Group items tagged

In this article, Hargittai likens the digital divide continuum to the varied dimensions of literacy and concludes that addressing the digital divide requires refinement in the understanding of use and skill - and incorporating those varied uses and skills into educational curricula. She explains that "the history of literacy shows that our understanding of functional literacy has evolved considerably over time requiring flexibility in education policy to keep up with the changing landscape." Full Citation: Hargittai, E. (2003). The Digital Divide and What to do About It. In D. C. Jones (Ed.), New Economy Handbook. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Social informatics is not explicitly mentioned in this article. However, I think it gives us direct insight into crafting our own definition of the term and its application. Bates looks at the overall domain of information science, and how we, as members of that discipline, can break free of the idea (which may have changed a bit since its writing in 1999) that there's no content to LIS education and practice, just structure (i.e., the core of our profession is to organize other discipline's information). Most applicable to our discussion, at least in this point of the semester, seems this excerpt: "In comparison to other social and behavioral science fields, we are always looking for the red thread of information in the social texture of people's lives. When we study people we do so with the purpose of understanding information creation, seeking, and use. We do not just study people in general. The rest of the social sciences do various forms of that. Sometimes this can be a very fine distinction; other times it is very easy to see. In communications research, a cousin to our field, the emphasis is on the communication process and its effects on people; in information science we study that process in service of information transfer. For another example, there are social scientists today who are observing people doing collaborative work through new types of networked systems in the field of computer-supported co-operative work (CSCW) . The sociologist or social psychologist identifies and describes the network of relationships and the social hierarchy that develops under these circumstances. They may examine the impact of technology on those social relationships and on the work of the individuals involved. The information scientist, on the other hand, follows the information the way Woodward and Bernstein "followed the money" in their Watergate investigations. That's the red thread in the social tapestry. When we look at that social hierarchy, we ar

Lessig starts with a story about a documentarian and the specter of litigation in that community of practice when it comes to fair use and clearing images, sounds, etc. in documentary filmmaking. He goes on to consider how to reframe copyright: "[W]e need an approach that recognizes the errors in both extremes, and that crafts the balance that any culture needs: incentives to support a diverse range of creativity, with an assurance that the creativity inspired remains for generations to access and understand."

This book review seems a good companion to Justin's post below on artificial intelligence/human-computer interaction. The reviewer ties three different books together under the theme of how humanity seems to be integrating itself with its digital machines - including discussion of brain-computer interaction (whoa.) and Google's search algorithms or "contouring."

The section on the ideological dissemination of information as it relates to Google is eye-opening (and really worrisome). I think when we talk about Singularity, "fear" will continue to be at the center of our discussions. For some, the biological integration with machines is just too radical to fathom, though the daily use of the Internet is now commonplace. I think we can rightly call certain technologies "external minds" (@ Mary, above) - so it's really not so much the shifting sense of what are bodies are as it is the effect - or danger - of increasingly personalized information certain technologies host that should be cause for concern.

Later in the article she talks about the same concepts as Jesse Schell, in terms of racking up points for online activity, though she draws the conclusion that your information will be sold to advertisers. Really a fascinating article!

Not an uncommon thought, but always worth revisiting.

"Motion for motion's sake" is a good way to describe a lot of the effects of technology these days, even outside of journalism. Everything's faster, but where is it really taking us?

Is technology promoting free speech or helping dissidents in controlled countries? "We see more and more people around the globe using the Internet, mobile phones and other technologies to make their voices heard as they protest against injustice and seek to realize their aspirations," Mrs. Clinton said. "There is a historic opportunity to effect positive change, change America supports," she said. "So we're focused on helping them do that, on helping them talk to each other, to their communities, to their governments and to the world."