סמינרים תשע"ז/Colloquium 2016-17

סמינר מחלקתי, 4.1.2017/ Colloquium, Prof. Robert T. Craig, For a Practical Discipline

For a Practical Discipline

Robert T. Craig, University of Colorado, Boulder

4.1.2017 ,12:15-13:45

Room 4026, Terrace Building

Abstract: 

In this talk I will defend the thesis that the organized academic field of communication can be best understood as a practical discipline: a distinct kind of intellectual discipline, the essential purpose of which is to cultivate a field of social practice. I propose this interpretation of the communication field as a counterfactual ideal that is relevant and normatively appropriate, even if never fully realized in our collective work. To cultivate a practice means to improve and disseminate it, and I will argue that the imperative to improve communication and disseminate better communication practices is fundamental to the historical existence of our discipline. Our core mission as a practical discipline is to cultivate the social practice of communication from diverse, often contending approaches and through various forms of critical and conceptual thought, scientific research, education and training, public engagement, and applied professional work. The essay will explicate the concept of practical discipline as it has evolved through several decades, and will defend it, against certain objections, as a relevant and appropriate normative ideal that illuminates the fundamental intellectual coherence of a communication discipline. 

סמינר מחלקתי, 27.12.16/ Colloquium, Pablo Boczkowski, How Young People Consume News on Social Media

Incidental News: How Young People Consume News on Social Media

Prof. Pablo Boczkowski, Northwestern University

12:15-13:45, 27.12.16

Terrace building, room 4026

Abstract:

In this presentation I will share results of an ongoing, mixed methods study of how people ages 18-29 consume the news on social media. The study shows that the ideal-typical mode in which young people consume news on social media can be characterized with the notion of "incidental news." Although incidental learning of news has long existed, it had been a secondary mode of information acquisition, not the predominant one. I will draw on the basis of these findings to reflect on current dynamics at the nexus of media, technology and politics that have become central to contemporary societies.

Colloquium, Dmitri Epstein סמינר מחלקתי, ד"ר דמיטרי אפשטיין, 13.12.16: People, practices, technologies and institutions of internet governance

Duality cubed: People, practices, technologies and institutions of internet governance

Dmitri Epstein, University of Illinois at Chicago

13/12/16, 12:15-13:45, Terrace Building, Room 4026

Abstract:

With the growing dependency of contemporary communication systems on internet protocols and
infrastructures, questions of internet governance move to the forefront of communication research. The
internet, however, poses an interesting challenge to established notions of governance. While internet
as a socio-technical system builds on existing institutions, it claims a narrative that (slightly paraphrasing
David Clark) rejects “kings, presidents and voting,” and believes “in rough consensus and running code”
(Hoffman, 2012). One of the challenges for the study of internet governance is the need to
compartmentalize aspects of governance mechanisms. Research on internet governance has
traditionally drawn on theories of international relations thus taking either state-centric or institutional
approaches. Recently, there is more research into “things that regulate” (Lessig, 2006, pp. 120–137),
such as the architecture of information systems or the role of algorithms in shaping online experiences
including freedom of expression, identity, and so on. In my work I argue that understanding internet
governance – both its mechanisms and its repercussions - requires a more holistic approach. While
governments of national states are still the main holders of informational power and are getting more
sophisticated in exercising it (primarily through regulation), they are no longer the ultimate holders of
that power. Innovation in technology design and innovation in technology adoption and use, both
involve “decision-making with constitutive effects” (Braman, 2009, p. 3) for informational power.
In this talk I want to delve into the mutually influential relationships between social structures, policy,
technology, and actors that shape those policies and technologies. I will unpack internet governance as
an interaction between three interrelated dualities: information technology design, regulation, and use.
Conceptually, I will build on the theory of structuration and recent research on internet governance (an
earlier version of this argument can be found in Epstein, 2015). A key element of this exercise will be
articulating the role human agency plays in the design, regulation, and use of information technologies
(Epstein, Katzenbach, & Musiani, 2016). Practically, I will draw on examples from my past research and
will use this framework to discuss my broader research agenda. I invite you to review Epstein (2015) and
Epstein, Katzenbach, & Musiani (2016) as a background for this talk. Both articles are accessible through:
http://www.thinkmacro.org/publications/
Cited work:
Braman, S. (2009). Change of state: Information, policy, and power. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Epstein, D. (2015). Duality squared: On structuration of Internet governance. In R. A. Lind (Ed.),
Produsing Theory in a Digital World 2.0 (pp. 41–56). New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing.
Epstein, D., Katzenbach, C., & Musiani, F. (2016). Doing internet governance: How science and
technology studies inform the study of internet governance. Internet Policy Review, 5(3).
https://doi.org/10.14763/2016.3.435
Hoffman, P. (2012, August). The Tao of IETF: A novice’s guide to the internet engineering task force.
Retrieved September 7, 2016, from https://www.ietf.org/tao.html
Lessig, L. (2006). Code. Version 2.0. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Colloquium, Nahuel Ribke - סמינר מחלקתי, 6.12.16: נאואל ריבקה, פורמטים גלובליים ו"טלוויזיה איכותית"

פורמטים גלובליים ו"טלוויזיה איכותית": מוניטין גלוקאלי ושיח חוצה תרבויות בפורמט הישראלי 'בטיפול'"

Nahuel Ribke (Tel Aviv University), Global Formats and "Quality TV": Glocal Reputation and Cross-cultural Discourse in the Israeli Format "In Treatment"

ביום שלישי הבא, 6.12.16, בשעה 13:45-12:15, נארח בסמינר המחלקתי את ד"ר נאואל ריבקה מאוניברסיטת תל אביב. הסמינר יתקיים בחדר 7052, בניין רבין

תקציר: 

בשנים האחרונות אנחנו עדים לנוכחות מוגברת של פורמטים טלוויזיוניים גלובליים ובמקביל להופעה של סדרות איכות, תהליך שכונה על די רוברט תומפסון (Thompson, 1997) כ"עידן הזהב השני" של הטלוויזיה. בעוד הפורמטים הגלובליים זוכים לביקורת מצד מבקרי תרבות ואקדמאים על השטחת התרבות ומחיקת מאפיינים של זהות המקומית, "סדרות האיכות" זוכות להילה ותשבחות ששמורות בדרך כלל ליצירות אמנות. הסדרה הישראלית "בטיפול" זכתה להצלחה רבה כפורמט גלובלי על ידי שילוב של מאפיינים סותרים על פניו: טלוויזיית "איכות" ונוסחה "סגורה" המאפיינת את הסחר בפורמטים. ההרצאה תתמקד בתהליך הגלובליזציה של הפורמט הישראלי "בטיפול", תוך מתן דגש על היבטים הפקתיים, אך גם גאו-פוליטיים ותרבותיים, שאפשרו את הצלחתו ברחבי העולם. 

 

 

Colloquium, Nili Steinfeld - סמינר מחלקתי, 22.11.16: נילי שטיינפלד, אפיון תומכים ונענים למעקב מדינתי, מסחרי ואקדמי

Motivations for consent: Characterizing supporters and compliers with state, commercial and academic surveillance

Nili Steinfeld, Ariel U

12:15-13:45, Room 7052, Rabin Complex

Abstract

In today's modern societies, diverse actors, including governmental, academic and private sector entities, engage in surveillance, primarily the collection, storage, and analysis of personal information. Although the different forms of surveillance differ in scope, authority, aims and motivations, the growing tendency of the various sectors to cooperate and share information, and the penetration of surveillance practices and methods into the commercial and academic spheres make a case for scholars and the public to address surveillance as a single category.

In a series of behavioral experiments, consent and support of surveillance by individuals is examined in an attempt to realize how individuals relate to surveillance and requests to disclose information with diverse entities, and for diverse purposes.

.