PhD studentship-Understanding UK digital comics information and publishing practices: From creation to consumption

The advert for the UK Digital Comics information and publishing practices: from creation to consumption PhD studentship opportunity is now available:

APPLY! [Click here]

Application deadline:  31 May 2019. 

DUE TO POPULAR DEMAND DEADLINE NOW EXTENDED TO 14TH JUNE 2019

[Direct link]

University Supervisors: Dr Ernesto Priego (Lecturer, Centre for Human Computer-Interaction Design) <— that’s me! and Dr Stephann Makri (Senior Lecturer in Human-Computer Interaction)

British Library Supervisors: Ian Cooke (Head of Contemporary British Publications) and Stella Wisdom (Digital curator)

[Direct link]

For more information on this and other opportunities see my previous blog post here or go to the British Library announcement at https://www.bl.uk/news/2019/february/ahrc-cdp-2019.

 

 

Digital Comics AHRC Collaborative PhD Opportunities with the British Library

I am delighted to announce that The British Library (British Library) and City, University of London (City) will be offering a fully-funded PhD studentship (including fees and living allowance) on the research theme of ‘Understanding UK digital comics information and publishing practices: From creation to consumption.’ The supervision team for this particular collaborative PhD will be:

  • City, University of London Supervisors: Dr Ernesto Priego (Lecturer, Centre for Human Computer-Interaction Design) and Dr Stephann Makri (Senior Lecturer in Human-Computer Interaction)
  • British Library Supervisors: Ian Cooke (Head of Contemporary British Publications) and Stella Wisdom (Digital curator)

We are super excited that another collaborative studentship on UK Digital Comics, between the British Library and the University of the Arts London (co-supervised by Dr Ian Hague and Professor Roger Sabin) will soon be advertised too.

This means that two of four fully-funded AHRC British Library Collaborative Doctoral Partnerships will focus on UK digital comics. These are incredible news for UK comics scholarship, and a testament of the growth of the field in recent years.

The projects have been developed for the AHRC Collaborative Doctoral Partnerships scheme. The successful candidates will be able to work with the project supervisors to further develop and refine the agreed focus of the research.

Initial announcement on the British Library website at https://www.bl.uk/news/2019/february/ahrc-cdp-2019

Application deadline and further details coming soon… watch this space!

#TheDataDebates: A Quick Twitter Data Summary

Screenshot of an interactive visualisation of a #TheDataDebates archive created with Martin Hawksey's TAGSExplorer
Screenshot of an interactive visualisation of a #TheDataDebates archive created with Martin Hawksey’s TAGSExplorer

1 October 2016 Update: I have now deposited on figshare a CSV file with timestamps, source and user_lang metadata of the archived tweets.

Priego, Ernesto (2016): #TheDataDebates Tweet Timestamps, Source, User Language. figshare.https://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.3976731.v1. Retrieved: 10 03, Oct 01, 2016 (GMT)

Social Media Data: What’s the use‘ was the title of a panel discussion held at The British Library, London, on Wednesday 21 September 2016, 18:00 – 20:00. The official hashtag of the event was #TheDataDebates.

I made a collection of Tweets tagged with #TheDataDebates published publicly between 12/09/2016 09:06:52 and 22/09/2016 09:55:03 (BST).

Again I used Tweepy 3.5.0, a Python wrapper for the Twitter API, for the collection. Learning to mine with Python has been fun and empowering. To compare results I also used, as usual, Martin Hawksey’s TAGS, with results being equal (I only collected Tweets from accounts with at least 1 follower). Having the collected data already in a spreadsheet saved me time. I only collected Tweets from accounts with at least one follower.

Here’s a summary of the collection:

First Tweet in Archive 12/09/2016 09:06:52
Last Tweet in Archive 22/09/2016 09:55:03
Number of Tweets 

594

Number of links

152

Number of RTs

312

Number of accounts

152

From the main archive I was able to focus on number of Tweets per source and user language setting.

Source

source Count
Twitter for iPhone

246

Twitter Web Client

131

Twitter for Android

100

Twitter for iPad

74

TweetDeck

12

UK Trends

11

Mobile Web (M5)

5

Hootsuite

5

Twitter for Windows Phone

3

Big Data news flow

1

Linkis

1

Twtterrific

1

iOS

1

Flipboard

1

Lt RTEngine

1

RoundTeam

1

Total

594

User Language Setting (user_lang)

user_lang Count Notes
en

547

en-gb

32

fr

7

6 of it are spam
de

3

it

3

ar

2

both spam
Total

594

 The summary above is of the raw collection so not all the activity it reflects is either ‘human’ nor relevant, as some accounts tweeting have been identified as bots tweeting spam (a less human readable hashtag could have potentially avoided such spamming given the relatively low activity). Except where I identified spam Tweets, in this post I have not looked at the Tweets’ text data (i.e. I haven’t shared here any text or content analysis). Maybe if I have time in the near future. As Retweets were counted as Tweets in this archive a more specific and precise analysis would have to filter them from the dataset.

I am fully aware this would be more interesting and useful if there were opportunities for others to replicate the analysis through access to the source dataset I used. There are lots of interesting types of analysis that could be run and data to focus on in such a dataset as this. As in previous posts about other events, I am simply sharing this post right now as a quick indicative update published only a few hours after the event concluded.

It was pointed out last night that “social media data mining is starting but still has a way to go to catch up with hard analytical methodologies.” A post like this does not claim to employ a such methodologies, it simply seeks to contribute to the debate with evidence that may hopefully inspire other studies.  Perhaps it’s a two-way process, and  “hard analytical methodologies” (and researchers’ and users’ attitudes regarding cultural paradigms around ethics, privacy, consent, statistical significance)  have also a way to go to catch up with new/recent pervasive forms of data creation and dissemination that perhaps require different, media-community- and content-specific approaches to doing research.

Other Considerations [I am reusing my own text from previous posts here]


Both research and experience show that the Twitter search API is not 100% reliable. Large Tweet volumes affect the search collection process. The API might “over-represent the more central users”, not offering “an accurate picture of peripheral activity” (González-Bailon, Sandra, et al, 2012). Apart from the filters and limitations already declared, it cannot be guaranteed that each and every Tweet tagged with #TheDataDebates during the indicated period was analysed. The dataset was shared for archival, comparative and indicative educational research purposes only.

Only content from public accounts, obtained from the Twitter Search API, was analysed.  The source data is also publicly available to all Twitter users via the Twitter Search API and available to anyone with an Internet connection via the Twitter and Twitter Search web client and mobile apps without the need of a Twitter account. These posts and the resulting dataset contain the results of analyses of Tweets that were published openly on the Web with the queried hashtag; the content of the Tweets is responsibility of the original authors. Original Tweets are likely to be copyright their individual authors but please check individually.This work is shared to archive, document and encourage open educational research into scholarly activity on Twitter.

No private personal information was shared. The collection, analysis and sharing of the data has been enabled and allowed by Twitter’s Privacy Policy. The sharing of the results complies with Twitter’s Developer Rules of the Road. A hashtag is metadata users choose freely to use so their content is associated, directly linked to and categorised with the chosen hashtag.

The purpose and function of hashtags is to organise and describe information/outputs under the relevant label in order to enhance the discoverability of the labeled information/outputs (Tweets in this case). Tweets published publicly by scholars or other professionals during academic conferences or events are often publicly tagged (labeled) with a hashtag dedicated to the event n question. This practice used to be the confined to a few ‘niche’ fields; it is increasingly becoming the norm rather than the exception. Though every reason for Tweeters’ use of hashtags cannot be generalised nor predicted, it can be argued that scholarly Twitter users form specialised, self-selecting public professional networks that tend to observe scholarly practices and accepted modes of social and professional behaviour. In general terms it can be argued that scholarly Twitter users willingly and consciously tag their public Tweets with a conference hashtag as a means to network and to promote, report from, reflect on, comment on and generally contribute publicly to the scholarly conversation around conferences.

As Twitter users, conference Twitter hashtag contributors have agreed to Twitter’s Privacy and data sharing policies.Professional associations like the Modern Language Association and the American Pyschological Association recognise Tweets as citeable scholarly outputs. Archiving scholarly Tweets is a means to preserve this form of rapid online scholarship that otherwise can very likely become unretrievable as time passes; Twitter’s search API has well-known temporal limitations for retrospective historical search and collection. Beyond individual Tweets as scholarly outputs, the collective scholarly activity on Twitter around a conference or academic project or event can provide interesting insights for the contemporary history of scholarly communications. Though this work has limitations and might not be thoroughly systematic, it is hoped it can contribute to developing new insights into a discipline’s public concerns as expressed on Twitter over time.

References

González-Bailon, Sandra and Wang, Ning and Rivero, Alejandro and Borge-Holthoefer, Javier and Moreno, Yamir, Assessing the Bias in Samples of Large Online Networks (December 4, 2012).  Available at SSRN: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2185134

Priego, Ernesto (2016) #WLIC2016 Most Frequent Terms Roundup. figshare.
https://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.3749367.v2AHRC [ahrcpress]. (2016, Sep 21).

Social media data mining is starting but still has a way to go to catch up with hard analytical methodologies #TheDataDebates [Tweet]. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/ahrcpress/status/778652767636389888

Priego, Ernesto (2016): #TheDataDebates Tweet Timestamps, Source, User Language. figshare. https://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.3976731.v1 Retrieved: 10 03, Oct 01, 2016 (GMT)

New Publication: Comics Unmasked: A Conversation with Adrian Edwards, The British Library

Design by Jamie Hewlett for Comics Unmasked at the British Library © Jamie Hewlett 2014.
Design by Jamie Hewlett for Comics Unmasked at the British Library © Jamie Hewlett 2014.

I have published a new article on The Comics Grid: Journal of Comics Scholarship:

Comics Unmasked: A Conversation with Adrian Edwards, lead curator of Printed Historical Sources, The British Library

In this interview Adrian Edwards, lead curator of Printed Historical Sources, The British Library talks to me about the Comics Unmasked: Art and Anarchy in the UK exhibition at The British Library which opens on Friday and will stay open until 19th August 2014.

 

How to cite: Priego, E 2014. Comics Unmasked: A Conversation with Adrian Edwards, lead curator of Printed Historical Sources, The British Library. The Comics Grid: Journal of Comics Scholarship 4(1):2, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/cg.an

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Copyright is retained by the author(s).

Published on 30 April 2014.

 

With many thanks to Ludi Price for her super speedy transcription help and to everyone at Ubiquity Press, who worked at neck-breaking speed to ensure this article was published before the opening of the exhibition.

#LibPub Session 6: Libraries and Archives Disrupting Publishing?

Winchell, Alexander. Image from ‘Preadamites; or a demonstration of the existence of men before Adam, etc’, British Library 003949013. Via The Mechanical Curator. Public Domain.
Winchell, Alexander. Image from ‘Preadamites; or a demonstration of the existence of men before Adam, etc’, British Library 003949013. Via The Mechanical Curator. Public Domain.

Today we’re back at our Libraries and Publishing module at #citylis. Last week there was no lecture due to Reading Week. I hope students had a chance to catch up with the readings on Moodle!

[On Wednesday evening I came back to London from Nairobi. I had the privilege of participating in the Discoverability of African Scholarship Online workshop that took place  on 10-11 March 2014. It was organised by the OpenUCT Initiative and the Carnegie Corporation of New York. I uploaded a fileset with relevant workshop materials to figshare, here, in case anyone is interested (if you are into the present and future of librarianship, you should!).]

Today we will be discussing how library collections and archives interrogate (disrupt?) previous and current conceptions of “publishing”. We’ll do this through two  presentations by two very special guest speakers:

  • Dr James Baker, Digital Curator, British Library
  • Dr Geoff Browell, Senior Archives Services Manager, Library Services, King’s College London

By hearing about their two different professional experiences in the present day, we will be hoping to stimulate a discussion about how future libraries and future publications will co-exist.

Some links to check out:

Don’t forget you can share resources and engage with us with the #LibPub and #citylis hashtags on Twitter.

I can’t wait. See you later!

 

SpotOn London 2013: Interdisciplinary research: what can scientists, humanists and social scientists learn from each other?

Logo Spot On

This year’s SpotOn London conference will take place at the British Library.

I have cancelled my appearance. If I have time I might write a post about it later.

SpotOn is a series of community events for the discussion of how science is carried out and communicated online. The flagship conference is the annual SpotOn London two day event, formerly called Science Online London, and now in its fifth year. They also host monthly SpotOn NYC events in New York City.

This year I’ll be participating in the following workshop:

SpotOn London 2013: Interdisciplinary research: what can scientists, humanists and social scientists learn from each other?
Friday 8 November, 2013 4:30 pm-5:30 pm.

Academics are increasingly turning to interdisciplinary working to maximise the potential of their research. Benefits allegedly include increased access to funding, resources, knowledge and impact (to name but a few) – but how do these partnerships work in real life? What can researchers from polar opposites of the academy learn from each other? And can we ever really get along? This will be an interactive session which will include drafting of a new contract for interdisciplinary scientists, humanist and social scientists.

Coordinator: Dr Philippa Grand (Head of Social Sciences, Palgrave Macmillan, @PalgraveSoc)

Contributors:

  • Dr Simon Bastow, (Senior Research Fellow, LSE Public Policy Group @simonjbastow)
  • Laura Hood (The Conversation, @Lahoo)
  • Des Fitzgerald (Sociologist at Kings College London, @Des_Fitzgerald)
  • Dr Ernesto Priego (Lecturer in Library Science, City University London @ernestopriego)

Session hashtag: #solo13hss

At the British Library: Digital Scholarship 101

British Library logo

Tomorrow at the British Library, I will facilitate an internal one-day workshop titled “Digital Scholarship 101”. The workshop, for British Library staff, will provide an opportunity to brainstorm together what digital scholarship is and how we can engage in it/with it within the Library.

In this introductory workshop we will familiarise ourselves and engage critically and creativelly with key trends such as definitions of digital scholarship, digital collaboration and authorship, online sharing and open licensing, digital content; digitisation, copyright in the digital age, the Text Encoding Initiative, text and data mining, text analysis, crowdsourcing, georeferencing and data/text visualisation.

 

At the British Library: Open Access Monographs in the Humanities and Social Sciences Conference

 Open Access Monographs in the Humanities and Social Sciences Conference

As many of you already know the Open Access Monographs in the Humanities and Social Sciences conference will take place the 1st and 2nd of July 2013 at the British Library in London.

I will participate within the second strand, titled “How exactly do you get your monograph published in open access?.” I will focus on issues around copyright and Creative Commons for HSS researchers.

I am honoured for the kind invitation; the whole programme (still being updated) is looking amazing!

At the British Library: Digital Scholarship, Resources And Research Workshop

cpd25 logoTomorrow I will participate at the ‘Digital Scholarship, Resources And Research Workshop‘ organised by the M25 Consortium of Academic Libraries (cpd25) at the British Library, London.

I will be the first speaker offering a quick overview of Digital Scholarship – definitions, context and trends. It will be by all means an introduction, a DS 101 if you will.

This workshop is aimed at students, researchers and librarians interested in digital scholarship and those wanting to learn how to navigate around the world of digital resources.

%d bloggers like this: