Thursday, November 30, 2006

Group 4 readings

Professional journalism vs amateur blogging

file:///c:/Documents%20and%20Settings/Sarah/My%20Documents/Blogging%20The%20new%20journalism.htm

The Kid with all the news about Tv News
http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061120/ZNYT05/611200312/-1/Help0530

Ancient calculator challenges notion of technology progression

"It's a popular notion that technological development is a simple progression. But history is full of surprises." - François Charette

Scientists just decoded the intricate working of a 2000-year old Greek calculator called "The Antikythera Mechanism" which can calculate astronomical cycles. See the article on Nature journal and BBC.

Wednesday, November 29, 2006

Readings for Group 3 presentation

Here are readings that pertain to Group 3's topic, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

First, a news article about the most recent exceptions to the DMCA legislation, added by the Librarian of Congress just last Wednesday:
http://www.stereophile.com/news/112706exemptions/

Second, an article about Internet fandom and the new role copyright law plays in this culture: "Digital Land Grab: Media corporations are stealing our cultural heritage. Can we take it back?"
http://www.technologyreview.com/BizTech/12076/

Also, for your own personal edification (if you want) here's a link to the nitty gritty of the DMCA legislation: http://www.copyright.gov/legislation/dmca.pdf

Do all those laptops help?

In the Chronicle of Higher Education today there's a report questioning whether using a laptop computer improves student performance:

To the hundreds of colleges that require students to buy or lease laptops, it may seem like a no-brainer: Supply a student with a portable computer, and surely he or she will reap some educational benefits.

But a laptop's value isn't so cut and dried, according to a study conducted by researchers at Carnegie Mellon University.

The study, which is described as one of the first systematic efforts to figure out how students use their laptop computers, came up with the uncontroversial finding that the machines give users more flexibility in choosing where and when to study. But the researchers found no evidence that the computers improved students' work.

In fact, a report on the study says, students with laptops tend to spend "significantly more time" working on assignments than other students do. But that extra time is not reflected in their finished products: Students with laptops get roughly the same grades as those who trek to computer labs. Instead of saving time, the report argues, laptop users are often killing it -- firing off e-mail messages, sending instant messages, and surfing the Web.

Laptop-users in J676, comments?

Tuesday, November 28, 2006

Group 1 web page

Here is a link to the group 1 web page. While it is still a work in progress, most of the information from our presentation is available in more detail.

Group 1 web page

Sunday, November 26, 2006

Readings for Group 1 presentation

Here are the readings for group 1’s presentation on Tuesday.

On Opposing the USA Patriot Act by Russ Feingold

Government Surveillance and Political Participation on the Internet by Brian Krueger

Saturday, November 25, 2006

Readings for Group 2 Presentation Next Thursday, Nov. 30

The readings for Group 2's presentation next thursday on Net Neutrality are:

High stakes battle over net neutrality - Denver Post

Congress must keep broadband competition alive - Lawrence Lessig


VIDEO: Hands of the Internet Co-Chair Mike McCurry on Net Neutrality - Politics TV

Hope you all had a happy Thanksgiving!

Wednesday, November 15, 2006

[Group6] FEED: things to think about

- About the novel

This science fiction novel paints a chilling picture what life would be like if our brain is online, i.e. if a transmitter is implanted directly into our brain, constantly sending "feed" from the network and transferring our thoughts and behaviors back to the network in all ways possible. It is heavily commercialized and obtrusive, but (almost) everybody is happy with it. 'Feed' is the story of Titus, a ordinary teen hooked up to the vast network of information who discovers that there is an alternative way of life, but is mostly unable to make sense of it until the very last page.


- The 'Information Age' characteristics in this story

This novel is a nice satirical summary of many theories and visions that we encountered during the semester. Of course there is the set of general discussion questions at the end of the book, but here are some others.

* On information use: Consider all the readings we have done concerning the Information Age. We know that there are ever-increasing avenues to conveniently and efficiently access information for those who have the necessary tools. These databases and caches of information can be utilized by academics and researchers to amass critically relevant research on a plethora of topics. However, concerning the general society, does or could this enhanced access to information lead to a decrease in actual knowledge like the protagonists in the book? Do you think many people find it futile in our society to really learn information they know they can look up in seconds and regurgitate?

* On literacy: One of the first things that is evident in this book is the deterioration of the characters' language and communication. It is true that the slang they use could hold loaded meaning we can't comprehend, like how people over a hundred years ago would be confused at much of the common discourse we use today. However, there are many instances that only slang and expletives are used in a stuttered fashion, as the characters seem to have difficulty expressing themselves verbally. Is there a correlation between enhanced technologies (which can diversify communication modes) and deficient ability of people to communicate in our world today? One might point to the use of acronyms and emoticons on instant message systems as an example...

* On connectedness: From the readings concerning political discourse to the ones that broadly speak of the information revolution, one example of a positive nature of the enhanced technology is a greater inter-connectedness. Taken to an exponential level in this novel, the characters are frequently interacting only with their own mind, and staring out into space while in the company of others. Do you see any of this today with our chronic use of ipods, cell phone capabilities and other gadgets?

* On existing social systems: Why doesn't all of society have the feed and what would that do to society? Does having the feed introduce a "feed divide" at all? Would be a kind of 'equal access' possible if everything and everyone is simply plugged in the vast network? How about the governmental problems addressed in the book? What causes Titus' change of heart towards Violet and does it relate to existing structures of the social system?

* On private and public: In the world of FEED, both the private and public spheres have given way to the commercial ones... bearing striking resemblances to 'our' world. But one could ask: If everybody is happy with it, would it be necessarily a dystopian thing? Could it be a democracy of some sorts, or should it still be regarded as the technocrat dictatorship?

* On the Future: Is there any good way to actually prevent our world becoming the world of 'Feed' in the near future?

Tuesday, November 14, 2006

Local public sphere? Marriage amendment listening session scheduled for tomorrow

From a UW-Madison press release today that showed up in my Bloglines RSS feeds:

A listening session will be held from 5-6:30 p.m. Wednesday, Nov. 15 in the Main Lounge of Memorial Union to give campus community members an opportunity to voice feelings related to the recently-passed marriage amendment and discuss the implications for domestic partner benefits.

Chancellor John Wiley and Provost Patrick Farrell are expected to attend the session, which is open to students, faculty and staff.

In the wake of last week’s election, UW-Madison intends to continue offering the services and benefits it currently offers to students, employees and their partners while awaiting legal clarifications regarding the implications of the amendment.

“I would like to reassure everyone that UW-Madison will continue to be a place that rejects discrimination and respects diversity of all kinds,” Wiley wrote in a Nov. 9 letter to the campus community. “There is a place for all people here, and the Nov. 7 approval of this amendment does not change that commitment.”

“But there are lingering questions about what this amendment might mean for current and future benefits for employees,” he added. “To that end, I am bringing together a group of staff from human resources, equity and diversity, and other relevant areas to review the amendment and its possible impacts.”

Using networked information technology to muster local stakeholders into a face-to-face, realtime public sphere discussion about the way state political issues affect the local citizenry, anyone?

Group 5 posting addendum: summary of Plant

Plant article: In “Weaving Women and Cybernetics,” Sadie Plant takes us on a journey from the mother of computer programming, Ada Lovelace, through the practice of weaving, then on to feminist philosopher Luce Irigaray and (masculinist?) psychiatrist Freud, and finally spins off into a mid-‘90s fantasia on cybernetics, feminism and strained metaphors regarding women, software and computers. She begins by tracing the lineage of software back to Ada Lovelace, a key figure in early thinking about programming for machines; she continues this trace (skipping over the many men involved in the process) to the one other quasi-famous female programmer, Grace Hopper, and suggests that software and programming is a feminine domain. Charles Babbage, with his inventions of the Difference Engine and the Analytical Engine, was the father of hardware, which frames an easy dichotomy between man/woman and software/hardware. Plant pushes this dichotomy further as the essay progresses, finally splitting man into the seeming master of war machines, who is ultimately defeated by the software/woman/science he can’t control.

But before she reaches that conclusion, Plant uses weaving and the technology of the loom that served as a metaphor for the early computer and its punch cards as a way to connect her metaphors of woman and computers/software. She writes, “It seems that weaving is always already entangled with the question of female identity, and its mechanization an inevitable disruption of the scene in which woman appears as the weaver” (431). Perhaps is it in this mechanization that woman enters Plant’s computer metaphor, as a ghost in the machine?

After discussing some of the history of weaving and its metaphorical connections to women and early software, she notes, “Like woman, software systems are used as man’s tools, his media and his weapons; all are developed in the interests of man, but all are poised to betray him…” (432). How does this betrayal happen? Plant is unspecific about details here, but through a series of more and more abstract metaphors concerning veils, the womb, the matrix and the absence/presence of space behind the computer screen, Plant argues that it ultimately happens through woman’s capacity for mimicry. From Irigaray, Plant uses woman’s innate capacity for simulation (mostly as background, supporter, canvas for man), to liken her to the computer: “she is not [the] only performer: now that the digital comes on stream, the computer is cast in precisely the same light: it, too, is merely the imitation of nature, providing assistance and additional capacity for man…” (433).

Ultimately, woman and the machine “may aspire to be the same as man, but in every effort they become more complex than he has ever been” (436) and enter the matrix. This matrix, or cyberspace, “joins women on and as the interface between man and matter, identity and different, one and zero, the actual and the virtual…the veils are already cybernetic” (437).

Monday, November 13, 2006

Group 5 posting

Michaels article: Eric Michaels, in “For a Cultural Future”, observes the production of Australian Aboriginal film and examines on a larger scale its effects on Aboriginal culture. He illustrates an instance of the traditional “Fire Ceremony,” a ceremonial dance functioning to resolve disputes that is significantly dangerous – and likely “savage” in Western eyes – as those who are punished risk being badly burned. Michaels highlights how the advent of film and television technologies in these traditional societies allows for a greater cultural continuity, but also recognizes that the flow of mainstream media through new channels into traditional cultures threatens to supplant them. Ultimately, it seems, the pendulum could swing both ways; and Michaels shows how even in the reverse – with Aboriginal media flowing outwards – there is a risk that cultural values will be cheapened and reduced to “savage theatre.”

Poster article
: Poster analyzes postmodernity through the lens of information organization and electronic communication. Electronic communication, he posits, is displacing the idea of a rational, autonomous, individual. The individual is rather being multiplied in various representations that are disseminated widedly in a decentralized environment. (think fax, mass emails, globally -accessible blogs) Identity becomes unstable as information/symbols/language that define it is multiplied, separated from the author, and used for marketing and monitoring. Like print, electronic communications allow speech at a distance to be more efficient. Though the way language is interpreted, confounds single definition of the individual.

He first talks about advertisements and theory surrounding it. The traditional theory is that ads are deceptive, and work to manipulate demand for a product (Marx). Though Poster goes on to credit ads with using language to construct alternate realities where one would never act the same as in real life. Linguistic properties connect the viewer and the product, associating meaning between the two. Pepsi=youth=sex=fun=popularity.

He next views computerized databases as masses of information about individuals that may be sold, monitored, reproduced, and distributed. Myspace comes to mind. Individuals are defined by certain traits, interests, histories, which can be sold to mircosoft for marketing purposes or looked up by future employers. Poster uses the term superpanopticon in that privacy is nulled so that constructs of the individual can be readily exchanged. The panopticon shapes and molds behavior by threat of surveillance. Databases multiply the power of surveillance, making an environment where the individual may not know that computers have their information, but the computer may know who he/she is.

Finally, Poster observes how electronic writing separates the individual from the message, much like print technology allowing a message to be sent long distances and viewed by multiple people. Thus, like Derridas acknowledged, the problem becomes (mis)interpretation of the author's original meaning. With blogs, instant messaging, email, the writing moreover is less fixed and more interpreted through signage.

Discussion questions: How does Plant connect the concept of the cyberspace to the feminine? What specific attributes does he bring up to compare the two? Do you agree or disagree with them?

Can you think of any contemporary examples of women in technology similar to Lovelace and Hopper? Any contemporary examples of technology that replace people in a similar fashion to the automated loom?

What would Poster have to say about the influx of Facebooks and Myspaces on the Internet? Is it generally empowering or subordinating, and for whom?

Is it due to technological advancements and modernization that cultural rituals like the Fire Ceremony disappear or are their other reasons?

Friday, November 10, 2006

WSJ writes a real story

Here's an interesting little article on how the UW has evolved in using information delivering technology, putting us in the "haves" end of the digital divide.

Thursday, November 09, 2006

Addendum to Group 4 posting!!

Question for Discussion re Chapter 6: is the small subset of people (who a) have access to info technology and b) care enough to use it to research politics) a large enough group to check political elites and the government?

Wednesday, November 08, 2006

Group 4 Postings: Information and American Democracy

CHAPTER FOUR:

Bimber uses the introduction section of chapter 4 to lay out the arguments he intends to address in the following sections of chapter 4. The chapter starts off with the introduction of Mike McCurry, a pioneer in the Political Internet Business, who started the firm Grassroots.com with the initial goal of providing "Internet-basedcommunications and mobilization products for the American political market."(111) McCurry's actions illustrate the "new political processes and opportunities associated with changes in the information environment of American politics."(111) Bimber then cites the NAM's use of "electronic mail networks and a password-secured wed site to coordinate a very rapid and intense exchange of information among groups, including working drafts of legislation that would be requested of Congress." (115) Bimber then alludes to the fact that
"the internet has brought more people into the loop…it just picks up the pace on everything…(and) gives everyone more time to communicate."(115) Bimber continues in the introduction to reveal the rest of chapter 4 will look at particular case studies to show how the "Internet could play two major roles: providing a means for highly responsive, rapid coordination among groups, and facilitating the large-scale mobilization of citizens."(116)

Consumer Protection and Privacy investigates the "Know Your Customer" regulations proposed by the FDIC, which hoped to identify money laundering through national banks. This regulation "would require each banking organization to develop a program designed to determine the identity of its customers; determine its customers' sources of funds; determine, understand and monitor the normal and expected transactions of its customers; and report appropriately any
transaction of its customers that are determined to be suspicious."(128) Insisting this proposed legislation infringed upon
civil liberties, the Libertarian Party sought to challenge the "Know Your Customer" proposed regulations. However, "the party lacked both the funds for a major mass media advertising campaign and a sufficiently large membership to provide much of a direct political threat."(130) Thus the Libertarian Party set out to create chain letter-type phenomenon, which they hoped would "leverage citizen involvement beyond he party's own membership."(130) Eventually the
Libertarian Party succeeds in their attempt of using the internet as a "new means of organizing collective action" and defeated the proposed regulations. (132)

Environmental Advocacy section highlighted how the power of the internet could be used to take "environmental activism to the next level."(139) Bimber cites the EDF who "undertook a major change in strategy in an effort exploit new possibilities for communication and information management made possible by the internet."(139) the key element of the internet was its capability of narrowing and focusing "information-rich messages linking local events and issues with citizens' individual interests. Prior to the internet, environmental groups worked more on a national level which overlooked many local
issues. Due to these new information and communication systems, environmental organizations have "dramatically ramped up the amount of cooperation and coordination with other groups because of its move onto the web and use of Internet-based communication."(147) Bimber closes this section of chapter 4 with an interesting conclusion; the internet has not only enhanced the capabilities of lobbying groups it has also changed the relationships between lobbying groups.

Campaigns for Office in 2000

According to Bimber, with the development of new technology the Internet has found an advantageous role in election campaigns. It is a new medium for political communication. Web sites can now supplement TV ads and allow a new venue for communication between voters and candidates. In 1992, a few candidates used e-mail to organize themselves externally as well as inform supporters. In 1998, the use of Internet expanded, but only well endowed candidates could use the Internet to their advantage because it was very expensive to create a Web site. The Internet offered real value for interaction with supporters. For example, Reform candidate Jesse Ventura relied exclusively on his Web site and e-mails and had no paid employees. Instead, he organized volunteers to run campaign events through his Web site. This produced about $600,000 in donations. Information technology was vital to his victory. By 2000, the Internet became an even more widely used tool in election campaigns
especially for the under-dogs. It was used to engage supporters, raise volunteers, collect donations, and send out informative e-mails. Bimber goes on to talk about the different experiments with Internet that candidates have used. He explains that in the end, the Internet cannot displace traditional media.

Summary of the Cases

All five cases show some sort of post-bureaucratic organization. The cases show the relationship between politics and and information technology and changes in organizational structure that have occurred. Smaller organizations are able to use the Internet to replace staff and lack of money. Larger organizations also use the low-cost communication to reach more people. Bimber says that technology expands the capacity to organize collective action. These cases also show that information abundance can lead to the fall in traditionally bureaucratic forms of political organization. However, the cases also show that there is a limited capacity to Internet and cannot displace other media like broadcast and television.

CHAPTER 5 centers on the question of whether or not the increased abundance of information and new structures for collective, action are linked to broader political engagement—is information producing more responsible, informed and virtuous citizens? He outlines the voter turnout trends from the first revolution to the third—which started in the 1820s at 80 percent and decreased to 50 percent by the 1980’s, only increasing once in the 1960s era.

Before delving into the true examination of why this might be, Bimber outlines the two theoretical assumption of the relationship between information abundance and engagement
1) Rational/instumental model assumes (202-203):
- that changes in the cost and variety of sources of information directly affects levels of political participation. As information becomes more inexpensive and abundant, citizens are more likely to participate.
- It is not possible for an individual to know what information is most relevant if he or she doesn’t know all of the content of information. Thus it becomes necessary for the public to establish “gatherers and transmitters” of information to reduce the uncertainty.
2) Psychological Model assumes:
- As information costs fall and sources multiply, the information-rich get richer and the information poor stay poor.
- Acquisition of new information does not necessarily make citizens better informed in an objective sense. (Individuals search for information that they believe, thus reinforcing opinions, “Citizens do not use a richer and more diverse media environment to better inform themselves about conflicting ideas and positions, but instead select a narrower and more parochial set of sources.” )
- The process whereby political information stimulates political engagement is contingent upon social context,

Bimber then explores the validity of theoretical approaches, by examining the demographics of those with access to internet technology between 1996 and 2001 and how they use this tool to politically search or engage. We see that between these times, the gap between educated and uneducated users decreased and the number of female users also increased. By 2001, the digital divide between users and nonusers was most visible in the areas of education and race (those with more education & income were still more likely to have access, and elders, women and Latinos less likely). As far as the actual use of internet, statistics displayed an increase in the extent to which users politically engaged online, but not markedly (in my opinion)—less than half of 2001’s users used the internet for political purposes at all.

Lastly, he uses NES data to examine the correlation between the number of individuals that partake in certain political activities (such as putting up lawn signs, donating money to campaigns, and voting). In essence, Bimber concludes that his findings are similar to that of the psychological theoretical assumption: the new information environment does not substantially change political engagement. The results, he admits, are so null and unsubstantial that they offer little insight into the true effect of the fourth information revolution’s effect on political participation.

CHAPTER 6:
Bimber essentially sums up his argument by explaining that, despite the incredible impact of the contemporary information revolution we currently are experiencing, this new abundance of information only serves to reinforce patterns of political behavior and involvement at the individual level that have existed since before the revolution began (229). For example, though such a plethora of political information exists that it would be so easy to research and inform oneself about politics, only those who wanted to be politically informed before are primarily the ones who continue to seek political information through new media and information techologies (229). Interestingly, Bimber concludes his book by introducing a model that he simultaneously lauds, yet does not completely support. Dahl believes the remedy for this inequality in information gathering is to utiilize telecommunications technology, because the availaibility of and access to the information will surely lessen any gaps in public participation between various parties (241). Similar to Bimber, Dahl acknowledges that, even in the face of all this information, only a subset of the population will participate in political decision-making and information-gathering. However, he says, this subset is still a substantial enough group to constitute a "check and counterbalance against the power of professional, institutionalized information elites" (241). Bimber offers more information both for and against Dahl's theory, and concludes both hopefully and skeptically that only time will tell whether or not that small subset will be large enough to constitute a Fourth Estate during the Fourth Information Revolution (249).

GROUP FOUR QUESTIONS:
1.How have political groups and interest groups integrated the use of
the internet to influence the general public who maybe unaware of
specific issues or political ideals?
2.Do you think the internet will be used more during the next
presidential election? If so how and to what degree do you think the
internet will affect the outcome?
3.Is it feasible to foresee the internet as facilitating the growth
and emergence of a united third party?
4. How would you describe the virtuous citizen today?
5. How would you describe your use of the Internet as a tool for political engagement, and what implications does the availability of this have on your role as a “citizen?”
6. In his analysis, Bimber does not address the indirect effects of technology on citizen engagement. What are the ways in which citizens’ political participation are indirectly influenced by the increased abundance of rich information found in the fourth revolution?

Tuesday, November 07, 2006

From the UW-Madison Offices of the Dean of Students: Toward a Bias-Free Campus

As we reflect on the various institutional and technological conduits of political communication in our present-day "information society" this week, and as we think about the constitutional results of Tuesday's election in Wisconsin, I would like to remind students that it is official UW-Madison policy to work toward "a bias-free campus." The Offices of the Dean of Students encourages all UW-Madison students to "Explore & Appreciate Diversity" and suggests some good ways of doing so:

Take time to reflect on your own biases and stereotypes. Accept responsibility for your prejudices and behavior.

Broaden your horizons by regularly attending the many lectures, conferences and events that the campus has to offer. Stretch yourself beyond the familiar.

Ask a librarian for the histories and biographies of people different than yourself. Relate their histories and experiences to your own.

Listen to the evening news as if you had a different skin color, sexual orientation or gender. Notice what would be relevant to you.

Listen to music from another culture. Share it with others.

Participate in ongoing training and workshops that focus on eliminating racism, sexism, homophobia and other forms of discrimination.

Attend an event where you are a minority. Take friends along to the many programs at the Multicultural Student Center.

Watch films and TV programs by and about people of different backgrounds and experience.

Report incidents of harassment to an on-call Assistant Dean in Student Advocacy & Judicial Affairs (263-5700 or dean@odos.wisc.edu).

Don't tolerate racist, sexist or homophobic remarks or "jokes." Speak up!

Monday, November 06, 2006

Group 3: Summary and Questions for Bimber's "Information and American Democracy"

Group 3-Part 1
Bruce Bimber’s Information and American Democracy

Chapter 1

Section 1 & 2

The first part of chapter one lays a concise groundwork for Bimber's book. He will focus on the way new technologies and their ability to disseminate information affects the political stage. He makes a number of claims and observations about how technological advancements, the internet in particular, are used in politics, alter people's perception of politics and enhance democracy. He states a strong claim on page 21: "Technological change in the contemporary period should contribute toward information abundance, which in turn contributes toward postbureaucratic forms of politics."However, earlier, he presents some other fundamental research that is important and, at times, seems contrary to this central claim. First, he says "[political leaders] used the Internet to identify interested citizens, distribute information, and solicit participation in the protest." (3) There is great value to politicians in being able to easily do that. Second, he says that the Internet is one of the first media that allows for mobilization of individuals without a central bureaucracy and huge levels of organization behind it (3), another valuable tool. Third, he says the Internet can group together a group of individuals who might not otherwise find each other. Last, and in contrary to his thesis, he says that "information technology does not exert large direct effects on traditional participation and public opinion" (4). Isn't a change in public opinion central to his thesis? True, it might exert a direct effect, but "information abundance," in a democratic world, will lead to public opinion. Either way, he lays out some interesting and sound claims.

Section 3 & 4

After laying out the theoretical agenda of the book, Bimber continues to discuss the empirical evidence for his "information regime model", including quantitative evidence (survey data on individual-level behavior) and qualitative evidence (historical analysis, case studies, public records, and interviews on elite behavior and the organization-level effects). He also points out the normative implications of this model, for example, the tradeoff between political equality and the achievement of a deliberative public good. At the end of this chapter, Bimber claims that his position is neither technological determinism nor social constructionism. His purpose is neither to analyze specific technologies and their specific effects on politics, nor the opposite. Rather, he will focus on the major trend that technological evolution brings information-richness and communication-intensiveness, and seek the relationship between information and the evolution of politics within the information regime model.

Chapter 1 Questions:

1. Do Bimber's positions of non-technological determinism and non-social constructionism imply a position of technological neutralism? If not, how do you understand his position? If it does, do you agree or not? How do you reconcile this position and the positions that we have read in the reader? 2. Bimber argues that the role of information in politics is largely ignored by researchers (P12). Why do you think information has not drawn much attention compared to other factors or constructs (as listed on P20)?

Chapter 2

In chapter two, Bimber separates his theory about the roots of information in America into three “revolutions.” He begins with the example of Alexander Hamilton’s successful publishing of “The Federalist” in early colonial America, one of the first political communications to recognize the importance of information dissemination to government affairs. The problem remained, however, that citizens often fear placing much power in the hands of a government remote from its people. This was true for the earliest American states, and it’s certainly true today. We often don’t believe government at the federal level is accountable or attuned to local concerns.

The Information Theory of the Federalist:
-- Alexander Hamilton posits that the new government would be the center of information for the new nation. There are two major issues at stake - that of distance between gov't and the people, and the idea of the extended republic as a solution to the problem of factions.
-- The ways that political structure affects the disclosure, mediation, and aggregation of political information strongly affect the state of democracy. The Federalist theory suggests a causal relationship between properties of information and qualities of democracy.The First Information Revolution and the Rise of Majoritarianism:
-- From 1789 to 1820, America lacked a national-scale flow of political information, meaning the gov't was cut off from its citizens.-- The rise of the Post Office helped to solve this problem, as well as the rise of "penny papers" - newspapers aimed at a mass audience in both content and price.

--Bimber says people in early America were in effect “quarantined” from the government by the lack of information flow. This didn’t change until the 1830’s/40’s with the creation of a national news media system and the development of the world’s most extensive postal service. Then at last national identities could form, as could political affiliations. The press and the postal service were responsible for the creation of a political party structure over time. Working closely with the media, parties soon dominated info flow, and in many ways they still do today. Hence our strict 2-party system and “majority rule” were spawns of information revolutions.

The Second Info Revolution and the Roots of Pluralism
By the time of the Industrial Revolution, the number of civic, social and public interest groups in America was growing rapidly. There were unions and consumer rights groups and lobbyists and all sorts of communication bodies that never existed before. Bimber calls this a “mania for association formation” This revolution was rooted not in the change of technology, but in the growing complexity. There were simply more subjects being discussed—a plurality of information to digest. This implies the fragmentation of later years…


The Third Info Revolution and the Mass Audience
During the third and most recent info revolution, information is getting faster and cheaper and more accessible. We’ve reached that economizing stage that creates a very egalitarian information model. But what will the effects be for political engagement and democracy? Information is now non-linear (more like circuits that are never-ending). This might, it can be supposed, challenge the normal modes for political action. If everyone can have private and specialized forums online to discuss the information that interests them, what will happen to our holistic sense of current affairs and politics? How will politicians legitimize themselves before the mass audience? Will we really be more active? Bimber thinks not.

Bottom line? Bimber takes a middle of the road stance by saying simply that technologies like the Internet don’t make democracy better, but they surely make it different. More pervasive? More effective? More equal? This has yet to be determined.

Chapter 2 Questions:

Assuming, like Bimber said, that information is now non-linear, how can politicians ensure that their messages are even reaching their intended audiences?
How do you perceive the role of the internet with democracy? Does the increased specialization that the internet offers increase the public’s ability to participate in the government or does it merely isolate others?

Chapter 3

Bimber explains that policy and political influence tend to flow to the best informed and that resources create command over information and communication and command over these things therefore, enhance political influence. Bimber goes on to explain that the foundation of this conclusion has changed as a result of developments is new information technology because communication has become abundant. He goes on to explain 5 main aspects of technology that has changed and affects politics.

low-cost channels for the distribution of information by political elites and organizations
ex. Electronic mail- provides affordable means for every candidate to distribute information.
new technology to allow elites and organizations to acquire highly detailed information at low costs to tailor their messages.
capacity of new technology to allow citizens to communicate directly with one another.
Ex. Online forums
the ability for any news organization to distribute information globally
The ability to archive news and other information.

In the section called The Bureaucratic Concept of Pluralism, Bimber outlined different theorists views on information; such as Tocqueville, Weber, Levy, etc. He explains that Tocqueville was far ahead of his time and believed that Americans possess a habit of association and cooperation but are confronted with the problem if information dissemination, so that people with common interests have a hard time finding each other. And then when they do, the exchange of information is hard do to proximity. Bimber says that his analysis suggests that richer flows of information in society should lead to more numerous and intense associations among citizens. He also says that theories suggest less bureaucratized structures.

In the section of Postbureaucratic Political Organizations, Bimber writes about what collective action and organization structure might look like with an abundance of information. He says that increased opportunities for collective action by organization-poor or organization-less groups might occur; that the nature and boundaries of organizations will change and less rigidly structures, more malleable and more responsive to changes. Also that membership will become less bureaucratized and that organizational structures will not have to fixed around either national or local issues. All of this has the possibility to lead to pluralism. He says that the spread of pluralism will be constrained by the psychology and market dynamics of mass communication and that another powerful constraint to pluralism is the structure of the state apparatus.

Chapter 3 Questions:

1. Since a few years have passed since the publication of Bimber’s book, are there other significant technological advances that could make his list of “main aspects of technology that have changed and affected politics”?

New field of "Web Science"

From an article today in the New York Times:

The Web has become such a force in commerce and culture that a group of leading university researchers now deems it worthy of its own field of study.

The Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of Southampton in Britain plan to announce today that they are starting a joint research program in Web science.

Tim Berners-Lee, who invented the Web’s basic software, is leading the program. An Oxford-educated Englishman, Mr. Berners-Lee is a senior researcher at M.I.T., a professor at the University of Southampton and the director of the World Wide Web Consortium, an Internet standards-setting organization.

Web science, the researchers say, has social and engineering dimensions. It extends well beyond traditional computer science, they say, to include the emerging research in social networks and the social sciences that is being used to study how people behave on the Web. And Web science, they add, shifts the center of gravity in engineering research from how a single computer works to how huge decentralized Web systems work.

“The Web isn’t about what you can do with computers,” Mr. Berners-Lee said. “It’s people and, yes, they are connected by computers. But computer science, as the study of what happens in a computer, doesn’t tell you about what happens on the Web.”

Google does it again...

This article in today's Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel caught my attention...

Google targets newspaper advertising

MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. (AP) -- Google Inc. plans to start selling advertising space in 50 top newspapers, expanding the Internet search engine's efforts to provide services off the Web and making it easier for companies advertising online to also show off their products in print.
A group of more than 100 Google advertisers will be able to place bids for space in newspapers owned by The New York Times Company, Gannett, the Tribune Company, the Washington Post Company and Hearst during a three-month test period, according to news reports.
Many newspaper executives see the proposed system as a way to increase sales as they struggle with reader defection and competition from online advertising. They downplayed any risks of letting Google handle their relationships with advertisers.
"We go into this with both eyes open," Mike Lemke, senior vice president for sales and marketing at Seattle Times Co., told the Wall Street Journal.

The move also positions Google - already the biggest seller of online advertising - to gain more customers during its pursuit of print, radio and television advertising.
"Print adds value the Internet doesn't have," Tom Phillips, who runs Google's print operations, told The New York Times. "It is a different browse-able reading medium."
The newspaper program, to be launched this week, will enable advertisers to pick specific newspapers and specific sections for their ads. Businesses would place bids on ad size, sections and days a newspaper is offering and the publication can view the bids and make selections. The newspapers can choose to accept as many or as few bids as they like at any time.
Executives said the system allows newspapers to tap into a group of advertisers they don't currently get, including smaller businesses and retailers.

Google will not earn any revenue during the test, but when the system is formally introduced next year, it will take a cut.

Source: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/G/GOOGLE_ADS?SITE=WIMIL&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Saturday, November 04, 2006

Group 1 references - Patriot Act

ACLU and Arab American groups file lawsuit over element of the USA Patriot Act. (2003, July 31). The Washington Post [Washington, D.C.], p. A02. Retrieved October 11, 2006, from Lexis-Nexis database. 

Button, G., Mason, D. & Sharrock, W. (2003). Disempowerment and resistance in the print industry? Reactions to surveillance-capable technology. New Technology, Work and Employment, 18, 50-61

Civil Rights Concerns in the Metropolitan Washington, D.C., Area in the Aftermath of the September 11, 2001 Tragedies. <http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/sac/dc0603/ch5.htm>.

Connecticut librarians see lack of oversight as biggest danger in antiterror law. (2005, September 3). New York Times [New York, NY], p. B5. Retrieved October 11, 2006, from Lexis-Nexis database. 

Diamond, J (2006, March, 1). Senate passes Patriot Act changes. USA Today, Retrieved October 11, 2006, from http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-03-01-patriot-act_x.htm

Dumm, T. (1996). Michael Foucault and the politics of freedom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Eggen, D (2005, April, 5). Patriot Act Changes to be Proposed. Washington Post, Retrieved October 11, 2006, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A26235-2005Apr4?language

Foucault, M. (1979). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. New York: Vintage

Four librarians finally break silence in records case. (2006, May 31). New York Times [New York, NY], p.B3. Retrieved October 11, 2006, from Lexis-Nexis database. 
J.P. Morgan is facing heat of Patriot Act. (2004, March 9). Wall Street Journal [New York, NY], p. C1. Retrieved October 11, 2006, from Lexis-Nexis database. 
Judge strikes down section of Patriot Act allowing secret subpoenas of internet data. (2004, September 30). New York Times [New York, NY], p. A26. Retrieved October 11, 2006, from Lexis-Nexis database. 

Kollar, Justin F. "USA PATRIOT Act, the Fourth Amendment, and Paranoia: Can They Read This While I'M Typing?" Journal of High Technology Law 3 (2004): 67-93. <http://www.jhtl.org/publications/V3N1/Kollar-Note-PDF.pdf>.

Krueger, Brian. (2005). Government Surveillance and Political Participation on the Internet, Social Science Computer Review, 23(Winter 4), 439-452

Lawsuit filed in support of Muslim scholar barred from U.S. (2006, January 26). New York Times [New York, NY], p. A18. Retrieved October 11, 2006, from Lexis-Nexis database. 

Lessig, Lawrence. (1999). Code and other laws of cyberspace. New York: Basic Books.

Lyon, D. (2001). Surveillance after September 11. Sociological Research Online, 6, 1-27

Martins, Cristine S., and Sophia J. Martins. "The Impact of the USA Patriot Act on Records Management." The Information Managment Journal (2005).

Pikowsky, R. (2002). An overview of the law of electronic surveillance post September 11, 2001. Law Library Journal, 94, 601-620

Protect our freedom to read. (2003, July 6). Denver Post [Denver, CO], P. E01. Retrieved October 11, 2006, from Lexis-Nexis database. 

Shrader, K (2005, July, 14). House panel OK's changes in Patriot Act. The Boston Globe, Retrieved October 11, 2006, from http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/07/14/house_panel_oks_changes_in_patriot_act/

Staples, W. (1997). The culture of surveillance: Discipline and social control in the United States. New York: Set. Martin’s.

"Surveillance Under the USA PATRIOT Act." American Civil Liberties Union. <http://www.aclu.org/>.
The crime of being a Muslim charity. (2006, March 12). The Washington Post [Washington, D.C.], p. B07. Retrieved October 11, 2006, from Lexis-Nexis database. 

The ‘library provision’ took center stage, but critics say subpoena-like national security letters, widely used by the FBI, deserve greater scrutiny. (2005, December 11). Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles, Calif.], p. A29. Retrieved October 11, 2006, from Lexis-Nexis database.

This internet footprint led to suspected killer: whether they know it or not, web users leave a trial of information with providers. (2002, June 16). St. Louis Post [St.Louis, Mo.], p.A1. Retrieved October 11, 2006, from Lexis-Nexis database.

Tullis, Matt. "Patriot Act Eroded Privacy for Terrorist- and Everyone." The Columbus Dispatch (2006). LexisNexis.

Friday, November 03, 2006

Group 4 - initial resources

Baker, C, Edwin, “The Classic Marketplace of Ideas Theory” in Human Liberty and Freedom of Speech. New York: Oxford University Press, 1989.

Commission on Freedom of the Press, “The Requirements” from A Free and Responsible Press. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1947.

Elliot, Deni and Charles Culver: “Defining and Analyzing Journalistic Deception” in Journal of Mass Media Ethics, Vol. 7, No.2, (1992).

Kovach, Bill, and Tomm Rosensteil, “Verification” from The Elements of Journalism. New York: Crown Publishers, 2001.

Lippman, Walter, “Stereotypes” from Public Opinion. New York: The Free Press, 1965.

Paterson, Philip, and Lee Wilkins, “Privacy” from Media Ethics, Fifth Edition. New York: McGraw Hill, 2005.

Radio/Television News Directors Code (From Website, July 2006).

Siebert, Fred, “Libertarian Theory,” in Four Theories of the Press. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1963.

Society of Professional Journalists Code (From Website, July 2006).

Grewel. "Why blogging began." The Toronto Star. Dec 13, 2005.

Biggs. "DIT Journalism must pass the truth test." South China Morning Post. March 7, 2006

Jarvis. "The bloggers and journalists are comrades-at-keyboards." The Guardian (London). August 21, 2006.

And many Web site links:
http://journalism.nyu.edu/pubzone/weblogs/pressthink/2005/01/21/berk_essy.html http://www.microcontentnews.com/articles/bloggingjournalism.htm
http://www.editorsweblog.org/analysis/2006/04/citizen_journalism_vs_professional_journ.php
http://www.ojr.org/ojr/workplace/1017958873.php
This link discusses bloggings role as a form of journalism http://www.secretlair.com/index.php?/clickableculture/entry/notes_blogging_vs_journalism/
this link is a blog that discuss how blogging and journalism overlap http://nymag.com/news/media/15971/
this link takes you to a chronogoly of the history of blogging
http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/2427/
this links to the rise of professional journalism today http://journalism.nyu.edu/pubzone/weblogs/pressthink/2005/01/21/berk_essy.html
this links to an essay about how the debate between bloggers and journalists is over http://iml.jou.ufl.edu/projects/Fall03/Landreville/society_journalism.htm
this link discusses journalism vs. blogging

Liberal Bloggers

The digital divide will ultimately determine how effective political blogs are at changing politics in the real world. Who can access the Internet to interact with opinion on blogs?

The "rallying the base" phenomenon may be the most important way blogs affect voter turn-out. Blogs are free to anyone with an internet connection, and such technologies can link the populace to the candidates through forums. It's likely that more people can surf the web on their own time than get to a political rally.

While Blogs allow virtually anyone, an El Salvador refugee for example, to publish their thoughts, political interest isn't tecnology driven. Reading the newspaper, having a stake in the issues, having politically active friends, being able to afford access to information (via Web or TV), weighs at least as heavy as Blogs in getting voters get involved.

Thursday, November 02, 2006

Group 2, preliminary bibliography

Eggerton, John. 2006. "Stevens still pushing on franchise reform." Broadcast and Cable. September 21. http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6374250.html?title=Article&spacedesc=news

Broache, Anne. 2006. "Net neutrality rift threatens comms bill". CNET News. September 13. http://management.silicon.com/government/0,39024677,39162343,00.htm

Lessig, Lawrence. 2006. "Congress must keep broadband competition alive". Financial Times. October 18. http://www.freepress.net/news/18510 

Bosworth, Martin H. 2006.  "Net neutrality attracts suprising allies."  Consumeraffairs.com. May 18. http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2006/05/neutrality_allies.html

Porter, Dave. "Sliver of hope in Media Coverage of Net Neutrality."

ONA Backs Net Neutrality. http://journalist.org/news/archives/000539.php

Chester, Jeffrey. "Congress poised to unravel the Internet." The Nation. August 18, 2006. http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060828/internet_bill

Comstock, Earl W. "What is net neutrality?" http://www.comptelascent.org/news/recent-news/what-is-net-neutrality_may2006.html

Stross, Randall. "Hey, baby Bells: information still wants to be free." New York Times. January 15, 2006.

Group 6: Initial references

Theme: Wikipedia vs Academic Authority

Group#6 has started putting together the project webpage. To draw connect ions with our theme, we are doing the project itself in the 'Wiki' format. At our project page, the reference list is being constantly and collaboratively updated.
Click to go to the project main page with the initial reference list:

http://capcold.net/wiki/wiki.php/group6_main

----------------

Note to class: Having started out, everyone in our group agrees that the Wiki method is very easy and efficient for a collaborative project like this. It's convenient to accumulate the material anytime anywhere, and build the 'final' webpage at the same time. If any group would like to try it out as well, feel free to visit my site (http://capcold.net/wiki) and build your own project page. If you would like to, but are not familiar with creating and editing Wiki-pages, let me know and I'll guide you through in 3 minutes (yes, it's that easy).

Group 3: Works Cited for DMCA

Works Cited

11thHour. “Universal's Legal Action ~ Fans Beware.” Firefly Forum. Prospero Technologies,
LLC. 24-Oct-2006. Accessed 31-Oct-2006. http://forums.prospero.com/foxfirefly/messages?msg=32591.1

Affinitive. “Case Study: Universal Pictures / Serenity.” Affinitive, LLC. 2006. Accessed 31-Oct-2006. http://www.beaffinitive.com/clients/casestudy_serenity.html

Aliner, I. 1. (2004). Copyright and the delivery of library services to distance learners. Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 9(3/4), 179-192.

Anderson, B. (2002). New technologies, new copyright laws, new challenges. Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian, 20(2), 89-92.

Anderson, B. (2002). First sale, digital copyright, and libraries. Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian, 21(1), 73-76.

Anderson, B. (2006). A primer on copyright law and the DMCA. Reference Librarian, 93, 59-71.

Anti-dmca.org

Association of Research Libraries. Timeline: A history of Copyright in the United States.
27 Oct. 2006 <http://www.arl.org/info/frn/copy/timeline.html>.

Becker, David. “Testing Microsoft and the DMCA,” CNET NEWS, April 15, 2003 http://news.com.com/2008-1082-996787.html.

Bradley, L. E. (1999). DMCA concerns rise. College & Research Libraries News, 60(6), 476.

Cohen, Daniel J. and Roy Rosenzweig. Digital History a guide to gathering, preserving,
and presenting the past on the web. 25 Oct. 2006
<http://chnm.gmu.edu/digitalhistory/copyright/1.php>.

Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility www.cpsr.org

Conaway, T. L. (2003). How the digital millennium copyright act jeopardizes online privacy. Nebraska Library Association Quarterly, 34(4), 12.

Congress of the United States: Congressional Budget Office: Copyright Issues in the
Digital Media: http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/57xx/doc5738/08-09-Copyright.pdf

CoverWeb. Copyright, plagiarism, and Intellectual Property. 25 Oct. 2006
<http://english.ttu.edu/kairos/3.1/coverweb/ty/anne.html>.

CowboyNeal. “Firefly Fans Fight Back Against Universal.” Slashdot. 28-Oct-2006. Accessed 31-Oct-06. http://slashdot.org/articles/06/10/28/1253206.shtml

Crosby, J. (1999). Safe harbors. Information Outlook, 3(2), 28-32.

d’Astous, Alain, et al. “Music Piracy on the Web – How Effective Are Anti-Piracy Arguments? Evidence From the Theory of Planned Behaviour.” Journal of Consumer Policy. 28 (2005): 289-310.

Davis, T. L., & Fiander, P. M. (2001). The digital millennium copyright act: Key issues for serialists. Serials Librarian, 40(1/2), 85.

Deyrup, M. M. (2005). IntellectuaI property and the university: An interview with kim bonner, director, center for intellectual property, university of maryland, university college. Library Administration & Management, 19(1), 4-6.

Digital-fair-use bills introduced in house.(2002). American Libraries, 33(10), 17.

“Does YouTube Really Have Legal Problems? How the Bell Lobby helped midwife YouTube.” www.slate.com. By Tim Wu Posted Thursday, Oct. 26, 2006

Educause. www.educause.edu

Electronic Frontier Foundation www.eff.org
-Case studies
- “Unintended Consequences: Seven Years Under the DMCA.” PDF Document

Electronic Frontier Foundation.(2002). Unintended consequences: Three years under DMCA. Retrieved October 23, 2006 from http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/20020503_dmca_consequences.html

fandom_lawyers. LiveJournal.com. Accessed 31-Oct-2006.

Ferullo, D. L. (2004). Major copyright is sues in academic libraries: Legal implications of
a digital environment. Journal of Library Administration, 40(1/2), 23-40.
Free Software Foundation www.fsf.org

Gantz, John, and Jack B Rocherster. Pirates of the Digital Millenium:
How the Intellectural Property Wars Damage Our Personal Freedoms, Our Jobs, and the World Economy. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2005.

Gohring, Nancy. “European Discontent Against Apple’s DRM Spreading”
MacWorld. 23.9 (Sept. 2006).Gooch, Richard. “Setting The Record Straight On Digital Rights Management”Billboard. 118 5 (Feb. 4, 2006): 4.

Grosso, A. (2002). Why the digital millennium copyright act is a failure of reason. Communications of the ACM, 45(2), 19-23.

Hakim, Danny. “'Star Trek' Fans, Deprived of a Show, Recreate the Franchise on Digital
Video.” New York Times. 18-Jun-2006. Accessed 31-Oct-2006. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/18/arts/television/18trek.html?ex=1308283200&en=8a6dd5474d6d099b&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

Harper, G. K. (2001). Copyright endurance and change. Journal of Electronic Publishing, 6(4).

Hinduja, Sameer. Music Piracy and Crime Theory. USA: LFB Scholarly
Publishing LLC, 2006.

Hollaar, Professor Lee. A. Legal Protection of Digital Information. 27 Oct. 2006
<http://digital-law-online.info/lpdi1.0/treatise4.html>.

Holland, Bill. “RIAA & lawmakers at odds over Webcaster lawsuits.”
Billboard. 113.25 (Jun. 23, 2001): 1.Litman, Jessica. Digital Copyright. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2001.

Jenkins, Henry. Convergence Culture. New York University Press, 2006.

Jenkins, Henry. Textual Poachers. Routledge, 1992.

Journal of Business, 2004, (Volume 77, No. 2), “Software Piracy: Market penetration in
the Presence of Network Externalities”

Karl-Erik Tallmo. The History of Copyright: A critical Overview With Source Texts in
Five Languages. 25 Oct. 2006. <http://www.copyrighthistory.com/anne.html>.

Lawlor, B. (2001). The copyright revolution: Issues raised during the DMCA rulemaking and their impact on the future of digital information. Managing Information, 8(4), 58-63.

Lawlor, B. (2000). The copyright revolution: Issues raised during the DMCA rulemaking and their impact on the future of digital information. NFAIS Newsletter, 42(12), 169-174;.

Lawlor, B. (1999). Database protection: Just where are we??? NFAIS Newsletter, 41(12), 157-162.

Lee, Jennifer. “Cracking the Code of Online Censorship”, N. Y. TIMES, July 19, 2001
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/19/technology/circuits/19HACK.html

Lessig, Lawrence. Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace. Basic Books, 2000.

Lessig, Lawrence. Free Culture. Penguin Press, 2004. Accessed 31-Oct-2006.

Lessig, Lawrence. “Jail Time in the Digital Age,” N.Y. TIMES, July 30, 2001, A7
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/30/opinion/30LESS.html.

Library of Congress (Full text of the DMCA):
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgibin/query/z?c105:H.R.2281.ENR:

Lipinski, T. A. (2003). The myth of technological neutrality in copyright and the rights of institutional users: Recent legal challenges to the information organization as mediator and the impact of the DMCA, WIPO, and TEACH. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 54(9), 824-835.

Maxwell, T. A. (2004). Mapping information policy frames: The politics of the digital millennium copyright act. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 55(1), 3-12.

McCullagh, Declan. "Will This Land Me in Jail?", CNET NEWS, Dec. 23, 2002 http://news.com.com/2010-1028-978636.html.

New cases interpret DMCA.(2000). Information Outlook, 4(7), 36.

“The Next Piracy War.” Anonymous. Billboard; Jan 17, 2004; 116, 3; General Interest
Module. pg. 10

One True b!X, The. “Browncoat Invoice.” 30-Oct-2006. Accessed 31-Oct-2006.
http://www.browncoatinvoice.com/

Pabawan. “YouTube and fan-made Star Wars videos.” Star Wars.com Blogs. 02-Aug-2006. Lucasfilm. Accessed 31-Oct-2006. http://blogs.starwars.com/lucasonline/54

Parsky, W. M. & Bansal, P. D.(1999). Online copyright protection in the new millennium: The digital millennium copyright act. NFAIS Newsletter, 41(2), 13-16.

Phoha, V. V. (2001). The DCMA needs fixing: Reexamining U.S. copyright laws. Communications of the ACM, 44(12), 33-34.

PDF Document: WIPO 2nd International Conference on Electronic Commerce and
Intellectual Property. September 20, 2001 Plenary on Ownership on the Internet. Patricia Schroeder, President & CEO, Association of American Publishers

“Safe Harbors: online liability provisions should benefit information professional.”
John Crosby. Information Outlook; Feb 1999; 3, 2; Education Module. pg. 28

“Same Issues, Different Packaging.” By Garret Sern and Wendy Wigen. Jan/Feb 2003. Educause Review. Pp 58-59.

Samuelson, Pamela. “DRM {and, or, vs.} The Law.” Communications
of the ACM. 46.4 (2003): 41-45.

Samuelson Law, Technology & Public Policy Clinic; Mulligan, Deirdre; Ozer, Nicky;
and Nielsen, Nicolai. “Unintended Consequences: Seven Years under the
DMCA.” Electronic Frontier Foundation. Apr-2006. Accessed 31-Oct-2006. http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/?f=unintended_consequences.html

Schumacher-Rasmussen, E. (2002). US appeals court upholds ban on posting DeCSS. EMedia, 15(9), 12-13.

Spinello, R. A. (2004). The DMCA, copyright law, and the fight to link. Journal of Information Ethics, 13(2), 8-23.

Strickland, L. S. (2003). Copyright's digital dilemma today: Fair use or unfair constraints? part 2: The DMCA, the TEACH act and other E-copying considerations. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 30(2), 18-23.

UCLA Cyberspace Law & Policy Institute: Digital Millennium Copyright Act:
http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/iclp/dmca1.htm

U.S. Copyright Office. “Digital Millenium Copyright Act of 1998 U.S. Copyright Office Summary.” Dec-1998. Accessed 31-Oct-2006. http://pdfdl.oceighty.net/pdf2html.php?url=http://www.copyright.gov/legislation/dmca.pdf

United States Copyright Office FAQs about copyright laws http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/

Von Lohmann, Fred. “Measuring The Digital Millennium Copyright Act Against The
Darknet: Implications For The Regulation Of Technological Protection Measures.” Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review. 2004. Accessed 31-Oct-2006. http://pdftohtml.spiritofanime.com/pdf2html.php?url=http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/DMCA_against_the_darknet.pdf

Warwick, S., & Williams, M. E. (1999). The new copyright laws: What they mean in an online environment. Proceedings of the National Online Meeting, 20, 499-510.

World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) www.wipo.int

Wu, Tim. “Does YouTube Really Have Legal Problems? How the Bell lobby helped midwife YouTube.” Slate. 26-Oct-2006. Accessed 31-Oct-06. http://www.slate.com/id/2152264/?nav=tap3

Zielinski, D. (2001). Stop!: Thief! Presentations Magazine, 15(7), 30-40.

blog the vote response

A friend of mine came over for dinner last night and we got to talking about the upcoming elections. She reads Newsweek, jokes about being attached to “old media” and wonders who the bloggers really are. I admit, although I read some blogs, I don’t read political blogs much. And so when she asked, would I recommend to her some political blogs to read, so she could know what the H---was going on…well, I didn’t have much to give her. So I’ve sent her the link to the NOW program (close enough to old media to make her comfortable).

I think one reason I don’t read political blogs is that the ones I know about can all be classified as unabashedly “left” or “right.” I suppose if people are going to be passionate enough about politics to blog, they’ll probably fall on extreme ends of our political spectrum, but I am dissatisfied with the “preaching to the choir” aspects of political blogs. I see Kos’s point that it’s all preaching to the choir, and that getting “offline” is the way to get beyond that, but I think that facts and a critical stance are sacrificed to incendiary or empty rhetoric when one is writing to people who share beliefs. For instance, the “well, we all know Bush is an idiot” joke that passes for political commentary in my classes and on blogs is a travesty of critical, political engagement, but it’s the norm on left-leaning blogs. Anyone have any smart, critically engaged political blogs to recommend?

Group 5 Bibliography

Babcock, Charles. 2006. "The Givers And Takers Of Open Source." Information Week. May 15.

Babcock, Charles. 2006 “It’s Open Season – as open-source vendors, the commercial market takes on a new and uncertain look.” Information Week. February 20.

Barlow, Lyde & Gilbert. "Open Source Software - The Case For And Against." Mondaq Business Briefing. December 7, 2004.

Blakeslee, Melise and Ferguson, Brian E. 2006. “United States: The Truths and Myths of Open Source Software.” Mondaq Business Briefing. May 31.

Bobko, Patrick. "Open-Source Software and the Demise of Copyright." Rutgers Computer and Technology Law Journal 27, (2001): 51-90.

Conry-Murray, Andrew. 2006. "The Open Source Leap Of Faith." Information Week. August 28

Dempsey, Bert. 2002. "Who is an open-source software programmer?" Communications of the ACM. Oct.

Free Software Foundation. "Free Software Definition." 2004. Last accessd November 1,2006 at http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

Gomulkiewicz, Robert W. 2004. "Entrepreneurial Open Source Software Hackers: MySQL and Its Dual Licensing." Computer Law Review & Technology Journal. Fall. P. 203.

Greenemeier, Larry. 2005. “Open source exuberance.” CMP Media. 11 Jul.
Gross, Neil. 1999. “Home Sweet Virtual Home: Software will strengthen ties with communities.” Business Week. Oct. 4.

Hamm, Steve. 1999. “The Wild and Woolly World of Linux; The drive to commercialize Windows’ funky rival is pitting capitalists against idealists." Business Week. Nov. 15.

Hof, Robert D. 2005. "The power of us." Business Week. Jun. 20.Jackson, Joab. 2006. SCO: Open source is bad for the economy. Government Computer News, July 28, sec. 1.

Kennedy, Dennis. "A Primer Source on Open Source Licensing Legal Issues: Copyright, Copyleft and Copyfuture." St. Louis University Public Law Review no. 20 (2001): 345-377.

Lagace, Martha. "The Simple Economics of Open Source," Harvard Business School: Working Knowledge for Business Leaders (2000), http://workingknowledge.hbs.edu/item/1503.html. (accessed November 1, 2006).

Leonard, Andrew. 2006. “Free Software Communists.” Salon.com. August 30.

Lessig, Lawence. Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace. New York, NY : Basic Books, 1999.

Murphy, Kevin. 2006. "Google is Microsoft's New Open Source." Computerwire. June 1.

Olson, Michael. "Dual Licensing." Chap. 5, in Open Sources 2.0: The Continuing Evolution, edited by Chris DiBona, Danese Cooper and Mark Stone, 71-90. Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly, 2006.

Open Source Initiative. "Open Source Initiative." 2006. Last accessed November 2, 2006 at http://www.opensource.org/index.php.

Pavlicek, Russ. 2001. "Where the heart lies." InfoWorld. Oct. 1.

Rogoway, Mike. 2005. Google seeds Oregon's open-source movement with $350,000. The Oregonian, October 26, sec. D.

Rogoway, Mike. 2006. O'Reilly Open Source Convention: Developing Portland's software reputation, digital rights fuel open-source debate. The Oregonian, July 29, sec. E.

Rosen, Lawrence. Open Source Licensing: Software Freedom and Intellectual Property. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2005.

Sani, Rozana. 2006. Open source push. Computimes, March 13, sec. 1.

Seltzer, Wendy. "Why Open Source Needs Copyright Politics." Chap. 10, in Open Sources 2.0: The Continuing Evolution, edited by Chris DiBona, Danese Cooper and Mark Stone, 149-160. Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly, 2006.

“Summer Camp for Coders.” 2005. The Economist. Sept. 17.

Vetter, Greg. "’Infectious’ Open Source Software: Spreading Incentives Or Promoting Resistance?" Rutgers Law Journal 36, (2005): 53-162.

Weber, Steve. The Success of Open Source. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2004.

Weisman, Robert. 2004. “Web Power to the People” The Boston Globe. November 9, D1.

2006. Private business embraces open source. The Irish Times, April 14, pg 6.

Wednesday, November 01, 2006

Weblog video clip- response

Overall, I thought this segment really shed light on the benefits of blogging in regards to politcs and voter decision. Even if the information that people are seeking out is biased, produced by an average joe blogger, it is still information. I completely agreed with the woman who said that she was sick of voting for the "lesser of the two evils" in an election. She was able to gain information early about a potential candidate and then follow him into midterm elections. The fact that she then was proud to give money to his campaign is such a good example of how politics can work today. It was not the advertisements that drew her to this man, but the fact that he called her personally after receiving a donation. Although this is completely unrealistic in bigger cities, I thought this was a good example of how ideal politics might work in our society. I really do think that blogging can help increase voter turnout and most definitely influence public opinion in elections.

blog the vote response

I do not know much about American politics and election, but this video clip is really interesting and, as Chelsey pointed out, does show the power of blogging in providing information and motivating people to participate in elections (of course as well as other social and political activities). This is a perfect example of blogs as public spheres and the idea of Web 2.0. I think one of my questions is: in this video, 'left-leaning' political bloggers (the subjects of this news story) are only a group of people with similar political opinions – they are not the only group who do political blogs. Then how about other groups of bloggers? Are there any problems about 'fragmentation', 'flaming', or irrational discourses that Papacharissi talks about in Chapter 26? It will be more interesting if we can see other sides of the story.