required >> their use. >> >> Maybe the issue is APA for the citation style? I frankly couldn't care >> less about citation styles, and didn't pick it. This seemed to be the >> most common style used in most previous IR conferences, but that >> doesn't mean it should predominate. I don't see why it can't be "use >> whatever you want as long as it is findable"--APA was arbitrary. >> Perhaps that is what signals "hard science"? Would, by contrast, MLA >> or Chicago then signal "Humanities"? >> >> I think there is value in getting our work out there. I think asking >> people to share what they do at AoIR is valuable. I suspect that a >> number of others do too. But I think there should also be options for >> not sharing. It may be (with deep apologies to Suely and Andrew, who >> have invested a lot of time and effort here) that SPIR just isn't >> worthy of ongoing support. >> >> WORD COUNT >> >> On the word count issue: One of the reason I've separated these is >> that I've heard largely support for the longer limits, with a few >> grumblings about 1,200 being too short. We've had a number of >> restrictions in the past, ranging from 250 to 1000. What I've heard >> consistently during my 8 years on Exec is people saying that it's hard >> to judge work based on two or three paragraphs alone, and that this >> results a bad refereeing process. I think the 500 word limit favors >> those who can write good abstracts. I count myself in that number--my >> longer work may not be that great, but I write an awesome 500 word >> abstract. That said, there were no such limits on roundtables, and >> some of the proposals were quite short. >> >> We have allowed full papers for the last couple (three?) years, but >> the number of papers submitted was vanishingly small, and a >> nine-thousand word paper requires a disproportionate amount of >> reviewer time. >> >> REVIEWING >> >> Finally, on the issue of reviews, I want to thank those who >> volunteered to review this year. I'll note that many of you did not, >> meaning that (a) your expertise was missing when it came to assign >> reviews and (b) the reviewers who were assigned often had more reviews >> than we have assigned in the past. I agree we need to provide better >> guidance to reviewers, and some of you (reviewers and authors) will >> hear from me soon about helping shape that process. But the first step >> is to be willing to put time into reviewing. >> >> I just want to be very clear that there was a range of excellent >> reviewing and reviewing that could have been much better, from a range >> of early-career scholars and more experienced reviewers. Regardless of >> this, I think our reviewers deserve a significant amount of praise and >> respect for volunteering to review. >> >> Alex >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Jeremy hunsinger >> wrote: >> > I think the problem in part is that it was a template that said it was >> > for a >> > paper, and not a template that said it was for a proposal or abstract. >> > This combined with the required length, added considerably to the lack >> > of >> > clarity. I think we need to go back to the 'those that need to submit >> > full >> > papers for them to count, can submit full papers' but those papers are >> > not >> > automatically submitted for publication, and the other track should be a >> > simple 500 word abstract, or longer panel abstract. the clarity of the >> > two >> > track system was again slightly problematic, but it was inclusive in >> > ways >> > that this system is not >> > >> > >> > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Alexander Halavais >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> It would be helpful, at least to me, if folks could be more explicit >> >> about *what* they objected to in the template. There were no content >> >> restrictions. Yes, there were spaces for citations, subtitles, and for >> >> a title, but if these were omitted, they were omitted. >> >> >> >> I am well aware of the power of defaults, but I'm missing what it was >> >> about this particular template that makes it difficult. (Yes, I've >> >> heard from folks that the word-count was restrictive, but that isn't >> >> directly a template issue.) >> >> >> >> Best, >> >> >> >> Alex >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Feona Attwood >> >> wrote: >> >> > Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had >> >> > similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. >> >> > >> >> > My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to >> >> > signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like >> >> > that >> >> > before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a >> >> > proposal in >> >> > this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into >> >> > that kind >> >> > of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, >> >> > innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that >> >> > format >> >> > were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life >> >> > out of >> >> > them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which >> >> > seemed >> >> > very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission >> >> > process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be >> >> > continued. >> >> > I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting >> >> > anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. >> >> > Feona >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> Hi Pals, >> >> >> >> >> >> With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the >> >> >> list >> >> >> regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of >> >> >> Internet Researchers today. >> >> >> >> >> >> I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, >> >> >> I >> >> >> feel >> >> >> personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group >> >> >> these >> >> >> days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR >> >> >> as >> >> >> my >> >> >> intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be >> >> >> fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. >> >> >> >> >> >> Some Big Questions I Have: >> >> >> >> >> >> 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same >> >> >> as >> >> >> organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these >> >> >> organizations? >> >> >> >> >> >> 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is >> >> >> it >> >> >> reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it >> >> >> reflected in submission procedures? >> >> >> >> >> >> 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our >> >> >> organization? >> >> >> How >> >> >> do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, >> >> >> necessary or >> >> >> fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? >> >> >> >> >> >> 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and >> >> >> artists >> >> >> really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My >> >> >> answer >> >> >> used >> >> >> to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as >> >> >> ubiquitous >> >> >> as literature studies. >> >> >> >> >> >> 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases >> >> >> professionalization >> >> >> trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest >> >> >> scholars >> >> >> and >> >> >> its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the >> >> >> boundaries >> >> >> of the field? >> >> >> >> >> >> Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want >> >> >> and >> >> >> leave the rest. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Fondly, >> >> >> T >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Dr. Theresa M. Senft >> >> >> Global Liberal Studies Program >> >> >> School of Arts & Sciences >> >> >> New York University >> >> >> 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 >> >> >> >> >> >> home: *www.terrisenft.net ** >> >> >> *(needs a serious updating) >> >> >> facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft >> >> >> twitter: @terrisenft >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> >> >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers >> >> >> http://aoir.org >> >> >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> >> >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> >> >> >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> >> >> http://www.aoir.org/ >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving >> >> > all >> >> > correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. >> >> > All >> >> > incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our >> >> > digital >> >> > document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. >> >> > >> >> > If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University >> >> > processed >> >> > in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered >> >> > items >> >> > and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. >> >> > There are >> >> > items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not >> >> > be >> >> > scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the >> >> > University. >> >> > >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> >> > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers >> >> > http://aoir.org >> >> > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> >> > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> > >> >> > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> >> > http://www.aoir.org/ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> -- >> >> // >> >> // This email is >> >> // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. >> >> // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. >> >> // >> >> // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur >> >> // http://alex.halavais.net >> >> // >> >> // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. >> >> // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> >> http://www.aoir.org/ >> > >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> -- >> // >> // This email is >> // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. >> // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. >> // >> // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur >> // http://alex.halavais.net >> // >> // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. >> // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) >> _______________________________________________ >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> http://www.aoir.org/ -- -- // // This email is // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) From tsenft at gmail.com Thu May 30 11:20:25 2013 From: tsenft at gmail.com (Terri Senft) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 14:20:25 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> Message-ID: Alex, My objections (which I've already articulated in the past) weren't with the template, but with the set out on the AoIR 13 Conference page, which laid at the paper proposal guidelines as follows: - Description/summary of the work's intellectual merit with respect to its findings, its relation to extant research and its broader impacts. - A description of the methodological approach or the theoretical underpinnings informing the research inquiry. - Conclusions or discussion of findings. ------------------------------------------------- Conclusions? Findings? In a paper proposed in January and delivered in October? You don't need to be a Foucault scholar to understand how that forecloses all sorts of projects, including ones that are activist, performance-oriented, involve collaboration with communities in flux, and so forth. Last year during a plenary talk for this very organization, I asked when we would hear from the Roland Barthes of Internet Studies. Under this sort of structure, I don't even think McLuhan would stand a chance. Thinkers this interesting just don't even want to play in the "Live Act my Finished Paper" sandbox. __________________________________________ Now, to the oft-suggested idea that interesting thinkers take their work to the preconference/workshop/roundtable/fishbowl/hamster wheel margins: I am actually okay with this. In fact, I tried it this year. I begin with the guidelines as stated. ROUNDTABLE and FISHBOWL PROPOSALS ? submit a statement indicating the nature of the discussion and form of interaction, and listing initial participants. Below are the responses I received for a proposal for a roundtable on the deployment of the term "slut" online, that pulled together a group of internationally recognized experts on teen sexuality education, global sex work, anti-racist activism, gaming cultures, and law. Roughly 80 percent of these individuals had never been to an AoIR conference before. Comments for the authors ------------------------ Review 1 In theory, a panel on this topic could be quite interesting but there is only an abstract provided, not a full proposal using the template, and it says very little about exactly what the panel will contain or its specific relevance to AOIR - it's just a very underdeveloped proposal. Review 2 I absolutely feel like a conversation about the role of social media in framing and negotiating sexual recognition and subjectivity NEEDS to be at IR14.0. My only concern: the connections between U.S./North American practices and other(ed) global practices seems tenuous and a bit unclear through the discussion. I would encourage participants to work on bringing these ties to the forefront to frame the discussion a bit more clearly. Review 3 The various phenomena you chose to discuss are very interesting and significant for various areas; however, I'm concerned that your proposal still stays on the surface level, focusing on describing the phenomena but not interpreting them. I'd like to know what sets of theories you are going to use to frame your discussion, and how you will do that. I'm also interested in learning how you would approach these phenomena with a cross-cultural angle. For example, how did you get the cross-cultural data? What sampling procedures are you going to use here? _____________ Now, I can see one reviewers mistaking my roundtable submission for a panel, but two out of three doing that? I'm just so confused, and clearly so is everyone else. The bottom line, and what I would really like to know, is whether this is an organization that is more interested in the margin, or the center? I'm not sure the answer can be both, and I'm not sure I want that decision made by ConfTool or whatever it is we are using. Control society and all that. With love in my heart (really), Terri Dr. Theresa M. Senft Global Liberal Studies Program School of Arts & Sciences New York University 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 home: *www.terrisenft.net ** *(needs a serious updating) facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft twitter: @terrisenft ______________________ From consalvo at mit.edu Thu May 30 11:20:03 2013 From: consalvo at mit.edu (Mia Consalvo) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 14:20:03 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> Message-ID: hi all, To weigh in on the template and reviewing: Template: 1. I am not a fan of templates generally, so having one at all is always a bit of trouble. I don't think it's really that hard to find author names on a paper or to have folks use different fonts or page widths. 2. The call this year said "Please note that your submissions must adhere to the template to be accepted". This is a bit off-putting, right off the bat. It immediately felt antagonistic, and made me feel that I was being judged first on how well I conformed to guidelines, and then only second on my ideas. 3. The template has guidelines for font choice, font size, an abstract (for an abstract!), headings, subheadings, charts, diagrams, references, images, and so on. Much of my time was spent deleting all of the stuff I didn't need to use. It also created an expectation in my mind (true or not) that this is what submissions are supposed to look like, that this is what they are supposed to include. I was trying to propose a roundtable and it didn't fit at all with the template. Somewhere else on the submission page (I forget where) I realized that roundtables didn't have to follow these guidelines, but I had already been put off by the formal structures. It wasn't about APA or MLA- it was the enforcement of a rigid structure that felt so anti-aoir. Reviewing: AoIR is not the only organization and/or conference to suffer from bad reviewing. The question is, if we are reviewing ourselves, why are we doing such a bad job at it? Are we overworked? Are we getting too many reviews? Are we having collective bad days? Are we being asked to review out of our depth? We really need to have a good discussion about this, because WE are the ones doing this to ourselves. Finally, I'd point out that reviewing scores me/us little or NO credits either in our university jobs, our daily life, or in general recognition other than a formal thank you somewhere in a program. I'm not suggesting reviewers be paid for their work, but maybe thinking about offering other kinds of recognitions (best review? best reviewer? top review mentors?) might help improve quality by encouraging us to spend more time on them. Mia On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Alexander Halavais wrote: > OK, so I want to separate the word-count issue from the template > issue, because they are divisible and too easily conflated. > > TEMPLATE > > On the template issue: we've been through this once before, but the > reason the template exists is to give some structure for proceedings. > I made the argument--and have made the argument since I ran for > VP--that I wanted what goes on at AoIR to reach a wider audience, and > to spread beyond those who can attend the conference each year. Many > of you running for Exec have expressed a similar interest, and have > proposed various mechanisms for accomplishing this. For me, getting > our work out in some form so that it was findable on the web was > important. > > The template exists because to be able to find and use stuff in a > collection, it is easier if there is some structural similarity--you > know where to find the title, the author, etc. There is nothing, at > least to my mind, that says "hard science" in that. Yes, there was a > format for subtitles (in case it's not obvious from this email, I > quite like subtitles), and tables, etc., but none of this required > their use. > > Maybe the issue is APA for the citation style? I frankly couldn't care > less about citation styles, and didn't pick it. This seemed to be the > most common style used in most previous IR conferences, but that > doesn't mean it should predominate. I don't see why it can't be "use > whatever you want as long as it is findable"--APA was arbitrary. > Perhaps that is what signals "hard science"? Would, by contrast, MLA > or Chicago then signal "Humanities"? > > I think there is value in getting our work out there. I think asking > people to share what they do at AoIR is valuable. I suspect that a > number of others do too. But I think there should also be options for > not sharing. It may be (with deep apologies to Suely and Andrew, who > have invested a lot of time and effort here) that SPIR just isn't > worthy of ongoing support. > > WORD COUNT > > On the word count issue: One of the reason I've separated these is > that I've heard largely support for the longer limits, with a few > grumblings about 1,200 being too short. We've had a number of > restrictions in the past, ranging from 250 to 1000. What I've heard > consistently during my 8 years on Exec is people saying that it's hard > to judge work based on two or three paragraphs alone, and that this > results a bad refereeing process. I think the 500 word limit favors > those who can write good abstracts. I count myself in that number--my > longer work may not be that great, but I write an awesome 500 word > abstract. That said, there were no such limits on roundtables, and > some of the proposals were quite short. > > We have allowed full papers for the last couple (three?) years, but > the number of papers submitted was vanishingly small, and a > nine-thousand word paper requires a disproportionate amount of > reviewer time. > > REVIEWING > > Finally, on the issue of reviews, I want to thank those who > volunteered to review this year. I'll note that many of you did not, > meaning that (a) your expertise was missing when it came to assign > reviews and (b) the reviewers who were assigned often had more reviews > than we have assigned in the past. I agree we need to provide better > guidance to reviewers, and some of you (reviewers and authors) will > hear from me soon about helping shape that process. But the first step > is to be willing to put time into reviewing. > > I just want to be very clear that there was a range of excellent > reviewing and reviewing that could have been much better, from a range > of early-career scholars and more experienced reviewers. Regardless of > this, I think our reviewers deserve a significant amount of praise and > respect for volunteering to review. > > Alex > > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Jeremy hunsinger > wrote: > > I think the problem in part is that it was a template that said it was > for a > > paper, and not a template that said it was for a proposal or abstract. > > This combined with the required length, added considerably to the lack of > > clarity. I think we need to go back to the 'those that need to submit > full > > papers for them to count, can submit full papers' but those papers are > not > > automatically submitted for publication, and the other track should be a > > simple 500 word abstract, or longer panel abstract. the clarity of the > two > > track system was again slightly problematic, but it was inclusive in ways > > that this system is not > > > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Alexander Halavais > > wrote: > >> > >> It would be helpful, at least to me, if folks could be more explicit > >> about *what* they objected to in the template. There were no content > >> restrictions. Yes, there were spaces for citations, subtitles, and for > >> a title, but if these were omitted, they were omitted. > >> > >> I am well aware of the power of defaults, but I'm missing what it was > >> about this particular template that makes it difficult. (Yes, I've > >> heard from folks that the word-count was restrictive, but that isn't > >> directly a template issue.) > >> > >> Best, > >> > >> Alex > >> > >> > >> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Feona Attwood > >> wrote: > >> > Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had > >> > similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. > >> > > >> > My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to > >> > signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like that > >> > before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a > proposal in > >> > this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into > that kind > >> > of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, > >> > innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that > format > >> > were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life > out of > >> > them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which > seemed > >> > very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission > >> > process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be > continued. > >> > I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting > >> > anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. > >> > Feona > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: > >> > > >> >> Hi Pals, > >> >> > >> >> With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the > >> >> list > >> >> regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of > >> >> Internet Researchers today. > >> >> > >> >> I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I > >> >> feel > >> >> personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group > these > >> >> days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR > as > >> >> my > >> >> intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be > >> >> fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. > >> >> > >> >> Some Big Questions I Have: > >> >> > >> >> 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same > as > >> >> organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these > >> >> organizations? > >> >> > >> >> 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it > >> >> reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it > >> >> reflected in submission procedures? > >> >> > >> >> 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our > organization? > >> >> How > >> >> do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, > >> >> necessary or > >> >> fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? > >> >> > >> >> 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and > >> >> artists > >> >> really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer > >> >> used > >> >> to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as > >> >> ubiquitous > >> >> as literature studies. > >> >> > >> >> 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases > >> >> professionalization > >> >> trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars > >> >> and > >> >> its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the > >> >> boundaries > >> >> of the field? > >> >> > >> >> Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want > and > >> >> leave the rest. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Fondly, > >> >> T > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Dr. Theresa M. Senft > >> >> Global Liberal Studies Program > >> >> School of Arts & Sciences > >> >> New York University > >> >> 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 > >> >> > >> >> home: *www.terrisenft.net ** > >> >> *(needs a serious updating) > >> >> facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft > >> >> twitter: @terrisenft > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > >> >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers > http://aoir.org > >> >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > >> >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >> >> > >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > >> >> http://www.aoir.org/ > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > >> > > >> > Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving all > >> > correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. All > >> > incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our > digital > >> > document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. > >> > > >> > If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University > processed > >> > in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered > items > >> > and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. > There are > >> > items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not > be > >> > scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the > University. > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > >> > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers > http://aoir.org > >> > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > >> > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >> > > >> > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > >> > http://www.aoir.org/ > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> -- > >> // > >> // This email is > >> // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > >> // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > >> // > >> // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > >> // http://alex.halavais.net > >> // > >> // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. > >> // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > >> _______________________________________________ > >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >> > >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > >> http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > > > > -- > -- > // > // This email is > // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > // > // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > // http://alex.halavais.net > // > // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. > // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Mia Consalvo, Ph.D. Visiting Associate Professor Comparative Media Studies Massachusetts Institute of Technology 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Building 14N-226 Cambridge, MA 02139-4307 USA consalvo at mit.edu 617.324.1868 From tsenft at gmail.com Thu May 30 11:38:54 2013 From: tsenft at gmail.com (Terri Senft) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 14:38:54 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> Message-ID: Mia, I love the idea of substantially honoring the work serious reviewers do by rewarding them at least with a solid line on their CV. Could we have something like an AoIR Conference Editorial Committee, just like we have an Ethics Committee? Where we could elect or appoint, say, six folks (grad students would be great) who would be "point people" for respective areas (say, identities and representation, communities and blah blah, interface and blah blah ) who could take on the heavy lifting of reviewing in their areas? Not instead of the blind reviews, but as a overseer over processes and someone to turn to when a reviewer says, "I'm really the wrong person to look at this.") Then, on a CV, under professional affiliations, a grad student could say, Association of Internet Researchers, Conference Committee Editorial Member--Race & Gender Area. Or like that.... T in areas where they have ? On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Mia Consalvo wrote: > hi all, > > To weigh in on the template and reviewing: > > Template: > 1. I am not a fan of templates generally, so having one at all is always a > bit of trouble. I don't think it's really that hard to find author names on > a paper or to have folks use different fonts or page widths. > 2. The call this year said "Please note that your submissions must adhere > to the template to be accepted". This is a bit off-putting, right off the > bat. It immediately felt antagonistic, and made me feel that I was being > judged first on how well I conformed to guidelines, and then only second on > my ideas. > 3. The template has guidelines for font choice, font size, an abstract (for > an abstract!), headings, subheadings, charts, diagrams, references, images, > and so on. Much of my time was spent deleting all of the stuff I didn't > need to use. It also created an expectation in my mind (true or not) that > this is what submissions are supposed to look like, that this is what they > are supposed to include. I was trying to propose a roundtable and it didn't > fit at all with the template. Somewhere else on the submission page (I > forget where) I realized that roundtables didn't have to follow these > guidelines, but I had already been put off by the formal structures. It > wasn't about APA or MLA- it was the enforcement of a rigid structure that > felt so anti-aoir. > > Reviewing: AoIR is not the only organization and/or conference to suffer > from bad reviewing. The question is, if we are reviewing ourselves, why are > we doing such a bad job at it? Are we overworked? Are we getting too many > reviews? Are we having collective bad days? Are we being asked to review > out of our depth? We really need to have a good discussion about this, > because WE are the ones doing this to ourselves. > > Finally, I'd point out that reviewing scores me/us little or NO credits > either in our university jobs, our daily life, or in general recognition > other than a formal thank you somewhere in a program. I'm not suggesting > reviewers be paid for their work, but maybe thinking about offering other > kinds of recognitions (best review? best reviewer? top review mentors?) > might help improve quality by encouraging us to spend more time on them. > > Mia > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Alexander Halavais >wrote: > > > OK, so I want to separate the word-count issue from the template > > issue, because they are divisible and too easily conflated. > > > > TEMPLATE > > > > On the template issue: we've been through this once before, but the > > reason the template exists is to give some structure for proceedings. > > I made the argument--and have made the argument since I ran for > > VP--that I wanted what goes on at AoIR to reach a wider audience, and > > to spread beyond those who can attend the conference each year. Many > > of you running for Exec have expressed a similar interest, and have > > proposed various mechanisms for accomplishing this. For me, getting > > our work out in some form so that it was findable on the web was > > important. > > > > The template exists because to be able to find and use stuff in a > > collection, it is easier if there is some structural similarity--you > > know where to find the title, the author, etc. There is nothing, at > > least to my mind, that says "hard science" in that. Yes, there was a > > format for subtitles (in case it's not obvious from this email, I > > quite like subtitles), and tables, etc., but none of this required > > their use. > > > > Maybe the issue is APA for the citation style? I frankly couldn't care > > less about citation styles, and didn't pick it. This seemed to be the > > most common style used in most previous IR conferences, but that > > doesn't mean it should predominate. I don't see why it can't be "use > > whatever you want as long as it is findable"--APA was arbitrary. > > Perhaps that is what signals "hard science"? Would, by contrast, MLA > > or Chicago then signal "Humanities"? > > > > I think there is value in getting our work out there. I think asking > > people to share what they do at AoIR is valuable. I suspect that a > > number of others do too. But I think there should also be options for > > not sharing. It may be (with deep apologies to Suely and Andrew, who > > have invested a lot of time and effort here) that SPIR just isn't > > worthy of ongoing support. > > > > WORD COUNT > > > > On the word count issue: One of the reason I've separated these is > > that I've heard largely support for the longer limits, with a few > > grumblings about 1,200 being too short. We've had a number of > > restrictions in the past, ranging from 250 to 1000. What I've heard > > consistently during my 8 years on Exec is people saying that it's hard > > to judge work based on two or three paragraphs alone, and that this > > results a bad refereeing process. I think the 500 word limit favors > > those who can write good abstracts. I count myself in that number--my > > longer work may not be that great, but I write an awesome 500 word > > abstract. That said, there were no such limits on roundtables, and > > some of the proposals were quite short. > > > > We have allowed full papers for the last couple (three?) years, but > > the number of papers submitted was vanishingly small, and a > > nine-thousand word paper requires a disproportionate amount of > > reviewer time. > > > > REVIEWING > > > > Finally, on the issue of reviews, I want to thank those who > > volunteered to review this year. I'll note that many of you did not, > > meaning that (a) your expertise was missing when it came to assign > > reviews and (b) the reviewers who were assigned often had more reviews > > than we have assigned in the past. I agree we need to provide better > > guidance to reviewers, and some of you (reviewers and authors) will > > hear from me soon about helping shape that process. But the first step > > is to be willing to put time into reviewing. > > > > I just want to be very clear that there was a range of excellent > > reviewing and reviewing that could have been much better, from a range > > of early-career scholars and more experienced reviewers. Regardless of > > this, I think our reviewers deserve a significant amount of praise and > > respect for volunteering to review. > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Jeremy hunsinger > > wrote: > > > I think the problem in part is that it was a template that said it was > > for a > > > paper, and not a template that said it was for a proposal or abstract. > > > This combined with the required length, added considerably to the lack > of > > > clarity. I think we need to go back to the 'those that need to submit > > full > > > papers for them to count, can submit full papers' but those papers are > > not > > > automatically submitted for publication, and the other track should be > a > > > simple 500 word abstract, or longer panel abstract. the clarity of the > > two > > > track system was again slightly problematic, but it was inclusive in > ways > > > that this system is not > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Alexander Halavais < > halavais at gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> It would be helpful, at least to me, if folks could be more explicit > > >> about *what* they objected to in the template. There were no content > > >> restrictions. Yes, there were spaces for citations, subtitles, and for > > >> a title, but if these were omitted, they were omitted. > > >> > > >> I am well aware of the power of defaults, but I'm missing what it was > > >> about this particular template that makes it difficult. (Yes, I've > > >> heard from folks that the word-count was restrictive, but that isn't > > >> directly a template issue.) > > >> > > >> Best, > > >> > > >> Alex > > >> > > >> > > >> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Feona Attwood > > >> wrote: > > >> > Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had > > >> > similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. > > >> > > > >> > My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to > > >> > signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like > that > > >> > before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a > > proposal in > > >> > this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into > > that kind > > >> > of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, > > >> > innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that > > format > > >> > were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life > > out of > > >> > them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which > > seemed > > >> > very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the > submission > > >> > process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be > > continued. > > >> > I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine > submitting > > >> > anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. > > >> > Feona > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: > > >> > > > >> >> Hi Pals, > > >> >> > > >> >> With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the > > >> >> list > > >> >> regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of > > >> >> Internet Researchers today. > > >> >> > > >> >> I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal > reviews, I > > >> >> feel > > >> >> personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group > > these > > >> >> days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR > > as > > >> >> my > > >> >> intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would > be > > >> >> fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. > > >> >> > > >> >> Some Big Questions I Have: > > >> >> > > >> >> 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the > same > > as > > >> >> organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these > > >> >> organizations? > > >> >> > > >> >> 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is > it > > >> >> reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it > > >> >> reflected in submission procedures? > > >> >> > > >> >> 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our > > organization? > > >> >> How > > >> >> do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, > > >> >> necessary or > > >> >> fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? > > >> >> > > >> >> 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and > > >> >> artists > > >> >> really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My > answer > > >> >> used > > >> >> to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as > > >> >> ubiquitous > > >> >> as literature studies. > > >> >> > > >> >> 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases > > >> >> professionalization > > >> >> trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest > scholars > > >> >> and > > >> >> its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the > > >> >> boundaries > > >> >> of the field? > > >> >> > > >> >> Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want > > and > > >> >> leave the rest. > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> Fondly, > > >> >> T > > >> >> > > >> >> -- > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> Dr. Theresa M. Senft > > >> >> Global Liberal Studies Program > > >> >> School of Arts & Sciences > > >> >> New York University > > >> >> 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 > > >> >> > > >> >> home: *www.terrisenft.net ** > > >> >> *(needs a serious updating) > > >> >> facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft > > >> >> twitter: @terrisenft > > >> >> _______________________________________________ > > >> >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > >> >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers > > http://aoir.org > > >> >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > >> >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > >> >> > > >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > >> >> http://www.aoir.org/ > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving > all > > >> > correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. > All > > >> > incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our > > digital > > >> > document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. > > >> > > > >> > If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University > > processed > > >> > in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered > > items > > >> > and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. > > There are > > >> > items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will > not > > be > > >> > scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the > > University. > > >> > > > >> > _______________________________________________ > > >> > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > >> > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers > > http://aoir.org > > >> > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > >> > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > >> > > > >> > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > >> > http://www.aoir.org/ > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> -- > > >> // > > >> // This email is > > >> // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > > >> // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > > >> // > > >> // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > > >> // http://alex.halavais.net > > >> // > > >> // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my > phone. > > >> // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers > http://aoir.org > > >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > >> > > >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > >> http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > -- > > // > > // This email is > > // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > > // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > > // > > // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > > // http://alex.halavais.net > > // > > // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. > > // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > > -- > Mia Consalvo, Ph.D. > Visiting Associate Professor > Comparative Media Studies > Massachusetts Institute of Technology > 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Building 14N-226 > Cambridge, MA 02139-4307 > USA > consalvo at mit.edu > 617.324.1868 > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Dr. Theresa M. Senft Global Liberal Studies Program School of Arts & Sciences New York University 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 home: *www.terrisenft.net ** *(needs a serious updating) facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft twitter: @terrisenft From ku26 at drexel.edu Thu May 30 11:49:15 2013 From: ku26 at drexel.edu (Unsworth,Kristene) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 18:49:15 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> Message-ID: <36DF838FDB1BE048866CF3ACE977294E06F848@MB1.drexel.edu> Mia, Terri and all, I think this is really a great idea. I hesitate to add too much since I wasn't able to participate as a reviewer this time around. I think that recognizing our work as reviewers for conferences would do a lot toward giving the process more weight. Good reviews do take time and often there is the feeling that no one else can step up to do the work. If we have a sort of "Editorial Committee" people that volunteer to be on it could make and plan for the time the review will take. In some institutions this may even "count" during annual review - which for those of us on the tenure track treadmill always appreciate. Last year was my first Aoir Conference and I have to say it was a fantastic experience; so much so that I volunteered to be on the Ethics Committee! Kristene Unsworth, Ph.D. Assistant Professor The iSchool, College of? Information?Science and Technology Drexel University 3141 Chestnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19104 Tel: 215.895.6274 ?| ?Fax: 215.895.2494 ischool.drexel.edu -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Terri Senft Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 2:39 PM To: Mia Consalvo Cc: air-l at listserv.aoir.org; jhunsinger at wlu.ca Subject: Re: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. Mia, I love the idea of substantially honoring the work serious reviewers do by rewarding them at least with a solid line on their CV. Could we have something like an AoIR Conference Editorial Committee, just like we have an Ethics Committee? Where we could elect or appoint, say, six folks (grad students would be great) who would be "point people" for respective areas (say, identities and representation, communities and blah blah, interface and blah blah ) who could take on the heavy lifting of reviewing in their areas? Not instead of the blind reviews, but as a overseer over processes and someone to turn to when a reviewer says, "I'm really the wrong person to look at this.") Then, on a CV, under professional affiliations, a grad student could say, Association of Internet Researchers, Conference Committee Editorial Member--Race & Gender Area. Or like that.... T in areas where they have ? On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Mia Consalvo wrote: > hi all, > > To weigh in on the template and reviewing: > > Template: > 1. I am not a fan of templates generally, so having one at all is > always a bit of trouble. I don't think it's really that hard to find > author names on a paper or to have folks use different fonts or page widths. > 2. The call this year said "Please note that your submissions must > adhere to the template to be accepted". This is a bit off-putting, > right off the bat. It immediately felt antagonistic, and made me feel > that I was being judged first on how well I conformed to guidelines, > and then only second on my ideas. > 3. The template has guidelines for font choice, font size, an abstract > (for an abstract!), headings, subheadings, charts, diagrams, > references, images, and so on. Much of my time was spent deleting all > of the stuff I didn't need to use. It also created an expectation in > my mind (true or not) that this is what submissions are supposed to > look like, that this is what they are supposed to include. I was > trying to propose a roundtable and it didn't fit at all with the > template. Somewhere else on the submission page (I forget where) I > realized that roundtables didn't have to follow these guidelines, but > I had already been put off by the formal structures. It wasn't about > APA or MLA- it was the enforcement of a rigid structure that felt so anti-aoir. > > Reviewing: AoIR is not the only organization and/or conference to > suffer from bad reviewing. The question is, if we are reviewing > ourselves, why are we doing such a bad job at it? Are we overworked? > Are we getting too many reviews? Are we having collective bad days? > Are we being asked to review out of our depth? We really need to have > a good discussion about this, because WE are the ones doing this to ourselves. > > Finally, I'd point out that reviewing scores me/us little or NO > credits either in our university jobs, our daily life, or in general > recognition other than a formal thank you somewhere in a program. I'm > not suggesting reviewers be paid for their work, but maybe thinking > about offering other kinds of recognitions (best review? best > reviewer? top review mentors?) might help improve quality by encouraging us to spend more time on them. > > Mia > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Alexander Halavais > >wrote: > > > OK, so I want to separate the word-count issue from the template > > issue, because they are divisible and too easily conflated. > > > > TEMPLATE > > > > On the template issue: we've been through this once before, but the > > reason the template exists is to give some structure for proceedings. > > I made the argument--and have made the argument since I ran for > > VP--that I wanted what goes on at AoIR to reach a wider audience, > > and to spread beyond those who can attend the conference each year. > > Many of you running for Exec have expressed a similar interest, and > > have proposed various mechanisms for accomplishing this. For me, > > getting our work out in some form so that it was findable on the web > > was important. > > > > The template exists because to be able to find and use stuff in a > > collection, it is easier if there is some structural similarity--you > > know where to find the title, the author, etc. There is nothing, at > > least to my mind, that says "hard science" in that. Yes, there was a > > format for subtitles (in case it's not obvious from this email, I > > quite like subtitles), and tables, etc., but none of this required > > their use. > > > > Maybe the issue is APA for the citation style? I frankly couldn't > > care less about citation styles, and didn't pick it. This seemed to > > be the most common style used in most previous IR conferences, but > > that doesn't mean it should predominate. I don't see why it can't be > > "use whatever you want as long as it is findable"--APA was arbitrary. > > Perhaps that is what signals "hard science"? Would, by contrast, MLA > > or Chicago then signal "Humanities"? > > > > I think there is value in getting our work out there. I think asking > > people to share what they do at AoIR is valuable. I suspect that a > > number of others do too. But I think there should also be options > > for not sharing. It may be (with deep apologies to Suely and Andrew, > > who have invested a lot of time and effort here) that SPIR just > > isn't worthy of ongoing support. > > > > WORD COUNT > > > > On the word count issue: One of the reason I've separated these is > > that I've heard largely support for the longer limits, with a few > > grumblings about 1,200 being too short. We've had a number of > > restrictions in the past, ranging from 250 to 1000. What I've heard > > consistently during my 8 years on Exec is people saying that it's > > hard to judge work based on two or three paragraphs alone, and that > > this results a bad refereeing process. I think the 500 word limit > > favors those who can write good abstracts. I count myself in that > > number--my longer work may not be that great, but I write an awesome > > 500 word abstract. That said, there were no such limits on > > roundtables, and some of the proposals were quite short. > > > > We have allowed full papers for the last couple (three?) years, but > > the number of papers submitted was vanishingly small, and a > > nine-thousand word paper requires a disproportionate amount of > > reviewer time. > > > > REVIEWING > > > > Finally, on the issue of reviews, I want to thank those who > > volunteered to review this year. I'll note that many of you did not, > > meaning that (a) your expertise was missing when it came to assign > > reviews and (b) the reviewers who were assigned often had more > > reviews than we have assigned in the past. I agree we need to > > provide better guidance to reviewers, and some of you (reviewers and > > authors) will hear from me soon about helping shape that process. > > But the first step is to be willing to put time into reviewing. > > > > I just want to be very clear that there was a range of excellent > > reviewing and reviewing that could have been much better, from a > > range of early-career scholars and more experienced reviewers. > > Regardless of this, I think our reviewers deserve a significant > > amount of praise and respect for volunteering to review. > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Jeremy hunsinger > > > > wrote: > > > I think the problem in part is that it was a template that said it > > > was > > for a > > > paper, and not a template that said it was for a proposal or abstract. > > > This combined with the required length, added considerably to the > > > lack > of > > > clarity. I think we need to go back to the 'those that need to > > > submit > > full > > > papers for them to count, can submit full papers' but those papers > > > are > > not > > > automatically submitted for publication, and the other track > > > should be > a > > > simple 500 word abstract, or longer panel abstract. the clarity > > > of the > > two > > > track system was again slightly problematic, but it was inclusive > > > in > ways > > > that this system is not > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Alexander Halavais < > halavais at gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> It would be helpful, at least to me, if folks could be more > > >> explicit about *what* they objected to in the template. There > > >> were no content restrictions. Yes, there were spaces for > > >> citations, subtitles, and for a title, but if these were omitted, they were omitted. > > >> > > >> I am well aware of the power of defaults, but I'm missing what it > > >> was about this particular template that makes it difficult. (Yes, > > >> I've heard from folks that the word-count was restrictive, but > > >> that isn't directly a template issue.) > > >> > > >> Best, > > >> > > >> Alex > > >> > > >> > > >> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Feona Attwood > > >> > > >> wrote: > > >> > Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have > > >> > had similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. > > >> > > > >> > My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals > > >> > seems to signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across > > >> > anything like > that > > >> > before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a > > proposal in > > >> > this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do > > >> > into > > that kind > > >> > of format. It seems designed to filter out anything > > >> > imaginative, innovative, speculative or original. The papers I > > >> > reviewed in that > > format > > >> > were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the > > >> > life > > out of > > >> > them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference > > >> > which > > seemed > > >> > very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the > submission > > >> > process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't > > >> > be > > continued. > > >> > I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine > submitting > > >> > anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. > > >> > Feona > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: > > >> > > > >> >> Hi Pals, > > >> >> > > >> >> With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to > > >> >> approach the list regarding some questions I have about > > >> >> culture of the Association of Internet Researchers today. > > >> >> > > >> >> I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal > reviews, I > > >> >> feel > > >> >> personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this > > >> >> group > > these > > >> >> days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of > > >> >> AoIR > > as > > >> >> my > > >> >> intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which > > >> >> would > be > > >> >> fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. > > >> >> > > >> >> Some Big Questions I Have: > > >> >> > > >> >> 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us > > >> >> the > same > > as > > >> >> organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from > > >> >> these organizations? > > >> >> > > >> >> 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? > > >> >> How is > it > > >> >> reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How > > >> >> is it reflected in submission procedures? > > >> >> > > >> >> 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our > > organization? > > >> >> How > > >> >> do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, > > >> >> necessary or fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? > > >> >> > > >> >> 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, > > >> >> and artists really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet > > >> >> studies'? My > answer > > >> >> used > > >> >> to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as > > >> >> ubiquitous as literature studies. > > >> >> > > >> >> 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases > > >> >> professionalization trump a desire for a conference that > > >> >> encourages its youngest > scholars > > >> >> and > > >> >> its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the > > >> >> boundaries of the field? > > >> >> > > >> >> Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you > > >> >> want > > and > > >> >> leave the rest. > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> Fondly, > > >> >> T > > >> >> > > >> >> -- > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> Dr. Theresa M. Senft > > >> >> Global Liberal Studies Program School of Arts & Sciences New > > >> >> York University > > >> >> 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 > > >> >> > > >> >> home: *www.terrisenft.net ** *(needs a > > >> >> serious updating) > > >> >> facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft > > >> >> twitter: @terrisenft > > >> >> _______________________________________________ > > >> >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the > > >> >> Association of Internet Researchers > > http://aoir.org > > >> >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > >> >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > >> >> > > >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > >> >> http://www.aoir.org/ > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of > > >> > receiving > all > > >> > correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. > All > > >> > incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by > > >> > our > > digital > > >> > document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. > > >> > > > >> > If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University > > processed > > >> > in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, > > >> > couriered > > items > > >> > and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. > > There are > > >> > items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but > > >> > will > not > > be > > >> > scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the > > University. > > >> > > > >> > _______________________________________________ > > >> > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the > > >> > Association of Internet Researchers > > http://aoir.org > > >> > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > >> > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > >> > > > >> > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > >> > http://www.aoir.org/ > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> -- > > >> // > > >> // This email is > > >> // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > > >> // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > > >> // > > >> // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // > > >> http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors > > >> above to autocorrect on my > phone. > > >> // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the > > >> Association of Internet Researchers > http://aoir.org > > >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > > >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > >> > > >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > >> http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > -- > > // > > // This email is > > // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > > // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > > // > > // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // http://alex.halavais.net > > // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my > > phone. > > // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > > _______________________________________________ > > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the > > Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, > > change options or unsubscribe at: > > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > > http://www.aoir.org/ > > > > > > -- > Mia Consalvo, Ph.D. > Visiting Associate Professor > Comparative Media Studies > Massachusetts Institute of Technology > 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Building 14N-226 Cambridge, MA 02139-4307 > USA consalvo at mit.edu > 617.324.1868 > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the > Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change > options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Dr. Theresa M. Senft Global Liberal Studies Program School of Arts & Sciences New York University 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 home: *www.terrisenft.net ** *(needs a serious updating) facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft twitter: @terrisenft _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From je.burgess at qut.edu.au Thu May 30 11:58:33 2013 From: je.burgess at qut.edu.au (Jean Burgess) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 04:58:33 +1000 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> Message-ID: <792900BF-9C47-4101-A061-D1AF767C3EA7@qut.edu.au> Thank you, Alex, for elaborating on this issue once again. A few comments just on the conference, rather than the broader set of questions Terri initially raised. I for one am OK with both the use of a template and the requirement to submit short papers, rather than only abstracts, for both individual papers and panel proposals. While the changes created extra work (and work is hard and annoying), I'm now glad that I have a nearly-finished short paper that will get published somewhere so people can read it, and like it or not, that will count as 'fully refereed paper in proceedings', which give me and my institutional those all-important brownie points. The roundtable and fishbowl formats left room for looser, more speculative or creative session formats. I reviewed several submissions. From my perspective as a reviewer, the short paper (rather than abstract) format made it easier to review them, without adding the burden of reading thousands upon thousands of words--it's much easier to get the gist of a paper if it has a bit more room for substance rather than meta-narrative; and it made it easier to separate submissions in terms of quality. I agree we could have done with clearer guidelines (customized to the new submission requirements, which in turn need to be matched to the criteria provided in conf-tool), but I for one exercised my best judgement on the relevance, interestingness, and rigour of the papers, not their technical compliance with the template. I also tried to mark across the range where appropriate. Having said that, using multiple reviewers usually does result in multiple perspectives. Cheers Jean On May 30, 2013, at 2:00 PM, Alexander Halavais wrote: > OK, so I want to separate the word-count issue from the template > issue, because they are divisible and too easily conflated. > > TEMPLATE > > On the template issue: we've been through this once before, but the > reason the template exists is to give some structure for proceedings. > I made the argument--and have made the argument since I ran for > VP--that I wanted what goes on at AoIR to reach a wider audience, and > to spread beyond those who can attend the conference each year. Many > of you running for Exec have expressed a similar interest, and have > proposed various mechanisms for accomplishing this. For me, getting > our work out in some form so that it was findable on the web was > important. > > The template exists because to be able to find and use stuff in a > collection, it is easier if there is some structural similarity--you > know where to find the title, the author, etc. There is nothing, at > least to my mind, that says "hard science" in that. Yes, there was a > format for subtitles (in case it's not obvious from this email, I > quite like subtitles), and tables, etc., but none of this required > their use. > > Maybe the issue is APA for the citation style? I frankly couldn't care > less about citation styles, and didn't pick it. This seemed to be the > most common style used in most previous IR conferences, but that > doesn't mean it should predominate. I don't see why it can't be "use > whatever you want as long as it is findable"--APA was arbitrary. > Perhaps that is what signals "hard science"? Would, by contrast, MLA > or Chicago then signal "Humanities"? > > I think there is value in getting our work out there. I think asking > people to share what they do at AoIR is valuable. I suspect that a > number of others do too. But I think there should also be options for > not sharing. It may be (with deep apologies to Suely and Andrew, who > have invested a lot of time and effort here) that SPIR just isn't > worthy of ongoing support. > > WORD COUNT > > On the word count issue: One of the reason I've separated these is > that I've heard largely support for the longer limits, with a few > grumblings about 1,200 being too short. We've had a number of > restrictions in the past, ranging from 250 to 1000. What I've heard > consistently during my 8 years on Exec is people saying that it's hard > to judge work based on two or three paragraphs alone, and that this > results a bad refereeing process. I think the 500 word limit favors > those who can write good abstracts. I count myself in that number--my > longer work may not be that great, but I write an awesome 500 word > abstract. That said, there were no such limits on roundtables, and > some of the proposals were quite short. > > We have allowed full papers for the last couple (three?) years, but > the number of papers submitted was vanishingly small, and a > nine-thousand word paper requires a disproportionate amount of > reviewer time. > > REVIEWING > > Finally, on the issue of reviews, I want to thank those who > volunteered to review this year. I'll note that many of you did not, > meaning that (a) your expertise was missing when it came to assign > reviews and (b) the reviewers who were assigned often had more reviews > than we have assigned in the past. I agree we need to provide better > guidance to reviewers, and some of you (reviewers and authors) will > hear from me soon about helping shape that process. But the first step > is to be willing to put time into reviewing. > > I just want to be very clear that there was a range of excellent > reviewing and reviewing that could have been much better, from a range > of early-career scholars and more experienced reviewers. Regardless of > this, I think our reviewers deserve a significant amount of praise and > respect for volunteering to review. > > Alex > > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Jeremy hunsinger wrote: >> I think the problem in part is that it was a template that said it was for a >> paper, and not a template that said it was for a proposal or abstract. >> This combined with the required length, added considerably to the lack of >> clarity. I think we need to go back to the 'those that need to submit full >> papers for them to count, can submit full papers' but those papers are not >> automatically submitted for publication, and the other track should be a >> simple 500 word abstract, or longer panel abstract. the clarity of the two >> track system was again slightly problematic, but it was inclusive in ways >> that this system is not >> >> >> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Alexander Halavais >> wrote: >>> >>> It would be helpful, at least to me, if folks could be more explicit >>> about *what* they objected to in the template. There were no content >>> restrictions. Yes, there were spaces for citations, subtitles, and for >>> a title, but if these were omitted, they were omitted. >>> >>> I am well aware of the power of defaults, but I'm missing what it was >>> about this particular template that makes it difficult. (Yes, I've >>> heard from folks that the word-count was restrictive, but that isn't >>> directly a template issue.) >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Alex >>> >>> >>> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Feona Attwood >>> wrote: >>>> Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had >>>> similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. >>>> >>>> My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to >>>> signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like that >>>> before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a proposal in >>>> this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into that kind >>>> of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, >>>> innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that format >>>> were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life out of >>>> them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which seemed >>>> very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission >>>> process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be continued. >>>> I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting >>>> anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. >>>> Feona >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Pals, >>>>> >>>>> With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the >>>>> list >>>>> regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of >>>>> Internet Researchers today. >>>>> >>>>> I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, I >>>>> feel >>>>> personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group these >>>>> days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR as >>>>> my >>>>> intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be >>>>> fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. >>>>> >>>>> Some Big Questions I Have: >>>>> >>>>> 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same as >>>>> organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these >>>>> organizations? >>>>> >>>>> 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is it >>>>> reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it >>>>> reflected in submission procedures? >>>>> >>>>> 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our organization? >>>>> How >>>>> do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, >>>>> necessary or >>>>> fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? >>>>> >>>>> 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and >>>>> artists >>>>> really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My answer >>>>> used >>>>> to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as >>>>> ubiquitous >>>>> as literature studies. >>>>> >>>>> 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases >>>>> professionalization >>>>> trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest scholars >>>>> and >>>>> its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the >>>>> boundaries >>>>> of the field? >>>>> >>>>> Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want and >>>>> leave the rest. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Fondly, >>>>> T >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dr. Theresa M. Senft >>>>> Global Liberal Studies Program >>>>> School of Arts & Sciences >>>>> New York University >>>>> 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 >>>>> >>>>> home: *www.terrisenft.net ** >>>>> *(needs a serious updating) >>>>> facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft >>>>> twitter: @terrisenft >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >>>>> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >>>>> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >>>>> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >>>>> >>>>> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >>>>> http://www.aoir.org/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> >>>> Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving all >>>> correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. All >>>> incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our digital >>>> document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. >>>> >>>> If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University processed >>>> in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered items >>>> and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. There are >>>> items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not be >>>> scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the University. >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >>>> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >>>> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >>>> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >>>> >>>> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >>>> http://www.aoir.org/ >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> -- >>> // >>> // This email is >>> // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. >>> // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. >>> // >>> // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur >>> // http://alex.halavais.net >>> // >>> // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. >>> // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) >>> _______________________________________________ >>> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list >>> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >>> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >>> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >>> >>> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >>> http://www.aoir.org/ >> >> > > > > -- > -- > // > // This email is > // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. > // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. > // > // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur > // http://alex.halavais.net > // > // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. > // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ From holly.kruse at gmail.com Thu May 30 12:00:35 2013 From: holly.kruse at gmail.com (Holly Kruse) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 14:00:35 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: <36DF838FDB1BE048866CF3ACE977294E06F848@MB1.drexel.edu> References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> <36DF838FDB1BE048866CF3ACE977294E06F848@MB1.drexel.edu> Message-ID: I think that it's great that we're having this discusson on the list. I've reviewed for the past eight or nine AoIR conferences, and I like to think that I have a pretty good handle on reviewing for this conference. I could be wrong. Still, I propose that for the next conference we craft clear guidelines for reviewers, so that reviewers are less apt, for instance, to expect a roundtable abstract to demonstrate the same level of theoretical development as paper proposals for a panel. Likewise, we could do our best to ensure that if we keep the SPIR template for submissions, reviewers are aware that not including a methodology or results section is totally fine if it's not appropriate for the paper that's being proposed. I'm willing to spearhead this effort at clarification. Holly From enicole at umich.edu Thu May 30 12:29:57 2013 From: enicole at umich.edu (Nicole Ellison) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 15:29:57 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] conference discussion Message-ID: Heya, I agree with Terri that there should be a space for the kinds of work she describes, but I also want to point out that for the kind of work that at least some of us do, it is quite difficult to adequately assess a paper that is based on proposed research that hasn't been conducted yet. If I'm reviewing a paper, I'd like to see findings and I'd like to see conclusions. If an author doesn't have them yet, maybe the paper should be submitted the following year. Since I know this is likely to be misunderstood, let me say it again: I think there should be a place for work in progress, performance, activist collaborations, etc. But there is also good, interesting, empirical work that can be written up in January and presented months later, and which can't really be assessed until this is done. For instance, suppose you propose an experiment and your manipulation doesn't work? I don't personally do experiments, but I'd like AOIR to be a place where this kind of work is welcome along with everything else. That was kind of the genesis for the organization in the first place, if I recall correctly. I think different formats for different kinds of work is the ticket here. Nicole From tamara at psu.edu Thu May 30 12:37:48 2013 From: tamara at psu.edu (Tamara Peyton) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 15:37:48 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR Message-ID: I've been a quiet yet active member of AOIR since 2003 and have watched it develop over that period. I, too, recently noticed a distinct influence of formalization and "scientification" of the conference, and have had more theoretical pieces rejected for the annual conference on a few occasions because they weren't "empirically grounded" (direct quote). I see this discussion as exemplifying the ongoing tensions within our Internet studies community. I "read" the template this year as signifying a shift to a more formal approach similar to ACM, a huge organization that is frequented, in part, by a lot of iSchool folks, and one could argue that iSchools have become one of the more prominent places for Internet Studies. So I actualy liked having the template, though I too puzzled over how to fit our panel paper (which yes it got rejected) into it, given we didn't have "findings" so much as general discussions of the impact of a phenomenon. Yet, because AOIR has typically been low profile in respect to iSchools and because AOIR hasn't annually produced printed proceedings, the AoIR community and organization has an inferior or even non-existent reputation in iSchools. As someone who has recently made the switch between sociology/media studies into the ACM /iSchool world, I can tell you that I cannot get any funding whatsoever to go to AoIR because it is seen as the least worthy of environments, mocked as one of those "lazy abstract-only playground venues" (direct quote from another uni's iSchool faculty). And this despite the fact that I know firsthand that AoIR is arguably THE best place to get a collection of top notch Internet Studies work seen and discussed! My point? The attempts to formalize and add more rigour to AoIR is something I think is a worthy cause. I get weary of self funding myself to go to the conference, only to see people slap-hazardly throwing together a presentation at the last minute based on a tiny abstract they wrote 9-12 months earlier. At the same time, as others have already more cogently pointed out, we have to be careful that our attempts to increase the quality of our community's output doesn't squeeze out the more experimental, last minute or provocative theory work, activist work, etc. How to do so is what we're apparently grappling with now. What could we do? Perhaps have university "ambassadors" for various venues that champion the association within areas typically neglectful of AOIR? Have specific meta-areas/meta-keywords that are standardized and self-selected by authors to papers so that the experimental, activist or theoretical papers get reviewed as a group and are reviewed only by like-minded reviewers who volunteer for those meta-areas? I do volunteer for reviews and I actually did 15 (!!) of them this year, with scores across the range depending on the internal merit of the piece as presented. To those who suggest we should do more and be more active, I have to say that I would love to but given the fact that my department will not support me in the attempt, I have had to sadly work towards conferences and venues with a higher "rep", in and outside of the ACM world (e.g. ASA and ICA annual confs). -- Tamara Peyton College of Information Sciences & Technology The Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA 16802 tamara at psu.edu / http://about.me/tamarapeyton / @pstamara From kfitz47 at gmail.com Thu May 30 12:41:57 2013 From: kfitz47 at gmail.com (Kathleen Fitzpatrick) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 14:41:57 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> <36DF838FDB1BE048866CF3ACE977294E06F848@MB1.drexel.edu> Message-ID: Hi, all. I wanted to mention that another of the organizations I'm active in, the Alliance of Digital Humanities Organizations, which puts on the annual DH conference, recently experienced some growing pains around its conference submission and reviewing process. The conference has recently seen a dramatic uptick in submissions, from a much more diverse range of fields, methodologies, and parts of the world than in the past, and as a result recent conference program processes were beset by challenges in getting the right reviewers for the right proposals. And this produced a lot of hard feelings across the board: among authors who felt rudely treated, among reviewers who felt overtasked, and among program committee members who totally *were* overtasked. This year's program committee, led by Bethany Nowviskie, introduced a number of changes in the process, which Bethany detailed in a blog post: http://nowviskie.org/2012/cats-and-ships/. The most important of these changes may have been the bidding process, in which reviewers get to request particular abstracts to review (as well as marking those abstracts for which they are not qualified). I have served as a reviewer for the last several years and can say that the proposals I was asked to review this year were far more appropriate to my subfield than they had ever before been. The process also included a few other crucial changes: First, after a reviewer submitted her reviews, she was able to see the other reviews of those abstracts (though without reviewer names attached), and she could modify or add to her reviews in response. Second, after the review period was closed, authors were given the opportunity to respond to the reviews. And finally, the program committee was able to return to particular reviewers to ask them for clarification or reconsideration, before making a final decision. All of this, from what I've heard, made the committee's process more complex, but I did not see any complaints online about the process or its results this year, while recent years had produced lots of audible discontent. Bethany has promised to write some more assessing the results of the process; the conference is coming up, so perhaps that will be available soon. All best, Kathleen -- Kathleen Fitzpatrick // Director of Scholarly Communication Modern Language Association // mla.org // @kfitz On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Holly Kruse wrote: > I think that it's great that we're having this discusson on the list. I've > reviewed for the past eight or nine AoIR conferences, and I like to think > that I have a pretty good handle on reviewing for this conference. I could > be wrong. Still, I propose that for the next conference we craft clear > guidelines for reviewers, so that reviewers are less apt, for instance, to > expect a roundtable abstract to demonstrate the same level of theoretical > development as paper proposals for a panel. Likewise, we could do our best > to ensure that if we keep the SPIR template for submissions, reviewers are > aware that not including a methodology or results section is totally fine > if it's not appropriate for the paper that's being proposed. I'm willing to > spearhead this effort at clarification. > > Holly > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > From krguidry at mistakengoal.com Thu May 30 12:48:47 2013 From: krguidry at mistakengoal.com (krguidry at mistakengoal.com) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 15:48:47 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6d04e73967d7208daadce231cb56c522@mistakengoal.com> On 2013-05-30 10:27, Terri Senft wrote: > > With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the > list > regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of > Internet Researchers today. I'm more than a little bit dismayed that all of the (public) responses to Terri's very broad questions about AoIR have focused entirely on the conference. Is that some quirk or oddity perhaps related to the timing of the questions and other recent posts related to the conference? Or is this evidence that for many people the conference *is* AoIR? I hope the former and not the latter as that would be quite limiting and very disappointing for those of us who rarely or never are able to attend the conference. Kevin From tsenft at gmail.com Thu May 30 12:52:11 2013 From: tsenft at gmail.com (Terri Senft) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 15:52:11 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] conference discussion In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I'm about to get cranky so just one more from my end. Just so we are all clear on this point: nobody is arguing, or has argued, that there isn't value to the type of 'straight' research Nicole is talking about. I can and have produced that sort of work myself. In fact, smelling trouble with this new proposal format, I even submitted a 'straight' proposal for a panel, and it was accepted. I can do that work. I *do* do that work. I can deliver that work. And I also do other sorts of things. What I am asking is if we have space anymore for other things beyond the sort of research Nicole describes. I'm asking selfishly. Sorry to be crude, but as I said to a friend, Denver is a long way for me to fly just to find out I'll be handing out Kleenex at Communication Annual publication circle jerk. Please understand that for me at least, this isn't about sour grapes, but what happens when an organization valorizes 'straight' (note adjective)research as the most legitimate trajectory of inquiry. If people submitted rigorous proposals with detailed findings and were rejected for boring the living crap out of the reader, they'd go up the wall. I feel the same way when someone looks at a project designed to be truly interdisciplinary* and says, 'Where's your sample?" My sample? I teach research methods. I value discussions on methodology. But that's not a question about method. That's just someone who doesn't understand a project spouting the language of method. And it's as dismissive as if I called someone's straight research boring. There are political affects to these types of dismissals that make the conference subtitle of Resistance and Appropriation a bitter pill to swallow. I would say more, but I've decided this is better laid out as a piece of writing. Which I will then submit for publication, because like all of you, that's what I do. Maybe when it's done, I'll submit it to AoiR to read on a podium, as per what appears to be manifesting as the new regime. Party On, T (**and by "interdisciplinary," I don't mean introduce communication scholars to interface designers--I mean getting sex workers who use mobile phones to talk with teen sexual health advocates, and then getting those two to talk to theorists of race and gender, all about, um INTERNET USE) On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Nicole Ellison wrote: > Heya, > I agree with Terri that there should be a space for the kinds of work she > describes, but I also want to point out that for the kind of work that at > least some of us do, it is quite difficult to adequately assess a paper > that is based on proposed research that hasn't been conducted yet. If I'm > reviewing a paper, I'd like to see findings and I'd like to see > conclusions. If an author doesn't have them yet, maybe the paper should be > submitted the following year. > Since I know this is likely to be misunderstood, let me say it again: I > think there should be a place for work in progress, > performance, activist collaborations, etc. But there is also good, > interesting, empirical work that can be written up in January and presented > months later, and which can't really be assessed until this is done. For > instance, suppose you propose an experiment and your manipulation doesn't > work? I don't personally do experiments, but I'd like AOIR to be a place > where this kind of work is welcome along with everything else. That was > kind of the genesis for the organization in the first place, if I recall > correctly. > I think different formats for different kinds of work is the ticket here. > > Nicole > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Dr. Theresa M. Senft Global Liberal Studies Program School of Arts & Sciences New York University 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 home: *www.terrisenft.net ** *(needs a serious updating) facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft twitter: @terrisenft From axel.maireder at univie.ac.at Thu May 30 13:47:35 2013 From: axel.maireder at univie.ac.at (Axel Maireder) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 22:47:35 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: <36DF838FDB1BE048866CF3ACE977294E06F848@MB1.drexel.edu> References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> <36DF838FDB1BE048866CF3ACE977294E06F848@MB1.drexel.edu> Message-ID: <2C076FEF-0116-4859-AC8A-BE9E7F7B535F@univie.ac.at> Dear all, Some thoughts from a young(er), European member of the AOIR community (finishing my PhD soon, hopefully): I've been at three IR-conferences within the last five years, and I have also been at ICA, IAMCR, ECREA and other communication conferences. Every time I attended, the IR was the highlight of the conference year. I've talked to other young Internet researchers, and a lot of them feel the same.The reason for this is neither that IR presentations are more sophisticated than at other conferences, nor that it has the best social events (well, they are fine, but have you been to IAMCR in Braga or Istanbul? ;-) The AOIR gathers researchers from different fields (communication, social anthropology, sociology,?), who present very different types of projects and ideas, based on very different theoretical and methodological perspectives - it is definitely very diverse. But, unlike at ICA, ECREA, and IAMCR, I always felt that there is a common ground at the IR, a collective major question that inspires most of us, and is reflected by many of the presentations. In the end, it is all about understanding what "the Internet" is, how society shapes it, how it reflects society, and how society is shaped by it. My feeling is that everyone is working on this question, from their own, necessarily limited, perspectives. For the AOIR community, the Internet is not "only" "object" of research (to study something else), but the Internet is fascinating in itself. In my opinion, this is the USP of the AOIR, and this is what it makes a community. And researching the Internet (still) needs new, uncommon, surprising ideas and approaches. I found those inspiring ideas at the last AOIR conferences, and I hope I will continue to find them in the future. (Whatever that means for the current discussion on CfP and reviewing) Axel --- Axel Maireder, MA Department of Communication, University of Vienna, Austria http://homepage.univie.ac.at/axel.maireder From bury417 at yahoo.ca Thu May 30 14:49:14 2013 From: bury417 at yahoo.ca (Rhiannon Bury) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 14:49:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> Message-ID: <1369950554.49508.YahooMailNeo@web140606.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Joining in for a? kick at the can. Like some others who have commented, I? have been around AoIR for years and have been accepted at every IR to which I made a submission, including this year. I happen to have a large research project (for one scholar) on the go with? lot of survey and interview data collected and analyzed over the past couple of years. Although it was time consuming, I was able to formulate an argument, demonstrate its merits, describe the methods and discuss the findings in 1200 words. In fact, when I finished, I realized that I had effectively written the 15-minute presentation (our panel has four presenters).?? But what if these? guidelines had been in place in 2005, or 2008 or even 2012? In February of those years, I had ideas, I had an argument (sort of), I might even have had some raw data or was in the process of collecting some. There's not a chance in hell I would have been able to come up with a short paper that would pass muster. To this end I would like to pick up and quote from one of Terri's posts in the thread: Conclusions? Findings? In a paper proposed in January and delivered in October? You don't need to be a Foucault scholar to understand how that forecloses all sorts of projects, including ones that are activist, performance-oriented, involve collaboration with communities in flux, and so forth. It seems to me that the short paper format is neither fish nor fowl. You either accept abstracts and take some chances on ideas in progress. Sure some papers will fizzle but others will soar. Or you ask for full papers and those you accept get published in an Annual Proceedings. If AoIR found that very few full papers were being submitted, then the solution is to get rid of the full paper submission. As for the disciplinary focus, if it has been decided that IR conferences are going to be traditional social science conferences that accept only empirical research, then say so and drop the claim to interdisciplinarity. If not, then these guidelines needs to be revisited and revised. best Rhiannon Rhiannon Bury Associate Professor Women's and Gender Studies Athabasca University rbury at athabascau.ca From davekarpf at gmail.com Thu May 30 15:04:12 2013 From: davekarpf at gmail.com (Dave Karpf) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 18:04:12 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: <1369950554.49508.YahooMailNeo@web140606.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> <1369950554.49508.YahooMailNeo@web140606.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I'll add my $.02. Like others, I found the 1,200 word limit a bit... odd. Abstracts are 250-500 words. Articles are 6,000-8,000 words. 1,200 words is part of the netherspace in between. 1,200 is basically a lengthy blog post. I, for one, have two home disciplines, each with its own conference norms. In political science (APSA), they just ask for an abstract, and they don't use peer reviewers. That puts a lot of authority in the hands of the elected leadership. It also lets authors propose a research puzzle that they expect to complete over the next 8-10 months. In communication (ICA), they ask for a full paper, and they do use peer reviewers. That puts power in the hands of the active membership. It ensures well-done research, and opens up the opportunity for conference proceedings, but also limits the pieces that can be contributed. For this year's AoIR, I basically took a powerpoint talk that I've given a few places and turned it into a 1,200 word short-paper. It was good to get it down on paper, but also felt underdeveloped compared to the papers I'm used to writing. Like Luis, I think this was embedded in the word limit, rather than the style template. I'm still new enough to AoIR that I can't say for sure what I think the community *should* be. I'm still acclimating and forming impressions of the community. But, FWIW, I much prefer the APSA model. I like conferences to be an opportunity to interact with works-in-progress. And if I have a piece that's already polished and complete, I'd rather send it to a journal than a conference. Looking forward to Denver, Dave On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Rhiannon Bury wrote: > Joining in for a kick at the can. > > Like some others who have commented, I have been around AoIR for years > and have been accepted at every IR to which I made a submission, including > this year. I happen to have a large research project (for one scholar) on > the go with lot of survey and interview data collected and analyzed over > the past couple of years. Although it was time consuming, I was able to > formulate an argument, demonstrate its merits, describe the methods and > discuss the findings in 1200 words. In fact, when I finished, I realized > that I had effectively written the 15-minute presentation (our panel has > four presenters). But what if these guidelines had been in place in > 2005, or 2008 or even 2012? In February of those years, I had ideas, I had > an argument (sort of), I might even have had some raw data or was in the > process of collecting some. There's not a chance in hell I would have been > able to come up with a short paper that would pass muster. To this end I > would like > to pick up and quote from one of Terri's posts in the thread: > > Conclusions? Findings? In a paper proposed in January and delivered in > October? You don't need to be a Foucault scholar to understand how that > forecloses all sorts of projects, including ones that are activist, > performance-oriented, involve collaboration with communities in flux, and > so forth. > > > It seems to me that the short paper format is neither fish nor fowl. You > either accept abstracts and take some chances on ideas in progress. Sure > some papers will fizzle but others will soar. Or you ask for full papers > and those you accept get published in an Annual Proceedings. If AoIR found > that very few full papers were being submitted, then the solution is to get > rid of the full paper submission. > > As for the disciplinary focus, if it has been decided that IR conferences > are going to be traditional social science conferences that accept only > empirical research, then say so and drop the claim to interdisciplinarity. > If not, then these guidelines needs to be revisited and revised. > > best > > Rhiannon > > Rhiannon Bury > Associate Professor > Women's and Gender Studies > Athabasca University > rbury at athabascau.ca > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Dave Karpf, PhD Assistant Professor George Washington University School of Media and Public Affairs www.davidkarpf.com davekarpf at gmail.com Author of *The MoveOn Effect: The Unexpected Transformation of American Political Advocacy *(Oxford University Press) From wellman at chass.utoronto.ca Thu May 30 15:40:37 2013 From: wellman at chass.utoronto.ca (Barry Wellman) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 18:40:37 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] think of the audience Message-ID: We do need some sort of quality control, because too much open vagueness is more likely to lead to unthought-through papers than exciting innovative ones. A public presentation is not the place to get advice on a diss. proposal -- you can do that in private or set up birds of a feather roundtables. But it is unfair to subject an audience to such stuff. This has been a problem with AoIR since the first Kansas meeting and one reason I have cut back on my attendance. While I would kvell to hear anything Terri Senft had to say about anything. Alas, we are all not Terri. YMMV Barry Wellman _______________________________________________________________________ S.D. Clark Professor FRSC NetLab Director Faculty of Information (iSchool) 611 Bissell Building 140 St. George St. University of Toronto Toronto Canada M5S 3G6 http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman twitter: @barrywellman NETWORKED:The New Social Operating System. Lee Rainie & Barry Wellman MIT Press http://amzn.to/zXZg39 Print $22 Kindle $16 Old/NewCyberTimes http://bit.ly/c8N9V8 ________________________________________________________________________ From dbrabham at email.unc.edu Thu May 30 15:58:49 2013 From: dbrabham at email.unc.edu (Brabham, Daren C) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 22:58:49 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> <1369950554.49508.YahooMailNeo@web140606.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I'll jump in and defend the longer word count for this year's submissions. I have reviewed for the conference several times and had always griped about how shoddy work slipped through because it was a "hot" or trendy topic. I grew tired of reading abstracts that promised to study some new flavor of the day (Second Life, Foursquare, Arab Spring and Occupy Wall Street on Twitter, MOOCs - you name it) by "doing an analysis" of the phenomenon. Sorry, but I don't think it makes me a social science square to demand a bit more explanation of a method than "an analysis." The purpose of academic research is to generate new knowledge, right? And we need to know that the new knowledge is being generated in the appropriate ways. You can't just "analyze" something...that analysis happens through some more precise procedures - critical discourse analysis, quantitative content analysis, ethnography, rhetorical criticism, Marxist cultural critique, lab experiments, whatever. Too many abstracts in previous years neglected even name-dropping these terms, which would have at least given some clue to the reviewer as to what the author was actually planning to DO to generate new knowledge. I echo Tamara's point that one grows "weary of self funding" a trip to "the conference [because one's home department does not view an abstract-submission conference as worthy for travel funding or for getting tenure], only to see people slap-hazardly throwing together a presentation at the last minute based on a tiny abstract they wrote 9-12 months earlier." You all have seen the scattered, read-off-the-back-of-my-cocktail-napkin-from-last-night presentations at AoIR (and other conferences), and it is damn frustrating and insulting to folks in the room who scraped together some money to fly halfway around the world to listen to good research. I believe the new word count was trying to catch the good abstract-writers and the folks who have a knack for latching onto glittery, trendy topics and hold them to a higher standard of knowledge creation. And even though I think we could probably develop a more flexible template (or several approved template versions), this is what the template was trying to do too - that's what all the "method" and "findings" stuff is about. Now, I'm all for the nontraditional, the transformative, and even the half-baked. Other organizations (say, the National Communication Association) have performance studies-type divisions that accept a wide range of submissions, even non-text ones, but all submissions adhere to a much deeper standard than just an abstract. There's some edgy work going on at NCA (though I have my own beef with that organization for other reasons!) that certainly breaks templates and genres but still manages to convey to reviewers that the work is well thought-out and will make a contribution to knowledge. I think we already are quite flexible with the range of methods and theories and research we accept. Want to toss out the "findings" section in the template and write a great critical-cultural essay? Go for it. A qualified reviewer will totally get what you're doing and won't fault you for altering the template...seriously they won't, especially a critical-cultural scholar. But I'm guessing (and Hector and past program chairs - you can correct me on this if I'm wrong) that not enough people are volunteering to review papers. It's hard to be the lone researcher who studies X when no one in the reviewer pool studies X. Either more of us need to step up to review or we need to reach out and invite ad hoc reviewers from wildly different disciplines to review papers for our conference (not just a pool of other submitters). Another idea: I like half-baked research, especially around the hot, trendy topics of the day. Why can't we have a "hot topics" panel or two at every conference where some folks - invited or competitively - jockey for a chance to offer first impressions of these new phenomena and sketch out bold agendas for research...which can then spur full papers to the next year's conference? So, like, with MOOCs or 3D printing or whatever it is that's hot this year, I'd rather hear a "Critical Reading and Agenda for Research on MOOCs" where people can talk frankly about the issues without having to prepare a full paper to talk on the topic. It could be a way our field plants early flags in these new landscapes as they emerge, in a more conversational way. I suppose Roundtable Discussions are what this kind of thing is for, but I've not seen a super awesome Roundtable yet....they seem more like rehearsed performances (panels, really) and not critical discussions. But I may not have attended the right ones. Anyway...those are my thoughts on the conference template/word count stuff. I still think we're a group that welcomes different research perspectives and needs to stay that way. I'd hate to see AoIR turn into another ACM or ICA or NCA or whatever (no offense)...it should stay small, interdisciplinary, and loose in its boundary-making. But I do think we can step up the quality control a bit. We're at a point where many more people want to present at the conference than there are slots for them, so why not ask for the bar to be raised? Final shout-out: Kudos to Hector for running a smooth CFP process (despite the expected hiccups with transitioning to a new template) and a smooth and relatively speedy review process. I feel like I was asked to review submissions that were much more in line with my expertise this year, when in many past year's it's felt like - for whatever reason - I was reviewing stuff that looked like Greek to me. Bravo on that, then. db --- Daren C. Brabham, Ph.D. Assistant Professor, School of Journalism & Mass Communication Editor, Case Studies in Strategic Communication | www.csscjournal.org University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Carroll Hall, CB 3365 Chapel Hill, NC 27599 (801) 633-4796 (mobile) daren.brabham at unc.edu | www.darenbrabham.com From mepetit at utsc.utoronto.ca Thu May 30 16:30:58 2013 From: mepetit at utsc.utoronto.ca (Michael Petit) Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 19:30:58 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR (Michael Petit) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <05af60d9c7db69d639f80c8219004c02.squirrel@webmail.utsc.utoronto.ca> Hello Everyone, I can't speak to how the template affected the composition of proposals submitted, but I can attest to its effect on at least one of the reviewers, who wrote the following about mine: ?While each abstract has strong elements, they are each far shorter and less developed than the short papers using the required SPIR template. While the SPIR template was quite demanding, it was nevertheless a template that every other paper and panel I?ve reviewed stuck to. [ ] While I feel something of a pedant reinforcing a template so at odds with the conference themes [of appropriation and resistance], to be fair to everyone who did use the template, these abstracts all need development.? Reject. Based on past experience (this would have been my 7th AoIR), this panel would have been accepted, but apparently theoretically-engaged work from a humanistic perspective that follows the methodologies of the humanities is much less welcome on the basis of the SPIR template. (I'm also wondering why some proposals (such as mine) were assigned 4 reviewers while others had only 2, but perhaps this is a separate issue.) Fiona writes that she did not submit a proposal this year because she found the template foreign to the ways in which she conducts and reports her research. But she also writes that she'll be attending AoIR to discuss the issues this thread has raised. I would very much like to contribute to those discussions, but unfortunately, like many, I do not have institutional funding to attend without being on the program. I won't be there. I hope those who attend find the conference interesting. I felt I had developed an intellectual home at AoIR, but the algorithmic thinking that underpins the template and the way this conference is being organized has given me second thoughts. -- Michael Petit, PhD Director, Media Studies and the Joint Program in New Media Studies Department of Arts, Culture & Media University of Toronto Scarborough Toronto, ON M1C 1A4 416.287.7164 From anafmonteiro at gmail.com Fri May 31 03:53:44 2013 From: anafmonteiro at gmail.com (Ana Francisca Monteiro) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 11:53:44 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] CFP - SIIE2013 - XV International Symposium on Computers in Education Message-ID: XV International Symposium on Computers in Education Viseu, Portugal | 13 - 15 november 2013 siie13esev.ipv.pt ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Overview ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The 15th edition of the International Symposium on Computers in Education (SIIE) will be held in Viseu, Portugal, from 13 to 15 November 2013. The International Symposium on Computers in Education (SIIE) is an international forum for presenting, discussing and reflecting on research, development and practices in the field of Information and Communications Technology (ICT) in Education. The previous editions were held alternately between Spain and Portugal, providing a space for researchers, educators and institutional representatives to exchange and debate ideas. SIIE has become a reference, particularly in the Ibero-American context. The 15th edition of the International Symposium on Computers in Education (SIIE) will be held in Viseu, Portugal, from 13 to 15 November 2013. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Topics ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The 15th edition of SIIE encourages the submission of original contributions in English (preferred), Spanish or Portuguese in various areas including, but not limited to, the following: - Design, development and evaluation of educational software - Interaction Design for education - Design and standardization of educational technologies, modelling languages and metadata - Data mining and Web mining for education - Semantic Web in education - Intelligent educational systems - Personal learning environments - Tools and Web-based educational resources - Games and simulations in education - Virtual laboratories - Ubiquitous/mobile computing and education - Robotics and education - Free/Open Software, Open Knowledge and Open Educational Resources - Technology, knowledge and skills management in education - Emerging technologies in education - Use and evaluation methodologies of ICT in educational contexts - Innovative experiences of ICT in Teaching / Learning - Social aspects of ICT in educational settings - Gender, cultural diversities and specific audiences - ICT applications for special education needs - Teacher education and ICT - Distance education - Social Web, collaborative systems and learning communities. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Formats ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Invited keynote speakers Paper presentation Posters ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Official Languages ---------------------------------------------------------------------- English (preferred) Portuguese Spanish ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Paper publication ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Accepted papers will be published in the Symposium Proceedings (CD-ROM with ISBN), which will be distributed to participants. Best papers presented at the Symposium will be selected, according to the Program Committee evaluation, for inclusion in other publications soon to be announced. The Organizing Committee is currently involved in negotiations to ensure the publication of papers in reference publications. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Paper submission ---------------------------------------------------------------------- All contributions must be sent as PDF (preferred), Doc, Docx or ODT and follow the official ACM Proceedings Format guidelines available at http://www.acm.org/sigs/pubs/proceed/template.html. Paper contributions will be limited to 6 pages and Posters contributions to 2 pages. All proposals must be anonymously submitted, the authors name and institution should not be included in the submitted file. These data should only be included in the submission form. Proposals will be submitted through https://www.easychair.org/account/signin.cgi?conf=siie13 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dates ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 15/06/2013 Submission ends 29/7/2013 Review results sent out 9/9/2013 Submission of final version of accepted proposals 1/10/2013 Deadline for registration of authors of accepted papers 13/11/2013 SIIE 2013 begins ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Registration ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For registrations paid until October 1, 2013 Registration fee: 150 ? For registrations paid after October 1, 2013 Registration fee: 180 ? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Emerging Researchers Bursaries ---------------------------------------------------------------------- SIIE 2013 has decided to offer financial support for two emerging researchers from low GDP European countries to enable their participation. The bursary consists of free entry to the SIIE (and social events), a 300 ? travel bursary and free accommodation (Students' Residence). The bursary is for PhD students and new researchers within one year of completing their PhD in order to allow them to participate in SIIE 2013 in Viseu. From raquelrecuero at gmail.com Fri May 31 04:30:08 2013 From: raquelrecuero at gmail.com (Raquel Recuero) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 08:30:08 -0300 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> <1369950554.49508.YahooMailNeo@web140606.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <51A889C0.1000805@gmail.com> Hi everyone! I'd like to make a few suggestions and perhaps add some ideas to the discussion: _1) About the new template:_ If I may talk for us in South America and specially in Brazil... Event though I think the new "short paper" (for us it is actually an extended abstract) is better than 500 words to allow you to argue a bit more about your research, the new model made hard for us to get funding to attend the conference because there is no full paper option. Before, we could submit full papers (and we actually did and the review process to get published in SPIR was *awesome*). *Suggestion:* I know this will sound very ACM/AAAI/IEEE etc.but... Why don't we create short/full paper proposals? Short papers are ideal for folks who have ongoing research and want to discuss it (maybe without publication) and full papers for those other folks (like me) who need to present something more complete in order to get funding. Also perhaps a way to differentiate roundtables and panels would be the format of papers (and the completeness of the research): roundtable = short papers; panel= full papers. We can also have different types of proposal for other things that contemplate other types of discussion. SPIR could continue on publishing full papers and the proceedings, short ones. _2) About reviews:_ Although I wasn't a reviewer this year and I think people are really generous to volunteer (I forgot to volunteer - shame on me!), it is pretty much a fact by now that while some reviews were awesome, some were not so good. My panel got through, but with odd reviews that only focused on one or two of our six papers. This seems to point out that reviewers are having some difficulties in understanding what they are evaluating (not one paper, but a panel of six) and how they should do it (perhaps the system we used is somewhat flawed). Also, my students that got rejected, like many people in this list, got complete opposite reviews with also complete opposite marks (like 90 and 24, for example). And I felt it was very discouraging for them (as for everyone else) to submit again because the process was so weird. It is normal to get rejected. But at least it seems fair to have *some* coherence in the rejection/approval process. *Suggestion:* We can create reviewer guidelines for different types of proposals. I also like the bidding process someone suggested and the idea of creating a program committee or something in order to credit properly the people who are doing the hard work. Maybe create meta reviewers would also help the conflicts (and I think someone already suggested this). _3) About AOIR__Conference_ That said, I would like to point that I *love* AOIR conferences. I've been to several others and still think we get more discussion and more debate with our papers in IR than in any other. Also, it is very much likely to find similar works and people with similar interests. However, I also feel that in the last conferences the abstract model was too short and many very very early works that perhaps were not yet polished enough to be presented were accepted. I think we need better ways to select good work (which doesn't mean it has to be finished) and the "short paper" was a step towards it. The conference, for me, is about a discussion, about exchanging ideas and we need good work to inspire them. *Suggestion*: If people feel the conference is becoming too broad, maybe we should think about creating tracks that represent the lines of research/objects of our associates. That would also help more focus on the discussions and would also help the reviewers to know what to expect and how to evaluate papers from each track. We could have, for example, a methodological discussion track. Sorry for the long email. :) Best, Raquel From R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk Fri May 31 05:00:20 2013 From: R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk (Deller, Ruth A) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 12:00:20 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR Message-ID: Wow, a few days away on annual leave and I come back to find AOIR asploding all over my inbox! Lots of things to digest here but my twopenn'orth on a few of them (apologies, these thoughts will be conference specific ones not ones pertaining to AOIR in general, although I might come back to that later) CONFERENCE TEMPLATES I'll hold my hands up, I really struggled with the format this year both to write and to review. I'm used to just submitting and reviewing conference abstracts of 250-500 words so a longer one - yet something too short to be a proper paper - was a bit of a shock to the system, and not only that, it had its own particular fonts and styles and layouts! I found that quite intimidating and unnecessarily formal and I wasn't sure of its purpose. As others have said, it was too short to be a paper, too long for an abstract and trying to decide exactly what got put into it was hard. When reviewing, it was problematic using the template because everyone had interpreted it in different ways, some giving mini papers, others extended abstracts, others something else entirely - I genuinely found it hard to judge and I do a lot of reviewing of abstracts and of papers - but this hybrid beast was new to me. Having seen Terri's comment about roundtables/panels, I fear I am possibly one of those guilty of confusing them in the reviewing process this year somehow - on last year's system it seemed much clearer whether things were papers, panels, fishbowls etc - although I was on the organising team last year and accessed everything via the back system so maybe it looked different for team members than for actual reviewers. I do worry that we might have lost some quality papers, panels and roundtables purely because of the formatting issues and people's difficulty in interpreting the brief both as authors and reviewers. CONFERENCE FEEL AND SO ON I think one of the things this issue with the templates highlights is the problems of interdisciplinarity - I am ALL FOR it and think one of our biggest strengths is that we can accommodate scholars from lots of disciplines and countries - but it does mean that, naturally, we all differ a lot in practice and in terms of what is considered 'prestigious' (unlike some people's experiences, my research centre actually thinks a lot of AOIR - probably not enough to fund me to go to Denver but that's just because they don't like spending money). Therefore, we're probably never going to agree on what the conference should be: a creative exchange where newer, innovative stuff can be shared, or a place for finished products. I'm not an either/or person, so I would always advocate the both/and way of thinking. Being on the conference team last year I did sometimes find we were restricted in what we could put on the programme and how we could structure plenaries, keynotes etc. I personally feel that we're researching at the cutting edge and the creative edge. The internet is always changing and I worry that to fully take on board Nicole's suggestion of only submitting things that had 'findings' would stifle that and lead to more dated things being presented rather than allowing us to be fresh - and I think one of our distinctive markers should be our ability to be up-to-date with developments in our research field. Academia moves ridiculously slowly, the internet maddeningly quickly - we can't let everything be dictated by the former when we're interested in the latter. That said, I also appreciate the concerns over 'rigour' needing to be part of the process. I wasn't convinced by the arguments that conferences aren't a place for sharing works-in-progress though - every conference I've ever been to (and they've all been interdisciplinary or in media, cultural studies and a bit of sociology and all in either the UK or USA so I acknowledge that different fields and countries will vary) has had a combination of new work, work-in-progress and work completed. I love that and I think it keeps things fresh as well as encouraging newer work, PhD students etc. I've heard terrible presentations on completed work and excellent ones on work-in-progress so I don't consider the stage the work is at to be a marker of quality at all. One option could be to have different streams - completed papers, work-in-progress, whatever. I'd love us to have more workshops or similar where we get to experiment with different internet platforms and technologies. I bet several people would love it if they could have an hour to learn about, and get to grips with, 4chan or Tumblr or Vine or whatever it may be. I would love much more creativity and innovation in the programme - more 'traditional' conference fare is fine, but only to a point. Conferences for me are much more about connection than anything else - I read articles and books if I want the finished, extensive product. I want conferences to inspire me and introduce me to exciting people. OTHER CONFERENCE STUFF Sarah mentioned the size of the conference (and the expense of it for many). I don't know if this is worth thinking about, but another organisation I was once part of used to have an annual conference of its members, who were from all over the world. It got difficult and expensive for many people to meet that way, so they moved to having conferences on each continent instead with a 'global gathering' every two or three years. So maybe we could look to alternate with a continental/national conference one year and a big global shindig the next? Or have more web/internet-based ways of sharing and connecting - if not streaming, then weeks/months where we actively work to share stuff via blogs or online repositories or YouTube or Twitter or whatever works best for what we want to share. Ruth From qcentral at indiana.edu Fri May 31 06:36:16 2013 From: qcentral at indiana.edu (qCentral) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 15:36:16 +0200 Subject: [Air-L] job in a cool spot with cool peeps In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2DCA2440-F12E-450B-86B6-AA9D2D28AB0F@indiana.edu> pretty interesting place (with Lucy Suchman, Adam Fish, and a number of other smart scholars across campus). > PLEASE CIRCULATE ? APOLOGIES FOR CROSS-POSTINGS > __________________________________________ > > The Department of Sociology at Lancaster University seeks to appoint a Senior Lecturer with a specialism in the media industries. > > You are expected to be research active with high-level publications and significant research funding, and have excellent teaching abilities at both UG and PG levels, relevant administrative skills and the ability to take a leadership role. Candidates with experience of working in the media industries are particularly encouraged to apply. If appointed, you will develop new postgraduate and undergraduate modules on the media industries, and new collaborative teaching initiatives with other departments. Salary will be in the range ?47,314 ? ?53,233. > > Lancaster Sociology is a research-oriented department with specialisms in science and technology studies, cultural political economy, mobilities, media and cultural studies, political sociology and gender and women?s studies. In the last UK Research Assessment Exercise the Department was placed in the top five group of UK departments. It was also recently placed 5th in the UK in the 2014 Complete University Guide, and in the top 40 sociology departments in the world in the 2013 QS World University Rankings. > > For more information on the post, including how to apply, go to: http://hr-jobs.lancs.ac.uk/Vacancy.aspx?ref=A722. > > The closing date for applications is Monday 24 June 2013; the interview date is to be confirmed. > > Informal enquiries are welcome and should be made to Dr Bronislaw Szerszynski, tel +44 (0)1524 592659, e-mail: bron at lancaster.ac.uk. > > The Department?s webpage is at http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/sociology/. > > ______________________ Mary L. Gray Senior Researcher, Microsoft Research New England, Cambridge MA Associate Professor, Communication and Culture Adjunct Faculty, American Studies; Anthropology; Gender Studies Indiana University, Bloomington mLg at qcentral dot edu www dot maryLgray dot org @maryLgray From jhuns at vt.edu Fri May 31 08:13:54 2013 From: jhuns at vt.edu (Jeremy hunsinger) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 11:13:54 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: <51A889C0.1000805@gmail.com> References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> <1369950554.49508.YahooMailNeo@web140606.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <51A889C0.1000805@gmail.com> Message-ID: aside from the conference and submission system, are there other significant cultural/structural questions that we should think about in regards to AoIR? or is the conference the main issue? I think one of the issue is that the conference has become the main issue, and the list has basically changed from a fairly dynamic one, to a fairly circumscribed announcement list with a little discussion instead of being, as it once was, a sort of intellectual heart that drives the conference. So for me, I'd say list-culture and perhaps other AoIR media cultures need some intervention to transform them toward a more integrative and enabling structure. That's always been one of my concerns though... I'm wondering what non-conference related matters are out there? From R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk Fri May 31 08:19:55 2013 From: R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk (Deller, Ruth A) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 15:19:55 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> <1369950554.49508.YahooMailNeo@web140606.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <51A889C0.1000805@gmail.com> Message-ID: Perhaps that is the very thing we should talk about - is the mailing list still the best environment for discussion, or has it become largely a technology (in academia anyway) of information? I'm on a bunch of academic mailing lists, but the conversation is usually CFPs, job ads and sometimes requests for help. Discussion is rare - and Air-L is one of the most 'discuss-y' of those I'm on even then. I discuss things all the time pertaining to AOIR... face-to-face, on Twitter... on Facebook... on blogs (or via reading others' blogs)... in forums... and in email too - but less so. Email once felt like a dynamic medium, now it doesn't really. I'm not saying we 'take it all to Twitter' or blogs, that'd be madness, as I think the list is still incredibly useful but maybe we ought to think about whether our discussion can thrive elsewhere as well? -----Original Message----- From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Jeremy hunsinger Sent: 31 May 2013 16:14 To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. aside from the conference and submission system, are there other significant cultural/structural questions that we should think about in regards to AoIR? or is the conference the main issue? I think one of the issue is that the conference has become the main issue, and the list has basically changed from a fairly dynamic one, to a fairly circumscribed announcement list with a little discussion instead of being, as it once was, a sort of intellectual heart that drives the conference. So for me, I'd say list-culture and perhaps other AoIR media cultures need some intervention to transform them toward a more integrative and enabling structure. That's always been one of my concerns though... I'm wondering what non-conference related matters are out there? _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From jhuns at vt.edu Fri May 31 08:24:32 2013 From: jhuns at vt.edu (jeremy hunsinger) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 11:24:32 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: <9EA00CA4-E564-4D38-84B0-8552EF2872EE@mdx.ac.uk> <1369950554.49508.YahooMailNeo@web140606.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <51A889C0.1000805@gmail.com> Message-ID: I agree there are other possibilities than email for discussion, though a few have been tried in the past to greater and lesser degrees for the organization. we also have the irc channel, we used to have and probably still have a full jabber system, the video system we used to have is gone though, but there are other capabilities we could use like twitter, facebook, zotero, and other tech. but i'm also wondering about the other issues people might see. On May 31, 2013, at 11:19 AM, "Deller, Ruth A" wrote: > Perhaps that is the very thing we should talk about - is the mailing list still the best environment for discussion, or has it become largely a technology (in academia anyway) of information? I'm on a bunch of academic mailing lists, but the conversation is usually CFPs, job ads and sometimes requests for help. Discussion is rare - and Air-L is one of the most 'discuss-y' of those I'm on even then. > > I discuss things all the time pertaining to AOIR... face-to-face, on Twitter... on Facebook... on blogs (or via reading others' blogs)... in forums... and in email too - but less so. Email once felt like a dynamic medium, now it doesn't really. I'm not saying we 'take it all to Twitter' or blogs, that'd be madness, as I think the list is still incredibly useful but maybe we ought to think about whether our discussion can thrive elsewhere as well? > Jeremy Hunsinger Communication Studies Wilfrid Laurier University Center for Digital Discourse and Culture Virginia Tech Imagination is the one weapon in the war against reality. -Jules de Gaultier () ascii ribbon campaign - against html mail /\ - against microsoft attachments From ngodbold at gmail.com Fri May 31 08:27:10 2013 From: ngodbold at gmail.com (Natalya Godbold) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2013 01:27:10 +1000 Subject: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ruth Deller commented: *So maybe we could look to alternate with a continental/national conferenceone year and a big global shindig the next? Or have more web/internet-based ways of sharing and connecting - if not streaming, then weeks/months where we actively work to share stuff via blogs or online repositories or YouTube or Twitter or whatever works best for what we want to share.* A cute idea. A panel, held via email, discussion board or chatroom. It happens at a particular time. Maybe the presentation is streamed, or maybe the paper is available in longhand before the time starts. Then for half an hour, people can ask the author questions about the paper, to which the author has to answer in real time. As an Australian who pays for most of her own conference attendances including the thousands of dollars in airfares to other continents, the idea has its merits. Mainly for the author, who gets instant feedback from a variety of sources. And your responses don't disappear into the air, you already wrote them down. That would give me a lot of useful grist for the mill. Perhaps it would be good to be in a chatroom or on a discussion board, for the sake of the layout. But if it happened say, via the air-l list, the discussion might prompt people who didn't intend to attend, to chuck in a comment. Probably this happens in your world all the time, but its a fascinating new idea to me. xn On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 10:00 PM, Deller, Ruth A wrote: > > Wow, a few days away on annual leave and I come back to find AOIR > asploding all over my inbox! Lots of things to digest here but my > twopenn'orth on a few of them (apologies, these thoughts will be conference > specific ones not ones pertaining to AOIR in general, although I might come > back to that later) > > CONFERENCE TEMPLATES > > I'll hold my hands up, I really struggled with the format this year both > to write and to review. I'm used to just submitting and reviewing > conference abstracts of 250-500 words so a longer one - yet something too > short to be a proper paper - was a bit of a shock to the system, and not > only that, it had its own particular fonts and styles and layouts! I found > that quite intimidating and unnecessarily formal and I wasn't sure of its > purpose. As others have said, it was too short to be a paper, too long for > an abstract and trying to decide exactly what got put into it was hard. > When reviewing, it was problematic using the template because everyone had > interpreted it in different ways, some giving mini papers, others extended > abstracts, others something else entirely - I genuinely found it hard to > judge and I do a lot of reviewing of abstracts and of papers - but this > hybrid beast was new to me. > > Having seen Terri's comment about roundtables/panels, I fear I am possibly > one of those guilty of confusing them in the reviewing process this year > somehow - on last year's system it seemed much clearer whether things were > papers, panels, fishbowls etc - although I was on the organising team last > year and accessed everything via the back system so maybe it looked > different for team members than for actual reviewers. I do worry that we > might have lost some quality papers, panels and roundtables purely because > of the formatting issues and people's difficulty in interpreting the brief > both as authors and reviewers. > > CONFERENCE FEEL AND SO ON > > I think one of the things this issue with the templates highlights is the > problems of interdisciplinarity - I am ALL FOR it and think one of our > biggest strengths is that we can accommodate scholars from lots of > disciplines and countries - but it does mean that, naturally, we all differ > a lot in practice and in terms of what is considered 'prestigious' (unlike > some people's experiences, my research centre actually thinks a lot of AOIR > - probably not enough to fund me to go to Denver but that's just because > they don't like spending money). Therefore, we're probably never going to > agree on what the conference should be: a creative exchange where newer, > innovative stuff can be shared, or a place for finished products. > > I'm not an either/or person, so I would always advocate the both/and way > of thinking. Being on the conference team last year I did sometimes find we > were restricted in what we could put on the programme and how we could > structure plenaries, keynotes etc. I personally feel that we're > researching at the cutting edge and the creative edge. The internet is > always changing and I worry that to fully take on board Nicole's suggestion > of only submitting things that had 'findings' would stifle that and lead to > more dated things being presented rather than allowing us to be fresh - and > I think one of our distinctive markers should be our ability to be > up-to-date with developments in our research field. Academia moves > ridiculously slowly, the internet maddeningly quickly - we can't let > everything be dictated by the former when we're interested in the latter. > > That said, I also appreciate the concerns over 'rigour' needing to be part > of the process. I wasn't convinced by the arguments that conferences > aren't a place for sharing works-in-progress though - every conference I've > ever been to (and they've all been interdisciplinary or in media, cultural > studies and a bit of sociology and all in either the UK or USA so I > acknowledge that different fields and countries will vary) has had a > combination of new work, work-in-progress and work completed. I love that > and I think it keeps things fresh as well as encouraging newer work, PhD > students etc. I've heard terrible presentations on completed work and > excellent ones on work-in-progress so I don't consider the stage the work > is at to be a marker of quality at all. > > One option could be to have different streams - completed papers, > work-in-progress, whatever. I'd love us to have more workshops or similar > where we get to experiment with different internet platforms and > technologies. I bet several people would love it if they could have an > hour to learn about, and get to grips with, 4chan or Tumblr or Vine or > whatever it may be. I would love much more creativity and innovation in > the programme - more 'traditional' conference fare is fine, but only to a > point. Conferences for me are much more about connection than anything > else - I read articles and books if I want the finished, extensive product. > I want conferences to inspire me and introduce me to exciting people. > > OTHER CONFERENCE STUFF > > Sarah mentioned the size of the conference (and the expense of it for > many). I don't know if this is worth thinking about, but another > organisation I was once part of used to have an annual conference of its > members, who were from all over the world. It got difficult and expensive > for many people to meet that way, so they moved to having conferences on > each continent instead with a 'global gathering' every two or three years. > So maybe we could look to alternate with a continental/national conference > one year and a big global shindig the next? Or have more > web/internet-based ways of sharing and connecting - if not streaming, then > weeks/months where we actively work to share stuff via blogs or online > repositories or YouTube or Twitter or whatever works best for what we want > to share. > > Ruth > > > > > _______________________________________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Natalya Godbold PhD Candidate (Human Information Behaviour / Health Communication) Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences University of Technology, Sydney ?`~.. ?><((((?>?. .~??`~.. ?><((((?>?. .~??`~.. ?><((((?>?. .><((((?>`~.??.~??`~.?.~??`~...?><((((?> .,,.~??`~.. ?><((((?>?. .....,,.><((((?>`~.??.~??`~.?.~??`~...?><((((?> .~??`~.. ?><((((?>?. .,,.~??`~.. ?><((((?>?. .~??`~.. UTS CRICOS Provider Code: 00099F DISCLAIMER: This email message and any accompanying attachments may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message or attachments. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the views of the University of Technology Sydney. Before opening any attachments, please check them for viruses and defects. Think. Green. Do. Please consider the environment before printing this email. From willronb at yahoo.com Fri May 31 09:33:17 2013 From: willronb at yahoo.com (William Bain) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 09:33:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR Message-ID: <1370017997.9639.YahooMailNeo@web122101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Dear AOIRers, I just wanted to note that recently the tendency on air-l seems to be that a discussive moment springs up from time to time, instead of being more constant, as in the past. Guess that's obvious from what's been said on this thread. However, in my humble, the cfp's and tecnho refs are great but I think the listserv is at its most dynamic when lots of opinions are being exchanged. The more info the better as I see it........? Possibly important in terms of renewal & spreading the word? Best wishes, William PhD Student Comparative Literature Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona From joseph.2011 at reagle.org Fri May 31 10:34:38 2013 From: joseph.2011 at reagle.org (Joseph Reagle) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 13:34:38 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR In-Reply-To: <1370017997.9639.YahooMailNeo@web122101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1370017997.9639.YahooMailNeo@web122101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <51A8DF2E.4080600@reagle.org> On 05/31/2013 12:33 PM, William Bain wrote: > from what's been said on this thread. However, > in my humble, the cfp's and tecnho refs are great > but I think the listserv is at its most dynamic > when lots of opinions are being exchanged. air-l certainly seems much more like a massive announce list than a discussion list presently, and hence I hesitate (including now) to violate this presumed focus. And this tends to be a self-perpetuating phenomenon. Perhaps it would be worthwhile to have an announce and discuss list? From enicole at umich.edu Fri May 31 10:39:15 2013 From: enicole at umich.edu (Nicole Ellison) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 13:39:15 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. Message-ID: Re: Ruth's comment that: "The internet is always changing and I worry that to fully take on board Nicole's suggestion of only submitting things that had 'findings' ..." I'd like to clarify that this is not what I said at all, nor do I think this should be the case. I'm actually pretty shocked that my note was interpreted this way. My comment was about the need for different kinds of presentation formats that support different kinds of work. For empirical ("straight") research, I think it makes sense to include "findings" when assessments about quality are being made. The perceived low-quality of the conference (and its subsequent implications for funding, tenure decisions, etc.) have been noted by others, and I think encouraging people to include their findings when submitting empirical work will go a long way towards addressing the problems others have noted with regard to cocktail-napkin-notes presentations or excellent abstracts/poor papers. ***I also think there should be separate formats for the other kinds of work that Terri and others have mentioned - be they roundtables, birds of a feather, performances, workshops, etc.*** I think the conference can support these different kinds of presentation modes. I agree that having clearer guidelines for authors and reviewers will help with the reviewing problems that have been noted, as would a larger reviewing pool. Thanks, Nicole -- Nicole B. Ellison Associate Professor School of Information University of Michigan From bakera at ohio.edu Fri May 31 10:52:06 2013 From: bakera at ohio.edu (Baker, Andrea) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 13:52:06 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR Message-ID: <2AB274F3-B1E0-45D6-A11B-87B394351E32@ohio.edu> Hi, everyone, I am out of town for a few days, and wanted to note just that I find this discussion fascinating. I hope we don't cut it off prematurely, but rather let the opinions flow freely. Clearly we are gathering a wide range of opinions on all sides, in response to this year's CFP and reviews, and the nature of AoIR, and its future direction. I hope to weigh in a little later on. cheers, andee From R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk Fri May 31 11:00:20 2013 From: R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk (Deller, Ruth A) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 18:00:20 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Nicole/All Thanks for the comment - apologies if I misunderstood your intentions although I am still a little confused - you state: "My comment was about the need for different kinds of presentation formats that support different kinds of work." - Absolutely, I totally agree with you here. But re: this comment: "For empirical ("straight") research, I think it makes sense to include "findings" when assessments about quality are being made. The perceived low-quality of the conference (and its subsequent implications for funding, tenure decisions, etc.) have been noted by others, and I think encouraging people to include their findings when submitting empirical work will go a long way towards addressing the problems others have noted with regard to cocktail-napkin-notes presentations or excellent abstracts/poor papers." - it seems to suggest (and I may be misreading you so I apologise if so) that any empirical research should be completed with some form of clear 'findings' before submitting an abstract (or equivalent) for a paper - and this is something I'm not very keen on applying as a rule. It's great for some to write abstracts including clear findings, of course, but I do think there is a place for papers that represent works-in-progress, or papers that represent empirical research currently underway that will be completed by the conference time. Indeed, this is often more useful than presenting things that are in press and we can read in journals or books a few weeks later. For one thing, having a conference paper accepted gives people an impetus to work on understanding, interpreting and analysing their data (if they have data, that is) rather than putting it off. For another, it keeps things 'fresh' and it also allows comments and questions that may provide vital input into the shaping of publications. And, of course, it opens up the space for PhD students who won't have concrete 'findings' often until later in their project. I don't think that's unique to us, by the way, the majority of conferences I've attended (as I mentioned) have papers at all stages of the process, so if people do have some findings to put in their abstract/submission, then that's great, but I would be very wary about making that the standard everyone should have to meet in order to give a paper. That was what I meant in my response to your earlier comment - however, I may still be misreading your intention here and apologies if that's the case. If you just mean 'it'd be good to put in your findings if you can at this stage but it's cool if you can't' rather than 'it's a must if you've done empirical research to put your findings in and if you're still figuring them out then you can't submit anything yet' then fair enough. Ruth ________________________________________ From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] on behalf of Nicole Ellison [enicole at umich.edu] Sent: 31 May 2013 18:39 To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. Re: Ruth's comment that: "The internet is always changing and I worry that to fully take on board Nicole's suggestion of only submitting things that had 'findings' ..." I'd like to clarify that this is not what I said at all, nor do I think this should be the case. I'm actually pretty shocked that my note was interpreted this way. My comment was about the need for different kinds of presentation formats that support different kinds of work. For empirical ("straight") research, I think it makes sense to include "findings" when assessments about quality are being made. The perceived low-quality of the conference (and its subsequent implications for funding, tenure decisions, etc.) have been noted by others, and I think encouraging people to include their findings when submitting empirical work will go a long way towards addressing the problems others have noted with regard to cocktail-napkin-notes presentations or excellent abstracts/poor papers. ***I also think there should be separate formats for the other kinds of work that Terri and others have mentioned - be they roundtables, birds of a feather, performances, workshops, etc.*** I think the conference can support these different kinds of presentation modes. I agree that having clearer guidelines for authors and reviewers will help with the reviewing problems that have been noted, as would a larger reviewing pool. Thanks, Nicole -- Nicole B. Ellison Associate Professor School of Information University of Michigan _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From tsenft at gmail.com Fri May 31 11:13:41 2013 From: tsenft at gmail.com (Terri Senft) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 14:13:41 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR In-Reply-To: <51A8DF2E.4080600@reagle.org> References: <1370017997.9639.YahooMailNeo@web122101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <51A8DF2E.4080600@reagle.org> Message-ID: Some quick things I wanted to throw in here: 1. First, It has come to my attention that some of the hardworking Conference Committee folks feel a bit "thrown under the bus" by these conversations. I wanted to say I feel lousy about this. One problem of striking while the iron is hot is that sometimes people feel burned by what transpires. This can especially be the case when those people are also feeling burned out--and who wouldn't feel burned out after 123678924 million conference submissions? I promise--and I hope anyone who has participated in these threads will do the same--not to talk here and privately, and then flake out when it's time to try and make things right. Personally, I have a bunch of ideas about how I can help, with submission guidelines, reviewer training, and maybe as part of a "critical and cultural theory" track, if we start to track. I promise to make good on my bitching and moaning by being more of a team player to make things right. I encourage others to do the same, here and now, in writing, so the Exec knows who to hunt down, after the smoke clears from these talks. 2. Re: the discussion Nicole raised about "straight" research: Because I know you follow my personal life (don't even front), I will remind that Nicole is a dear friend and a colleague whose work I admire and cite constantly. She values what I do, and I value what she does, and sometimes, we even do the same things! One more time: what I am trying to suss is not whether 'straight' or experimental/theoretical work is better stuff, but whether AoIR can hold both dear in practice. We all talk a big game about the interdisciplinary life, but if we are going back to the same old same old when the rubber meets the road, that's something people have a right to know. 3. Re: Barry's comment about doctoral candidates and quality: SHAME ON YOU for writing so dismissively about our strongest organizational component. You know how much you've influenced me as an intellectual and how I love you as a human being, but man, sometimes you miss the boat. To wit: You say, "Everyone is not Terri Senft," which appeals to my supermodel nature so thanks, but you don't get that as an intellectual I didn't start this way. It was raw, sheer luck that Andrew Herman and Tom Swiss grabbed me to contribute AS A GRAD STUDENT to a conference ( later a book) that for all intents and purposes, began this organization. You know what the conference's name was? THE WEB: MYTH, METAPHOR, MAGIC.How's that for hippy dippy? You want the next round of Terri Senfts? You need to GROW THEM. And it starts with things like conferences. I think getting some shady, half baked submissions is worth it. Others don't. I get it. Just want to know if it's time for me, and others like me, to move on--no harm, no foul. 3. I love Joseph's idea about an Announce list and a Discuss list. In the most informal poll ever among Twitter users, it seems lots of them won't discuss stuff in email format because they fear 'cluttering' the list (among other concerns.) An Announce list would keep people tangentially interested in Internet Studies up to date, and a Discuss list might better foster longer um, discussions. I think that's enough from me. Fondly--no really! T Because I know you follow my personal life (don't even front), I On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Joseph Reagle wrote: > On 05/31/2013 12:33 PM, William Bain wrote: > >> from what's been said on this thread. However, >> in my humble, the cfp's and tecnho refs are great >> but I think the listserv is at its most dynamic >> when lots of opinions are being exchanged. >> > > air-l certainly seems much more like a massive announce list than a > discussion list presently, and hence I hesitate (including now) to violate > this presumed focus. And this tends to be a self-perpetuating phenomenon. > > Perhaps it would be worthwhile to have an announce and discuss list? > > ______________________________**_________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/** > listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Dr. Theresa M. Senft Global Liberal Studies Program School of Arts & Sciences New York University 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 home: *www.terrisenft.net ** *(needs a serious updating) facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft twitter: @terrisenft From R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk Fri May 31 11:19:39 2013 From: R.A.Deller at shu.ac.uk (Deller, Ruth A) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 18:19:39 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR In-Reply-To: References: <1370017997.9639.YahooMailNeo@web122101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <51A8DF2E.4080600@reagle.org>, Message-ID: Terri - thanks for saying this: "1. First, It has come to my attention that some of the hardworking Conference Committee folks feel a bit "thrown under the bus" by these conversations" and reminding us that there's a team working really hard on IR14 right now. I hope the conference committee don't feel too downhearted by all of this discussion - I know how much work goes into these things and knowing who the Denver team are, am confident it will be absolutely brilliant in October - so please guys, don't take any of it personally and know we appreciate your hard work. These conversations are what happen with a bunch of opinionated academics from various traditions get together and I trust something productive will come from it, but I hope no-one takes things too much to heart. Ruth ________________________________________ From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org [air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] on behalf of Terri Senft [tsenft at gmail.com] Sent: 31 May 2013 19:13 To: Joseph Reagle Cc: William Bain; air-l at listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR Some quick things I wanted to throw in here: 1. First, It has come to my attention that some of the hardworking Conference Committee folks feel a bit "thrown under the bus" by these conversations. I wanted to say I feel lousy about this. One problem of striking while the iron is hot is that sometimes people feel burned by what transpires. This can especially be the case when those people are also feeling burned out--and who wouldn't feel burned out after 123678924 million conference submissions? I promise--and I hope anyone who has participated in these threads will do the same--not to talk here and privately, and then flake out when it's time to try and make things right. Personally, I have a bunch of ideas about how I can help, with submission guidelines, reviewer training, and maybe as part of a "critical and cultural theory" track, if we start to track. I promise to make good on my bitching and moaning by being more of a team player to make things right. I encourage others to do the same, here and now, in writing, so the Exec knows who to hunt down, after the smoke clears from these talks. 2. Re: the discussion Nicole raised about "straight" research: Because I know you follow my personal life (don't even front), I will remind that Nicole is a dear friend and a colleague whose work I admire and cite constantly. She values what I do, and I value what she does, and sometimes, we even do the same things! One more time: what I am trying to suss is not whether 'straight' or experimental/theoretical work is better stuff, but whether AoIR can hold both dear in practice. We all talk a big game about the interdisciplinary life, but if we are going back to the same old same old when the rubber meets the road, that's something people have a right to know. 3. Re: Barry's comment about doctoral candidates and quality: SHAME ON YOU for writing so dismissively about our strongest organizational component. You know how much you've influenced me as an intellectual and how I love you as a human being, but man, sometimes you miss the boat. To wit: You say, "Everyone is not Terri Senft," which appeals to my supermodel nature so thanks, but you don't get that as an intellectual I didn't start this way. It was raw, sheer luck that Andrew Herman and Tom Swiss grabbed me to contribute AS A GRAD STUDENT to a conference ( later a book) that for all intents and purposes, began this organization. You know what the conference's name was? THE WEB: MYTH, METAPHOR, MAGIC.How's that for hippy dippy? You want the next round of Terri Senfts? You need to GROW THEM. And it starts with things like conferences. I think getting some shady, half baked submissions is worth it. Others don't. I get it. Just want to know if it's time for me, and others like me, to move on--no harm, no foul. 3. I love Joseph's idea about an Announce list and a Discuss list. In the most informal poll ever among Twitter users, it seems lots of them won't discuss stuff in email format because they fear 'cluttering' the list (among other concerns.) An Announce list would keep people tangentially interested in Internet Studies up to date, and a Discuss list might better foster longer um, discussions. I think that's enough from me. Fondly--no really! T Because I know you follow my personal life (don't even front), I On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Joseph Reagle wrote: > On 05/31/2013 12:33 PM, William Bain wrote: > >> from what's been said on this thread. However, >> in my humble, the cfp's and tecnho refs are great >> but I think the listserv is at its most dynamic >> when lots of opinions are being exchanged. >> > > air-l certainly seems much more like a massive announce list than a > discussion list presently, and hence I hesitate (including now) to violate > this presumed focus. And this tends to be a self-perpetuating phenomenon. > > Perhaps it would be worthwhile to have an announce and discuss list? > > ______________________________**_________________ > The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/** > listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: > http://www.aoir.org/ > -- Dr. Theresa M. Senft Global Liberal Studies Program School of Arts & Sciences New York University 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 home: *www.terrisenft.net ** *(needs a serious updating) facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft twitter: @terrisenft _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From dtoews at yorku.ca Fri May 31 11:26:38 2013 From: dtoews at yorku.ca (David Toews) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 14:26:38 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. Message-ID: <1370024798.51a8eb5eb9a34@mymail.yorku.ca> I am an outsider looking in, I don't attend AOIR. Nor do I attend AA, but I do lurk on this listserve and I consequently I feel free to take from Terri's list of questions the problem of "Who are we?" I'm not a part of the we, so for me its more a problem of "who are you?". I'm actually very interested in the question of "who are you". From what I can see, you are an organization of communications scholars rooted in the idea that the internet represents a dramatically new media of communication who are at the same time trying to downplay this drama because you are at the same time rooted in the notion that communications as a field still needs to be more professionalized. So your choice to me seems simple: a) make it explicit that this is a communications organization with respectable professional standards, or b) re-think your objectives: are you committed to such objects 'the internet' and 'media' or are you open thinkers enough to pursue new ways of imagining the convergence of the social, cultural, and technological? I would think (b) would be alot more interesting. The world has enough 'communications' conferences and organization. Two cents worth from an outsider. -- Dr. David Toews, PhD Assistant Professor Sociology Department York University 2060 Vari Hall 4700 Keele Street Toronto, Ontario Canada M3J 1P3 Tel. 416-736-2100 ext. 60307 Fax. 416-736-5370 dtoews at yorku.ca Follow me on Twitter! http://twitter.com/dtoews From wellman at chass.utoronto.ca Fri May 31 16:31:49 2013 From: wellman at chass.utoronto.ca (Barry Wellman) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 19:31:49 -0400 Subject: [Air-L] terri misinterpreted me Message-ID: just for the record, as these things perpetuate. Barry Wellman _______________________________________________________________________ S.D. Clark Professor FRSC NetLab Director Faculty of Information (iSchool) 611 Bissell Building 140 St. George St. University of Toronto Toronto Canada M5S 3G6 http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman twitter: @barrywellman NETWORKED:The New Social Operating System. Lee Rainie & Barry Wellman MIT Press http://amzn.to/zXZg39 Print $22 Kindle $16 Old/NewCyberTimes http://bit.ly/c8N9V8 ________________________________________________________________________ From sflorini at indiana.edu Fri May 31 16:34:13 2013 From: sflorini at indiana.edu (Sarah Florini) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 18:34:13 -0500 Subject: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR Message-ID: HI, all. I just want to echo what has already been said about the conference organizers. You guys are awesome. I appreciate all your work. I'm sure everyone feels the same. I, personally, see this conversation as part of the growing pains of the organization. The change in the submission process just happened to be the thing that sparked it. But, the conversation was probably going to happen sooner or later. If such conversations didn't happen occasionally, AoiR would become calcified and cease to be the reflexive intellectual space we all seem to appreciate. But, I have nothing by love and praise for the conference organizers. There have been a lot of good ideas put forth. I think the track idea might be a useful one to think about. We're an interdisciplinary organization, and if we want to have an interdiscipinary conference we need to try and find a way to accommodate the disciplinary needs of members. That way people can "fit" AoIR into what they need to be doing for tenure, promotion, travel funds, etc. A lot of people have said that their home departments don't take AoIR conferences seriously and won't give them funding to come. Those people need a peer refereed full paper that can be published in proceedings to justify their attendance to their departments. I would hate to see AoiR conferences loose those people and their work. So, we should keep those needs in mind. But, we also need to keep in mind the points that have already been made about work in-progress, performances, activist work, etc. It seems like there could be some kind of track system for different kinds of work so that we can be more confident that those different "flavors" of contribution are being evaluated appropriate criteria. Also, ditto to what Terri said about being willing to help. As these problems get tackled, I'm always happy to help with what I can. Best, Sarah Florini A.W. Mellon Postdoctoral Fellow Department of Communication Arts University of Wisconsin-Madison From huatongs at gmail.com Fri May 31 16:35:14 2013 From: huatongs at gmail.com (Huatong Sun) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 16:35:14 -0700 Subject: [Air-L] =?windows-1252?q?Conference_review=2C_=93sampling_procedu?= =?windows-1252?q?re=2C=94_and_interdisciplinarity?= Message-ID: Dear Terri, I was Reviewer 3 for your roundtable proposal who asked about sampling procedure. Thanks for your feedback to my review, and I appreciate having this chance to engage in a discussion of exploring the interdisciplinarity of the AOIR. Maybe you don?t remember, I met you and Nicole in the CSCW workshop on digital identity in Chicago in 2004, and I enjoyed chatting with you about your book project of camgirls at that time. In this message, I'd like to clarify about some misunderstanding about my review and share my thoughts. Hopefully this side of reviewer?s story will help improve the quality of future AOIR conferences, :). A disclaimer first: I saw most of the current discussion about the AOIR review system started from this year?s paper template; however, I didn?t use that template to review your proposal, and I reread the CFP part concerning the roundtable session to make sure I understood the expectation of the conference organizers for this format before reviewing your piece (since I didn?t get particular review guidelines for roundtable proposals). And I do support work-in-progress submissions: I regularly submit this type of work for feedback myself and I organized a review of this type of submissions for a conference last year. Let?s go back to the review. A review is just a review, one person?s opinion about certain research, and I?m upset to see such a review is misinterpreted in this context of a discussion on how to make an interdisciplinary conference better. So far I only attended AOIR once (as many interdisciplinary researchers with small travel budgets on this list, I have to be highly selective on the conferences I go). While I enjoyed the fresh ideas at AOIR, I was disappointed to see some presentations only had the depth of news reporting, which I regarded as an issue of description vs. interpretation in research. Of course your proposal is much more than that, but I don?t want to deny that my past experience influenced my review. I wanted to see more of the details, as I wrote in the comment. I guess one could understand my feelings if s/he serves on a job search committee: There are always those moments of disappointment when you see a stellar job applicant looks glorious on paper articulates his/her research framework poorly in a phone interview. By all the means, I?m sorry about the misunderstanding and frustration that came from my unsophisticated use of ?sample? in review comments. I?m a qualitative researcher, and I don?t do experimental social science research at all. When I asked about ?sampling procedures? in review, I simply wanted to know how you chose your cases for cross-cultural comparison because I reviewed many cross-cultural studies that picked up their sites randomly without justification. The lesson I learned from this case is that I would be much more careful about my wording in review in the future, particularly for this type of interdisciplinary conferences. Even though I didn?t intend to, people could misinterpret the connotation that go with certain words. I apologize about this misuse. On the other end, I was wondering whether the sampling question lacked legitimacy if it had been raised by an experimental social scientist. Isn?t one part of the joys of attending this kind of interdisciplinary conferences is to have our ideas collided in different perspectives? Yes, we are looking for camaraderie in professional communities, but we also want to see our ideas inquired and challenged by people who share research interests in similar topics but employ different research methodologies. Or maybe are we just still so discipline-rooted? The conference review process is always an interesting and heated topic for discussion. I?d like to recommend Jonathan Grudin?s recent piece: ?Varieties of Conference Experiences? (The Information Society, 29: 71?77, 2013). Citing Anderson?s research, he wrote: ?A selective conference accepts perhaps 5 percent that most experts would agree are strong, dismisses about 50 percent that attract no positive reviews, and arguably conducts a lottery to select among the rest to fill the remaining slots? (p. 75). For an interdisciplinary conference like AOIR, it is not a surprise that we have arguments about those selected papers. Yes, my submission was selected this year, but the one before this was rejected. As a writing scholar, I saw the problem of the paper template, and I discussed it in length with my colleague Jim Porter as we both tried hard to fit our own papers into that template before the deadline. I hope we are able to find a better system to review papers, and this is why I wrote to share another side of the story. Terri, I feel your pain about center and marginality, as my work was considered marginal. I still remembered how I was stunned to find that I was the only one who had a different skin color from dozens of attendees in a big meeting room as I was respectfully nodding my head and earnestly taking notes of the feedback for my dissertation proposal at a graduate research network years ago. In retrospect, I?m grateful for the critical (and sometimes brutal) feedback. It has taught me how to negotiate in a milieu of diverse perspectives, learn to be open-minded, and not to be offended by the face value of the words; of course it helped me improve my project eventually. I always use that experience to remind myself to be supportive to new work. I hope this note clarifies some confusions and misunderstanding about my review. I?m looking forward to reading more exciting work from you! Best, Huatong ------------------------------------------------------------------ Huatong Sun, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Digital Media Studies Interdisciplinary Arts and Sciences University of Washington Tacoma http://faculty.washington.edu/htsun/ Book: Cross-Cultural Technology Design: Creating Culture-Sensitive Technology for Local Users http://global.oup.com/academic/product/cross-cultural-technology-design-9780199744763 From loriken at illinois.edu Fri May 31 17:56:15 2013 From: loriken at illinois.edu (Kendall, Lori) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2013 00:56:15 +0000 Subject: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <72A7C5438AAF2B4382455117C749427D2A4961E8@CITESMBX1.ad.uillinois.edu> Hey folks, I've reviewed submissions for most of the IR conferences, and have been on the Conference Committee for three years now, as program chair and as VP. In October, I'll be AoIR's incoming president, and will continue on the committee in that capacity. As such, I've been following this discussion with a great deal of interest and thought. I want to thank all of you for your thoughtful comments and ideas. I also want to say, first and foremost, that you all rock, and our conference rocks. Rest assured that the decisions on what to accept were very difficult; if we have not managed to take your submission for this conference it's not a reflection on the quality of your work. We simply had too much good work. I hope I'll see you all in Denver, because I can promise you it will be a great conference. What I mostly hear when I talk to people who attend the IR conferences is that they are better in many ways than other conferences they attend. I have also heard people say that this perception doesn't always extend to people in their departments, disciplines, etc. That's sad, and I hope we can do a better job of showing people outside of AoIR who we are and what we do. I know that desire has driven many of the things Alex and the other members of the executive committee have been trying to do over the past several years. SPIR, and the (slightly) longer submissions, is part of those efforts. I see much of the struggle here as part of the hard work of being interdisciplinary. That struggle will continue in the process of planning the conference, including the work of reviewing. There have been a lot of good suggestions that have come up in this discussion, and I'm assembling these for later reflection and discussion amongst the conference committee and the executive committee. About the only thing I'll say upfront is that we have a tradition of avoiding tracks at AoIR, and I'm not convinced we should abandon that tradition. That seems to me to be a way to move away from interdisciplinarity, back to our separate silos, rather than mixing it up, and exposing ourselves to the wide variety of types of work that appear at the IR conferences. If anything, I'll be pushing this year and the next few years to mix things up more. Thanks again for all your hard work, and I look forward to seeing you in Denver! Lori From bury417 at yahoo.ca Fri May 31 18:32:22 2013 From: bury417 at yahoo.ca (Rhiannon Bury) Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 18:32:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR In-Reply-To: <72A7C5438AAF2B4382455117C749427D2A4961E8@CITESMBX1.ad.uillinois.edu> References: <72A7C5438AAF2B4382455117C749427D2A4961E8@CITESMBX1.ad.uillinois.edu> Message-ID: <1370050342.5962.YahooMailNeo@web140604.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Great response Lori. You rock! :) I totally get receiving too many great submissions and having to make hard choices.? But investing all that time writing a short paper, fiddling around with formatting etc makes that rejection even more disappointing. We expect that with a journal submission but for a conference abstract? I still firmly believe that the potential of a paper can still be assessed in 600 words. I would also never use more than 2 reviewers unless there was a complete difference of opinion. If we don't want to go with "tracks", and we want to remain interdisciplinary, then we need to work on the proposal guidelines so that they do not disadvantage submissions? based in humanities and or cultural studies that are primarily theoretical engagements. (I don't want to say theoretically-based because I would hope much empirical work would be theoretically informed). Cultural studies papers do not have "Methodology" sections. They do not have "Discussions of Findings." So some "and/or" phrasing will be needed. One suggestion would be to is add a place on the form to indicate "discipline(s)".?? Reviewers should also specify their disciplinary orientation not just their areas of interest or expertise. best Rhiannon ? ________________________________ From: "Kendall, Lori" To: "air-l at listserv.aoir.org" Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 6:56:15 PM Subject: Re: [Air-L] Let's Talk About AoIR Hey folks, I've reviewed submissions for most of the IR conferences, and have been on the Conference Committee for three years now, as program chair and as VP. In October, I'll be AoIR's incoming president, and will continue on the committee in that capacity. As such, I've been following this discussion with a great deal of interest and thought. I want to thank all of you for your thoughtful comments and ideas. I also want to say, first and foremost, that you all rock, and our conference rocks. Rest assured that the decisions on what to accept were very difficult; if we have not managed to take your submission for this conference it's not a reflection on the quality of your work. We simply had too much good work. I hope I'll see you all in Denver, because I can promise you it will be a great conference. What I mostly hear when I talk to people who attend the IR conferences is that they are better in many ways than other conferences they attend. I have also heard people say that this perception doesn't always extend to people in their departments, disciplines, etc. That's sad, and I hope we can do a better job of showing people outside of AoIR who we are and what we do. I know that desire has driven many of the things Alex and the other members of the executive committee have been trying to do over the past several years. SPIR, and the (slightly) longer submissions, is part of those efforts. I see much of the struggle here as part of the hard work of being interdisciplinary. That struggle will continue in the process of planning the conference, including the work of reviewing. There have been a lot of good suggestions that have come up in this discussion, and I'm assembling these for later reflection and discussion amongst the conference committee and the executive committee. About the only thing I'll say upfront is that we have a tradition of avoiding tracks at AoIR, and I'm not convinced we should abandon that tradition. That seems to me to be a way to move away from interdisciplinarity, back to our separate silos, rather than mixing it up, and exposing ourselves to the wide variety of types of work that appear at the IR conferences. If anything, I'll be pushing this year and the next few years to mix things up more. Thanks again for all your hard work, and I look forward to seeing you in Denver! Lori _______________________________________________ The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ From mariarosariataddeo at gmail.com Fri May 31 23:20:29 2013 From: mariarosariataddeo at gmail.com (Mariariosaria Taddeo) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2013 07:20:29 +0100 Subject: [Air-L] CFP: Workshop Ethics of Cyber Conflict Message-ID: <6D48C248-4A64-4A00-BBCF-7B7BADB33891@gmail.com> Dear Colleagues, Apologies for cross posting. Please find below a CFP on a 'Workshop on the Ethics of Cyber Conflict', which I am organising in collaboration with the NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence. With kind regards, Mariarosaria Taddeo -- Dr. Mariarosaria Taddeo Research Fellow in Cyber Security and Ethics, PAIS, University of Warwick Research Associate - Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford http://taddeo.philosophyofinformation.net/index.html ************************************* Ethics of Cyber Conflict Time: November 2013 Place: Rome, Italy Participation fee: none In the age of the so-called information revolution, the ability to control, disrupt or manipulate the enemy?s information infrastructure has become as decisive as weapon superiority with respect to determining the outcome of conflicts. So much so that Pentagon?s definition of cyberspace as a new domain in which war is waged, alongside land, sea, air and space, comes as no surprise. The deployment of cyber conflicts as part of a state?s defensive or offensive strategy is a fast growing phenomenon, which is rapidly changing the dynamics of combat as well as the role that warfare plays in political negotiations and the life of civil societies. Such changes are not the exclusive concern of the military, for they also have a bearing on ethicists and policymakers, since existing ethical theories of war, together with national and international regulations, struggle to address the novelties of this phenomenon. The issue could not be more pressing and there is a much felt and fast escalating need to share information and coordinate ethical theorising about cyber conflicts. Contributions to the workshop will address issues concerning the way ICTs are affecting our ethical views of conflicts and warfare, as well as the analysis of just-war principles in the light of the dissemination of cyber conflicts; humanitarian military interventions based on ICTs; whether preventive acts of cyber war may satisfy jus-ad-bellum criteria; challenges of upholding jus-in-bello standards in cyber warfare, especially in asymmetric conflicts; attribution and proportionality of the response to cyber attacks; moral permissibility of automated responses and ethical deployment of military robotic weapons. More details can be found on the workshop website http://ccdcoe.org/428.html . The workshop will be a two-day event organised by the NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence and chaired by Dr Mariarosaria Taddeo, Department of Politics and International Studies, University of Warwick. The event will gather ethicists, experts in military studies, policymakers and experts in cyber security to discuss the ethical problems caused by cyber conflicts. Submission of Papers: Authors are required to submit an extended abstract of the planned paper which should describe the topic and set out the main aspects and structure of the research (up to 1000 words). Following a preliminary review and acceptance of the abstract, the authors will be requested to submit the full paper that meets high academic quality, which will be considered for a publication in an international peer-reviewed journal. Speakers will be offered travel, transfer from,and to the airport, accommodation for the duration of the event. Submission details, author guidance and other practical information will be made available on the Centre?s website latest by August 2013. Important Dates Extended abstracts (1000 words): 9 September 2013 Notification of acceptance: 30 September 2013 Full paper: 07 November 2013 Registration is required for this event, please contact events -at- ccdcoe.org For enquiries about the workshop, please contact Lt Ludovica Glorioso (ludovica.glorioso -at- ccdcoe.org) or Anna-Maria Talih?rm (anna-maria.taliharm -at- ccdcoe.org)