Search Here ….

Tags

affect AI AI slop AI STORIES alumni Blogging book care ChatGPT conferences cultural bias data analysis electronic literature ELMCIP ephemerality exhibition fascism Gephi history journalister lip-syncing LLMs machine vision network analysis norsk open access presentation publication publications R representation research science fiction self-representation selfies Snapchat social media Surveillance talks teaching trip report twitter UiB visualisation workshop
Uncategorised

a work of electronic literature for each web 2.0 tool

Jill6 Comments

Mark Merino over at Writer Response Theory posts a fabulous table matching up a work of electronic literature to each popular web 2.0 tool. I’ve stolen the whole thing, it’s so useful – I hope Mark doesn’t mind (yell at me if you do, Mark!). Mark suggests using these creative works of fiction and poetry to enrich a course where students learn about social technologies and web 2.0: “You wouldnít think of teaching writing without some examples of powerful rhetoric or inspirational works of literary mastery. At the very least, youíd expect students to be aware of some of the poetic, evocative, and creative potential of language. So why teach a course in Web 2.0 tools without some examples that push the boundaries of functional literacy with these tools?”

Have any of you experience with using creative works like these in teaching web 2.0 and the like?

Tool Elit Work
RSS Feeds: J.R. Carpenter, Tributaries and Text-Fed Streams
Blogs: Rob Wittig, Robbwit.net and Toby Litt, Slice
Social Annotation, Social Bookmarking: Diigo: Mark C. Marino, Marginalia in the Library of Babel
Facebook: Kate Armstrong, “Why Some Dolls are Bad“
Wiki: multi-authored, Los Wikiless Timespedia, A Million Little Penguins
Twitter: Jay Bushman, The Good Captain.
Page Aggregator: Netvibes Kate Pullinger and Chris Joseph, “Flight Paths“
Online Maps: Google Maps Charles Cummings, 21 Steps
Web 2.0: Wikipedia, Amazon.com, Facebook,
email, and more….		 Serge Bouchardon, “The 12 Labors of the Internet User“

Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

6 thoughts on “a work of electronic literature for each web 2.0 tool”

  1. mez

    hi jill,

    just as you’ve reposted mark’s table, i’ll repost my comment on it here as well:0)

    —
    elit 2.0 from my own stable:

    *twitter:

    1. s[p]erver[se]_: 404 poetry_ [2007]
    [also in: http://www.youownmenow.net/exhibition.php%5D

    2. [started today] New Media Scotlandís new Twitterist-in-residence [2008]
    http://twitter.com/mediascot

    3. _Poetic Game Interventions [V.1]_ entitled _Twittermixed Litterature [2007]
    http://www.well.com/user/jmalloy/elit/elit_software.html#mez
    http://groups.google.com/group/leanmp/browse_thread/thread/a0fd5a15177c964d

    *blogging:

    1. cross.ova.ing ][4rm.blog.2.log][
    http://netwurker.livejournal.com/ [since 2003]

    2. ______dis[ap]posable_
    http://disapposable.blogspot.com/ [2007]

    *facebook:

    1. _Tag Platform Poetry_ [2007]
    [A Poetic/Social Network/ MMO/Visual Mashup where character screenshots of
    of World of Warcraft Characters are imported into the Facebook. The photos in the respective albums are then tagged with poetic descriptions in the areas normally reserved for traditional photo labelling. These description lines are then aggregated at the bottom of each album to create a type of cross-plaform tagged poetry.]

    cheers,
    mez

  2. Jill Walker Rettberg

    Thanks, Mez, these are great additions!

  3. Mark Marino

    Thanks for reposting this, Jill,

    J.R. Carpenter added this note to my Facebook version of this post:
    Yes, very useful – thanks. Another addition in the Online Maps category: “in absentia” – a new e.lit piece that uses the Google Maps API to “haunt” aerial photographs of the Mile End neighbourhood of Montreal with the stories of former tenants (fictional or otherwise) who have been forced out by gentrification and its erasures: http://luckysoap.com/inabsentia

    Best to the family,
    Mark

  4. Jill Walker Rettberg

    Thanks, Mark! I suggest people interested in this go on over to Mark’s original post, as that’s where the most up-to-date version and addendums will be.

  5. S¯ren Pold

    Interesting development! Perhaps also look at this ‘exhibition’ of creative mis-use of web2.0 services – initiated by Geoff Cox:
    Antisocial Notworking: http://project.arnolfini.org.uk/projects/2008/antisocial/index.php

  6. future of the book is digital « word and image

    […] Meanwhile Jill Walker at¬†jilltxt¬†¬†posted about Mark Merino’s ¬†on¬†Elit 2.0 (a guide to literary works on social software)¬†¬†at¬†Writer Response Theory¬†which is a¬†table matching up works of electronic literature to popular web 2.0 tools. with the suggestion¬†of “using these creative works of fiction and poetry to enrich a course where students learn about social technologies and web 2.0″. […]

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

Screenshot of a paragraph from a New York Times article published May 12, 2026. Text reads: "The price of tomatoes -tart bursts of flavor in salads and sandwiches — surged nearly 40 percent in April from a year ago on a combination of bad weather, high tariffs and climbing transportation costs."
AI STORIES

Genre glitches and unexpected promotional phrases as a sign of AI writing

A genre glitch is a characteristic of LLM-assisted writing where the text suddenly switches genre, typically inserting a short promotional phrase full of sensory details into an informational text. Genre glitches occur when a word in the generated text is heavily associated with a genre or context that is markedly […]

Top of a ransom note from Shinyhunters hacking group. Text reads: "SHINYHUNTERS rooting your systems since '19 ;) ShinyHunters has breached Instructure (again). Instead of contacting us to resolve it they ignored us and did some "security patches"."
Networked Politics University politics

UiB self-hosts the open source version of Canvas, so wasn’t affected by the breach

On May 1st Canvas announced a security breach, and then yesterday the system was hacked. The login page was replaced by a ransom note: if universities don’t pay up by 12 May, student data will be released. Here’s what the login page looked like yesterday: Way back in 2015, when […]

AI and algorithmic culture Networked Politics

AI-generated images, fascist aesthetics: Dieselbrølet and Heimatstrom

My German is pretty dodgy, so when I first saw Heimatstrom on Bluesky, shared by Roland Meyer, a professor of visual culture at Universität Zürich’s Digital Society Initiative, I misinterpreted it and thought it was a far-right campaign. But no, Heimatstrom is a group of left-wing environmentalists using fascist AI […]

Photo of a billboard ad at Oslo S train station showing a smiliing conductor and the text "Du må ikke sove. Joda, bare sov du."
AI STORIES

“Du må ikke sove”: a floating motif detached from its meaning (or: LLMs can write Norwegian but miss cultural references)

There’s a new ad for the train between Stavanger and Oslo in Norway that uses a line from Arnulf Øverland’s famous anti-fascist poem Du må ikke sove (“You must not sleep”). Du må ikke sove, you must not sleep, the ad says. And then it flips it, jovially, joda, bare […]

AI and algorithmic culture University politics

Academics in Norway: Sign this petition asking for research-based discussions of how to use AI in universities

I just signed a petition calling for Norwegian universities to use research expertise on AI when deciding how to implement it, rather than having decisions be made mostly administratively. ,  If you are a researcher in Norway, please read it and sign it if you agree – and share with anyone else who might be interested. The petition was written by three researchers at UiT: Maria Danielsen (a philosopher who completed her PhD in 2025 on AI and ethics, including discussions of art and working life), Knut Ørke (Norwegian as a second language), and Holger Pötzsch (a professor of media studies with many years of research on digital media, video games, disruption, and working life, among other topics).  This is not about preventing researchers from exploring AI methods in their research. It is about not uncritically accepting the hype that everyone must use AI everywhere without critical reflection. It is about not introducing Copilot as the default option in word processors, or training PhD candidates to believe they will fall behind if they do not use AI when writing articles, without proper academic discussion. Changes like these should be knowledge-based and discussed academically, not merely decided administratively, because they alter the epistemological foundations of research. Maria wrote to me a couple of months ago because she had read my opinion piece in Aftenposten in which I called for a strong brake on the use of language models in knowledge work. She was part of a committee tasked with developing UiT’s AI strategy and was concerned because there was so much hype and so few members of the committee with actual expertise in AI. I fully support the petition. There are probably some good uses for AI in research, but the uncritical, hype-driven insistence that we must simply adopt it everywhere is highly risky. There are many researchers in Norway with strong expertise in AI, language, ethics, working life, and culture. We must make use of this expertise. This is also partly about respect for research in the humanities, social sciences, psychology, and law. Introducing AI at universities and university colleges is not merely a technical issue, and perhaps not even primarily a technical one. It concerns much more: philosophy of science, methodological reflection, epistemology, writing, publishing, the working environment, and more. […]

screenshot of Grammarly - main text in the middle, names of experts on the left with reccomendations and on the right more info about the expert review feature
AI and algorithmic culture Teaching

Grammarly generated fake expert reviews “by” real scholars

Grammarly is a full on AI plagiarism machine now, generating text, citations (often irrelevant), “humanizing” the text to avoid AI checkers and so on. If you’re an author or scholar, they also have been impersonating and offering “feedback” in your name. Until yesterday, when they discontinued the Expert Review feature due to a class action lawsuit. Here are screenshots of how it worked.