- Air-L - lists.aoir.org

music stuff
by Barry Wellman 09 May '07

09 May '07

Two pre-Internet authors on Sociology of music: Rob Faulkner's book on Networks of Hollywood Musicians Richard P (Pete) Petersen's books and articles Sorry, I don't have titles handy. 12-day road trip has fried the brain. even if these guys are pre-net, they are both smart and thoughtful on this subject. Which reminds me of an interaction I had last Saturday at a Bat Mitzvah in Tucson. Me: Is that the Andrews Sisters singing "Candyman"? DJ: No, It's Christine Aguilera. Me: Sounds like the Andrews Sisters from the 40s. DJ: I didn't know they had discs then. Barry Wellman _____________________________________________________________________ Barry Wellman S.D. Clark Professor of Sociology NetLab Director Centre for Urban & Community Studies University of Toronto 455 Spadina Avenue Toronto Canada M5S 2G8 fax:+1-416-978-7162 wellman at chass.utoronto.ca http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman For fun -- updating songs, movies and history: http://chass.utoronto.ca/oldnew/cybertimes.php Elvis wouldn't be singing Return to Sender now _____________________________________________________________________

1 0

Re: [Air-l] Online Activism -- empirical research references?
by Paul DiPerna 08 May '07

08 May '07

I'd like to send a quick thank you to all those who shared references and citations with me on/off list over the past week.. I'm grateful for the insights and help. - Paul ------------- Paul DiPerna Blau Exchange http://www.blauexchange.org online ID: http://claimid.com/pdiperna > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [Air-l] Online Activism -- empirical research references? > From: "Denise N. Rall" <denrall(a)yahoo.com> > Date: Mon, May 07, 2007 12:33 am > To: air-l(a)listserv.aoir.org > > >From my files: > > Pickerill, Jenny (2003). Cyberprotest: Environmental > activism online. Manchester: Manchester University > Press. > > >From Moses Boudourides, via email sent to AIR in 2002: > Jordan, Tim (2002). Activism! Direct Action, Hactivism > and the Future of Society. London: Reaktion Books. > > Langman, Lauren, & Morris, Douglas (2002). Internet > mediation: A theory of alternative globalization > movements. In M. Gurstein & S. Finquelievich (eds.), > Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on > Community Informatics. Montreal, Canada, October 8, > 2002. > > McCaughey, Matha, & Ayers, Michael D. (eds.) (2003). > Cyberactivism. OnlineActivism in Theory and Practice. > New York & London: Routledge. > > Morris, Douglas, & Langman, Lauren (2002). Networks of > dissent: A typologyof social movements in a global > age. In M. Gurstein & S. Finquelievich(eds.), > Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on > Community Informatics. Montreal, Canada, October 8, > 2002. > > Myers, Daniel J. (???). Social activism through > computer networks. [Online] > > Samuel, Alexandra (???). Decoding hactivism: Purpose, > method, and identity in a new social movement. > [Online] > > Samuel, Alexandra (???). Digital disobedience: > Hactivism in political context. [Online] > > > Denise N. Rall, PhD > Southern Cross University, Lismore NSW 2480 AUSTRALIA > Tues: Room T2.17, +61 (0)2 6620 3577 Mobile 0438 233 344 > http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/rsm/staff/pages/drall/ > Virtual member, Cybermetrics Group, University of Wolverhampton, UK > http://cybermetrics.wlv.ac.uk/index.html > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ > No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go > with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started. > http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail > _______________________________________________ > 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/

2 1

conference reminder
by Davidgbeer＠aol.com 08 May '07

08 May '07

Dear members, Apologies for cross-posting but just a reminder that the call for abstracts for the event 'Towards a social science of Web 2.0' closes on the 18th of May. The event will be held at the University of York (U.K.). Further information is available here: _http://www.york.ac.uk/res/siru/web2.0conferenceCFP.pdf_ (http://www.york.ac.uk/res/siru/web2.0conferenceCFP.pdf) Regards, Dave Beer

1 0

cfp; disagree with James Whyte (and who?)
by Barry Wellman 08 May '07

08 May '07

1. I disagree strongly with James Whyte, that we should segregate calls for proposals, conferences, etc from this list. I daresay that it is the lifeblood of this list for many scholars and important for most of the rest. Indeed, as this is AoiResearchers, calls for publishing such research is part of what distinguishes us from uninformed talkers. 2. James Whyte's request (and frequent posts) have made me (and some others) wonder: who is James Whyte? Almost all posters to this list anchor themselves institutionally thru their e-address or their sig. But I cannot find such in Mr. Whyte's posting. And a quick check of the 20 items in Google scholar wasn't useful, as "James Whyte" is more common than "Barry Wellman" "Charles Ess" etc. G.Scholar came up with a variety of James Whyte's. So James Whyte, in view of your frequent posts, I (and I think some others) would appreciate knowing more about you, in order to put your comments in context. Barry Wellman _____________________________________________________________________ Barry Wellman S.D. Clark Professor of Sociology NetLab Director Centre for Urban & Community Studies University of Toronto 455 Spadina Avenue Toronto Canada M5S 2G8 fax:+1-416-978-7162 wellman at chass.utoronto.ca http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman for fun: http://chass.utoronto.ca/oldnew/cybertimes.php _____________________________________________________________________

4 3

FW: CALL FOR CHAPTER PROPOSALS
by Katy E. Pearce 08 May '07

08 May '07

From: Aniko620(a)aol.com [mailto:Aniko620@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 7:30 AM To: mussmanap(a)state.gov; katy(a)katypearce.org Subject: CALL FOR CHAPTER PROPOSALS CALL FOR CHAPTER PROPOSALS The Handbook of Research on Language Acquisition Technologies: Web 2.0 Transformation of Learning will provide an up-to-date overview of current developments in Information and Communication Technologies related to the fields of second and foreign language acquisition. The volume will feature chapters (5,000-7,500 words) authored by leading experts in the field of CALL, e-Learning and educational technology, offering an in-depth description of key terms and concepts related to different areas, issues and trends in Information Communication Technologies. RECOMMENDED TOPICS Topics include, but are not limited to: (i). A history of Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 technologies (ii). The case for the originality of Web 2.0 technologies (iii). The pitfalls of Web 2.0 technologies in the classroom (information overload, Internet security, the dangers of online communities for students) (iv). Web 2.0 and the potential for educational Institutions (v). The pedagogical implications of Web 2.0 (vi). Second Life and language education (vii). E-Learning 2.0 (distance learning, mobile learning, blended learning) (viii). Web 2.0 and the history of Computer Assisted Language Learning (ix). The use of blogs in language education (x). Virtual gaming and Web 2.0 (xi). Podcasting in language education (xii). Wikis in language education (xiii). The pedagogical implications of social network environments (xiv). Social software and learning (xv). The role of the ICT/CALL coordinator and Web 2.0 technologies (xvi). E-moderation and Web 2.0 (xvii). Conditions for the successful implementation of Web 2.0 in education (xviii) Laptop projects (wireless and one-to-one) (xix). Case studies using Web 2.0 in language learning contexts. Other areas of research on Web 2.0 technologies (YouTube, Second Life, MySpace, iPods, Mobile Learning, Course Management Systems, Social Software, ning.com, Flickr, etc.) and language learning will also be considered. INVITED SUBMISSIONS Individuals interested in submitting chapters (5,000-7,500 words) on the above- suggested topics or other related topics in their area of interest should submit via e-mail a 2 page manuscript proposal clearly explaining the mission and concerns of the proposed chapter by June 15, 2007. We strongly encourage other topics that have not been listed in our suggested list, particularly if the topic is related to the research area in which you have expertise. Upon acceptance of your proposal, you will have until November 30, 2007, to prepare the first draft of your chapter of 5,000-7,500 words and 7-10 related terms and their appropriate definitions. Guidelines for preparing your paper and terms and definitions will be sent to you upon acceptance of your proposal. Please forward your e-mail of interest including your name, affiliation and a list of topics (5-7) on which you are interested in writing a chapter to: Michael Thomas, editor, at <michael.thomas(a)nucba.ac.jp> no later than June 15, 2007. You will be notified about the status of your proposed topics by July 1, 2007. This book is scheduled for publishing by Information Science Reference (an imprint of IGI Global) <http://www.idea-group.com> in 2008. ________________________________________ See what's free at AOL.com.

1 0

(no subject)
by Homero Gil de Zuniga 08 May '07

08 May '07

Interesting Pew's report about technology users... The first paragraph is very revealing. Most of "us" may have/use a lot of technology in our lives but still we don't engage that much into interactive and/or selfexpressive tasks... which are essential to crystallization of civic engagement or political participation. Also worth noting the little quiz to find out what type of info tech user one is. I just found out that according to the Pew, they claim I am a "technological omnivore"... Nothing that I didn't know before. Cheers, HGZ ----------------- A Typology of Information and Communication Technology Users Fully 85% of American adults use the internet or cell phones - and most use both. Many also have broadband connections, digital cameras and video game systems. Yet the proportion of adults who exploit the connectivity, the capacity for self expression, and the interactivity of modern information technology is a modest 8%. Fully half of adults have a more distant or non-existent relationship to modern information technology. Some of this diffidence is driven by people's concerns about information overload; some is related to people's sense that their gadgets have more capacity than users can master; some is connected to people's sense that things like blogging and creating home-brew videos for YouTube is not for them; and some is rooted in people's inability to afford or their unwillingness to buy the gear that would bring them into the digital age. These findings come from the Pew Internet Project's typology of information and communication technology (ICT) users. The typology categorizes Americans based on the amount of ICTs they possess, how they use them, and their attitudes about the role of ICTs are in their lives. Ten separate groups emerge in the typology. Here is a link to the complete report: http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/213/report_display.asp What kind of information technology user are you? Answer a few questions to see where you fit in the new typology of information and communication technology users developed by the Pew Internet Project. Take our quiz here: http://www.pewinternet.org/quiz/

1 0

Re: [Air-l] we need a better word than lurking
by jerichob＠juno.com 08 May '07

08 May '07

A "lurker" exposes herself... I've subscribed to this list for a while, and I even did contribute once, so I guess I'm not an utter lurker, but this thread has gotten me thinking about a number of things (which often happens with this list). First, by way of introduction, I am a Ph.D. candidate at UC San Diego Communication Department, in my 7th year, and desperately trying to finish my dissertation (so I really, really should not be writing this email, especially since I'm nearly done with a chapter). One of the reasons I "lurk" is that I don't have very much time (I'm also a single mom - but that's truly invisible work in the academic world), and composing emails takes time. Another reason is that my main research is only tangentially related to topics I've seen on this list - my dissertation is on famine early warning systems, and I did my fieldwork in Ethiopia, and while the Internet plays an increasing role in these systems, most of my research had to do with the face-to- face interactions of early warning experts in Addis Ababa, and other- than-electronic communications. I'm not up on things like blogs, but I'd like to be, which is one of the reasons I subscribed to this list. I also value the CFPs and conference announcements. Once I finish the Ph.D., I am planning to do more work in the area of information technology (including the Internet) in humanitarian planning and response, and this list may become more immediately relevant for me then. For me, subscribing to lists is one way of finding out what conversations are going on in a particular field or area of research, and deciding if I want to move into them. This may seem opportunistic, but I suspect it's how a lot of people learn about fields other than the one they are immediately participating in. So now you know who I am (partly). Anyway, I've been thinking about the "lurker" discussion, and the idea of intent and assuming intent, and perhaps the reason "lurker" doesn't seem to fit right to me is because the initial definition of it is to remain hidden with evil intent, or to lie in wait. I don't feel that not contributing to lists is particularly evil (though I do feel that not replying to personal emails is). Perhaps this connotation can't help but carry over into the Internet usage of the term because the word did exist before and many people initially became familiar with it in its traditional context (as in criminals lurking in the darkness and that sort of thing). Just a thought. At any rate, for those who are worried about presuming anything about list readers' intentions or expressing unwarranted aspirations for them, "lurker" would seem to be a particularly bad choice of label. (For me, the term conjures up images not of passivity but of waiting for the right moment to attack.) There are a number of reasons why I haven't posted much to this particular list (yet) - most of the time it's because I don't have much to contribute about a topic. If there is a more general topic about which I have a strong opinion (such as academic publishing), I feel that since I haven't contributed to the list otherwise, my participation in these discussions would be less than legitimate (my own personal hang-up). If someone asked about something I knew something about, I would respond. And if I had a question that I felt people on the list could help me with, I'd certainly ask it (and in fact probably will when I revise a paper to submit for publication this summer). Sometimes I will talk with a colleague about something I've read on the list, but I've never felt compelled to report these conversations to the list as a marker of my participation in the exchange of ideas related to the list (no doubt to many subscribers' benefit). Perhaps I am a free rider or dead weight in this particular arena, but that fortunately is not true of others. Best regards, Jericho Burg Ph.D. Candidate Department of Communication University of California, San Diego http://www.communication.ucsd.edu/people/g_burg.html

1 0

searching and religion
by Barry Wellman 08 May '07

08 May '07

The 2-part title of this post refers to the 2 themes of the new issue of JCMC. One part is on social aspects of search engines (edited by Eszter Hargittai) and the ohter is on online religious stuff (edited by Charles Ess, et al). The table of contents is below my sig. Jen Kayahara and I have an article in the Searching section that is relevant to the "lurking" discussion this list has been having. Two points: 1. I want to repeat the obvious, but oft-forgotten, truism: people have lives off-line too. (even me.) Many readers/lurkers carry the info back to their off-line contacts, or send email comments about what they have read to their friends. 2. Jen & I found (using "Connected Lives" data) that there is a dialectic between getting info offline and checking it online, then discussing it offline, then discussing it online, etc. Indeed, we make a giant leap from our small Toronto sample and hazard a guess/supposition that the two-step flow of communication idea is much less viable in the Internet age. It's so easy to gather info and to communicate that there is often a multi-step flow of communication. Barry Wellman _____________________________________________________________________ Barry Wellman S.D. Clark Professor of Sociology NetLab Director Centre for Urban & Community Studies University of Toronto 455 Spadina Avenue Toronto Canada M5S 2G8 fax:+1-416-978-7162 wellman at chass.utoronto.ca http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman for fun: http://chass.utoronto.ca/oldnew/cybertimes.php _____________________________________________________________________ http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol12/issue3/ Special Theme I: The Social, Political, Economic, and Cultural Dimensions of Search Engines Eszter Hargittai, Guest editor 1. The Social, Political, Economic, and Cultural Dimensions of Search Engines: An Introduction Eszter Hargittai This collection explores how search engines are embedded in social processes and institutions that influence how they function and how they are used. 2. Heuristic and Systematic Use of Search Engines Werner Wirth, Tabea Böcking, Veronika Karnowski, and Thilo von Pape Different types of cognitive processing of search results may occur, depending on situational demands and the Web experience and domain-specific involvement of the user. 3. In Google We Trust: Users' Decisions on Rank, Position, and Relevance Bing Pan, Helene Hembrooke, Thorsten Joachims, Lori Lorigo, Geri Gay, and Laura Granka Users have substantial trust in Google's ability to rank search results by their true relevance, even when abstracts are manipulated to be less relevant. 4. Searching for CultureHigh and Low Jennifer Kayahara and Barry Wellman Torontonians first obtain cultural information from interpersonal ties or other offline sources and then turn to the Web for efficiency and up-to-date information. 5. Learning to Search and Searching to Learn: Income, Education, and Experience Online Philip N. Howard and Adrienne Massanari Years of online experience, frequency of use, and sophistication with multiple search engines can overcome socio-economic status in predicting how active a person is in searching across different topics. 6. Is Relevance Relevant? Market, Science, and War: Discourses of Search Engine Quality Elizabeth Van Couvering Fairness and representativeness are not key determiners of search engine quality in the minds of search engine producers. Rather, they invoke alternative standards of quality, such as customer satisfaction and relevance. 7. Equal Representation by Search Engines? A Comparison of Websites across Countries and Domains Liwen Vaughan and Yanjun Zhang A study of search engine coverage of websites in four domains from four countries finds that U.S. sites received higher coverage rates than their counterparts in other countries. 8. Google Bombing from a Time Perspective Judit Bar-Ilan The behavior of Google bombs over time seems to be dependent on the type of Google bomb (humor, ego, or ideological) and on the community promoting the bombed page. Special Theme II: Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Religion and Computer-Mediated Communication Charles Ess, Guest editor (with Akira Kawabata and Hiroyuki Kurosaki) 9. Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Religion and Computer-Mediated Communication Charles Ess (with Akira Kawabata and Hiroyuki Kurosaki) Individually and collectively, the articles in this collection highlight characteristics that foster or hinder religions' migration online. 10. Diaspora on the Electronic Frontier: Developing Virtual Connections with Sacred Homelands Christopher Helland Diaspora religious groups use the Internet for long-distance ritual practice and cyber pilgrimage to connect to their homelands. 11. Internet Use among Religious Followers: Religious Postmodernism in Japanese Buddhism Kenshin Fukamizu Japanese Buddhists who participate in online interaction have a more critical attitude toward their faith systems than their non-Internet using counterparts. 12. Online-Religion in Japan: Websites and Religious Counseling from a Comparative Cross-Cultural Perspective Akira Kawabata and Takanori Tamura The new Shinto-derived religions Konko-kyo- and Tenrikyo- provide successful Internet-based religious counseling services. 13. Conflict and Intolerance in a Web Community: Effects of a System Integrating Dialogues and Monologues Mitsuharu M. Watanabe Users less tolerant of different views post more often to the BBS than to the weblogs of the Spiritual Navigator system, which is designed to balance conflict with stability. 14. Who's Got the Power? Religious Authority on the Internet Heidi Campbell There is a need to distinguish layers of authority in online religious contexts in terms of hierarchy, structure, ideology, and text. 15. Islam, Jihad, and Terrorism in Post 9/11 Arabic Discussion Boards Rasha A. Abdulla Message exchanges on three Internet discussion boards in the Arab and Muslim world shed light on how Muslims viewed the attacks from a religious point of view. 16. Islam and Online Imagery on Malaysian Tourist Destination Websites Noor Hazarina Hashim, Jamie Murphy, and Nazlida Muhamad Hashim Malaysian tourism destination organizations display few Muslim images on their websites. 17. Virtually Sacred: The Performance of Asynchronous Cyber Rituals in Online Spaces Stephen Jacobs Designers envisage the Christian Virtual Church and Hindu Virtual Temple websites in terms of conventional notions of sacred space and ritual performance. 18. Technological Modernization, the Internet, and Religion in Singapore Randolph Kluver and Pauline H. Cheong Technological modernization and religion co-exist and mutually reinforce one another within the Singaporean context, according to religious leaders.

1 0

Lurkers, lookers, active observers?
by Roxanne Hiltz 08 May '07

08 May '07

I like both "Lookers" and "Readers" but also like for a more formal term, "Active Observers" This means that they do read regularly, and that they think about what they are reading... Roxanne Hiltz > Today's Topics: > > 1. we need a better word than lurking (Barry Wellman) >

3 2

Re: [Air-l] we need a better word than lurking
by Kevin Guidry 08 May '07

08 May '07

On 5/7/07, Nancy Baym <nbaym(a)ku.edu> wrote: > Funny you mention that. Just a few minutes ago I was working on a > paper and when I got to the point where I wanted to talk about > "lurkers" I stopped and chose "invisible participants" instead. I'd like to hear more about this decision. I find it difficult to describe those who do not, well, participate as participants. I assume your definition of participation is different from mine. Kevin

4 3