The excellent academic group weblog Crooked Timber has produced a kind of online seminar via their weblog about Yochai Benkler’s recent book The Wealth of Networks which has attracted much attention in the blogosphere and contends that the Internet has enabled a new model for producing public goods which is under threat from corporations and governments.

The seminar happened back in May ‘06 so you won’t be able to join the discussion there any more but the archives are still available and worth reading. And if you want to comment further Benkler’s book is - appropriately - online and in wiki form.

David Brake

If you’ve been wondering what the man who popularised the term virtual community has been thinking about these days you should check out this post he wrote on the Annenberg Centre’s DIY Media blog. It outlines the potential importance of digital literacy for enabling political engagement. Well worth a look as is the weblog as a whole.

The British Academy has produced a report on Copyright and research in the humanities and social sciences which concludes inter alia while the law itself gives academics sufficient ability to use copyright work, “risk averse publishers, who are often themselves rights holders, demand that unnecessary permissions be obtained, and such permissions are often refused or granted on unreasonable terms” and “there are well-founded concerns that new database rights and the development of digital rights management systems (DRMs) may enable rights holders to circumvent the effects of the copyright exemptions designed to facilitate research and scholarship”.

David Brake

The Open Rights Group (which does need a proper website not just a blog) has been launched as a kind of British Electronic Frontier Foundation. I’m sure it will do some sterling work but it’s a shame that almost immediately some digital rights extremists (an unlikely grouping) came along to a brainstorm for its founding and put a cat among the pigeons by being very rude about it (entertainingly).

It’s hard to take seriously their argument that corporations should be encouraged to behave more and more badly until their digital abuses are recognised by the public, but they seem to have managed to spark a lot of online flaming. You’d think the respondents, most of whom have more than a decade of online experience would know better than to respond to trolling?

Update: The ORG doesn’t have a ‘proper’ website yet but when searching for something rights related I did find the Campaign for Digital Rights which seems to share a lot of the ORGs objectives and has quite a bit of useful information about the state of UK and European law and why it should be changed.

Online magazine Salon has a fascinating roundup of recent developments in the burgeoning market for kid tracking. I didn’t realise that intrusive technologies are already on the market - from GPS trackers (obvious) to RFID tags sewn into pyjamas or school ID badges (sneaky). It doesn’t go into surveillance of the online experience itself which is very common - AOL has a "guardian" feature that lists:

• Web sites your child successfully visited.
• Web sites your child attempted to visit but was restricted from.
• The number of e-mails and Instant Messages your child has sent.
• Your child’s Address Book and Buddy List activity.

But at least AOL’s tools notify your kid that you are tracking them - many other addon ‘parental control’ programs do not.
Is anything permissible in surveillance as long as you are monitoring a child? The UN convention on the rights of the child includes a right to privacy. But two countries have yet to ratify it - Somalia and the US.

Update: The department’s own Prof Sonia Livingstone has written a book chapter defending a child’s right to online privacy in “Information Technology at Home” (edited by Kraut, to be published by OUP).

The Institute for Public Policy Research (leading UK think-tank) has launched a 3-week consultation (on their blog) concerning Britain digital future.

Today we launch the first of three week-long online consultations, as a way of gathering opinion, ideas and recommendations for our Digital Manifesto. We will post questions under the following themes, over the following weeks:

• 7th-13th April: Innovating
• 14th-20th April: Reassuring
• 21st-27th April: Empowering

In each instance, we invite replies to our specific questions (added to this blog) from all sorts of perspectives, and all types of expertise. With authors’ permission, we would like to be able to use or quote these ideas in our final publication, and credit them accordingly.

I reckon that media and new media scholars should make their voice heard about their preferred direction of new media development in Britain (and elsewhere)? Top of my head: open source, in-house capacity, surveillance, digital inequality, etc, etc, and unfortunately etc. again.

home advanced inc loan services financialloan abcadvance cash loan fast$10,000 loanloan chance 2ndloan collateral receivable as accountsadvanced payment loansno home loans 1 doc Map

rating credit returns a1 bondmortgage credit accept financing cardaccount merchant services card retail creditaccredite investorlimit credit age cards forcredit alabama counselorsbad for cards credit all creditcredit union 1st valley Map

What the hell is “civil society”? Neera Chandhoke - openDemocracy

bi movies freemovies blow jobs freefree gallery movie blowjobfree blowjobs moviessex movies free braziliandefloration free moviesmovie free clips enemacum free shot movies facial Map

Finally someone from the mainstream media (Steven Levy) asks this obvious question. He gets part of the answer - bloggers tend to link to people like themselves - but tacitly assumes that there are a large number of (for example) black women blogging about the same kinds of things that the leading (white male) bloggers are and being excluded.

This misses the wider point that sociologists like Bourdieu have explored - that many people - particularly those of lower social status or women - may simply never think of political discussion as something ‘for them’ either because they don’t see politics as relevant to them or because they feel their opinions would not be listened to.

Needless to say this has touched off a lot of discussion including a spectacularly over the top and sociologically uninformed contribution from one A list blogger.

I’m blogging this from the LSE itself today - I’m at an event about blogging and journalism. My comments in italics

Meta comment: The notes below may or may not turn into a ‘proper posting’ - as John Lloyd and Robin Mansell pointed out one of the problems with blogging as an alternative space for journalism is that good journalism requires time and time is money. I could spend several hours turning the comments that follow into a report on the event complete with my own thoroughly-thought-through comments but when I was a journalist that would cost you at least �200 to get. There are very few opportunities to make a reasonable income from blogging so it will always be dominated by people who have time to do it either because they have an income elsewhere and adequate spare time or because they have an axe to grind about some particular issue.

Time taken to improve this blog posting would come at the expense of my thesis and at the moment I can’t really afford it. Anyway, nobody said anything that sufficiently outraged me to make a counter-blast worth my while.

If I had spoken out at the meeting it would have been to suggest that what is needed now is some way to broaden the kinds of people who blog today. There are millions of people who might want some way to express themselves but who feel nobody would want to listen to them. Perhaps some kind of school blogging programme should be considered alongside other IT literacy items on the syllabus?

My notes on the event follow:
(more…)

WriteToThem.com - like the name says this site lets you locate and then email or fax not just your member of Parliament (as its predecessor faxyourmp did) but your local councillors, MEP or MSP plus Welsh or London Assembly Members. It’s bizarre that this had to be done through a charity - MySociety - set up by a committed policy wonk rather than being something that our own government would have implemented ages ago, but better late than never I suppose. At least the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister did fund the project in the end.

Now comes the question of whether these representatives will actually respond to enquiries. My MP, Jeremy Corbyn certainly didn’t when I tried sending him a message via faxyourMP (and the statistics suggest he rarely does respond). I ended up having to pick up his email address directly via a pamphlet…

Hello everyone!? Although I’ve been a member of this blog for quite sometime, I have yet to log on, introduce myself and get posting!? It is a real pleasure to read all of your posts, and I’m pleased to be a part of it.? And of course, many thanks to David for setting this blog up and quietly but persistently reminding us to use it.

Very very broadly, I’m working on the relationship between citizenship and new media, at least the ways in which new media discourses claim to extend, transform, reconstitute or even all out create new kinds (or dimensions) of citizenship.??Amidst all the claims that?new media is transforming the ways we think of belonging, geographies, nation-states and social, cultural and political? forms of membership, I found it difficult to differentiate between what citizenship?is, what it can be and particularly how it might be changing.? So despite the numerous criticisms?(i.e. glaring ethno and eurocentrism, a total lack of empirical support and what some might term ‘discrepancies’ between civic entitlements and human rights), I found T. H. Marshall’s civil, political and social dimensions - in addition to his critique of capitalism and committment to social equality - a critical starting point for thinking about citizenship.?

As you can imagine I was pleased to hear of a new T. H. Marshall fellowship and exchange program developed by LSE, the social science research?centre of Berlin (WZB) and the University of Bremen.? The new collaboration was launched on Jan.18th with a talk on ‘Citizenship and Social Policy in 21st Century Europe.’? Although the speakers were articulate, the themes have been well rehearsed in the literature and in my opinion there was too much talk about pensions.? Nonetheless, there were a few points I thought would be worthy of posting.

Jane Lewis (of LSE) spoke about gender and citizenship and focussed on the ‘profound shift’ in the relationship between gender and the state,?particularly regarding the kind of social expectations attached to gender.? Lewis was primarily referring to the shift in the ‘women-as-domestic-carers and men-as-breadwinners’ model.??The new model is that women are now as obligated to work as their male counterparts as ‘citizen workers’ rather than citizen-carers/mothers. However, Lewis makes clear that the discursive justification for these shifts do not speak of gender but are discussed in terms of market growth and potential contributions to the maintenance of nations. Lewis concluded by noting that althoug these changes have not been accompanied by gender equity, creating an alternative model of citizenship (in contrast to the citizen-worker) based on the citizen-worker-carer will lead to greater developments in gender equity.

I’m intrigued by the idea of ‘citizen-carer’ but am not convinced that such a model will address gender (or other) inequities.? When it comes down to it, ‘caring’?has long been part of women’s unrenumerated obligations to state and society and maybe I’m missing something, but?I don’t see how extending such citizen obligations to all genders will change the socio-economic inequities around the gendered division of labour.

Stephan Leibfried spoke on the tensions (or as Marshall claimed - the war) between capitalism and citizenship. Beginning with the 1997 Amsterdam Treaty, new politics of citizenship and equality have been emerging (nationality and gender). In the European constitution, there now 18 categories of equality. Some of these include colour, social origin, property, birth, disability and more… I find this interesting in terms of changing expectations/practices of and to citizen rights and obligations. However, I still need to some work around the differences between civil liberties, human rights and civic entitlements; I find it interesting to contextualize the many emerging communications rights within a much broader expansion of rights based frameworks.

Also, Liebfried spoke about the transformation of citizenship from ethnic nationalist notions of citizenship to member citizenship. Again, not new, but it has interesting implications as far as the relationship between media and citizenship?go.? Perhaps more interesting are the implications of an ever widening rights-based citizenship…

Media btw, was almost totally absent from this talk.

All for now, but hope y’all keep posting!

Zoe

?

lesbian movies jameson jennafoxx movies kittylesbians sex moviesmi movie loca vidamovie collector crackmpegs petra verkaik moviefucking movie starsmovie free xxx Map