Comments for Remixing Anthropology

Comment on The end of the connoisseur? by kerim

kerim — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 07:04:19 +0000

Thanks Jonathan. I don’t think it is so much a question of valuable content being hidden, so much as the fact that the rise of Google now means that a lot of other stuff might be a lot more popular and higher ranked than what anthropologists are doing … and anthropologists themselves are now relying even more on such tools for their own research. If grumpy professor X writes a review article I know his biases from his other writings, but what do I know about how Google ranks things. One thing I do know, however, is that we are not helpless. Blog links matter for Google rankings, and more anthropologists blogging about anthropological research will help!

Comment on The end of the connoisseur? by Jonathan Lewis

Jonathan Lewis — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 06:22:30 +0000

Just a note to say thanks for organizing the session this morning. I was too jet-lagged to ask a question, but learned a lot.

Regarding the problem Eric raised about the Google black box and the potential for anthropologists’ work to become difficult to find, I wonder if there are any actual cases of valuable and widely appreciated anthropological content become essentially hidden due to low search-engine rankings. The best SEO is interesting content, which anthropologists are good at. And Google is far from having a monopoly of search, especially in places such as China and Japan, so it’s not clear to me what competitive advantage Google could gain by “hiding” useful content.

I thought that Kerim’s point about the bias of open media such as Wikipedia with its massive coverage of anime compared to e.g. African literature was more urgent and something that anthropologists can actually do something to fix. It would be nice to get to the stage where anthropologists start complaining about the black-box gorilla hiding their stuff. This morning’s session got me thinking about how to make more of my own research data (mostly on Japanese open source software communities and political communication) available online.

Jonathan Lewis
Hitotsubashi University, Tokyo

Comment on Massively Multiplayer Online Anthropology by kerim

kerim — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 23:56:31 +0000

Well our session was approved, so now I have to write it!

Comment on Massively Multiplayer Online Anthropology by John Postill

John Postill — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 20:33:13 +0000

Hi Kerim

what became of this paper?

thanks

John

Comment on Questions of Properness: Debating the ecology of information sharing in the digital age by two sides to sharing knowledge « another anthro blog

two sides to sharing knowledge « another anthro blog — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 20:38:22 +0000

[...] Christen’s upcomming presentation. Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Open access and the irony of normal [...]

Comment on Notice of Acceptance by o.w.

o.w. — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 15:15:07 +0000

podcast! podcast! podcast! any word or plans for one? Or will you send us free tickets?

Owen.

Comment on Notice of Acceptance by tsharple

tsharple — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 15:31:23 +0000

That’s fantastic news! I heard about it while conducting ‘collaborative’ fieldwork in South Africa!

I’m looking forward to an exciting session and hopefully a decent ramp of this blog in the leadup!

Comment on Gather Around for A Picture by kachristen

kachristen — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 23:09:31 +0000

That is fabulous!

Comment on Erkan Saka on Blogging as a research tool by kerim

kerim — Thu, 29 May 2008 15:14:49 +0000

It seems to me that much of the discussion has been more of an educational nature, as new media folks try to explain blogs to those who are less web-savvy. But there have been some excellent substantive discussions as well, many of which are directly relevant to the things we are talking about here. I’m going to have to spend some time picking through it all more carefully when I have time this summer…

Comment on Erkan Saka on Blogging as a research tool by codonnell

codonnell — Thu, 29 May 2008 15:01:28 +0000

I’ve been enjoying the list activity that this particular paper has brought about. At a more meta level, I have become curious about why this particular essay has prompted more discussion on the list than previous essays. I’ve seen more comments that begin like:

I have been a subscriber to this list for some time, but this is my first (nervous) posting. I am compelled to write because…

This is one reason why I think New Media (and I think we need to start thinking about what this term means, because it gets thrown around so often) is so interesting. There is something about these mediums that compels us in new and interesting ways. It has compelled numerous people to post on a list that recently for one reason or another has had some difficulty generating a critical mass of responses. This essay however has so many responses that I don’t sense a coherent critique or trajectory for Erkan to take post-list discussion. I hope that Mary Stevens attempts to bring things back together for a closing set of remarks, though I do not envy the amount of work that may be.

I think the responses also stress the list-serve forum, because a great many good points have gone un-responded to. Regardless, it has been delightful to see such interest in a topic near and dear to my (and this blog’s) interests.