Deadline April 10^th (To Meet April 15^th AAA Deadline for Sessions)

Email Abstracts to sydneyyeager@gmail.com

Digital Anthropologists’ Current Engagements with 21^st Century Publics: #Digital Publics, #Ethics, #Methods, #Insights

The future publics, which anthropologists of the 21^st Century will engage with, occupy a social space in which the digital and the physical overlap.  Therefore, ethnographic study of these future publics merits consideration of the corresponding and relevant digital social spheres.

In light of this year’s conference theme “Future Publics, Current Engagements,” this panel intends to demonstrate how digital anthropologists are currently engaging with and researching “digital publics.”   This panel will highlight the current engagements of anthropologists conducting field research which bridges the overlap between digital publics and physical public spaces.  This panel strives to foster a discussion of the methods, ethics, and insights that Digital Anthropology can offer for “engaging with future publics” as digital technology continues to become a part of the everyday lives of the people anthropologists study around the world.  Major questions include: How do anthropologists collect and analyze data while doing digital field work?   What are the ethical issues facing anthropologists who rely on visual data and texts collected in the digital publics of the internet (social networking sites, forums, websites, etc)?  How does digital anthropology intersect with the physical as people increasingly act in physical space in response to the digital realm?  What kind of “future publics” are being constructed through today’s “current engagements” by users and anthropologists in the cyberspatial plazas of the internet (social networking sites, etc.)?

Furthermore, as digital technology continues to become a part of the everyday lives of the people anthropologists study, what insights can Digital Anthropology offer the broader discipline for “engaging with future publics”?  A discussion of ethnographic examples and evidence of the interactions between digital/online and physical life is pertinent to both the future of anthropological engagements with the public and to current concerns about digital studies in anthropology.

Building off goals established in the first organizational meeting of the newly formed Digital Anthropology interest group (DANG), this panel will address critical questions relating to the methods and ethics of digital fieldwork.  Presenters will demonstrate the applicability of insights, drawing from their current engagements with digital publics to advance the discipline of anthropology and prepare anthropologist for engagement with future publics.

Digital Anthropologists’ Current Engagements with 21^st Century Publics: #Digital Publics, #Ethics, #Methods, #Insights

DANG Call for Papers

Deadline April 10^th (To Meet April 15^th AAA Deadline for Sessions)

We are seeking presenters with papers which will address questions of ethics in digital anthropology.   We want to include papers which demonstrate innovative methods solutions to issues particular to digital fieldwork.  Papers with findings and insights applicable to digital anthropology and the future of anthropology as a whole are strongly encouraged.  We are particularly interested in having papers that discuss the overlap and interactions between digital/online and the physical.   We invite presenters to submit paper abstracts pertinent to the themes outlined above; however, we do not wish to limit abstracts to strictly these themes.  

We invite abstracts of 250 words to be submitted by April 10, 2013 to sydneyyeager@gmail.com  Look for email confirmation.

WHAT’S AT STAKE? A DISCUSSION OF TRANSPARENCY, AUTHENTICITY, APPLICATION, THEORY, AND ACCESSIBILITY IN PUBLIC ANTHROPOLOGY

What we mean by the phrase “public anthropology” reveals as much about our discipline as it does our own imagining of it. The application of the label “public” and the increasing engagements with new lines of public discourse by anthropologists have resulted in an expansive landscape that encompasses classroom, journal article, ethnography, blogosphere, and beyond. In our discipline’s history, Margaret Mead remains an iconic public anthropologist, a figure widely recognized outside of anthropology and touted as emblematic of an ideal practitioner who was able to bridge the spaces among the academy, public policy, popular discourse, and speak to issues at home and abroad. Why does contemporary anthropology claim no singular public anthropologist and struggle with our role as public intellectuals? Is this because the world has changed; the discipline has changed; and an individual who can embody all of the threads of public anthropologies no longer exists? Or is it because we have an outmoded notion of public anthropologist? This session seeks to redefine public anthropology by looking at what cutting-edge practitioners are doing and how their work can intersect and support the various efforts.

This roundtable discussion will consider the question “What’s at stake?” in the various iterations of public anthropology through a series of questions and topics considering the topic from multiple angles and circulated to participants in advance. After an introduction of roundtable participants, each participant will reflect briefly on the first of five related themes—transparency, authenticity, application, theory, and accessibility—in public anthropology, fostering a provocative, personal, and interactive discussion among the panel. Time will be provided for engagement from attendees.

New publics, new public spaces, and new forms of public anthropology are emerging at a more rapid pace and the audience for our work and insight has both grown and splintered. Engagement happens in classrooms, in one-on-one conversations, virtually, locally and globally – all simultaneously. As this fragmentation occurs it raises issues related to the quality and status assigned to work, the applications for anthropological insight, the translation of contributions into metrics for professional advancement, and the role of technology and biases related to technology. It is these threads of inquiry that have brought together this group of scholars and professionals to engage, debate, and provoke our thinking as anthropologists with a stake in the publics with which we align

Contact Sarah Ono at [Sarah.Ono@va.gov]

DIGITAL MEDIA AND NEOLIBERAL URBANISM

The use of digital media has become increasingly pervasive in many dimensions of urban life. Although people and institutions frequently celebrate digital development, these often naturalized new technologies invite new inquiries into the relationship between power and media. The organizers of this panel are involved in Philadelphia-based ethnographic research that explores the use of new media in urban planning/public participation, youth media programs and social exclusion, cultural branding of immigrant organizations, and the spectacle of broadcast news interventions of neighborhood blight.

We invite papers that reflect upon similar topics in other U.S. cities with the hope of illuminating the commonalities and points of disjuncture between different cities living out post-industrial poverty and segregation. While our focus is North America, we also welcome research from international sites. Ultimately, we hope to bring ethnographic insight to the relationships between digital media, urban policy, activism, and land use.

Topics may include:
- listserv communities and neighborhood watch organizations
- the use of digital media in urban planning and participation
- new systems of surveillance
- smartphone coverage of police brutality – the strengthening of community-based radio and tv programs in light of new media policies and media consolidation
- news media representations of race and gender in urban spaces

Please send abstracts (up to 250 words) to [azellers@temple.edu] by Saturday, March 16.

“Future Publics, Current Engagements” fits well with the interests of our group and it would be a shame to miss this opportunity to put together a session that can share the research and methods of digital anthropology. Last fall there were numerous, successful sessions that addressed issues relating to digital anthropology. It is possible for us to put together a successful session for 2013 which can be associated with DANG and that works toward achieving some of the goals we set during our business meeting last fall.

We have two options for how we would like to set this session up. Last fall it was mentioned that the Society for Visual Anthropology was interested in sponsoring a session with us. If this option is still on the table, I think it would be preferential. In addition, we have the right to claim some conference time to do whatever we want.

Does anyone of ideas for a the theme, topic, purpose of a session on Digital Anthropology? Our session needs to fit with the overall theme. Potentially we could discuss how the “current engagements” of anthropologists working around the world could benefit from the addressing “future publics” with the methods and insights gained from digital anthropology. That of course is still a very vague topic, but it would leave us room to address both digital methods and insights from digital research. Do we have a preference about what exactly we think this session should be focused on?

Deadlines:

The AAA Call for invited sessions closes on March 15.

The AAA Call for volunteered sessions closes on April 15.

Either way, we need to get busy if we want to make this happen. Sydney would great appreciate everyone’s feedback. After we have a more concrete idea for what we want to do, she can organize a “hangout” on Google+ so that interested members of DANG can discuss this over video chat.

Please share your suggestions and feedback.

On the anthropology of digital worlds and the professionalization of blogging
On Open Access

More posts to come.

Job Description:

National Association located in Arlington has an excellent opportunity for a website and database professional.

Duties include web application and relational database development and maintenance; CMS, DB and web support; listserv administration; maintaining SOPs and documentation; and, training and assisting end users. Experience working for a membership association preferred.

Requirements:

Bachelor’s degree in computer science or related field, or equivalent knowledge with three years of related professional experience. Requires proficiency in ColdFusion (including CFCs), HTML, JavaScript, jQuery, Ajax, CSS, MS SQL. Familiarity with a content management systems, PHP, WordPress and MySQL a plus. Familiarity with a variety of the field’s concepts, practices and procedures. Basic understanding of DNS, IIS, Dreamweaver, Photoshop, VPN. Strong oral and written communication skills. Ability to think strategically and multi-task. Demonstrated ability to handle complex tasks, formulate plans, and to carry out objectives; ability to interact effectively with individuals and meet stringent deadlines.

Must be flexible, have a good sense of humor, and be able to work with a small staff in a fast-paced, deadline-driven environment. Excellent benefits package.

Note: If you hear of other jobs that would be of interest/relevance to DANGsters, please let us know so we can post them!

For those unfamiliar with WAC, I think this answer to one of the questions in their FAQ describes them well:

“WAC was founded in 1985 as the only representative, international organization of practicing archaeologists. It encourages open dialogue between archaeologists and others concerned about the past, including Indigenous peoples and First Nations people whose pasts are told by archaeologists. One of WAC’s primary functions is to hold an international congress every four years.”

WAC is known, in part, for bringing together archaeologists and interested parties from many non-western countries who often are not part of some of the other large archaeology organizations. This gives scholars who have small archaeological communities in their home countries the chance to engage with others in similar situations, to discuss not only archaeological theory and research, but policies, legislation and problem-solving. WAC tries to raise funds to assist marginalized peoples in attending the conference. That being said, for those not in the region of the conference costs for attendance can still be prohibitive.  The plan for this year is to charge a reduced fee for those who want to participate online in lieu of attending in person.  If enough money is raised through the current solicitation for online donations, they will be able to reduce the cost even further.

Here is a link to the WAC-7 Pozible.com fundraising site, where you can read about the project and watch a cute and informative video on the reason for going online.

World Archaeology Congress-7 Meeting

World Archaeology Congress

• Will make fieldwork both harder and easier. On-the-spot knowledge but maybe fewer opportunities to travel physically?
• More trouble with IRB clearance
• Depends on types of usage developed
• More engaged anthropology
• Erase borders (special/ temporal) of field + fieldwork
• No longer think of those we study / work with as separate from us as we write our analysis
• Just like visual methods but more broad and diverse
• Broadening definition of who is an anthro who does anthro
• Making new connections: tags, clouds, data access
• Increasing scope of fieldwork to long term/ deep background
• Digital mediation storage of data; more rapid communication of ideas
• Access to data
• Being in more than one site at once (physical world and virtual world)
• All of the above: collaboration; publication; critique (all instant)
• Possible to engage with archive / literature in the field – Good or bad??
• More concrete and real time research beyond notes – audio visual resource, connectivity to your subjects/ informants; translation and accessibility and essential) Research will become something you can experience again and again
• They can back up field notes in real time and avoid double work
• Allows instant communication, spatial location, notes that are sent auto
• More rapid turnaround new and more data. Imagine if George Hunt was on Twitter
• Sharing notes/ images/ ideas as they come to us in the field.
• Real time check on ideas as you develop and share them from the field
• Real time discursive reflexive interpretation of excavation data and method.
• It helps if you stay in real time
• Greatly increases the speed of sharing to allow others to build up on it
• Continuing real time participation while outside the field
• Instant archiving of archaeological data availability in situ mapping online
• Place of or as motif of existing tools. Anything that makes data collection easier or more precise
• Creating apps for specific anthro uses
• Using mapping apps
• Quicker video capture – but ethics?
• Mobile devices can be used to keep digital notes, pictures, recordings to store them on the cloud
• It’s on all in one journal, camera, recorder encyclopedia, and everything in between and a phone to boot
• Tools for research respondents/ participants to control access to their data in flexible ways
• Mobile devices can be used to keep digital notes, pictures, recordings to store them on the cloud
• Quicker knowledge disbursement
• Will be fantastic! Need to insure every access for 1 to 1 communication (more/ better than email)
• Break down barriers between field/ not field; enable participants to share own expertise
• All in one: notes; records, collaboration, etc
• More ethnographies of mixed reality – interact as a part of everyday life
• Informants are already using it – it is part of field already
• More collaboration between cultural informants
• Allows for more voices to be heard
• Develop methodology to sanction uses of digital communication such as Facebook to remain in contact with informants after you return from the field
• I don’t think we need to make it necessary but integrate into process of promotion review etc
• Moderate comments to get people on tenure committees to read them and see them as professional

• Resistance from those who want money
• Inaccessibility’s of literature and copyright
• Who sets criteria and the system of journal ranking
• Pressure on library budgets
• Peer review and cost
• Sustainability of scholarly communication as things transform
• Access
• Transparency and accessibility in the academic and public realm, be it ideas or research
• Institutions adherence to ISI and other indexes that don’t index OA
• Cost: we can’t afford to keep doing what we’re doing
• How to pay for OA in all disciplines
• There isn’t enough access in general, it isn’t public
• Convincing people that OA isn’t stealing. Also organizations won’t lose money
• Structure of long articles for multilevel audiences
• Making research available to colleagues and the public
• Inequality in whose work gets published/ made accessible/ seen as legitimate
• Increasingly limited access particularly for scholars in non-elite non-US non-academic settings
• Development of references online for creator recognition
• Need to find viable financial models to enable OA
• Privatization of everything
• How do you pay for it?
• Open Access can be seen as less prestigious for tenure
• Political economy – public research generating private profits
• OA allows everyone access to knowledge. This issue is important for scholars who are not associated with universities
• The wait period to be published – topics are already past contemporary
• Human subjects
• Finding feasible financial models that support journals yet permit OA
• Sustainability
• Preservation of systematic peer review through OA transition

 
What can we do to educate the AAA membership about Open Access and persuade them to support OA principles?

• Dialogue about structures of academic knowledge production
• Rapid rate of pub timeframes is largest persuasive. Research beat by blog posts by months and years. Shorter cycle
• Give them moral insight to their work (not just attribution)
• Make it relevant to them. Author rights, access to many, more people using their research
• Show value to their peers/ profs
• Show them that they also benefit from OA
• Make work in digi-anthro a model in all respects (peer review, distribution). Make it something to emulate
• Increase the audience reach
• Show related examples
• Demonstrate impact of OA and maintained rigor
• Ask them to visualize peer review and tenure with OA pubs
• Show the quality of current OA pubs, effectively use them in classrooms
• Promote / publish in/ cite OA journals
• Blog about the problems associated with closed access
• Clarify the risks of obsolescence
• Hold information session to demonstrate the benefits of the free flow of information
• Redirect prestige
• Get them involved in joint international/ well organized boycott actions of publishers (big/ closed access)
• A governing body of OA in anthropology to keep work scholarly and discipline specific
• Aside from financial feasibility OA modes ensure everyone has the doc which makes it more powerful altogether

• Coding (but I can’t teach that)
• PowerPoint
• Knowing what to keep off line
• Skills for critical engagement with the implicit architectures of online action
• Multimedia production, creation and publishing tools, B.S. screening – how to sort knowledge from info
• Writing
• Have it be democratic and inclusive
• How to develop their voice
• How to collaborate through cloud – editing, working toward one goal
• How to do research online – methodology of internet culture ethnography
• See use of blog posts etc in classroom on syllabi regularly, courses teaching digital anth, traditional pubs on topic, increasing desire for learning
• How to research knowledge and share information with both lay and professional community
• How to find information
• How to critically asses information they find online
• To understand the context of information
• How to e valuate sources on Internet
• How to create online communities that support internal motivations to learn
• Healthy skepticism, playfulness
• Ability to discriminate quality
• Ability to find information and data and not just random Google responses
• Orienteering, navigation with special consideration
• How to assess materials they find though searches
• How to discern high quality reliable info
• Internet communication skill, verification
• Using more than Google to locate info and how to use Google better
• Source criticism and analysis
• Evaluate quality of sources
• How to not only find information
• But evaluate it (is it legitimate? Authoritative? Relevant?)
• Critical thinking
• How to best reform their already excellent data management and filtering skills
• How to evaluate online materials

 
How can we use the Internet to become better teachers w/o it being just another goddamn thing to keep up with?

• Utilize online tools students are familiar with such as blogs instead of writing assignments like essays/ papers
• Need to be skilled in computer knowledge
• New tools/ toys can make it easier to teach/ share
• Think of it as a tool, not as a thing we have to do. Use it when appropriate
• We need smooth platforms and applications
• Blogging = means of staying current on areas of research outside one’s immediate topic of focus
• We can use it as a transnational transformative tool in classroom
• Reach people ion different places
• Different ways of completing assignments, collaborative tool
• Post challenges we have had and how we solved so others can use info
• Give students ability to create, discover, share
• Make it part of your daily teaching practice e
• Incorporate into lesson plan
• Just let it happen for the most part. It’s coming to saturate everything we do anyway
• Link interactive teaching activities with real world classes – use the possibilities of online teaching to enhance (not replace) traditional classroom instruction – use best practices
• Use internet to make other tasks easier – less time intensive, i.e. searching for reading
• Instant feedback and availability of learning objectives beyond the classroom, i.e. open source syllabi
• Teach anthro of online worlds
• Use internet as one would other info resources
• Student peer interaction
• Use it for instruction rather than demonstration
• Make the classroom a “cloud” of knowledge
• Utilize its resources and use them effectively: images, programs, videos, widgets, and how to follow those evolutionary patterns i.e. remain in the know by vigilance

• Help educators teach children using better tech tools
• Teach people to communicate better
• A better understanding of the way people engage with and through technology so we can create better relationships and tools
• More thoughtful understanding of the variation and cultural impact of online life
• Greater public awareness to understanding other cultures
• Create access
• Share ideas and findings to the public (disseminating knowledge)
• Get anthros into public eye, info policy debates, create public intellectuals
• Raise key questions of ethics and policy for public debate and action
• Broader network of dialogue partners from various fields / backgrounds
• We empathize (with people and animals) and care better when we grasp what anthro is about
• Give people real, right answers about humans and culture that are readable, accessible, and not ethnocentric and reductive
• Public collaboration
• Academia 2.0
• Impact policies concerning digital development in education / business / networking worldwide
• Sharing the value of social research and social theory for broad publics
• Public anthro can show the world that anthro does provide value
• Demonstrate what we know. Anthro is relevant
• Make publics more knowledgeable so appreciation for anth increase and education increases
• Recognition of value of anthro methods and findings. Usefulness
• Open our consciousness on lives, livelihoods, wider understanding
• Anthropology as accessible way of knowing understanding the world
• They’re constantly increasing with the digital world, why would they invest so much time if it’s not relevant to the public?

 
What are the criteria we will use to develop best practices for using Internet platforms to bring anthropology to the people? That is to say, how will know if we are effective in reaching our public online?

• Give your best practices
• Copy what exists and works
• Achievable project
• Circulation data
• Analytics
• Google analytics
• Ask our publics
• Gather data
• Its effective if there is participation and awareness
• Page views
• Use existing digital measures, figure out which make most sense
• Dispersion, now often linked, big data
• Volume of online blog contact / search
• Develop general profession online standards to survey blog readership regularly
• Track not only page view metrics, but also conversations that result
• Is it facilitating dialogue? Do people care?
• Set goals/ outcomes in advance, then ask if we are meeting them
• Responsiveness, i.e. comments likes shares, particularly sharing and commenting as well as watching it evolve
• Go create research agendas with networked publics – open up debate on relevance, allow parasitic interpretation
• Information / findings available online can be open to public feedback and collaboration
• Making access to internet to all public, otherwise it is not possible especially in 3rd world countries
• Shaping conversations in various media, i.e. are our perspectives being picked up by others… science, journalists