An intensity chart of my levels of busy-ness since 2007

I just noticed the year view of iCal gives me a nice intensity chart of how busy my life has been over the last few years, at least in terms of how many meetings and calendar events  I have.

Calendar-2007  Calendar2008

In 2007 it looks as though my spring was fairly light, but things heat up for Scott and my wedding in early June, and the rest of the year is fairly busy too. I was on sabbatical in the academic year of 2007/8, but still had lots of appointments, it seems. Our daughter was born in April, and the rest of the year was busy in a way not tracked by calendars.

Calendar2009  Calendar2010

By mid-2010 I was pregnant again, and I wonder whether my pregnancy exhaustion forced me to be a little less busy, because the calendar’s not very busy. I remember I was napping every afternoon and still going to bed by nine pm. Benji was born in February 2010 and you can very clearly see my parental leave – and how things got very busy again when I was back at work in the autumn, although Scott and I were each only working 50% that semester.

Calendar2011  Calendar2012

2011 and 2012 look pretty steady – you can’t even really spot my summer holidays, which seems a little sad.

Calendar2013

This last year very clearly shows the election campaign all spring, though. A lighter summer, and hopefully the next few months will keep some of that nice yellow, as I’m on sabbatical again.

I suppose this isn’t a very useful visualisation, but I had forgotten that all my calendar events for the last several years are actually archived and probably I could get more information out of them than this. It’s also nothing to what dedicated self-trackers are tracking. Here’s a snippet from Chris Dancy’s calendar where he tracks everything he does in great detail.

dancy-calendar-screenshot

My simple iCal view won’t yield the kind of self-analysis that Chris Dancy’s calendar will, but it’s interesting because it’s generated entirely without my intending it to be generated – I’m just using my calendar to keep track of my appointments, and when I suddenly click on the Year view, I see my life, portrayed in levels of busy-ness from yellow to red.

29. August 2013 by Jill
Categories: Visualise me | Leave a comment

Tutorial: How to explore a network graph of electronic literature in Gephi

Update July 2014: a newer dataset is available that includes 44 dissertations (here is the gephi file), and the final paper is now published: Rettberg, Jill Walker. 2014. “Visualising Networks of Electronic Literature: Dissertations and the Creative Works They Cite.” ebr: electronic book review, July 2014. 

We’ve been doing a lot of work lately using Gephi to visualise connections between authors, creative works, critical writing and events in the ELMCIP Electronic Literature Base. It’s pretty easy to get started, and here’s a writeup of the quick tutorial we gave participants in our Visualising Electronic Literature workshop last week.

First of all you’ll need to download and install Gephi, which is open source and available for Mac OS X, Linux and Windows. Then download this ready-made .gephi file which contains information about 32 PhD dissertations on electronic literature and the creative works they reference. To make that file I entered information about the dissertations and links to the creative works they reference in the ELMCIP Electronic Literature Knowledge Base and then exported that information and imported it into Gephi. Here’s the list of dissertations and you can follow the links yourself. I’ll explain how to do the export and import in a separate tutorial next week, so that you can create your own electronic literature datasets to visualise.

First you

Figure 1: When you first open the .gephi file you’ll see a tangle of nodes in the middle.

When you open the .gephi file you’ll see a tangle of nodes in the middle (Figure 1). There are three tabs at the top. This one is the overview, which is where you can set up your visualisation. The  middle top tab lets you see the Data Laboratory, where you can view all your data as a spreadsheet – which is what it really is. This is useful for sorting or seeing what nodes are actually in there, and for things like ranking the nodes according to how many references they have pointing to them. The third tab opens the Preview window which is where you make your visualisation pretty and export it as an image or PDF file.

Basic navigation

You zoom in and out using a scroll bar on a mouse or moving two fingers up and down on a touchpad. You can move the whole network around by right-click-and-dragging (cmd + click the mouse to drag on a Mac).

You can turn on labels by clicking the T icon at the bottom, but this gets pretty hard to read. You can adjust the size of the labels by using the controls at the bottom (hint: if you click that tiny upwards arrow on the bottom right you get more controls:

View labels and adjust the way nodes and edges look using the bottom menu bar. Click the little arrow on the right to get more controls.

Figure 2: View labels and adjust the way nodes and edges look using the bottom menu bar. Click the little arrow on the right to get more controls.

Figure 3: More controls hidden away at the bottom.

Figure 3: More controls hidden away at the bottom.

You can also use the arrow with a question mark on the left of the graph window Gephi-arrow-icon to select a node and see information about it in the upper left of the workspace. The little hand icon Gephi-hand-icon lets you move individual nodes – which if you want to analyse this as a network you should only do to make the graph more legible, for instance to be abel to read the labels clearly.

You may like to switch between the Overview and the Preview views often. You do that right at the top of the workspace. Preview gives you a far more legible graph, and you can adjust settings there so as to show labels more clearly.

Some basic terms

We’re doing a network analysis, so each PhD dissertation and each creative work is a node. The connections between them are edges, and in this graph an edge is drawn when a dissertation references a creative work. That means it’s a directional edge: it’s a one-way link from the dissertation to the creative work – the creative work doesn’t reference the dissertation. If you were visualising your Facebook network, you would have undirected edges, because if you’re friends with someone on Facebook, they’re also friends with you.

This is also a bipartite or two mode network, because there are two types of node: PhD dissertations and creative works. If you click on the Data Laboratory tab you can see that the nodes and edges have types corresponding to this.

How to layout your network

A good way to start exploring your data is to apply a layout algorithm to it. You do this from the Layout section, circled in red in Figure 4. I’ve selected the ForceAtlas 2 algorithm, which is good for finding community structures. It clusters nodes that have many shared edges, assuming that shared edges indicates similarity. In this network, you can see some dissertations almost only reference creative works not referenced by any other dissertation – like the node surrounded by a ring of other nodes towards the top of Figure 4. Other dissertations share references, like the ones on the right hand side of the network. In the middle you see lots of nodes that are referenced by many different dissertations. The unconnected nodes are dissertations for which I have not yet entered references.

When you select ForceAtlas 2, you need to press Run to see the layout, and you need to stop it when you are satisfied. You can play with settings until you get a layout you are happy with. I found that setting the Scaling and Gravity to 20 made the network more legible. You can also tick the “Prevent overlap” box to space nodes out a bit more.

Figure 3:

Figure 4: The ForceAtlas 2 layout is useful for finding community structures.

It would be useful to see the difference between creative works and PhD dissertations, so let’s partition our network to show the two types of node in different colours. You do that in the window in the upper left of the workspace, as circled in red in Figure 5. Remember to click the green refresh button so you can see what node attributes you can partition the network by.

Figure 3: Partition the network by type to clearly see which nodes are PhD dissertations and which are Creative works. In this view, Creative works are blue and PhD dissertations are red.

Figure 5: Partition the network by type to clearly see which nodes are PhD dissertations and which are Creative works. In this view, Creative works are blue and PhD dissertations are red.

Next you can rank the nodes by the number of inbound links, or their in-degree. All edges in this network point from PhD dissertations to Creative works, so PhD dissertations have an in-degree of zero. All the creative works have an in-degree of at least 1, but some have far higher in-degree. If you run the “Average degree” algorithm in the Statistics window on the right of the workspace, you can see the average degree  and then you will be able to view the actual degree of each individual node in the Data Laboratory (Figure 6). You can see that afternoon, a story has the most references from dissertations, 10 of 32 dissertations cite it.

Figure 4: You can view nodes in the Data Laboratory to see their individual degree - that is, how many creative works they reference, or how many dissertations reference them.

Figure 6: You can view nodes in the Data Laboratory to see their individual degree – that is, how many creative works they reference, or how many dissertations reference them.

You make the frequently-cited nodes appear bigger by selecting the Ranking tab instead of the Partition tab, selecting Edges and the attribute by which to rank them (In-degree) and then you click on the tiny diamond-shaped icon next to the colour wheel in the upper left of that tab so they’re sized instead of coloured differently (Figure 7). You can choose a minimum and maximum size that you think shows the variation well.

Figure 5: Make frequently-cited creative works bigger by ranking them.

Figure 7: Make frequently-cited creative works bigger by ranking them.

Now let’s see how this looks in Preview (Figure 8). Click the refresh button at the bottom to see your graph – and you’ll have to click refresh every time to make any changes, too. The default view gives you curved edges. It’s useful to know that in network analysis this means that the edges are directed, and you can read the direction by following the curves in a clockwise direction. So don’t use curved edges just because you think they’re pretty – or if you do, realise that people who know network analysis are going to read meaning into your pretty curves. In this graph we actually do have directed edges, so curved edge lines are appropriate.

Figure 8: Adjust the size of labels, the background colour, the colour of edges and other details in Preview, then you can export your graph as an image or a PDF.

Figure 8: Adjust the size of labels, the background colour, the colour of edges and other details in Preview, then you can export your graph as an image or a PDF.

In Figure 8, I’ve ticked the “Show Labels” box, and I’ve reduced the font size a lot. I’ve also ticked the “Shorten label” box and set the maximum length to 15 characters. I set the colour of the edges to be light grey.

It’s still quite hard to read the labels of the nodes because the labels overlap. To fix this you’ll have to go back to the Overview. can try running the ForceAtlas 2 layout algorithm again with “Prevent Overlap” ticked, or you can try the “Label Adjust” algorithm instead, or you can simply drag individual nodes around so they overlap less. You can also try running ForceAtlas 2 with increased Scaling.

One way of simplifying the graph is to filter out the nodes that are less frequently cited. You do this from the Filter tab on the right – it may be hiding behind the Statistics tab, so check the tabs at the top of this part of the workspace.

Figure 9: Filter by degree by selecting Topology, then pulling the Degree option down into the Queries section below. Set the degree to 2 and click the Filter button and all creative works that are referenced by only one dissertation will disappear from your graph. (They'll come back if you click Filter again.)

Figure 9: Filter by degree by selecting Topology, then pulling the Degree option down into the Queries section below. Set the degree to 2 and click the Filter button and all creative works that are referenced by only one dissertation will disappear from your graph. (They’ll come back if you click Filter again.)

If you run the ForceAtlas 2 layout algorithm again now, you’ll see the nodes pull together in a different way. In Figure 10 you can see how the graph clusters differently without the infrequently-cited works.

Figure 10: Run the ForceAtlas 2 layout algorithm again to see how these nodes cluster without the infrequently cited nodes.

Figure 10: Run the ForceAtlas 2 layout algorithm again to see how these nodes cluster without the infrequently cited nodes.

Now you can turn labels on in the Overview and more or less read it. You can also use the hand icon Gephi-hand-icon to drag nodes slightly around so the labels don’t overlap, or just to click on an individual node and see what it connects to (Figure 11).

Figure 11: Turn on labels (at the bottom of the screen) and click nodes to see which nodes connect to which. Use the hand tool to drag individual nodes around for increased legibility.

Figure 11: Turn on labels (at the bottom of the screen) and click nodes to see which nodes connect to which. Use the hand tool to drag individual nodes around for increased legibility.

When you’re happy, switch to Preview again and make it pretty.

Figure 12: Make your final adjustments in Preview.

Figure 12: Make your final adjustments in Preview.

Now you can think about what the connections mean. I think the clusters correspond pretty clearly to genres of electronic literature. I can see interactive fiction, kinetic poetry, installation-based visual poetry with physical interfaces, generative narratives and poetry and in the middle, a big tangle of “classics” that are cited by a lot of different dissertations.

For more details, read the draft of my paper on this dataset for ELO2013 in Paris next month, or Scott Rettberg’s analysis of canonicity as expressed in the Electronic Literature Knowledge Base (PDF) where he uses similar visualisations of a slightly different dataset. Here’s the description of our panel, which will also include analyses of Brazilian electronic literature and of embodiment in electronic literature, using the Knowledge Base as a dataset.

In future tutorials I’ll explain how to actually get data out of the Electronic Literature Knowledge Base and into Gephi, so you can get your hands on different kinds of data to analyse. And I’ll also explain how to convert this two-mode network into a one-mode network and what that means.

Do ask if you have any questions or ideas!

28. August 2013 by Jill
Categories: Digital Humanities, Electronic literature, ELMCIP, Social Network Analysis | 3 comments

Figshare for sharing academic papers with their datasets

My paper for Chercher le texte, the Electronic Literature Organization’s 2013 conference in Paris next month, is about ready and I’ve uploaded it to the ELO conference website and to Figshare.

Figshare was new to me. It’s an open access non-peer-reviewed research repository built to contain more than just papers: the idea is that you share your datasets, images, posters or whatever – and if you like a traditional paper as well – and Figshare sets you up with a nice website for your research materials all citation ready.

My paper is a network analysis of links to creative works of electronic literature from dissertations on electronic literature, so Figshare makes it easy to share the paper along with that data, allowing anyone else who is interested to import the same data into Gephi or some other software and do their own exploration of it. Excellent! It’s like GitHub for academics! Of course, some academics already use GitHub in fascinating ways, but I do like the idea of a site specifically for academic datasets, and I especially appreciate the citation information they provide. It also provides versioning, which is useful for this kind of data – I hope to get more PhD dissertations analysed before the conference, and when I do, I’ll update the dataset and the paper too – and Figshare will keep track of that for me.

My ELO2013 article, with its datasets, on Figshare

Figshare’s view of my paper with its datasets. Note how easy it would be to cite this. And sharing in social media is nicely integrated too, although the embed option doesn’t work with selfhosted WordPress blogs  like mine.

I would like Figshare even better if there was some layer of peer-review here. You could leave uploads open to everyone, but with some kind of peer-review on top of that to give the best work a stamp of approval from your peers, you could make this sort of publication the only kind we would need. On the other hand, you do to some extent get this from the shares and views – although my own two shares are the only ones here, and at least 20-30 of my views, maybe more, are because I used this URL when I had participants in our workshop last week download the dataset as a test set to learn to use Gephi.

Another point is that Figshare was very obviously built for the natural sciences, and there are very few humanities papers in there. I’m not sure how much that matters. Less community for us humanists, certainly, but we can still use it for sharing.

I’ve never done research before the last year or so where I’ve thought of myself as using datasets – traditionally that’s not how we think about our work in the humanities. Obviously doing visualisations with data from the ELMCIP Electronic Literature Knowledge Base does generate datasets that others could reuse. What I do have from previous research is piles of screenshots of works and blogs that I’ve written about but not used in my publications. Most of that is sort of half-lost on forgotten hard drives. Perhaps if sites like Figshare become part of our workflow, even we humanists will start thinking about our notes and screenshots and other materials as datasets that could be shared?

Figshare also promises to help write your data management plan for grant applications, because they provide the services required by funding agencies – a system for keeping data safe. Not private or confidential, but archived, permanently. I’m not sure I’d trust a private company with that, to be honest. Figshare was started by a PhD student and is owned by Digital Science, a subsidiary of Macmillan Publishing that “creates software and tools rather than content”. Which sounds good, but how long will they be around? How independent are they? What is their plan for monetizing this? This is exactly the sort of system universities should be working together to provide, for example through GÉANT, the European network that among other things provides Eduroam, secure roaming wifi for students and employees at hundreds of universities worldwide. Actually, most universities’ open access research archives, such as my own university’s BORA, probably support uploading datasets along with papers. But I don’t think they suggest it – you can upload multiple files, but it’s certainly not the default expectation, and poking around BORA I couldn’t find any examples of research publications archived with their datasets.

There’s also a shift here to a culture of sharing research before it’s quite finished, and preprints before they’re in a journal. My paper here is less finished than it will be when it goes to publication, so it’s not really a preprint, just a draft of a conference presentation that I plan to do further work on. I’d certainly love any feedback on it at this point, though!

26. August 2013 by Jill
Categories: Digital Humanities, Electronic literature, social media | 1 comment

Busy start of sabbatical: joint course, e-lit exhibition, visualisation seminar, kids!

So busy. Last week was a wonderfully fun and inspiring intensive summer class, Collaborative Creativity in New Media, with ten US and ten Norwegian students as well as wonderful faculty: Rob Wittig, Joellyn Rock, Sandy Baldwin and Rod Coover as well as Scott and me from here. The students made wonderful projects in just six intensive days, based on characters from the character generator Scott set up, a mysterious letter from Archibald Baker III, lots of explorations and photos and sounds and collages and writing and more. The projects will be available online once we and the students have had more time to finalise things, and we’re planning to repeat the course next year as well.

collaborative-creativity-in-new-media1

Today my fingers ache from typing fast as I translate the catalogue for a new exhibition on electronic literature that Scott has put together at the university library, with a little help from me and a lot from the library. The poster, made by Pedro Vasquez at the library, is wonderful.

exhibition_poster-elit-at-library-2013-600px-wide

Tomorrow I’m meeting my team from the Digital Methods Winter School in Amsterdam (Anne Helmond, Erik Borra, David Berry and Jean-Christophe Plantin), to discuss our progress finishing the paper we started in the data sprint in January, visualising the fields of digital humanities and electronic literature using book recommendation data from Amazons in different countries. So hopefully I’ll have got some more work done on the paper before 14:00 tomorrow.

And on Monday we’re hosting another seminar and workshop here, that should be fantastic: Visualising Electronic Literature. The first day consists of public presentations in Bergen Public Library, and Tuesday and Wednesday will be a hands-on workshop where we’re going to be teaching participants how to use Gephi to analyse data from the Electronic Literature Knowledge Base, and we’ll do a data sprint of our own to get some projects started. It should be really good fun, but oh my, how to have the time for it all!

digital-arena-electronic-literature-reading-series2013_smaller

On top of this, of course our three and five year olds have been acting up from all the late nights and babysitting and barely seeing their parents. Yesterday I spent lots of time with them, and they’ve been so much happier. I wish wish wish the days had a lot more than 24 hours, because how on earth am I going to get everything done and hang out with the kids?

The good thing? I’m on sabbatical so I’m NOT at orientation meetings like the rest of my department. And sometimes we get to bring the kids along, like on the summer course excursion to Fløyen last Saturday, where our kids played with a visiting post.doc’s son.

20130815-131806.jpg

15. August 2013 by Jill
Categories: Academia, Digital Humanities, Electronic literature | Leave a comment

Follow me on Facebook instead?

With national elections coming up next month here in Norway, I’m interested in how politicians are using social media. There’s certainly a lot of activity on Facebook, and KrF’s Knut Arild Hareide is one of the people said to be using Facebook most successfully, daring to be quite personal. This promotional video came out this morning. It starts off with Hareide posting a selfie with the text “I’m in good shape for the elections!” and then running off, music in his earbuds. A supporter runs after him, trying to tell him all the things he agree with him on and to ask some questions, but Hareide runs on, completely oblivious. The final slogan is “Follow me on Facebook instead.”

On the one hand, Hareide really does seem to be very present on Facebook. On the other hand, doesn’t the video seems to say that he ignores voters and supporters in real life? What do you think?

Gunn Enli leads a project at the University of Oslo comparing use of social media in elections, collaborating with, among others, Axel Bruns, who does the same thing in Australia. In an interview with Forskning.no last week Gunn said that one of the main differences between Norwegian and US politicians’ use of social media is that Norwegian politicians invite and participate in debate and dialogue to a far greater extent than the Americans do. Party this is because Norwegian elections don’t depend on donations, so Norwegian politicians don’t have to use social media to solicit donations from their supporters.

Erna Solberg, the leader of Høyre and, if the current opposition wins, our next Prime Minister, admitted defeat this morning, though, and wrote that she has blocked private messages on Facebook, and may not answer all questions to her wall either.

Erna Solberg begs for our understanding: she really appreciates our messages but can't answer them before the election.

Erna Solberg begs for our understanding: she really appreciates our messages but can’t answer them before the election. Posted to her Facebook page on August 5, 2013 at around 9 am.

Solberg (or an assistant?) does answer many of the questions posted to her wall, though, and in the last few days she has answered far more questions than Hareide has.

Questions on Erna Solberg's Facebook wall. The snapshot was taken on August 5, 12pm.

Questions on Erna Solberg’s Facebook wall. The snapshot was taken on August 5, 12pm.

Direct democracy and direct communication with voters takes a lot of time – and yet is increasingly important.

05. August 2013 by Jill
Categories: Networked Politics, social media | Leave a comment

Being Norwegian AND another nationality

I was born in Norway and have lived here for more than 35 of the 41 years I’ve been alive, but I’m still not a Norwegian citizen. You see, Norway is among the dwindling group of countries that still insists that people should only be citizens of one country. Only 5 of 27 EU countries still insists upon this, and one of those five, Denmark, is on its way to changing that.

I fulfil the requirements to be granted Norwegian citizenship, but would have to renounce my Australian citizenship to “become Norwegian”, or more specifically, in order to have a Norwegian passport and the right to vote or be a member of parliament. I already have pretty much all the other rights, although the three hour lines at the police station to renew my residency permit every two years aren’t much fun, I’ll admit that.

The recent debates about Norwegian children being stripped of their Norwegian citizenship when they inherit the citizenship of their non-Norwegian parent (meaning, for instance, that families can no longer move home to Norway together) have reignited all my frustration with the Norwegian lack of acceptance of plurality, of the possibility of having an identity and loyalties that are not single. So I wrote a letter to the paper (of course).

Norske verdier? was published in Bergens Tidende on Saturday. On Sunday, an English translation was published on The Foreigner with the title Norwegian or Not Norwegian.

Only two political parties in Norway appear to be working for dual citizenship: SV and Venstre. I was happy to see SV politician Olivia Corso Salles, herself a dual Brazilian/Norwegian citizen, arguing for dual citizenship in Dagsavisen today. You see, there are plenty of Norwegians who also hold another citizenship for various reasons. In fact, 52% of all people who became Norwegian citizens after 2010 also hold the citizenship of another country. So the “rule” that you can’t become a Norwegian without renouncing your other citizenship, and that you lose your Norwegian citizenship when you take the citizenship of another country, really only counts for people from some countries. Unfortunately for me, it counts for Australians. Another useful article I’ve found that explains some of the background for the Norwegian citizenship laws is by peace researchers Tove Heggli Sagmo and Marta Bivand Erdal, who present many good arguments for dual citizenship.

I was born and mostly grew up in Norway. My husband and two youngest children are US citizens. My eldest daughter’s paternal grandmother is Norwegian but her grandfather was born in Germany. My parents are from Australia. My great-great-great-great grandparents moved to Australia from Ireland and England and Austria. Probably there are Norwegian marauders in my ancestry too if you go far enough back, certainly my ancestors lived in countries the vikings attacked. Norwegian descendants in Minnesota still celebrate the 17th of May, Norwegians move en masse to Spain today, there are Norwegian schools and churches all over the world. And there are more and more of us, you know, more and more people with ties to more than one country, whether because our parents moved from somewhere else, or because we married someone from another country or because we moved for work, or as refugees. I want to live in a world that accepts that I am more than simply Norwegian or Australian. I am both, and more.

05. August 2013 by Jill
Categories: Uncategorized | 1 comment

Norwegian values

I would probably vote for SV if I was a Norwegian citizen and could vote in the Norwegian elections this September, as I agree with them more than I agree with most other parties, but I think Mathias Fischer has a valid point that SV’s current social media campaign, #norskeverdier, has some flaws. The premiss of the campaing is to “reclaim Norwegian values” from the right wing parties and show that Norwegian values (= norske verdier) are in fact gender equality, equal rights, diversity and solidarity, values that of course are central to SV’s party program. Audun Lysbakken, who leads SV, is shown in a national costume eating a kebab to front the campaign, though personally I like the photo of the full leadership group, looking wonderfully silly in their national costumes.

The retweets on Twitter suggest that the flaw is that anyone can use the #norskeverdier tag, and of course hashtags can’t be locked down. So you have tweets like “Oil and gas. #norskeverdier” or “Refusing illegal immigrants with third degree burns medical help after suicide attempts. #norskeverdier”. Not quite what SV had in mind?

Or perhaps it was. On Dagsnytt 18 last night, Lysbakken said the purpose of the campaign wasn’t to get all Norwegians to post tweets about equality and solidarity but to challenge FrP’s claim that they are the representatives of “Norwegian values”, and what Norwegian values are. Lysbakken said we shouldn’t think there is a set of values that “all Norwegians” (whatever that means) share. In an opinion piece in Dagbladet, Lysbakken writes that SV wants to break down the division between a Norwegian “we” and an immigrated “them”.

Certainly as an immigrant, or a second-generation immigrant as I’m known here, since I was born here of immigrated parents (no, you don’t get to be Norwegian just because you’re born here) the idea of Norwegian values raises very mixed emotions. On the one hand, I love living in a country with universal healthcare, good parental leave, subsidised and high-quality child care, no meetings after 4 pm because everyone knows parents need to pick their kids up, decent unemployment benefits etc etc etc. On the other hand I am regularly appalled by the xenophobia I see here. What is the fear of dual citizenship, in a world where so many of us have cultural roots in more than one country? What do you mean my children inherit the worst possible residence rights – not my permanent residency after 35 years of living here, but their father’s at the time temporary permit, since he had only lived here two years? What do you mean two Norwegian-born children lost their Norwegian citizenship because their Australian father signed them up to also be Australian by descent, and now Norway won’t let the family return to Norway with the Norwegian mother because the two twins are not Norwegian citizens and their mother doesn’t have high enough income to get a family reunion visa to bring them with her?

australian-twins-denied-norwegian-citizenship

Norwegian values. I love them and I hate them.

I like some of the photos SV is sharing as part of their campaign, though. The caption on this one asks “Am I Norwegian enough now?”

norsk-nok-nå?

This morning the satirists at Opplysningskontoret posted their own response, on FrP’s behalf, with Per Sandvik (the second in command for FrP) as Chairman Mao and the tagline: “OK, Audun. Let’s talk about equality.”

opplysningskontoret-FrP-likhet

I’ll leave the interpretation of that up to you.

30. July 2013 by Jill
Categories: Networked Politics, social media | 2 comments

Dating project blogs: 40 Days of Dating

Blogs are a genre that work beautifully for projects with clear rules and goals that can be tracked in daily posts. Lose weight, cook everything in Julia Childs’ cookbook, stop buying things, declutter the house, only wear clothes you have made yourself, wear just one dress for a whole year, survive cancer - I wrote a post about these project blogs a while ago.

One example I’ve written about several times (including in my book Blogging – second edition due out in October!) is The Date Project, which I discovered in 2002 when John Hiler dissected it and other dating blogs. As I wrote back then, Hiler points out a problem with real life blogs as narratives: real life just doesn’t respect the suspense and the dramatic curve we love in narratives. Hiler wrote:

I’m realizing that the whole fun of dating blogs comes from vicariously experiencing the frustrations and humiliations of the dating circuit.  It’s no fun when someone finds true love in, say…  twenty-seven days (?!).  It’s like Bridget Jones getting married in the first chapter, or Carrie Bradshaw meeting Mr. Big in the first season (oh wait, that one did happen).

I came across a new, far more fancily designed dating project blog today: 40 Days of Dating. They’re up to day 21 and true love is not yet clearly apparent, but then, this project has a rather different premise to The Date Project. While the guy in The Date Project committed to meeting new people and asking women out, hoping to get a girlfriend out of it, 40 Days of Dating is actually written by a couple. The catch is that the couple is not a romantic couple – yet. They write:

Two good friends with opposite relationship problems found themselves single at the same time. As an experiment, they dated for 40 days.

40-days-of-dating-about-us

Of course there’s always the possibility of romance. And due to the delayed publication – they’re just now publishing the daily interviews that they wrote this spring – we know that the project will indeed last for forty days. Perhaps it will work better as a narrative than The Date Project did in 2002?

40 Days of Dating

29. July 2013 by Jill
Categories: Blogging, Electronic literature | Leave a comment

An offline troll

I arrived home from holidays to find a hand-addressed letter in the letter box. The contents weren’t so nice, though: Continue Reading →

29. July 2013 by Jill
Categories: Uncategorized | 5 comments

Being offended at joy or grief in social media

I wrote an opinion piece for Aftenposten this week arguing that we need to be more tolerant of people who share personal crises – or for that matter, personal happiness – in social media. Yesterday, journalist Kjersti Nipen did a great follow-up interview with me, which resulted in a two-page spread in today’s Aftenposten, complete with a photo of me and the kids on our way down to Grønskjeret, because that’s what we were doing when the photographer caught up with us – it’s summertime, and the kids and I are off work and preschool for a few weeks.

For non-Norwegian readers: the title of the interview is “Accepting other peoples’ happiness and grief on Facebook is just common decency”, which refers to the many, many complaints we keep reading, at least in Norway (how is this in other cultures?), from people who are deeply offended to read about their Facebook friends’ cancer treatment side-effects or see photos of their babies or read about their chronically ill children or see another photo of that beautiful beach in Spain.

In the interview, Kjersti and I talk a bit about the comments to my op-ed, which I found very interesting. There were (predictably enough) plenty of people complaining about what they saw as annoying and , but also some very interesting counter-strategies, like the woman going through cancer treatment who asked her Facebook friends whether they wanted to be on the “truth” or “sunshine” list. About 15% answered “truth”; nobody asked for sunshine. So now those 15% get to hear the gory truth, and the other 85% just get boring, bland posts that couldn’t possibly offend anybody.

I wonder whether the 85% now complain that Facebook is trivial and doesn’t provide true connections?

It seems some people will be offended by anything other than the most vapid, boring posts in social media. And often the same people will complain that Facebook is trivial and doesn’t provide true connections.

Unfortunately this piece is paper-only, though you may be able to read it on ATEKST if you have a university or library connection. The op-ed I wrote that this is a follow-up to is online-only, though, so you can read that: Skam og sosiale medier.

13. July 2013 by Jill
Categories: social media | Leave a comment

← Older posts

Newer posts →