November 2006 - Air-L - lists.aoir.org

cfp Special Issue of Fibreculture
by O'Riordan, Kate 22 Nov '06

22 Nov '06

Call for papers After convergence, what connects? :: fibreculture :: has established itself as Australasia's leading forum for discussion of internet theory, culture, and research. The Fibreculture Journal is a peer-reviewed journal that explores the issues and ideas of concern and interest to both the Fibreculture network and wider social formations. Papers are invited for the 'After convergence' issue of the Fibreculture Journal, to be published early in 2008. Guest editors are Caroline Bassett (Sussex, UK), Maren Hartmann (Bremen, Germany) and Kate O'Riordan (Lancaster/Sussex, UK). There are guidelines for the format and submission of contributions at http://journal.fibreculture.org These guidelines need to be followed in all cases. Contributions should be sent electronically, as word attachments, to: Guest editors: Caroline Bassett (c.bassett(a)sussex.ac.uk <mailto:c.bassett@sussex.ac.uk> ) Maren Hartmann (maren.hartmann@uni-bremen <mailto:maren.hartmann@uni-bremen.de> <mailto:maren.hartmann@uni-erfurt.de> .de) Kate O'Riordan (k.oriordan(a)lancaster.ac.uk) Everything that arises does not converge. A more variegated landscape emerges as processes of digitalization, crystallizations of an intrinsically technological-social, continue re-shaping cultures and re-working societies, not in their image, but into something new. It is increasingly obvious that there is no digital behemoth, no single form, no single function, no New World Order. Rather a series of reconfigurations, reformulations, new functions, new contents, new spaces, new grounds, new uses, have emerged and are emerging within global media networks. In response to the (not unexpected) non-arrival of the unifying beast, which is to say in response to the perceived exhaustion of convergence (or the re-definition of its limits), new disciplinary islands are being declared with 'keep out' and 'invented here' signs all over their beaches. In other words there has been a balkanization of techno-cultural investigation. Thus gaming scholars define themselves against internet scholars, or film scholars, locatives stand distinct from screeners. Particular groups of sub-specialists claim particular modes of inquiry: ethnographers for everyday life, speculative theory for digital art, for instance. Indeed, entire vocabularies, originally invoked in a spirit of general experimentation, are now corralled, restricted and defended by particular groups. If these vocabularies often seize up in the process, refusing to say more than they were meant to say, and in particular refusing the unorthodox connections between the empirical and the speculative, the possible and the desirable, that gave them their energy in the first place, nobody seems to notice. So, there is no behemoth. At the same time we insist that connections are produced and so a question we consider worth addressing is not what unites digital forms as one, but what connects them together as many. Further we want to explore how these connections are made. We are less interested in doing that through mainstreaming a particular critical approach (which is to say drawing different areas back under one critical umbrella, making that the connection), than we are in trying to think about exploring/defining/critiquing some of the shared characteristics of different digital media formations. We believe that despite the exhaustion of convergence metaphors, and the rise of disciplinary sub-divisions, these connections remain crucial. Papers addressing but not limited to the following topics are welcome: * Media/Medium Theory * Difference between and specificity of New Media forms * Issues, Limits, Problems of Convergence. * Re-thinking the vocabulary of Affect/Emotion/Perception * Histories of New Media Theory * 'Technology and Cultural Form' revisited? * Methodologies Deadlines: * 250 word abstracts: due February 28th 2007 * Completed Paper: due September 30th 2007 * Expected Publication: February 28th 2008.

1 0

Two Visiting Tutors in Digital Media
by Niran Abbas 22 Nov '06

22 Nov '06

Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Kingston University. The School of Humanities is seeking to appoint two visiting tutors to teach on either Digital Audio Production or Creative Digital Photography for the MA in Digital Media. The two modules run from second semester for 6 weeks in 2-3 hour blocks once a week (Jan 29th-March 5th; March 13th- April 16th). Dates to be confirmed. Pay is hourly. To apply please send your CV, together with a brief covering letter and the names and contact details of two referees to the MA programme director, Niran Bahjat-Abbas N.Bahjat-Abbas(a)kingston.ac.uk Dr Niran Bahjat-Abbas Senior Lecturer in Media and Cultural Studies (Digital Media) 020 85472000 EXT: 62384 Kingston University School of Humanities, Faculty of Arts & Sciences Penrhyn Road Centre, Penrhyn Road, Kingston, Surrey KT1 2EE MA Digital Media-Programme Director http://fass.kingston.ac.uk/postgraduate/digital_media/index.shtml Descriptors of Modules: Creative Digital Photography This stage of study is practice-focused. Students will carry out the following: Audit their own digital photography skills with a view to augmenting and improving them, using a choice of imaging technologies (e.g. Photoshop, After Effects) to successfully accommodate concepts and themes. Consider, in their practice-based work, the significance of the theoretical frames of reference relevant to their own practical photographic works, from Walter Benjamin and Roland Barthes, to Susan Sontag, Jean Baudrillard, and to contemporary photo-digital approaches such as that of Lev Manovich. Observe and review the practices of contemporary photographic work in a range of genres (including documentary, abstract, personal/amateur, portrait, architecture, fine art). Reflect on these observations of theory and practice and apply findings to their own practical digital photographic projects. Development a reflective process that will produce clear, meaningful and context-sensitive imagery. Use improved digital photographic skills to develop presentation skills and improve final portfolios across the MA programme. Digital Audio Production This module will give students an opportunity to acquire knowledge and understanding of digital audio technology as it applies to digital media production. Students will produce audio soundtracks using a range of computer software. The module will give an introduction to Logic Audio for Mac OS X and Cubase for PCs. It will also cover programs such as Reason and Recycle. The module will include: introduction to the Midi keyboard, music keys and scales understanding Midi how Midi works in Logic and Cubase navigation, basic sequencing and programming synthesis and sampling recording and editing techniques creating environments and understanding plug-ins understanding compression techniques creating and optimising audio files. Students will have access to Reason instruments and will be encouraged to use this tool at the outset to experiment with music genres, sequencing, effects, and automation. In the context of this programme, students will also gain an understanding of production and optimization of audio for digital media distribution platforms such as websites, sound installations, interactive multimedia CD and DVD-ROMs. There are no mandatory requirements for this particular module, though some experience with sound-editing software and an interest in audio production will be desirable. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr Niran Bahjat-Abbas Senior Lecturer in Media and Cultural Studies (Digital Media) RM: T814 020 85472000 EXT: 62384 Kingston University School of Humanities, Faculty of Arts & Sciences Penrhyn Road Centre, Penrhyn Road, Kingston, Surrey KT1 2EE MA in Digital Media Programme Director http://fass.kingston.ac.uk/postgraduate/digital_media/index.shtml _________________________________________________________________ Windows Live Messenger has arrived. Click here to download it for free! http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/?locale=en-gb

1 0

Internet killed the video star
by Wainer Lusoli 22 Nov '06

22 Nov '06

Sorry for the recent wave, we seem to live in interesting times; 2007, that is, according to the Economist. http://www.economist.com/theworldin/business/displayStory.cfm?story_id=81333 68&d=2007 W -------------------------------------------- Wainer Lusoli w.lusoli(a)chester.ac.uk http://www.lusoli.info http://del.icio.us/lusoli

1 0

Call for Participants: Swarm CES 2007 Project
by Julian Kilker 21 Nov '06

21 Nov '06

Swarm CES 2007 call for participants The annual Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas is one of the focal points in the landscape of contemporary consumer culture, but one which as of yet has been mostly overlooked by scholars of technology, society, and popular culture. Its massive sprawl—both conceptually and physically—far outweighs the abilities and resources of any single scholar, so we propose a different approach: this January 2007, we invite academics from across the humanities and qualitative social sciences to join us at in Las Vegas for 3 days of collaborative, on-site research. No predetermined topics, no disciplinary approach preferred – the only requirements are that you study some aspect of technology in a social/cultural context, and that you be willing to try a new approach to research and collaboration. The premise underlying this "swarm scholarship" is straightforward: if we each take a crack at CES, but in a coordinated way, the result will be more interesting, more inclusive, and potentially more insightful than otherwise possible. We hope to demonstrate that such scholarship can be fast, agile, and responsive to contemporary events. Costs should be little more than a plane ticket and in some cases a car rental; housing will be available with UNLV faculty members, some of whom will be participating in the project, and free Press/Analyst credentials can be arranged for the trade show itself. Here's the plan: CES runs from Monday, January 8th through Thursday, January 11th, 2007. We will gather for an introductory dinner Sunday evening (the 7th), in order to meet each other and discuss ideas. Monday and Tuesday are relatively unstructured in the daytime; participants are encouraged to attend the show, inductively developing and fine-tuning research questions and gathering material. In addition, the resources and Special Collections of the UNLV research library located about one mile from the convention site will be available. Both evenings, we'll reconvene for dinner and debriefing, exchanging materials, and discussing ideas and suggestions for the following day. Finally, on Wednesday morning we'll gather on the UNLV campus for a more structured activity: 10-minute "idea-in-progress" talks, each followed by discussion. After we all head home and decompress from this intense (and hopefully fun) few days, we'll each write something sooner rather than later, aiming for generally accessible 20-30 page articles. We'll collectively decide how to publish the results (potential options include a journal special issue or an edited volume, as well as more unconventional new media options), but the goal is to produce a finished work by July 1 (within six months of the show itself). Interested? Contact us by December 1 to sign up (so that we can plan appropriately)... We currently have plans for about eight participants. Julian Kilker, University of Nevada, Las Vegas (kilker(a)nevada.edu) Josh Greenberg, George Mason University (jgreenb2(a)gmu.edu) Schedule summary: January 7th-10th, 2007 - Sun: Participants arrive in Las Vegas throughout the day, gathering for dinner and planning that evening. - Mon: First day of CES, possible early evening introduction to UNLV Special Collections - Tues: Second day of CES, evening discussion of publishing genres and modes - Wed: Presentations with feedback time, leave evening

1 0

Practice vs Scholarship
by Kevin Sherman 21 Nov '06

21 Nov '06

Thanks everybody for your input. It has been very helpful and encouraging, encouragement I really needed at this point in time. I posted this new vs old activism question to a list owned by both scholars and activists and the activists pretty much said: "activism is activism" which i read to mean that in the past people have tried to change things (the world?) and today people are still trying to change things (the world?). (the response to this, i think, is that while the core reasons for activism haven't changed, perhaps the way in which that activism is carried out, has). But their response also had a decidedly anti-scholarship feel to it--"while you scholars are busy studying activism, we're busy actually doing it. by the time your findings come out, we've moved on to new things." But isn't that the plight of the scholar no matter what they study...especially insofar as technology-related topics are concerned? Should I take that response to mean that I shouldn't bother studying activism--in other words, are we talking to ourselves or are we making a difference in the lives of those who practice what we study? Guess I'm having a bit of a...moment. sorry. Kevin Sherman PhD Candidate Centre for Communication Research Auckland University of Technology >>> massa(a)itc.it 22/11/2006 10:52 a.m. >>> It seems nobody suggested this edited collection: Cyberactivism: on-line activism in theory and practice. London: Routledge. Find a review at http://english.ttu.edu/kairos/9.1/reviews/depew/index.htm I have in my toread list this paper that is in this edited collection (but I haven't read it yet): Garrido, M., & Halavais, A. (2003). Mapping networks of support for the Zapatista movement. In M. McCaughey & M. D. Ayers (Eds.), Hope it helps P. On 11/21/06, Kevin Sherman <kevin.sherman(a)aut.ac.nz> wrote: > Can anyone direct me to significant literature regarding what > constitutes old political activism vs new activism--particularly insofar > as its organisation, structure and implementation is concerned? Of > interest is how (and whether) the Internet plays a role in what some are > calling a new (global?) activism. > > Alternatively, if you think there's nothing particularly new about > activism, I'd be interested in that as well... > > I realise this is a fairly broad question, but your responses needn't > be similarly expansive--just a quick thought here or there would be > greatly appreciated! > > Kevin Sherman > PhD Candidate > Centre for Communication Research > Auckland University of Technology > _______________________________________________ > The air-l(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org ( http://aoir.org/ ) > Subscribe, change 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(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org ( http://aoir.org/ ) Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/

3 2

What ever happened to MoveOn.org?
by James Watt 21 Nov '06

21 Nov '06

I have the feeling I'm being a straight man here, but taking the question seriously, MoveOn.org reports a current roster of 3.2 million members. Here's what they said they did in the most recent U.S. election campaign, in which they mainly supported Democrat candidates and raised money for close races: "You made over 7 million calls to voters (and millions more to members)getting people to the polls one by one. You gave over $27 million. And you raised the issues that powered the electionespecially Iraq, which some pundits told Democrats to steer clear of."--Eli Pariser, MoveOn.org Political Action, Oct. 8, 2006 One way they did this was by using e-mail recruitments asking members to sign up on-line to host "calling parties." Then they e-mailed the location of the parties to all members within a close driving distance, urging them to bring their cell phones and make calls encouraging registered Democrat and Independent voters to get to the polls (they didn't waste cell phone minutes on trying to convert Republicans). Much of this was done on a two or three day turn around, and there were hundreds (maybe thousands) of these parties announced. Very impressive from an IT standpoint. I doubt the Republican National Committee feels that their profile has dropped sufficiently... >Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 12:14:31 -0500 >From: Barry Wellman <wellman(a)chass.utoronto.ca> Speaking of which, whatever happened to "Move On" and "Meet Up"? They were highly touted organizing affordances of the Dean campaign in the US just 2-3 years ago. And Dean is chair of the Democratic party in the US. >Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 11:16:56 -0600 (CST) >From: elw(a)stderr.org > >i still get mail from them. often. > >profile seems to have lowered a bit, though... ======================================================== James H. Watt Professor of Communication Director, Social and Behavioral Research Laboratory (http://www.sbrl.rpi.edu) Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute 110 8th Street, Sage Lab 4518 Troy, NY 12180-3590 email: wattj(a)rpi.edu voice: (518) 276-4130 or 276-2784 fax: (518) 276-3740

1 0

new vs old activism
by Kevin Sherman 21 Nov '06

21 Nov '06

Can anyone direct me to significant literature regarding what constitutes old political activism vs new activism--particularly insofar as its organisation, structure and implementation is concerned? Of interest is how (and whether) the Internet plays a role in what some are calling a new (global?) activism. Alternatively, if you think there's nothing particularly new about activism, I'd be interested in that as well... I realise this is a fairly broad question, but your responses needn't be similarly expansive--just a quick thought here or there would be greatly appreciated! Kevin Sherman PhD Candidate Centre for Communication Research Auckland University of Technology

10 9

Re: [Air-l] new vs old activism
by J Patrick Biddix 21 Nov '06

21 Nov '06

My dissertation research focused on the nature of college activism related to Internet Communication Technology (ICT). I've posted most of my current research online and have a few papers under review: www.jpatrickbiddix.net/estudentprotest.html Briefly from my abstract: This study found that todays student protests begin electronically well before the real life action takes place. The capabilities afforded by electronically-enhanced tactics allow students to rapidly and effectively plan, coordinate, mobilize, and execute actions. Perhaps most notably, the Internet and cell phones also allow students to extensively share tactics and assistance before, during, and after a significant action. Additional unique findings of this study concern the role of non-campus organizations in student protests, the use of email to strategize and supplement meetings, and student reliance on technological immediacy. Definitely interested in what you find out through this query. J Patrick Biddix, Ph.D. www.jpatrickbiddix.net --------------------------------- --------------------------------- Sponsored Link Get an Online or Campus degree - Associate's, Bachelor's, or Master's -in less than one year.

2 1

everything old is new again
by Barry Wellman 21 Nov '06

21 Nov '06

I've profited by the discussion about online petitions and "new" activism. But as a guy who got politically active in the late 1950s, I wryly offer the following. "New activism" is what "we" are doing now. "Old activism" is that "they" did a while ago. Speaking of which, whatever happened to "Move On" and "Meet Up"? They were highly touted organizing affordances of the Dean campaign in the US just 2-3 years ago. And Dean is chair of the Democratic party in the US. Barry Wellman _____________________________________________________________________ Barry Wellman S.D. Clark Professor of Sociology NetLab Director Centre for Urban & Community Studies University of Toronto 455 Spadina Avenue Toronto Canada M5S 2G8 fax:+1-416-978-7162 wellman at chass.utoronto.ca http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman for fun: http://chass.utoronto.ca/oldnew/cybertimes.php _____________________________________________________________________

3 2

Petition Tony Blair, online that is
by Stephen Coleman 21 Nov '06

21 Nov '06

I don't share Wainer Lusoli's apparent delight at the arrival of the Ten Downing Street e-petitions tool. From a political perspective, one might ask why citizens are being urged to petition the Prime Minister, when the UK's system of government is not presidential, but parliamentary. More significantly, this technology has been built so that people are only allowed to sign petitions, but not discuss them. Unlike the Scottish Parliament's e-petitions, public deliberation is prohibited. This leads to a narrow notion of democracy without discussion in which petitions can claim neither representative nor deliberative legitimacy. >From the perspective of internet research, this is an interesting illustration of how political design can undermine technical potential. Contrast this with the great tradition of political petitioning that has existed in Britain since the late thirteenth century. The Chartists of the mid-nineteenth-century did not make a political impact by collecting signatures, but by holding mass meetings to discuss the cause of their petition. Imagine iif the Chartists - or the disarmament movement of the 1960s - had been allowed only to plead with the Prime Minister rather than assemble, deliberate and develop their own convictions. Citizens sending petitions via this new e-tool should be encouraged to subvert its intended restrictive use by setting up an alternative web space in which propositions can be openly discussed and revised. Stephen Coleman, Professor of Political Communication, Institute of Communications Studies, University of Leeds

3 2