February 2024 - Air-L - lists.aoir.org

[Call for Papers] CySoc 2024 - International Workshop on Cyber Social Threats @ICWSM 2024
by Ugur Kursuncu 12 Feb '24

12 Feb '24

Call for Papers: CySoc 2024 - International Workshop on Cyber Social Threats @ICWSM 2024 Deadline: March 24, 2024 Website: https://cy-soc.github.io/2024/ <https://cy-soc.github.io/2024/> Submissions: https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=cysoc2024 <https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=cysoc2024> The Fifth International Workshop on Cyber Social Threats, CySoc 2024, will be held in conjunction with the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (ICWSM) in Buffalo, NY, USA, on June 3, 2024. The workshop will be held in a hybrid format (both in person in Buffalo, NY, and online). The accepted papers will be presented in person at the CySoc 2024 workshop and published in the workshop proceedings of the conference. This workshop will bring together researchers and practitioners in computer and social sciences from both academia and industry to exchange ideas on understanding the multi-faceted social, psychological, cultural, emotional, communicative, and, linguistic aspects of harmful content while leading the discussion on building novel computational methods to reliably detect, derive meaning from, interpret, understand, and counter them. We welcome papers that employ quantitative and/or qualitative, analytical, and theoretical approaches to examine a diverse range of issues related to harmful online communications. Papers that discuss resources, data, or tools are also welcome as either demos or short/regular talks. This year we offer a spotlight topic on “The Use and Misuse of Generative Artificial Intelligence,” and special consideration will be given to submissions that focus on this timely and important topic. Topics for research and discussions include (but not limited to): Spotlight topic: The Use and Misuse of Generative Artificial Intelligence Online extremism Harassment and cyberbullying Hate speech Misinformation and disinformation (e.g., epidemics of fake news, images, and videos, during a disaster, health issues, and elections) Gender-based violence Human trafficking Illicit drug trafficking Mental health implications of social media Ethical considerations on privacy-preserving social media analytics Emotional and psychological support Trust relationship and community dynamics Relationship between the social web and mainstream news media Cultural implications of social web usage Influencer identification and community detection for movements Submission guideline As per the AAAI-ICWSM guidelines: All papers must be submitted as high-resolution PDF files, formatted in AAAI two-column, camera-ready style, for US Letter (8.5" x 11") paper. Full papers are recommended to be 8 pages long and must be at most 11 pages long, including only the main text and the references. The mandatory Ethics Checklist (and brief additional Ethics Statement, if desired, see below), optional appendices, etc., do not count toward the page limit and should be placed after the references. Appendices, if they exist, should be placed after the Ethics Checklist. Revision papers and final camera-ready full papers can be up to 12 pages. Dataset papers must be no longer than 10 pages, Poster papers must be no longer than 4 pages, and Demo descriptions must be no longer than 2 pages. No source files (Word or LaTeX) are required at the time of submission for review; only the PDF file is permitted. Finally, the copyright slug may be omitted in the initial submission phase, and no copyright form is required until a paper is accepted for publication. For more information: https://www.icwsm.org/2024/index.html/call_for_submissions.html#guidelines <https://www.icwsm.org/2024/index.html/call_for_submissions.html#guidelines> Anonymity: The review is double-blind. Therefore, please anonymize your submission: do not put the author names or affiliations at the start of the paper, and do not include funding or other acknowledgments in papers submitted for review. To submit papers, please go to https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=cysoc2024 <https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=cysoc2024>. Co-organizers: Ugur Kursuncu, Georgia State University, GA, USA. Kai-Cheng Yang, Northeastern University, MA, USA. Matthew DeVerna, Indiana University, IN, USA. Francesco Pierri, Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy. Yelena Mejova, ISI Foundation, Turin, Italy. Jeremy Blackburn, The State University of New York at Binghamton, NY, USA. — Ugur Kursuncu, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Georgia State University

1 0

21st International Conference on Software and Systems Reuse (ICSR 2024): Last Call for Papers
by Announce 12 Feb '24

12 Feb '24

*** Last Call for Papers *** 21st International Conference on Software and Systems Reuse (ICSR 2024) June 10-12, 2024, 5* St. Raphael Resort and Marina, Limassol, Cyprus https://cyprusconferences.org/icsr2024/ (*** Submission Deadline: March 4, 2024 AoE (extended) ***) The International Conference on Software and Systems Reuse (ICSR) is a biannual conference in the field of software reuse research and technology. ICSR is a premier event aiming to present the most recent advances and breakthroughs in the area of software reuse and to promote an intensive and continuous exchange among researchers and practitioners. The guiding theme of this edition is Sustainable Software Reuse. We invite submissions on new and innovative research results and industrial experience reports dealing with all aspects of software reuse within the context of the modern software development landscape. Topics include but are not limited to the following. 1 Technical aspects of reuse, including • Reuse in/for Quality Assurance (QA) techniques, testing, verification, etc. • Domain ontologies and Model-Driven Development • Variability management and software product lines • Context-aware and Dynamic Reuse • Reuse in and for Machine Learning • Domain-specific languages (DSLs) • New language abstractions for software reuse • Generative Development • COTS-based development and reuse of open source assets • Retrieval and recommendation of reusable assets • Reuse of non-code artefacts • Architecture-centric reuse approaches • Service-oriented architectures and microservices • Software composition and modularization • Sustainability and software reuse • Economic models of reuse • Benefit and risk analysis, scoping • Legal and managerial aspects of reuse • Reuse adoption and transition to software reuse • Lightweight reuse approaches • Reuse in agile projects • Technical debt and software reuse 2 Software reuse in industry and in emerging domains • Reuse success stories • Reuse failures, and lessons learned • Reuse obstacles and success factors • Return on Investment (ROI) studies • Reuse in hot topic domains (Artificial Intelligence, Internet of Things, Virtualization, Network functions, Quantum Computing, etc.) We welcome research (16 pages) and industry papers (12 pages) following the Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science format. Submissions will be handled via EasyChair (https://easychair.org/my/conference?conf=icsr2024) Submissions will be **double-blindly** reviewed, meaning that authors should: • Omit all authors’ names and affiliations from the title page • Do not include the acknowledgement section, if you have any, in the submitted paper • Refer to your own work in the third person • Use anonymous GitHub, Zenondo, FigShare or equivalent to provide access to artefacts without disclosing your identity Both research and industry papers will be reviewed by members of the same program committee (check the website for details). Proceedings will be published by Springer in their Lecture Notes for Computer Science (LNCS) series. An award will be given to the best research and the best industry papers. The authors of selected papers from the conference will be invited to submit an extended version (containing at least 30% new material) to a special issue in the Journal of Systems and Software (Elsevier). More details will follow. IMPORTANT DATES • Abstract submission: February 26, 2024, AoE (*** extended ***) • Full paper submission: March 4, 2024, AoE (*** extended ***) • Notification: April 8, 2024, AoE • Camera Ready: April 15, 2024, AoE • Author Registration: April 15, 2024 AoE ORGANISATION Steering Committee • Eduardo Almeida, Federal University of Bahia, Brazil • Goetz Botterweck, Lero, University of Limerick, Ireland • Rafael Capilla, Rey Juan Carlos University, Spain • John Favaro, Trust-IT, Italy • William B. Frakes, IEEE TCSE committee on software reuse, USA • Martin L. Griss, Carnegie Mellon University, USA • Oliver Hummel, University of Applied Sciences, Germany • Hafedh Mili, Université du Québec à Montréal, Canada • Nan Niu, University of Cincinnati, USA • George Angelos Papadopoulos, University of Cyprus, Cyprus • Claudia M.L. Werner, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil General Chair • George A. Papadopoulos, University of Cyprus, Cyprus Program Co-Chairs • Achilleas Achilleos, Frederick University, Cyprus • Lidia Fuentes, University of Malaga, Spain

1 0

Reminder: Symposium: The value of blockchains for the media industries
by Indrek Ibrus 12 Feb '24

12 Feb '24

A reminder of a conference CFP deadline, which is in only 3 days: Symposium: The value of blockchains for the media industries https://publicvalueofdata.tlu.ee/symposium/ <https://publicvalueofdata.tlu.ee/symposium/> Tallinn University’s Baltic Film, Media and Arts School will organise a symposium to investigate both the existing visions for and the real-world endeavours and practices of using blockchains in the media and cultural industries. The symposium, which will take place on 23–24 May (in Tallinn), invites empirical as well as theoretical contributions that focus on the value of blockchains as specific technologies for data governance in the media industries. What value is being pursued/sought, who is creating value, who is extracting it and who is governing the exchange of that created value? The symposium’s keynote talk will be provided by Professor Ellie Rennie (RMIT University) and select industry experts. The deadline for submitting abstracts is February 15th. Decisions will be communicated back to authors by February 28th. Abstract submission: https://publicvalueofdata.tlu.ee/submission/ <https://publicvalueofdata.tlu.ee/submission/> All presenters will be invited to submit their papers to the special issue of the Baltic Screen Media Review that will be published at the end of 2024. Participation fee: 80 euros. More information about the symposium: https://publicvalueofdata.tlu.ee/symposium/ <https://publicvalueofdata.tlu.ee/symposium/> Agenda The perceived and experienced value of blockchains for the media industries While the expectations for blockchains are sometimes downplayed, these technologies are often also highly promoted. In the upcoming symposium, we will therefore be interested in the evidence of real contexts of technology development – where are the normative discourses coming from, why are experiments being carried out, what are their actual results, what are the gains and what are the emerging problems? While we are interested in critical takes, we are also genuinely interested in the opportunities that these technologies have provided. That is, we are interested in exploring their claimed transformative potential in the media industries, including in relation to enhancing transparency, efficiency and security across various operations. Amid the centralising tendencies of Web 2.0 platforms, the potential of blockchains to democratise and decentralise market dynamics on the Internet towards “Web3” needs careful attention. When it comes to practical uses, then, first, blockchain technology is claimed to hold significant potential for content authentication and copyright management. It employs digital fingerprinting to establish ownership records, aiming to reduce piracy and unauthorized content use. This is seen as crucial in an environment where intellectual property rights are frequently contested. Smart contracts in blockchain promise more equitable, efficient and transparent royalty distribution, automating payments and reducing dependence on intermediaries. Second, blockchains can open avenues for direct content monetisation and audience engagement. Creators can use blockchains for direct sales and micro-transactions, bypassing conventional distribution channels and thereby fostering closer audience connections. This approach could democratise media access and create a more diverse media landscape. Another often-seen benefit is blockchain’s ability to combat fake news through immutable records, thereby enhancing media source credibility and reliability. In essence, blockchain’s decentralised nature has been celebrated for not only fortifying security against data breaches but also promoting a more democratic and equitable media industry. It is argued to empower creators, reward audience participation and ensure integrity in content dissemination and monetisation. This technology is often seen not just as a tool for operational improvement but as a catalyst for a more transparent, more efficient and more user-centric media ecosystem. The risks of blockchains for the media industries Yet, incorporating blockchain technology into the media industries, while promising, comes with its own set of risks and challenges. On the technical side, one of the often addressed practical concerns is the complexity and scalability of blockchain systems. Implementing such technology requires significant investment, in terms of both financial resources and expertise. This complexity extends to the regulatory environment, which remains in a state of flux. Media firms venturing into blockchain must navigate a landscape filled with legal uncertainties, especially concerning copyright laws, data protection and financial regulations related to cryptocurrencies. Significantly, the decentralised approach of blockchain might also pose challenges for traditional media business models, which rely on centralised control for content management and monetisation. Furthermore, if media companies incorporate cryptocurrencies into their business models, they expose themselves and their partners to the notorious volatility of these digital assets, which can significantly impact financial stability and revenue projections. With cryptocurrencies also comes the risk that early investors could gain a significant hold over relevant currencies and other assets, thus undoing the promise of greater decentralisation and fairer wealth distribution. Paper topics All these factors collectively highlight the need for a cautious and well-informed approach to integrating blockchain technologies in the media sector. Hence, we are inviting papers that critically examine the above-mentioned phenomena, addressing both the risks and the opportunities. As the implementation of blockchains in the media industries assumes knowledge from multiple domains, we are inviting and encouraging submissions from those in the fields of media and communications studies, computer science, law, economics, management, public administration and related fields. The papers could focus on any of the following (non-exhaustive) set of topics: • transparency and accountability: papers investigating how blockchains can enhance transparency in media production and distribution, and their impact on accountability within the media industries; • content authentication and copyright protection: papers exploring the role of blockchains in the governance of intellectual property rights; • monetisation and micro-transactions: papers analysing blockchain-based monetisation schemes in the media industries, including micro-transactions and direct artist-to-audience revenue models; • data privacy and consumer protection: papers examining the implications of blockchains on data privacy and their potential role in safeguarding consumer information; • ethical implications of blockchain technology in media industries: papers discussing the ethical uses of blockchains in content creation and distribution; • decentralisation of media platforms: papers assessing the cultural and economic impact of blockchain-based distributed social networks and content platforms; • impact on advertising models: papers investigating how blockchains can transform advertising models in media, particularly in terms of transparency, efficiency and fraud; • tokenisation of media assets: papers exploring the implications of tokenising media assets (like films, music, books) on the industry, including issues related to ownership and trade; • blockchains in journalism: papers delving into the use of blockchains in journalism, addressing issues like source verification, combating fake news and ensuring ethical reporting; • regulatory and legal challenges: papers analysing the legal and regulatory hurdles and pathways towards implementing blockchains in the media industries; • global accessibility and inclusivity: papers considering how blockchains are implemented in different cultural and economic contexts and/or what their effects are on global inclusiveness and accessibility of content; • innovation in content delivery models: papers exploring innovative content delivery models enabled by blockchains, such as decentralised streaming; • blockchains and audience engagement: papers assessing how blockchain technology can be used to enhance audience engagement and participation in media production and curation; • future of the Internet: papers theorising the role of blockchains in the future iterations of the Internet (metaverse, Web3) and what these bring about for contemporary media industries; • blockchains and wealth distribution: papers assessing critically the effects of blockchains on wealth distribution in media and cultural industries. More information about the symposium can be found here: https://publicvalueofdata.tlu.ee/symposium/ <https://publicvalueofdata.tlu.ee/symposium/> ________________________________________________________________________ Meediainnovatsiooni professor, Balti Filmi, Meedia ja Kunstide Instituut (BFM), Tallinna Ülikool Telefon: 56978885 Email: indrek.ibrus(a)tlu.ee Professor of media innovation, Baltic Film, Media and Arts School (BFM), Tallinn University Tel: +37256978885 Email: indrek.ibrus(a)tlu.ee Recent publications Järvekülg M, Ibrus I & Rohn, U (2023) Shifting from Web2 to Web3: The adaptive creator experiences on blockchain-based video-sharing and streaming platforms. Convergence. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/135485652312141 Ibrus, I., Karjus, A., Zemaityte, V., Rohn, U., & Schich, M. (2023). Quantifying Public Value Creation by Public Service Media Using Big Programming Data. International Journal of Communication, 17, 6741-6763. Main research projects Public Value of Open Cultural Data: https://publicvalueofdata.tlu.ee/ CresCine: https://www.crescine.eu/

1 0

Book launch of Perfect: Feeling Judged on Social Media - 6 March at King's College London
by Zeena Feldman 12 Feb '24

12 Feb '24

Dear friends and colleagues, Please join us at King’s College London for the launch of Rosalind Gill’s powerful new book Perfect: Feeling Judged on Social Media. ** When and where ** Wednesday 6 March 2024 17:30 to 19:00, followed by a wine reception Nash Lecture Theatre (room K2.31 in the King’s Building) – King’s College London, Strand Campus Register at https://www.kcl.ac.uk/events/book-launch-of-rosalind-gills-perfect-feeling-… ** Event description ** Social media is replete with images of 'perfection'. But many are unrealistic and contribute to a pervasive sense, for users, of never being good enough. Try too hard and you risk being condemned for being 'attention-seeking'; don't try hard enough and you're slacking. In this event, Prof Rosalind Gill (Goldsmiths) discusses these dynamics, guided by young women's own words to show how they feel watched all the time; worry about getting things wrong; and struggle to live up to an ideal of being 'perfect' yet at the same time 'real'. Gill’s intervention will be followed by reflections from an esteemed panel of scholars concerned with contemporary digital culture and its impacts, including Sarah Banet-Weiser, Simidele Dosekun, Zeena Feldman, Xintong Jia and Christina Scharff. ** Speakers ** Sarah Banet-Wesier is the Dean of the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania and its Lauren Berlant Professor of Communication. She is also a research professor at the University of Southern California’s Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism, and founding director of the Center for Collaborative Communication at the Annenberg Schools. Her significant contributions to understanding the relationship between gender, inequality and the media include Believability: Sexual Violence, Media, and the Politics of Doubt (Polity Press, 2023) and Empowered: Popular Feminism and Popular Misogyny (Duke, 2018) Simidele Dosekun is Assistant Professor in the Department of Media and Communications at LSE, where she also serves as Programme Director for the MSc Global Media and Communications (LSE & Fudan) and MSc Global Media and Communications (LSE & UCT). Dr Dosekun's research centres African women to explore questions of gender, race, subjectivity, and power in a global context. She is the author of Fashioning Postfeminism: Spectacular Femininity and Transnational Culture, and co-editor of African Luxury: Aesthetics and Politics. Her work has appeared in the journals Feminist Media Studies, Feminism and Psychology, Qualitative Inquiry, and Feminist Africa, among others. Rosalind Gill is University Professor of Inequalities in Creative and Cultural Industries at Goldsmiths, University of London. Gill has produced groundbreaking work on gender and media; cultural and creative work; and mediated intimacy, and made a significant contribution to debates about the ‘sexualization of culture’. Her many books include Confidence Culture (Duke, 2022); Gender in an Era of Post-truth Populism (Bloomsbury, 2022); Aesthetic Labour (Palgrave, 2017); New Femininities: Postfeminism, Neoliberalism and Subjectivity (Springer, 2011); and Gender and the Media (Polity, 2006). Zeena Feldman is Senior Lecturer in Digital Culture in the Department of Digital Humanities at King’s College London, where she runs the Quitting Social Media Project. She is also Director of the Queer@King’s Research Centre. Dr Feldman’s research considers how digital communication technologies impact understandings and performances of traditionally analogue concepts – for instance, belonging, identity and wellbeing. She has published widely, including anthologies with Routledge and IB Tauris/Bloomsbury and in Information, Communication & Society; the European Journal of Cultural Studies; Feminist Media Studies; Celebrity Studies; TripleC; and Cultural Policy, Criticism & Management Research. Xintong Jia is Lecturer in the Department of Sociology at the University of Essex. Her interdisciplinary research considers media and gender, feminist epistemology, reality dating television, advertising and consumer culture, the dynamics of (post)feminism, and audience reception in global and transnational contexts. Dr Jia’s work has been published by the European Journal of Cultural Studies; Bologna University Press; Routledge; and Palgrave Macmillan. Christina Scharff is Reader in Gender, Media and Culture in the Department of Culture, Media & Creative Industries at King’s College London, and Associate Dean for Doctoral Studies for the Arts & Humanities Faculty. Her work offers vital international perspectives on contemporary feminism, gendered media and gendered labour through theoretically informed empirical research. Dr Scharff’s research has been supported by grants from the Economic & Social Research Council and the British Academy, and published in top-tier journals including Feminist Theory; European Journal of Cultural Studies; European Journal of Women's Studies; Gender, Work & Organization; Cultural Sociology; Feminist Media Studies; Theory, Culture & Society; and The Sociological Review.

1 0

The platformization of consumer culture - Special Issue
by Alessandro Caliandro 12 Feb '24

12 Feb '24

Dear Colleagues, *Marketing Theory* journal published a special issue, edited by me and Alessandro Gandini, Lucia Bainotti and Guido Anselmi on ‘platformization of consumer culture’. In our introductory position paper (‘*The platformization of consumer culture: A theoretical framework*’, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/14705931231225537) we provide a comprehensive framework useful to introduce and theorise the concept of platformization of consumer culture. Specifically, we identify four key 'tensions' characterizing the platformization of consumer culture: *datafication vs liquification*; *standardization vs ephemerality*; *interaction vs mediation*; *immateriality vs materiality*. If you like, please have a look at the special issue ; ) Here is the table of contents: *Restless platformance: how prosumer practices change platform markets* Daiane Scaraboto and Eileen Fischer https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/14705931231195188 *Platformised possessions and relational labour * Janice Denegri-Knott, Rebecca Jenkins, Mike Molesworth and Georgiana Grigore https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/14705931231201783 *Memetic logics of participation: fitness body culture on Instagram* Jonathan David Schöps, Sarah Schwarz and Veronika Rojkowski https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/14705931231201779 *How consumer-initiated platforms shape family and consumption * Lydia Ottlewski, Joonas Rokka and John W. Schouten https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/14705931231201780 *Curating a consumption ideology: platformization and gun influencers on Instagram* Jenna Drenten, Lauren Gurrieri, Aimee Dinnín Huff, and Michelle Barnhart https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/14705931231207329 *Digital consumers and platform workers unite and fight? The platformisation of consumer activism in the case of# cancel_efood in Greece* Photini Vrikki and Eleftheria Lekakis https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/14705931231195191 *The cultural underpinnings of platformization: how social movement organizations helped form the category of the sharing economy* Domen Bajde, Maja Golf-Papez and and Barbara Culiberg https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/14705931231201781 best regards, Alessandro Caliandro, Alessandro Gandini, Lucia Bainotti and Guido Anselmi -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alessandro Caliandro Associate Professor in Sociology of Culture and Communication Researcher V-DATA project (Surveillance Capitalism in Italy): https://vdataresearch.com/ Research Stream 3 Leader of ACTIVE-IT: https://ageingsocieties.unimib.it/active-it/ Member of Ageing Societies: https://ageingsocieties.unimib.it/ Università degli Studi di Pavia Dipartimento di Scienze Politiche e Sociali Strada Nuova 65 27100 Pavia phone: 0382 984325 e-mail: alessandro.caliandro(a)unipv.it Alessandro Caliandro's Personal Meeting Room (ZOOM) https://us02web.zoom.us/j/8629741587 *If you please, check out my most recent publications ; ) * Caliandro, A., Gandini, A., Bainotti, L., & Anselmi, G. (2024). The platformization of consumer culture: A theoretical framework. *Marketing Theory*, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/14705931231225537 Audy Martínek, P., Caliandro, A., & Denegri-Knott, J. (2023). Digital practices tracing: studying consumer lurking in digital environments. *Journal of Marketing Management*, 39(3-4), 244-274. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2022.2105385

1 0

10 Fully-Funded PhD Studentships
by Scott Wright 12 Feb '24

12 Feb '24

Hi everyone, Bournemouth University is delighted to announce 10 fully-funded PhD studentships. The Faculty of Media and Communication (FMC) is keen to encourage applications across all our research interests. FMC is an amazing place to undertake a PhD. We are a world-leading centre for the study of media and communication. You will you be joining a vibrant, rich, and rapidly expanding research community. Ranked number one in the UK for Research Power in Media, Communication and Cultural Studies (REF 2021), FMC been awarded around £3,000,000 in research grants in 2023-24. We have 10 research centres<https://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/?f%5b%5d=field_faculties:2426>, including the National Centre for Computer Animation (NCCA<https://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/research/centres-institutes/national-research…>), the Centre for Excellence in Media Practice (CEMP<https://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/research/centres-institutes/centre-excellence…>) the Centre for Comparative Media and Politics Research<https://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/research/centres-institutes/centre-comparativ…>, the Centre for Intellectual Property Policy and Management (CIPPM<https://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/research/centres-institutes/centre-intellectu…>) and the Centre for Science, Health and Data Communication Research<https://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/research/centres-institutes/centre-science-he…>. The Faculty has a community of approaching 200 PhD students. We offer a vibrant PhD training program<https://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/study/postgraduate-research/postgraduate-rese…>; a PhD Summer School in Digital Methods; and a host of research events, seminars and conferences – including the internationally-recognised Research Process Seminar Series. Students receive up to £3,000 to support their research. You can find a searchable list of supervisors here<https://staffprofiles.bournemouth.ac.uk/browse/phd-supervisors>, but it is worth also looking on the staff pages of our four departments: Communication and Journalism<https://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/about/our-faculties/faculty-media-communicati…>, Computer Animation<https://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/about/our-faculties/faculty-media-communicati…>, Humanities and Law<https://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/about/our-faculties/faculty-media-communicati…>, and Media Production<https://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/about/our-faculties/faculty-media-communicati…>. Please reach out to potential supervisors in the first instance. Full details can be found here<https://blogs.bournemouth.ac.uk/research/2024/02/08/fully-funded-phd-studen…> and in the Fully Funded Studentship Policy<https://intranetsp.bournemouth.ac.uk/documentsrep/BU%20Fully%20Funded%20PhD…>. Applicants will be asked to complete a bespoke application form<https://intranetsp.bournemouth.ac.uk/documentsrep/BU%20Fully%20Funded%20Stu…> and attach this to their online application<https://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/study/postgraduate-research/fees-funding/stud…>. Best wishes, Scott Professor Scott Wright Deputy Dean Professor of Political Communication and Journalism Faculty of Media & Communication Bournemouth University p: 01202 9 62055 t: https://twitter.com/scott_wright1 w: https://staffprofiles.bournemouth.ac.uk/display/swright google scholar: https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=VzWDwiEAAAAJ&hl=en ________________________________ BU is a Disability Confident Employer and has signed up to the Mindful Employer charter. Information about the accessibility of University buildings can be found on the BU AccessAble webpages. This email is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email, which must not be copied, distributed or disclosed to any other person. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Bournemouth University or its subsidiary companies. Nor can any contract be formed on behalf of the University or its subsidiary companies via email.

1 0

Call for Expressions of Interest Conference Hosts for AoIR2026
by Michelle, Association of Internet Researchers 11 Feb '24

11 Feb '24

The Executive Committee of the Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR) is seeking expressions of interest (EOI) from prospective Conference Hosts for AoIR’s annual meeting in October 2026, *which will take place in North America.* *We will consider two kinds of proposals*. The *first* is our regular model, where the proposers wish to bring AoIR to their city and/or university. This proposal includes a core conference committee (as far as is possible this far in advance). The *alternate approach* involves individuals who would like to run an AoIR conference nominating themselves to do so, with AoIR choosing the location (based on cost, convenience, and other considerations). In this case, AoIR would put together a committee, though we are also open to groups putting themselves forward as a pre-formed committee (or a part of one) too. We see this as widening the potential pool of AoIR conference committee members, including program chair. Please reach out to prez(a)aoir.org with any questions about this new hosting possibility. *EOIs are due to the AoIR Executive Committee by 15 April 2024*. EOIs will be reviewed by the AoIR Executive Committee, who will then gauge feasibility through a series of follow-up discussions with proposers. Proposers for the 2026 conference will be informed of decisions regarding conference hosting by September 2024. The AoIR membership will be informed of the 2026 conference location during the AGM at AoIR2024 in Sheffield. The AoIR conference draws an international group of around 600 researchers and practitioners to present and discuss work at the cutting edge in understanding the individual, social, political, economic and cultural aspects of the internet and related technologies. The conference host committee is a regional group of scholars that may be part of the same or different organizations. They are also invited to propose a Program Chair. The Program Chair oversees the submissions and review process of papers, panels, workshops, and preconferences, and schedules the conference sessions. The Program Chair may be a member of the organization that acts as Conference Host. Members of the Conference Host Committee should have a strong existing connection to AoIR. Serving on the conference host committee is a large commitment. The role of the committee is to make contributions to the conference theme and call for papers, identify keynote and plenary speakers, plan and provide crucial local knowledge and connections, and oversee region-specific fundraising (where possible, provide venue space at cost or in kind). AoIR will assist with the practical conference planning, including negotiating contracts with hotels, meeting venues, catering, and the like, and will partner with the host committee on many of the administrative details of the conference, such as reception and meal planning, AV and wifi provision, and exhibitor displays. *Teams* that are interested in hosting the conference in their university(ies)/city should *submit a brief expression of interest by 15 April, 2024*. The EOI should include the following and be no longer than 5 double-spaced pages: 1. the individuals and organization(s) involved, and their proposed roles; 2. the connection of proposers to internet research and to AoIR; 3. a description of any prior experiences proposers have had with organizing or hosting a conference, and the roles played in this; 4. an argument to support the proposed conference location, especially with respect to ease of travel for AoIR’s multinational community of conference participants; 5. initial thoughts on local venue options (AoIR has in the past held the annual conference at a variety of venue spaces including universities, conference centers, and hotels); 6. prospective conference dates, keeping in mind any major local, national, and international holidays, semester schedules, or other aspects that might affect the timing of the conference; *Individuals* or groups who are interested in running the 2026 conference at a site to be determined by AoIR should write a letter of application indicating their relevant skills and experience. Feel free to team up with other people, if you feel you can. You are encouraged to contact Nik John with questions so that we can help you understand what hosting AoIR2026 entails. Expressions of interest or questions can be sent to prez @ aoir.org. Looking forward to hearing from you, Nicholas John President, Association of Internet Researchers

1 0

[cfp] papers for Histories of Computing in Asia workshop now being accepted
by Christopher Leslie 11 Feb '24

11 Feb '24

Dear Colleagues, I hope you’ll consider submitting a paper for the Histories of Computing in Asia workshop, which will be held in Phuket, Thailand, in September 2024. We welcome historical accounts, first-hand narratives, historiographies, pedagogical papers, and papers about relevant museum or archival holdings. More information is available in our full CFP: https://ifipwg97.org/workshops/hca2024/ As can be seen from our full CFP, IFIP Working Group 9.7 is interested in broadening the history of computing with an understanding of international cooperation and developments in Asian countries. Asia offers many exemplary stories about the importance of international connectedness in computing. Many computing professionals hail from this region, to be sure, but also some early developments like Korea’s Cyworld presaged international phenomena. As always, adapting technology to local conditions results in innovation and local histories provide important caveats to universal histories. Some of this information has been published in languages other than English, so our workshop will also help to build a bridge between the English-speaking community with research in other languages. Our typical practice is to publish post-workshop proceedings. We will review conference papers (2,500 to 5,000 words) until 1 April 2024. Acceptances along with reviewer comments will be announced on 1 May 2024. We will circulate draft papers in advance of the workshop with the aim of fostering a lively discussion at the workshop, which will be held at Dusit Thani Laguna in Phuket. Authors can then revise their papers based on comments at the workshop for consideration in the proceedings volume, which will be published by Springer. Working Group 9.7 has organized more than a dozen workshops that highlight the international nature of the history of computing, particularly with our Springer volumes on Nordic countries, Soviet and Russian computing, and eastern Europe. Even though the workshop language is English, most of our participants do not speak English as a first language; we are committed to international exchange, so we encourage all researchers to participate. Draft papers are now being accepted. Sometime before April 1, please submit your work via Springer's EquinOCS service: https://equinocs.springernature.com/service/HC2024 Would you be so kind as to forward this announcement along your networks and inform your colleagues and students who might potentially be interested? If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Chris Leslie --- Dr. Christopher Leslie (he/him) Author of From Hyperspace to Hypertext: Masculinity, Globalization, and Their Discontents (Palgrave 2023) https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-981-99-2027-3 Blog: chrisleslie.info Chair, IFIP Working Group 9.7: History of Technology Lecturer, Faculty of Liberal Arts Prince of Songkla University Hat Yai, Thailand

1 0

Call for abstracts --> "Digital Work Futures: Adopting and Adapting to AI-Infused Platforms in the Digital and Creative Industries" (4S/EASST, Amsterdam)
by Martin Berg 10 Feb '24

10 Feb '24

Dear colleagues, Join us for exciting discussions about the future of work at the 4S/EASST conference in Amsterdam this summer. The deadline for abstract submission is approaching quickly (Monday, February 12). I'm organising and chairing the panel "Digital Work Futures: Adopting and Adapting to AI-Infused Platforms in the Digital and Creative Industries" (Panel P278), which would probably interest many of you. Check it out and submit your abstract at https://nomadit.co.uk/conference/easst-4s2024/p/14355. Best wishes (with apologies for cross-posting), Martin Berg — Professor Martin Berg Department of Computer Science and Media Technology Malmö University https://mau.se/en/persons/martin.berg/

1 0

UN Cybercrime AHC Meeting #11 Notes
by Joly MacFie 09 Feb '24

09 Feb '24

(I am running the sessions of the 6th and Concluding meeting of the UN Cybercrime Ad Hoc Committee into Otter, for easier comprehension - https://joly.substack.com/p/51969f5d-7820-4672-9bec-0df5dd5cf3ef ) So, after 9 or so meetings hacking the treaty draft text run by Vice Chairs, Monday morning on week two, Chair Mebarki returned for a session on the actual proposed UN Resolution <https://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?OpenAgent&DS=A/AC.291/25&Lang=E>. The main bone of contention, which many weighed in on, was the actual name of the convention, Russia wanted the existing “Countering the Use of Information and Communications Technologies for Criminal Purposes”, while the U.S. favored the simpler “Countering Cybercrime”. Here is how they lined up. [image: Screenshot of text] <https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep…> One would think “Cybercrime’ wins. === Article 9 of the resolution is a kind of afterthought: 9. Decides that, in order to raise awareness of cybercrime and of the role of the [name of the Convention] in combating and preventing it, [date] should be designated International Anti-Cybercrime Day. The only country to offer support for this was Russia, who referred to it as “International Cybercrime Day” (Anti- possibly lost in translation). One wonders how many zero days would be timed for this! === So, after two hours of this, the session was notable as being the first one with multistakeholder input. Access Now and EFF were called earlier last week, but were no shows, as they were also on this day. However several others stepped up to the plate for 30 mins of statements. First up, Romanian NGO eLiberare <https://www.eliberare.com/> emphasized the needs of victims of trafficking and sex abuse, suggesting the treaty contained “the bare minimum when it comes to safeguards… … to avoid retraumatization”, including adult victims. Specifically, by the suggestion of putting the burden of proving victimhood on those who have faced enormous and significant trauma, the classification of victimization grant someone access to the rights and protections, therefore, the thresholds this convention establishes have to be very well thought out. also, on sex abuse material: We express the concern regarding vagueness or a broad scope, as it could allow even for the targeting of mandatory reporters or service providers. A more narrow focus is needed for any such provision to be effective. *Privacy International* <https://privacyinternational.org/> also expressed scope concerns. Privacy international welcomes the opportunity to intervene at this session. While we recognize the cyber crimes can pose a threat to the enjoyment of human rights, my organization has long documented that human rights violations committed under the guise of combating cybercrime. We have also consistently recommended that the UN cyber crime treaty should be narrow in scope, and should contain robust safeguards to mitigate the risk of these violations. Regrettably, the latest draft fails to address many of our significant concerns. I would like to address three of these concerns. Firstly, the scope of application of investigative powers is very broad. Indeed, there is a disconnect between the chapter on criminalization and the scope of procedural measures. Under the current tax the powers afforded to law enforcement agencies apply to the investigation of criminal offences committed by means of a computer system, as well as the collection of evidence in electronic form of any criminal offence. Consequently, the scope of application of Article four appears to be expanded well beyond cyber dependent crimes. Arguably, it will make the treaty one of the most far reaching in criminal matters. These over broad scope gives rise to the danger that the convention will be used to justify the prosecution of the legitimate exercise of human rights. Secondly, we believe that the draft text is unbalanced. It gives sweeping privacy and basic powers to law enforcement agencies without robust human rights, limitations and safeguards. Article 29 and 30, for example, provide for real time collection of traffic data interception of content data. These are extremely intrusive measures that required a set of stringent limitation and safeguards. Unfortunately, article 24 does not include some key safeguards, well established in international human rights law, such as such as the principles of legality and necessity, prior independent authorization of surveillance measures, further leaves too much to discretion of State Parties in the scope of application of the human rights safeguards. Thirdly, the chapter of international cooperation is also very broad in scope of application, and with no detailed human rights safeguards. For example, in relation to sharing of personal data, the wording of article 36 fails to provide effective protection. Privacy International joined over 100 civil society organizations and experts to recommend that the convention should only move forward if it pursues a specific goal of combating cybercrime. The present draft falls far short of this goal and Privacy International recommends to comprehensively revise… At which point the mic was cut off at the 3 minute mark. The *Atticus Foundation *took up the cudgel: I would like to once again highlight our particular concerns about the latest draft of the convention, and narrow scope of the whole convention to cyber dependent crimes specifically defined and included in this text as necessary — any broader application gives rise to the danger that the convention will be used to criminalize legitimate online expression, which is likely to create discriminatory impacts and deepen gender inequality. To include a language or specific provisions against excessive criminalization to ensure that security researchers, whistleblowers, journalists and human rights defenders are not prosecuted for the legitimate activities, and that other public interest activities are protected. To strengthen data protection and international human rights standards throughout the entire convention is required. This means removing references to domestic standards, and including the principles of non discrimination, legality, legitimate purpose, necessity and proportionality, as well as introducing explicit references to safeguards such as prior traditional authorization for, for accessing or sharing data, as well as for conducting cross border investigations, and cooperation in accordance with the rule of law, a right to notification as soon as investigations allow, and the right to effective remedy. The two are connected and one makes no sense without the other. Finally, to mainstream gender across the convention, so as to ensure the convention is not used to undermine people's human rights on the basis of gender. Furthermore, to limit the scope of application of procedural measures and international cooperation to cyber dependent crimes, established in the criminalization chapter of the convention, in order not to undermine trust in secure communications, and infringe on international human rights standards. And finally, Madam Chair, avoiding endorsing any surveillance provisions that can be abused to undermine cybersecurity and encryption, so as not to allow for excessive information sharing for law enforcement cooperation beyond the scope of specific criminal investigations. Madam Chair, the final outcome of the treaty negotiation process should only be deemed accessible if it effectively incorporates strong and meaningful safeguards to protect human rights ensures legal clarity for fairness and due process and fosters international cooperation under the rule of law, International Chamber of Commerce <https://iccwbo.org/> had concerns: We are very worried that the latest drafts and amendments continue to include deficiencies that could end up jeopardizing cybersecurity, compromising data, privacy, and eroding online rights and freedoms, Let me just highlight one major point of concern for international business across regions and industry sectors, and this is access to data held by the private sector. As it currently stands, the Convention does not sufficiently limit access to data to what is necessary and proportionate to law enforcement needs. The convention should include provisions to ensure clarity and predictability in government access, and embrace transparency. Furthermore, real time collection of traffic data and interception of content data are considered a significant invasion of privacy and references to such practices should be removed from the convention. In addition, provisions are needed to ensure that states cannot demand access to data in third states without the third state's explicit consent. *Cybersecurity Tech Accord* <https://cybertechaccord.org/> was brutal: First, the treaty would weaken cybersecurity globally by facilitating the compromising of critical security measures and the criminalization of penetration test. testing in cybersecurity research that keeps the digital ecosystem resilient against cyber criminals. Second, the convention would slow down sharing of electronic evidence without a specific narrow scope and clear a dual criminality provisions. Data custodians will be asked to break the law in one state to comply with data requests from another frustrating cooperation. Third is just mentioned, the convention would generate serious conflicts of laws. Just one example is the new italicized language and articles 42, 44 and 45. That would force service providers to hand over data in secret irrespective of where it is located, and without the knowledge of the state that it is in. This violates the law in many countries, Article 4, and the UN Charter. Fourth, the text would allow any state party to obtain the personal information of other states citizens without sufficient safeguards and perpetual secrecy, forcing service providers to hand over data with no ability to notify users or object even when those requests are manifestly unlawful. Fifth by leaving it completely in the hands of individual states to define the breadth and type of subject matter that comes under its scope. The convention facilitates human rights violations and put lives at risk. Finally, allowing for secret access to secured systems, extraterritorial exfiltration of data and secret real time surveillance with no transparency safeguards presents grave risks to States national security as well. Abuse of key provisions could result in real time surveillance of an access to the secret data of state officials without the knowledge of the impacted state. We don't support the adoption of the convention or ratification of it unless all six of these issues are meaningfully addressed, and we can't support the compromise package either. It continues to allow states to decide what crimes the convention would cover if even the most incidental use of ICTs was involved, and e-evidence for all serious crimes. The limitation to serious crimes is not meaningful for all the reasons previously stated in our submissions, and the link to unspecified other instruments creates more ambiguity. Madam Chair, our concerns are not theoretical. They're based on what is happening right now two firms globally. Regrettably, this negotiation is going in the wrong direction. What we have before us is a bad treaty that has united civil society and industry opposition, in a way I've never seen in decades working in international relations. *Microsoft* <https://www.microsoft.com/> pulled no punches: Having listened carefully to the deliberations last week, and having consulted extensively with member states as well as with other stakeholders, we are even more concerned going into the second week. As currently drafted, neither the zero draft now the seventh session draft, nor the various compromised proposals, adequately addressed the concerns industry and civil society have raised. Each version that we have seen could have profound negative impact on the digital ecosystem, including the severe risk of creating a digital surveillance treaty in the guise of a Cybercrime Convention. Again, nothing of what I say should come as a surprise to anybody. The position of stakeholders, both from industry and civil society has been remarkably aligned on these concerns. As I've said before, in my now 20 plus years of working in multilateral and multi stakeholder negotiations, I've never witnessed industry and civil society to be as aligned in their concerns as I've seen during this process. By and large, we could all swap and read each other's statements, and frankly, that alone should give pause to member states. Looking at the current state of play, Microsoft is disappointed that our key concerns on the various draft texts, that we and other industry and civil society entities broadly and continuously shared with member states, have not been adequately addressed. And, frankly, looking at the trajectory of the draft text that appears that each compromise practice is becoming more problematic. Microsoft urges states to use the remainder of this week to clearly and narrowly define the scope of this treaty, improve safeguards throughout the convention, specifically as it pertains to covert surveillance and strengthen protections for cybercrime researchers. Otherwise this convention could not only gravely harm fundamental rights and create a confusing cooperation landscape for states and providers, but it could allow cybercrime to thrive and make cyberspace considerably less secure. And we could not support its ratification. *Ambivium Institute* <https://www.facebook.com/AmbiviumInstitute/> raised a good point about the GDC possibly conflicting with this Convention. A world that is striving to become digitally connected will need that it is connected with the landscape of each country. Those who desire to close the gaps lack the capacity to effectively implement most of the item being advocated here. It will be important for government and civil society to clearly push for domestic rule of law that align with existing law that guarantees political rights and safety n the area of privacy. Keeping in mind, as member states are advancing these conventions, the Summit of the Future is also drafting language that calls for a Digital Compact that will be different from the language of these conventions. Digital cooperation is necessary for countries to protect the safety of individual when online. The data infrastructure should not negate the definition of crime in online space. This convention is still the beginning stage for a long negotiation between the global north and global south wherever the exchange of new technology will need and will continue to be the problem. I urge countries that are developed to be open and to share their knowledge, and to also make open technology available for countries and stakeholders that are still lacking money to fund it. and, finally, *DB Connect* advocated capacity building. Cybercrime knows no boundaries, criminals can orchestrate attacks from anywhere in the world targeting victims across different jurisdictions without international cooperation. Law enforcement agencies are limited in their ability to investigate, collect evidence and apprehend perpetrators operating abroad. Different countries possess unique strengths and expertise in combating cybercrime, therefore, here today, as multistakeholders, I'm diligently asking member states to understand that sharing knowledge, best practices, and resources, allows for a more comprehensive and effective response. Joint operations and training programs can enhance the capabilities of law enforcement agencies worldwide. *VIDEO* <https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1f/k1fiyqkyay>* | **OTTER* <https://otter.ai/u/D8tnkZ9pM9x6WyG5dSN46hB5oFI?utm_source=copy_url> -- -------------------------------------- Joly MacFie +12185659365 -------------------------------------- - -- -------------------------------------- Joly MacFie +12185659365 -------------------------------------- -

1 1