Group items tagged

I really like this piece! I'm not super familiar with DML as a field, but the author's attention to the world-making capabilities (and not even capabilities - it's built in or "politically preloaded") of research methods. The post provides a clear defense against those who would argue that research is just objectively recording the world. At the same time, it doesn't slip into a poststructuralist wormhole about meaning. There's an attention to politics here that 's fruitful [Ah! but politics in general.. What are this author's projects' politics? What departmental/ disciplinary political fights shape the ground on which DML research takes place?]

The CHI Fieldschool is a unique experience that employs the model of an archaeological fieldschool (in which students come together for a period of 5 or 6 weeks to work on an archaeological site in order to learn how to do archaeology). Instead of working on an archaeological site, however, students in the CHI Fieldschool will come together to collaboratively work on several cultural heritage informatics projects. In the process they will learn a great deal about what it takes to build applications and digital user experiences that serve the domain of cultural heritage - skills such as programming, media design, project management, user centered design, digital storytelling, etc.

I've been reading this book and it has a bunch of stuff related to conducting ethnography in virtual spaces. The editor proposes the idea of cyber-social-scientific knowledge to get at the internet as both a cultural artefact and cultural context. Chapters 6 and 10 seem particularly relevant to discussions of digital ethnography.

An article by Rosie Flewitt Provides insights that the well established traditions of ethnography can bring to the more recent analytic tools of multimodality in the investigation of early literacy practices.

Looks to be an article useful for Week 5, possibly Week 7; a recent look at how to use ethnographic "traditions" in a multimodal context. Topic concerns "literacies" for three and four year olds in the "digital age".

Here's the abstract: In this article I reflect on the insights that the well established traditions of ethnography can bring to the more recent analytic tools of multimodality in the investigation of early literacy practices. First, I consider the intersection between ethnography and multimodality, their compatibility and the tensions and ambivalences that arise from their potentially conflicting epistemological framings. Drawing on ESRC-funded case studies of three and four-year-old children's experiences of literacy with printed and digital media,1 I then illustrate how an ethnographic toolkit that incorporates a social semiotic approach to multimodality can produce richly situated insights into the complexities of early literacy development in a digital age, and can inform socially and culturally sensitive theories of literacy as social practice (Street, 1984, 2008).

The Center for Media Justice presents some great material, particularly as an entry point to undergrads on concepts of media justice and examining the ways oppression operates in a digital sphere, troubling open internet and "closing digital divides" Great stuff!

This is a great site that keeps a record of videos removed from YouTube for copyright violations. You can't watch them, but there's something great about having a record that they were there at all. I'm fascinated by the "when" of online culture and the tendency for some material to disappear. This is one of the places I've found that lets me see what the internet used to be.

This is a great resource. I really like the concept of there being a resting place for tombstoned IP-offensive user generated content, much of what could be perceived as works of art depending on your perspecitve (IP vs remix culture). Also, a good example of creative censorship and the REAL governing authority -- RIAA, MPAA, etc.

From website: "This portal is a gateway to the cultural materials of Plateau peoples that are held in Washington State University's Libraries, Manuscripts, Archives and Special Collections (MASC), the Museum of Anthropology and by national donors. The collections represented here have been chosen and curated by tribal consultants working in cooperation with University and Museum staff." The About section has a good description of the curation process. In summary, the digital collection allows annotation and content submission by registered tribal members and organizations; also allows visitors and guests to leave text, audio, and video comments on content. The Tribal Links section for each category connects the historical content to contemporary cultures. Content controls allow participants to flag content as sensitive; presumably there is non-public content that is somehow managed. Here is a record that has some annotation by tribal organization: http://plateauportal.wsulibs.wsu.edu/html/ppp/display.php?tid=2&cid=4&fid=147&pgst=0 Metadata seems to include geospatial metadata that allows mapping of buildings, etc. From what I understand, the software used to support this collection is based on an Australian project with similar approach. Unfortunately, not much on the site about the software tools. I will try to locate and add the Australian project and related documentation. Is this digital ethnography? It seems to approach it; but limited markup by tribal members and organizations gives limited view of offline implications of online data.

This is the article by Henry Jenkins talking about the trends in young generations and their participation in the digital world creation. This article seem relevant because it explores how and why these digital communities are forming, which would give us a better sense of how to study them.

As digital continues to influence behavioural change across all demographics and cultures, new tools and techniques are starting to allow greater access and insight into people's behaviours globally.

"As a planner I continually encourage the brands I work with to understand their audience behaviours and then create experiences and utilities that fit within this existing routine, rather than try and change behaviours, so when exploring research opportunities we should be doing the same thing - whether that involves simply listening, using mobile devices, creating videos / blogs / diaries / collages, gaming … or any combination of these." Little disappointed Lucas-Garner didn't reference privacy issues in her discussion of methodology in industrial research.

Great example of using digital tools to conduct ethnography. Notice that not only does the photographer/travel writer show his pictures to the source community on his laptop, but he's staged a photo of that. The documentarist's relationship with his subjects becomes part of the story selected by the BBC writer for our consumption. I've been trying to puzzle out why that is. Does today's BBC readership want or expect reassurance of ethical cultural fieldwork? Does that picture demystify our exotic "13-year-old eagle huntress," or does it reinforce a contrast between the modern and the traditional in Mongolia? I'd be very interested in your thoughts.

I think--looking at both articles--that it reinforces the "us" and "them" quality of the work. The idea that the US has that says, "Duh, girls can totally do that too" against the extraordinary existence of a huntress. --I was briefly skimming over the comments in other article and noticed this gem... "I raised my son and daughter on a ranch in Wyoming, USA, and I remember once when a Mongolian diplomat came to their "sister country" Wyoming to visit. I took my 9 year old daughter and he talked to her through a translator about horse races and archery. She was enthralled, since she'd been riding horses nearly since she was old enough to walk. Your story of the eagle hunters, and the young girl and her father, is very powerful." ...which I think illustrates the point. The way this girl's mother talks about "horse races and archery" like they are a totally foreign concept added the fact that she felt the need to add the bit about talking through a translator.

this is all you really need to read (abstract/chapter intro...): New technologies represent a system of constraints and possibilities that constitute the foundation of new rhetorical spaces: the spheres of new communicative and persuasive procedures. Nowadays, urban planning has the chance to critically and rigorously experiment with these new spaces. It has the chance to transgress traditional representational codes and to expand its semantic horizons. This chapter portrays one such challenging exploration: the fecund crossroads between qualitative analytical approaches and digital languages within the planning field. It is a path that embraces diverse dimensions media and messages, analysis and rhetoric, ethics and aesthetics.

I only read the first 15 pages or so of this chapter through Google Books preview - but - I loved it. It's beautifully written (jargon-y at times, but it's good for the genre). Plus, it works as a manifesto for the kinds digital ethnographies I want to read/experience. The best part for me was the author's focus on "multi -sensory aesthetics" in digital ethnographies. It's worth a block quote: Understanding that reason doesn't produce the totality of our actions, to create real communicative space, and induce peoples to act it is not enough to "tell" rather it is s necessary to transfer energies, make sentiments, and emotions vibrate, awaken latent aspirations, knowledge and enrages, rediscovering the powerful role of artistic and poetic languages. It is necessary to focus on the cognitive and communicative performance of aestehec pleasure, a pleasure that is not an accessory but rather a central moment of very communicative process.

The Interest Group for Digital Practices in History and Ethnography will address the data concerns of history as a research domain and those of the ethnographic disciplines (including cultural anthropology, folklore studies, ethnomusicology, interpretive sociology, and science and technology studies). This group proposes to build a medium sized tent (smaller than the whole of the digital humanities or of the social sciences, larger than a particular discipline) to explore strategies and frameworks for the collaborative care and use of research data of diverse types.

Watson, N. "Why We Argue About Virtual Community: a Case Study of the Phish.net Fan Community." Communication Abstracts. 21.5 (1998). Print. This is a fabulous article - old, but solid on the fights about online vs. offline communities. I read it in a Digital Culture class in 2008. I cite it all the time, and would love to go back in light of our discussions in class. This might go well in week seven when we talk about online communities.

Please do, Mara. I really want to read this. Or I can scan a copy in Knight Ref.

Here is a link to a pdf I made of my copy. https://docs.google.com/open?id=0ByPQDYtlq5NmUlhYLXlIRHlnVkE Let me know if you would like it shared in another format. Can't wait to discuss this one!

Marko Pelijhan is an incredible digital artist, a lot of his work comments on surveillance. This project is a cool collaboration with North and Arctic Peoples and climate scientists - and brings up some important questions for me around open authoring and traditional ecological knowledge, how might platforms like this incorporate the necessary feedback loops or knowledge-ownership protocols of a particular person/group. How do you protect the sacred in the digital sphere? "The Arctic Perspective Initiative (API) is a non-profit, international group of individuals and organizations, founded by Marko Peljhan and Matthew Biederman, whose goal is to promote the creation of open authoring, communications and dissemination infrastructures for the circumpolar region. Its aim is to work with, learn from, and empower the North and Arctic Peoples through open source technologies and applied education and training. By creating access to these technologies while promoting the creation of shared communications and data networks without costly overheads, continued and sustainable development of autonomous culture, traditional knowledge, science, technology and education opportunities for peoples in the North and Arctic regions is enabled."

This is the digital arm of the diy zine archiving project I have been involved with for years. Check out the about section for explanations of collective structure, tools used to build the site, and connection to other diy archives.

Super cool project, Mara! I like how the mission statement notes that QZAP is a "living history," and that the members are also documenting the history of hardware/software used to create this digital platform where the archived history of these zines lives. (I'm not sure if that last sentence makes sense, but hopefully you know what I mean...)

The website contains the following statement under the heading "Intellectual Property and Ethical Issues": "Ethical considerations are handled primarily by individual depositors, based on (a) their arrangements with their primary consultants regarding consent and permission and (b) their concern for materials they do not wish to make public. While guidelines for ethical ethnographic research behavior have been around for many years, the methods of gathering permissions for recordings have varied widely in the decades since video technology has been employed as part of fieldwork" This seems to bring to light the concerns being presented when dealing with materials recorded over a large time period, where ethical considerations chanced considerably. This might be a good project to talk about when we are discussing the ethics of digitization.

One perspective on which digital tools are most effective (and practical) for ethnographic fieldwork.

Pretty convincing post about the potential for using the ubiquitous smartphone and cloud-based tools in ethnographic settings...but there are some assumptions, as well as some breaks with "tradition" (a few obvious, a few not so much...). I've been using my iPhone in a few ways that parallel the systems Horan has developed, and would be happy to explore some of these tools/apps/affordances...

I agree with some of his techniques, although I still find hand written field notes to be useful. You might be more inclined to write certain things down in the field rather than speak them out loud to be recorded in front of the people you are working with. I also was interested in his section on "local currency." ("Local Currency Whether we want to admit it or not, money talks. Obviously, one should adhere to the local customs regarding the proper use of money in every situation, but spending money can gain you access to areas of life that may otherwise be closed off to you. Generosity in time and money goes a long way, so remember to bring cash to gain access to people and places that you may be unfamiliar with.") This section seems to leave out the fact that spending money in a way which is not culturally appropriate can be as detrimental in certain cases, as it is helpful in other situations.

Great title. Not a very useful link.

the "iWant" tool does not appear to work...nor is it very clear how it works. But, I think it is indicative of the kinds of data mining/harvesting approaches people are taking when it comes to "public" streams of discourse/conversation/knowledge that Twitter represents.