How an Archive of the Internet Could Change History https://t.co/zI601OaGly
— Helen Hockx-Yu (@hhockx) June 22, 2016
Reminder of the deadline for the submission of full papers: 31 July 2016
The issue is scheduled for publication in Spring 2017.
Digital media has initiated the transformation of archiving practices with implications for audio-visual archives, written archives and libraries. The substitution of finding aids, including paper cards, by databases is in most instances seen as beneficial and an advance.
However, the digitization of archival holdings poses a lot of questions that have not yet been thoroughly discussed. The physical nature of the sources is no longer an obstacle to their universal accessibility. Is digitization thus leading to the disappearance of the emphatic notion of the archive, because digitized materials are becoming mere elements of the constantly growing and flowing mass of data in electronic circuits? Will digital techniques replace the archive as an institution? Do we have to envision archives without records and without a documentation strategy and documentarists as hackers who build ad hoc collections from randomly commented links?
With regard to broadcast archives, it can be observed that the form and comprehensibility of metadata, access and usage regulations have not kept pace with digitization. How can this asynchrony be dissolved? How can the means of digital technology and the Internet be used to create comprehensible and accessible metadata? How can archives be connected are there historical examples we could learn from?
Articles for this special issue, Archives of the Digital could, for example, address ideas and visions for the reconfiguration of archives, or the epistemology of the archive (and its notions), treat exemplary case studies of (interdisciplinary) practices for the interpretation of archival content, or elaborate on the impact of digitization for scholars working in the archives/with archival holdings.
Dans la seconde partie des années 1990 émergent plusieurs enquêtes sur les usages.
Par exemple :
Boullier, Dominique et Charlier, Catherine. A chacun son Internet. Enquête sur des usages ordinaires . In: Réseaux, volume 15, n°86, 1997. Modèles et acteurs de la production audiovisuelle. pp. 159-181. DOI : 10.3406/reso.1997.3118
Pouts-Lajus, Serge et Tiévant, Sophie. Observation des usages d’Internet dans différents lieux d’accès public. Bulletin des bibliothèques de France (BBF), n° 5, 1999, p. 30-34. Disponible sur le Web : <http://bbf.enssib.fr/consulter/bbf-1999-05-0030-004>. ISSN 1292-8399.
A two-day conference, University of London, United Kingdom, 14–15 June 2017
Organised by the School of Advanced Study, University of London, the British Library, The National Archives of the UK, the Oxford Internet Institute, Aarhus University, L’Institut des sciences de la communication (CNRS, Paris-Sorbonne, UPMC), L3S Research Center – Leibniz University Hannover, the Royal Library, Denmark, the Bibliothèque nationale de France, L’Institut national de l’audiovisuel and Aix-Marseille University.
Un aperçu de quelques possibilités, travaux et outils issu d’un workshop organisé par le History Council of South Australia pour le SA History Festival 2016 et tenu à la State Library of South Australia, le 10 mai 2016.
AoIR routinely hosts several preconference workshops before the main conference. Attendees must register to attend a preconference; the price of the preconference is included as part of the main conference. All workshops will be held on October 5th.
Parmi elle celle organisée par Camille Paloque-Bergès (HT2S Cnam, membre de Web90 ) et Kevin Driscoll (University of Virginia):
404 History Not Found: Challenges in Internet History and Memory Studies
How did the Internet become relevant in today’s culture and politics? How were its codes and rules—whether technical, social or cultural—constructed, challenged, and normalized? How did net culture become a mass phenomenon of global importance? To understand why and how the “Internet rules” today, it is essential that we look back at the internet’s past. In this pre-conference, we will discuss the specific theoretical and methodological challenges that arise in the study of the internet through time and memory, for purposes of both historiography (what net histories and how?) and epistemology (net histories as an object of media research). Attendees will be invited to participate in three hands-on, interactive sessions organized around issues, sources and methods fundamental to researching net diachronicity.
Net history survives in unexpected places, unfolding through time and space, collapsing in on the present. The artifacts that surface may be incomplete or inscrutable absent their original contexts, requiring us to borrow creatively from other fields and develop new historical methods (Ankerson, 2011; Brügger & Finnemann, 2012; Paloque-Berges, 2016). From formal archives and oral histories to lingering web sites, software, and hardware artifacts, the material evidence of the past suggests a diversity of social, temporal, and technical regimes. Indeed, recent scholarship on early networks reveals a greater range of experiences, technologies, norms and motivations than is found in best-known histories of the internet (Brammer, 2015; Brunton, 2013; Driscoll, 2014; Hargadon, 2011; Mailland, 2015; Paloque-Berges, 2011; Rankin 2014, 2015; Russell, 2014; Russell & Schafer, 2014; Schafer & Thierry, 2012; Schulte, 2013; Streeter, 2011). In their wake, we question how to make sense of conflicts and contradictions while respecting the subjective lived experiences of individual participants. What is our responsibility to find and document hidden histories, obscure sources, and less visible networks? How will a richer understanding of the internet’s past change how we engage with its present and imagine its future?
This pre-conference will include three workshop sessions organized around core research challenges in net history: (1) epistemology, (2) sources and methodology, and (3) mediation and transmission. Selected participants, rather than present whole case studies, will intervene on specific challenges—for instance: theoretical paradoxes or deadlocks, methodological problem-solving, and demonstrations of born-digital artifacts. The audience will be involved by taking positions, suggesting ad-hoc solutions, and identifying common themes.
(…) This pre-conference will be a full-day workshop facilitated by Kevin Driscoll and Camille Paloque-Berges with support from the Agence Nationale de la Recherche project Web90. The discussions and hands-on activities will be accessible to all AOIR attendees but will be especially engaging for researchers encountering issues of temporality, memory, nostalgia, or a need to “go back in time” in their own work.
Un stimulant article de Lara Putnam (UCIS Research Professor and Chair of the Department of History at the University of Pittsburgh).
This essay explores the consequences for historians’ research of the twinned transnational and digitized turns. The accelerating digitization of primary and secondary sources and the rise of full-text web-based search to access information within them has transformed historians’ research practice, radically diminishing the role of place-specific prior expertise as a prerequisite to discovery. Indeed, we can now find information without knowing where to look. This has incited remarkably little reflection among mainstream historians, but the consequences are profound. What has become newly possible? How do the new digital affordances relate to the current boom in transnational topics and approaches? How do the reach, speed, and granularity of digitized search impact our ability to reconstruct the supranational past? This essay heralds the novel forms of knowledge-generation made possible by technological transformations. It also attempts an accounting of all the ancillary learning that international research in an analog world once required. What kinds of knowledge and insight did place-based research across borders instill? What are the intellectual and political consequences of leaving that behind?
Le nouveau livre de Wendy Hui Kyong Chun, après Control and Freedom: Power and Paranoia in the Age of Fiber Optics et Programmed Visions: Software and Memory, également parus au MIT Press.
New media—we are told—exist at the bleeding edge of obsolescence. We thus forever try to catch up, updating to remain the same. Meanwhile, analytic, creative, and commercial efforts focus exclusively on the next big thing: figuring out what will spread and who will spread it the fastest. But what do we miss in this constant push to the future? In Updating to Remain the Same, Wendy Hui Kyong Chun suggests another approach, arguing that our media matter most when they seem not to matter at all—when they have moved from “new” to habitual. Smart phones, for example, no longer amaze, but they increasingly structure and monitor our lives. Through habits, Chun says, new media become embedded in our lives—indeed, we become our machines: we stream, update, capture, upload, link, save, trash, and troll.
Chun links habits to the rise of networks as the defining concept of our era. Networks have been central to the emergence of neoliberalism, replacing “society” with groupings of individuals and connectable “YOUS.” (For isn’t “new media” actually “NYOU media”?) Habit is central to the inversion of privacy and publicity that drives neoliberalism and networks. Why do we view our networked devices as “personal” when they are so chatty and promiscuous? What would happen, Chun asks, if, rather than pushing for privacy that is no privacy, we demanded public rights—the right to be exposed, to take risks and to be in public and not be attacked?