===
PLEASE CHECK YOUR EMAIL BEFORE CLASS FOR INSTRUCTIONS SENT OUT TODAY, TH 20 FEB! (always do this before class, and also check website too.)
===
present this coming week 20 Feb. We will shift the next presentations accordingly. But keep up with the reading schedule on the Info tab, “621: dates at a glance.” We will keep up on the reading even as we shift presentation dates.
So don’t stop reading! Keep on going, snuggle in and read! make sure you have checked class web site links! Try out Bruno Latour's new MOOC!
Note your email: I sent out a link to a Washington Post item (optional) I used when I worked on my assignment for the Latour MOOC this week (below).
And I also emailed a pdf of the Bost14 article (optional) that ties together some of the connections we are about to start making forward, while the Law13 article helps us think back over what we have done so far, as well as peek into what is coming up. (It has already sent by email, and there is a link to it on the right side of our website too; do be sure to read, fundamental to the rest of the course.)
Note your email: I sent out a link to a Washington Post item (optional) I used when I worked on my assignment for the Latour MOOC this week (below).
And I also emailed a pdf of the Bost14 article (optional) that ties together some of the connections we are about to start making forward, while the Law13 article helps us think back over what we have done so far, as well as peek into what is coming up. (It has already sent by email, and there is a link to it on the right side of our website too; do be sure to read, fundamental to the rest of the course.)
===
Katie's field notes re Latour MOOC on FUN (mentally comparing with CD MetaMOOC for discussion):
Facebook: Saturday, February 15, 2014
Who else is taking the Latour MOOC? Has anyone started their news blog yet? I love that this is all about sorting knowledges, and that the terms here are all about detecting connections: "keep a blog in which you’ll note all the instances you will be encountering where you can detect connections between a piece of science or a technical project and another piece of culture, society or politics. Yes, it is a huge task, but it is on the connections you have to focus. What you have to do first is to follow the press or to subscribe to several news feeds, blogs or newsletters. You may also want to jot down notes about conversations that you have heard or in which you have participated where the questions of expertise, public discussions around evidence and proof, or the effect of this or that technology are being brought in. Ideally you should write every day. The crucial point is to follow the news in real time; that is, from the first day of class to the last. It is the only way to share in the difficulty that all readers have when they have to find their ways through the maze of news before the issue is settled."
9 others like this.
• Katie King:
Merci de fournir les informations suivantes pour vous connecter à votre compte F...See More
• comment #1: I've watched only the first video. I was trying not to get behind on the History and Future of (Mostly) Higher Education. But I may have to choose only one! I'll work it again on Sunday.
• Katie King: I'm doing both and I think they go together well! the blog thing is very cool as exercise and I am having students do Field Notes for the Meta-MOOC (Davidson) which is more individual but has some possibilities for crowdsourcing. As far as I understand it, Latour MOOC is simultaneously teaching people to do Actor-Network analysis of world news on science, blog by coding elements of the network in real time, and then all this can be crowdsourcing data as well as big data illustrative of what ANT could do. And I think this is only one piece of the MOOC. Looks very cool!
• Katie King: one could do this without taking the MOOC but it would not have the crowdsourcing possibilities: AFTER READING SCIENCE NEWS ITEM: 1) underline people & organizations (ACTORS ) shaping it all as you read; 2) inventory of participants (eg: =places & events =organizations =stakeholders with different interests =individual =views of the world) 3) comment: what have you learned about the making of science? exemplify, clarify, dispute what is said in MOOC? interconnect with observations of others in MOOC.
• Katie King: I had already marked this news item for my grad class for thinking about so-called new materialisms (so-called here = boundary object), seems perfect for this: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/soft-lobbying-war-between-sugar-corn-syrup-shows-new-tactics-in-washington-influence/2014/02/12/8123da00-90dd-11e3-b46a-5a3d0d2130da_story.html
Inside the secretive war between sugar and corn syrup
www.washingtonpost.com
New documents show how rival industries poured millions into academic research, groups
• Katie King: read responses from Latour and others and suddenly I'm performing: added inventories and more. MORE: Scored first comment! "Hi Katie, thanks for adding this in-depth inventory and discussion! This topic provides a great window into the channels by which private industry, academic institutions, non-profit institutions, and the U.S. government are linked and work to produce (or avoid) change in policy, economics, and popular opinion." WE ALL LOVE TO BE NOTICED!
===
COMMENT:
.
KatieKing environ une heure avant
I am interested in the struggle between Sugar and Corn industries here, and how agribusiness is shaping research and policy making through money and influence. What gets lost is how to evaluate the claims, whether differences between corn and sugar matter that much and if so how, to bodies with and without, say, type 2 diabetes. As a person reading the news, I am required to be increasingly skeptical here about "academic research" which loses authority because corrupted by money. Similarly the FDA and other regulatory entities are also corrupted, and so how does adjudication happen except in my own head? how collective except on the internet? wondering just how effective crowdsourcing and investigative reporting are for such claims? I am forced back onto the evidence of my own body, which is a different type of knowledge than epidemiological data or other kinds of knowledge producing data sorts. This is far from a satisfactory default, even though it has its own rationality.
Hi Katie, thanks for adding this in-depth inventory and discussion! This topic provides a great window into the channels by which private industry, academic institutions, non-profit institutions, and the U.S. government are linked and work to produce (or avoid) change in policy, economics, and popular opinion. PÉDAG
Hi Katie, thanks for adding this in-depth inventory and discussion! This topic provides a great window into the channels by which private industry, academic institutions, non-profit institutions, and the U.S. government are linked and work to produce (or avoid) change in policy, economics, and popular opinion. PÉDAG
.
- places and events: Washington DC, USA, petition to US FDA, release of internal documents, meta-analysis of peer review articles, statement by Corn industry officials, money invested over 2 years, 2009 email details plan, 2004 document on consultation with private research firm, 2010 study on metabolic effects, 2010 attempts to rename corn syrup, formation Citizens for Health 1992.
- . organizations: Citizens for Health (non profit funded by sugar industry), Food and Drug Administration US, Center for Responsive Politics, Sugar Association, Corn Refiners Association, Coke, Pepsi, Rippe Lifestyle Institute, Center for Consumer Freedom, Cargill, Berman & Co., the Academic Network.
- stakeholders with interests: consumers, sugar companies, corporate interests, washington policymakers, traditional lobbyists, nonprofit groups, academicians, journalists, lawmakers, regulators, donors, food markets, agricultural sectors, food manufacturers, science advisors, doctors, consulting agencies, peer reviewed journals, lawyers, data itself?
- . individuals: James Rippe (cardiologist & consultant for corn industry), Audrae Erickson (Exec Corn Refiners), Richard Berman (DC lobbyist), Adam Fox (lawyer for sugar industry), James Turner (founder Citizens for Health)
- . views of the world (network of controlling values): healthful attention to food and food labeling, profit maximization for corporations, influencing DC policy, expertise, investigative journalism, public opinion, regulation of interests pressuring lawmakers, electoral politics, forms of data collection, “soft lobbying,” science as POV for expertise and policy advising, clinical experience and expertise, experimental practices, peer-review publication, shaping of public opinion by tv, news, online, aggressive tactics to promote interests, sorting good and bad data, validation of data in public exchange
- . translation and composition: does the drama of the machinations between sugar and corn agribusiness interests and their paid agents create a media ecology in which the procedures for sorting data are generally discredited, rather than disarticulated in terms of political interests? When media audiences are confronted with the proper uses of such investigative journalism do they default to some forms of authoritative trust over others? in own body, in groups of belonging, to preferred kinds of knowledge practice?
===
See also:
Clarke 2005: 141: "these maps are not intended as formulas for analysis, but as directions through which to begin and deepen analytic work, as sites of engagement.... The ways we are surprised by some results of our work often demonstrate overt assumptions we have had that we were blind to. ...surprise at grasping some new position or way of 'seeing' something indicates openness to unanticipated data, analyses, and difference(s) -- not stupidity for not having 'seen' it before."
===
===
No comments:
Post a Comment