• delivery
• documentary
• entropy

Check out this experiment in "micro-documentary" by UT graduate student Will Burdette. Will discusses the work of Fritz Blaw in terms of Lave and Wenger's Situated Learning. Blaw is Austin's human poster filter. Burdette explains:

• Jim Brown's blog
• Login or register to post comments
• Read more

• delivery

• Jim Aune's blog
• Login or register to post comments

• delivery
• technology

In the past, the Blogora has discussed technology and platforms of delivery. In the words of mcsantos, "Digital technology emphasizes delivery since conventions are diverse and still very much under formation. And because digitality stresses becoming over being." And in the words of Cynthia, "Put technology into play, and that platform [of delivery] is a quaquaversal (Being and Becoming going in all directions at once)."

Well, Prince Charles gave a lecture in Abu Dhabi on Monday as a hologram (there's video of it if you follow the link):

Prince Charles gave a keynote lecture at a summit meeting on advanced energy technologies in Abu Dhabi on Monday — not in the flesh, but as a three-dimensional hologram. By not flying there and back, he avoided adding about 20 tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere (the carbon cost of flying him and his entourage), according to conference organizers.

• Jim Brown's blog
• Login or register to post comments

• delivery

Okay, let's see if i can get a Jim Aune-style thread going here. I'm working on a dissertation chapter that deals a bit with delivery. In some recent scholarship, I'm seeing a renewed concern for the "fifth canon" (especially in computers and writing scholarship). My questions (and some provisional answers):

1) Are you seeing what I'm seeing? Drop me a few citations if you can. Here are a few examples:

DeVoss, Danielle Nicole and James E. Porter. "Why Napster Matters to Writing: Filesharing as a New Ethic of Digital Delivery." Computers and Composition 23 (2006): 178-210.

• Jim Brown's blog
• 7 comments
• Read more

• communication
• delivery
• writing

*Sigh* The perennial post-CCCC buzz on the WPA list about whether or not to 'read' papers at the conference has begun. Here's part of Rob Hudson's post on 'The insidious practice of monotonously reading your paper at a conference': "I had the great fortune of attending CCCC this year and was surprised that some presenters actually read papers, verbatim, at the podium! Others engaged the audience with interactive, cooperative presentations. As an unenlightened adjunct faculty with a mere Masters degree in writing, perhaps I am ignorant and don't understand why I can't simply read the paper myself, at home, without paying a conference fee.... But as an instructor who encourages students to present such content well, I can't understand why this practice of monotone reading persists." There have been rants for and against, and some calls for both/and. I'm in the 'for' camp, and it strikes me as extremely problematic for people to use terms like 'insidious,' or for other posts to be subject-lined "how can communications specialist do this to each other behind closed doors?"(see Tom Miller's post). I am a writer. I teach writing. I perform writing. I publish writing. And I do all of it behind closed doors. It is odd to me that a conference on composition does not seem to welcome compositions.

• Cynthia's blog
• 5 comments