Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
|
digital_culture_and_politics [2021/09/27 15:49] ntnsndr [2/ Anxieties] |
digital_culture_and_politics [2024/11/14 13:34] (current) ntnsndr [Peer review (weeks 12-14)] |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| *Examines issues at the intersection of digital media, culture and politics, such as regulation and network architecture, piracy and hacking, and grassroots activism. Engage with a range of theories about cultural politics, democracy, liberalism and neo-liberalism in relation to digital information and communication technologies.* | *Examines issues at the intersection of digital media, culture and politics, such as regulation and network architecture, piracy and hacking, and grassroots activism. Engage with a range of theories about cultural politics, democracy, liberalism and neo-liberalism in relation to digital information and communication technologies.* | ||
| - | In this particular section, we focus on the everyday politics of digital life, in social media and platform labor, and the implications for broader political culture. The course will also guide students through the process of developing an academic research article on the topic, from research and outlining to peer review. | + | In this section, we will consider the current state of democracy in digital life at local, national, and global levels. Students will conduct original research and present their findings at the end of the semester. |
| ## Instructor | ## Instructor | ||
| - | Nathan Schneider ("Nathan" or "Professor Schneider") | + | Nathan Schneider ("Nathan" or "Professor Schneider", he/him) |
| <nathan.schneider@colorado.edu> | <nathan.schneider@colorado.edu> | ||
| Armory Building, 1B24 | Armory Building, 1B24 | ||
| - | Office hours: Wednesday at 4-5 p.m., or by appointment ([[:email_etiquette|via email]]) | + | Office hours: Wednesday at 3-5 p.m., or by appointment ([[:email_etiquette|via email]]) |
| Website: [nathanschneider.info](https://nathanschneider.info) | Website: [nathanschneider.info](https://nathanschneider.info) | ||
| ## Objectives | ## Objectives | ||
| - | * Gain familiarity with academic and popular literature on the politics of digital space | + | * Think critically about the intersection of democracy and digital life |
| * Develop and explore an original research question on digital cultures | * Develop and explore an original research question on digital cultures | ||
| * Practice the process of academic research, writing, reviewing, and publishing | * Practice the process of academic research, writing, reviewing, and publishing | ||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
| ## Components | ## Components | ||
| - | The architecture of this course seeks to cultivate a scholarly community around a set of shared questions. The course consists of three concurrent processes: our meetings, your notebooks, and an edited collection of our collective research. | + | This course seeks to cultivate a scholarly community around a set of shared questions. The course consists of three concurrent processes: our meetings, your notebooks, and a conference on our collective research. |
| ### Class meetings | ### Class meetings | ||
| - | The basis of our academic community is our time together twice each week. In general, we will spend the first session focused on the week's readings, and the second session developing and sharing our own research. | + | The basis of our academic community is our time together twice each week. Participation is essential to cultivating a successful community, and participation is not compatible with absence. One or two absences over the course of the semester are acceptable, but please discuss with the instructor if any more are necessary. |
| - | + | ||
| - | Participation is essential to cultivating a successful community, and participation is not compatible with absence. One or two absences over the course of the semester are acceptable, but please discuss with the instructor if any more are necessary. | + | |
| #### Evaluation | #### Evaluation | ||
| Line 40: | Line 38: | ||
| * Respectful listening to other members of the class and feedback on fellow students' ideas (10 points) | * Respectful listening to other members of the class and feedback on fellow students' ideas (10 points) | ||
| - | Participation will be evaluated twice---once at the midterm, and once at the end of the semester. | + | Participation will be evaluated twice—once at the midterm, and once at the end of the semester. |
| ### Notebook | ### Notebook | ||
| - | Research flourishes through cultivating habits. Each week, students will produce a weekly notebook entry that reflects engagement with the assigned readings, in dialog with their own research projects. The notebook might consist of a prose reflection, bullet points, annotated pictures, network charts, or whatever else best suits your ways of thinking. Be sure to reflect on both the content of the readings and their methodologies. | + | Research flourishes through cultivating habits. Each week, students will produce a weekly notebook entry on the readings and their progress with their own research projects. The notebook might consist of a prose reflection, bullet points, annotated pictures, network charts, or whatever else best suits your ways of thinking. |
| Notebooks may be in any persistent medium, so you can refer back to them for years to come. Here are some suggestions: | Notebooks may be in any persistent medium, so you can refer back to them for years to come. Here are some suggestions: | ||
| - | * Paper notebook\* | + | * Paper notebook |
| - | * A folder of word-processor documents or simple plain-text files (e.g., .md, .txt)\* | + | * A folder of word-processor documents or simple plain-text files (e.g., .md, .txt) |
| - | * Citation managers, such as Mendeley, Zotero\* | + | * Citation managers, such as Mendeley, Zotero |
| - | * Git repositories, such as Gitea\*, GitHub, GitLab\*, Gogs\* | + | * Git repositories, such as Gitea, GitHub, GitLab, Gogs |
| - | * Mind-mappers, such as Diagrams.net\*, Miro, Mural | + | * Mind-mappers, such as Diagrams.net, Miro, Mural |
| - | * Note-taking tools, such as Evernote, Hypothesis\*, Joplin\*, Simplenote\* | + | * Note-taking tools, such as Evernote, Hypothesis, Joplin, Simplenote |
| - | * Wiki platforms, such as BookStack\*, DokuWiki\*, Notion, Roam Research, Zim\* | + | * Wiki platforms, such as BookStack, DokuWiki, Notion, Obsidian, Roam Research, Zim |
| - | Asterisks denote open-source software, which is recommended as it gives you more control over your data and likely uses more resilient file formats. | + | Tools that use open-source software and/or open formats are recommended to ensure the persistence and durability of your notebooks. |
| - | Turn in a digital representation of your notebook entries on Canvas, at the end of each of the three sections. Entries should be completed before class on Tuesday each week. | + | Turn in a digital representation of your notebook entries on Canvas, at the end of each of the course's units. Entries should be completed before class on Thursday each week. |
| #### Evaluation | #### Evaluation | ||
| Line 64: | Line 62: | ||
| **30 points** | **30 points** | ||
| - | *Weekly notebook entries.* Demonstrate engagement with the assigned readings, including the following: | + | *Weekly notebook entries.* Demonstrate [[engagement with assigned sources]], including the following: |
| * Summarize major ideas, particularly those of special interest to you (10 points) | * Summarize major ideas, particularly those of special interest to you (10 points) | ||
| Line 70: | Line 68: | ||
| * Raise questions for future research that could build on the readings (10 points) | * Raise questions for future research that could build on the readings (10 points) | ||
| - | Notebook entries will be evaluated at the end of each of the three sections of the course. | + | Notebook entries will be evaluated at the end of each of the sections of the course. |
| - | ### Edited collection | + | ### Conference proceedings |
| - | The shared goal we work toward is to produce an edited collection of our class's research on the politics of everyday digital life. Reaching this goal will take us through the full research cycle for producing an original contribution to our shared discourse. In this way, in addition to our explorations of the topics at hand, we will be reflecting on the media of scholarly communication. | + | The shared goal we work toward is to produce a conference and publication collecting our class's research on the state of democracy in digital life. Reaching this goal will take us through the full research cycle for producing an original contribution to our shared discourse. In this way, in addition to our explorations of the topics at hand, we will be reflecting on the media of scholarly communication. |
| - | You may work individually or in pairs. Pairs will be expected to produce somewhat longer articles. Individuals' articles should be 2,000-2,500 words, not including references. Pairs' articles should be 3,000-3,500. Articles should follow APA style. They should include some approximation of the these sections: | + | You may work individually or in pairs. Pairs will be expected to produce somewhat longer articles. Individuals' articles should be 2,000-2,500 words, not including references, charts, or data. Pairs' articles should be 3,000-3,500. Articles should follow APA style. They should include some approximation of the these sections (which can be adjusted with different names or purposes depending on the context): |
| + | * Introduction | ||
| * Literature review | * Literature review | ||
| * Methodology | * Methodology | ||
| * Findings | * Findings | ||
| - | * Discussion | + | * Conclusion |
| - | Each paper should be one of two types: | + | The paper should also be prefaced with a brief abstract of up to 150 words, not included in the main word count. |
| - | * Empirical, collecting data about real-world activity and analyzing it | + | Each paper should employ a qualitative research method (or methods) to answer a clearly stated research question. Papers should demonstrate a solid grasp of the existing literature around the topic. The number of references will vary based on the type of paper (a conceptual paper may have more than an empirical one), but meaningfully engaging with fewer than 5 scholarly sources (not including primary and journalistic sources) is likely inadequate. Aim for at least 15 references in all. |
| - | * Conceptual, presenting or challenging frameworks for analysis | + | |
| While ambition is a wonderful thing, keep in mind that these articles are short, and your top priority should be clarity and precision. A small contribution to existing knowledge may be more successful than a sweeping thesis, which is more likely to contain oversights or excessive generalization. | While ambition is a wonderful thing, keep in mind that these articles are short, and your top priority should be clarity and precision. A small contribution to existing knowledge may be more successful than a sweeping thesis, which is more likely to contain oversights or excessive generalization. | ||
| - | We will proceed through the process together, with presentations to share early suppositions for feedback, formal peer review, with the goal of publication in our class's edited collection, which we will publish for private circulation. | + | We will proceed through the process together, sharing early suppositions for feedback and conducting a formal peer review. Our class's conference proceedings will be published for private circulation. |
| #### Evaluation | #### Evaluation | ||
| Line 96: | Line 94: | ||
| **50 points** | **50 points** | ||
| - | *Present research questions - 5 points.* In one minute, and with one slide, share the questions you plan to investigate and your planned methods. | + | *Present research questions* (5 points) In one minute, and with one slide, share the questions you plan to investigate and your planned methods. |
| - | *Abstract - 5 points.* In under 300 words, summarize your research, including the questions, methods, findings, and contribution to the relevant literature, including references (not included in the word count). | + | *Extended abstract* (5 points) In under 300 words, summarize your research, including the questions, methods, findings, and contribution to the relevant literature, including references (not included in the word count). |
| - | *Complete draft - 5 points.* Submit a complete draft for peer review, with the required word length, style, and references. | + | *Complete draft* (5 points) Submit a complete, anonymized draft for peer review, with the required word length, style, and references. |
| - | *Peer review participation - 5 points.* Provide [[peer review|detailed reviews]] of two fellow students' drafts, 300-500 words each. Restate the findings, identify strengths and weaknesses, and suggest directions for improvement. Determine whether there is need for "minor revisions" or "major revisions" before publication. | + | *Peer review participation* (5 points) Provide [[peer review|detailed reviews]] of two fellow students' drafts, 400-600 words each. Restate the findings, identify strengths and weaknesses, and suggest directions for improvement. Determine whether there is need for "minor revisions" or "major revisions" before publication. |
| - | *Conference - 5 points.* In the final week, participate in a class conference, sharing insights from the research and writing process. | + | *Conference* (5 points) In the final week, participate in a class conference, sharing insights from the research and writing process with one informative slide. |
| - | *Formatted preprint - 25 points.* Submit a revised final draft using our shared formatting template, in a brief note of 300-500 words, summarize the revisions in light of peer review in a cover letter. | + | *Formatted revision* (25 points) Submit a revised final draft using our shared formatting template; in a brief note of 300-500 words, summarize the revisions in light of peer review in a cover letter. |
| * Cover letter (5 points) | * Cover letter (5 points) | ||
| - | * Grasp of relevant [[scholarly sources|scholarly literature]] (5 points) | + | * Sophisticated [[engagement with assigned sources|engagement]] with relevant [[scholarly sources|scholarly literature]] (5 points) |
| - | * Original contribution (5 points) | + | * Design and execution of original research (5 points) |
| - | * Completeness and stylistic correctness (5 points) | + | * Clearly explained contribution to knowledge (5 points) |
| - | * Sophisticated engagement with at least two course readings (5 points) | + | * Completeness, word count, and stylistic correctness (5 points) |
| ### Grading | ### Grading | ||
| Line 130: | Line 128: | ||
| If you find yourself in a position where lack of access to food, housing, health care, or other basic necessities interferes with your studies, consider seeking support from the [Dean of Students](https://www.colorado.edu/studentaffairs/deanofstudents) and, if you feel comfortable doing so, your instructor. We will work to assist you however we can. | If you find yourself in a position where lack of access to food, housing, health care, or other basic necessities interferes with your studies, consider seeking support from the [Dean of Students](https://www.colorado.edu/studentaffairs/deanofstudents) and, if you feel comfortable doing so, your instructor. We will work to assist you however we can. | ||
| - | ## Topics | + | ## Agenda |
| - | The course proceeds in three topical sections, consisting of one topic per week. Readings will provide examples of diverse types of research articles that you can draw from as examples for your own. All readings are available online and are largely open-access. Some may require access through our university libraries, either on the campus network, through the libraries' website, or on a [VPN connection](https://oit.colorado.edu/services/network-internet-services/vpn). | + | The course proceeds through several major units, each designed to help inform the development of your research toward our class conference. |
| - | ### 1/ Artifacts | + | ## Naming our questions (weeks 1-2) |
| - | Do our networks have politics? How does it matter? | + | To help us develop our research questions, we will read together a short book by a prominent media scholar, available through the campus library: |
| - | #### 1a/ Micropolitics | + | * Zizi Papacharissi, _[After Democracy: Imagining Our Political Future](https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ucb/detail.action?docID=6455828)_ (Yale University Press, 2021) |
| - | * Langdon Winner, “[Do Artifacts Have Politics?](https://www.jstor.org/stable/20024652),” _Daedalus_ 109, no. 1 (Winter 1980) | + | **Week 1**: Preface-ch. 3 |
| - | * Alexis de Tocqueville, "[Book Two, Section 1, Chapter VII: Connection Of Civil And Political Associations](https://www.gutenberg.org/files/816/816-h/816-h.htm#link2HCH0028)," in _Democracy in America_ (1840; repr., Library of America, 2004) | + | |
| - | #### 1b/ Cyberspace | + | **Week 2**: Chs. 4-5 |
| - | * Lisa Nakamura, “[Race in/for Cyberspace: Identity Tourism and Racial Passing on the Internet](https://smg.media.mit.edu/library/nakamura1995.html),” _Works and Days_ 13, no. 1–2 (1995) | + | *By the end of the unit, in notebooks, formulate 3-5 potential research questions you might like to explore.* |
| - | * John Perry Barlow, “[A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace](https://www.eff.org/cyberspace-independence),” Electronic Frontier Foundation (1996) | + | |
| - | #### 1c/ Structurelessness | + | ## Literature review (weeks 3-5) |
| - | * Fred Turner, "[Where the Counterculture Met the New Economy: The WELL and the Origins of Virtual Community](https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/40060901.pdf)," _Technology and Culture_ 46, no. 3 (2005) | + | To deepen our thinking about our research questions, we will explore what the existing literature does and doesn't already say about our interests. |
| - | * Jo Freeman, “[The Tyranny of Structurelessness](https://www.jstor.org/stable/41035187),” Berkeley Journal of Sociology 17 (1972) | + | |
| - | #### 1d/ Iron laws | + | **Week 3**: Identify a reading list of 5 [[scholarly sources|scholarly articles]] and 5 primary sources relevant to your preliminary research questions |
| - | * Aaron Shaw and Benjamin M. Hill, “[Laboratories of Oligarchy? How the Iron Law Extends to Peer Production](https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12082),” _Journal of Communication_ 64, no. 2 (April 1, 2014) | + | **Week 4**: Produce an annotated bibliography, summarizing each source along with its relevance and potential usefulness to your research |
| - | * Nathan Schneider, “[Admins, Mods, and Benevolent Dictators for Life: The Implicit Feudalism of Online Communities](https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820986553),” _New Media & Society_ (2021) | + | |
| - | ### 2/ Anxieties | + | **Week 5**: Add 5 more sources (including both scholarly and primary) to your bibliography that fill in gaps you have identified in your preliminary reading list |
| - | What is all this doing to us? | + | *By the end of this unit, produce a well-honed research question based on gaps you observe in the existing literature. You will present your research question in class.* |
| - | #### 2a/ Affect | + | ## Research methods (weeks 6-9) |
| - | * Sara Ahmed, "[Affective Economies](https://muse.jhu.edu/article/55780/summary)," _Social Text_ 22, no. 2 (2004) | + | Now, we turn to the methods we will use to investigate our research questions. |
| - | * Anne Applebaum and Peter Pomerantsev,"[How to Put Out Democracy’s Dumpster Fire](https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2021/04/the-internet-doesnt-have-to-be-awful/618079/)," _The Atlantic_ (April 2021) | + | |
| - | #### 2b/ Labor | + | * Bonnie S. Brennen, _[Qualitative Research Methods for Media Studies](https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/cusystem/detail.action?docID=6710103)_ (Routledge, 2021) |
| - | * Tiziana Terranova, “[Free Labor: Producing Culture for the Digital Economy](https://doi.org/10.1215/01642472-18-2_63-33)” _Social Text_ 18, no. 2 (June 1, 2000) | + | **Week 6**: {{:lib:brennen-qqrmms-donotshare.pdf|Chs. 1-2}} |
| - | * "[Ghost Work](https://listen.datasociety.net/episodes/ghost-work)," _Data & Society_ podcast (May 14, 2019) | + | |
| - | #### 2c/ Bias | + | **Week 7**: Choose two chapters to read on your own and outline a basic research plan |
| - | * Safiya Umoja Noble. "[Google Search: Hyper-Visibility as a Means of Rendering Black Women and Girls Invisible](https://urresearch.rochester.edu/institutionalPublicationPublicView.action?institutionalItemVersionId=27585)," _InVisible Culture_ 19 (2013) | + | **Week 8**: Begin employing your research method to answer your research question |
| - | * Shalini Kantayya (dir.), _[Coded Bias](https://colorado.mediaspace.kaltura.com/media/Coded+Bias/1_vqk573fg/107413122)_ (2020) | + | |
| + | **Week 9**: Review initial results and continue research | ||
| - | #### 2d/ Surveillance | + | *At the end of this unit, turn in your extended abstract based on your preliminary research.* |
| - | * Shoshana Zuboff, “[Big Other: Surveillance Capitalism and the Prospects of an Information Civilization](https://doi.org/10.1057/jit.2015.5),” _Journal of Information Technology_ 30, no. 1 (March 1, 2015) | + | ## Rethinking everything (weeks 10-11) |
| - | * Simone Browne, "[Dark Sousveillance Race, Surveillance and Resistance](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IsMFdiLsqbg)," Digital Praxis Seminar and the CUNY Digital Humanities Initiative (December 9, 2013) | + | |
| - | #### 2e/ Abuse | + | Just when you thought you knew what you were doing, we will consider a collection of theoretical perspectives from outside the Global North. Do these invite us to rethink our framing and findings? |
| - | * Adrienne Massanari, “[#Gamergate and The Fappening: How Reddit’s Algorithm, Governance, and Culture Support Toxic Technocultures](https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815608807),” _New Media & Society_ 19, no. 3 (March 1, 2017) | + | * Dilip M. Menon (ed.), _[Changing Theory: Concepts from the Global South](https://www-taylorfrancis-com.colorado.idm.oclc.org/books/edit/10.4324/9781003273530/changing-theory-dilip-menon)_ (Routledge India, 2022) |
| - | * Julian Dibbell, “[A Rape in Cyberspace](http://www.juliandibbell.com/texts/bungle_vv.html),” _The Village Voice_ (December 23, 1993) [contains descriptions of virtual sexual assault] | + | |
| + | **Week 10**: Ch. 1 | ||
| - | ### 3/ Emergence | + | **Week 11**: Read two chapters from the book on your own and reflect on your theory and methodology |
| - | What is emerging and who is designing? | + | *During this unit, focus on drafting your conference paper.* |
| - | #### 3b/ Commons | + | ## Peer review (weeks 12-14) |
| - | * M. Six Silberman, "[Reading Elinor Ostrom in Silicon Valley: exploring institutional diversity on the Internet](https://wtf.tw/pubs/silberman_reading_ostrom_in_silicon_valley.pdf)," in _Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Supporting Group Work_ (2016) | + | Finally, as we revise and reflect on the politics of the season, we will read something together, to be determined based on our shared discussions and how the political season proceeds. |
| - | * Seth Frey, P. M. Krafft, and Brian C. Keegan, "['This Place Does What It Was Built For': Designing Digital Institutions for Participatory Change](https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3359134)," _Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction_ 3 CSCW (2019) | + | |
| - | #### 4a/ Decentralization | + | **Week 12**: Paper drafting |
| - | * Youssef El Faqir, Javier Arroyo, and Samer Hassan, “[An Overview of Decentralized Autonomous Organizations on the Blockchain](https://doi.org/10.1145/3412569.3412579),” in _Proceedings of the 16th International Symposium on Open Collaboration_ (2020) | + | *Distribute the complete, anonymized draft of your paper.* |
| - | * Kei Kreutler, "[A Prehistory of DAOs](https://gnosisguild.mirror.xyz/t4F5rItMw4-mlpLZf5JQhElbDfQ2JRVKAzEpanyxW1Q)," Gnosis Guild (July 21, 2021) | + | |
| - | #### 3c/ Moderation | + | **Week 13**: Anne Norton, _[Wild Democracy: Anarchy, Courage, and Ruling the Law](https://academic-oup-com.colorado.idm.oclc.org/book/45531)_ (Oxford University Press, 2023) [read 5-6 chapters whose titles interest you] |
| - | * Joseph Seering, "[Reconsidering Self-Moderation: the Role of Research in Supporting Community-Based Models for Online Content Moderation](https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3415178)," _Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction_ 4, no. CSCW2 (2020) | + | **Week 14**: Conference |
| - | * Derek Caelin, “[Decentralized Social Networks vs. The Trolls](https://conf.tube/videos/watch/d8c8ed69-79f0-4987-bafe-84c01f38f966),” ActivityPub Conference (2020) | + | |
| - | + | *At the start of the final week, turn in your revised, properly formatted paper and be prepared to present at our conference.* | |
| - | #### 3d/ Archaeology | + | |
| - | + | ||
| - | * P. Maxigas and Guillaume Latzko-Toth. "[Trusted Commons: Why 'Old' Social Media Matter](https://policyreview.info/articles/analysis/trusted-commons-why-old-social-media-matter)," _Internet Policy Review_ 9, no. 4 (2020) | + | |
| - | * Amelia Winger-Bearskin, “[Indigenous Wisdom as a Model for Software Design and Development](https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/blog/indigenous-wisdom-model-software-design-and-development/),” Mozilla Foundation (October 2, 2020) | + | |
| --- | --- | ||
| [ [[:note/digital_culture_and_politics|Notes]] ] | [ [[:note/digital_culture_and_politics|Notes]] ] | ||
| + | |||