- Air-L - lists.aoir.org

Re: [Air-L] job opportunity at the Web Foundation
by Dhanaraj Thakur 15 Nov '16

15 Nov '16

Hi all, Please see below and share with interested colleagues. take care, Dhanaraj *Policy Fellow* We’re recruiting a Policy Fellow to work directly with our founding director, Sir Tim Berners-Lee. Based in Cambridge, Massachusetts, the Fellow will support Sir Tim in existing policy issues where the Foundation is active and will also help to research possible future trends globally in the web and internet policy space. She or he will assist with strategy and forecasting on emerging issues, conduct desk research and lead on producing related policy materials aimed at key decision-makers. The Fellow will also collaborate closely with our policy and communications teams to translate findings into action, and ensure that Sir Tim’s and the Foundation’s voice influences key debates and decisions globally. This is a unique role for a talented and motivated person who is able to apply academic acumen to real world policy challenges facing the internet. Please note that candidates should be in possession of a doctorate, or close to completing one (ABD stage), or alternatively possess a relevant Masters’ degree and further research and policy analysis experience equivalent to a doctorate. Interested candidates should read the full job description <http://webfoundation.org/docs/2016/11/Web_Foundation_Policy_Fellow_JobPosti…> and apply by sending a cover letter and CV to jobs(a)webfoundation.org <mailto:%20jobs@webfoundation.org> with “Policy Fellow” in the subject line. *Deadline:* 30 November 2016 -- Dhanaraj Thakur Research Manager Alliance for Affordable Internet <http://a4ai.org> +1 240 232 5878 (USA) skype: dhanaraj.thakur *World Wide Web Foundation | **1110 Vermont Ave NW, Suite 500, Washington DC 20005, USA.*

1 0

2 weeks till Moneylab #3 !
by Max Dovey 15 Nov '16

15 Nov '16

*MoneyLab #3 Failing Better * Symposium | Workshops | Exhibition 1 - 2 December 2016 Pakhuis de Zwijger, Amsterdam *A two-day symposium featuring talks, workshops and performances that confront the notion that finance is too big to fail.* *Themes* Universal Basic Income, Feminist Economics, Global Finance, Financial Surveillance, Post-Work Society, Decentralized Democracy, Blockchain Governance, Smart Contracts, Credit Unions, DAOs, Publishing Models, P2P Distribution, Copyright Law, Streaming Models, Platform Cooperativism, Community Currencies, Commons Transition *Background* After Bitcoin forked, and remains in tatters, it is now blockchain technology that ignites visions of deregulated and decentralized organization, while it is simultaneously sanitized by commercial banks. Meanwhile the sharing and “service” economy lost its innocuous veneer and streaming services have failed and continue to fold the music industry. Despite the mutation of crowdfunding into crowd-equity and platform co-operatives, artists and designers continue to struggle to financially support themselves. All the while the financial mediators of the previous centuries continue to drag themselves onward into global debt. We are failing better, nonetheless. Workers’ unions are on the rise and numerous collectives are working together to collectively ensure their own wellbeing and build alternative models of social governance. The aspirations of grassroots organizations such as DiEM25, that promise to liberate social democracy from the stronghold of global finance, are gaining momentum across Europe. People’s parties such as Podemos and the Five Star Movement get closer to an electoral majority. This momentum has thrust radical economic alternatives onto center stage and some governments in Europe have begun experimenting with progressive policies such as a living working wage and a universal basic income. MoneyLab #3 will assess the ambition of financial provocations that have ignited to establish a terrain of social and political reform, from decentralized networks to state governments. The rift we find ourselves in goes much further than 'the banks’ and financial retaliation can be considered more than attempts to fail better. *Speakers * Virginia Alvarez, Tori Abernathy, Steyn Bergs, Anne Breure, Ruth Catlow, Alex Foti, Frank Jan de Graaf, Max Haiven, Austin Houldsworth, Dmytri Kleiner, Bindu De Knock, Jeroen Van Loon, Thomas Kern, Richard Kohl, Silvio Lorusso, Nathalie Maréchal, Renzo Martens, Nick McGuigan, Dan Mihaltianu, Sabine Niederer, Johannes Ponader, Patrice Riemens, Arthur Röing Baer, Emily Rosamond, Trebor Scholz, Brett Scott, Matthias Tarasiewicz, Cassie Thornton, Nathaniel Tkacz, Ben Vickers, Henry Warwick & Koos Zwaan. *Workshops* The Accountability Institute, Baltan Laboratories, Bitcoin Wednesday, Feminist Economics Department, FIBER, Fine Art Financ€ Lab, Furtherfield, Nethood, PublishingLab & University of the Phoenix. *Evening Program * Thursday 1 Dec: Fiscal Drag Live, Mezrab, Amsterdam Friday 2 Dec: Failing Better Afterparty, Roest, Amsterdam *Practical information* Tickets: € 10 per session € 30 per day € 60 two day pass Students: 50% discount on all tickets All tickets include lunch and evening program. Full program available here <http://networkcultures.org/moneylab/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2016/11/ML3…> *bit.do/moneylab3* <http://bit.do/moneylab3> *networkcultures.org/moneylab* @INCAmsterdam <https://twitter.com/@incamsterdam> #MoneyLab -- Forget Network - a monthly radio show on Itunes <https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/forgetnetwork/id1111827614> and Soundcloud <https://soundcloud.com/max-dovey> MoneyLab <http://networkcultures.org/moneylab/> | 1 & 2 Dec 2016 | Pakhuis de Zwijger, Amsterdam <http://www.maxdovey.com/>

1 0

Qualitative Content Analysis sampling methodology advice needed?
by Alicia BR 15 Nov '16

15 Nov '16

Hello all, I am looking for reading suggestions for how to develop a robust sample for qualitative content analysis of web content that is not specific to a particular platform or period of time. Here's the scenario: We are looking to create a comparative analysis of 'screen time' advice available for parents. This includes advice from commercial providers, government, NGOs, peer-to-peer discussion sites, bloggers and beyond. We can create a typology of these different categories of advice-givers and once the sample is generated will be using a deductive analysis framework based on the parental mediation literature (in part looking to see if popular advice and research literature match up). But before we get there we are struggling to generate a sample that is both purposive (representing the different categories of institutions and individuals acting as advice-givers) and yet also representative within those categories. Sonia Livingstone and I conducted a short version of this exercise for a policy brief <http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/66927/> on screen time earlier this year, but now want to extend this into a more detailed study. Any suggestions for methods readings and/or examples of work that have achieved something similar are most welcome! Best, Alicia Dr Alicia Blum-Ross Research Officer, Parenting for a Digital Future Department of Media & Communications London School of Economics and Political Science www.parenting.digital

2 1

CFP - ICA 2017 Pre-Conference "The challenges and promises of participatory policy-making: Communication practices, design considerations and socio-technical processes."
by Dmitry Epstein 15 Nov '16

15 Nov '16

Dear colleagues, Apologies for cross-posting, but I hope you will fine the attached CFP of interest. Please feel free to share with others. Best, Dmitry --- Dmitry Epstein Assistant Professor of Digital Policy Department of Communication University of Illinois at Chicago www.thinkmacro.org comm.uic.edu 2017 International Communication Association Preconference *The challenges and promises of participatory policy-making: Communication practices, design considerations and socio-technical processes.* Hosted by: CalIT2, UC San Diego Supported by: CITRIS and the Banatao Institute, UC Berkeley Department of Communication, University of Illinois at Chicago Co-sponsored by: ICA Communication and Technology Division ICA Communication Law and Policy Division Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet) May 25, 2017 | San Diego, CA Room 5302, Atkinson Hall, UC San Diego *Extended abstracts due: January 18, 2017* *Final manuscripts due: April 24, 2017**Submit at: **http://tinyurl.com/ica2017policy <http://tinyurl.com/ica2017policy>* Tied to the ICA ’17 conference theme of interventions, this pre-conference asks to unpack how the socio-technical design of online civic engagement in policy-making may “alter and disrupt” democratic processes, practices, and occurrences. As such it explicitly deals with “communication practices that engage with a political event, social phenomena, industrial or socio-cultural practice.” The growth of online tools for civic engagement has ignited the imagination of researchers and practitioners of democratic participation. The internet harbored great promise for cheaper, broader and more inclusive public engagement in politics through self organization, dissemination of information, and transparency. It has also harbored a promise to disrupt the ways government interacts with its citizens through open data, provision of services or engagement of citizens in policy deliberation and crowdsourcing. Interactive, informed, and meaningful civic engagement in government decision-making processes has been viewed as the pinnacle of participatory government efforts. In the US, on his second day in the office, President Obama addressed senior staff and cabinet secretaries, urging them to “find new ways of tapping the knowledge and experience of ordinary Americans.” In Iceland, the government used crowdsourcing in drafting a new constitution. Locally, municipalities experiment with combining both online and offline methods to engage members of the public in participatory budgeting exercises. In the area of internet governance, remote participation has been an important component in efforts to develop effective arrangements for multistakeholder deliberations and decision-making. There is a variety of activities that fit under the broad umbrella of civic engagement or e-participation in policy-making. Those range from purely consultative engagements such as virtual town halls, through policy ideation and crowdsourcing, to binding decision making such as participatory budgeting, rulemaking or the development of internet standards. While significant focus has been placed (in both research and practice) on technological solutions involved in effective online civic engagement in participatory and direct democracy activities, less attention has been paid to the systemic understanding of how these technological solutions interact with the social, political, institutional, and educational arrangements of such engagements and their potential to disrupt and alter traditional democratic practices. This pre-conference focuses on unpacking the black box of online civic engagement for planning and policy-making activities from a systemic perspective. We invite competitive submissions of empirical analysis, case studies, and conceptual work that review the continuum of offline and online participation arrangements through a socio-technical systems lens—an interaction between human participants, institutional arrangements, and affordances of online participatory tools. We envision this workshop as a boundary searching—or boundary expanding—exercise that will tackle three major aspects of research of online civic engagement: (a) conceptual and theoretical work for describing and analyzing the socio-technical nature of online participatory policy-making tools, (b) methodological approaches to studying those phenomena with an emphasis on interdisciplinarity and system design, and (c) cases and datasets that invite and enable systemic analysis of both tools and social, political, institutional, and educational arrangements as they traverse both online and offline environments. Our goal is to engage with scholarship on digital divide, online cooperation, informed participation, psychology, internet governance, and computer mediated communication, in order to inform research on civic engagement that goes beyond the analysis of solely technical aspects of platform design and data mining. Theoretical areas and empirical contexts may include but are not limited to: - Conceptual and empirical work on participatory and crowdsourced policy-making. - Empirical case studies of the use of online ideation and participatory tools in rulemaking, participatory budgeting or internet governance deliberation. - Studies of controversies, successes, and failures in technology-driven participatory civic engagement. - Conceptual and empirical explorations of socio-technical considerations in the design of participatory platforms. - Analysis of interactions between offline and online processes and practices of policy-making. - Unpacking of tensions between expert and citizen knowledge and authority in policy deliberation. - Discussions of contextual factors that influence online civic engagement in policy-making (e.g., digital divide, literacy, motivation, political efficacy). *Submission details* At this time we invite authors to submit extended abstracts (800-1000 words) that describe the main thesis, research goals, and to the extent possible, the methodological background and findings of their paper. All extended abstracts must be uploaded through EasyChair at http://tinyurl.com/ica2017policy by 18 January 2017, with all identifying information removed. All contributions will be blindly peer-reviewed, and acceptance notifications will be sent out before the end of February 2015. Authors of the accepted abstracts will be asked to submit a full original manuscript of approximately 4000 to 8000 words, which has not been published elsewhere, by 1 May 2016. *Pre-conference logistics* The preconference will take place on Thursday, 25 May 2017 in Room 5302, Atkinson Hall, UC San Diego. Presenters are expected to register for the pre-conference, but registration is open to both presenters and non-presenters. At the moment, the registration fees stand at 25 USD. *Timeline:* - Extended abstracts due by January 18 (via EasyChair) - Notifications sent by Feb. 24 - Full paper drafts due by May 1 *Organizing Committee* - Brandie Nonnecke, PhD, CITRIS and the Banatao Institute, UC Berkeley - Dmitry Epstein, PhD, University of Illinois at Chicago - Tanja Aitamurto, PhD, Stanford University

1 0

2017 ISA Junior Scholar Meeting
by Leonie Tanczer 15 Nov '16

15 Nov '16

*Apologies for any cross-posting* If you are attending ISA's 58th Annual Convention next February, the STAIR/ICOMM Junior Scholar Meeting might be of interest to you: The ISA Junior Scholar Meeting is a facilitated meet and greet where established academics engage with prior selected junior scholars. Early career scholars ranging from PhD students to Post-Docs (i.e., a recent PhD graduate who had their doctorate awarded within the last three years) are eligible to apply. For more information and guidelines on the application process: https://isaicomm.wordpress.com/2017-isa-junior-scholar-meeting/ Application Deadline: December 7, 2016 ___________________________________________ Leonie Maria Tanczer PhD Student School of History, Anthropology, Philosophy and Politics Queen's University Belfast Twitter: @leotanczt<https://twitter.com/leotanczt> Website: http://www.leonietanczer.net/ Key Fingerprint: F9A6 3C62 DE8E B52F CBB6 14D0 65CC 15A4 4A57 D0C1

1 0

CfP: 2nd Workshop on Supporting Complex Search Tasks (SCST 2017)
by Toine Bogers 15 Nov '16

15 Nov '16

========================================================= CALL FOR PAPERS SCST 2017: 2nd Workshop on Supporting Complex Search Tasks (co-located with CHIIR 2017) http://humanities.uva.nl/~mkoolen1/SCST17/ Oslo, Norway March 11, 2017 ========================================================= ------------------------ Description & Objectives ------------------------ One of the current challenges in information access is supporting complex search tasks. A user's understanding of the information need and the overall task develops as he or she interacts with the system. Supporting the various stages of this task involves many aspects of the system, e.g. interface features, presentation of information, retrieving and ranking. The Supporting Complex Search Tasks workshop (SCST 2017) aims at creating and fostering an interdisciplinary forum where researchers can exchange ideas about alternative experiments and prototypes, and contribute to the development of a research agenda in supporting complex search tasks. ------------------ Topics of interest ------------------ We invite position papers addressing open research questions related to: * Context: What are the obvious use cases and applications of complex search? * Tasks: What are essential features of work tasks and search tasks to take into account? * Heterogeneous sources: With a multitude of information, varying from introductory to specialized, and from authoritative to speculative or opinionated, when to show what sources of information? * Search process: How does the information seeking process evolve and what are relevant differences between different stages? * UI/UX: What affordances are required and in what stage of the search process? How can we make the search process transparent to the user? How and when does the initiative shift between system and user? * Evaluation: How do we evaluate and compare approaches? Which measures should be taken into account? ------ Format ------ This is a workshop proper where discussion is central, and all attendees are active participants. We will start the workshop with a full round of introductions of all participants, making everyone feel welcome and part of the workshop. Then, the workshop continues with two short keynotes by keynote from academia to be confirmed and keynote from industry to be confirmed to set the stage and ensure all attendees are on the same page. Next, we will have presentations of contributed papers, with each paper getting a 1-minute boaster and a poster presentation in an interactive poster session. There will be 3-4 breakout groups seeded from the open research questions (see Goals) and the contributed papers, each group thoroughly prepared by a chair who guides the discussion, with examples from relevant IR evaluation campaigns such as the TREC Session and Tasks Tracks and the SBS Interactive and Suggestion Tracks, and from concrete examples of complex support systems with their UX and UI challenges. The breakout groups will report to the audience and a panel of experts, with continued discussion on what we learned, concrete plans for the next year, and a roadmap for the longer term. The discussion will continue during a social event, where the discussion will continue in a more informal way over food and drinks, deep into the Oslo night. The organizers have gained a proud reputation for their open and inclusive workshops, leading to new research collaborations, other workshops, and new evaluation tracks. The results will be disseminated in various ways: * A high quality, peer reviewed workshop proceedings, published in the CEUR workshop proceedings series (http://ceur-ws.org/) * A report on the results of the workshop in the ACM SIGIR Forum of June 2017. * Depending on the outcome, we will consider a special issue in an appropriate journal. * Last, but not least, the results can be fed into the running tracks at TREC, CLEF, and other evaluation campaigns. -------- Audience -------- The workshop will bring together a varied group of researchers—bridging CHI and IR in a natural way—with experience covering both user- and system-centered approaches, to work together on the problem and potential solutions, and identify the barriers to success and work on ways of addressing them. Authors can submit both research and position papers. Papers can be 2+1 pages max., with 2 pages of narrative text and an additional page for tables/figures/notes/references. Submitted papers will be peer-reviewed in a double-blind review process. --------------- Important dates --------------- * Paper submission deadline: February 1, 2017 * Notification of acceptance: February 20, 2017 * Camera-ready deadline: March 1, 2017 * SCST 2017 Workshop: March 11, 2017 ---------- Organizers ---------- * Nick Belkin (Rutgers University) * Toine Bogers (Aalborg University Copenhagen) * Diane Kelly (University of Tennessee) * Jaap Kamps (University of Amsterdam) * Marijn Koolen (Huygens ING) * Emine Yilmaz (University College London) For further questions, please contact a member of the organizing committee.

1 0

WEBCAST TODAY: Internet Society Briefing Panel at IETF 97 – The I in IoT: Implications for a Global Open Internet @ISOCTech
by Joly MacFie 15 Nov '16

15 Nov '16

Since Seoul is 14 hours ahead of NYC this is just about to kick off! joly posted: "Today Tuesday 15 November 2016 the Internet Society(ISOC) will present a briefing panel at the Internet Engineering Task Force meeting in Seoul, Korea (IETF 97). The briefing's theme is The I in IoT: Implications for a Global Open Internet. We will explor" [image: Internet Society] <http://isoc.org>Today *Tuesday 15 November 2016* the *Internet Society <http://isoc.org>*(ISOC) will present a briefing panel at the *Internet Engineering Task Force meeting <https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/agenda/>* in Seoul, Korea (IETF 97). The briefing's theme is *The I in IoT: Implications for a Global Open Internet <https://www.internetsociety.org/internet-society-briefing-panel-ietf-97>. *We will explore how the internet shapes the design of smart objects, and how they in turn will shape the architecture of the internet. Are there general guidelines with respect to security and overall behavior for these new devices? What should designers of smart object architectures take into account because of the interaction between devices and the internet? Panelists: *Carsten Bormann*, Universität Bremen; *Erica Johnson*, University of New Hampshire InterOperability Laboratory; *Michael Koster*, Samsung/SmartThings; H*annes Tschofenig*, ARM Limited; *Juan Carlos Zúñiga*, SIGFOX. Moderator: *Olaf Kolkman*, Internet Society. The briefing will be webcast live on the *ISOC Tech Matters YouTube Channel <https://youtu.be/wiZwxU-p9T4>*. *What: ISOC@IETF97 The I in IoT: Implications for a Global Open Internet <https://www.internetsociety.org/internet-society-briefing-panel-ietf-97> Where: Seoul, Korea When: Tuesday 15 November 2016 12pm-1:30pm KST | 03:00-04:30 UTC Webcast: https://youtu.be/wiZwxU-p9T4 <https://youtu.be/wiZwxU-p9T4> Twitter: #ISOC + IoT http://bit.ly/2ezWMmZ <http://bit.ly/2ezWMmZ>* Comment <http://isoc-ny.org/p2/8797#respond> See all comments <http://isoc-ny.org/p2/8797#comments> *Permalink* http://isoc-ny.org/p2/8797 -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast -------------------------------------------------------------- -

1 1

CFP: Why VR? Why Now?: A critical discussion of Virtual Reality experiments and experiences
by Thao Phan 15 Nov '16

15 Nov '16

*CALL FOR PAPERS* Why VR? Why Now?: A critical discussion of Virtual Reality experiments and experiences *Journal of Transformative Technologies* http://www.ttrujournal.com.au/call-for-papers/ *Abstracts due: * February 10th, 2017 *Issue Editors: * Simon Young Thao Phan Andrew Lynch *Contact:* editor(a)ttrujournal.com.au The ‘virtual insanity’ predicted by Jamiroquai’s Jay Kay in 1997, has certainly arrived, bringing with it an unprecedented range of VR technologies and software to experience for the contemporary media consumer. While it remains to be seen which of the multitude of competing technologies (Sony’s PlayStation VR, HTC’s Vive, Samsung’s Gear VR or even the humble Google Cardboard) will reign supreme in the consumer market, there has never been a more pressing time for scholarly analysis of how this state of ‘virtual insanity’ came to be, and how we might better comprehend its significance for the academic areas of media, screen and cultural studies. For its inaugural issue, The Journal of Transformative Technologies (JoTT) invites authors whose research involves or intersects with critical discussions of VR. Is this generation of VR experiences truly the one which will “go mainstream”, and if so, why? Does VR have the potential to supersede other less interactive media formats like film and television with more immersive engagement possibilities, or will it end up on the ever growing pile of redundant and forgotten “next big things”? How does VR’s claims to universal appeal clash with issues of accessibility and imagined audiences? Do contemporary VR experiences blur boundaries of genre in media entertainment, or are they still tethered to genres laid down by older media forms? What is the significance of aesthetics (both hardware and software) in embodied practices of VR? How have fictional representations of Virtual Realities and their input devices shaped expectations, or influenced the production, of the current generation of VR technologies? Potential topics may include, but are not limited to: - VR experimentation in art - VR experiences and genre theory - VR accessibility and design - Challenging expectations of VR experiences - The increasing omnipresence of mediated realities - VR and everyday life - Predictive imaginings of VR across other media forms - VR technologies and their futurist aesthetics - Haptic experiences of the imaginary through VR - Gamifying VR - VR technologies and media archaeology - VR and the posthuman/cyborg - Virtual experiences and critical studies of gender and sexuality In addition, we also welcome submissions that deal more broadly with issues relating to the areas of mediated realities and/or VR technology in theoretical or critical terms. We are open to nontraditional submissions including creative and nonlinear works. Please send all enquiries and submissions to editor(a)ttrujournal.com.au. Abstracts must be accompanied by a brief curriculum vitae. All eligible submissions will be sent for double-blind peer-review. JoTT does not charge authors for publication. Abstracts to be submitted by *February 10th 2017* with full submissions due by *May 10th 2017.* http://www.ttrujournal.com.au/

1 0

Deadline Approaching: Distribution Matters ICA 2017 Preconference
by Joshua Braun 14 Nov '16

14 Nov '16

A quick reminder that November 20th is the deadline for abstract submissions to the Distribution Matters ICA preconference. The call is below. Cheers, Josh Distribution Matters // Media Circulation in Civic Life and Popular Culture ICA PRECONFERENCE CALL May 25, 2017 in San Diego [This call is on the web at https://distributionmatters.wordpress.com] This preconference aims to examine how and why media distribution matters to civic life and media culture and the ways in which it underpins issues that are more traditionally examined in terms of media production or textual analysis. After all, many of the biggest challenges and opportunities facing the media industries today revolve around the capacity to circulate media and information instantaneously and more cheaply than ever before via the internet—what Michael Curtin, Jennifer Holt, and Kevin Sanson (2014) have referred to as the "distribution revolution." At the same time, grappling with the signal importance of media distribution in industry and public life also means understanding that this importance is older than, and reaches beyond, today's commercial internet. Scholars from across the field of media industry research—and in other areas including media law and regulation, communication history, journalism studies, and cultural theory—have used a variety of analytical vocabularies to theorize the distribution process. Historian and social theorist Michael Warner (2002), for instance, offers examples from the 17th century press when he argues that distribution is the central concern in the construction of democratic publics. "Not texts themselves create publics, but the concatenation of texts through time," he writes. "Only when a previously existing discourse can be supposed, and when a responding discourse can be postulated, can a text address a public" (p. 90). In other words, reliable distribution networks make possible the individual and collective conceit that when we publish a text we are speaking to the same assembled group over time. Media distribution, then, can be read as the infrastructural heart of "imagined communities" in the style of Benedict Anderson (2006). If, as Charles Acland (2003) argues, "the organization of how, when, and under what conditions people congregate is a fundamental dimension of social life," it is through distribution practices and infrastructures that much of this organization takes place (Tryon, 2013), both historically and in today's media environment. CALL FOR ABSTRACTS We aim to bring together the growing group of scholars who focus on distribution as its own topic of study, as well as other work that intersects with distribution, but has not typically been framed in that way—topics such as internet governance, trending algorithms, digital rights management, media infrastructures, and others. Participants should submit an extended abstract of one to two pages. Accepted abstracts will be developed into papers to be distributed to panelists and other attendees in advance of the event. Abstracts may take the form of brief case studies, position papers, conceptual interventions, or other formats likely to lead to engaged discussion. Rather than lengthy research presentations, participants will present briefly (5 minutes) on their work before participating in a roundtable discussion. Submissions dealing with both contemporary and historical themes and subjects are welcomed, as are submissions from a wide variety of disciplinary approaches. Suggested topics include, but are not limited to: * Distribution and Imagined Community. How do contemporary, legacy, and historical distribution infrastructures, practices, and policies affect the construction of publics and our sense of community? Whether it's a nation's postal network, the broadcast radius of the local television station, the circulation footprint of the local newspaper, the far-flung reach of satellite television channels, or the "calculated publics" (e.g., Gillespie, 2014) produced by algorithms on contemporary online media platforms, we welcome explorations of the ways in which distribution brings together—or divides—publics and public discourses. * Distribution and Media Work. Can a focus on distribution broaden traditionally production-focused accounts of labor in the media industries, whether by considering distribution as an important form of labor unto itself or by exploring the impact of distribution on production work? We welcome accounts that examine what it takes to get content in front of audiences, and the various kinds of labour involved—from PR and marketing work to warehousing, shelf-stacking and transportation. * Distribution and Public Discourse. Much has been said—and debated—about the manner in which digital technologies have allowed ordinary people to distribute their own content, as well as the manner in which a few large online intermediaries have come to dominate revenues and the market for audiences' attention. Digital distribution platforms (and some of their historical predecessors) also present us with a high-choice media environment characterized by filter bubbles and fragmentation. Where do these debates about disintermediation and fragmentation stand today? And what does it mean to examine them in terms of distribution? * Distribution, Public Visibility, and Surveillance. The infrastructures of distribution—the presence of papers on news racks or channels on the dial—have long served to make the audiences for particular media visible to a broader public, as well as to interpellate prospective members of those audiences/publics. At the same time, distribution infrastructures also offer tremendous affordances for surveillance—rifling the mail, intercepting telegraph signals, tapping phones, placing digital cookies, deep packet inspection. We welcome contributions that examine distribution as a tool of visibility and/or consider its role in the business and politics of seeing and being seen. * Distribution, Popular Culture, and Personalization. Digital media is characterized by the contrasting dynamics of increased sociability (through apps, social media and 'sharing') and increased individualization (through mobile viewing, miniature screens, and personalized recommendations). By some accounts, media use has shifted from being a communal, in-person experience in theaters and living rooms to a rather more individual and personalized one, enjoyed by each user on her own personal device. We welcome contributions that examine the changing scale of media experiences through various distribution technologies. * Distribution and Intellectual Property. The one-click model of friction-free digital distribution is still a work in progress. Content providers, streaming services, and digital storefronts jockey for position in ways that have resulted in fragmentation, incompatible standards, and copy protection schemes that alter consumers' relationships with their media and devices. Unsurprisingly then, unauthorized distribution (i.e., piracy) remains a constant feature of everyday media consumption in all countries. We welcome contributions examining the relationship between distribution, IP, and consumption. * Affordances of Distribution, Past and Present. Digital distribution infrastructures include a tremendous number of high-tech affordances for selectively placing content in front of audiences—filters, recommender systems, geolocation/geoblocking, and metadata-based categorization to name just a few. What role do these affordances (and their associated constraints) play in contemporary media distribution and its social impacts? And what historical precedents exist for what we typically think of as uniquely digital phenomena? FORMAT Panelists whose abstracts are accepted will develop them into papers that will be distributed in May to preconference attendees in advance of the event. Participants will introduce, then discuss their papers with other scholars in a series of thematically organized roundtables, with the conversation moderated by a panel chair who participates in the conversation. Roundtables will be held in front of the full audience of preconference attendees; after the initial moderated discussion the floor will be opened to audience questions. The final panel of the preconference will be a reflection by senior scholars on the work and themes of the day. The organizers hope to work with participants following the event to develop a selection of the conference abstracts into papers for a special issue or edited volume. SUBMISSION PROCESS Please email submissions to <distribution.matters.preconf(a)gmail.com> by November 20, 2016. Authors will be informed of acceptance/rejection decisions no later than December 20, 2016. Accepted abstracts will be posted to the preconference website in advance of the event. If you have questions about submissions or any aspect of the preconference, you may direct them to <distribution.matters.preconf(a)gmail.com> or contact any of the individual organizers—Joshua Braun <jabraun at umass dot edu>, Ramon Lobato <ramonlobato at gmail dot com>, or Amanda Lotz <lotz at umich dot edu>. LOCATION AND REGISTRATION The preconference will be held at San Diego State University's Conrad Prebys Aztec Student Union (6075 Aztec Cir Dr.), which is located directly on the San Diego trolley system's Green Line, making it reachable from the conference hotel for just $5 round-trip. For faster door-to-door service, participants can split cab fares to and from the event. More details on transport to and from the event will be provided at a later date. Registration will be limited to 60 persons via a registration code to be issued by the organizers. After accepted presenters have registered, registration will be open to any ICA attendee who requests a code until the cap of 60 is reached or administrative deadlines force us to finalize event attendance. Thanks to the generosity of our sponsors, we do not anticipate a registration fee. CONFIRMED PARTICIPANTS Sandra Ball-Rokeach, ICA Fellow, Professor in the Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism at the University of Southern California, director of the USC Communication Technology and Community Program Sandra Braman, ICA Fellow, John Paul Abbott Professor of Liberal Arts and Professor of Communication at Texas A&M University. Stuart Cunningham, Distinguished Professor of Media and Communications, Digital Media Research Centre, Queensland University of Technology Greg Downey, Evjue-Bascom Professor in the School of Journalism and Mass Communication and the School of Library and Information Studies at the University of Wisconsin-Madison Sharon Strover, Philip G. Warner Regents Professor in Communication, director of the Technology and Information Policy Institute at UT Austin Joseph Turow, ICA Fellow, Robert Lewis Shayon Professor of Communication, University of Pennsylvania Annenberg School for Communication SPECIAL THANKS This preconference is possible thanks to the ICA Media Industry Studies Interest Group and the ICA Journalism Studies and Popular Communication Divisions. We are especially grateful for financial support from the Media Industry Studies Interest Group; the University of Michigan Department of Communication Studies; the University of Massachusetts Amherst Journalism Department and College of Social and Behavioral Sciences; the San Diego State University School of Journalism and Media Studies; and the Culture Digitally scholarship collective. It is thanks to their generous support that we expect to be able to make this event free to participants. -- Josh Braun, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Journalism Studies Journalism Department University of Massachusetts Amherst @josh_braun Skype: wideaperture http://wideaperture.net/ new book: http://wideaperture.net/?view=book "Maybe the only gift is a chance to inquire, to know nothing for certain. An inheritance of wonder and nothing more." William Least Heat-Moon

1 0

E-Voting
by Yosem Companys 14 Nov '16

14 Nov '16

From: Zacharia Gichiriri <zacharia.gichiriri(a)strathmore.edu> Are there any countries that have implemented a form of mobile voting? Is there any research on the potential, challenges and applicability of mobile voting? Considering the explosive growth of mobile phones across Africa, would the use of mobile phones for elections (citizens voting through mobile phones) improve election outcomes and transparency? Best, -- Zack.

5 6