- Air-L - lists.aoir.org

net neutrality by another name, oecd report
by Jeremy Hunsinger 29 Apr '07

29 Apr '07

I thought some of you might find this interesting/useful. Internet traffic prioritisation: Internet traffic prioritisation is an increasingly important policy issue as bandwidth demands increase and Internet applications require higher levels of quality of service to function well. Debates about traffic prioritisation, particularly in the context of “network neutrality” discussions, have been divisive. The study provides background for national debates by examining the role of traffic prioritisation in networks and highlighting associated policy and regulatory issues. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/43/63/38405781.pdf jeremy hunsinger Information Ethics Fellow, Center for Information Policy Research, School of Information Studies, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (www.cipr.uwm.edu) wiki.tmttlt.com www.tmttlt.com () ascii ribbon campaign - against html mail /\ - against microsoft attachments http://www.stswiki.org/ sts wiki http://cfp.learning-inquiry.info/ Learning Inquiry-the journal http://transdisciplinarystudies.tmttlt.com/ Transdisciplinary Studies:the book series

4 4

cfp: controversial images in popular communication
by Attwood, Fiona 29 Apr '07

29 Apr '07

CALL FOR PAPERS: CONTROVERSIAL IMAGES For a special issue of Popular Communication: International Journal of Media and Culture, 2009, edited by Sharon Lockyer and Feona Attwood. Controversial images are increasingly central to media which are concerned with scandal, titillation and horror, and in a culture where images and image making is so important. Controversial images circulate in a wide range of different media forms from films, TV programmes, newspapers, and advertisements, to internet sites, video games, and music videos. In recent years there have been a number of instances where controversial images have become the primary focus of public fascination and debate. These include the paparazzi shots of Princess Diana's fatal accident, images from Abu Ghraib, the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons and footage of the execution of Saddam Hussein. More generally, images of sex, scandal, destruction and abuse function as the emblem for some of the major social and cultural concerns of our times. This special issue seeks to address the significance of controversial Images and their subsequent public debates, and reflect on what they can tell us about the production, content and reception processes of contemporary media. Proposals are welcomed on, but not limited to, the following topics and areas: Shock sites Extreme porn Religious controversies Atrocity images War reporting Body horror Invasion of privacy issues Media representation of sensitive subjects Censorship and regulation Proposals with an international focus are particularly welcome, as are those which focus on controversial images in various different countries. Proposals of 200-250 words, accompanied by a biographical note of 100 words should be sent by Tuesday 31st July 2007 to Feona Attwood, f.attwood(a)shu.ac.uk. The deadline for submission of drafts will be March 2008 and June 2008 for finished drafts. Popular Communication: International Journal of Media and Culture The journal provides a forum for the scholarly investigation, analysis, and dialogue on communication symbols, forms, phenomena, and strategic systems of symbols within the context of contemporary popular culture across the globe. Popular Communication publishes articles on all aspects of popular communication, examining different media such as television, film, new media, print media, radio, music, and dance; the study of texts, events, artifacts, spectacles, audiences, technologies, and industries; and phenomena and practices, including, but not limited to, fan, youth and subcultures, questions of representation, digitalization, cultural globalization, spectator sports, sexuality, advertising, and consumer culture. The journal welcomes diverse theoretical and methodological perspectives within the tradition of media, communication, and cultural studies as well as interdisciplinary research in and across related disciplines. Editors: Cornel Sandvoss (University of Surrey, UNITED KINGDOM) C. Lee Harrington (Miami University, USA) Jonathan Gray (Fordham University, USA)

1 0

E-Journals
by Michael Gurstein 29 Apr '07

29 Apr '07

I edit and "publish" JoCI an on-line fully open access journal (Journal of Community Informatics http://ci-journal.net) and tend to agree with most of what has been said about the opportunities (and risks) of on-line journals. Just a few points to add: We are a "global" journal which means that most of our editorial board (I think highly distinguished within the context of Community Informatics) is from outside of the US, and I'm based in Canada but with strong links to South Africa and Australia as well as the US. What that means is that the specific nature of the relationship to the P&T & other academic incentive processes are somewhat different from most of those discussed here. The fact that RESEARCH funding as well at P&T in South Africa (and parts of Asia as well as Australia and the UK) is directly tied to publications with ranking in the Thomson ISI index is a problem -- and dare I say a problem not just for us, or for our potential authors. The fact is that the "A" ranked journals in the ISI index are overwhelmingly skewed to the issue areas and recognition structures of developed countries even in those research topic areas of direct and immediate significance to the developing countries themselves such as for example enablng communities with Information and Communications technologies. (Dare I say that these issues are of broader significance than simply academic.) The on-line journal structure and including open access is of course, ideal for an emerging discipline such as Community Informatics where it gives CI and its exponents an opportunity to get wide exposure both academically and among those non-academics with an interest in the area, where other and more traditional routes (and media) would be much slower and more problematic. The issue of academic acknowledgement is of course, an issue but that would be an issue for those identifying with CI in any case, and a journal gives CI a means for legitimation and exposure in the short run which would can only accelerate the broader processes of academic acceptance. Cash funding for the journal is much less of a problem given that we are using very workflow smart software (OJS v.2) but some regular cash is still required for exceptional or highly specialized activities. As well of course, a continuing stream of volunteer labour is required and it helps a lot if one has access to some kind of "incentives" (graduate stipends, control over internal staff resources etc.etc.) to ensure a continuing stream and particularly the timely execution of the various activities otherwise committed to by volunteers. It very much helps if the journal is not simply another P&T publishing venue otherwise whatever the initial spurt of energy (or money) that created it will very quickly fade (or some other opportunity will beckon) and there will be little energy or will to replace this. The reason, I suspect, for the short lifespan of many on-line journals. The opportunity for reach and thus readership and potential influence is vastly greater than the relatively small one of traditional journals. This is both an advantage and a risk in that it rather puts some additional pressure on the core academic mission of the enterprise and forces a contininuing reflection on the precise nature of the research publishing (and thus peer reviewed journal) enterprise. This isn't a bad thing, and re-thinking the rather stale and unwieldy model of traditional academic journal publishing is a very good thing but figuring out how to locate oneself in the almost infinite space of e-publishing opportunity is a continuing challenge. To sum up I guess, the shift to on-line (and dare I say open access) journals is probably unstoppable for a variety of reasons including cost and the pressure for open knowledge which is coming from a variety of directions and not incidentally increasingly from research funders. The new model at the moment is very much an entrepreneurial as opposed to an institutional one i.e. it depends on the energy and creative enterprise of an individual or individuals rather than the continuity of academic or commercial or other institutional structures. My sense though is, as several have suggested in a somewhat tentative way, (and was suggested explicitly in the context of JoCI by Tony Salvador of Intel), that the future is in translating the emerging power and modalities of knowledge networks into e-publishing form. This is one where the "journal" is the publishing expression not of a commercial/institutionally structured discipline/sub-discipline/sub-sub-discipline, nor that of a knowledge community as articulated by its leadership, but is in fact the way that an extended network of knowledge collaborators give a public voice (and public access) to the considered products of their collaborative knowledge creations. Collaborative blogs and wikis are I think, something of a precursor to this but figuring out how exactly this could fit into the broader framework of academic and research structuring and funding is still in the somewhat distant future. And this will have to wait I think, until the current generation of grad students and junior academics i.e. digital/electronic community natives, are in positions of authority. The reality, as several here have already alluded to, is that the academic structures haven't really caught up to web 1.0, let alone adapting themselves to the opportunities and risks of shifting their intellectual product into a web 2.0 (;-)) environment. Best, MG Michael Gurstein, Ph.D. Editor in Chief: Journal of Community Informatics http://ci-journal.net Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and Training, Vancouver, BC CANADA http://www.communityinformatics.net

1 0

Second Life Research
by Jonathan Basile 28 Apr '07

28 Apr '07

I am researching gendered relations on Second Life, and wanted to know if anyone was aware of studies or rese4arch that had been done on this particular online community. I am most interested in studies focused on gender, but anything more general would be of interest as well. Also, let me know if you are a second life user and interested in chatting. Thanks! -Jonathan Basile

4 3

Resources and teaching materials
by Erika Pearson 27 Apr '07

27 Apr '07

Hello all I am compiling a list of resources (books, AV, etc) for my library to help improve the internet studies section. I would be interested to know what materials or texts others who are teaching/researching in the field think of as being useful. Any references you can suggest, however obvious or obscure, would be greatly appreciated (because I am sure I'm forgetting some key names!) with thanks Erika ~~ Erika Pearson Dept. of Media, Film and Communication. University of Otago P.O. Box 56 Dunedin 9054 Aotearoa/New Zealand Ph: (+0064 3) 479-8680 E-mail: erika.pearson(a)otago.ac.nz

3 2

Wikipedia (reply for Mark Bell)
by Luis Gutierrez 27 Apr '07

27 Apr '07

>Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 19:55:33 -0400 >From: "Mark Bell" <typewritermark(a)gmail.com> >Subject: Re: [Air-l] Wikipedia Bibliography >To: air-l(a)listserv.aoir.org >Message-ID: > <732865eb0704261655h66a4f228p41dcdb000ee3bd5f(a)mail.gmail.com> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > >Phoebe, > >I just joined the Wiki research group and I will post it there. Thanks for >the heads up. > >Here is the abstract of my thesis: > >The Transformation of the Encyclopedia: A Textual Analysis and Comparison >of the *Encyclop?dia Britannica* and *Wikipedia* >The purpose of this thesis is to explore the following research question: >Are there grammatical textual differences between *Encyclop?dia Britannica*and >*Wikipedia*? Specifically, this study will focus on the articles for >"Communism" and "Dwight D. Eisenhower" that appear in the online version of >Encyclop?dia* Britannica* and *Wikipedia*. Using a grammatical textual >analysis, the study finds there is little difference grammatically >between*Encyclop?dia Britannica >* and *Wikipedia* though they are very different types of systems. There are >several different types of textual or contextual methods that could expand >on this initial approach to find differences between* Encyclop?dia >Britannica* and *Wikipedia*. > >what are you doing with Wiki's? > > Mark, I do a lot of online research, and wikipedia is my first stop, then google, then more specialized databases if needed. For instance, for biographical and bibliographical research, I feel lucky if the person of interest is in wikipedia. The wikipedia article gives me an overview of the person's life and work, and often a rather complete bibliography. It also gives me external links where I should go for more information. Then I will go to the heavyweights such as the LOC and the WBIS in order to double check the wiki information; many times I don't find anything new. With most library databases now requiring subscription or pay by view, I still manage to get most of the information I need for free. Luis -- Luis T. Gutierrez, Ph.D. Editor, "Solidarity, Sustainability, and Non-Violence" Home page: http://pelicanweb.org/solisust.html Current issue: http://pelicanweb.org/solisustv03n04.html Email: luisgutierrez(a)peoplepc.com

1 0

CFP: Learning and Research In Second Life Preconference Workshop
by Jeremy Hunsinger 27 Apr '07

27 Apr '07

Call for Papers/Participation Please join us in a workshop on learning and research in Second Life (R) on October 17, 2007 in Vancouver at Internet Research 8.0 (http:// wiki.aoir.org/index.php?title=About_IR8.0) Paper Deadline August 15th. Second Life(R) is a 3d virtual environment created by Linden Lab which has captured the attentions of researchers and teachers from around the world from a variety of disciplines. This workshop aims to improve the understanding of Second Life as a Learning and Research environment. It will bring 35 researchers together to collaborate, discuss and workshop diverse topics related to research and learning in Second Life. We will pursue a full-day schedule in which participants will discuss their work and interests on four different topics: learning in Second Life, integrated learning, the contributions of research to the community and ethical research methods. How can we better enable learning in this sphere? How can we better enable research? As a highlight, Robin Linden will give a talk to the group, and members of Linden Lab will likely participate throughout the day. We encourage researchers to submit papers and short biography to slworkshop(a)tmttlt.com which will be selected and distributed amongst participants before the workshop. First invitations will be offered to those who provide full papers for consideration. These papers have two purposes: first is to provide a common platform for understanding our research and teaching and second submitted papers may be considered for publication in an edited volume being produced in relation to the workshop, or possibly in peer reviewed publication derived from the workshop (these are currently under discussion). Subsequent invitation will be made based upon research/teaching statement and biography. If you are interested in participating, please send an email containing your information to slworkshop(a)tmttlt.com. Decisions will be made by September 1st, barring incident. There is a limit of 35 participants at the physical meeting; the event will be simulcast into Second Life. We welcome professionals, faculty and graduate students to participate. This workshop is sponsored by Linden Lab creators of Second Life and is organized by Jeremy Hunsinger and Aleks Krotoski. Free lunch, coffee breaks and the room is included in participation. jeremy hunsinger Information Ethics Fellow, Center for Information Policy Research, School of Information Studies, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (www.cipr.uwm.edu) wiki.tmttlt.com www.tmttlt.com () ascii ribbon campaign - against html mail /\ - against microsoft attachments http://www.stswiki.org/ sts wiki http://cfp.learning-inquiry.info/ Learning Inquiry-the journal http://transdisciplinarystudies.tmttlt.com/ Transdisciplinary Studies:the book series

1 0

Fwd: [ias-opportunities] Call for SOUPS posters and discussion sessions
by Jeremy Hunsinger 26 Apr '07

26 Apr '07

looks interesting... Begin forwarded message: > From: Lorrie Cranor <lorrie+(a)cs.cmu.edu> > Date: April 26, 2007 11:08:35 PM EDT > To: ias-opportunities(a)cerias.purdue.edu > Subject: [ias-opportunities] Call for SOUPS posters and discussion > sessions > Reply-To: Lorrie Cranor <lorrie+(a)cs.cmu.edu> > > Call for Posters and Discussion Sessions > Symposium On Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS 2007) - July 18-20, > Pittsburgh, PA > http://cups.cs.cmu.edu/soups/2007/ > > SOUPS posters and discussion session proposals are due May 18. See > details below. > > SOUPS registration is now open. The early registration deadline in > June 5. A preliminary program will be posted soon. > > > POSTERS > > We seek poster abstracts describing recent or ongoing research or > experience in all areas of usable privacy and security. Submission of > late breaking results and work in progress is especially > encouraged. Submissions should follow the same formatting instructions > as refereed papers, but should be at most two pages and should not > include categories and subject descriptors, general terms, or > keywords. They should include a copyright block. Accepted poster > abstracts will appear in the ACM Digital Library as part of the ACM > International Conference Proceedings Series. Please follow the final > submission formatting instructions when preparing your poster abstract > to avoid the need to revise poster abstracts after acceptance > decisions are made. In addition, SOUPS will include a poster session > in which authors will exhibit their posters. Note, poster abstracts > should be formatted like short papers, not like posters. Authors of > accepted posters will be sent information about how to prepare and > format posters for the conference. > > > DISCUSSION SESSIONS > > SOUPS will feature parallel, moderated breakout sessions (similar to > Birds of a feather sessions) in which symposium participants will > discuss a topic related to usable privacy and security. These sessions > may include a brief introduction to the topic by the moderator, but > otherwise will not include formal presentations. Discussion session > topics may include, but are not limited to, definitions or metrics, > design critiques, research agendas, or frameworks for collaborative > research. We seek proposals for discussion session topics. Proposals > must include a one paragraph statement of the topic to be discussed > and a one paragraph bio of each proposer that describes their > experience or interest in the topic. Optionally, proposers may submit > up to two pages of background material that can be distributed to > participants and posted on the SOUPS website. Authors of accepted > proposals will be expected to moderate their discussion session and > provide a brief report on their session for posting on the SOUPS web > site after the symposium. > > jeremy hunsinger Information Ethics Fellow, Center for Information Policy Research, School of Information Studies, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (www.cipr.uwm.edu) () ascii ribbon campaign - against html mail /\ - against microsoft attachments http://www.aoir.org The Association of Internet Researchers http://www.stswiki.org/ stswiki http://cfp.learning-inquiry.info/ LI-the journal http://transdisciplinarystudies.tmttlt.com/ Transdisciplinary Studies:the book series

1 0

Re: [Air-l] how to pin down web 2.0
by Lane DeNicola 26 Apr '07

26 Apr '07

Mark Warschaur mentioned O'Reilly Media as the cited progenitor of the term Web 2.0, and I'd argue Tim O'Reilly's (rather lengthy) 2005 article--appropriately titled "What is Web 2.0?"--is probably still the best general source on the concept: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.… According to the concept as built there, Alex Halavais is effectively right, that the term denotes "companies that have attracted funding or make money on the web over the last few years," but also that "it suggests some kind of breaking point with earlier approaches to design," to wit: "In exploring the seven principles above, we've highlighted some of the principal features of Web 2.0. Each of the examples we've explored demonstrates one or more of those key principles, but may miss others. Let's close, therefore, by summarizing what we believe to be the core competencies of Web 2.0 companies: * Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective scalability * Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that get richer as more people use them * Trusting users as co-developers * Harnessing collective intelligence * Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service * Software above the level of a single device * Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND business models The next time a company claims that it's "Web 2.0," test their features against the list above. The more points they score, the more they are worthy of the name. Remember, though, that excellence in one area may be more telling than some small steps in all seven." I'd advocate the use of the term, if only because of its circulation as industry vernacular, but its use should be well-qualified. As a fluid construct (one used here to designate "companies with certain competencies," rather than, say, qualities of specific technologies) perhaps the best course would be to qualify it as "O'Reilly's (or whomever's) conceptualization of Web 2.0." -- Lane DeNicola Doctoral Candidate | Dept. of Science & Technology Studies Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute http://www.nacresky.com/lad Tried the Science Studies Search Engine? <http://www.nacresky.com/ssse>

11 15

Trouble with journals
by John Postill 26 Apr '07

26 Apr '07

------ Original Message ------ Received: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 09:54:32 AM BST From: "John Postill" <jpostill(a)usa.net> To: "Maximilian C. Forte" <mforte(a)alcor.concordia.ca>, <medianthro(a)easaonline.org> Subject: [Medianthro] Trouble with journals Max Forte wrote: > I am > also a very passionate proponent of open access publishing, and in that vein I am the > editor of a specialized, peer reviewed journal titled, KACIKE: The Journal of Caribbean > Amerindian History and Anthropology (at www.kacike.org) which has encountered absolutely > *none* of the problems that opponents of open access journals normally list. > I'm glad Max has brought up the subject of journals as I've been discussing this issue with colleagues recently and it seems to me (and others) that something's seriously wrong with how the system works. I've experienced firsthand and heard stories of journal submissions where one is kept waiting anything between 12 and 24 months before hearing any substantial news, and that's after having chased this up with the journal a number of times. At the same time, authors are not allowed to submit the same piece to another journal, so often at the end of a very long wait a rejection comes and they're back to square one having wasted precious months. It's clear that people are busy and that peer reviews take time, but should we really have to wait 12-15 months, or even longer, for a response? Perhaps journals should commit themselves to a reasonable waiting period (say, max 4 months) and publish figures of the time it takes them on average to get back to prospective contributors? Or perhaps contributors themselves should publish or circulate these figures in the public domain? Any thoughts on this? ****************************************** EASA Media Anthropology Network http://www.media-anthropology.net For further information please contact: Dr John Postill Sheffield Hallam University, UK jpostill(a)usa.net To manage your subscription to this mailing list, visit: http://lists.easaonline.org/listinfo.cgi/medianthro-easaonline.org

11 25