« an if:book reader and contributor comments | Main | On the basic un-truth of The Media and the postmodernism of it all... »
first draft of meeting agenda 
11.06.2005, 10:11 PM
1. purpose and goal
to understand how academics with expertise, integrity, and "a voice" can be encouraged to speak to a wider public audience through blogs and other internet-based forms, and how that effort might be supported and strengthened over time.
we intend for the day's discussion to be instrumental in generating specific and concrete ideas which can be fashioned into a fundable proposal.
2. agenda
in the morning we would like to talk about the experience of blogging
* your motivation for starting to blog
* key moments and issues in terms of creating and establishing a relationship with an audience; why do they trust you?
* character of your interaction with readers
* reaction from colleagues, both local and in your field generally
* how blogging differs from other writing -- academic and/or journalistic, depending on your experience; e.g. one out of many questions, what is the essential difference between blogging which allows your voice to be heard without editing or mediation of any significance and writing for publications which run everything through editors and sometimes publishers.
* and a more general question about the "social role" of blogging - what is it's current and potential contribution to the mediasphere and society generally.
in the first part of the afternoon we want to explore hopes and dreams about where blogging might go over the next five to ten years. since this question divides in at least three big ways and then in endless more ways, i'll leave these open-ended so each of us can focus on the part of each question we're most interested in.
* how would you like to see the shape/form of blogs change.
* how might the social role of blogging shift over time.
* is there clear value in aggregating individual voices; if so how do you safeguard the individual voice
please add more and/or subdivide these at will
in the second half of the afternoon we'd like to discuss concrete ideas and suggestions
assuming that aggregation of some sort makes sense,
* what kind of support do you ideally want/need to make your blogs better, to get a wider audience, to interact differently with your readers. etc.
* along what lines does aggregation make the most sense; what level of aggregation might yield the most
* who decides who joins an aggregation?
* amateur vs. professional; does the distinction make any important sense here.
please add more
Posted by bob stein at November 6, 2005 10:11 PM
Comments
that last question ... hmmm... i wonder more about the blur between producer and receiver, or content provider and audience. just read a pew figure that 53% of 14-22 yr olds (forgive me if i'm a digit or two off) have produced or are producing web content, via blogs, sites. so what happens when the broadcast audience broadcast themselves, when the print audience write themselves, when the radio audience podcast themselves etc....
similarly, the wall that previously separated theory and practice for academics has tumbled down in the areas of new media studies. we study, but we produce ourselves, produce, participate. what does this blur do to the rigor of the study? its objectivity (whatever that is in a postmodern understanding)? i'd love to get folks'thoughts on some of these wrinkles.
Posted by: brian at November 4, 2005 10:08 PM
I would like to put on the agenda a discussion of wiki/blogs and pedagogy. Esp. something like my initiative - that is a communal place for pedagogy built around the idea that we share our expertises.
Posted by: manan at November 8, 2005 3:53 PM
i second manan's rec. if we expand our discussion to include social software, like wikis, we can talk more about online (and off) communities of learning and communites of practice.
also, a new blog for what newspapers should do to save themselves (a hot topic in the trade press):
http://www.tcf.ua.edu/wnfn/
Posted by: brian at November 9, 2005 2:29 PM