One of my goals with my website was to create an easier way for me to communicate with people I wished to interview or have involved in my research. In a sense, I was working towards creating a community for my research involving scholars, amateur historians and actual participants in the civil rights/ Black Power movements. I think I naturally assumed that everyone I would be dealing with would have a basic computer literacy in terms of knowing how to find a website, email, open an attachment, but I’m finding this is not always the case.
I have to agree that it is mush easier to do the research I want to do with the current technology. I think it may be unrealistic of me, however, to think that I can build this group I had envisioned when so many of those involved (especially the senior citizens, age 65+) are not as computer literate as I would have expected. In some cases, I think there may even be instances of technophobia where the internet can be seen as something negative, invasive and at the least, to be suspicious of.
I like Shirkey’s book because it speaks to me. I wonder if there is an assumption on his part, like mine, that ‘everybody is doing it’ when that would only mean people below the age of 65, who have means, a certain level of education, etc..
I’m interested in the Cohen and Rosenzweig chapter on mass marketing and the role Google plays in ranking on its search engine. I especially was interested in their discussion of a site’s ‘reputation’. I have to wonder how much of that decision making is based on critical analysis, how much Google will receive in advertising for ranking certain sites and how much of that is just personal taste. What I’m taking away from the chapter is that much of it seems to be arbitrary and that it is up to the website’s producer to get traffic for the site. The quality may not always be attraction that builds a reputation that invites traffic.
After doing the readings, my question is would it be worthwhile for one to just buy their own server as opposed to having to count on companies like Dreamhost to publish one’s website. My biggest obstacle to keeping my site up over time won’t be so much the maintenance as it will be the fees my hosting company will charge me. For one doing this kind of work, would it be more efficient in the long run in terms if preservation to invest in one’s own server?
Tech question - is it possible to make the exhibit page with thumbnails of all the items in the archive the first one seen (index page) when a user goes to the digital archive section of my site? Response to collections post - I had the exact same questions when I started with omeka. I guess I'm leaning towards theme/subject over format, but I do have one collection that is all photos but of the chairmen of the of the organization I'm researching. Most of my collections will be named after the types of documents in that collection.
My main problem right know may be trying to figure out if there is a size limit to files (.jpg, .pdf) that can be uploaded. I tried to upload two .pdf files the other day, 16mb and 18mb. It took a while but still wouldn’t upload. If I have this problem now, what will happen when I try and upload a (small) video file?
I am also having trouble with loading files onto my exhibit. It would help if I had more examples to work with, but I am having a hard time with the exhibit.
-EJ
Prof. French, I may not understand your question correctly, but any of the work I’ve created for the web is done assuming that it’ll be seen on a PC even though the work itself will be done on a Mac. I keep it simple, though, because I can’t tell if this work will be seen on a laptop, a PC running Windows 2000, XP, Vista, etc. All I can do is hope for the best.
I do have a tech question that was not covered in the reading. How can I convert an .mov file into a .wmv file? Embedding .wmv files on a page is easier for me and would be easier to see on a PC.
I have also thought about using a universal youtube style video player but I’m not sure how to set one up. Is there a program that would allow you to do that?
Much of what Cohen and Rosenzweig discuss in their essays on ‘Designing for the History Web’ is pretty technical in terms of programs, hardware, etc. I have to wonder if this may be too much for the average historian and if this instead will necessitate some type of ‘partnership’ between those who work in multimedia and historians. Flash, XML, directories, etc. – these are things that it would take semesters to learn about for an undergrad majoring in Media or Computer Science.
Is this an unrealistic thing to expect of the average historian or does it necessitate the discipline becoming some type of dual discipline? Would it perhaps be wiser to find a way for historians to instead work more with media people who would do the hands on tech work in terms of creating the website? Is this different than the relationship historians already have with print publishers? If the historian were to take almost an equal amount of classes in media and web production, would it take away from what they already have to do in order to become the best historians possible?
-ej
I am also very frustrated with the annotated bibliography assignment and said many of the same things to myself as Nderise did. It would have been so much simpler to cut and paste, etc. I would imagine a tool like Refworks really comes in handy when you have over 200 items that need to be cited and not just 10.
My main problem had to do with the ‘notes’ and how to get them included in the final bibliography.
I also want to build on her comment about ‘what’s the point?’. Sometimes there is just too much going on a webpage that it becomes distracting and NOT simple to follow. I’m surprised I’m not wearing glasses yet due to how much I have t o read on a computer screen in such small type. But, that being said, I do think that most sites don’t fully take advantage of the all that is possible. “Interchange” makes a point about immersion and interactivity. This is where a site beats a book hands down and enhances the learning experience ( I especially like what Dan Cohen had to say about the use of maps). Is it so much a question of how to best use the new technologies or better organization?
http://www.refworks.com/refshare?site=010331135929600000/RWWS4A623177/core%20website
The issue of the character “Mickey Mouse” is used for discussion purposes in the readings so I thought I might base my question around that. I may be confused about the situation in terms of trademark vs. copyright. The character “Mickey Mouse” is a Disney trademark, but the animated features, etc. are productions which are/were copyrighted. .. at least, this is my understanding.
Lessig uses the animation “Steamboat Willie” to demonstrate how Disney based his animated features on works by other authors and/or material in the public domain. “Steamboat Willie” , as well as other early Mickey Mouse features (”The Mad Doctor” ) are (supposedly) in the public domain. I have read that this is because the Disney people did not the renew the copyright for the cartoon properly. If the “Mickey Mouse” character from one of these early features is used for whatever purposes, however, it’s almost certain that Disney will come after the user.
On top of that is the issue of fair use… so the academic engaged in using such media in work that is educational and not for profit, what are the bottom line rules in such a scenario? Do they really have to ask for permission when they will most certainly be denied even if they do have the legal right to use it? Does the recognized ‘confusion’ over the copyright issue realistically work in the favor of the people trying to use the material? Does the original intent of copyright laws, “the promotion of learning” (”Owning the Past”) stand up in such situations by default?
I’d be interested to know if most of the collaborative work in the humanities was being done at public universities or private ‘elite’ universities such as Columbia and NYU. I wonder if either environment is seen as being more conducive to collaborative work in the humanities.
Spiro refers to the academy as being adversarial and in general, this has been my experience. I think it was Nicole in the last class (Univ. of Florida?) who mentioned some of the differences she experienced between being in a public and private university. I work at CUNY, mostly with grad students, and while I feel there may be a sense of elitism in general with graduate school, I get the sense that the atmosphere is more suited for collaborative work at a public university as opposed to a private one.
Unsworth’s delivery mentions that almost all of the scholars he introduces on his panel are from public universities. I tried to scan the articles to see if any one mentioned whether or not they had researched this, but Unsworth’s introductions were all I could find.
