Michael Wesch is speaking in Bergen a week from today at Scandic Hotel here in Bergen – at the It’s Learning conference which costs 4000 kr. Do you think they’d notice if I just sort of snuck in and pretended I’d forgotten my name tag?

For those of you who aren’t familiar with Michael Wesch, he’s an Assistant Professor of Cultural Anthropology at Kansas State who does digital ethnography, but the cool thing about him is how he makes these YouTube videos that get the point about social media and web 2.0 across in such a beautiful way – talk about merging form and content. See, here’s his most famous one (and yes, I’ve raved about it before):

Or you might like this video of a talk he gave about YouTube – with a lot of video in it.


Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

2 thoughts on “michael wesch is in town (but the conference is kind of expensive)

  1. […] Anthropological introduction to YouTube 09Mar09 Hittade tack vare jill/txt en fantastisk presentation (med mycket video) av Michael Wesch d?§r han presenterar “An anthropological introduction to YouTube” f??r Library of Congress. Ifall ni har missat det s?• var Michael Wesch han som skapade det fantastiska filmen som f??rklarade Web 2.0 som hette “The Machine is Us/ing Us” […]

  2. Scott Rettberg

    I hear the lobsters at that conference are exceeded only by the backrubs you receive during the plenary sessions. Looking forward to meeting Michael next week on the street outside of the conference venue.

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

AI STORIES

AI-generated stories have longer endings than human stories

My colleague Jessica Witte has just shared a preprint where she compared the emotional arcs of the stories we generated using gpt-4o-mini to those of human-authored (pre-2022) stories from the subreddit r/WritingPrompts, conveniently gathered in this dataset. She found a distinct difference in the endings of the LLM-generated stories: both […]

How to peer review a paper in 2026

Dorothy Bishop, a psychologist, wrote a useful list of what reviewers need to look out now that so many papers are bad science that looks good thanks to LLMs. Read her whole blog post, she explains it well, but here’s a brief version because I’m pretty sure we’ll be needing […]

“So what if it was ChatGPT? It *could* have been true!”

I recently read a good article on the different kinds of truth a language model operates with by Luke Mann, Liam Magee and Vanicka Arora, Truth Machines: Synthesizing Veracity in AI Language Models, but despite its lovely typology of truths (consensus, correspondence, coherence and pragmatic) it doesn’t help me with […]

AI STORIES

AI shimmer and sparkle

I have this hunch that sparkles and glow and shimmer are somehow a point in the latent spaces of LLMs that have more connections than you would expect. Perhaps their connotation to magic and to the unknown matches some of the mystique of genAI? Or perhaps these words are used […]

Don’t do a systematic review if you’re in the humanities

This paper is a great example of why you probably shouldn’t use a systematic literature review for a theoretical and conceptual research question like “How does artificial intelligence affect the perception of authenticity and aura in art?” However, if you’re looking for an annotated list of 48 recent articles about […]