This document summarizes discussions from the CATaC'10 conference at the University of British Columbia. It touches on several topics, including theoretical frameworks for understanding technology and communication, the relationship between online and offline identities and communities, and how networked technologies are shaping concepts of self and culture. It questions whether individualism is being replaced by a focus on relational and collective identities, and explores how social media platforms commodify user data and identities.

1. Second Looks CATaC’10 University of British Columbia

2. Some First Impressions … the internet is an endless sea of niches… (Delany, 2009a, 20, in McQueen and Green, 324)

3. Some First Impressions … Critical discourse community … that knows how to have fun together …

4. Some additional insights … Theory Additional theoretical resources – feminist theory at work in Maya van derVelden Theory is sexy! David Kreps – chatroulette, sex & Foucault Innis-Eisenstein-McLuhan-Ong-Baron-Kondor framework consistent with, e.g., the use of text messaging by the WujalWujal as a possible example of secondary literacy? (Brady & Dyson) Theory-Praxis dialogue Broad spread of theoretical backgrounds (see “Second First Looks”) – some presentations left theory more tacit. Not a critique, but useful reminder that explicit theoretical references are helpful for offering conceptual groundwork for dialogue, critique, etc.

5. Some additional insights … As the bloom is off, e.g., open source, etc. the bloom is off new technologies? From 1990s’ “wiring the world” for democracy in an electronic global village to, e.g. paper / radio / cassettes as the most cost-effective media for distance education, vis-a-vis mobile phones are good for following up learning – not so good at delivering new learning (Hewling &Sesnan)

7. Additional needs … We need a visual grammar for Web 2.0 environments e.g., A. Shiri et al work on visual design – cross-cultural approaches to visual design “grammars” / “vocabularies” cf. Gordan Fletcher’s typologies of photobombing

8. Philosophical Anthropology relational beings – emphasized / embodied / enacted, e.g., in Chase, Charnley, Mclean: intellect is not only located in the mind, but also in heart, body, and soul Brady & Dyson:humans need to communicate first of all to cooperate – only then in order to meet basic needs. humans need to communicate first of all to cooperate – only then in order to meet basic needs. contra / in addition to Hofstede’s notion of culture as “software of the mind” (Lee et al) – while remaining useful in several studies, rooted in a cognitivist model of knowledge (based in Cartesian rationalism)vs. more contemporary enactivism that emphasizes precisely a holistic, non-dualistic understanding of knowledge as incorporating (pun intended) non-reflective, pre-cognitive processes of the body in knowing and navigating the world (cf. Susan Stuart, 2008)

10. loss of sense of individual self / individual privacyPostman-Huxley: we fall in love with the technologies of our enslavement … Especially as these are increasingly owned and controlled by and for corporations, rather than by states allegedly interested in the common good

11. Some additional insights … Connections with larger trends, findings in CMC Cheong and Martin:critical research focuses on how power dynamics in online interaction mirror social hierarchies outside classroom …  overall shift from 1990s’ dichotomies between “real” / “virtual,” “offline” / “online” (“first age” of Internet studies – Wellman, 2010) to “third age” defined by recognition of inextricable interweaving of offline / online, e.g. In recent research on community and the Internet, the emphasis is shifting from ethnographic studies of virtual communities, to studies of people’s blending of offline and online contacts. (Kendall 2010, p 320)

12. Looking forward … Who are you? contra emerging and increasingly rich and complex understanding of human begins as active agents, as embodied / enactive / relational beings … But: A) relationalityorality collectivism that (from Vygotsky to Souleymane & Nocera) renders the individual entirely dependent on the community B) We – including our information and free labor offered up in the name of social communication - are commodities; especially for young people whose identities are in formation and especially vulnerable to group constraints – those identities are increasingly defined within the “pre-packaged,” consumer-oriented drop-down menu choices. beginning with gender identity (cf. Livingstone, Bromseth and Sundén, and others in The Blackwell Handbook of Internet Studies)

13. Looking forward … Culture? is the fog lifting?

14. Looking forward … Culture? No proof in our study for an influence of cultural dispositions on the acceptance levels. […] The literature does not yet provide a conclusive model of cultural dispositions vis-à-vis learning. (Roche & Todorova) Hofstede – at least re. collectivism is alive and well … Al-Saggaf, Souleymane & Nocera … at least as a “nice can-opener” … We’re still in the dark ages regarding our theoretical constructs of “language,” “culture,” much less “language learning” – Ken Reeder

15. Looking forward … Culture? Notion of idioculture: An idioculture is a system of knowledge, beliefs, behaviors, and customs shared by members of an interacting group to which members can refer and that serve as the basis of further interaction. Members recognize that they share experiences, and these experiences can be referred to with the expectation they will be understood by other members, thus being used to construct a reality for the participants (Fine, 1987, p.125). This definition accommodates the idea of culture as a locally emerging activity system involving a briefer stretch of history (Cole and Engestrom, 2007), and includes multiple cultural selves and hybrid identities on the Internet that interact with each other cross-culturally to form unique cultures of their own. The definition fits well with the ephemeral, fluid nature of the Internet which fuels the development of cybercultures, cultures that emerge among those who use the Internet to communicate, developing its own etiquette, norms, customs, ethics and mythology, just as an idioculture does. (528)

16. Some additional insights … Looking forward … Who are you? bintu(the ones who have been to somewhere) – CATaC’10 And, we hope you will become “wiltus” … And, we hope, you will (return) to CATaC’12 …