My Books

   

In Collections

Blogs

The Impact of Mobile Apps

Seattle.
The next speaker at AoIR 2011 is Meghan Grosse. She begins by pointing out how mobile devices have changed how we function in public and private spaces – not least also with the rise of apps, which have enabled us to personalise our mobile experience. The road here has been long; mobile phones have gradually added functionality, and the explosion in the range of apps has been a recent development which now no longer relies on hardware changes, but software development.

With the emergence of these tools also came the presumption that people should take advantage of these. These apps enable people to stay in touch with work, friends and family, which can make otherwise dead time useful, but also creates new expectations for people to stay up-to-date with things happening in their fields of professional and personal interest.

The Intimacy of Using Mobile Devices

Seattle.
The final panel at AoIR 2011 for today begins with Guillaume Latzko-Toth, whose interest is in mobile devices and the notion of intimacy. By mobile devices, he means mobile digital information and communication devices: portable, hand-held devices through which media is accessed and collaboratively produced. Mobility doesn’t simply mean moveability or portability in this, but rather, this refers to devices which are used while the user is mobile. Such devices are digital and versatile; they are app-enabled.

By intimacy, on the other hand, Guillaume refers to the dimensions of proximity, contact, and privacy. Mobile devices are a technology of proximity, and at the same time we are in a proximity relationship with them – mobile devices are close to us in a spatial sense, in an emotional sense, and in a metonymical sense; we wear them on us, or keep them very close to us, we are closely attached to them emotionally, and they are similar to us to the extent that the represent and encapsulate our identity.

Rethinking the Overlay of the Online and Offline

Seattle.
The Wednesday keynote at AoIR 2011 is by the abundantly energetic Tom Boellstorff, whose provocation to us is to rethink the digital. This is about both online and offline, and is interested in exploring emergent research areas. After all, what do we mean by digital: just the things we plug in, or the things which are online – or is there more to it? Part of the point here is also to reconnect the digital to indexicality – to return to the roots of the term ‘digit’.

Tom’s early work has been focussing on research into gay and lesbian culture in Indonesia – how are these concepts positioning themselves in contrast to, or adapting ideas from, Western gay and lesbian culture? Additionally, he’s also worked on Second Life; he’s been interested how a space like this transforms existing theory and practice. His current interests tend towards questions of methods, fieldsites, and ethics.

The Wisconsin Protests and the Egyptian Revolution

Seattle.
The next speaker at AoIR 2011 is Annette Vee, who positions the Wisconsin protests in a wider context of protest movements in recent years. How do social movements travel across transnational networks? What role do digitally-shared social media play in this context?

Annette suggests that synchronous online digital communication platforms are globalising our imagined communities, so that we identify not with our fellow citizens, but with those around the world who share our ideologies. There are some similarities between the revolt against the Mubarak regime in Egypt, and the protests against Governor Walker’s draconian unionbusting laws in Wisconsin; they took place around the same time, at least.

Coordinating Online Resources for the Wisconsin Protests

Seattle.
OK, sadly I missed part of the Wisconsin protests AoIR 2011 panel, but I’m here at least to cover Matt Gaydos’s presentation. The history of Wisconsin’s protest and activist movements is strong, and the recent grassroots movement against the virtual outlawing of unions is an important new step in this; Matt recounts the story of himself and his fellow students becoming outraged enough to be persuaded to act.

Some of the organising took place through community-organised Defend Wisconsin Websites and Twitter accounts; these were useful, but only to people who were involved right from the start – they didn’t provide enough material for latecomers to begin to understand the issues, and to learn about how they might be able to help.

The Twitter Response to Snow Disruptions by Swedish Train Operator SJ

Seattle.
The final presenter in our panel at AoIR 2011 is Anders Larsson, who shifts our focus to Sweden. Twitter was used by the national Swedish train operator during the extreme winter of 2010/11 to address the disruptions to train services. There is a strong impetus for major businesses and organisations to be on Twitter, of course; SJ (which used to be the state-owned monopoly train company in Sweden) has been online as @SJ_AB for some time now – but only on weekdays between 9:00 and 16:00 (even though their phone service is online for longer hours).

The last winter generated especially extreme amounts of snowfall; this disrupted train travel to a considerable amount, especially during the Christmas travel season. SJ didn’t use Twitter during the entire Christmas holiday, however (given that much of the crisis happened outside regular business hours?).

Patterns of Twitter Use during #eqnz

Seattle.
My own paper (with Jean), on the Twitter response to the second Christchurch earthquake on 22 February 2011 through the #eqnz hashtag, was next at AoIR 2011. Here are the slides – audio soon, hopefully now also added.

Twitter Activity Patterns during #qldfloods

Seattle.
The next speaker in our AoIR 2011 panel is Frances Shaw, who focusses our attention on the December/January 2010 Queensland floods crisis; the peak period in southeast Queensland followed 9 January 2010. The floods washed down from Toowoomba through the Lockyer Valley (were a significant number of lives were lost) and into Ipswich and Brisbane. On Twitter, discussion of the floods was coordinated through the #qldfloods hashtag, and the Queensland Police Service Media Unit account @QPSMedia emerged as a leading actor.

Frances worked through the #qldfloods dataset as well as through tweets sent by and directed at the @QPSMedia account, manually coding a subset of these tweets according to a set scheme: informational tweets; media sharing; help and fundraising; direct experience; and reactions and discussion. Over the entire #qldfloods dataset, discussion and reactions, information, and help and fundraising were especially prominent, tweets to and from @QPSMedia focussed especially on information.

Introducing a Theory of Acute Events

Seattle.
The next session at AoIR 2011 is our own, fabulous panel on crisis communication. We begin with an overview paper by my CCI colleagues Jean Burgess and Kate Crawford, who introduce the idea of acute events. Kate begins by outlining the idea of media ecologies involving a wide range of different media platforms, and their specific performance during acute events (such as crises, but also a range of similar events).

Jean follows on by defining acute events as significant real-world events which are associated with intense bursts in media activity – from political elections to royal weddings, from celebrity deaths to natural disasters. We can identify acute events on the basis of their timeline: a sharp peak of high volume and identity (whether locally or globally); highly mediated, involving multiple actors and interests; on Twitter, coordinated around specific #hashtags; and producing controversies and other adjunctive conversations associated more broadly with the topic.

Examining Entitativity on Facebook

Seattle.
The final speaker in this session at AoIR 2011 is Anita Blanchard, whose interest is in entitativity on Facebook: the feeling of the ‘groupiness’ of specific groups. Such entitativity emerges from the presence of clear group boundaries, internal homogeneity between members, social interaction in the group, a clear group structure, and shared common goals held by all members. Such entitativity is a necessary precursor to key group processes and outcomes, such as a common group identity.

So, what is the level of entitativity on Facebook? How groupy can it be? There are a range of obvious groupings here: each member and their circle of friends, communicative groups as constituted in a fluid and ephemeral fashion through status updates, likes and comments, as well as formal interest and fan groups, of course.

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - blogs