[genderstudies] Call for Papers: "Questioning Digital Activism"

[Cgrilo]

*http://currents.cwrl.utexas.edu/call-for-papers
Deadline: January 17, 2013 *

Social media technologies like Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, podcasts, text
messaging, and other mobile blogging programs have recently been used to
share information between activists around the world. From the Arab Spring
to Occupy Wall Street, web-roots campaigns have arguably seen countless
successes, while information-sharing hacktivists like Wikileaks and
Anonymous have demonstrated the potential value of digital media technology
in exposing institutional malfeasance. But while many tout the value of
digital activism for promoting positive change, others remain skeptical.
Some argue, for example, that digital technology fails to generate the
actions and social conditions necessary to produce stable communities or
meaningful change. Many debate whether online discussions truly allow for
greater understanding of diverse voices or merely draw us into echo
chambers of increasingly like-minded and perhaps extremist groups. Some
note digital media is employed not only by groups seeking public good, but
also by terrorist organizations and hate groups. Meanwhile, the ethics and
legality of hacktivism remain unclear. Along with these new issues raised
by social media, the perennial problem of access remains. If digital media
technologies become the favored means of promoting and participating in
causes, then what of those without the capacity to engage with these
technologies? Finally, what do these debates suggest for the future of
pedagogy and scholarship regarding digital literacies? In what ways might
pedagogy and scholarship be reimagined or retooled in response to the
questions raised here in order to shape the next generation of digital
activism?

The 2013 issue of *Currents in Electronic Literacy* invites scholarly work
that engages questions at the intersections of advocacy, activism, and
digital media technologies. In addition to essays, *Currents* invites
compositions using media such as websites, videos, digital presentations,
interviews, archives, or other forms. Digital or technological submissions
in non-traditional formats should include a 500-word document explicating
the piece presented.

Some lines of scholarship for the 2013 issue include—but are not limited
to—the following:

   - What are digital activism's greatest potentials and limitations—both
   in general and in specific cases (e.g., in specific political campaigns or
   instances of civil rights, resistance, or revolutionary advocacy)?


   - What problematic forms of digital activism exist—including but not
   limited to the activities of terrorist organizations such as Al Qaeda, hate
   speech sponsored by various racial supremacy and other groups, digital
   crime and terrorism such as distributed denial of service attacks (DDoS)
   and illegal hacking activities? What issues do these problematic forms
   raise for other digital activists such as increased surveillance,
   censorship, and security issues?


   - What role do digital media technologies play in today's notion of
   public advocacy or activism? How do these technologies shape the forms of
   advocacy we employ?


   - Do digital media technologies expose any interesting alternative forms
   of rhetoric and writing or reveal anything about rhetorical invention or
   memory?


   - To what extent has digital media technology become the favored
   contemporary "space" for activism and what are the implications for those
   without access to these technologies?


   - How rhetorically effective is digital activism compared to previous
   media technologies and boots-on-the-ground activism?


   - In what ways is digital media changing political campaigns and are
   such changes rhetorically significant? Does the United States Supreme
   Court’s opinion in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010)
   affect the impact of such technologies on political campaigns, and if so
   what impact is it likely to have on the use of digital technologies in
   political campaigns?


   - Does digital media alter the ways in which we generate and experience
   social solidarity? Does it shift the boundaries of our national, ethnic,
   religious or other identities in any important ways?


   - How do issues of censorship and the often fragile security of digital
   systems reveal a potential overreliance on digital activism?


   - Are there marginal forms of digital activism that need to be uncovered
   and if so what are they and why are they important?


   - Do online peer-to-peer sharing, blogging, or the increased access of
   amateur journalists allow dilettantes and partisans undue influence on the
   news cycle or potentially degrade public discourse?


   - In what ways might digital, multimedia, or non-traditional scholarship
   be considered forms of digital activism? How do digital scholars today use
   new and social media to mobilize or to effect changes at the boundaries of
   traditional academic spheres of conversation and publication?


   - By what criteria should digital activism be assessed? Is the
   accomplishment of public discourse enough, or must an end goal be reached?
   On these grounds, are digital activist campaigns succeeding or failing?


   - Can digital activism be monetized, and if so, does it inherently
   compromise the nature of digital activism? What political, ethical,
   logistical or social differences exist between raising money click to click
   versus door to door?


   - To what extent is digital activism the cultural product of service
   providers, as opposed to citizen-users? Who mediates, transmits, and,
   ultimately, owns “the people’s” voice?


   - Recent court cases have tested the limits of privacy and other
   constitutional protections, including against self-incrimination, by
   bringing defendants’ own online voices to witness against them. If
   technology continues to expand and evolve at its present rate, how can
   legal structures keep pace? What might happen to juridical systems,
   individual activists, and digital media if they do not?


   - With respect to the issues raised above, how should pedagogy regarding
   digital literacies be reimagined or retooled to shape the next generation
   of digital activism?

*Currents* *in Electronic Literacy* is internally peer-reviewed by a cohort
of graduate students and faculty at the University of Texas at Austin
according to Ebsco Publishing’s policy for “Editorial Board Peer-Review.”
All submissions to *Currents* should adhere to MLA style guidelines for
citations and documentation. Submissions should state any technical
requirements or limitations. *Currents* reserves all copyrights to
published articles and requires that all of its articles be housed on its
own Web server. It is the policy of *Currents* that all accepted
contributions meet Section 508 accessibility standards (for example,
captioning for video and transcripts for audio). While all
*Currents*articles are accessible, readers are advised that these same
articles may
contain links to other websites that do not meet accessibility guidelines.
Please direct all submissions and questions to: *currentsdwrl at gmail.com*.
The deadline for submissions is January 17, 2013.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.stevens.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/private/genderstudies/attachments/20121203/3261b2f6/attachment-0001.html>