[Air-l] questioning authority

Fri Mar 30 14:20:24 PDT 2007

All:

I agree again Ted. One does not have to agree with a political
philosophy to see certain facts that are incontrovertible but colored
with an agenda. Often times, our worst critics are right about us;
however, it is the underlying spirit of those comments and the motive
behind the comments that betray them when one is conducting research. I
often find that I learn as much, if not more, from the opposing
viewpoint when conducting research or analysis. Facts are facts, but is
the context in which facts are often used that color the truth, the
whole truth and nothing but the truth as my law professor was fond of
saying. 

-----Original Message-----
From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org
[mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Ted M Coopman
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 5:10 PM
To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org
Subject: Re: [Air-l] questioning authority

All,

I'm all for critical. If anything we are not critical enough.

My point is the difference in critiquing a media outlet for what it is
or is not (easy) as opposed to critiquing the policies of government
and/or the practices of an industry (more difficult).

I may not share the underlying neo-liberal ideology that drives the
Economist, but that does not mean that their analysis is faulty or lacks
value. You just have to adjust for ideology/bias. While Wired is
certainly not in the same league, it is still (IMO) a valuable resource.

-TED

Ted M. Coopman
Department of Communication
University of Washington

On Fri, 30 Mar 2007, Heidelberg, Chris wrote:

> Ted:
>
> You are absolutely correct in opinion. Many of the journals simply did

> not have the information that I needed when I began my research back 
> in 2001, and many of the books are just beginning to catch up within 
> the past two years. The point is this: once the technology has been 
> employed in most, but not all cases, the critical analysis is often
way too late.
> Where has the criticism been for the systemic erosion of individual 
> rights versus strengthened corporate rights that has been going on 
> since literally 1984 since the AT&T break up.
>
> Chris
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org
> [mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Ted M Coopman
> Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 1:13 PM
> To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org
> Subject: Re: [Air-l] questioning authority
>
> All,
>
> Ultimately, Wired is a just tech industry rag that reflects that 
> industry's agendas, philosophies, and enthusiastic support of a 
> particular form of global capitalism. If a researcher is interested in

> the impact, consumption habits, and trends of technology and culture 
> in that sphere, then this is good place to start.
>
> Honestly, I find more worthwhile information and perspectives on the 
> state of high tech in Wired than in most journals. After all, those 
> individuals, companies, and products highlighted have a significant 
> impact on how technology  is developed and packaged, which has a huge 
> effect on the development of culture, social practice, and the
economy.
> The bias in their representation should, like in all media, be taken 
> as a given and a matter of degree.
>
> The critiques of Wired, as excluding alternative perspectives that 
> represent critical analysis, excluding voices that don't adhere to its

> proto-libertarian philosophy or that challenge its Utopian approach to

> technology, and is at times sexist or classist, are valid, but not 
> particularly surprising in the context of commercial trade or popular 
> media.
>
> It seems obvious such a commercial enterprise would ignore these 
> perspectives as antithetical to its basic philosophy and self-interest

> and those of its target readership. Virtually all commercial media, 
> especially special interest/trade magazines, ignore systemic
critiques.
> Why would Wired be any different?
>
> -TED
>
> Ted M. Coopman
> Department of Communication
> University of Washington
>
> On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Peter Timusk wrote:
>
>> Of course and what the internet could become is almost meaningless 
>> (through repetition) asked all the time. How do pop magazines mesh 
>> with technology progress over time? How real are these next steps or 
>> really different.
>>
>> Are there any models of this idea of the next step in the pop media 
>> or
>
>> technical press or even the academic press and consumer prices for 
>> technology or Moore's law of decreasing processor size.
>>
>> As a further critique and why I am trying to do internet impact 
>> studies I believe there was very little new written about the 
>> internet
>
>> in academia in the late and middle 1990's most was repetitive 
>> scholarship.
>>
>> Wired has been well critiqued by women scholars that I know 
>> of...mostly for sexism but also racism and abilist writing and being 
>> highly pro capitalist. What is missing is the plain none hyped 
>> impacts
>
>> of the net.
>>
>> Witness my systems science course where we are studying bio- 
>> evolutionary models of economics and evolutionary algorithms and not 
>> one female scholar on our reading list. Very cool systems science 
>> views NOT.
>>
>>
>> Peter Timusk,
>> B.Math statistics (2002), B.A. legal studies (2006) Carleton 
>> University Systems Science Graduate student, University of Ottawa
> (2006-2007).
>> just trying to stay linear.
>> Read by hundreds of lurkers every week.
>>
>>>   In fact, I imagine there are significant, perhaps 
>>> impossible-to-overcome, methodological hurdles for one who would 
>>> attempt to decide or measure what the Internet "is [for]."
>>>
>>>
>>> Kevin
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/
> _______________________________________________
> 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/