After a well-earned vacation, danah boyd has returned to blogging and has posted her dissertation Taken Out of Context: American Teen Sociality in Networked Publics online. danah is a pioneering scholar of social networking sites, a she-really-only-JUST-got-her-PhD!? kind of researcher who has already done so much important work – and who is extremely good at getting her message out there, speaking at conferences and meetings across the world and participating in commercial research as well as research aimed at establishing policies.

So I’m thrilled to be able to read her dissertation. I’m printing the whole thing as I write, because this is something I want to be able to curl up with and a piece of writing I’m sure I’ll be referring to in my own work.


Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

4 thoughts on “danah boyd’s dissertation is online

  1. Kristina

    The link does not work. :o(

  2. Jill Walker Rettberg

    Oops, a missing ” killed the links… Fixed now, thanks.

  3. […] janvier 2009 · Pas de commentaire Belle surprise, ce matin, en lisant jill/txt ‚Äî j’apprends que la th?®se de doctorat deDanah Boyd est maintenant disponible en ligne! […]

  4. Weekly Reader | William Patrick Wend

    […] Via Jill, I am slowly engrossing myself in danah boyd’s freshly published dissertation about social networks. […]

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

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.