(interesting critique of cell phone based approach to clean water delivery in the Kibera slum--worth reading the whole thing, small snippet below)
Immiserating the Poor: We Have An App For That (Social Media vs. the iPhone in Egypt and a Kenyan slum) � Gurstein's Community Informatics: "Allowing for a privatized and individualized approach to water provision simply means that those with the resources—to own and use cell phones, to devote time to chasing water suppliers and standing in water queues, and to financially compete for scarce water supplies in the local water marketplace–will be well served and those who don’t have those resources will be left behind and forgotten.
As well, by advantaging those who are the most able – the most technologically sophisticated, the wealthiest, the youngest and the most agile in the community—the possibility of developing community and collaborative strategies for addressing these fundamental issues will be drained away since those most able to respond effectively will have their needs met (and not incidentally as the description boasts, more efficiently and at a better price). If the actions of those immensely brave people demonstrating for democracy in Egypt and Tunisia, teaches us anything it is that major social issues such as the provision of clean and low cost water must be addressed by collective action rather than responding simply to individual actions which by their very nature in this context would be competitive, divisive and collectively disempowering."
Saturday, March 5, 2011
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Corporate-Funded Online 'Astroturfing' Is More Advanced and More Automated Than You Might Think | | AlterNet
Corporate-Funded Online 'Astroturfing' Is More Advanced and More Automated Than You Might Think | | AlterNet:
"As the Daily Kos has reported, the emails show that:
- companies now use “persona management software”, which multiplies the efforts of the astroturfers working for them, creating the impression that there’s major support for what a corporation or government is trying to do.
- this software creates all the online furniture a real person would possess: a name, email accounts, web pages and social media. In other words, it automatically generates what look like authentic profiles, making it hard to tell the difference between a virtual robot and a real commentator.
- fake accounts can be kept updated by automatically re-posting or linking to content generated elsewhere, reinforcing the impression that the account holders are real and active.
- human astroturfers can then be assigned these “pre-aged” accounts to create a back story, suggesting that they’ve been busy linking and re-tweeting for months. No one would suspect that they came onto the scene for the first time a moment ago, for the sole purpose of attacking an article on climate science or arguing against new controls on salt in junk food."
"As the Daily Kos has reported, the emails show that:
- companies now use “persona management software”, which multiplies the efforts of the astroturfers working for them, creating the impression that there’s major support for what a corporation or government is trying to do.
- this software creates all the online furniture a real person would possess: a name, email accounts, web pages and social media. In other words, it automatically generates what look like authentic profiles, making it hard to tell the difference between a virtual robot and a real commentator.
- fake accounts can be kept updated by automatically re-posting or linking to content generated elsewhere, reinforcing the impression that the account holders are real and active.
- human astroturfers can then be assigned these “pre-aged” accounts to create a back story, suggesting that they’ve been busy linking and re-tweeting for months. No one would suspect that they came onto the scene for the first time a moment ago, for the sole purpose of attacking an article on climate science or arguing against new controls on salt in junk food."
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Heads up!! Change in syllabus!!
I've made a couple of changes in the syllabus for after spring break. Here are the changes. Please make sure that you note them on your syllabus and are prepared for the changes.
What is this group? What does it do? How do you know? Are these good guys?
Why or why not?
3/22 Marc Andrejevic, iSpy, chapters 1-2
3/24 Marc Andrejevic, iSpy, chapter 6-7
3/29 "Google's Revolution Factory" --Alliance of Youth Movements
look through and analyze this website: http://www.movements.org/.
"Diverting the Radicalization Track"
"Diverting the Radicalization Track"
Be sure to read the summit reports (links available at both sites).
What is this group? What does it do? How do you know? Are these good guys?
Why or why not?
Google's Revolution Factory - Alliance of Youth Movements: Color Revolution 2.0
Google's Revolution Factory - Alliance of Youth Movements: Color Revolution 2.0: "In 2008, the Alliance of Youth Movements held its inaugural summit in New York City. Attending this summit was a combination of State Department staff, Council on Foreign Relations members, former National Security staff, Department of Homeland Security advisers, and a myriad of representatives from American corporations and mass media organizations including AT&T, Google, Facebook, NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, and MTV.
http://allyoumov.3cdn.net/f734ac45131b2bbcdb_w6m6idptn.pdf
One might suspect such a meeting of representatives involved in US economic, domestic and foreign policy, along with the shapers of public opinion in the mass media would be convening to talk about America's future and how to facilitate it. Joining these policy makers, was an army of 'grassroots' activists that would 'help' this facilitation.
Among them was a then little known group called 'April 6' from Egypt. These Facebook 'savvy' Egyptians would later meet US International Crisis Group trustee Mohamed ElBaradei at the Cairo airport in Februrary 2010 and spend the next year campaigning and protesting on his behalf in his bid to overthrow the government of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak."
http://allyoumov.3cdn.net/f734ac45131b2bbcdb_w6m6idptn.pdf
One might suspect such a meeting of representatives involved in US economic, domestic and foreign policy, along with the shapers of public opinion in the mass media would be convening to talk about America's future and how to facilitate it. Joining these policy makers, was an army of 'grassroots' activists that would 'help' this facilitation.
Among them was a then little known group called 'April 6' from Egypt. These Facebook 'savvy' Egyptians would later meet US International Crisis Group trustee Mohamed ElBaradei at the Cairo airport in Februrary 2010 and spend the next year campaigning and protesting on his behalf in his bid to overthrow the government of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak."
Celebrities and corporations
New media theorists (like techno-enthusiasts) have accepted the idea that networked communications are characterized by distributed, peer-to-peer, personal, immediate, ubiquitous communication (the repercussion here is that the internet is not like television and not like cinema). The basic idea: people use their networked personal media devices to talk about themselves and to connect with their friends. People want to know what their friends are doing and they want to tell their friends what they are doing.
The basic debate among new media theorists has concerned the political, economic, and cultural impact of these practices. So, theorists have taken sides over whether these practices are democratic (or whether they have liberal or conservative tendencies), whether they enhance the economic prospects of most people (who can make money?), and whether the culture is more heterogeneous or homogeneous, stagnant or vital.
Hearing comments in our class, though, I'm starting to wonder if our (new media theorists) basic assumption is wrong (or, another way to put this, I'm starting to think that my diagnosis of capture in affective networks is so right that no one even cares anymore or can even imagine that digital networks would function in any other way). Why? Because the default mode of (your? mainstream culture's? students?) thinking is in terms of corporations, celebrities, and consumption (or so it starting to seem to me based on comments in class). People seem basically to identify with the needs and desires of celebrities for celebrity and corporations for profit and consumers for consumer goods. For example, it never would have occurred to me think of Twitter as first and foremost a vehicle for the distribution and contribution of nuggets of celebrity, even as I recognize that the business of mass culture uses Twitter (and other platforms) to good effect (and even though I just saw the really great Justin Bieber where he uses Twitter to generate and connect with fans).
So, on the one hand, it seems that you assume that new media are primarily celebrity, corporate, consumer access devices. But I think there is another hand, that is, I think that you also assume that there is something vaguely democratic and free (liberatory) about networked media. If you think this, then it makes sense to worry about the effects/impact of the first hand (celebrity, corporate, consumer). But if you only think of new media in terms of the first hand, then you have to figure out what opportunities there are for critique, change, freedom, politics, etc. Differently put, if you think about new media only in terms of the first hand, you'll have to grapple with the repercussions for subjectivity. One site/cite for this is the notion of "whatever being" that I develop in chapter 3.
The basic debate among new media theorists has concerned the political, economic, and cultural impact of these practices. So, theorists have taken sides over whether these practices are democratic (or whether they have liberal or conservative tendencies), whether they enhance the economic prospects of most people (who can make money?), and whether the culture is more heterogeneous or homogeneous, stagnant or vital.
Hearing comments in our class, though, I'm starting to wonder if our (new media theorists) basic assumption is wrong (or, another way to put this, I'm starting to think that my diagnosis of capture in affective networks is so right that no one even cares anymore or can even imagine that digital networks would function in any other way). Why? Because the default mode of (your? mainstream culture's? students?) thinking is in terms of corporations, celebrities, and consumption (or so it starting to seem to me based on comments in class). People seem basically to identify with the needs and desires of celebrities for celebrity and corporations for profit and consumers for consumer goods. For example, it never would have occurred to me think of Twitter as first and foremost a vehicle for the distribution and contribution of nuggets of celebrity, even as I recognize that the business of mass culture uses Twitter (and other platforms) to good effect (and even though I just saw the really great Justin Bieber where he uses Twitter to generate and connect with fans).
So, on the one hand, it seems that you assume that new media are primarily celebrity, corporate, consumer access devices. But I think there is another hand, that is, I think that you also assume that there is something vaguely democratic and free (liberatory) about networked media. If you think this, then it makes sense to worry about the effects/impact of the first hand (celebrity, corporate, consumer). But if you only think of new media in terms of the first hand, then you have to figure out what opportunities there are for critique, change, freedom, politics, etc. Differently put, if you think about new media only in terms of the first hand, you'll have to grapple with the repercussions for subjectivity. One site/cite for this is the notion of "whatever being" that I develop in chapter 3.
Monday, February 28, 2011
Paper Topics--first paper due on March 11 at 5:00
Be sure to read the instructions carefully.
Deadline: Papers are due on March 11 at 5:00. I do not accept late papers--no exceptions. You must submit a paper and electronic version. Paper versions are due in my office at 5:00 on March 11. Electronic versions must be sent to my email address: jdean@hws.edu. Again, you must submit both versions (submitting just one does not count and you will get a "0").
Format: Papers must be typed, double-spaced, with a title page, citations (recognized academic form), and page numbers. The paper version must be stapled in the upper left corner. Papers should be 7-9 pages long (6 is too short; 10 is too long).
Style: Papers must have a thesis, that is, a primary claim for which you argue on the basis of your reading of the texts assigned for the class. The thesis must appear in your first paragraph. So the assignment is to write an essay on one of the topics listed below. The essay should answer the question the topic poses. In answering the question, the essay should draw from (and cite) the relevant course materials. You are welcome to email me your thesis in advance to make sure you are on the right track. Note, though, I will be away March 7-11; because I will be in the UK (and hence 5 hours ahead), there could be up to a 24 hour delay in my response time. The repercussion--don't wait till the last minute to ask about your thesis.
Assessment: The criteria for assessment (not in rank order) are 1) the format requirements; 2) the cogency of the thesis; 3) the quality of the argument; 4) the quality of the writing; 5) the depth of engagement with the course readings; 4) the understanding of the readings demonstrated in the paper. I am looking for papers that take a position and present strong, well-supported arguments for it.
Questions (choose 1):
1. The first assignment for the class was coming up with an internet timeline. Drawing from Lovink, Terranova, and Dean, write an essay in which you identify a central dynamic, antagonism, or theme in the emergence of network culture. Be sure to specify something like periods, moments, or stages.
2. Lanier describes lords and peasants of the cloud. Does Terranova share his concern? How do they both compare with Anderson? Do networked communications really point to a new economy in which all products will be free? Why or why not? Write an essay in which you take a specific position on the economic effect/potential of networked computing.
3. Lanier and Dean both address the effects of networked computing on people/subjects. Are their concerns the same? Completely opposite? Is his concern with the hive, flatness, blankness, conformity, and crowds the same as her diagnosis of secondary orality, whatever being, or affective networks? Why or why not? Write an essay in which you take a specific position on the effect of networked computing on subjectivity/identity.
4. Compare and contrast Terranova and Dean's account of network politics. What are key points of overlap and divergence in their accounts? What are the repercussions of their discussions of the mass, image, and (for Dean) affective networks? Write an essay in which you take a specific position on the effect of networked computing on politics.
Deadline: Papers are due on March 11 at 5:00. I do not accept late papers--no exceptions. You must submit a paper and electronic version. Paper versions are due in my office at 5:00 on March 11. Electronic versions must be sent to my email address: jdean@hws.edu. Again, you must submit both versions (submitting just one does not count and you will get a "0").
Format: Papers must be typed, double-spaced, with a title page, citations (recognized academic form), and page numbers. The paper version must be stapled in the upper left corner. Papers should be 7-9 pages long (6 is too short; 10 is too long).
Style: Papers must have a thesis, that is, a primary claim for which you argue on the basis of your reading of the texts assigned for the class. The thesis must appear in your first paragraph. So the assignment is to write an essay on one of the topics listed below. The essay should answer the question the topic poses. In answering the question, the essay should draw from (and cite) the relevant course materials. You are welcome to email me your thesis in advance to make sure you are on the right track. Note, though, I will be away March 7-11; because I will be in the UK (and hence 5 hours ahead), there could be up to a 24 hour delay in my response time. The repercussion--don't wait till the last minute to ask about your thesis.
Assessment: The criteria for assessment (not in rank order) are 1) the format requirements; 2) the cogency of the thesis; 3) the quality of the argument; 4) the quality of the writing; 5) the depth of engagement with the course readings; 4) the understanding of the readings demonstrated in the paper. I am looking for papers that take a position and present strong, well-supported arguments for it.
Questions (choose 1):
1. The first assignment for the class was coming up with an internet timeline. Drawing from Lovink, Terranova, and Dean, write an essay in which you identify a central dynamic, antagonism, or theme in the emergence of network culture. Be sure to specify something like periods, moments, or stages.
2. Lanier describes lords and peasants of the cloud. Does Terranova share his concern? How do they both compare with Anderson? Do networked communications really point to a new economy in which all products will be free? Why or why not? Write an essay in which you take a specific position on the economic effect/potential of networked computing.
3. Lanier and Dean both address the effects of networked computing on people/subjects. Are their concerns the same? Completely opposite? Is his concern with the hive, flatness, blankness, conformity, and crowds the same as her diagnosis of secondary orality, whatever being, or affective networks? Why or why not? Write an essay in which you take a specific position on the effect of networked computing on subjectivity/identity.
4. Compare and contrast Terranova and Dean's account of network politics. What are key points of overlap and divergence in their accounts? What are the repercussions of their discussions of the mass, image, and (for Dean) affective networks? Write an essay in which you take a specific position on the effect of networked computing on politics.
Mid-Term Exam
Mid-Term Exam
Deadline: Tuesday, March 8, at 5:00. Exams are due in paper and electronic format. Paper versions must be handed in to my office by 5:00 on March 8. Electronic versions must be emailed to me at jdean@hws.edu by 5:00 on March 8. Exams must be typed, double-spaced, with citations and page numbers. The paper version must be stapled in the top left corner. Both versions must be handed in by the deadline. I will not accept late exams.
You may use your books and consult with others in the class. As a preface or introduction to your exam, explain how you went about answering the questions. Did you work with others? With whom did you work? How did you organize yourselves? What was the process? Be as specific as possible. Failure to provide this account will result in a ten point penalty (that is, ten points deducted from your total exam points).
Note: As stated on the syllabus, there are group projects due on March 31, April 5, April 7 and later. You need to form yourselves into groups and choose one of the topics. You must designate which group you are in (by topic and date) on your mid-term exam. Failure to do will result in 10 point penalty (that is, ten points deducted from your total exam points).
Each question is worth 10 points.
1. Jaron Lanier argues against cybernetic totalism. What are the key features of cybernetic totalism? What arguments does Lanier offer against it?
2. What is "lock in" and why does it matter? Make sure that your answer includes technical and cultural/political components.
3. Why does Lanier think that flat information networks threaten creativity?
4. Why does free choice make stars inevitable? Be as thorough as possible.
5. Several authors (Lovink, Dean, Terranova) criticize the 'late eighties "Californian" mindset'. What is that mindset and why do they criticize it?
6. How does Terranova describe the "mass"? What makes the mass a feature of contemporary network culture? How does the concept of the mass inform or figure in Terranova's critique of the idea of a rational, deliberative public sphere?
7. Terranova emphasizes that a cultural politics of information, "as it lives through and addresses the centrality of information transmission, processing, and communication techniques" extends beyond the distinction between signal and noise. It encompasses a wide array of objects and interfaces, choices and designs, that organize our perceptions and influence the transmission and receipt of information/signals. What aspects of contemporary life come to mind? Come up with a vivid, detailed example to illustrate Terranova's point. Be sure to attend to what she calls the "level of distracted perception . . [that] informs habits and percepts and regulates the speed of a body by plugging it into a field of action." In your answer, begin with a schematic account formulated in terms of Shannon's diagram and then add to and enrich that schematic with more atmosphere and detail. After you have a detailed example in mind, consider the political implications and for whom: police, surveillance, or state apparatuses? for those seeking to resist or change a political formation? for the general field or norm that establishes the base point or expectations for political action (that is, the level of everyday habit and normal life)?
8. According to Terranova, some specific features of the architecture of the internet induce divergence and differentiation. What are these specific features? How are the challenges met? And, what features or qualities does addressing divergence and incompatibility give to the internet?
9. What is the decline of symbolic efficiency? Why does it matter?
10. What are the key features of blogs? What do they have in common with search engines?
11. What are the differences between the ways that cinema and networked media produce subjects?
12. How do affective networks capture users?
Deadline: Tuesday, March 8, at 5:00. Exams are due in paper and electronic format. Paper versions must be handed in to my office by 5:00 on March 8. Electronic versions must be emailed to me at jdean@hws.edu by 5:00 on March 8. Exams must be typed, double-spaced, with citations and page numbers. The paper version must be stapled in the top left corner. Both versions must be handed in by the deadline. I will not accept late exams.
You may use your books and consult with others in the class. As a preface or introduction to your exam, explain how you went about answering the questions. Did you work with others? With whom did you work? How did you organize yourselves? What was the process? Be as specific as possible. Failure to provide this account will result in a ten point penalty (that is, ten points deducted from your total exam points).
Note: As stated on the syllabus, there are group projects due on March 31, April 5, April 7 and later. You need to form yourselves into groups and choose one of the topics. You must designate which group you are in (by topic and date) on your mid-term exam. Failure to do will result in 10 point penalty (that is, ten points deducted from your total exam points).
Each question is worth 10 points.
1. Jaron Lanier argues against cybernetic totalism. What are the key features of cybernetic totalism? What arguments does Lanier offer against it?
2. What is "lock in" and why does it matter? Make sure that your answer includes technical and cultural/political components.
3. Why does Lanier think that flat information networks threaten creativity?
4. Why does free choice make stars inevitable? Be as thorough as possible.
5. Several authors (Lovink, Dean, Terranova) criticize the 'late eighties "Californian" mindset'. What is that mindset and why do they criticize it?
6. How does Terranova describe the "mass"? What makes the mass a feature of contemporary network culture? How does the concept of the mass inform or figure in Terranova's critique of the idea of a rational, deliberative public sphere?
7. Terranova emphasizes that a cultural politics of information, "as it lives through and addresses the centrality of information transmission, processing, and communication techniques" extends beyond the distinction between signal and noise. It encompasses a wide array of objects and interfaces, choices and designs, that organize our perceptions and influence the transmission and receipt of information/signals. What aspects of contemporary life come to mind? Come up with a vivid, detailed example to illustrate Terranova's point. Be sure to attend to what she calls the "level of distracted perception . . [that] informs habits and percepts and regulates the speed of a body by plugging it into a field of action." In your answer, begin with a schematic account formulated in terms of Shannon's diagram and then add to and enrich that schematic with more atmosphere and detail. After you have a detailed example in mind, consider the political implications and for whom: police, surveillance, or state apparatuses? for those seeking to resist or change a political formation? for the general field or norm that establishes the base point or expectations for political action (that is, the level of everyday habit and normal life)?
8. According to Terranova, some specific features of the architecture of the internet induce divergence and differentiation. What are these specific features? How are the challenges met? And, what features or qualities does addressing divergence and incompatibility give to the internet?
9. What is the decline of symbolic efficiency? Why does it matter?
10. What are the key features of blogs? What do they have in common with search engines?
11. What are the differences between the ways that cinema and networked media produce subjects?
12. How do affective networks capture users?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)