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

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.