Group items tagged

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?

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND WORKERS' PRIVACY: ENFORCEMENT Hans-Joachim Reinhardt The use of information technology at work has emphasized a tension between two distinct principles that appear at first sight to be opposed to one other: On the one hand, there is the principle of the inviolability of the employees' private lives and private communications and, on the other, the principle of the employers' rights to enjoy their private property and their managerial powers of command.

I was exploring the journal "First Monday" which was listed in the Google Docs table when I came across this topic of "Obfuscation." Besides just liking the sound of the word, I was fascinated by all the various forms in which digital obfuscation can take place. I thought this article might also be useful for my group project which involves Ethics and Technology. (This is also my first time bookmarking, or using Diigo!)

Mary Beth, I added all those journals just FYI (so you don't think they were approved contributions by our expert prof; I hope they're all applicable!)

Interesting! I like the broadened idea of "obfuscation" -- not just by writing prose that is untrue, but the way we organize or provide access to those words can also be obfuscating. Just making something hard enough to find or get to. A crappy taxonomy can be a weapon of deceit!

I swear I just posted this to the group but it didn't show up, so apologies for a potential duplicate. This blogger observes the fact that a traditional mass media (think Nightly News with Walter Cronkite) doesn't really exist anymore, thanks to social news sites, YouTube, and the explosion of TV channels.

i always wonder about this...if the nightly news will ever "die out." i think about how older people (like my parents and grandparents) still turn the tv on to watch the news every single night, no matter what. personally i hope the nightly news sticks around. i find myself overwhelmed by online content. the news program gives me a summary of some issues...and if i want to do addition research on my own online, i can (don't have to trust them as the only 'authority'). maybe it's lazy that i want them to choose for me. but i like watching regular news programs...especially because i know those stories will come up on the daily show/colbert report :)

I took a class called "Internet and Democracy" at the UT school of journalism last year. It was fascinating to see how the journalism folks are getting used to social media. A lot of the same questions as LIS, but really working from a different model.

I often get frustrated by my 77 year old mother, who recently got a nice new computer (under much pressure from her daughters), but has a lot of reluctance about using it. This journal (iJETS) had many articles such as this one, that I believe could shed light on tactics to motivate this segment of society.

I really enjoyed this article, because my 63 year old mother in law is very computer-resistant, and I find it very frustrating. She wants to talk to me on the phone, but I really only want to use email. A generation difference really can make a technology difference.

My mom is also not online and no interest in the iPad. She often comments how the newspaper in her city is getting thinner and thinner so I often wonder if her view of the world and events if filtered by the fact that she's not online, and so much news and opinion is. Conversely, I met up with an old friend from high school last week who told me he refuses to really activate his Facebook account because his 70-something mom is on it and very active. I also know 30 year olds who only use computers and email at work because they have to and eschew everything else. Generalizations aside, I'm not convinced it's physical age, but more of a state of mind when it comes to new technology.

For me it's helpful to understand a discipline by looking at the types of classes someone undertaking it might enroll in/teach. I found the Rob Kling Center for Social Informatics at Indiana University Bloomington in my surfing and thought it might be helpful for others as well to get a sense of what a primary course of SI study might entail. Perhaps most helpful though is that the center provides a history of the term, "social informatics" and a few foundational documents (nearly all by the center's namesake) of the discipline.

Does 1996 seem like it was a long time ago? Not sure, but I thought that getting some foundational information was very helpful!

While exploring the ACM journal today, I came across the article below that kind of relates to this thread. It talks about the growing popularity of "Informatics" (in general)as a college/university discipline, and how and why it has evolved as an off-shoot of Computer Science. http://cacm.acm.org.proxy.libraries.rutgers.edu/magazines/2010/2/69363-why-an-informatics-degree/fulltext

Here's a link to the article that JSB referred regarding blogging as a means to create context rather than just content. Sullivan is a terrific writer; I think what he outlines here is blogging at its best. I'm not sure it universally applies because so many blogs I encounter just take up words in space.

This happened a few days ago now, but I forgot to post it until I went to talk about it in my journal this week! From the article: "Over the course of three days in June, artist Kyle McDonald captured the faces of Apple patrons in two of the company's Manhattan stores. He did this by installing a program on computers in the stores, which automatically took an image every minute." His idea was that the photos constituted an art project about what people look like when they engage with technology. The Secret Service confiscated his computers after an Apple Store employee traced where the photos were being transferred to. I thought this was interesting because it's an example of visual surveillance of people's physical presence/actions in public spaces like Greenfield talks about, rather than surveillance of their digital actions, which so much of the literature focuses on. I definitely think the artist's project constitutes a violation of the privacy of the people whose photographs he took, but I can't help thinking it's also a really fascinating project that wouldn't work if people knew their photo was being taken in that moment.