May 2011 - Air-L - lists.aoir.org

Television in a digital era
by Jo Pierson 25 May '11

25 May '11

Special Issue announcement Television in a digital era - Usage and policy issues Jo Pierson, Joke Bauwens and David Geerts (eds.) Telematics and Informatics - An interdisciplinary journal on the social impacts of new technologies November 2011 ISSN 0736-5853 Elsevier published the Special Issue 'Television in a digital era - Usage and policy issues ' (Guest Editors Jo Pierson, Joke Bauwens and David Geerts) Volume 28 Issue 4 of 'Telematics and Informatics' Journal (Editor-in-Chief Jan Servaes) Synopsis: In drawing and examining the social-cultural, industry and policy processes that accompany the digitization of television, this special issue aims to contribute to a multi-faceted understanding of the conditions and forces that cause the changes and orient the evolution of digital broadcasting. From the empirical evidence and observation presented in the articles we learn that change is never instant, but nevertheless from time to time rapid; that structures sometimes impede change, sometimes speed it up; that television still is television to many people, and at the same time breaks free from its traditional meaning. In dealing with all these juxtapositions this special issue aims to give an informed account of how social institutions, i.e. citizens, consumers, policymakers, industrialists and engineers, are dealing with television’s changes. Within a few decades this will be history, or at best, relevant source material for a historiography of digital television. Contents: Introduction: Ready for use? An old medium in new times (J. Bauwens, J. Pierson and D. Geerts) The promises of iDTV: Between push marketing and consumer needs (W. Van den Broeck, J. Bauwens and J. Pierson) Acceptance and rejection of mobile TV among young adults: A case of college students in South Korea (H. Lee, D. Kim, J. Ryu and S. Lee) Video mediated social interaction between groups: System requirements and technology challenges (D. Williams, M.F. Ursu, J. Meenowa, P. Cesar, I. Kegel and K. Bergström) A Living Lab research approach for mobile TV (D. Schuurman, K. De Moor, L. De Marez and T. Evens) From high hopes to high deficit and back: A historic overview of Europe's HDTV policy and reflections towards the future of HDTV (N. Walravens and C. Pauwels) The digital switchover as an information society initiative: The role of public policy in promoting access to digital ICTs (M. Sourbati) For more information on the book, follow the link below: <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%2356…> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jo Pierson ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Vrije Universiteit Brussel - Free University of Brussels Interdisciplinary Institute for Broadband Technology (IBBT) Studies on Media, Information and Telecommunication (SMIT) Pleinlaan 2 / B-1050 Brussels / Belgium T: + 32 (0)2 629 2412 F: +32 (0)2 629 1700 E: Jo.Pierson(a)vub.ac.be @imuses Office: 0C.005 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: [Air-L] List Submission: Cybersex?
by Trudy Barber 25 May '11

25 May '11

Hi there.. In answer to your question... I think it might have been me.... ;) I created one of the first immerive VR sex installations in1992.. You might also want to look at Stahl Stenslie and Kirk Woolfords CyberSM... Cheers Trudy. Dr. Trudy Barber FHEA FRSA Senior Lecturer in Media School of Creative Arts, Film and Media University of Portsmouth Room 3.19 St. George's Building 141 High Street Portsmouth PO1 2HY United Kingdom Trudy.Barber(a)port.ac.uk T: +44 (0)23 9284 5307 F: +44 (0)23 9284 5372 http://www.port.ac.uk/departments/academic/scafm/staff/title,56309,en.html Ongoing current project see: http://www.cdpt.info Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_mjwJTPc4c >>> Hilary W 25/05/11 5:21 AM >>> Greetings, I was wondering if the list's collective mind could help me with a question: when was cybersex (here defined as two or more individuals engaging in typed descriptions of physical sex acts, emotions etc) first discussed popularly and by whom? The academic history of cybersex extends far back to the Internet's beginnings - lists/MUDs/BBS - and was far more popular back in the 90's than now (when seemingly questions of addiction etc take over apart from Attwood's recent revisit). It all seems to blur together and so far I have Rhinegold (1991) and Turkle (1995) as the earliest and most popularly mentioned discussions. Any thoughts, comments, epiphanies would be greatly appreciated :) -- Hilary Wheaton PhD Candidate Curtin University -http://proceedbydebate.blogspot.com/ -http://hilarywheaton.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ The Air-L(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/

1 0

CfP: Academic MindTrek 2011 - Extended submission deadline 12th June
by Helja Franssila 25 May '11

25 May '11

======================================================================== Academic MindTrek 2011: Call for Papers, Posters, Tutorials, Demos, and Workshops 28th-30th September, 2011 Tampere, Finland http://www.mindtrek.org, http://www.mindtrek.org/2011/academic papers due on: 12th June 2011 (extended) extended deadline for workshops: 27th May 2011 In cooperation with ACM, ACM SIGMM and ACM SIGCHI publications will be published in the ACM digital library and a selected set of high-level contributions will published as book chapters or in journals ======================================================================== Academic MindTrek 2011 Call for Papers, Demonstrations, Tutorials and Workshops We are pleased to invite you to the Academic MindTrek conference from 28th - 30th September 2011, which brings together a cross-disciplinary crowd of people to investigate current and emerging topics of media in the ubiquitous arena. Among the media to be discussed, will be business, social, technical and content-related topics. September 6th is the main Academic day, featuring the following themes: 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, theory, art-works, mixed reality concepts, the Web 3.0, and user experiences that make ubiquitous and ambient media tick. 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. 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. Media Business, Media Production and Media Management Media business and media management face the challenges of the emergence of new forms of digital media. This theme focuses on business studies, policies, practices, and organizational structure of media firms. 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. Tools and Demonstrations The aim is to gather tools and demonstration contributions from researchers and professionals from the communities related to the topics of media in the ubiquitous arena. The objective for the Tools Session is to provide a forum for exchanging experiences and automated solutions to support the topics areas in its various manifestations and needs. The target audience includes members of the academic community, who can demonstrate the results of their research projects implemented in these areas, as well as members of the industry / companies who are interested in presenting or commercial tools for internal use. The Tools Session will consist of presentations and practical demonstrations of the tools selected. MindTrek as an Academic Conference In addition, 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 attend the business conference tracks as part of the academic conference fee during these days as well. 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 experts and thinkers present results from their latest work regarding the development of Internet, interactive media, and the information society. MindTrek 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 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. Academic MindTrek 2011 offers a wider spectrum of topic areas that previously, and we are looking forward for: - case-studies (successful, and especially unsuccessful ones) - oral presentation of fresh and innovative ideas - artistic installations and running system prototypes - user-experience studies and evaluations - technological novelties, evaluations, and solutions - scientific, business, or media oriented contributions - proposals for own workshops. 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. Several 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 MindTrek 2011. 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. Demonstrations and Tools Proposals Demonstration and tool proposal shall be 2-3 pages and include: a) a description and motivation of the problem addressed by the tool; b) general architecture of the tool; c) description of the main features; d) a brief comparison with other existing related tools; e) screens to illustrate the interface of the tool (if applicable); f) the type of license, and g) the address (URL) on the Internet where it will be available for use or to copy (download), if applicable. It is strongly recommended that the authors make the tool (or a suitable version or movie) on the Internet during the evaluation of articles. 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. Extended Abstracts This year you also have the possibility to submit an extended abstract to the conference for several conference themes. Extended abstracts are limited to the conference themes of ambient media, social media, digital games, open source, and media business. 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. Posters All submissions will be peer-reviewed double blinded, therefore please remove any information that could give an indication of the authorship. Posters should be between 2-3 pages long and a poster should be presented during the conference. Submission Deadlines - 27th May 2011: deadline for workshop proposals - 12th June 2011: 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) - 1st July 2011: deadline for tutorial proposals - 20 July: camera ready papers and copyright forms Key-Dates - 22nd June 2011: notification of acceptance/rejection for papers, posters, and demos - 15th July 2011: notification of tutorial proposals - 28th-30th Sept. 2011: MindTrek academic conference Suggested key-dates for workshop organizers - 1st July 2011: deadline for workshop papers - 20th July 2011: deadline for final papers Conference Themes 1. Social Media - business models, service models, and policies - social media in innovation and business - intra- and interorganizational 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. 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 gaming - social and casual gaming - player-created content - pervasive and ubiquitous gaming - mobile and cross-media gaming - gamification, funware and playful designs 4. 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 5. Media Business and Media Management - media policy, politics, practices, conception, and media regulation - organizational structures, practices, and strategies - production technology, processes, and optimization - business models, service models, public funding, and media economics - patterns of media use, engagement, and consumer experiences - advertising, media consumption, new audience models, and media user models - competition analysis, media governing, assessment, performance indicators - business and media management in new media genres: gaming, social media, Internet, digital cinema, iTV - traditional media business and management: broadcasting, publishing, journalism, and movie industry - innovative service designs, strategies, and ideas - teaching & training of media management and media business Paper Submission - Please follow the style guidelines on http://www.acm.org/sigs/publications/proceedings-templates for formatting your position paper and final 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://webhotel2.tut.fi/emmi/Conferences/2011mindtrek/ Organizing Committee General Chair Artur Lugmayr, Tampere Univ. of Technology (TUT), FIN Programme Chairs Heljä Franssila, Tampere Univ. (UTA), FIN Christian Safran, Graz University of Technology, AUT Imed Hammouda, Tampere Univ. of Technology (TUT), FIN Theme chair: Social Media Hannu Kärkkäinen, Tampere Univ. of Technology (TUT), FIN Theme chair: Open Source Björn Lundell, University of Skövde, SE Theme chair: Ambient Media Lasse Kaila, Tampere Univ. of Technology (TUT), FIN Theme chair: Media Business, Economics and Management Artur Lugmayr, Tampere Univ. of Technology (TUT), FIN Theme chair: Digital Games Janne Paavilainen, University of Tampere (UTA), FIN Demonstration Chair Daniela Soares Cruzes, Norwegian Univ. of Science and Technology, NOR Workshop Chair Niels Henrik Helms, Knowledge Lab, Univ. of Southern Denmark, DK Tutorial Chair Theresa Champel, Univ. of Lisbon, PT Local Arrangement Chair and Conference Management Eero Raisanen, Hermia, FIN Tentative Programme Committee (from MindTrek 2010 - to be confirmed) Pradeep K. Atrey, The University of Winnipeg, CANADA Staffan Björk, Chalmers University of Technology, SWEDEN Johanna Bragge, Helsinki School of Economics, FINLAND Peter A Bruck, CEO and Chief of Research Studios Austria, AUSTRIA Irek Defee, Tampere University of Technology (TUT), FINLAND Nicole Ellison, Michigan State University, USA Hanna-Kaisa Ellonen, Lappeenranta University of Technology Jussi Holopainen, Nokia, FINLAND Abdelmagid Salem Hammuda, Qatar University, QATAR Kaisa Henttonen, Lappeenranta University of Technology Sal Humphreys, Queensland University of Technology, (QUT), AUSTRALIA Aki Järvinen, IT University of Copenhagen, DENMARK Juha Kaario, NOKIA, FINLAND Jan Kallenbach, Helsinki University of Technology (HUT), FINLAND Jonas Kronlund, ELISA, FINLAND Kai Kuikkaniemi, HIIT - Helsinki Institute for Information Technology, FINLAND Cai Melakoski, TAMK University of Applied Sciences, FINLAND Frans Mäyrä, University of Tampere (UTA), FINLAND Marianna Obrist, ICT & S Centre, University of Salzburg, AUSTRIA Hannu Paunonen, Metso Automation, FINLAND (confirmed) Matthias Rauterberg, Eindhoven University of Technology, NETHERLANDS Calin Rusu, Technical University of Cluj-Napoca, ROMANIA Antti Salovaara, Helsinki Institute for Information Technology (HIIT), FINLAND Kirsi Silius, Tampere University of Technology (TUT), FINLAND Sanna Talja, University of Tampere (UTA), FINLAND Manfred Tscheligi, ICT & S Centre, University of Salzburg, AUSTRIA Kaisa Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, Tampere University of Technology (TUT), Finland Annika Waern, Swedish Institute of Computer Science, SWEDEN Karsten D.Wolf, University of Bremen, GERMANY Zhiwen Yu, Kyoto University, JAPAN Ioannis Stamelos, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, GREECE Jonas Gamalielsson, University of Skövde, SWEDEN Sulayman K. Sowe, UNU-MERIT, NETHERLANDS/UNITED NATIONS Tommi Mikkonen, Tampere University of Technology, FINLAND Jaco Geldenhuys, Stellenbosch University, SOUTH AFRICA Daniela Soares Cruzes, Norwegian Univ. of Science and Technology, NOR Contact Questions concerning academic content, papers, tutorials, workshops, scientific contributions: Email: academic.chairs (at) mindtrek.org General questions concerning payments, administration, copyright forms, local arrangements, and the venue: Email: academic.info (at) mindtrek.org Submit papers here http://webhotel2.tut.fi/emmi/Conferences/2011mindtrek/ Further Information http://www.mindtrek.org Supported by: City of Tampere, Nokia Oyj, Ubiquitous Computing Cluster, Tampere University of Technology, Tampere University, TAMK University of Applied Sciences, Technology Centre Hermia, Neogames, Digibusiness cluster, Sombiz and COSS The Finnish Centre for Open Source Solutions, Ambient Media Association (AMEA). -- Heljä Franssila project manager, M.Sc.(Tech.), B.Soc.Sc., PhD student School of Information Science (SIS) Tampere Research Center for Information and Media (TRIM) University of Tampere Finland GSM +358 50 5749725 http://www.uta.fi/sis/en/index.html

1 0

Cyberactivism, twitter and elections in Venezuela. Research
by Daniela Artigas Avila 25 May '11

25 May '11

This is the abstract of the latest project we have been doing, is about cyberactivism, venezuelan elections and Twitter. If some of you are interested or working with similar categories, please, let us know. We have some methodological issues to solve. More about the investigation program here (in spanish) www.apropiacion.blogspot.com *Abstract* This research aims to describe the routines developed by the users of twitter during the Venezuelan elections. It relies on the contributions of Boyd (2005), Masten and Plowman (2003) and FAO (2011) related to digital ethnography and passive observation and study methods and techniques appropriate for the work that seeks to shape and characterize participants a specific community, we also considered the research of Gonzalez (2005) and Rheingold (2002) about cyberactivism, and smart mobs. Data collection was performed with the tool The Archivist, and was the processed with the statistical software named CAVanaTuit. Among the first results we noted that the Venezuelans have developed a series of practices, games and behaviors that run regularly during the electoral day , it was observed that people become digital reporters during the establishment of voting centers, voting and the vote count. Among the most used tags, besides #26S, we found and organize by frequency of appearance: #Venezuela, #Cuba, #ElNacional, #cosasquepasaranantesdelboletín #fuerafocas. During the morning of 27S, the twitter’s Venezuelans positioned 8 of 10 trending topics in the global section on Twitter. * * *Key words*: Twitter, Venezuelan elections, ciberactivism, digital ethnography, #26S Daniela ARtigas Avila Assistant professor at Unica <http://www.unica.edu.ve> / content web coordinator at LUZ Web <http://www.luz.edu.ve> @danielaart <http://twitter.com/#/danielaart>

1 0

Re: [Air-L] Research
by Andras Lukacs 25 May '11

25 May '11

Hi Kattie, I recently went through the same process with my IRB, so maybe I can help. 1. Participant observation in "public areas" was not a major issue as far as consent concerned. 2. Participant observation in "guilds" is done with the consent of the guild master (usually announcement on guild website). Guild members/participants have the option to op-out. 3. Interviewing 13-17. Usually happens in VOIP settings. Participants first visit my research site and read the "Assent Form". This form asks them to talk to their parents about the research and ask questions, etc. Once the interview is scheduled, I try to speak with a parent/legal guardian. This part only takes a couple minutes and aimed at gathering verbal parental consent. If parent/guardian is not available, I reschedule the interview and try to get an email permission from the parent. The procedure with the IRB was pretty tedious. If you have specific questions, please email me off-list. Cheers. ~andras On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:07 AM, kattie hogan <hogankattie(a)yahoo.com>wrote ( mailto:hogankattie@yahoo.com ): > I am currently a doctorate student and my interest is online adolescent > identity performances. My IRB is currently unsure about the types of > consent I should obtain from these young people and whether parental consent > must be obtained and how I would go about collecting those signatures. I > would like to work with 14-17 year olds from different geographic areas, so > face to face interviews would be a challenge. Any advice? Thank you in > advance --- Andras Lukacs Doctoral Candidate Department of Sociology Loyola University Chicago alukacs(a)luc.edu

1 0

Methodology Question Help
by Nikki Usher 24 May '11

24 May '11

Hiya: I don't think this got picked up? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Nikki Usher <nikki.usher(a)gmail.com> Date: Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:03 PM Subject: Methodology Question Help To: air-l(a)listserv.aoir.org Hi: Normally I recruit subjects for interviews in person, but this time I'm using email and I'm having a little trouble figuring out what the best practices are for methodology. Let me explain about how we got our sample without giving TOO many details since one of you might be a kind reviewer. As you may have gathered by now, I write about new media and journalism. 1) An organization provided us a list of news articles with just their headlines. 84 articles in total. So we had to find the bylines, emails and contact information. journalists are typically regarded as public figures by the IRB on account of their publishing activities and public persona. The people we were able to find and contact all had Web sites promoting their work with email addresses, etc. 2) We recruited participants via email using IRB approved language (obvs) - we were able to get approx. 34 email addresses from this initial data set - and so far have 15 respondents. We have promised to keep their responses anonymous, though the "star" of the effort is now a known quantity and would be identified as such by her responses, so she's OK with us using her name. 3) We are almost close to saturation with the thematic interview responses but we'd like more interviews to be sure. We also think a potential reviewer would think "15, really, that's super small." We are conducting some follow up emails with this first batch of email addresses. Our concern here is self-selection of respondents. However, isn't self-selection always the concern with interviews (Weiss - talking to strangers, Silverman, etc. etc.)? I just don't know what we should do about response rate because I don't normally recruit over email to a widely dispersed group of people who don't have any connection to each other. In a real life organization, you might say, talk to 15 of the reporters who all have something in common that you've been able to observe, or select to interview people based on hierarchy. 4) We have *another *data set where if we can't get saturation we can look for participants but it is much larger (about 150) - from a second wave of the organization's story output. Would we need to send out emails to all of these journalists to remain consistent, or could we just approach the first, say, dozen, going by date of story publication until we got saturation? Or would we have to start over and email EVERYONE? We are pretty sure we will reach saturation of themes quite soon. Thanks!! -- Nikki Usher, PhD USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism mobile: 213-220-7824 www.nikkiusher.com

1 0

Another Question for Candidates from Joseph K.
by Alex Halavais 24 May '11

24 May '11

As a note, I'm sending these out to AIR-L again, because I think it's important that folks are involved in the election process, but I do encourage you to go to http://aoir.org for some individual questions, comments, links to blog posts, and personal statements. JOSEPH K. asked the following question to almost (!) all the candidates for AoIR Executive positions. """ What concrete tasks or changes to the organization would you aim to put in place during your first 90 days in office? """ So, once again, a round-up... ***** TED COOPMAN (VP candidate) ***** """ Joseph, The VP begins by working with Alex the sitting president to help him enact his agenda – he is the President. The Exec is also somewhat constrained, like any elective body, by those in it. That is, what members want to work on. Ideally… First, what I would like to see done is to set out an agenda/policy map for the first year. A clear set of goals with time-lines that consists of the presidents, the exec members, and my own plans/desires. Second, complete the ongoing comprehensive review of bylaws and make any required changes and put changes that must be voted on before the membership.This will really help. Third, I would work with Micheal the treasurer to create a plan to expand membership and secure sponsors. We have had some discussions on this and I think firming up the plan and then implementing it is possible in the near term. Related to this is the ongoing discussion on perhaps hiring someone for outreach and similar tasks. Please keep in mind that while we are all online and interactive that deliberation across timer zones is slow. Not as slow as institutional time but definitely not internet time! Also, there needs to be Exec member buy in for any changes. -TED """ ***** LORI KENDALL (VP candidate) ***** """ Joseph K.: The first thing I intend to do is to implement a formal process for transferring knowledge from one IR conference Program Chair to the next. This will involve both collecting information from this year’s Program Chair (convenient, since this is me! :) and setting up a system to continue passing on this information from year to year. My aim is two-fold. First, I would like to make it easier for new Program Chairs to get up to speed. For those who have never served in such a capacity, there is a lot to learn, both technically and procedurally. The second purpose is to improve the conference planning process and especially to improve the reviewing process. """ ***** MONICA MURERO (VP candidate) ***** """ Honorific Aoir Lifetime Member for outstanding services to the Aoir community, Prof Murero will greatly benefit Aoir on every task: administrative, financial , executive, publishing, budget and conference related matters. In fact, during the first 90 days of service (Oct-Jan.) Aoir must complete several concrete tasks. Examples include: Finalization of Conference financial matters, management of memberships, and legal duties. A highly-experienced and knowledgable candidate is crucial to make imoortant tasks concretely run from day one. Also, budgeting for the new conference, CFP , conference theme and administrative duties need to be addressed. Furthermore, the previous exec might leave “hot” unresolved tasks in the hands of the new officers that need attention, Under safe hands, important tasks can be addressed from day one. Decisions influence Aoir mid-term activities. Aoir values must be protected and tasks developed under experienced hands. With well-recognized contributes to the Aoir executive committee and a curriculum of excellence, Prof. Murero is the most experienced candidate for the VP position. Mantain the sense of community people find at the Aoir conference and air-list, and work together for the health of the association is a must. Every 2 months, the exec Report will inform members about current activities by offering new opportunities to the Aoir community. An informal, welcoming and high-quality attitude in discussing crucial topics will keep Aoir the fantastic open place for interdisciplinary discussion and collaborations we have created over the years. """ ***** ANTHONY HOFFMANN (Student Rep candidate) ****** """ Joseph – thanks for the question. As articulated in the above statement, I would like to pursue my mentorship proposal. One of the strengths of the Association is that there are very few distinctions drawn between established faculty and up-and-coming students – I believe that keeping such distinctions at a minimum (by avoiding, say, the development of separate spaces for faculty versus students) is important for maintaining AoIR’s inclusivity. A mentorship program, while it creates a distinction in terms of how and who may apply (and what role they may serve, be it mentor or mentored), ultimately serves to bring together both established and up-and-coming scholars and researchers, which I see as being in the spirit of inclusivity. Plus, it has the potential to add value and further diversity the programming of the annual conference – creating a new space for dialogue and the exchange of ideas. More to the point of the question, then: in my first 90 days in office I will aim to gather feedback as to what members of the Association, should they support such a program, would want a mentorship program to look like. From there, I will synthesize input and put forward a proposal as to how such a program might work. """ ***** KELLY QUINN (Student Rep candidate) ***** """ Hi Joseph – Thanks for the opportunity to respond. I have two specific ideas that can be quickly implemented by the AoIR Executive Committee. The first is to more effectively utilize the AoIR graduate student listserv. Currently, we have fewer than 200 subscribers on the graduate student listserv, and little activity takes place therein. I would like to see a campaign during and after the annual conference to encourage grad students to subscribe to the list, and then use it to publicize grad student conferences and cfps specifically targeting graduate students (awards, journals, fellowships), to announce talks and seminars, and to suggest grad student resources (monetary and otherwise) that might be useful to our student members. Second, to engage the entire membership a little more actively, I would encourage the Executive Committee to work toward establishing a regularly scheduled AoIR Twitter meetup, or short tweeting discussion sessions (30 minutes to an hour) that would target specific topics that are pertinent to internet researchers. Topics might include internet research ethics on specific technologies (social network sites, blogs), the use of specific research methods, strategies for recruitment, and so on. The key is holding these conversations at regularly scheduled times and announcing the topic in advance, so that any interested members could join the discussion. Because our membership is comprised of internet researchers, I believe that AoIR can and should take a leadership role in utilizing various new media formats to engage and connect its membership. """ ***** ANDREA BAKER (Open Seat candidate) ***** """ Joseph, hi, thanks for your question. I would ask that the exec committee discuss adding places and times for informal roundtable discussions to the program. If agreed, I would then help implement steps to insure that the call for papers for IR 13.0 included solicitation of discussion leaders and their topics. """ ***** SORAJ HONGLADAROM (Open Seat candidate) ***** """ Hi Joseph, my first concrete tasks would be to initiate an agenda for the committee on how to broaden the scope of the association. This can be done in several ways, but one I am having in mind is to promote the activities of the association in non-western countries, especially in Asia. For example, the association could join hands with other local groups to hold seminars on topics of our interest in the region. Soraj """ ***** MARK JOHNS (Open Seat candidate) ***** """ In the first 90 days? NONE! I would spend the first 90 days learning about the dynamics of the Executive and understanding the issues most important to the other members. Only by listening to one another and building trust in this new setting would anything be accomplished in the future. While I have met all of the Exec members, and know some quite well, every group has its own chemistry and I would spend the first 90 days trying to to see how the chemistry of this group works. """ ***** ULF-DIETRICH REIPS (Open Seat candidate) ***** """ Hi Joseph, thanks for your comment. I would begin by listening to the new president and other incoming officers (some with much more experience than me in AoIR office matters) as to what are the most important and pressing issues, and help with those as much as I can. If adequate, I would then attend to Nr. 3 above and publish a call to submit links, materials, and descriptions to a repository with useful software for Internet researchers. Furthermore, I’d write up and post information about other societies that may be of interest to AoIR members and collect comments from AoIR members about their experiences with and interests in those societies (plus pointers to more societies to add to the list). I hope in this process some ideas for joint projects will emerge, so we can contact officers from the other societies to follow up on those ideas. Also, at some point we may be able to draw a landscape of organizations with overlapping interest that may serve as a visual guide for PhD students. """ ***** CRISTIAN BERRIO ZAPATA (Open Seat candidate) ***** """ I believe two main courses must be taken: (1) begin contacts to open AOIR conference activities to other continents and cities. One of my colleagues proposed Asia. That could be. What about Brazil? Maybe Buenos Aires, Argentina? We must congregate people from various latitudes in different places. (2) Language might be a barrier in this moment. Although it is clear that English keeps being the general language of the association, we must open to other languages and built information structures to do so. (3) Both (1) and (2) required that we plan a compatible manware – repository structure. What about using AOIR as a base for exchange of professors from distant latitudes? In general, I believe the first goal is to develop AOIR globally to the side of the developing countries, as the association can bring a lot to them, opening opportunities to people in the developed countries. Exchange of knowledge and information in seek of better life for everyone. """ -- // // This email is // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberflâneur // http://alex.halavais.net //

2 1

Research
by kattie hogan 24 May '11

24 May '11

I am currently a doctorate student and my interest is online adolescent identity performances. My IRB is currently unsure about the types of consent I should obtain from these young people and whether parental consent must be obtained and how I would go about collecting those signatures. I would like to work with 14-17 year olds from different geographic areas, so face to face interviews would be a challenge. Any advice? Thank you in advance

3 2

CFP Broadband Policy and" New Democracy"
by Richard Taylor 24 May '11

24 May '11

Dear Colleagues, With apologies for cross-postings: Call for Paper Proposals New ICTs + New Media = New Democracy? Communications policy and public life in the age of broadband A by-invitation experts' workshop New America Foundation September 20-22, 2011 Are "new media" fundamentally changing the practice of democracy? Recent years have seen a significant transition in the role computer mediated communications play in the political sphere. A technological revolution driven by economic and market forces is undermining settled practices, established institutions, and traditional communications norms. As a result, public policies governing the telecommunications and media infrastructure need to be re-examined, and their theoretical foundations and paradigmatic assumptions reformulated. Technological developments and broadband communications have forced the rules of political discourse to change: contemporary new media are circumventing and displacing old media; political candidates and public officials are finding new ways of communicating with the public; fundraising and advertising in political campaigns are being reshaped; and voiceless organizations and communities around the world are making themselves heard -- both within their national boundaries and around the world. The Institute for Information Policy at Penn State University and the New America Foundation's Open Technology Initiative are pleased to announce this call for paper proposals, which focuses on the role broadband policies play in the promotion and preservation of democracy and human rights. Authors of the selected papers will be invited to present and discuss them during a three day by-invitation-only experts workshop designed to bring together American and international experts and to be held at the New America Foundation in Washington, DC, between September 20-22, 2011. This workshop is part of a series of events focused on "Making Policy Research Accessible," organized by the IIP, with the support of the Ford Foundation. Presenters at the workshop will be invited to submit their completed papers for review by the Journal of Information Policy (www.jip-online.org) Paper topics may include, but are not limited to: . Freedom, democracy and justice: Changing concepts of democracy in the 21st century . Campaign financing policies in the age of broadband communications . Viability of existing telecommunications/media policies in light of technological change . Preservation of freedom of expression and the public sphere in the new media environment . Human rights and policy implications of recent popular uprisings around the world . Allocation of resources allowing broadband communication to fulfill their role in democracy . Private and public ownership of communication networks and their implications for democracy Abstracts of up to 500 words and a short bio of the author(s) should be submitted to pennstateiip(a)psu.edu by June 30, 2011. Please write IIPOTIWS: YOUR NAME in the subject line. Abstracts not sent according to the above instructions will not be reviewed. Accepted presenters will be notified by July 15, 2011. Prof. Richard Taylor Co-Director, Institute for Information Policy The Pennsylvania State University

1 0

UNESCO - World Summit on the Information Society
by Monica Murero 24 May '11

24 May '11

> The World Summit on the Information Society (16-20 May, 2011) provided interesting opportunities to network with multiple stakeholders. Organized by UNESCO, ITU, UNCTAD and UNPD, the World Summit Outcome Document is available here: > http://groups.itu.int/wsis-forum2011/Agenda/OutcomeDocument.aspx > > Monica > http://aoir.org/2011/05/13/monica-murero-candidate-for-vice-president/#comm… > Vice-President Candidate, Aoir > ------------- > Monica Murero , Ph.D. > AoIR Exec, 2003-2009; AoIR Treasurer, 2005-2009 > Honorific AoIR Lifetime Member > > Director E-Life International Institute > Associate Professor in Politics of e-Government > and in Sociology of New Technology > University Federico II, Italy > Consultant, World Health Organization > LinkedIN: http://it.linkedin.com/pub/monica-murero-ph-d/16/52/606 > Twitter: http://twitter.com/#!/monica_murero or @monica_murero > Facebook: murero monica >

1 0