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. […]
Helge Tenn¯
From your subtitle: “(why blogging is better than advertising)”
I know my fare share about both and I would certainly say that the enormous complexity and versatility of advertising does not correctly compare with the complexity of blogging.
And why does it have to be “either, or”? Why can’t it be both? We see that it’s not one channel alone that includes, touches or transfers it’s values, stories and products/services to customers, but rather the combination of channels based on the channels individual features and abilities.
I would rather say “HOW blogging can be a beautiful supplement to your marketing mix”.
Helge
Jill Walker Rettberg
Oh, I have no problem agreeing wtih that, Helge. I regretted the title after it was printed in the program – but it doesn’t matter too much. There are definitely cases where blogging is better than advertising.
Letizia Jaccheri
this presentation is good. I will give a presentation about my blog at an NTNU forun next week. I will cite this. 🙂 Letizia Jaccheri
Tom J Hals¯r
Hi Jill!
It was an honor to have you with us. You really set off some new ideas into our heads.
Theres a small video teaser from the seminar put up on our site, or should I rather say blog 🙂
Thanx again Jill for an interesting talk.
:)tom
http://www.grafilledit.no
jill/txt » i’m speaking on social networks at first tuesday this tuesday
[…] I’m giving a talk for First Tuesday here in Bergen this Tuesday evening, on social networks. They got an interesting line up – Rune R¯sten, who runs one of Norway’s large social networks, Nettby, is speaking, and so is Kjetil Manheim, from Tarantell. I heard Kjetil speak on Web 2.0 at the graphic designers’ conference, RELEVANS, and he was excellent; very informative and inspiring at the same time. My job is to be the academic giving perspective and cultural implications and so on, which should be fun, especially in a brief and efficient twenty minutes each. […]