Comments on: The Scienciness of danah boyd http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/06/26/the-scienciness-of-danah-boyd Cornelius Puschmann on corporate and institutional blogging, linguistics, open access and other things that interest him. Sat, 22 Nov 2008 04:48:13 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: Cornelius http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/06/26/the-scienciness-of-danah-boyd#comment-37526 Cornelius Fri, 13 Jul 2007 23:56:28 +0000 http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/06/26/the-scienciness-of-danah-boyd#comment-37526 Your point about the problems with measuring class using quantitative data is well made - I agree that there is no definite answer to that question and I find danah's observation quite persuasive. As noted at some point in my blog entry, her method is perfectly suited for answering all sorts of questions. I'm just not sure if it is well-suited for answering that question in particular. But you're absolutely right that that point is open to debate. The other aspect - that presenting her thoughts in a certain way lead the news sites to label it as a study (without consulting danah first) - is what makes this such an interesting case. The meta-issues are indeed interesting and lead to all sort of tricky questions in conjunction with how academics communicate in the age of the social web. Your point about the problems with measuring class using quantitative data is well made - I agree that there is no definite answer to that question and I find danah’s observation quite persuasive.

As noted at some point in my blog entry, her method is perfectly suited for answering all sorts of questions. I’m just not sure if it is well-suited for answering that question in particular. But you’re absolutely right that that point is open to debate. The other aspect - that presenting her thoughts in a certain way lead the news sites to label it as a study (without consulting danah first) - is what makes this such an interesting case.

The meta-issues are indeed interesting and lead to all sort of tricky questions in conjunction with how academics communicate in the age of the social web.

]]> By: Michael Clarke http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/06/26/the-scienciness-of-danah-boyd#comment-37499 Michael Clarke Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:30:34 +0000 http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/06/26/the-scienciness-of-danah-boyd#comment-37499 Hmm. Not sure I agree. Firstly, I'd quibble (and yes, we're talking opposing ontologies here) that danah has to do substantive qualitative work to back up her conclusions. One could equally rule out quantitative analysis on the grounds that the criteria for analysis would only be valid in the beholder. Now I'll grant that that's a position which is hard to sustain in terms of medical research about the success rates of a vaccine or treatment method but when it comes to something as fuzzy and subjective as people, I don't see that a fuzzy, subjective position which acknowledges and reflects on it's limitations is an invalid one. It may well be the most appropriate position to take since in all things social, we're dealing with theorising about people's perceptions of themselves. To be more explicit, I'd say that danah was theory building. Maybe quantitative research is one way of testing that theory but her initial lack of it isn't necessarily a problem. My second quibble is as to the authority that scientists actually have - history suggests that facts tend to be most mutable in the hands of those who most vigorously attest to their concreteness and validity - fine when you're talking about the tensile strength of a steel cable (if your sums are right), not so fine when it comes to issues of society and class. On the other hand - I do agree that danah's mix and match of academic and blog discourse is on shaky ground. Whether she likes it or not, she's an academic, she presents herself as such and she can't put off the privilege and responsibilities of academic speech at will any more than a judge can visit a strip joint. So to that extent, I'd say that the BBC's reaction was not unfair (I'm not contradicting myself, I'm developing an argument, ok?) This is turning into an essay so I'll stop! But the meta-issues have certainly become more interesting than the ostensible ones. Note on capitalization: Sorry, LS. Personal names start with whatever the owner wants them too. But that's just me. Hmm. Not sure I agree. Firstly, I’d quibble (and yes, we’re talking opposing ontologies here) that danah has to do substantive qualitative work to back up her conclusions. One could equally rule out quantitative analysis on the grounds that the criteria for analysis would only be valid in the beholder. Now I’ll grant that that’s a position which is hard to sustain in terms of medical research about the success rates of a vaccine or treatment method but when it comes to something as fuzzy and subjective as people, I don’t see that a fuzzy, subjective position which acknowledges and reflects on it’s limitations is an invalid one. It may well be the most appropriate position to take since in all things social, we’re dealing with theorising about people’s perceptions of themselves. To be more explicit, I’d say that danah was theory building. Maybe quantitative research is one way of testing that theory but her initial lack of it isn’t necessarily a problem.

My second quibble is as to the authority that scientists actually have - history suggests that facts tend to be most mutable in the hands of those who most vigorously attest to their concreteness and validity - fine when you’re talking about the tensile strength of a steel cable (if your sums are right), not so fine when it comes to issues of society and class.

On the other hand - I do agree that danah’s mix and match of academic and blog discourse is on shaky ground. Whether she likes it or not, she’s an academic, she presents herself as such and she can’t put off the privilege and responsibilities of academic speech at will any more than a judge can visit a strip joint. So to that extent, I’d say that the BBC’s reaction was not unfair (I’m not contradicting myself, I’m developing an argument, ok?) This is turning into an essay so I’ll stop! But the meta-issues have certainly become more interesting than the ostensible ones.

Note on capitalization: Sorry, LS. Personal names start with whatever the owner wants them too. But that’s just me.

]]> By: Following up on danah boyd’s essay and its reception - CorpBlawg http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/06/26/the-scienciness-of-danah-boyd#comment-36266 Following up on danah boyd’s essay and its reception - CorpBlawg Sun, 01 Jul 2007 21:54:39 +0000 http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/06/26/the-scienciness-of-danah-boyd#comment-36266 [...] concerning socioeconomic status and social networking sites with a second post (read the first one here). As with my previous piece, I’m especially interested in the reception and in how boyd [...] [...] concerning socioeconomic status and social networking sites with a second post (read the first one here). As with my previous piece, I’m especially interested in the reception and in how boyd [...]

]]> By: Thoughts on knowledge blogs and an interview with Tess Ferrandez - CorpBlawg http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/06/26/the-scienciness-of-danah-boyd#comment-35902 Thoughts on knowledge blogs and an interview with Tess Ferrandez - CorpBlawg Thu, 28 Jun 2007 16:30:15 +0000 http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/06/26/the-scienciness-of-danah-boyd#comment-35902 [...] now, after an exciting trip into the world of science blogging, we return to our regular scheduled [...] [...] now, after an exciting trip into the world of science blogging, we return to our regular scheduled [...]

]]> By: Cornelius http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/06/26/the-scienciness-of-danah-boyd#comment-35857 Cornelius Thu, 28 Jun 2007 08:20:10 +0000 http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/06/26/the-scienciness-of-danah-boyd#comment-35857 I think conferences, workshops etc about scholarly publishing and communication are a start - for example I hope there will be room to discuss this at the PKP Conference (http://ocs.sfu.ca/pkp2007/). There's a tendency to look at these things from a purely technical perspective (e.g. how do we implement an institutional repository? how do we assure permanent access to research results?) but I don't think anyone has thought about 'best practices' or 'rules of conduct' for academic Web publishing yet. I think conferences, workshops etc about scholarly publishing and communication are a start - for example I hope there will be room to discuss this at the PKP Conference (http://ocs.sfu.ca/pkp2007/). There’s a tendency to look at these things from a purely technical perspective (e.g. how do we implement an institutional repository? how do we assure permanent access to research results?) but I don’t think anyone has thought about ‘best practices’ or ‘rules of conduct’ for academic Web publishing yet.

]]> By: CaptainBooshi http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/06/26/the-scienciness-of-danah-boyd#comment-35839 CaptainBooshi Thu, 28 Jun 2007 03:26:18 +0000 http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/06/26/the-scienciness-of-danah-boyd#comment-35839 You raise a good point about the need for more discussion about the changing methods of communication. I don't believe that danah boyd was doing this all purposefully, but she was doing everything you said, and this is something we need to talk about, especially during the ongoing advent of open-access digital journals. Do you have any ideas how we can bring this into a broader focus besides just discussing it more? You raise a good point about the need for more discussion about the changing methods of communication. I don’t believe that danah boyd was doing this all purposefully, but she was doing everything you said, and this is something we need to talk about, especially during the ongoing advent of open-access digital journals. Do you have any ideas how we can bring this into a broader focus besides just discussing it more?

]]> By: Cornelius http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/06/26/the-scienciness-of-danah-boyd#comment-35737 Cornelius Wed, 27 Jun 2007 17:31:29 +0000 http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/06/26/the-scienciness-of-danah-boyd#comment-35737 "Without saying so, I think you suggest that we should, as bloggers, adhere to a set of codes or guidelines for ethical use of the blogosphere - are you?" Yes, though I'm not suggesting that I have the magic formula to resolve certain ambiguities, e.g. is there *always* a clear difference between a blog entry, an essay, a paper, a study etc (I think most of the time there is, but sometimes things inevitably get fuzzy. New technology makes new forms of expression possible and that's absolutely a good thing (I love my blog). But by labeling something in a deliberately unclear way we can make it look like something it isn't, or we can make it easy for others (i.e. old and new media) to misrepresent our work and create a false image of its authority. "It can’t hurt an academic’s career to stir up controversy, and in using the media in this way I’m sure danah completely knew what she was doing." Absolutely, and I honestly have no issue with looking out for media attention. I just think we need to check the validity of our claims constantly, because the BBC & co certainly won't do it. “Without saying so, I think you suggest that we should, as bloggers, adhere to a set of codes or guidelines for ethical use of the blogosphere - are you?”

Yes, though I’m not suggesting that I have the magic formula to resolve certain ambiguities, e.g. is there *always* a clear difference between a blog entry, an essay, a paper, a study etc (I think most of the time there is, but sometimes things inevitably get fuzzy.

New technology makes new forms of expression possible and that’s absolutely a good thing (I love my blog). But by labeling something in a deliberately unclear way we can make it look like something it isn’t, or we can make it easy for others (i.e. old and new media) to misrepresent our work and create a false image of its authority.

“It can’t hurt an academic’s career to stir up controversy, and in using the media in this way I’m sure danah completely knew what she was doing.”

Absolutely, and I honestly have no issue with looking out for media attention. I just think we need to check the validity of our claims constantly, because the BBC & co certainly won’t do it.

]]> By: Dean Giustini http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/06/26/the-scienciness-of-danah-boyd#comment-35733 Dean Giustini Wed, 27 Jun 2007 16:50:27 +0000 http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/06/26/the-scienciness-of-danah-boyd#comment-35733 Cornelius, As an amused observer of the danah controversy (now the 'danah effect'), and someone in an information-related field, I have been reading/browsing/scanning commentary on various blogs and stumbled into yours. You make a lot of really good points, especially about trust which I think increases in proportion to your academic and blog notoriety. Without saying so, I think you suggest that we should, as bloggers, adhere to a set of codes or guidelines for ethical use of the blogosphere - are you? Fresh off her spearking stint at Harvard, danah may have been emboldened to do something that would catch attention for, as the Scobleizer wrote yesterday, we live in a Paris Hilton news-saturated world. It can't hurt an academic's career to stir up controversy, and in using the media in this way I'm sure danah completely knew what she was doing. Cornelius,
As an amused observer of the danah controversy (now the ‘danah effect’), and someone in an information-related field, I have been reading/browsing/scanning commentary on various blogs and stumbled into yours. You make a lot of really good points, especially about trust which I think increases in proportion to your academic and blog notoriety. Without saying so, I think you suggest that we should, as bloggers, adhere to a set of codes or guidelines for ethical use of the blogosphere - are you? Fresh off her spearking stint at Harvard, danah may have been emboldened to do something that would catch attention for, as the Scobleizer wrote yesterday, we live in a Paris Hilton news-saturated world. It can’t hurt an academic’s career to stir up controversy, and in using the media in this way I’m sure danah completely knew what she was doing.

]]> By: Cornelius http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/06/26/the-scienciness-of-danah-boyd#comment-35721 Cornelius Wed, 27 Jun 2007 15:34:48 +0000 http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/06/26/the-scienciness-of-danah-boyd#comment-35721 Good point, I admit I was being far too general there. Information on the make-up of user groups on MySpace and other networks are certainly interesting and relevant for a number of reasons. And I can't stress enough that I too find the idea plausible that MySpace=lower class and Facebook=upper class (simplifying a great deal) and that this is also reflected in the look, feel and "culture" of the sites. "Boyd’s analysis, adademically rigorous or no, rings true enough to make a difference in my professional behavior and provide me with some ammunition when it comes time to justify it." The ammunition part is what irks me. It's (better) ammunition if it is based on (more) substantial research. That's not your problem though, but ours. Good point, I admit I was being far too general there. Information on the make-up of user groups on MySpace and other networks are certainly interesting and relevant for a number of reasons. And I can’t stress enough that I too find the idea plausible that MySpace=lower class and Facebook=upper class (simplifying a great deal) and that this is also reflected in the look, feel and “culture” of the sites.

“Boyd’s analysis, adademically rigorous or no, rings true enough to make a difference in my professional behavior and provide me with some ammunition when it comes time to justify it.”

The ammunition part is what irks me. It’s (better) ammunition if it is based on (more) substantial research. That’s not your problem though, but ours.

]]> By: LS http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/06/26/the-scienciness-of-danah-boyd#comment-35719 LS Wed, 27 Jun 2007 15:05:20 +0000 http://corpblawg.ynada.com/2007/06/26/the-scienciness-of-danah-boyd#comment-35719 <blockquote> But what exactly is it that shouldn’t go unacknowledged? That the use of social networking sites may be socially stratified? Not only would that be hardly surprising (if it could be proven), but it would also hardly serve as a grounds for any kind of activism (should we ban Facebook for elitism, or MySpace for appealing to the proles?) ... All of these things seems ridiculously implausible. </blockquote> Here you're either being "truthy" or you're stunningly uncreative. I work as a Web developer and something of on online organizer for a non-profit that's very concerned with reaching out to a diverse audience. As a designer, I've always looked down on MySpace for reasons that should be obvious. As soon as Danah's paper connected the dots for me, however, I realized that we should be making an effort not to discount the MySpace audience. Boyd's analysis, adademically rigorous or no, rings true enough to make a difference in my professional behavior and provide me with some ammunition when it comes time to justify it. (Note on capitalization: Sorry, Danah, personal names start with capital letters.)

But what exactly is it that shouldn’t go unacknowledged? That the use of social networking sites may be socially stratified? Not only would that be hardly surprising (if it could be proven), but it would also hardly serve as a grounds for any kind of activism (should we ban Facebook for elitism, or MySpace for appealing to the proles?) … All of these things seems ridiculously implausible.

Here you’re either being “truthy” or you’re stunningly uncreative. I work as a Web developer and something of on online organizer for a non-profit that’s very concerned with reaching out to a diverse audience. As a designer, I’ve always looked down on MySpace for reasons that should be obvious. As soon as Danah’s paper connected the dots for me, however, I realized that we should be making an effort not to discount the MySpace audience. Boyd’s analysis, adademically rigorous or no, rings true enough to make a difference in my professional behavior and provide me with some ammunition when it comes time to justify it.

(Note on capitalization: Sorry, Danah, personal names start with capital letters.)

]]>