- Air-L - lists.aoir.org

why do people start programming?
by danah boyd 06 May '11

06 May '11

A high school computer science teacher started wondering about what motivated people to start programming. So he created http://ilearnedtoprogram.com/ and quickly the stories poured in. He's now sitting on all of this data and wondering if it's of use to anyone besides his own curiosity. In particular, he's looking for scholars who want to ask questions of the data and help him think about what's going on. I don't know if any of y'all are doing this kind of STS work, but if you happen to be passionate about such kinds of questions, he's looking for folks to talk with: http://itmoves.wordpress.com/2011/05/03/why-i-need-help-from-scientists/ danah

1 0

Help finding resources for successful local online retailing
by Rayed AlGhamdi 06 May '11

06 May '11

Hi colleagues, I am searching for literature of successful countries in domestic/local online retailing. Some countries in developing world still 10-15 years behind in terms of e-commerce in general and e-retailing specifically. I want to find resources of successful development of other countries: how did they address the problems, overcome them and diffuse this service locally. Kind regards, Rayed

1 0

Re: [Air-L] a question about privacy protection and copyright > in Internet research
by Jennifer Myers 06 May '11

06 May '11

Hello Maria, I am a doc student, but since I am doing my dissertation using publicly available blogs with bloggers who have pseudonymous identities, I've had to think about the issue of privacy quite a bit so I figured I would share my process thus far. First, I searched out researchers doing research such as this, and naturally I went to my advisor and asked her what she did. She explained what she did, but said that I needed to read up on the topic. So I read up on what others were doing. I ran across AoIR's document on ethics and found a lot of useful advice/information in Markham and Baym's edited book Internet Inquiry, which lead me to many other authors that were discussing this topic. If you want to email me privately, I can send you some of the articles and books I found most useful. Second, I decided that since this topic isn't black and white, I would include a section within my literature review on what is currently being done in instances such as this, what privacy in internet research means, , etc. I also discussed measures that I would be taking in my method chapter. I know this isn't typically included but when I defended my proposal my committee was happy I had addressed it so thoroughly, because they had questions about this. Plus, all the reading and research helped me come to my decisions. Third, I contacted the Human Subjects Committee at my university and discussed it with them. They determined that if it was publicly available to anyone with Internet access then they would treat it as such. Of course I would need consent/permission from the participants that I chose to interview. In my most recent discussion over my IRB application, they wanted me to include a statement within my consent form (for the interviewees) saying that if they chose to keep their blog identity that there is a chance it would be linked to their blog. Although, I've decided I will interview all of my bloggers, initially they approved that I would be able to include blog posts from bloggers that I was not interviewing and would not need consent since it was a public text without log-in or password. I was able to work with the review board on creating a consent form that I could send via email and their response indicated consent. Of course there was more to the process and I haven't conducted my research yet so... Since it was technically ok by the review board, I had to figure out my own ethics as a researcher. One main question I had was about perceived privacy - do people really think that what they write or say in a specific context has the potential to be published and brought out to a larger audience that wouldn't normally see what they said (i.e. an academic journal when they are just writing a blog)? Was I comfortable pulling direct quotes from blogs without telling the blogger when they can be traced back to the blog even if I changed the blog name and URL? There were many other questions that I had and it took me many months to figure them out, and I'm sure as I conduct the research more questions will arise. I probably would have email this group if I would have been a part of it then. In the end, I've decided to do what I am comfortable with as a researcher within obvious research ethic boundaries. I hope you don't mind me including these, but here are some questions that I thought might be useful to you as you make your decision. In my process I found answering similar questions helpful so I figured I would include them. Are you quoting all of the comments or are you just categorizing them. If you are categorizing and publishing the results in aggregate then is it likely that where the information came from will be discovered? When you Google (or whatever search engine you use) the quotes do the sources of data pop up? Do people have to log-in in order to post the comments? Can anyone without log-in read the comments? What do you consider sensitive? Would your commenters feel that what you think is sensitive is the same thing as what they consider sensitive (i.e. do you know the groups well enough to make this determination)? Jennifer Myers Doctoral Candidate at Florida State University jennifer.b.myers(a)gmail.com

1 0

Reminder: IR 12.0 (Seattle) Fee Waiver Application--DUE June 1
by Alex Halavais 06 May '11

06 May '11

Now that folks are beginning to plan their participation for Seattle, I wanted to remind everyone about the fee waiver awards. Best, Alex Fee Waiver Program In order to increase the diversity of participation in the AoIR annual Internet Research (IR) conferences, the Association of Internet Researchers will make available up to three conference fee waivers per year. The number of fee waivers will depend first of all upon the ability of the conference budget to sustain such waivers (a judgment to be made by the AoIR Executive Committee upon the advice of the AoIR Treasurer and the local organizing committee) as well as upon the quality of the applications for fee waivers. Applications for fee waivers are invited from student or faculty authors whose paper or panel proposals have already been accepted via the AoIR IR conference reviewing process. All applications should be directed to the Vice-President of AoIR (Alex Halavais, vp(a)aoir.org) and must be received by June 1, 2010. Late applications cannot be considered. Applications should be no longer than 2 pages, and must include the following information: 1) A brief description of how the author’s presentation or contribution to the AoIR IR conference will uniquely articulate and/or represent a distinctive perspective (e.g., of persons and/or cultures) otherwise unlikely to be represented at the annual AoIR Internet Research conference. 2) An explanation of the author’s distinctive circumstances that would warrant a fee waiver. These may include, but are by no means limited to: * exceptionally limited financial resources (e.g., as a graduate student or scholar in a non-OECD country, as a disabled person on a limited income, etc.); * exceptional limits on institutional support otherwise normally available (e.g., travel funds, grant funds, etc.); * other exceptional circumstances that render the usual AoIR IR conference fees an insurmountable obstacle to attending the IR conference in order to present one’s own work. Applicants may also include a letter of support from someone familiar with her / his circumstances, special needs, etc. Such a letter is optional, however, not a requirement. Applications will be reviewed by the AoIR Executive Committee. Fee waivers will be awarded on the basis of the Executive Committee’s collective judgment as to which presentations will make the most distinctive contribution to the AoIR IR conference. In order to respect and protect the privacy of the applicants, all Executive Committee discussions and deliberations of fee waiver applications will be held in strict confidence. The AoIR Executive Committee regretfully acknowledges that there will be more fully meritorious applications than we will be able to award and support. Nonetheless we hope that awarded fee waivers will not only assist deserving scholars and researchers, but also thereby enrich the AoIR IR conferences in important new ways. Best, Alex Halavais -- // // This email is // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberflâneur // http://alex.halavais.net // -- // // This email is // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberflâneur // http://alex.halavais.net //

1 0

CJC Issue:Democratizing Communication Policy in the Americas
by lshade＠alcor.concordia.ca 06 May '11

06 May '11

Colleagues, fyi and apologies for any cross/duplicate postings. leslie Leslie Regan Shade Associate Professor Concordia Univ., Dept. of Communication Studies ********** Canadian Journal of Communication Vol 36, No 1 (2011) Democratizing Communication Policy in the Americas: Why It Matters http://www.cjc-online.ca/index.php/journal/issue/current/showToc Editorial Democratizing Communication Policy in the Americas: Why It Matters Roberta G. Lentz, Leslie Regan Shade Articles: Interpreting Privacy on Campus: The Freedom of Information and Personal Privacy Act and Ontario Universities Martin R. Dowding Canadian Copyright: History, Change, and Potential Sara Bannerman >From Pirates to Partners: The Legalization of Community Radio in Uruguay Evan Light Peering Ahead: An Examination of Peer-to-Peer Signal-Sharing Communities that Create Their Own Affordable Internet Access Gwen Shaffer Metaphors for Democratic Communication Spaces: How Developers of Local Wireless Networks Frame Technology and Urban Space Alison Powell The Institutional Development of Indigenous Broadband Infrastructure in Canada and the U.S.: Two Paths to "Digital Self-Determination" Rob McMahon Research in Brief: The Media Communications Environment through a Spatial Lens: The Mapping the Media in the Americas Project Chantal Hansen, Heng Sun, Nigel Waters >From Media Niche to Policy Spotlight: Mapping Community-Media Policy Change in Latin America Arne Hintz Democratizing Communication Policy in Canada: A Social Movement Perspective Robert A. Hackett, Steve Anderson Commentary: Making Media Public: From Discussion to Action? Nicole S. Cohen, Sonja Macdonald, Patricia Mazepa, David Skinner Sex, Money, Media: A Tribute and Political Reflection Catherine Murray, Alison Beale Book Reviews: Making Our Media: Global Initiatives Toward a Democratic Public Sphere, Vol. 1: Creating New Communication Spaces Elizabeth Miller Making Our Media: Global Initiatives Toward a Democratic Public Sphere. Vol. 2: National and Global Movements for Democratic Communication Paula Chakravartty Communications Research in Action: Scholar-Activist Collaborations for a Democratic Public Sphere Milton Mueller

1 0

SIGDOC 2011 CFP, Spring newsletter, and Elections
by Liza Potts 06 May '11

06 May '11

My apologies for cross-posting, but I wanted to make sure everyone is aware of the upcoming deadlines for the conference and elections. We would love to see more participation from AOIR folks! Take care, Liza ______________________________________ Liza Potts, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Writing, Culture, and Technology Co-Director, CeME Lab Old Dominion University Norfolk, VA 23529 AIM: LizaPotts Skype: lkpotts http://ceme.digitalodu.com/ ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Ashley Williams <ashleyew(a)gmail.com> Date: Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 12:00 PM Subject: SIGDOC 2011 CFP, Spring newsletter, and Elections To: SIGDOC-ANNOUNCE(a)listserv.acm.org Dear SIGDOC Community, I am pleased to announce that SIGDOC’s Spring Newsletter is online: http://www.sigdoc.org/newsletter/current. Our latest newsletter includes Notes from SIGDOC’s Chair, Brad Mehlenbacher; information about upcoming conferences; various CFPs; and resources for job seekers. Also of note, the CFP for SIGDOC 2011 is open. The submission date for papers is 20 May 2011; for posters it’s 20 June 2011. Details here: http://sigdoc.org/2011/index.html Finally, as a reminder, SIGDOC elections are open through noon ET, 6 June 2011, for the Executive Board positions of Chair, Vice-Chair, and Secretary/Treasurer. SIGDOC members were emailed election materials on 4 April 2011. Here is the slate for the upcoming term: ACM SIGDOC Election Candidate List, 2011-2013 Chair Brad Mehlenbacher, North Carolina State University, U.S.A. Aristidis Protopsaltis, Coventry University Technology Park, UK Vice-Chair Robert Pierce, IBM Rational Software, U.S.A. Junia Anacleto, Federal University of Sao Carlos, Brazil Secretary/Treasurer Liza Potts, Old Dominion University, U.S.A. Manuela Aparicio, Higher Institute of Labour and Social Enterprise, Portugal Best wishes, Ashley Williams, Ph.D. SIGDOC Information Director Twitter: http://twitter.com/sigdoc Web: http://www.sigdoc.org/ LinkedIn : http://www.linkedin.com/groups?about=&gid=1969844&trk=anet_ug_grppro

1 0

Deadline extension: Workshop on online patient expereince
by Phoenix Mo 05 May '11

05 May '11

We apologise for cross-postings. The deadline for our workshop at HCI 2011 has been extended to 13th of May, 2011 iPEx Workshop on Online Patient Experience and its Role in E-health Northumbria University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK - 5th July 2011 - at the 25th Human Computer Interaction conference (HCI2011) Organisers Sue Ziebland Department of Primary Health Care, University of Oxford Pamela Briggs School of Life Sciences, Northumbria University John Powell Health Sciences Research Institute, University of Warwick Call for papers Overview of the Workshop The Internet has an important role in the provision of reliable, relevant and timely health information for the public and patients. Traditionally, authoritative health information has been based on facts and figures, not the experiences of patients. However the rise of patient-generated content on the Internet, in the form of online patient experiences (PEx) has changed the landscape of health decision-making. Online PEx can have both positive and negative influences - PEx can enhance social support, and facilitate adjustment to an illness but can also raise anxiety levels and in an unmoderated format can deliver very powerful but misleading messages. PEx is important for researchers and e-health designers alike and in this workshop we seek to bring the new PEx community together to share new approaches and findings. We are inviting 2-4 page papers for consideration for this workshop. Submissions should be sent to Dr. Phoenix Mo (phoenix.mo(a)northumbria.ac.uk) by the 13th May 2011. For full workshop details see https://sites.google.com/site/opex2011/ The iPEx programme presents independent research commissioned by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Programme Grants for Applied Research funding scheme (RP-PG-0608-10147). The views expressed in this programme are those of the author(s), representing iPEx, and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health.

1 0

Re: [Air-L] Twitter Data Sharing Update - Thou Shalt Not Share Collections of Tweets
by stu＠texifter.com 05 May '11

05 May '11

The "perp" in this case would gladly buy a large informal after-hours roundtable the first two rounds of microbrew to discuss the matter in depth at #ir12 I think I understand what Twitter is doing and their perfectly reasonable follow up email will be on the blog soon ;-) ~Stu -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Air-L] Twitter Data Sharing Update - Thou Shalt Not Share Collections of Tweets From: Alex Halavais <[1]alex(a)halavais.net> Date: Thu, May 05, 2011 2:39 pm To: [2]air-l(a)listserv.aoir.org This seems like an opportune time to ask whether there is ever a time when violating the Terms of Service is an ethical practice for researchers. (As a practical issue, clearly Twitter can block access to particular IP blocks that it finds violating its API ToS, or turn off the firehose if you are whitelisted.) The natural response to this for most people is that it is never ethically permissible to do so. While I recognize that (for example) this would expose you to personal sanctions from the company for violating those terms, and potentially expose your institution, I'm less concerned with the legal implications than I am with ethical restrictions this places on the researcher. I think there are cases where violation of a set of Terms is ethically permissible, a position I took up at an AoIR preconference workshop last year. This gives us a concrete example. It seems to me that the tweets themselves are not owned by Twitter, and so they are restricting your ability to access these materials programmatically, not to actually having or redistributing the content. If you "magically" were in possession of a collection of tweets, they would have little say in their redistribution (though the authors might, an issue that I think is separate). Specifically, Twitter prohibits "scraping" the service, but fails to define this. If I hire a war room to cut and paste tweets, does this violate the policy? It's simply not clear. It seems to me there is a kind of Turing-test for scrapers: Twitter would have no way to know (other than asking) whether I was scraping programmatically or had hired a room full of undergrads to cut and paste. I've gotten away from my original question. There's no question that the courts have thus far sided with ToS as generally being binding. But when is it (or is it ever) ethically either acceptable or necessary to violate a web site's Terms? Best, Alex -- // // This email is // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberflâneur // [3]http://alex.halavais.net // _______________________________________________ The [4]Air-L(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers [5]http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: [6]http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: [7]http://www.aoir.org/ References 1. mailto:alex@halavais.net 2. mailto:air-l@listserv.aoir.org 3. http://alex.halavais.net/ 4. mailto:Air-L@listserv.aoir.org 5. http://aoir.org/ 6. http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org 7. http://www.aoir.org/

1 0

Re: [Air-L] Twitter Data Sharing Update - Thou Shalt Not Share Collections of Tweets
by Michael Zimmer 05 May '11

05 May '11

Stu- I'm not in full agreement with your starting point that tweets "yearn to be free". I think the nature of the platform (140 character limit, broadcast as one voice among millions of accounts, viewed via a live stream that makes it almost impossible to read every single one) also supports the notion that tweets are meant to be fleeting. -michael > On May 5, 2011, at 9:35 AM, Stuart Shulman wrote: > >> Hi Michael, >> >> We did not contest the violation warning and so we took the data down. The policy is another matter. These are tweets that yearn to be free, insofar as tweets can collectively yearn for anything: >> >> http://bit.ly/ixJVHu >> >> In this instance, I find myself liking the Facebook policy, which in an opposite manner sets data free. This may explain, in part, why the "Scraping Facebook" video seems to be getting more views than the one on harvesting Twitter tweets: >> >> http://www.screencast.com/t/iW3rvdYY >> >> ~Stu >> >> On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Michael Zimmer <zimmerm(a)uwm.edu> wrote: >> It appears the Twitter API doesn't care if you're selling or giving it away, as I.4.a prohibits any attempt to "sell, rent, lease, sublicense, redistribute, or syndicate access to the Twitter API or Twitter Content to any third party without prior written approval from Twitter", as well as noting that "Exporting Twitter Content to a datastore as a service or other cloud based service, however, is not permitted" >> >> http://dev.twitter.com/pages/api_terms >> >> I'm not justifying their terms, but it does appear that you violated them. >> >> -mz >> >> >> -- >> Michael Zimmer, PhD >> Assistant Professor, School of Information Studies >> Co-Director, Center for Information Policy Research >> University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee >> e: zimmerm(a)uwm.edu >> w: www.michaelzimmer.org >> >> >> On May 5, 2011, at 7:24 AM, Stuart Shulman wrote: >> >>> Twitter closed down our efforts to share post-Osama bin Laden Twitter data >>> (or any other collections) for research purposes, again citing their TOS & >>> API TOS. >>> >>> http://bit.ly/l8DSA3 >>> >>> To be clear: we were giving the data away, not selling it. Also, it was not >>> scraped of Twitter. Rather, it was gathered using a Twitter-authorized >>> account and an API that lets us fetch 1500 items at a time. >>> >>> It is a shame that the now 2 million tweets cannot, for example, be sampled >>> and coded using a crowd source model. Or could they? >>> >>> I am assuming the provision against sharing data does not extend to >>> individuals who gather it and keep it to themselves or work with it in a >>> research team. >>> >>> ~Stu >>> >>> -- >>> >>> Stuart Shulman >>> President & CEO >>> Texifter, LLC <http://www.texifter.com/> >>> >>> >>> >>> Have you tried DiscoverText? >>> http://discovertext.com >>> *Featuring the Facebook Graph & Twitter APIs* >>> _______________________________________________ >>> The Air-L(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list >>> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >>> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >>> >>> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >>> http://www.aoir.org/ >> >>

5 4

Twitter Data Sharing Update - Thou Shalt Not Share Collections of Tweets
by Stuart Shulman 05 May '11

05 May '11

Twitter closed down our efforts to share post-Osama bin Laden Twitter data (or any other collections) for research purposes, again citing their TOS & API TOS. http://bit.ly/l8DSA3 To be clear: we were giving the data away, not selling it. Also, it was not scraped of Twitter. Rather, it was gathered using a Twitter-authorized account and an API that lets us fetch 1500 items at a time. It is a shame that the now 2 million tweets cannot, for example, be sampled and coded using a crowd source model. Or could they? I am assuming the provision against sharing data does not extend to individuals who gather it and keep it to themselves or work with it in a research team. ~Stu -- Stuart Shulman President & CEO Texifter, LLC <http://www.texifter.com/> Have you tried DiscoverText? http://discovertext.com *Featuring the Facebook Graph & Twitter APIs*

6 7